1 Wednesday, 30 January 2013
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everyone.
7 Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
8 MS. EDGERTON: Good morning, Your Honours. I've just been asked
9 to put on the record, Your Honours, that the document which was the
10 subject of your ruling at the end of the proceedings yesterday afternoon,
11 earlier in the day received Exhibit Number D2817 when it was used by
12 Dr. Karadzic with General Milosevic.
13 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
14 Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please continue.
15 WITNESS: DRAGOMIR MILOSEVIC [Resumed]
16 [Witness answered through interpreter]
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Excellencies.
18 Good morning to everyone.
19 Examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]
20 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, General Milosevic.
21 A. Good morning.
22 Q. Given the fact that I have very little time, I wanted to join a
23 couple of topics. You told us why the troops were persistent and brave
24 because they were a people's army defending their homes. Were there any
25 negative consequences for the security of officers because it was not a
1 professional army?
2 A. There were.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we have 1D7534.
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Do you recognise this document, General? Somebody signed it for
6 you, but your name is at the bottom.
7 A. I do recognise it.
8 Q. What is it about briefly, please.
9 A. The gist is that an order is being issued specifying measures to
10 protect officers.
11 Q. What was the reasoning behind it?
12 A. There was wilful conduct by individuals and people reacted
13 inappropriately concerning some commands that were issued to them and a
14 number of officers found themselves in danger due to the behaviour of
15 certain groups of -- or irresponsible people. As far as I know, it even
16 went as far as one commander, brigade commander, being killed. He was
17 not from the SRK. In that regard, measures and orders were issued in
18 order to improve the security of officers and the way the military police
19 was used to provide security for those officers.
20 Q. Thank you. In the area of your corps, were there any murders,
21 especially of civilian dignitaries by our soldiers?
22 A. Yes, there were. In Grbavica, the president of the
23 Executive Council of Novo Sarajevo municipality was killed,
24 Budo Obradovic. Before holding that position, he had been a battalion
25 commander as part of the 1st Romanija Brigade. He was the epitome of
1 someone who went about his work fairly and appropriately. The civilian
2 and military police investigated his case. I am not aware of any
3 details. I just know that the man was killed. I don't know to what
4 extent it was documented in terms of procedure.
5 As for Colonel Jovo Bartula, who commanded the artillery regiment
6 in the SRK, was wounded due to the wilful conduct of some people. He had
7 been wounded in his arm. So the consequences were not as serious, but
8 still it was a reflection of that type of behaviour vis-a-vis officers.
9 Q. Thank you, General.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have this admitted?
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2842, Your Honours.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. General, I have to move to the next topic immediately to discuss
15 the relationship between the president of the republic and the commander
16 of the Main Staff.
17 In the briefest of terms, can you tell us what you knew about it
18 and what was your view of that relationship?
19 A. My screen doesn't seem to be working, so I won't be waiting for
20 any documents.
21 I have a specific opinion, position, regarding that, although its
22 importance was far broader than what I will try to explain here, trying
23 to put my answers within the time allotted.
24 My knowledge or my estimate that I reached based on what was
25 going on between the President of Republika Srpska and the commander of
1 the Main Staff is that the relationship was detrimental. It was not a
2 good one. The person who did not work on improving that relationship was
3 Mr. Mladic. He wanted to be dominant in all situations without
4 respecting the structure, level of address, and the people's positions in
5 our area. That is to say, in the area of Republika Srpska.
6 I was quite displeased. There were a number of situations which
7 indicated that things were wrong. I never had occasion at any meeting or
8 encounter to hear from the horse's mouth, so to say, what the root of the
9 problem was in your relationship with Mr. Mladic. I don't know whether
10 it was a matter of argument or open confrontation. I simply know that
11 Mladic refused having anyone on a higher position than his.
12 Q. Thank you. General, do you remember that in early August 1995, I
13 attempted to change the structure and establishment formation in order to
14 change the Main Staff into a General Staff and make certain personnel
15 changes? It was in document D2159. If you recall, all of the generals
16 at the time save for yourself supported Mladic. D2159.
17 JUDGE KWON: No, that's very leading, Mr. Karadzic. You're not
18 giving evidence.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wanted to draw the attention of
20 the participants to the following, and I would like to ask the General
21 the following.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. What was the position of the generals in this attempt of mine
24 concerning General Mladic, and what was your position? Why were you not
25 on the same side or list?
1 A. May I? The question you put, in order for me to be able to
2 explain to the Chamber, it requires a somewhat long explanation.
3 However, I will do my best to bring it down to only a few sentences.
4 It is all true. There was an attempt following the president's
5 decision to have Mr. Mladic removed. It's a well-known matter. What
6 followed was his objection or refusal. He did so by gathering the
7 generals, rallying the generals against the measure. It indeed took
8 place. We all know what the dates in question are. Some were in early
10 All of the generals arrived in Banja Luka, and it was very clear
11 that they accepted General Mladic's position in the sense that the
12 president of the republic was wrong and that Mladic should not be
13 removed. I was not in Banja Luka at that moment when the gathering took
14 place since I was still engaged in combat. I have to repeat once again
15 all areas were important to me, especially the situation in the Nisici
16 plateau. As I was there, no one managed to communicate with me to tell
17 me that I was expected to appear anywhere, be it with Mladic or
18 President Karadzic given the fact that both sides had summoned the
19 generals. I was completely unaware of it. When I returned to the
20 command, my associates briefed me on what went on.
21 That same afternoon, I set off together with Colonel
22 Cedo Sladoje. We wanted to see President Karadzic in an attempt to help
23 resolve the situation or even things out so as to perhaps gain a better
24 insight as to whether the removal should take place or not. We visited
25 Mr. Karadzic, and he wasn't able to make a decision at the time.
1 The very next day I went to Banja Luka to find General Mladic. I
2 wanted the whole thing to be resolved in a more intelligent way, but it
3 was also my estimate that I was not the kind of mediator who could even
4 things out.
5 I found Mladic not in Banja Luka, but I was transported by
6 helicopter to Ostrelj. It's a hill, a mountain, just outside Drvar. I
7 found him there. He explained it to me and he told me what the other
8 generals had accepted the day earlier.
9 Then Croatian MiGs 21 and 29 arrived as part of their sources and
10 there was a real threat that we would be killed at Ostrelj. That is why
11 our conversation was very brief. It was my decision to accept his
12 position as he persisted that he should not be removed.
13 This is in the briefest possible terms, but actually that is how
14 things developed.
15 Q. Thank you. Was it seen as you joining the other generals in
16 supporting Mladic? Was that how the Main Staff saw it?
17 A. Yes. That's how they interpreted my behaviour. That very day I
18 was supposed to undergo an eye surgery at the Military Medical Academy in
19 Belgrade. It was a very important health issue for me, but I asked for
20 it to be postponed, and I left the next day from Banja Luka. I went to
22 Q. Thank you. Was the general public informed, as you recall, the
23 Assembly and the general public were informed that the last of the
24 generals had signed the last of the ones to be -- to give his opinion had
25 signed in favour of Mladic?
1 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness repeat his answer, please.
2 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Milosevic, the interpreters were not able to
3 hear your answer because you overlapped with the translation of
4 Mr. Karadzic's question. If you could repeat it.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My last answer?
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I understand. The general
8 public was informed that I, too, had accepted the standpoint and joined
9 the viewpoint of the other generals, and the conclusion was that I was
10 supporting Mladic's conduct and attitude, although this was done, as I
11 have said, it was not my intention to be the one, but it is true that it
12 was used for those purposes.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have 65 ter 8415.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. This is a poor version. I have a better version in Serbian.
16 This is a telegram. I have -- well, I'll read it to you.
17 "To the Republika Srpska National Assembly, to the president of
18 the Republika Srpska.
19 "Dear sir, today the commander of the VRS Main Staff Colonel
20 Mladic met the commander of the VRS Sarajevo-Romanija Corps Major-General
21 Dragomir Milosevic who was informed of the content of the discussions at
22 the expanded session of the advisory board. General Milosevic, like
23 every other general of the Republika Srpska, was in entire agreement with
24 all the decisions and conclusions adopted at the session including the
25 letter addressed to the Republika Srpska National Assembly and the
1 President of Republika Srpska regarding the decision of the president to
2 relieve the commander of the VRS of duty and to order changes to the
3 system, organisation, and staffing the VRS. Since Major-Generals
4 Budimir Galic and Radivoje Miletic have previously expressed their
5 support by telephone, it has been established that all the generals are
6 absolutely united."
7 Is --
8 JUDGE KWON: Slow down. Slow down.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. -- is this what it says here?
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I confirm that this is what
13 was announced, what was broadcast, but I heard that this was the case. I
14 didn't know what the communique was, because I wasn't there. I was
15 outside the area where this was taking place. I was in Belgrade.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. May this be admitted
17 into evidence?
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
19 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It seems that the more legible
21 version is on the other side of the Serbian version.
22 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. We'll receive it.
23 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D2843, Your Honours.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. General, can you tell us very briefly what the result was of this
1 attempt of mine?
2 A. I think the result is well known. As I see it, there was no
3 replacement of Mladic. There was no shake-up. I did not follow the
4 situation further, so I can't say what its effects were or its impact on
5 relations within the Army of Republika Srpska and the government organs.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we look at 65 ter 13935. This
8 is a letter dated the 27th of August, 1995. Can we have -- well, this
9 was signed by Miletic, not Jelacic, but the content is the same. Can we
10 see the next page, please.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Were you aware of this decision of mine on my withdrawing my
13 previous decisions?
14 A. I was aware that the course of events was as described here, but
15 as I have said, I did not receive information in writing. I did not see
16 documents of this kind.
17 Q. But were you aware that I myself had withdrawn my previous
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May it be admitted into evidence?
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2844, Your Honours.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. General, I can't go through all the areas, but there's one topic
1 I want to ask you about. What was the policy of the Sarajevo-Romanija
2 Corps vis-a-vis humanitarian aid passing through and arriving in
3 Sarajevo? I'm speaking in general terms of humanitarian aid, utilities,
4 electricity, water, and so on.
5 A. Yes. I have to say now that this is a highly complex issue
6 linked to events throughout this period and the course of the war, that
7 is, the conflict that obtained in the area I was in. It deserved a great
8 deal of attention and the absolute care of everyone involved, both
9 military and civilians. An area such as the area of Sarajevo, that's
10 what I'm referring to now because I don't have all the information
11 concerning humanitarian aid in Republika Srpska as a whole, the city of
12 Sarajevo had to receive all kinds of humanitarian aid and everything that
13 related to the population.
14 I confirm that the flow and the activities were not disturbed by
15 the command of the corps and were not obstructed in any way whatsoever,
16 but I understood that the delivery had to be done in such a way that we
17 would have to reassure ourselves as to what kind of goods were being
18 sent. So everything that referred to attempts to smuggle in arms,
19 ammunition, and other such things in these kinds of transports had to be
20 efficiently established, and we had to make sure that this could not
21 happen. So whenever such a thing did happen, that along with
22 humanitarian aid a convoy would contain things that were prohibited, then
23 that was a situation we had to resolve.
24 Q. Thank you. General, what was the proportion of such instances in
25 relation to the total number of convoys daily? How often did these
1 problems arise?
2 A. I cannot be certain, but very often something would happen that
3 was not in line with what had been agreed. However, in spite of this, it
4 was my impression that humanitarian aid was not compromised, that it was
5 not obstructed when one had to determine whether it had arrived in
6 Sarajevo or not.
7 Q. Thank you. From whom -- by whom were you informed that the
8 convoys had been approved and what was the further procedure?
9 A. We received that from the Main Staff. It all went through
10 Mr. Indjic, and he passed on all this information to the organs in the
11 command who were supposed to provide this information to the check-points
12 controlling the entrance of convoys, and they would be told who was
13 coming, what was coming, and so on.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we see 1D7543, please.
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
16 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, your microphone is off.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I apologise.
18 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. General, this is your document from 1993 in which you say that
20 you had been informed by the Main Staff that they had approved this. Can
21 you look at your instructions, the instructions you issued to your units
22 concerning this?
23 A. It says:
24 "To carry out reception, planned control, and secure movement
25 along approved roads throughout. Firmly adhere to current rules and
1 guidelines regarding movement of UNPROFOR convoys."
2 I don't see the document any further.
3 Q. Was this an exception? What was your attitude to this? What is
4 this in fact? Is this a one-off situation, or did this kind of thing
5 happen all the time?
6 A. Yes, I understand your question. Of course, we had to carry out
7 certain checks and to have indicators. That was our regular practice.
8 Q. Thank you. Did you know or were you able to know that this
9 humanitarian aid being sent through to the civilian population under
10 Muslim control, that it was also given to the armed forces?
11 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
13 MS. EDGERTON: That's another leading question.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I withdraw my question.
15 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. General, what was the situation as regards food for your men in
17 the corps? How did the supplies arrive in this period? Do you remember?
18 A. Well, of course I remember. There was a shortage of foodstuffs,
19 and this included both staples, strategic foodstuffs and those that were
20 less important. That was a constant problem, and we had to seek a way to
21 compensate for these shortages and to make sure that soldiers received
22 the food that it was possible for them to receive, but these things came
23 as humanitarian aid, and no one dared approve its use for the army. But
24 speaking on my own behalf exclusively, I think that this practice was not
25 all right because a soldier is also a human being and needs to eat and
1 needs to be helped.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I tender this document.
4 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2845, Your Honours.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we have 1D --
7 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, I told you that you would have half an
8 hour today and the time's up. I'd like -- would like you to conclude in
9 five minutes.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency. I
11 thought that only my cross-examinations were to be limited and that when
12 it comes to examination-in-chief I can schedule my time according to
13 how -- how important I believe the witness to be, but I will do my best.
14 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, the Chamber rarely limits your
15 examination-in-chief. However, your estimate was only six hours for this
16 witness, and you have spent almost 14 hours, and you indicated that your
17 examination will have been concluded by yesterday. So I think it's more
18 than reasonable to expect you to conclude in half an hour today. In any
19 event, five minutes.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can we have 1D7545. I
21 apologise -- well, I am sorry, Your Excellency, that I have to limit my
22 witness to yes or no answers because he has much to tell us.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Can you look at this document of yours from August 1993 and tell
25 us briefly that you are drawing attention to the shortages in relation to
1 your troops.
2 A. The contents speak of the problem and its size. For me, the
3 problem was how to organise food for my soldiers. My soldiers were
4 worried. They didn't know whether they had support and equipment for
5 fighting. They were not so much concerned with the food, but I was the
6 one who had to raise that issue with certain bodies in order to make sure
7 that my troops had the necessary food.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2846, Your Honours.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. General, sir, perhaps you can answer with yes or no. What was
13 your attitude towards repairs of the water supply system and the
14 electricity supply system that was needed to supply the other side, the
15 enemy side?
16 A. I will not be happy if you want me to answer by just yes or no
17 since I know what was done in order to repair the water and electricity
18 lines. We respected all requests by UNPROFOR, and we reacted to any
19 need, and we did whatever was necessary to make sure that there was
20 water, electricity, and all the other bare necessities for everybody.
21 I personally, at the request of the CEO of Unioninvest,
22 Mr. Bogdan Ceko, I made sure that the Moscanica water source was
23 repaired, that people who were engaged in the repair works were
24 protected. That water well supplied the city of Sarajevo. To be more
25 precise, the old part of the city, and the repair works were done
2 Q. 1D7544. Take a glance. This is your document [Realtime
3 transcript read in error "indictment"]. Tell us whether this is the
4 document that you have just described for us. 7544.
5 A. Yes, yes. That's the document. This is my order whereby I
6 ordered that the work of those men should be secure, that they should not
7 be touched while engaged in the repair works.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Admission? Can this be admitted?
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2847, Your Honours.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. General, sir, what about the supply with electricity of our part
13 of Sarajevo as opposed to the Muslim part of Sarajevo?
14 A. It was one and the same. When there was no electricity in our
15 part, there was no electricity over there and vice versa. This is what I
17 Q. Thank you.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now take a look at 1D7547.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Please look at the third paragraph from the bottom, where it says
21 since electricity is necessary, you propose that a ring should be set up.
22 A. Yes, yes. Later on people, and I mean repairsmen, did a
23 fantastic job. There was constant fighting going on. Still they managed
24 to connect the line and provide both sides with electricity.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted? And I have
1 another document, and I will bring this to an end.
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2848, Your Honours.
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. 1D7546. General, can you explain why you issued this proposal
6 regarding alternative routes for convoys? Do you remember this document?
7 Is this your signature?
8 A. Signature, yes. Let me see. Of course I remember. As a matter
9 of fact, I see now what the document was about. My position was -- or
10 better say, the position of the corps command was that no obstacles
11 should be placed in the way of convoys. We wanted them to pass through
12 as quickly as possible. That's why we proposed certain points through
13 which movements should go, and that proposal implied guarantees for the
14 bridges in the city, guarantees that there would be no disturbance on our
16 Q. Thank you. Please look at bullet point 4 where you mention the
17 reasons. You don't have to read. Just tell us what prompted you to
18 issue this proposal.
19 A. I was prompted with what you can read here. You can see what we
20 did, what the -- kind of movements there were, what shortcomings may
21 arise. When something could be spotted in our zone of responsibility,
22 then a proper attitude could have been adopted to the situation.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted? And the last
24 question. Can the document be admitted?
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D2849, Your Honours.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. I'm not asking you about any exact numbers, but just
4 approximately, can you tell us how many sorties there were and how many
5 landings at the Sarajevo airport daily? I'm talking about humanitarian
6 aid, UNPROFOR flights, over the period of 1.300 days, and how big was the
7 percentage of flights and landings that experienced problems on --
8 problems coming from any of the two sides?
9 A. It seems to me that I cannot give you anything that would be
10 conclusive information. However, I can share with you my impression.
11 You have to bear in mind that the corps command was very close to the
12 airport and that we had a visual contact, and we did not have to rely on
13 any information. We could see with our own eyes that the arrivals of
14 certain aircraft at Sarajevo airport was to a large extent uneventful.
15 It seems to me that that airport functioned even better than the airport
16 here in Amsterdam.
17 Q. General, sir, did you have all of these documents at your
18 disposal during your trial?
19 A. No. No. My trial and the intentions and the attempts or desires
20 of my lawyer who wanted to achieve things and put in place some kind of
21 defence system, it was not represented either partially or fully.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you very much.
23 I have no more time. I have questions but no time.
24 JUDGE KWON: I want to tell you that the situation regarding your
25 trial is not relevant in this case, because we are not having a retrial
1 or the judgement was -- your judgement was not in evidence in our case.
2 Ms. Edgerton.
3 MS. EDGERTON: I was on my feet to raise an objection as to the
4 relevance of that line of -- that question, Your Honours.
5 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, will you not be taking into account
6 for credibility purposes the fact that the witness has been convicted
7 and --
8 JUDGE KWON: We also -- we take some judicial notice of some
9 adjudicated facts from his case regarding convoys.
10 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, but in light of that, don't you think that
11 his explanation as to his trial is relevant if you're going to consider
12 the fact that he's been convicted in terms of his credibility?
13 JUDGE KWON: Very well. We'll leave it there at that time.
14 Yes. Your examination-in-chief is over, Mr. Milosevic.
15 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Bourgon.
18 MR. BOURGON: Good morning, Mr. President. Just a quick
19 transcript correction. At page 14, line 21, the question was put to the
20 witness: "This is your indictment," whereas Dr. Karadzic said, "This is
21 your document." Thank you, Mr. President.
22 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Mr. Milosevic, you will now be
23 cross-examined by the Prosecution, in particular Ms. Edgerton,
24 representative of the Office the Prosecutor, but given the circumstances,
25 in particular for her preparation, before we start hearing your
1 cross-examination we -- we decided to hear three witnesses' evidence. So
2 probably in my estimate you'll start being cross-examined tomorrow or
3 Monday next week.
4 Do you understand that, sir?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand. I would be grateful
6 to you if I were given a short break. I don't know whether I may be
7 allowed to tell you this. I have just one shirt. I don't have the time
8 to deal with that and make myself presentable given the intensity of the
9 way we work here. So if my cross-examination may be delayed until
10 Monday, it would help me enormously to be able to cope with the
12 JUDGE KWON: Probably that may be possible, but at the same time,
13 the -- the Chamber does not want to lose its court -- courtroom time, so
14 we'll see how it evolves. But before doing so, I have some questions
15 about what you said with respect to Mr. Karadzic's attempt to remove
16 Mr. Mladic from the position of his -- of the command of the VRS.
17 You explained in detail what -- what you did or how you reacted
18 to that -- in that regard, but could you tell us the reason for
19 Mr. Karadzic to try to -- or attempt to remove him, and what's the point
20 of disagreement with the civilian leadership and military leadership, and
21 what was the rationale for the VRS generals to decide to support the --
22 Mladic's position? In other words, what was wrong with Mr. Karadzic?
23 I was asking a compound question, but I believe that you will be
24 capable of answering all the points.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'll do my best to
1 provide the answer based on my perception of the situation. I'm not
2 purporting to say that I was on top of the situation and that I was aware
3 of the deeper reasons for which Mr. Karadzic wanted to remove
4 General Mladic. I can't tell you what exactly was the pretext, but I can
5 share with you my impression, as I've already explained.
6 We already started feeling -- or, rather, sensing that there were
7 problems in relations between Mr. Karadzic and General Mladic. The
8 relationship as it was, was the one of domination -- or, rather, Mladic
9 wanted to be independent and not controlled by any superior body, and
10 that was the structure of their overall relationship.
11 I believe that that was the true indicator showing that he wanted
12 to reap rewards of his popularity among people and achieve certain
13 effects, perhaps in some future elections or something. I really can't
14 say. I can only speculate.
15 Your Honours, it seems to me yesterday on the screen there was a
16 document which General Mladic issued in order to warn the corps command
17 or, more precisely, he warns myself that I should not be doing certain
18 things in relation to a meeting with civilian structures. That document
19 was not actually addressed at me. There was a tendency to create an
20 impression that civilian bodies were exercising certain things that were
21 not in line with rules of combat. I don't have any evidence to support
22 that, but I am saying that this was my feeling, that this is what the
23 intention was. But I would like to say that this was not only the result
24 of Mr. Mladic but also of those who were creating an atmosphere of a bad
25 relationship between Mladic and Karadzic. Fuel was added to that fire
1 from wider sources.
2 I know that Mr. Mladic was bothered by my conduct, because I was
3 not prepared to tell him, "General, sir, God has sent you to be our
4 commander." The truth is, however, that I respected his orders, but I
5 did not do it overzealously. I was not overzealous in my dealings with
6 him, and that's why I was put under a lot of pressure.
7 It was implied that I obeyed Mr. Karadzic, that I obeyed his
8 orders. First of all, this is not correct. I never received any
9 instructions or orders that would be issued for the Sarajevo-Romanija
10 Corps exclusively. Whatever arrived from the Presidency applied across
11 the board to the Army of Republika Srpska and the developments
12 surrounding the army.
13 I was exposed to a lot of trouble. First of all, there were a
14 lot of inaccuracies in the interpretation of my conduct and -- and
15 falsities. First of all, I was perceived as being a member of the
16 Serbian Democratic Party. I was never a member of any party by the
17 League of Communists of Yugoslavia. There is no doubt about that. I
18 was. I was mocked by some of the people from the Main Staff. For
19 example, when they saw my jeep, my military vehicle, they would say,
20 "There he is in the SDS jeep." That was a nonsense that could only
21 insult me. I had to ignore all that and focus on those issues that we
22 have discussed over the past few days. My main task was to look after
23 the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps and its destiny.
24 Certainly this may not be the most precise of answers. I'm sorry
25 I had to be somewhat more expansive in my answer.
1 When General Mladic entered my office at the corps command, he
2 inspected my walls to see whether his photo was hanging on them, but he
3 was also happy that President Karadzic's photo was not on the wall. The
4 photo that I had on the wall was of Duke Misic, the famous hero from our
6 As for the rest, we had to co-operate, and we were not supposed
7 to allow ourselves to create the situation that existed during the
8 Second World War where we had two sides, Chetniks on one side, Partisans
9 on the other, and all that had disastrous consequences. That was my main
10 concern, and I could not change anybody's attitude. I could only appeal
11 to my former colleagues to change their attitude.
12 Your Honours, I have nothing further to say in that respect. If
13 you have any more questions, please go ahead.
14 JUDGE KWON: You told me that General Mladic was sort of dominant
15 and wanted to be independent from his superior. Does it mean that he was
16 disobedient or defiant to -- to his commander, i.e., Supreme Commander?
17 Do you have some examples where Mr. Mladic disobeyed the order from the
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could the witness receive
20 appropriate interpretation of the word "defiant."
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't even see that
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Well --
24 THE ACCUSED: Disobedient or defiant.
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes, I said so.
1 Now do you understand the question?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did. I understood it just the
3 way you put it. That was the nature of his conduct. I cannot confirm,
4 though, specifically where and when he may have put forth any requests or
5 whatever one would call it inside civilian structures instead of orders.
6 I can't say which ones he ignored or declined. I don't know that. Any
7 details about the conflict between the two people is something I am not
8 aware of. I don't have clear indications. I'm merely discussing my
9 general impression, and that is the extent of my knowledge.
10 JUDGE KWON: And on your own you said the generals decided to
11 support General Mladic and that Mr. Karadzic was wrong at the time. What
12 was the reason for the conclusion that Mr. Karadzic had been wrong?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't think I said that
14 Dr. Karadzic was wrong.
15 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. I'll read out what you said. It's
16 transcript page 5, lines 9.
17 "All of the generals arrived in Banja Luka, and it was very clear
18 that they accepted General Mladic's position in the sense that the
19 president of the republic was wrong and that Mladic should not be
21 Could you tell us the reason for such conclusion?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is what I said. At the
23 meeting they supported him. They supported Mladic. That means that they
24 believed Karadzic was wrong. That piece of information that it was their
25 estimate that Karadzic was wrong is not something as -- that I can use as
1 any proof or source of knowledge. This is simply my understanding. If
2 all of them arrived there and in their conversations with him they
3 expressed their views that they support Mladic, this in turn meant that
4 they were trying to say that Mr. Karadzic was wrong. That is the
5 conclusion that one draws from it. I'm not asserting that they stated it
6 in so many words, though.
7 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE KWON: Then given the court schedule and in addition to the
10 wish of the witness, it seems possible that we start the
11 cross-examination of Mr. Milosevic on Monday. And in -- how much do you
12 expect your cross-examination to last, Ms. Edgerton?
13 MS. EDGERTON: Preliminarily because I haven't had, obviously,
14 the chance to digest the information this morning, I would say now, seven
15 hours. On reflection, I might be able to reduce that.
16 JUDGE KWON: That adds more reason to defer the cross-examination
17 to Monday.
18 THE ACCUSED: Excellencies, when we have lost the habit that if
19 we -- for the long weekends, why it shouldn't be Tuesday as usual.
20 JUDGE KWON: I don't remember, but the Chamber has some meetings,
21 something like that. Just a second.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber has something to do on Friday, so that
24 was the reason why we changed the schedule.
25 THE ACCUSED: But usually if we start Monday next week, we start
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes. The Chamber is aware of that.
3 JUDGE MORRISON: Yes, Dr. Karadzic. We're out of
4 synchronisation, though. This week is unusual. We normally would have
5 sat -- not sat last Monday and sat on Friday, but for this week only it
6 was changed, and therefore the knock-on effect is that we sit next
8 THE ACCUSED: Okay. Thank you.
9 JUDGE KWON: And we are going to take different regime in April
10 and May. I think that has been informed.
11 Mr. Milosevic, you may be excused.
12 THE ACCUSED: No translation.
13 JUDGE KWON: We'll hear your cross-examination on Monday next
14 week. You may be excused.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 THE ACCUSED: No translation. I don't think he got translation.
17 JUDGE KWON: General, did you hear my explanation that your
18 examination -- cross-examination will start on Monday next week?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did, Your Honour. I heard and
20 understood. Everything's fine. Thank you.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
22 [The witness stands down]
23 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Bourgon.
24 Before we proceed, Mr. Robinson, the Chamber is -- is seized of
25 the Defence filing of yesterday, i.e., the request for presence of
1 counsel for Witness Edin Garaplija. I wonder whether you are in the
2 position to answer why Mr. Garaplija is wanting a lawyer to be present
3 during the testimony and what the legal basis for that would be.
4 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. I've been in touch with
5 Mr. Garaplija's lawyer, and although I haven't put that exact question to
6 him, I believe that the reason that Mr. Garaplija wants him to be present
7 is because Mr. Garaplija was prosecuted for the events in which he is
8 going to give evidence, and I think that there's some concerns concerning
9 his rights about self-incrimination. And I'm not a hundred per cent sure
10 what self-incrimination actually would exist since his case has been
11 finished, but there's enough of a connection between his criminal case
12 and his testimony that I think it would be fair for him to be represented
13 by a lawyer.
14 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber wasn't aware of his earlier conviction.
15 Mr. Tieger, do you confirm that?
16 Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
17 MS. EDGERTON: He -- indeed, he was tried and convicted in Bosnia
18 for -- I hesitate to speak unless I'm precisely sure of how -- the
19 wording of the charges but I'm not at this moment, but indeed that's the
21 JUDGE KWON: And the Prosecution does not object to the presence
22 of his attorney to be present?
23 MS. EDGERTON: No.
24 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Shall we take a break now?
25 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
2 MR. ROBINSON: Before we take a break, would it be possible for
3 me to read a very brief stipulation or agreement that the parties had
4 reached concerning the evidence of Congressman Tony Hall.
5 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber was informed informally of that, but the
6 Chamber would prefer to have it in writing by a joint -- joint
8 MR. ROBINSON: Very well, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. We'll have a break for half an hour and
10 resume quarter to 11.00.
11 --- Recess taken at 10.15 a.m.
12 --- On resuming at 10.46 a.m.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 JUDGE KWON: Would the witness make the solemn declaration.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
16 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
17 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Hrsum. Please take a seat and make
18 yourself comfortable.
19 WITNESS: TOMISLAV HRSUM
20 [Witness answered through interpreter]
21 JUDGE KWON: Before you start giving evidence, Mr. Hrsum, I would
22 like to draw your attention to a particular Rule here at the Tribunal.
23 Under this Rule, Rule 90(E), you may object to answering a question from
24 the accused, the Prosecution, or even from the Judges if you believe that
25 your answer will incriminate you. When I say "incriminate," I mean that
1 something you say may amount to an admission of your guilt or could -- or
2 could provide evidence that you have committed an offence. However, even
3 if you believe that your answer will incriminate you and you do not wish
4 to answer the question, the Tribunal has the power to compel you to
5 answer the question. But in such a case, the Tribunal will make sure
6 that your testimony compelled in such a way will not be used as evidence
7 in other cases against you for any offence other than false testimony.
8 Do you understand what I have just told you, sir?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have.
10 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
12 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
13 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Hrsum.
14 A. Good morning, Mr. President.
15 Q. I have to ask you and remind myself, because despite of my quite
16 extensive experience here, I often forget, and that is that we have to
17 pause between questions and answers so that the interpreters would be
18 able to interpret it all.
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
20 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, microphone.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. On the screen before you, when the cursor stops moving and the
23 letter A appears, it should be a prompt for you to start answering.
24 That's better than losing something for the transcript.
25 Mr. Hrsum, did you provide a statement to the Defence team?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'd like to call up 1D7053 in
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Do you see the statement before you, Mr. Hrsum?
7 A. I do.
8 Q. Have you read it and signed it?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Let us pause, please. Thank you. Does the statement accurately
11 reflect what you told the Defence team?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. If I were to put the same questions to you in this courtroom
14 today that you were put by the Defence team, would your answers be
15 basically the same?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, I seek to tender
19 this exhibit. It is under Rule 92 ter with an associated document.
20 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Tieger, any objection?
21 MR. TIEGER: No, Mr. President.
22 JUDGE KWON: I take it you are requesting for a leave to -- to
23 add to the 65 ter list.
24 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, we are. We didn't have this
25 document at the time we filed our list.
1 JUDGE KWON: Very well. We'll grant the request and admit both
2 of the documents. Shall we give the exhibit number for the statement
4 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. That will be Exhibit Number
6 JUDGE KWON: And the associated exhibit.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Which is 65 ter 1D14001 will be Exhibit D2851.
8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
9 Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I'd now like to read
11 out a summary in the English language of Mr. Hrsum's testimony.
12 [In English] Tomislav Hrsum was born on 10th of June, 1957, in
13 Rusanovici village, Rogatica municipality. He completed the secondary
14 School of Internal Affairs in Sarajevo, after which he was assigned to
15 Traffic Police Station 1 in Sarajevo. In the mid-1980s, he was appointed
16 police inspector at the Sarajevo city S-U-P, SUP.
17 From 1987, Tomislav Hrsum was assigned to the criminal
18 investigation service at the Pale SJB station. Early in 1994, he was
19 appointed chief of the criminal investigation service at the Pale SJB,
20 where he stayed until the end of 1996. After that, he was assigned to
21 the office of the RS MUP as the chief inspector.
22 Right up until the outbreak of the war, the Pale SJB was a
23 territorial and organisational unit of the Sarajevo city SUP, while
24 functionally it was also linked to the Sarajevo security services centre
25 whose purview was greater than that of the Sarajevo city SUP.
1 The Pale SJB was financed and obtained all other materiel and
2 technical equipment from the Sarajevo city SUP.
3 The SDS established in July 1990 following the establishment of
4 the SDA and HDZ. The SDS programme was equally -- equality of all
5 nations and nationalities and resolving state matters through agreements.
6 The SDS and the SDA had divided power in Pale and an agreement between
7 the parties was formed. However, the SDA did everything in its power to
8 ensure its predominance over the security organs.
9 The SDA establishment of the Patriotic League in 1991 and the
10 Green Berets caused fear and anxiety among the Serbs due to the partial
11 inclusion in the police of these organisations. The Serbs did not have
12 paramilitary formations as they supported and trusted the JNA to protect
13 them. The Muslims refused to discharge their compulsory military
14 service, meaning that the JNA comprised a high number of Serbs. Before
15 the war, Muslims in Pale illegally procured weapons. At this time, the
16 Assembly adopted a declaration of independence against the will of the
17 Serbian people, and the Serbian deputies replied by forming an Assembly
18 of the Serbian people in BH.
19 Tomislav Hrsum is aware that at the beginning of 1992, members of
20 the Sarajevo Stari Grad police station, with members of the
21 Patriotic League, set up permanent check-points around Sarajevo. People
22 from Pale were frequently abused at these check-points, their property
23 and documents were seized, and this was often done by criminals who were
24 members of the reserve police force and the Green Berets. Following
25 this, all Serbian policemen in the Sarajevo Stari Grad SJB were expelled
1 and disarmed which caused additional fear, uncertainty, and anxiety
2 amongst the Serbs -- Serbian people.
3 When a member of -- of a Serbian wedding party was killed in
4 Bascarsija, Serbs gathered in Pale and relied on the police to make --
5 relied on the police to make sure -- to take measure and patrols were set
6 up. In March 1992, Muslim policemen from the Pale area stated that they
7 did not want to continue attending work and handed in their badges and
8 weapons. However, some did not return these. Muslim paramilitary units
9 blocked Pale municipality from all sides and attacked a Serbian
10 settlement. A general mobilisation of the Territorial Defence, the armed
11 forces for the RS, was only mobilised after the killing of JNA soldiers
12 in Sarajevo.
13 During the fighting, a large number of refugees from Sarajevo
14 moved to Pale. A holding centre was established in the local gym whilst
15 accommodation was found. Pale hosted approximately 400 Muslims who were
16 being transferred to Central Bosnia. Accommodation was found in the gym
17 for them and a guard was kept by JNA soldiers.
18 Muslims in Pale were safe and went on with their regular
19 activities and many people still had faith in the J -- SJB. However,
20 when war broke out, members of paramilitary forces placed obstacles on
21 the road disrupting traffic and abusing Serbs who were leaving the area.
22 Muslims requested to leave Pale -- requests to leave Pale were granted in
23 June 1992, and there were no incidents during this departure. Records
24 were kept of these applications.
25 When war broke out -- out all contacts with the Sarajevo city SUP
1 and others ceased, and the jurisdiction were lost so that the functioning
2 of the SJB, particularly in criminal investigation service, became
3 blocked. Muslim paramilitary units blocked the territory of Pale on
4 6th of April, 1992, and there was immediately a problem in the form of a
5 shortage of materiel and technical equipment required for work, and there
6 was no way to implement the detention of persons.
7 Muslim attacks continued. One incident occurred when
8 approximately 50 soldiers were killed transporting food even after their
9 passage had been agreed. Another attack took place on the day of a
10 funeral for a JNA soldier. Muslims attacked Serbian positions while the
11 soldiers were present at the funeral. Muslims also killed children,
12 women, and elderly residents of Serbian villages and shelled the -- the
13 war hospital in Koran causing considerable damage.
14 In general, there were no paramilitary units in Pale area.
15 However, there was one recorded incident with Arkan's Tigers who looted
16 shops and removed vehicles. However, there were number of Muslim
17 criminals in the area. Military security organs frequently submitted
18 information about constant armed provocations, attacks and incursions
19 in -- in the military facility of Renovica, which was armed -- from which
20 armed inhabitants were removing and stealing weapons and military
21 equipment. As a result, SJB police launched an operation to disarm these
22 groups, detain persons and impose law. Although a peaceful hand-over of
23 weapons had been agreed, the police came under heavy fire and those
24 responsible were detained. Later that month, Muslim paramilitary units
25 attacked Serbs and killed about 12 people, including women and children.
1 Those responsible were detained.
2 This is a short summary, and I don't have further questions at
3 that moment.
4 JUDGE KWON: Well, Mr. Hrsum, as you have noted while
5 Mr. Karadzic read out the summary of your statement, your evidence in
6 chief in this case has been admitted in writing, and now you'll be
7 further examined by the representative of the Office of the Prosecutor,
8 Mr. Tieger.
9 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
11 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Cross-examination by Mr. Tieger:
13 Q. Good morning, Witness.
14 A. Good morning.
15 Q. Can you remind me, please, of the exact date of the establishment
16 of the SDS party?
17 A. If you mean the SDS of Republika Srpska, I think it was in July
18 in 1990, and the local municipal SDS organisation at Pale was established
19 a little later, sometime in September.
20 Q. And what was the precise date in July of the SDS Republika Srpska
22 A. I think it was on the 12th, the 12th of July, if I'm not
24 Q. And do -- can I assume correctly that the reason you are able to
25 recall this date with such specificity is because you are a follower
1 and/or member of the SDS?
2 A. No. I was not a member of the SDS at that time or later for that
3 matter. In 1997, we members of the police had to have written
4 certificates from the municipal parties saying that we were not members
5 of any political party in order for us to do the job of policeman.
6 Q. And since that time, Mr. Hrsum, have you become politically
7 active in connection with or on behalf of the SDS party?
8 A. Now? I didn't understand your question. Throughout the time I
9 was employed in the police, I was never politically active in the SDS.
10 Q. I'm not sure what translation you received. I said since that
11 time. So after the period of time when you were -- when you had to
12 provide a written certificate that you were not a member, after that
13 time, did you become politically active in connection with or on behalf
14 of the SDS?
15 A. I did not become a member of the SDS. I did not become
16 politically active, because in the course of 1998 and 1999, all the way
17 until 2000, representatives of the international police certified members
18 of the police of Republika Srpska.
19 Q. Mr. Hrsum, were you not on the list of SDS candidates for office
20 in 2012 in your hometown or home municipality of Rogatica?
21 A. Yes, that's correct. I became politically active in the SDS
22 two years ago.
23 Q. Well, Mr. Hrsum, maybe in future questions you can try not to
24 parse out my question with such -- with -- at that kind of level. I
25 asked you at any time were you a member. That is the -- and you broke it
1 down into the years in which you were not, ignoring this fact.
2 MR. TIEGER: And let me just call up 65 ter 24496 quickly,
4 Q. We see there a list of candidates for the SDS party, and that is
5 your name reflected at number 14; correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you, sir.
8 MR. TIEGER: I tender that, Mr. President.
9 MR. ROBINSON: No objection.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We will receive it.
11 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P6088, Your Honours.
12 MR. TIEGER:
13 Q. Now, Mr. Hrsum, your statement indicates in various places and in
14 various ways that the Muslims of Pale left the municipality voluntarily
15 despite all efforts to make them stay and the efforts of the Pale police
16 to protect them, and that's found, for example, in paragraph 22 where you
17 talk about Muslims leaving voluntarily, or in paragraph 15 where you say
18 the whole time Muslims in the Pale area were safe and went on with their
19 regular activities.
20 So is it your position, Mr. Hrsum, that there were no
21 distinctions made, no discrimination against Muslims, no distinctions
22 made between them and Serbs in Pale?
23 A. I assert that the Muslims at Pale were safe until they left
24 voluntarily, until they changed their place of residence voluntarily.
25 They were secure. Whether there were problems in certain enterprises or
1 companies, discrimination against them, I can't say, but when it comes to
2 the public security station and its employees, we were not aware of these
4 Q. And further, according to you, the voluntary departure of Muslims
5 from their homes or their places of business and so on began with or at
6 least was reflected by the voluntary departure of the Muslim police from
7 the Pale SJB; correct? That is, the departure of the Muslim police was
8 also voluntary according to you?
9 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. That's a compound
10 question. I think it's better if he asks them one at a time as a yes
11 answer would be ambiguous.
12 JUDGE KWON: Do you understand the question, Mr. Hrsum?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't understand it well enough,
14 because one part refers to the voluntary departure of Muslims from the
15 Pale municipality, and the other refers to the termination of employment
16 of Muslim policemen. These were two different events, and they were not
17 mutually connected.
18 JUDGE KWON: Very well. If you could rephrase your question,
19 Mr. Tieger.
20 MR. TIEGER:
21 Q. Do you claim, as appears to be the case at paragraph 13 of your
22 statement, Mr. Hrsum, that the Muslim police voluntarily stopped coming
23 to work without explanation and then a meeting was organised and the
24 Muslim police advised that they wanted to temporarily stop coming to work
25 and handed in their weapons and official IDs on their own?
1 A. I have to give a rather lengthy reply to this question. Some of
2 the Muslim policemen employed in the crime service where I worked, and
3 there were two Muslims working there, left their jobs at the Pale police
4 station in 1991, and the other one left sometime in early 1992. That's
5 when they stopped coming to work at the Pale police station, which had
6 procedures in force at the time relating to being moved from one
7 organisational unit to another. That's as regards those two.
8 Also, sometime in early 1992, in January, for inexplicable
9 reasons the commander of the Pale police station, his name was Efendic,
10 stopped coming to work. Efendic was his last name. I can't recall his
11 first name at the moment. He did this for no reason. And some 10 days
12 later, it was discovered that he had started work in the organisational
13 unit of the MUP in Sarajevo. The -- another one who in early 1992 worked
14 as a forensic technician was sent to the training centre for staff
15 members in Vraca. That was a school where I had gone to which was later
16 transformed into a training centre for staff members. So he was sent to
17 a specialist course there and he never came back. Later on we learned
18 that when he completed the course, he started work in the Stari Grad
19 public security station. The procedure at the time --
20 Q. Mr. Hrsum, that's more detail than necessary. Let me shortcut
21 this by asking you whether the -- well, first of all let me say this:
22 The time that you have given for the commander of the police station
23 Efendic, stopping coming to work in January is contradicted by
24 paragraph 13 of your statement where you place that event after such
25 things as the referendum on independence and actually use a precise date
1 of 17 March 1992. But to get to the heart of the matter, let me ask
2 you --
3 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. I think it's only fair
4 to the witness that this be put to him for an answer, not to make it a
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
7 MR. TIEGER: That's fine.
8 JUDGE KWON: Would you like to see your statement? Do you have
9 it with you?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do.
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Mr. Tieger referred to paragraph 13 of your
13 MR. TIEGER: Let me -- in fairness to the witness, Mr. President,
14 the date of March 17th refers to the Muslim police in the Pale area and
15 the reference to Efendic is more amorphous, indicating simply that they
16 were preceded in that by Efendic. I'm going to withdraw that comparison
17 and simply ask, if I may, and simply ask the witness.
18 Q. Witness, is it your position then, without regard to the
19 specifics of how you claim some Muslims left, that the Pale police, the
20 Serbian members of the Pale police, did not disarm the non-Serb police
21 employees and remove them from service? Do you deny that that happened?
22 A. No. No. That did not happen.
23 Q. Let me direct your attention then to a couple of documents.
24 MR. TIEGER: First I'd like to turn to 65 ter 01495. The second
25 page of that, please.
1 Q. And this is a report of the 24th of March, 1992, from the joint
2 MUP Ministry of the Interior in Sarajevo, referring to the removal of
3 policemen of Muslim nationality from the Pale and Sokolac Public Security
4 Stations on 23 March. It indicates the number of policemen, talks about
5 events at Pale involving the chief of the SUP, Mr. Koroman, and
6 six active-duty policemen with rifles, and Mr. Koroman's claim that the
7 removal of these Muslim policemen was a counter-measure against a move
8 made by the Stari Grad Public Security Station in Sarajevo. And then the
9 report goes on to note that a mixed commission was formed in the joint
10 MUP to examine those claims.
11 Mr. Hrsum, this document is a reflection, is it not, of events in
12 March when in fact policemen of Muslim nationality were removed from
13 service by Mr. Koroman and the Serbian members of the public security
15 A. Well, what you say does not correspond to the facts. Employees
16 of Muslim nationality asked for a meeting, six or seven of them who had
17 remained, because, as I have already explained, the others had left
18 individually, one by one. They asked for a meeting with the management.
19 It was requested by Abdulah Kadrovic [phoen] who was in the Pale local
20 commune. After this meeting, they expressed a wish to not have to come
21 to work temporarily, and they explained this by the problems that had
22 arisen in the city of Sarajevo and some other municipalities where there
23 had been some forcible disarming of members of the Serb police, and they
24 insisted on this. They were very persistent. This Abdulah Kadrovic, who
25 was a very good policeman and very influential in the Pale police
1 station, on behalf of all these other policemen kept explaining that they
2 would have to stop coming to work on a temporary basis, and they asked
3 the chief and commander of the police station to approve this. And it
4 was approved, but they had -- because, of course, when a policeman is
5 temporarily not doing their job, he has to give back his badge and his
6 personal official weapons. As for their private weapons, if they had
7 hunting weapons or something like that, they did not have to give that
8 back nor was it taken from them.
9 Q. Mr. Hrsum, you say "what you say," meaning me, "does not
10 correspond to the facts," but of course I was showing you a
11 contemporaneous document produced at the time, immediately after those
13 But let me not show you only a document of the joint MUP, but
14 let's see what the Pale SJB of Republika Srpska had to say about that.
15 MR. TIEGER: And before I do that, Mr. President, I would tender
16 the last document, 65 ter 01495.
17 MR. ROBINSON: No objection, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll receive it.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P6089, Your Honours.
20 MR. TIEGER:
21 Q. Now, the document you're about to see, Mr. Hrsum, is dated the
22 8th of February, 1993 --
23 JUDGE KWON: Exhibit number?
24 MR. TIEGER: Oh, did I not -- I apologise for that.
25 65 ter 24483.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, could you zoom in a
3 MR. TIEGER:
4 Q. As we can see from the header, Mr. Hrsum, this is a document of
5 the Republika Srpska Ministry of the Interior Public Security Station
6 Pale, dated 8 February 1993, and it's a record in connection with the
7 hand-over from the former chief to the new SJB chief. And it states:
8 "According to its records, in the course of 1992, the police
9 station did the following:
10 "Due to the security reasons in mid-March, the police station
11 disarmed the non-Serb police employees and removed them from service."
12 So, Mr. Hrsum, this in fact is the -- or the subsequent account
13 by the Pale police station itself about the removal of those policemen,
14 and this is in fact the accurate account of what happened to these police
15 officers, is it not?
16 A. No. That's not how it happened. As I understand it, this is a
17 report of the police station commander compiled because of the hand-over
18 to another chief of the police station where he mentioned the events that
19 had taken place, but why he described them in this way, I don't know.
20 These things didn't all happen all in March. Members of the Muslim
21 ethnicity, it was only on the 22nd of May, 1992, that their weapons began
22 to be taken away, first of all in the Renovica municipality and then in
23 other places. So this really does not correspond to the real truth. And
24 those six or seven policemen employed at the Pale Public Security Station
25 did not represent any kind of security threat, so I don't know why this
1 was formulated in the way it was.
2 Q. And as you've alluded to, Mr. Hrsum, the document also notes that
3 weapons owned by non-Serb citizens were seized and that was irrespective
4 of whether the owners had permits for them or not, that is, whether the
5 weapons were legally possessed or not. That's another difference between
6 what you said and what this document, official document by the Pale SJB,
8 A. I can only repeat that those policemen who were of Muslim
9 ethnicity who voluntarily handed over their weapons, I think this was in
10 the second half of March or the beginning of the second half of March,
11 they did not have their personal or hunting weapons taken away if they
12 had proper licenses for those weapons.
13 As for the citizens of non-Serb ethnicity, it was only on the
14 22nd of May that their weapons began to be confiscated. It says here
15 that this was done in -- around the middle of March.
16 MR. TIEGER: I tender this document, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P6090, Your Honours.
19 MR. TIEGER:
20 Q. I'd like to look at some other contemporaneously produced
21 documents, Mr. Hrsum, and contrast that -- those documents to what you
22 have asserted in your statement, again now focusing on your claim that
23 the Muslims of Pale left their homes, their livelihoods, and made
24 themselves refugees voluntarily.
25 This Court, Mr. Hrsum, has already received evidence that at the
1 time that these events were taking place in 1992, the president of the
2 Crisis Staff of Pale advised a member of the collective Presidency of
3 Republika Srpska and one of the war commissioners that Muslims were being
4 forcibly moved out, including through a large number of illegal and
5 criminal actions.
6 Now, I'll -- you're welcome to see that document if you want.
7 The Court just -- and the parties just saw that recently, but let me ask
8 you if you are aware of the fact that the president of the Crisis Staff,
9 who was also the president of the Executive Committee, was saying that at
10 the time such events were taking place?
11 A. I am personally not aware of this, and I think it was not known
12 in the public security station either.
13 MR. TIEGER: And I'm referring to P6034, Mr. President, and I
14 believe it's a document of July 7th, 1992.
15 Q. I'd also like to look at what the contemporaneous documentation
16 revealed about the role of the police in moving Muslims out. And in that
17 connection, Mr. Hrsum, although you asserted just now that you were not
18 aware -- aware of it and think it was not known in the public security
19 station either, this Court has also recently received evidence - that's
20 D00031 - that in a meeting of the Municipal Assembly on 18 June 1992, the
21 president of the Assembly and the chairman of the Executive Committee,
22 who was also the president of the Crisis Staff, objected to the
23 activities of the public security station in this respect, that is,
24 during the course of discussion about Muslims moving out, because it had
25 participated in the attempt to organise the Muslims and move them out.
1 Mr. Hrsum, according to the president of the Assembly of the
2 municipality, according to the president of the Executive Committee, who
3 was also president of the Crisis Staff, the Pale police were involved in
4 efforts to organise the Muslims and move them out. That was actually the
5 case, wasn't it?
6 A. There was an Assembly meeting in the second half of the month of
7 June, when conditions were in place for the meeting to take place, and
8 after that the Crisis Staff was disbanded. After the marathon session of
9 the Assembly, a decision was made that those Muslims who wanted to change
10 their place of residence should be allowed to do so. That decision was
11 made, and the Executive Board of the Municipal Assembly sent a written
12 note to the public security station. They asked us to put in place
13 conditions and undertake measures for the secure departure of all those
14 who wanted to leave, and we were supposed to make sure that they crossed
15 the separation line safely.
16 The public security station never participated in any discussions
17 as to whether the Muslims should leave Pale or not. The only involvement
18 was for us to provide security for all the Muslims in Pale, bearing in
19 mind the circumstances and the times as they were.
20 Q. You also take some pains in your statement to credit the police
21 with conscientiously and scrupulously protecting non-Serbs, including
22 following through on investigations of crimes against non-Serbs. And I
23 think we can find that in paragraph 23, referring -- that begins with
24 alleged incidents committed by Muslims against Serbs which were reported
25 to the investigating judge in Sokolac, but which then goes on to cite
1 several incidents in which Muslims were victims and assert that criminal
2 investigations were duly conducted. And in particular, you cite the case
3 of the murder of Muharem Hasna and Ramiz Kujovic.
4 A. [No interpretation]
5 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter could not hear the witness.
6 MR. TIEGER:
7 Q. Witness, I heard you say, "Da," but perhaps you can confirm that
8 to the interpreter. She didn't hear you.
9 A. It is correct that those individuals were killed in Pale, and
10 those killings --
11 Q. Mr. Hrsum, sorry, I appreciated the fact that you responded by
12 acknowledging that you had said that in your statement, because I want to
13 get on to another aspect. I didn't want you to explain that in detail
14 just yet because I do want to look at what actually happened with that
15 investigation. And the reason I want to look at that is because,
16 contrary to the suggestion in paragraph 3 about the scrupulous
17 performance of duty by the Pale police in connection with this incident,
18 there was severe criticism by the chief of the criminal investigation
19 service for not -- for the not proper investigation and fulfilment of
20 their completion of the investigation in connection with that event, and
21 in particular, you were criticised for that, Mr. Hrsum. Do you recall
23 A. I don't remember that I was criticised, but I remember the
24 incident. Those people of Muslim ethnicity were killed, and the
25 investigation was carried out by the investigating judge from Sokolac.
1 The records of the investigation and further instructions were in the
2 hands of the investigating judge. At that time, pursuant to the
3 regulations that were in effect in our area, it was an investigating
4 judge who carried out an on-site inspection, compiled the records of
5 that, and based on all those documents, photographic evidence and
6 everything else that could possibly be collected on the spot in view of
7 the technical shortcomings were then forwarded to the investigating judge
8 and then the investigating judge would then forward the material to the
9 prosecutor who then decided whether any other measures should be
10 undertaken or, alternatively, there was enough to issue an indictment and
11 continue with the procedure.
12 That was the procedure that was in place. Such on-site
13 inspections were carried out by an investigating judge accompanied by
14 police members, and all that was done at our request.
15 Q. Thank you. Mr. Hrsum, I think the answer to the question I had
16 asked was no, you don't remember that you were criticised. For future
17 questions, I would appreciate it if we could follow a question-and-answer
19 MR. TIEGER: Let me, then, turn to 65 ter 24148 which is a report
20 on activities of the criminal investigation service in the period between
21 1 April and 31 December 1992.
22 If we could turn, please, to page 4 of the English and also 4 of
23 the B/C/S. Scroll down toward the bottom.
24 That report states, and I'll just read two pertinent sections at
25 the -- toward the bottom of the first full paragraph on page 4 of the
1 English and toward the -- in the second-to-last paragraph on -- in the
2 B/C/S. It states -- here it says:
3 "Toco Hrsun," but if you look at the B/C/S, you can clearly see
4 it's "Tomo Hrsum," as we can see from later entries, "did not write the
5 official report in connection with the murder of Hasna Kujovic, the
6 report in connection with the damage caused by a hand-grenade thrown into
7 the Sandro [phoen] bar, and neither did he take the written statement
8 from Predrag Vojnovic about the circumstances of the traffic accident he
9 had caused or the statement of the injured party."
10 And it continues with similar criticisms on the next page, in the
11 middle of page 5 of the English and toward the bottom of the next page in
13 "In the same vein, Tomo Hrsum interrogated several persons who
14 participated in the crime of forcible entry and theft into a shop in
15 Praca, but he never finished the case so that a criminal report was never
16 submitted or registered in spite of the significant material damage."
17 And it goes on to note you are "carrying out certain tasks that
18 were never reported to anyone without having done anything concrete, no
20 Q. Now, focusing specifically on the murder of Hasna Kujovic, which
21 you cite in your statement, this official report on the activities of the
22 criminal investigation service, Mr. Hrsum, states that, in fact, you
23 didn't write the official report in connection with that murder and
24 criticises that failure as a problem of the service; correct?
25 A. That report was written, and it was sent to the investigating
1 judge, without that report -- without all the necessary documentation
2 that should have been obtained from the doctor who inspected the body,
3 because that was all that we could do. We did not have an expert that
4 could have carried a post-mortem. So all that was forwarded. It was all
5 registered, and that report is in the files of the prosecutor, and I
6 suppose that the prosecutor forwarded all that to the investigating judge
7 who then ordered certain other measures that needed to be carried out. I
8 believe that exists in the archives of the prosecutor's office.
9 It may have happened that the report was not immediately compiled
10 because there was a medical report pending, photo documentation had to be
11 prepared. At that time we did not have a forensic technician who could
12 do that. Before the war we had a forensic technician. He was a Muslim,
13 but he left the public security station in January. Everything, however,
14 was done and sent to the prosecutor's office in the form of a report, and
15 that was all registered in the log-book that was kept at the public
16 security station. I believe that that log-book still exists and that all
17 that can be verified even today.
18 Q. Well, it -- it hadn't -- it certainly hadn't been completed by
19 this date. It hadn't been completed by December 5th when -- and the
20 problem with not completing it, the problem with the fact that you didn't
21 write that official report means that the report doesn't get submitted to
22 the public prosecutor; right? A?
23 MR. TIEGER: And in that connection, I'd like to look at
24 65 ter 18828.
25 MR. ROBINSON: If the witness can be given a chance to answer
1 that question.
2 MR. TIEGER: Well, I'm going to direct his attention to something
3 very indirectly and then give him a chance to answer the question. I
4 think that's the more efficient way to proceed.
5 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Hrsum, would you like to comment on Mr. Tieger's
6 statement just now?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know what to say. I've
8 already told you that we had to wait for an order from the judge as to
9 whether to do something else. We had to wait for the doctor's report on
10 visual inspection, and based on that, we compiled our report and sent it
11 to the prosecutor's office. There were crimes that could not be
12 registered immediately in the log-book, because some facts had to be
13 collected to point to a reasonable doubt that existed. When reasonable
14 suspicion was established, then we forwarded information to the
15 prosecutor's office in the form of a report.
16 MR. TIEGER:
17 Q. And -- and the --
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Please proceed.
19 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
20 Q. And the reality is, Mr. Hrsum, that the head of the criminal
21 investigation service, the head of criminal investigations, criticised
22 the failure to write the official report, not only the document we've
23 just seen but in the document I was just about to show you, 65 ter 18828.
25 And if we look at the bottom of the page, we can see the
2 [As read] "Tomo Hrsum, an inspector in the criminal service did
3 not complete a large number of cases. He did not write an official
4 report on the investigation of murder of Hasna Kujovic and the
5 investigation on site was completed in 1992 by the investigating judge
6 and employees of this SJB, which means that the report has never been
7 submitted to the Sokolac municipal public prosecutor."
8 And the date of this document is December 5th, 1992.
9 A. This does not tally with any of the facts. There is a report
10 with all the necessary documents. The SJB Pale sent all that to the
11 prosecutor's office. The investigating judge also attached his report.
12 All that was recorded in the log-book, and a copy of that exists at the
13 Pale SJB. This does not correspond with the truth.
14 I really don't know what kind of report is this. I don't know
15 who drafted this, who -- who it was sent to, who verified this. What is
16 this report about? I would like somebody to explain to me.
17 Since I was the chief of the crime prevention services and if a
18 report was written about the work of that service, it had to be sent to
19 the chief and to the superior of the organ because that report would have
20 been written by the SJB and the administration for administrative affairs
21 and then it was sent to the officer in charge. And based on that, an
22 annual report would be drafted. I don't know what is -- what this is.
23 If this is an annual report that had to be sent to the higher instances
24 within the MUP. I really don't know what this is.
25 What kind of report is this? I don't know who it was sent to.
1 Every report had to be stamped. It had to be signed. Is this stamped?
2 Is this signed? Is this a statement? What is this?
3 Q. If we turn to the last page, we can see that it's dated the
4 5th of December, 1993. It says: "Report written by Stjepan Micic." At
5 the stop of the page -- well, let's see very quickly. At the top of the
6 page, the first page, it indicates: "Composed by the head of the
7 service, Mr. Micic," and then it was followed by the report on the
8 31st of December that we previously saw.
9 And in that connection, let me just turn quickly to --
10 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. What's the date of this document,
11 Mr. Tieger?
12 MR. TIEGER: You can find it on the last page, Mr. President.
13 JUDGE KWON: And which is? Is it not May 1993?
14 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry. That would be correct. My apologies for
15 that misreading of the date, or misstatement of the date. 1993 is what I
16 meant to say instead of --
17 JUDGE KWON: Do you know Stjepan Micic, Mr. Hrsum?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do.
19 MR. TIEGER: Mr. President, I don't want to interrupt the Court's
20 questions, but I was -- in that regard I was going to turn to
21 65 ter 24485, which is a list of Pale police station members.
22 JUDGE KWON: But let's hear from the witness about this document.
23 Now you see that there is signature of Micic.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I see Mr. Micic's signature here
25 and I can see that that report was written on the 12th of May, 1993.
1 A report on the work of the crime prevention services and the
2 report on the police organs and departments within the SJB were issued on
3 a monthly, three monthly, and biannual basis. They would be drafted on
4 the 1st of January, the 1st of April, and then there would be the
5 biannual report which was written on the 1st of July. All those reports
6 had to have a heading, the addressee. If that was a proper report. If
7 it was just something that an individual did for his own pleasure, it
8 didn't have to. Every such report had to be stamped and signed by the
9 person who drafted it, but with the Court's leave, I would like to
10 provide another comment if I may.
11 Perhaps some things about Mr. Micic. On the eve of the war he
12 arrived at the SJB. He -- some five or ten days before the war broke
13 out, he was appointed by the MUP of the Republic of Bosnia and
14 Herzegovina and that's where he worked. All that time that he was at the
15 SJB, he always had problems. He was a man who had graduated from the
16 school of political sciences. He was a journalist and he didn't know
17 much about the policing and the police work. He didn't know what was
18 necessary, what facts were necessary to collect in order to establish
19 that there was reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed.
20 I can see an example here. My conversation or -- with several
21 individuals in Praca. It is true at that we brought those individuals
22 in, that we took their written statements and we interviewed them, but
23 there was not an aggrieved party. There were no damages. We could not
24 interview all the persons at the same time over a short period of time.
25 We could not bring them in in such a short period of time because there
1 were a lot of people who had stolen goods from a shop, and that shop was
2 socially owned, and those goods were taken away. And based on the
3 statements that we collected and that were for the large part denied by
4 the individuals who were suspected as the perpetrators of the crimes, we
5 did not have any grounds to send all that to the prosecutor in the form
6 of a crime report because all that would have been returned to us by the
7 prosecutor's office or rejected by him. It was not common practice to do
9 Conditions had to be put in place for the proper facts to be
10 collected in order to point out that a crime was indeed perpetrated by
11 certain individuals. Based on the indicia that we had at that time, we
12 could not draft a criminal report. That's why I don't understand who did
13 this and who that person sent it to.
14 JUDGE KWON: In the future, could you speak a bit -- a bit more
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise.
17 JUDGE KWON: And you don't have to be nervous and just
18 concentrate on the question, please.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.
20 JUDGE KWON: Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
21 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President. I'd tender those last
22 two documents, please.
23 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. Just to be clear, I think we
24 haven't had any -- tender -- this is three documents. I'm not sure if
25 we're -- 24481, 18828, and I'm not sure if he's offering 24485. In any
1 event, we no objection to those.
2 JUDGE KWON: Having noted down two documents --
3 MR. TIEGER: Well, since -- I was going to pass on that. We can
4 call up 24485 very quickly. It's a list that wasn't shown to the witness
5 yet and just he can confirm --
6 JUDGE KWON: First document, could you give the number again,
7 RS MUP report, end-of-year report.
8 MR. TIEGER: 24481, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE KWON: And 18828.
10 MR. TIEGER: That's correct.
11 JUDGE KWON: We'll admit those two.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibits P6091 and P6092 respectively,
13 Your Honours.
14 MR. TIEGER: And if we could quickly call 24485.
15 Q. Mr. Hrsum, if you could just confirm that that is your name that
16 appears there as well as Mr. Micic and other members of the Pale SJB,
17 including the chief, Malko Koroman.
18 A. Yes.
19 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Exhibit P6093. Almost done, Mr. Tieger?
21 MR. TIEGER: I noticed that, Mr. President. I have three
22 discrete areas -- well, actually more like two areas. One of which is --
23 is quite brief and specific and I'll try to move through those as quickly
24 as possible, if I may. I think they're areas the Court would want to
25 hear about.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Please proceed.
3 MR. TIEGER: Thank you very much. And Mr. Reid had provided me
4 with a note indicating when the allotted time had been up, but we were in
5 the middle of a discussion and I -- although I asked him to do so so I
6 could note it specifically for the Court, I failed to do so. So thank
7 you for bringing that to my attention.
8 Q. Mr. Hrsum, I want to look at one other aspect of the Pale
9 police's monitoring of and responding to any crimes against Muslims. And
10 in that connection, I'd like to turn to paragraph 17 of your statement
11 where you refer to the Muslims, the hundreds of Muslims, who arrived from
12 Bratunac, and as Mr. Karadzic says in his summary, were hosted by the --
13 by Pale authorities in Pale.
14 In paragraph 17, Mr. Micic -- Mr. Hrsum, you state:
15 "There is no record or information that these citizens had been
16 abused during their stay in Pale."
17 Do you know, Mr. Hrsum, whether or not these -- or first of all,
18 do you claim that these 400 people, that none of these 400 people had
19 been abused at any time prior to their arrival in Pale, or during their
20 stay in Pale, or as they were being escorted to their ultimate
21 destination from Pale?
22 A. Before they arrived at Pale, I can't say whether they were
23 ill-treated, whether they were subjected to some illegal measures. I can
24 claim that during their stay at Pale, which was for about 48 hours, no
25 repressive measures were applied against any individual by the police.
1 Until the moment they were provided security for the convoy, those people
2 did not suffer any abuse. There were about 400 of them. I don't know
3 the exact number, but I believe that there were about 400 of them.
4 Q. Well, you say there was no record or information, but this
5 Trial Chamber has repeatedly seen the video evidence of what these people
6 looked like upon their arrival in Visoko. And I understand that our
7 video capabilities are limited today, but I don't think there'll be any
8 dispute among the parties if I say that those people were visibly beaten
9 and bruised and gashed and limping and some -- one unable to hold down
10 any water, and in short, they were manifestly abused.
11 Now, Mr. Hrsum, that took place either before they arrived at
12 Pale, while they were in Pale, or after they left Pale under escort. Are
13 you saying the Pale police never became aware of the beatings and abuse
14 that these people suffered?
15 A. The Pale police did not investigate whether those people had been
16 mistreated earlier on and whether they had went through any unpleasant
17 situations prior to their arrival at Pale. As of the moment when they
18 arrived there and as of the moment when the president of the municipality
19 spoke to those who escorted them from Bratunac, I can claim with
20 certainty that no one at Pale undertook any repressive or provocative
21 measures against those people. They were accommodated in Pale, and they
22 were placed in the sports hall of the Romanija club. And since the
23 premises were not too large, some of them even slept on the buses. The
24 buses were secured because they were in the vicinity of the police
25 station. We even organised that food be brought from the barracks at
1 Pale. The same kind of food was being delivered to the policemen on duty
2 in the station, meaning they enjoyed the same kind of food, and I claim
3 that with certainty.
4 Our police did not take part in escorting them to their final
5 destination. The public security station personnel verified what route
6 was to be taken. All routes were cut off. They found a safe route
7 through the forest in order to bring them from Pale down to Ilijas. That
8 was the task that the police station took -- undertook upon itself. The
9 next day the route was checked in order to verify whether it was safe and
10 whether the buses can pass through. These were very narrow forest and
11 village roads. That was the task of the Pale Public Security Station.
12 The following day the people were transported. Now, whether they
13 had been mistreated before that or not, all I can say is that they were
14 dressed partly in civilian clothes and partly in military close. Some of
15 them had military jackets or military pants, whereas the rest of their
16 clothes would be civilian. Now, whether they had been mistreated or not,
17 that's something I can't say, and the public security station at Pale did
18 not attempt to obtain information of any potential mistreatment earlier
20 Q. So I take it that as far as you know, no one was ever punished
21 for what happened to these people.
22 A. I don't know whether someone was punished in Bratunac and whether
23 such people may have been from the military or civilian authorities. All
24 I know is that there were no problems at Pale.
25 If I may, it was explained to the authorities in Pale and to the
1 police that those Muslims wanted to go to Central Bosnia. Whether that
2 was true or not, I ...
3 Q. We just talked about what happened at the time of the arrival of
4 the Bratunac -- the hundreds of people from Bratunac. Do you claim that
5 the members of the Pale police never beat people in custody at any time
6 during 1992? And in particular, I'm referring to Muslims.
7 A. I don't understand. Do you mean the citizens from Bratunac or
8 some other Muslims who were temporarily in the Romanija sports hall?
9 Q. No. I was explicitly trying to move away from the event
10 involving the hundreds of people from Bratunac since you express some
11 views on that, but I was asking you if you claim that Muslims were never
12 beaten at any other time in 1992 while in the custody of the police.
13 A. Well, I can't say that perhaps there were no abuses by those who
14 secured the premises or that maybe they allowed entry to certain
15 individuals. As for the leadership of the Pale police station, it was
16 never made aware of it. They were never notified by either those who
17 guarded any people or the people who were there, who were occasionally
18 visited by the chief of police. There were strict orders that no person
19 can enter the premises unless approved by the chief of the police
21 Whether there were any abuses is something I can't say, but I can
22 say something else: If that had been known, if that had been
23 established, measures would have been taken definitely against the
24 employees who secured the sports hall and against those who attempted to
25 enter the premises. That's what I can say with certainty. As for
1 anything else, I cannot be certain. In any case, the authorities tried
2 to prevent unauthorised entry by all means.
3 As for the policemen of the public security station at Pale, I
4 dare claim that they did not undertake any repressive measures against
5 the people detained there.
6 Q. All right. Please try to heed the Court's suggestion about the
7 length of the answers, sir.
8 What about you, Mr. Hrsum? This Trial Chamber has received
9 evidence, in fact - that's in P00733 - that you were personally involved
10 in beating Muslim detainees.
11 A. I never did that.
12 Q. And can you think of any reason why anybody would single you out
13 from other policemen as being a person involved in beatings?
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we ask Mr. Tieger to show the
15 document to the witness and mention the name.
16 JUDGE KWON: Of course he will come to that, but I would like you
17 not to interfere with the lines of questions from the Prosecutor.
18 Yes, Mr. Tieger, please continue.
19 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
20 Q. Did you recall the last question I asked, sir?
21 A. I do recall your last question. I don't know who that could have
22 been or why they would say that. I claim that I have never taken part in
23 such activities, and I never entered the room where those people were
25 MR. TIEGER: That's at P730 -- 00733, paragraph 23.
1 JUDGE KWON: I think it's fair to put it to the witness. Was it
2 admitted under seal or not?
3 MR. TIEGER: No, Mr. President. I was actually calling it up.
4 JUDGE KWON: It was Mr. Crncalo's statement.
5 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Mr. Sulejman Crncalo.
6 Okay. It gives the date.
7 JUDGE KWON: Probably you need to give him -- show the next page
8 for the witness.
9 MR. TIEGER: Yeah.
10 Q. If you've read that portion, sir, we're moving on to the next
11 page which contains the bulk of that paragraph. And then just to
12 continue, in paragraph 24 it notes that Mr. Koroman arrived and
13 recognised Mr. Crncalo and ordered Mr. Hrsum from the room. That's
14 what's alleged, sir. Do you claim that wasn't you?
15 A. It is me, but this is not true, and the sequence of events is not
16 described as it should be. I recall having seen this statement. It's
17 even on the internet. This statement is inaccurate in describing how it
18 developed and why. I don't know if you want me to expand. I simply
19 wanted to say that the employees of the crime service in
20 Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time never wore uniforms and did not have
21 batons that he mentions here. All of the equipment crime officers had
22 was the official ID, the official sidearm, and handcuffs. There were no
23 batons ever issued to the employees of the crime service or any uniforms
24 until the war began when we were issued with standard issue military
25 uniforms that we also wore at the front lines.
1 Mr. Crncalo was brought by Mr. Koroman, the chief of station,
2 into my office. He was taken in by some policemen, and he wanted to
3 speak to Mr. Koroman first. He brought him in to the office and said
4 that a statement should be taken since he was found with a weapon, a
5 hunting rifle. It seemed that his possession of that weapon was against
6 the law. It was a type of misdemeanour, as a matter of fact. It did not
7 qualify as a crime. That is why he was released.
8 As for the other person, he did not have a weapon on him at the
9 moment of being brought in to the police station.
10 Once the interview in the police station was over, the same
11 Mr. Koroman, because they frequently talked to him and he represented
12 himself as a Muslim representative, trying to give an impression that he
13 could speak for the Muslim side, and they frequently met in the municipal
15 Q. All right. I have --
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] An intervention for the transcript.
17 We don't have the end of the sentence. The witness said that
18 Malko Koroman put them in his own vehicle and took them home to their
20 MR. TIEGER: Thank you.
21 Q. I have one more very discrete area, and that arises from
22 paragraph 15 of your statement, sir, in which you say:
23 "In mid-April, the RS Presidency established the Territorial
24 Defence as the armed forces of the Serbian Republic of BH which was
25 not mobilised since these forces were mobilised at a later date."
1 The fact is, sir, and -- that an imminent threat of war and a
2 general public mobilisation was ordered on the entire territory of the RS
3 by the republic officials, and in that case by Mr. Subotic, on the
4 16th of April, 1992, right in mid-April, the time you say it was first
5 formed and not mobilised.
6 MR. TIEGER: And that's P02412. If we could turn to that
8 As we see at the bottom, the decision, a general public
9 mobilisation has been ordered on the entire territory of Serbian BH, and
10 that document is dated the 16th of April, 1992.
11 Further, if we turn to the next page in English, and the next
12 page in B/C/S as well, it provides a statement of reasons. It further
13 provides that the municipal Territorial Defence Staffs that have operated
14 regularly so far shall remain in the same formation and establishment.
15 Q. And in fact, Mr. Hrsum, contrary to the suggestion in your
16 statement, Pale was one of those municipalities where the municipal TO
17 staff was already operating regularly; correct? By that date.
18 A. Relatively speaking. There were Muslim employees in those staffs
19 as well who sometimes were there and sometimes were not. At some point
20 there was even some talk of missing documents. I can't confirm that. It
21 was just a rumour.
22 Q. Well, in fact, in early April, the Pale municipality staff was
23 not only functioning, but it was operating in such a manner as to be
24 engaged in military activity against the old part of the city of
1 A. No. The TO staff did not take part in the operation aimed at
2 Sarajevo. When the first clashes erupted on the 6th -- well, the
3 territory of Stari Grad municipality and the border with the municipality
4 of Srpski, Serbian Stari Grad, those two settlements have a clear
5 division between them, between the Serbian and Muslim settlement. The
6 moment there were problems, the Serbian citizens who live in the
7 direction of the Srpski Stari Grad municipality, they set up positions
8 and asked for help and asked that members of TO units joined them.
9 However, at the time, the TO did not have any units. There was a
10 barracks in Pale where Serb citizens reported to mobilisation which was
11 issued by the JNA. They were trying to man their ranks.
12 MR. TIEGER: Can we call up 65 ter --
13 Q. Sir, that was long answer. I trust you've -- I haven't asked you
14 about everything the TO was doing. I asked you about whether or not they
15 engaged in military activity against the old part of Sarajevo. I think
16 you've answered that question.
17 MR. TIEGER: And in that connection, I'd like to turn to
18 65 ter 15577. This is a document of the command of the
19 2nd Military District dated the 8th of April, 1992. And if we turn to
20 page 2 of the English and we see item under 4th Corps. It's on page 1 of
21 the B/C/S. It provides or it -- it states that:
22 "During the afternoon, the members of the Territorial Defence
23 from Pale municipality opened ... fire on the sector of Vratnik and on
24 the old part of the city of Sarajevo."
25 Q. This is a contemporaneous reflection of the reality of what was
1 happening with respect to the Pale TO, Mr. Hrsum, that is in
2 contravention of what you've just told us; correct?
3 A. Looking at the report, one would say so. Fire was opened. There
4 was sporadic shooting. At the time, the Pale police station also sent in
5 a reinforced patrol to a check-point. The check-point was at the
6 location where a check-point had been agreed upon between the public
7 security station chief at Pale and the public security station chief at
8 Stari Grad. The people who self-organised and who set up guards
9 exchanged fire. There was even mortar fire as far as I know and
10 according to what those policemen who were there at the check-point told
11 us. Well, that was simply not in their report.
12 MR. TIEGER: I have nothing further, Mr. President, except to
13 tender this document.
14 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll receive it.
15 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P6094, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE KWON: We have about seven minutes before the break,
17 Mr. Karadzic. Would you like to start your re-examination, if any?
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There is, Your Excellency, but I'll
19 need more than seven minutes. Perhaps it is a good time for a break.
20 The last break was also a little bit early. Perhaps this one could be
21 too. I'll be able to conclude my cross-examination after the break -- my
23 JUDGE KWON: Very well. We'll have a break for 45 minutes and
24 resume at 10 past 1.00.
25 [The witness stands down]
1 --- Recess taken at 12.24 p.m.
2 --- On resuming at 1.15 p.m.
3 JUDGE KWON: I have a brief question for you, Mr. Robinson, in
4 private session. Could the Chamber move into private session.
5 [Private session]
7 [Open session]
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll bring in the next witness.
9 While we're doing that, Mr. Robinson, having heard the overall
10 estimated length of the cross-examination for General Milosevic, I wonder
11 whether you are now in the position to tell us when we'll hear the
12 evidence of Mr. Krstic.
13 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, thank you, Mr. President. We actually made a
14 filing just a few minutes ago of our weekly witness list for next week
15 but we're proposing that General Krstic be heard on either Wednesday
16 afternoon or Thursday after the testimony of Mr. Trifkovic and Garaplija.
17 So we are estimating that on Tuesday the cross-examination, and hopefully
18 the redirect, could be completed for General Milosevic. And then on
19 Wednesday we would have Mr. Trifkovic, Mr. Garaplija, and if there is any
20 time left over that day, General Krstic, and if not, we would have
21 General Krstic the next day.
22 And I've also notified his lawyer of that.
23 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. And from next week we are supposed to
24 move to Courtroom III, but while we are hearing evidence of
25 Mr. Milosevic, we will remain in Courtroom I. And I appreciate the
1 assistance, co-operation of the Chamber that hears the Mladic case.
2 [The witness takes the stand]
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
4 Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
5 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Hrsum, you were shown document P6 in
6 relation --
7 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not catch the number.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. In relation --
10 JUDGE KWON: Could you repeat the exhibit number.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] P6090. Now it's all right in the
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. On page 40 of today's transcript, lines 1 to 6, you mentioned the
15 events in the public security station of Stari Grad which influenced the
16 events at Pale. In your statement, in paragraph 7 you say that the SDS
17 won a landslide victory at Pale. Did the SDS share power with the SDA
18 party at Pale?
19 A. Yes. It shared power with the SDA at Pale so that the deputy of
20 the president of the municipality was a Muslim. That was how they agreed
21 to share power.
22 Q. Thank you. Did these inter-party agreements concern other
23 government bodies and services such as the police, for example?
24 A. Yes, but it was only afterwards, only later that these agreements
25 had to do with the MUP of Republika Srpska. However, in the public
1 security station of Pale, there was never a division of the police
2 station between the Muslim part and the Serb part.
3 Q. Thank you. Mr. Hrsum, I'm interested in the pre-war period now.
4 Why was Stari Grad mentioned? Was there an agreement in Stari Grad for
5 there to be a similar division of posts as in the police as at Pale?
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
7 MR. TIEGER: Well, maybe it's -- excuse me. Maybe it's
8 relatively harmless in context, but it should be -- it's rather
9 inappropriate to ask the question and then answer it in the --
10 immediately afterwards in the submission to the witness. So I'd
11 discourage that form of questioning.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Mr. Hrsum, can you then tell me why on page 40, during today's
15 cross-examination, you mentioned the Stari Grad Public Security Station
16 in connection with events at the Pale Public Security Station?
17 A. In all the stations and before these agreements were made the
18 ethnic composition of the policemen reflected the ethnic composition of
19 the local population. In Sarajevo, there was a certain number of
20 policemen doing their jobs, but in mid-February they were simply disarmed
21 and chased out of the Stari Grad police station, and they arrived at the
22 Pale police station. However, they did not carry on their work on the
23 territory of the Pale Public Security Station but were instead sent to do
24 that work in the part of the Stari Grad municipality in Sarajevo which
25 was mostly Serb as regards population, and that was Vucija Luka and other
2 Q. Thank you.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now briefly look at D386 in
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Please take a look at this document and tell us who issued it and
7 what it refers to.
8 A. This document was issued by the Stari Grad Public Security
9 Station in Sarajevo, and it refers to the situation and the impossibility
10 to work of members of the Serb ethnicity in that police station, and it
11 talks about how they're at risk.
12 Q. Thank you. Ismet Dahic is mentioned and the Green Berets in
13 point 2. Can you tell us what you know about this?
14 A. Well, when the reserve police force was mobilised following
15 orders from the minister of the interior, in the Stari Grad police
16 station parts of members of the Patriotic League and the Green Berets
17 were mobilised, and the chief of the station and the commander of the
18 station co-operated with the command of the Green Berets and the
19 Patriotic League, and they were even together with active-duty policemen
20 at the check-points. I'm referring to policemen from Stari Grad.
21 Q. Thank you. Can we look at the last page to see how many Serb
22 policemen signed this.
23 A. I can't see the number very well.
24 Q. About 20?
25 A. Some 20 or so.
1 Q. Mr. Hrsum, was it the custom when someone was received into the
2 reserve police force or the regular police force to check up on these
3 people, and were these members of the Green Berets and the
4 Patriotic League scrutinised in this sense?
5 A. Before the war, for someone to be part of the reserve police
6 force they had to be subjected to a check. It couldn't be someone who
7 had been convicted of a crime or who was being tried for a crime or even
8 for a misdemeanour with the exception of some traffic violations and so
9 on. There were teachers and doctors who were in the reserve police force
10 and eminent people. However, the persons who were in the Green Berets
11 and the Patriotic League who entered the reserve police force in
12 Stari Grad municipality were not subjected to such checks. I had been
13 employed in the crime prevention service for a long time, and I knew
14 that -- among them were even persons who were known to the police and who
15 were prone to committing crimes.
16 Q. Thank you, Mr. Hrsum. After the war you worked until 2001, as it
17 says in paragraph 1 of your statement. Did you have to go through a
18 security check? Did you have to be certified? You just mentioned that
19 the ITPF certifies policemen.
20 A. Well, ITPF certified the police in Republika Srpska on two
21 occasions. The first time was in late 1997 and early 1998, and there was
22 a rigorous certification of the police of Republika Srpska by the IE [as
23 interpretation] Federation sometime in 2000. I personally went through
24 this certification process, and I have the certificate at home.
25 Q. Thank you. These events in Stari Grad municipality, which is
1 neighbouring to Pale, how did it -- how was it reflected in the police
2 station at Pale? You spoke about this on page 40 of the transcript.
3 A. The events in the Stari Grad Public Security Station had
4 repercussions in the security station in Pale. There were comments,
5 unlawful acts. However, nothing changed in the work of the Pale Public
6 Security Station. It continued to function in the same way as before,
7 and all communications went through the city SUP and the security centre,
8 and those persons who had arrived were sent to the area of these
9 neighbourhoods which were inhabited by Serbs where a municipality was
10 established later on, and there was a single station, department there,
11 set up there, which was -- actually came under the command of the Pale
12 Public Security Station.
13 Q. Thank you. Today on pages 41 and 42, you said that document
14 56090 --
15 THE INTERPRETER: P6090, sorry, interpreter's correction.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. -- you said that what was stated was not correct because the
18 chronological sequence of events was incorrectly described and that the
19 Muslims were not disarmed in March but in May 1992. Is this correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please let's have a look at D16.
22 D16, please.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Can you tell us the date here and what this refers to?
25 A. This refers to the speech made by Malko Koroman in the public
1 media, that is, in a TV broadcast, because in the community centre at
2 Pale police -- a television station was started, and the Muslims were to
3 hand over their weapons. There was a consequence of the situation in the
4 Renovica local commune when a police tactical action was carried out to
5 disarm Muslims when two police officers were killed.
6 Q. Thank you. In this document, P6090, does it say that citizens of
7 Muslim ethnicities were disarmed in March, and before this, was there any
8 disarming of Muslims before the 22nd of May, and why was this order
9 issued -- or, rather, what was the occasion for what happened on the
10 22nd of May, when those people from Renovica had to hand over their
12 A. Well, there were several things that influenced the planning and
13 implementation of the tactical police action. One of these was that in
14 the Renovica area, there were armed persons in uniform moving about, and
15 up to that point such uniforms had not been seen in the former
17 The second reason for this action was that there were frequent
18 reports by the military security organs to the effect that there were
19 incursions and constant attacks and incursions in the Renovica barracks,
20 which was in the centre of Renovica, and at the perimeter of this area
21 there were three or four villages from which equipment and materiel were
22 removed. This includes weapons, ammunition, explosive devices, and so
24 The third reason was that in the Renovica area, there were two
25 persons who could be linked to a murder which had taken place before the
1 war broke out, and the corpse was found in the Pale area, but the place
2 where the crime was perpetrated and the perpetrator could not be found.
3 However, based on a report from the security centre in Sarajevo, we knew
4 that these two people were the last to be seen with the victim while he
5 was still alive.
6 Q. As a member of the police, were you informed about the arming,
7 the new arming that was taking place on the territory of your
8 municipality, and did the police demand that these weapons be handed
10 A. Before the war broke out, the police had information about the
11 distribution of weapons to Muslims. And on three occasions, the police
12 took action with representatives of the security services who were in
13 charge of these actions, because they joined in these actions to detect
14 criminal offences and submit criminal reports. There was other
15 information about this, but it was just indicia.
16 Q. In the transcript it's been transcribed differently. Was that
17 the CSB, and what CSB was -- had jurisdiction over Pale, and was it
18 involved in detecting illegal arming?
19 A. The CSB of Sarajevo with its headquarters in Sarajevo was
20 responsible for several municipalities in the Sarajevo area. Its
21 operative purview was broader in territorial terms than just the SUP of
22 Sarajevo, and their employees were always involved in investigating
23 serious crimes, or if a public security station needed assistance and
24 asked for assistance from employees of the CSB. In Pale we regularly
25 informed the CSB and asked for their assistance. Until -- this was all
1 until the war broke out.
2 Q. Thank you. Can you recall a name of a person who participated in
3 the dissemination and concealment of weapons?
4 A. In one case it was Dulovic, a soldier who was at the barracks in
5 Renovica. That barracks was actually a depot of equipment and materiel
6 more than barracks for a combat unit or troops. This Renovic [as
7 interpreted], together with some other persons from the Podgrab, Praca
8 and Renovica municipalities, was detained, and this was something that
9 the military security organs in the Victor Bubanj barracks were in charge
10 of. After this, there was a protest by members of the Muslim ethnic
11 group both in Pale and Sarajevo.
12 The second instance was when a hodza - that is a representative
13 of the religious community - who was carrying out his religious duty in
14 the Praca area, and he had a TAM vehicle, and in his vehicle, based on a
15 report, weapons were found.
16 A third instance was very telling. It was a shop selling sports
17 equipment in the Pale area, and this happened in early 1991. The person
18 who was running that shop was selling weapons and also giving away
19 weapons and without the buyers of the weapons obtaining licenses
20 beforehand. And he did not make lists of these people, nor did he inform
21 the police station of these sales, and he had to do that in order for
22 those persons to get licenses to carry weapons. And employees of the CSB
23 participated in this, and those persons, in order to say that there is --
24 to reduce their responsibility said that they had been doing this with
25 the approval of people from the MUP, and they mentioned certain names.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He mentioned Avdo Hebib. It seems
2 the name did not make it into the record.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can we look at D14.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. An imam is referred to, a Muslim priest. Is that what you had in
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. The date is the 28th of April. Mr. Hrsum, is the name of
11 Senaid Memic mentioned, from Hrasnica, who distributed the weapons?
12 A. Yes, he is mentioned.
13 Q. Thank you. Today my learned friend Mr. Tieger suggested to you
14 that based on the unsigned document which was not issued as part of the
15 standard protocol, the disarming took place in March. Before these
16 weapons were discovered on the 28th of April and after the 22nd of May,
17 were Muslims disarmed? Were they disarmed before this?
18 A. The Muslim population was not being disarmed before this date.
19 They were not disarmed on this occasion either, at least not all of them.
20 Before the war Fazlo Gljiva took part in distributing and forwarding
21 weapons. Allegedly, he submitted an anonymous report actually reporting
22 himself. He stated the weapons were on his vehicle as he sold some and
23 gave away some. There was all -- basically a clash among the members of
24 the Muslim community because some received weapons for free from him,
25 whereas others paid a lot, and they were dissatisfied with Gljiva's
1 behaviour. In order to protect himself and as we were told by the CSB,
2 he reported that the weapons were in his vehicle. This was only later
3 when Fazlo, aka Gljiva, returned. For a while he was absent. Once he
4 returned, he wanted to settle accounts with those who caused trouble for
5 him later on. So he informed certain people at the public security
6 station to go and collect such weapons. This was not the process of
7 disarmament of the Muslim population en masse such as the one which
8 followed the 22nd of May.
9 Q. Thank you. Today at pages 43 and 44 of the transcript, my
10 learned friend Mr. Tieger suggested to you -- or actually, you answered
11 that departure was made possible only to -- for those Muslims who wanted
12 it; correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Thank you.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have D31, please, Defence
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Can you identify the document? Is the date the 18th of June?
19 A. Pardon me. Could we please zoom in? The document is the minutes
20 of a session of the Pale Municipal Assembly. This one was held on the
21 18th of June, 1992. Actually, the 15th of June.
22 Q. And that is actually two and a half months after the outbreak of
23 war in Sarajevo.
24 A. Yes, exactly two and a half months later.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we go to page 4, item 2. We'll
2 see whether the same goes for the English version. Item 2. Can we
3 please locate it in the English.
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Tell us what was decided here. The decision-making process is
6 described, as well as the discussion which preceded it.
7 A. Yes. I know that it was decided to approve the requests of
8 Muslims who wanted to change their places of residence on a temporary
9 basis. It pertained to all those who wanted to move, and it was decided
10 only after a marathon session. I think this particular session lasted
11 for 15 or 16 hours. It was based on their request and based on the lists
12 which they brought in themselves on two or three occasions that they were
13 allowed to leave. They asked the Municipal Assembly at Pale to approve
15 Q. Thank you. You pointed out that it was a temporary change of
16 residence. As regards our law, is there a difference between a permanent
17 and temporary place of residence?
18 A. These were two different terms when describing a citizen's
19 status. A permanent place of residence entailed being registered with
20 the competent police station where he or she would be issued with an ID,
21 passport, or any other document they may have required in order to
22 exercise their rights that they could enjoy in the given place of
24 The temporary place of residence is temporary. It happened once
25 people moved from their permanent place of residence to another location
1 where they stayed temporarily, either for education, work, or other
2 personal needs. They were duty-bound to report their new place of
3 residence within 15 days to the competent police station. They did not
4 have to deregister from their original municipality. It sufficed that
5 one brought in his or her ID and explained why they wanted to stay in the
6 area. They would be issued a certificate stating that the person in
7 question was to reside in the area for a specified period of time.
8 Q. Does it actually mean that it meant moving permanently?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Thank you. Today in document P6091, you could see that --
11 actually, it was suggested to you on the basis of that document that you
12 did not undertake any investigations and did not submit any criminal
13 reports for the murder of Vujovic and that you did not submit a report.
14 You said that it was incorrect; right?
15 A. Right.
16 Q. You explained at some length the sequence of activities. Perhaps
17 you can tell me this: When does an investigating judge appear? Once he
18 is included in the process, what is the police role as of that moment on?
19 A. The role of the police is to collect operational information in
20 order to detect the perpetrator and to follow the investigating judge's
21 orders in view of certain measures that he deemed necessary.
22 Q. Thank you.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have a look at D2851 in
24 e-court. It is a Defence exhibit.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Can you tell us what this is, what is being forwarded?
2 A. Copies of the crime register documentation.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have page 7 in the Serbian
5 and 45 in the English. Zoom in, please. Could the other participants be
6 left with the English version, whereas I'd like myself and the witness to
7 be able to see the Serbian only.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Can you tell us what is in the first column, report, the second,
10 reported, and then we have the dates; correct?
11 A. Yes. Could we please zoom in.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we scroll up, please.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. What is in entry 22?
15 A. It is a case file forwarded to the municipal public prosecutor's
16 office for the murder of Muharem Kujovic.
17 Q. Who reported it?
18 A. The public security station.
19 Q. By having done that, was the case file effectively handed over to
20 the judiciary?
21 A. Yes, formally and legally speaking. However, it was up to the
22 public security station to undertake all measures within its competence
23 in order to discover the perpetrator. This case file was not closed by
24 virtue of having sent it to -- the entire case file, that is, that was
25 necessary to be forwarded to the judiciary, but it was still upon the SJB
1 to undertake its measures in order to discover the perpetrator or some
2 other facts pertaining to the crime in question.
3 Q. Thank you. How does this tally with the position expressed in
4 document P69 -- 6091, where it is stated that you did not do what you
5 were supposed to?
6 A. What do I know? It's probably not true what's in the document.
7 Q. It is stated there that you didn't submit a report concerning
9 A. We submitted a report in the case of Haso as well.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have page 8 in the Serbian
11 and 59 in the English.
12 JUDGE KWON: Before -- let's go back to the page. Can we see the
13 English page as well. I don't think it was translated in full. Do you
14 see the full name, father's name, place of birth, and residence?
15 Let's -- we can collapse the English now. But "not known --" probably
16 underneath notation of "Not known" or whatever, I see entries number 1
17 and number 2 which are not translated. Could you read out that part for
18 us. We can zoom in a bit further.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Sir, the Chamber would like you to read out something. Perhaps
21 we can clarify it. Is it the name? Is it in that box next to 22?
22 A. Muharem Kujovic, the victim, Kujovic. There was his place of
23 residence, and it is also the place where the murder took place, and we
24 have the name of the victim there. Here we have who submitted the
25 report, the name of the victim. We don't see who it was sent to. On the
1 other page we have the measures undertaken and whether any orders were
2 issued by the investigating judge. Perhaps I may explain.
3 It is a large book, a large register, say 70 by 40 centimetres.
4 That is the criminal register. It was kept at Pale as of 1975, and it
5 was used all the way until 2006, when I left the service, and I think
6 they still use it.
7 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Hrsum, do you see number 1 and number 2? What I
8 want you to do is read out those two items, number 1 and number 2, in the
9 row of 23.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 23?
11 JUDGE KWON: If the usher could show the -- Lizdek or -- Milo --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Ranko Makic [phoen], Ivo Andric
13 Street number 16, Pale. These individuals submitted reports to the SJB.
14 In those cases, there was no on-site investigation. These individuals
15 reported crimes to the SJB. There is a date when the report was filed,
16 when it was registered, and here is the aggrieved party, the person whose
17 vehicle was stolen. At that moment it was not known who the perp was.
18 JUDGE KWON: I would leave it -- leave it at that. Please
19 continue, Mr. Karadzic.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 Can we go to the following page in Serbian, and then can we go to
22 page 59 in English. Let's see what happened to Hasim [as interpreted].
23 8, Serbian; 59, English.
24 Under 46 in Serbian -- can this be zoomed in.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Who is it who reported the numbers 46?
2 A. It was the SJB, because its employees carried out an on-site
4 Q. Who was the aggrieved party?
5 A. I believe it was Hasim Kujovic from Pale, if I'm not mistaken.
6 Q. Thank you. What was the crime? You will see it in the last
8 A. A murder.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This can be removed.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Sir, you were asked whether you were politically engaged.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] On line 13, the name should be
14 Hasna. It's a lady's name, not Hasim.
15 MR. TIEGER: Well, that's -- okay. Now I really have to object,
16 and I -- maybe this is something we take outside the -- we discuss
17 outside the presence of the witness, but of all the times not to use a
18 leading interjection and testify as the accused is accustomed to doing,
19 that would have been it.
20 JUDGE KWON: Do you follow, Mr. Karadzic? It's not that you are
21 giving evidence. In order to rectify, you have to ask the witness
22 instead of stating yourself.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] When it comes to Hasna, it was my
24 intervention on the transcript.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. And when it comes to the question, I said: Earlier today you
2 were asked on page 35 whether you were politically engaged, and you
3 answered that you were politically engaged in 2012.
4 A. And that is correct.
5 Q. First of all, let us establish this: Line 13, page 80. What is
6 the name of the aggrieved party? It has been misrecorded for a number of
7 times. Is it Hasim Kujovic or Hasna Kujovic?
8 JUDGE KWON: It's a -- I think that can be confirmed by the
9 witness, because it is what he said.
10 Yes, Mr. Hrsum. Did you say Hasim or Hasna?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Hasna. That's what I said, Hasna.
12 I did not utter the name Hasim. Hasim was never a victim.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Mr. Hrsum, does the crime register accurately reflect the name
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Thank you. And now, you confirmed Mr. Tieger's question that you
18 were indeed politically engaged in 2012. I'm asking you this: Were you
19 professionally engaged and politically engaged at the same time, and if
20 you were, when was that?
21 A. I was never professionally and politically engaged at any time
22 before 2012. At that time, I was pensioned off.
23 Q. And now on page 36 there was a reference to discrimination. What
24 was the basis for bringing in individuals and remanding them in custody,
25 primarily those who were of non-Serb ethnicity?
1 A. Only crimes before the incident that happened on the 22nd of May.
2 Q. Thank you. Was Islam religion ever the grounds for remanding
3 people in custody?
4 A. No, never.
5 Q. On page 37, it was not fully clarified whether those two or three
6 police officers and crime investigation inspectors left the police or
7 whether they were transferred to another unit. On page 38, you were
8 interrupted when you started your sentence with the words "The procedure
9 to transfer people." Please explain. They left the police or were they
11 A. If you are referring to the two employees of the crime prevention
12 service and their commander who had been appointed upon agreement, his
13 name was Muslim, Efendic. I will answer this: The procedure for a
14 person to be transferred from one unit to another unit, irrespective of
15 the fact that both units were parts of the Sarajevo SUP, implied the
16 following: First of all, the head of the organisational unit had to
17 agree to hire that person. The head of the organisational unit that that
18 person was leaving also had to be obtained [as interpreted]. All that
19 was confirmed by the secretary of the SUP, and that was what constituted
20 the regular transfer of one person from one unit to another. All those
21 three individuals who were transferred immediately started working in
22 Sarajevo, one in Ilidza, one in Stari Grad, and I believe that Efendic
23 started working in the republican SUP.
24 Q. Who was the secretary of the city SUP at the time? Was that
25 procedure complied with?
1 A. It was Mico Stanisic, and that procedure was not complied with.
2 It was not complied with at the public security station at Pale either.
3 Q. Thank you. 6034 is a document that was mentioned.
4 Zdravko Cvoro, the president of the Executive Board, sent some objections
5 to the effect that some Muslims participated in the forcible transfer of
6 some other Muslims. Somebody provided that information to Mr. Cvoro.
7 Did it prove to be correct?
8 A. You mentioned that Muslims participated in the forcible transfer
9 of Muslims. I don't know about that.
10 Q. Policemen.
11 A. Police officers never took part in forceable transfer. They
12 never advocated forcible transfer of Muslims. Police officers were only
13 engaged in providing security. They only took measures in order to
14 protect Muslims in the area. As far as the letter of the president of
15 the Executive Board is concerned, I must say that at the beginning of the
16 war and the course of the war, the local authorities always wanted to
17 place under their control the local police security stations. They
18 wanted to issue them orders as to how they would do their policing work.
19 It was not just the case in Pale. It spilled over to other
20 municipalities as well. They also wanted to place under their control
21 those military units that were set up later. However, no single public
22 security station was under the control of the local authorities. They
23 reported to their superiors in the ministry, i.e., in the MUP, which were
24 the CSBs along the lines of control and ultimately to the minister.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can P6034 be displayed? Let us see
1 who Mr. Cvoro had in mind when he drafted his letter.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Mr. Hrsum, could you please read the document.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask those who can
5 follow in English to look at the document off the screen, i.e., could the
6 English be collapsed.
7 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters kindly ask that the document
8 be shown on the screen for their benefit.
9 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He addresses the War Commission of
11 Pale municipality --
12 JUDGE KWON: If you'd like the witness to read out the document,
13 we need to show the English page to the interpreters. We all have it, so
14 why don't you put the question to the witness.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is precisely what I wanted,
16 for all the other participants in the trial to be provided with the
17 off-screen copy of the document. Could you please read the document for
19 JUDGE KWON: No, you know the situation. Interpreters do not
20 have access to the English page independently.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, maybe I did not
22 say this on time. I didn't ask the witness to read the document aloud.
23 I just wanted him to look at it, and then once he had -- has looked at
24 it, I will have a question to put to him.
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes. What is your question?
1 Yes, Mr. Tieger.
2 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry, but is there some reason we're not
3 looking at the document at the same time and have it available in
5 JUDGE KWON: No. We did that --
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I --
7 JUDGE KWON: -- for the benefit of the witness so that he could
8 read it. But you have access to English page.
9 MR. TIEGER: No, I do. I just wanted the participants to.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Mr. Hrsum, earlier today Mr. Tieger suggested to you that the
13 police participated in the forcible transfer of Muslims from Pale
14 contrary to the decision which was passed on the 18th of June, the one
15 that we have seen today. When you look at this document, would you say
16 that it were the police who did that or is it, rather, that Mr. Cvoro is
17 complaining? What is Mr. Cvoro complaining about? Does the document say
18 that the police were involved in that?
19 MR. TIEGER: I object, Mr. President. Either the witness is
20 being asked to simply recite what he sees in the document or he's being
21 asked for an interpretation of this document in a manner that is outside
22 the province of most witnesses, unless they're called as some kind of
23 expert. So I don't -- I mean, in -- for previous questions, Mr. Karadzic
24 has been asking the witness for information that he might have had, and
25 this is straying into an area that's not appropriate.
1 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Hrsum, you may answer to the question what
2 Mr. Cvoro was complaining about.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I'm looking at this document,
4 and I didn't know anything about its existence, Mr. Cvoro is complaining
5 about the arbitrariness, about the lack of organisation, about the
6 forcible transfer of Muslims on the part of the police which caused some
7 problems. However, his ultimate request is for the municipal
8 authorities -- or, rather, my impression is that the municipal
9 authorities managed to exercise control over the police station, and he
10 refers to some other presidents of the Executive Boards that had the same
11 problems. However, the police station acted on their instruction, and
12 they did it in a safe way. Nobody was hurt. Nobody experienced anything
13 bad among those who wanted to move out of their own will -- will.
14 That transfer process did not last only a day or two. It lasted
15 much longer. Some problems arose, and some Muslims were even afraid that
16 they would not be able to move out because the municipal authorities had
17 not set up their commissions on time, so the lists of the population were
18 not compiled, i.e., their immovable properties that they were leaving
19 behind. This is why the process took somewhat longer. And later on --
20 okay. It lasted a bit longer, that.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Thank you. Please look at the document once again. Tell us
23 where it is that Mr. Cvoro pinpoints the police as perpetrators?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, that's why I
25 wanted the witness to have a good look at the document and give us his
1 answer, not as an expert but as a police officer.
2 JUDGE KWON: The point you were -- objected to was how you put
3 the question, not the content. Refrain from asking a leading question.
4 Can you answer the question?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't see here that he mentions
6 the police anywhere here. He does not mention the police. The only time
7 he mentions the police is when he says that the police station does not
8 report to them directly. It would probably be better that -- if they had
9 the police station under their authority. I don't see --
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Thank you. You as a police officer, what inferences would you
12 make? Who is it that Mr. Cvoro pinpoints as the perpetrators of these
14 A. When it comes to those criminal acts, he pinpoints individuals
15 or -- or, rather, he points to some groups or one may even conclude that
16 he pinpoints at some Muslims who put pressure on each other to move out.
17 He is not very specific in that respect.
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
19 MR. TIEGER: I just want to continue my objection, and I think
20 the last answer reflects the impropriety of this exercise asking this
21 witness basically to offer some speculations about this document.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I be allowed to respond?
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Tieger was very express and
25 confronted Mr. Hrsum with the fact that the police participated in
1 unlawful transfer. I'll tell you the exact page.
2 Now, I'm trying to establish who it is that Mr. Cvoro complains?
3 Who does he pinpoint as perpetrators? Let's leave aside the fact that he
4 wants control over the police. Does he pinpoint the police as the main
5 culprits, and if he does, where, in what line? This arises from the
6 Prosecutor's suggestions during his cross-examination.
7 JUDGE KWON: I was reading the questions by Mr. Tieger, but I
8 don't think he put the question it was police that wilfully forced the
9 population out.
10 Did you ask such a question, Mr. Tieger? 43, 44.
11 MR. TIEGER: I'm looking at the exact language. It is correct
12 that I addressed --
13 JUDGE KWON: A role of the police.
14 MR. TIEGER: -- that's right, addressed these documents, but I
15 simply recited the language in the document and asked if that didn't
16 reflect the situation.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes, you referred to P6034 --
18 MR. TIEGER: That's right.
19 JUDGE KWON: -- and lines 20, 21, that said --
20 MR. TIEGER: And then --
21 JUDGE KWON: That document revealed about the role of the police
22 in moving Muslims out. So it's fair enough to ask whether this document
23 pinpointed the --
24 MR. TIEGER: When I --
25 JUDGE KWON: -- police but --
1 MR. TIEGER: There's a bit of mixing and matching here by --
2 that's why I was looking at the transcript. I pointed to this document
3 in the context of asking questions about Muslims being forced out and the
4 reflections on that. I turned to D00031 in connection with the
5 complaints of the president of the Assembly and president of the
6 Executive Committee and president of the Crisis Staff about police
7 involvement. So Dr. Karadzic seems to be turning to another document and
8 trying -- I was -- that's why I was looking to see whether there was
9 explicit reference to this document in that connection, but I do know
10 there was a reference to the language of D00031, which is not being
11 addressed at this moment.
12 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Let's continue.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Just one more question, Mr. Hrsum. You saw the statement of
16 Sulejman Crncalo who says that on the 3rd of March, 1992, there were
17 beatings in the police. What was the ethnic make-up of the police at the
18 Pale police station on the 3rd of March, 1992?
19 A. On that date the ethnic make-up was unchanged. It was the same
20 as before, when both Muslims and Serbs -- I don't think we had any Croats
21 perform police tasks.
22 Q. Did any of the Muslim policemen confirm that on the 3rd of March
23 someone was beaten up because of their ethnicity or religion?
24 A. There was never such a complaint at the police station, nor did
25 it ever come up, nor was it ever recorded by anyone, nor did anyone ever
1 discuss any such thing. At the entrance to the police station there were
2 two duty officers, and it was always two members of the Serb ethnic group
3 and two Muslims who did that so that this cannot be correct. It was
4 never anything that was confirmed or not confirmed or anything that was
5 acted upon.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Hrsum. I have no
7 further questions.
8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Tieger.
9 MR. TIEGER: I have just a couple questions arising in connection
10 with the register, Mr. President, if the Court would permit. You may
11 recall that Mr. Karadzic took the witness's -- took the witness to
12 certain entries and I have a couple of questions about those particular
13 entries. I can make it brief if the Court wishes.
14 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Mr. Tieger.
15 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
16 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Tieger:
17 Q. Mr. Hrsum, in paragraph 23 of your statement -- is it 23? That's
18 where you make reference to the criminal report filed in connection with
19 the murder of Muharem Hasna and Ramiz Kujovic. Do I understand, because
20 you reference them together, that those people were killed at the same
22 A. No, they were not killed at the same time.
23 Q. So they were killed at different times?
24 A. At different times.
25 Q. And why is it called an unknown perpetrator for three different
2 A. Because we didn't discover who the perpetrator was. We didn't
3 have into -- we didn't have any information as to who had done this and
4 under what conditions.
5 Q. It says a criminal report was also filed against an unknown
6 perpetrator. Perpetrator singular, report singular. Is that what
7 happened or were there multiple reports?
8 A. There were multiple criminal reports as you can see from the
9 log-book. So these reports were submitted individually, but as the
10 perpetrator was unknown, it implies neither the singular nor the plural.
11 It refers to each perpetrator of each criminal offence, or several
12 perpetrators, but this was the form of words that was normally used.
13 Q. And, in fact, the date of submission of the report listed in
14 item 46 on page 59 of the English was subsequent to the report by
15 Mr. Micic which we saw earlier; correct?
16 JUDGE KWON: Shall we upload D2851. Item 46, page --
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's 8 in Serbian. English, 59.
18 MR. TIEGER: Okay. If it's taking too much time, I can let the
19 document speak for itself unless it needs to be translated. Okay. It's
20 up now.
21 Q. Can you just read the dates of the submitter -- of the submission
22 and the dates of the report. And tell us quickly again what those two
23 dates represent.
24 A. The first date, I don't see it up there, but I think --
25 JUDGE KWON: If you -- if you touch it, it -- all right.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sorry. I apologise. The first
2 date is the date when information was received or when the criminal
3 offence was learned of. The second date is the date of submission of the
4 final file to the public prosecutor's office, although the public
5 prosecutor's office was aware based on the log-book of what was going on.
6 Mr. Micic, if it has to do with when he -- I think that his
7 report is dated March 1993, if I recall correctly.
8 MR. TIEGER: I have nothing further, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we clarify this? Can we look
11 at Micic's report, P6092, only to establish the chronology of dates, to
12 see whether Mr. Hrsum spoke correctly.
13 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, it's in our evidence. Would you like
14 to spend time for that? I think it's in March or May in 1993. You can
15 leave it there.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If we established that this was
17 after the 20th of May, 1992, then everything is all right, and I don't
18 need to go into it any further.
19 JUDGE KWON: I'm not in the position to confirm that. Let us see
20 it, then.
21 Could you remind us of the exhibit number, Mr. Tieger, Micic
23 MR. TIEGER: It was either 6092 or 6091. I have them under ERNs
24 at the moment. My recollection, however, I mean if it's going to cut to
25 the chase, is that we addressed that before ourselves as May 12, 1993,
1 and I think that was -- it's not only in the document itself but it's on
2 the record at least once.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes. It was the document you misread the date.
4 It's Exhibit P6092, 12 of May, 19 -- let us see the date. Last page,
5 probably. So 12th of May, 1993.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So 51 weeks after the report
7 submitted by Hrsum. I just wanted to establish that, that it was a year
8 later and not before, as Mr. Tieger suggested in his cross-examination.
9 JUDGE KWON: The dates speak for themselves.
10 That concludes your evidence, Mr. Hrsum. On behalf of the
11 Chamber, I would like to thank you for your coming to The Hague to give
12 it. Now you are free to go.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 [The witness withdrew]
15 JUDGE KWON: Is the next witness ready to come in?
16 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE KWON: Then let's continue. While we are waiting for the
18 next witness, going back to the issue I raised with respect to the
19 witness from Portugal, I think we can file it publicly with a
20 confidential annex. Did you -- could you explore the possibility and get
21 confirmation from -- from the embassy.
22 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President.
23 THE ACCUSED: If I was asked, I would suggest to start fresh
25 JUDGE KWON: I wanted to conclude two witnesses by tomorrow just
1 in case.
2 THE ACCUSED: We can do it tomorrow.
3 JUDGE KWON: You never know.
4 [The witness entered court]
5 JUDGE KWON: Would the witness make the solemn declaration,
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
8 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
9 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, sir. Please make yourself comfortable.
10 WITNESS: SRDJAN SEHOVAC
11 [Witness answered through interpreter]
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
13 Examination by Mr. Karadzic:
14 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Sehovac.
15 A. My respects, Mr. President.
16 Q. Please bear in mind that we both have to pause before question
17 and answer so that the interpreters and the court reporters can interpret
18 and record everything.
19 Did you make a statement to the Defence team?
20 A. Yes.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please let's look at 1D7054 in
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Is this the statement you see before you now?
25 A. Yes, it is.
1 Q. Are you aware that some parts had to be excluded as irrelevant to
2 this case on the order of the Chamber?
3 A. I am aware that some parts have been excluded.
4 Q. Have you read this statement and signed it?
5 A. Yes, I have.
6 Q. Does it reflect correctly what you said, and is there anything
7 you would change now?
8 A. It reflects correctly what was said, but there are some typing
9 errors. For example, page 2, point 4, second paragraph.
10 Q. Can you tell us what the mistake is?
11 A. It says here "SDB." It should be "SNB," because the State
12 Security Service, as you know, was operating before the war, and the SNB
13 was established --
14 THE INTERPRETER: Or the SDB, that is, interpreter's correction.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- was established after that.
16 Another error has occurred.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. In the transcript -- SDB was before the war; is that correct,
20 A. Yes. And in wartime the SNB was established. And in point 33,
21 the letters have been switched again. It should say here "SDB" and not
22 "SNB." And the same error occurred in point 34: "Did you or the SNB
23 have ..." It should be: "Did you or the SDB have ..."
24 Q. Thank you. Mr. Sehovac, both of these interventions, does it
25 refer to the questions or to your replies?
1 A. No, I am referring to my responses, because we need to have
2 precise information as to what service was involved.
3 Q. Is there anything else?
4 A. On page 12, point 36(B), the SS tattoo should be deleted. And
5 instead of "Handzar Division" it should say "Young Muslims Unit," and
6 this refers to Mr. Izetbegovic and his past.
7 Q. Is this the sentence: "Very often the fact was mentioned" --
8 A. Yes, yes. That's it. So that should be deleted. He had an SS
9 tattoo and he was a member of the Handzar Division. No, that's
10 incorrect. He was a member of the Young Muslims Unit.
11 Q. So the tattoo and SS, that should be deleted?
12 A. Yes, yes. Up to "that he was." And page 36(B), in (B) again the
13 letters say "SDB" instead of "SNB." And I have no further comments to
14 make as regards this statement.
15 Q. Thank you. Mr. Sehovac, if I were to put the same questions to
16 you today, would your answers to them be basically the same as in this
18 A. Yes. Basically they would be the same. I would not change
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, may I tender
21 this statement and the associated documents?
22 JUDGE KWON: We'll deal with associated exhibits separately.
23 We'll admit the statement first.
24 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D2852, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE KWON: To save time, the Chamber has the following
1 questions with respect to 1D921, 1D6133, and 1D6167. I note that there's
2 no English translation have been uploaded. So if they are uploaded now,
3 the Chamber didn't have time to see them, so I would like you to lead
4 live about those ones. And the 1D6147 is included in para 20. That
5 should be redacted. And the Chamber has doubt as to the relevant --
6 relevance of 1D6132, 1D6134. So in order to tender them, after
7 explaining the relevance to the Chamber, I would like you to lead live as
8 well when the Chamber satisfied with its relevance. And with respect to
9 6136, which is an intercept, you should lead with the witness how he was
10 able to authenticate that intercept, whether he himself was an intercept
11 operator or otherwise.
12 Mr. Sehovac, we are about to adjourn and continue tomorrow
13 morning, but as you may be already aware, you are not supposed to discuss
14 with anybody else about your testimony. Do you understand that, sir?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand that.
16 JUDGE KWON: We will continue tomorrow morning at 9.00.
17 The hearing is adjourned.
18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.45 p.m.,
19 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 31st day
20 of January, 2013, at 9.00 a.m.