{short description of image}

  1. 1 Wednesday, 16th June, 1999

    2 (Open session)

    3 (The accused entered court)

    4 --- Upon commencing at 9.48 a.m.

    5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours.

    6 Case number IT-95-14/2-T, the Prosecutor versus Dario

    7 Kordic and Mario Cerkez.

    8 JUDGE MAY: The first matter to note is that

    9 Mr. Kordic is back with us today, having been to the

    10 hospital.

    11 The next matter which I propose to deal with

    12 is the temperature in the courtroom which at the moment

    13 seems to be reasonable. Yesterday afternoon, it

    14 wasn't, and if it gets hot again, we'll move to another

    15 more suitable venue.

    16 I shall deal with the submissions which we

    17 heard yesterday and give a formal ruling in relation to

    18 the matters which are being determined so far.

    19 Dealing with the transcript of evidence of

    20 Mr. Friis-Pedersen from Blaskic, that, following the

    21 decision of the Appeal Chamber in Aleksovski, is

    22 admissible, and the Defence have realistically not

    23 sought to argue otherwise. Accordingly, the transcript

    24 will be admitted, together with the relevant exhibits.

    25 In a moment, I will check with Mr. Lopez-Terres to make

  2. 1 sure that we have the right exhibits.

    2 Let me deal with the other matters, namely,

    3 the statement which Mr. Pedersen made to the Prosecutor

    4 in August 1996. That will not be admitted at the

    5 moment. If the Prosecution wish to have this admitted

    6 in addition to the transcript, we shall require further

    7 argument upon it.

    8 Similarly, the statement of Mr. Haskic will

    9 not be admitted for the moment. Again further argument

    10 from both parties will be required if that is to be

    11 admitted, and at a convenient time we can hear those

    12 arguments, if necessary.

    13 Mr. Lopez-Terres, I noticed that the

    14 transcript has a "Z" number, 2706. Is it proposed that

    15 it should be an exhibit in the trial?

    16 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) That was

    17 our intention indeed.

    18 JUDGE MAY: Now, the exhibits which are

    19 attached and which are also, according to Aleksovski,

    20 admissible, a report from the Busovaca joint commission

    21 to which the witness refers in his evidence, Z754, and

    22 it's intended that it should have that exhibit number,

    23 is it?

    24 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) That is

    25 correct, Mr. President.

  3. 1 JUDGE MAY: Attached to that is something

    2 that was 187A. Is that part of the exhibit? Let me

    3 just show you. Just show that to counsel, please. It

    4 may be that it's all part of the same exhibit, but I

    5 would just like to be sure.

    6 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) It is

    7 indeed the same document, just a part of it having been

    8 translated into French.

    9 JUDGE MAY: [Indiscernible] in the Blaskic

    10 trial?

    11 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) Exactly,

    12 Mr. President.

    13 JUDGE MAY: Very well. The exhibit will be

    14 admitted with that number, 754, and the transcript will

    15 be 2706.

    16 The other matters which were put before us

    17 are not admitted at the moment.

    18 Can we have the witness back, please?

    19 I should have mentioned this, while the

    20 witness is coming, that we have to discuss the

    21 procedure. I understand that Friday is not convenient

    22 for the Defence, and therefore what I propose is that

    23 we discuss it at 3.15 tomorrow or thereabouts.

    24 MR. NICE: We discussed the matter amongst

    25 ourselves and, subject to the Chamber's ruling, had

  4. 1 thought that it might come most conveniently after the

    2 next two witnesses. That's today's witness and the one

    3 who follows. It had been my hope that those witnesses

    4 would be concluded by the end of today and therefore

    5 that it might be possible, if the Chamber thought this

    6 was a good idea, to launch the procedural matters first

    7 thing in the morning. But it's all so uncertain, the

    8 timing, that we're entirely in your hands.

    9 JUDGE MAY: Well, after the next two

    10 witnesses sounds sensible.

    11 MR. NICE: Thank you. That helps me with

    12 timing the arrival from hotels and so on of the next

    13 witness.

    14 (Closed session)

    15 (The witness entered court).

    16 (redacted)

    17 (redacted)

    18 (redacted)

    19 (redacted)

    20 (redacted)

    21 (redacted)

    22 (redacted)

    23 (redacted)

    24 (redacted)

    25 (redacted)














    13 redacted pages 3936 – 4000 (closed session)













  1. 1 (redacted)

    2 (redacted)

    3 (redacted)

    4 (redacted)

    5 (redacted)

    6 (redacted)

    7 (redacted)

    8 (redacted)

    9 (redacted)

    10 (redacted)

    11 (redacted)

    12 (redacted)

    13 (Open session)

    14 JUDGE MAY: This is Mr. Dzidic?

    15 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) Kadir

    16 Dzidic.

    17 (The witness entered court)

    18 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will

    19 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the

    20 truth.

    21 JUDGE MAY: Yes. Take a seat.

    22 Yes, Mr. Lopez-Terres.


    24 Examined by Mr. Lopez-Terres:

    25 [Witness answers through interpreter]

  2. 1 Q. Are you Mr. Kadir Dzidic, born in 1949?

    2 A. Yes.

    3 Q. During the conflict in Vitez, you lived in

    4 Vitez, where you were a physics teacher; is that

    5 correct?

    6 A. Yes.

    7 Q. During your teaching career, one of your

    8 pupils was the accused Dario Kordic?

    9 A. Yes.

    10 Q. Could you tell the Court, what was your

    11 opinion of Dario Kordic as a pupil?

    12 A. Yes. He was a pupil who stood out as very

    13 industrious, and he applied himself very well to the

    14 problems of physics, and he was one of my favourite

    15 students.

    16 Q. Could you tell us if, at the time, Dario

    17 Kordic behaved as a person with a rather

    18 individualistic character, or did he like to take part

    19 in various group activities organised at the time?

    20 MR. STEIN: I object. This is clearly

    21 leading; probably not particularly relevant.

    22 JUDGE MAY: I agree.

    23 Let's go on, shall we?

    24 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation)

    25 Q. Could you tell us anything else about the

  3. 1 behaviour of Dario Kordic, who was your pupil?

    2 A. As I said, he was a good student, and

    3 disciplined. However, physically, he was not very

    4 strong, in order to match the other children at the

    5 time, so that sometimes he was slightly pushed aside by

    6 those who were more physical and more engaged in

    7 physical activities than he was.

    8 Q. Thank you. Mr. Dzidic, you still teach

    9 physics in a school in Zenica, where you live with your

    10 family at the moment?

    11 A. Yes.

    12 Q. Mr. Dzidic, is it true that you were a member

    13 of the SDA and that you were the president of its local

    14 section in Vitez?

    15 A. That is correct.

    16 Q. You were a member of the coordinating

    17 committee for the protection of Muslim interests in

    18 Vitez; is that correct?

    19 A. Yes, it is.

    20 Q. Lastly, you were a member of the war

    21 presidency in Vitez; is that correct?

    22 A. I was a co-opted member of the war presidency

    23 upon my release from the prison in Zenica.

    24 Q. But you are no longer a member of the SDA,

    25 Mr. Dzidic, are you?

  4. 1 A. I no longer engage in political activities.

    2 Q. Thank you, Mr. Dzidic, for this clarification

    3 regarding your work. We shall now move on to those

    4 matters of which you have been called to give your

    5 testimony here.

    6 On 16th April, 1993, around half past 5.00,

    7 you were in your flat in Vitez, and you were awakened

    8 by an explosion; is that correct?

    9 A. Yes.

    10 Q. And from your flat, could you see that some

    11 parts of Vitez were under fire or under shelling?

    12 A. I saw through the bathroom window that houses

    13 in Old Vitez were on fire in the area inhabited

    14 exclusively by Muslims. I saw the flash of artillery

    15 pieces from Krcevine and Jardol, from where these

    16 shells were fired. I saw that the entrances to my

    17 building and other buildings had been blocked by people

    18 who were my neighbours, some of them in uniforms, and

    19 they were all Croats.

    20 Q. Just a moment, Mr. Dzidic. You are saying

    21 that you saw houses ablaze; could you also tell us

    22 which were the villages in which, as you saw it, houses

    23 were ablaze?

    24 A. That was Old Vitez, Stari Vitez, looking from

    25 one vantage point. And then, from my own balcony and

  5. 1 my neighbour's balcony, I also saw Ahmici on fire.

    2 Those were the areas which were -- from where plumes of

    3 smoke were rising and where the fires were burning.

    4 Q. You tell us that you saw and heard shooting,

    5 artillery fire, which came from villages; that is,

    6 specifically, the village of Jardol. Was it a Muslim

    7 or a Croat village?

    8 A. That was a predominantly Croatian village,

    9 but there may be a couple of Muslim houses there, too.

    10 Q. In your view, Mr. Dzidic, the shelling and

    11 this shooting that you saw in the morning of the 16th

    12 of April, did it come from the HVO, or from the BH

    13 army?

    14 A. From the side of the HVO.

    15 Q. You are in no doubt in this regard?

    16 A. No.

    17 Q. I will show you now a document, Mr. Dzidic,

    18 which is an aerial view of the town of Vitez. This

    19 document was already used, Z2126 (sic). Could we

    20 please have this exhibit shown to the witness.

    21 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: There is a mistake; it is

    22 Z2186, not 2126; 2186.

    23 Will you please show this document to the

    24 witness.

    25 Q. Mr. Dzidic, can you find your way about that

  6. 1 map?

    2 A. I'm trying.

    3 Q. Could you please show us where your building

    4 was? If, that is, you can find it.

    5 A. Just a moment, please.

    6 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Lopez-Terres, why don't you

    7 help the witness with the orientation? Point out some

    8 of the buildings.

    9 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) Could the

    10 witness locate the Workers' University building? We

    11 spoke about it, for instance.

    12 JUDGE MAY: Tell him -- it's difficult for a

    13 witness to locate things on an aerial photograph. Tell

    14 him where you say it is.

    15 A. I think I can find it.

    16 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Lopez-Terres, will you please

    17 tell us where this building is?

    18 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) You mean

    19 the building in which the witness lived? Well, that is

    20 precisely what my question was to the witness,

    21 Mr. President.

    22 JUDGE MAY: No, I want to you explain to us,

    23 to start with, where we are supposed to be. The

    24 witness doesn't know; we don't know. Now, I've got

    25 2186. What is building "A," please?

  7. 1 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) I'm really

    2 sorry. I was to show the document to the witness. You

    3 can retrieve this from me. I'm sorry about this

    4 misunderstanding.

    5 "A" is Hotel Vitez on this plan. "B" is the

    6 cinema building, and we shall come to it later. "C" is

    7 the post office building, and "D" is the building which

    8 housed the chess club.

    9 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Dzidic, do you see where

    10 those buildings are?

    11 A. This copy is a bit clearer. My apologies,

    12 because my eyesight is not that good.

    13 JUDGE MAY: There's no need for you to

    14 apologise.

    15 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) We can

    16 move on, if the witness cannot give us any information

    17 regarding this document today.

    18 Q. Mr. Dzidic, your flat was on what floor in

    19 that building?

    20 A. My apartment was on the fourth floor of the

    21 building which is marked with the letter "D."

    22 Q. So your building was in the neighbourhood of

    23 the chess club, is it?

    24 A. Across from the chess club.

    25 Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Dzidic. So we were

  8. 1 able to locate your building after all.

    2 In the morning of the 16th of April, 1993,

    3 did you hear -- you told us that there was an attack,

    4 and you told us that it was an HVO attack; did you

    5 expect that?

    6 A. No, I did not expect it in any way.

    7 Q. But you told us a little while ago that you

    8 could see that the soldiers were blocking the entrance

    9 into buildings; you also saw soldiers in the street,

    10 and at that moment, you decided to go to a neighbour's

    11 flat in your building; is that correct?

    12 A. Yes, I went over to the apartment of my

    13 Croatian neighbour. She was a woman with whom I had

    14 excellent neighbourly relations. I also took my wife

    15 and children with me.

    16 Q. You decided to leave your flat because you

    17 felt threatened, you felt there was a danger at the

    18 moment?

    19 A. Yes, that was precisely the reason.

    20 Q. What were you afraid of?

    21 A. I was afraid of everything that I was

    22 seeing. I was afraid that some of the soldiers or

    23 someone else would enter my apartment, that something

    24 ugly would happen, because something bad could have

    25 happened to both me or my wife or my children. This is

  9. 1 why I went over to my neighbour. I felt more secure

    2 there.

    3 Q. Thank you. And you were, therefore, in your

    4 neighbour's flat, and you saw three HVO soldiers

    5 arrive; they were wearing camouflage uniforms, and they

    6 knocked on the door of your neighbour's flat. Is that

    7 correct?

    8 A. The soldiers first knocked on my door, which

    9 was across the hallway, a couple of metres away, so I

    10 could hear the knocking. It was very loud. Then my

    11 neighbour stepped out of her apartment and said that we

    12 were not there, that we had gone to Travnik. And then

    13 they said that it was not right, that they knew very

    14 well that I was in the building.

    15 Q. At that moment, you, yourself, came out of

    16 your neighbour's flat; is that so?

    17 A. Yes. I saw that it was an awkward

    18 situation. I recognised the men. I invited them into

    19 my neighbour's apartment to sit down, have coffee, and

    20 talk. They accepted the invitation, came in, sat

    21 down. Among them were two men whom I knew by name, and

    22 the third one I knew by sight, but I cannot recall his

    23 name, even to date. The two whom I knew were Josip

    24 Franjic, an ex-student of mine, and Igor Vujica, a

    25 neighbour who lived maybe one or two kilometres away

  10. 1 from my apartment, whom I had known from some young men

    2 who are my relations, and he was associated with them.

    3 Q. In addition to these two soldiers whose name

    4 you gave us, there was a third person whose name you

    5 also mentioned, or rather a part of his name, you gave

    6 us?

    7 A. Other persons? No, these three soldiers came

    8 in. My neighbour and her daughter were present, as

    9 well as my family.

    10 Q. Do you remember the conduct of the three

    11 soldiers? Did they ask for something in particular?

    12 A. The third soldier was very nervous. He was

    13 playing with his pistol all the time, and he kept

    14 asking me where was Fuad Kaknjo, and saying something

    15 to the effect that he would kill him as a dog. I was

    16 unable to tell him, because I didn't know.

    17 After a while, he also calmed down. We all

    18 had coffee. Then they left. It was just an informal

    19 conversation that we had, and I believe that in the

    20 end, we arrived at understanding each other.

    21 Q. And who was Fuad Kaknjo?

    22 A. At that time, Fuad Kaknjo, and even before

    23 the war, he was president of the executive board of the

    24 municipality. He was legally elected, and he was very

    25 prominent, and he held prominent positions for a period

  11. 1 of time.

    2 Q. Did he live in the same neighbourhood as you?

    3 A. We lived in the same building. He was in the

    4 next segment of the building, the next entrance.

    5 Q. Thank you. So do you remember still the name

    6 of the third soldier? You said there were three

    7 soldiers. Do you know the name of the third soldier

    8 who was tense and who was asking all those questions

    9 about Kaknjo?

    10 A. No, I cannot, and I never made it -- I

    11 believe that his name was Livancic, but it is not clear

    12 to me. I also remembered him as one of my ex-students,

    13 but I still cannot recall his first or last names.

    14 Q. Thank you. You mentioned three names, and

    15 particularly the name Igor Vujica, and another name,

    16 Josip Franjic. I should like to show you two

    17 documents, Mr. Dzidic.

    18 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) These are

    19 documents 2.610 and 2.711, so 2710 and 2711.

    20 Would Mr. Usher please help me.

    21 Q. Mr. Dzidic, you have these two documents

    22 before you. The first document -- that is, 2710 -- it

    23 is the 19th of May, 1994. It comes from the military

    24 authority of Vitez, the Croat Republic of Herceg-Bosna,

    25 and you see the name of Igor Vujica, former member of

  12. 1 the Vitezovi, who became a member of Vitez (sic) in

    2 1993, on the 15th of December, 1993. Do you see this

    3 document relative to Igor Vujica?

    4 A. I have this document in front of me, and its

    5 heading is "Request for Treatment of a Wounded Soldier

    6 in the Republic of Croatia." The registration

    7 number is 1779-09/4-09/94-2553.

    8 Q. Right.

    9 A. Yes, that is it.

    10 Q. This document, does it relate to the soldier

    11 Igor Vujica that you spoke a little while ago?

    12 A. Yes, it says 25 March, 1972. I don't know

    13 the extent of the injuries of Mr. Vujica and whether he

    14 could have been recovered by then.

    15 Q. No, no, no, I'm referring to the identity.

    16 Is that the same person as the one that you spoke

    17 about?

    18 MR. STEIN: Judge, with respect, this is the

    19 same kind of examination that we had with the last

    20 witness, where this witness is being asked to look at

    21 military documents and things of which he should not be

    22 familiar and probably is not.

    23 JUDGE MAY: He can identify the names on

    24 here, but let's move on, because the witness can't say

    25 anything more about these, I take it.

  13. 1 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation)

    2 Q. Do you know the name of the father of Igor

    3 Vujica that you told us a little while before in your

    4 testimony?

    5 A. Yes, this father's name was Nikica, the son's

    6 name was Igor, but I don't know about the date of

    7 birth. It could be right.

    8 Q. You are confirming that the name of the

    9 father of soldier Igor Vujica that you spoke about is

    10 Nikica?

    11 A. Yes.

    12 Q. The age of Igor Vujica, on the basis of the

    13 date of birth indicated in this document, would it

    14 correspond, would it tally with the age of Igor Vujica,

    15 the soldier that you referred to?

    16 A. Yes, it would. It would correspond.

    17 Q. Thank you. Will you now look at the second

    18 document shown here. This is a certificate issued on

    19 the 20th of January, 1996, also by the military

    20 authority of Vitez, which is issued to an individual

    21 called Josip (Nike) Franjic, and it says that on the

    22 16th of April, 1993, he was a member of the Vitez

    23 Brigade. The particulars indicated here in this

    24 document, would they correspond with the particulars of

    25 the soldier Josip Franjic that you spoke about before?

  14. 1 A. Yes, they correspond, both the first, last

    2 name, and father's name, and again, I cannot say

    3 anything about the date of birth.

    4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Dzidic. Shall we move on?

    5 So you stayed in your building on the 16th of

    6 April, and on the 17th of April, that is, the next day,

    7 at around 4.00 in the afternoon, soldiers came to your

    8 apartment to look for you?

    9 A. Yes, they came.

    10 Q. And you were taken?

    11 A. It was Slaven Kraljevic and another soldier,

    12 whose last name I later heard was Krizanac, but I

    13 didn't know him then. They took me along. They took

    14 me around the building to a cafe called 072, where

    15 Darko Kraljevic was located.

    16 When they brought me to him, he first said,

    17 "Kadir, where is your brother?" My answer was,

    18 "Darko, he is on duty, just as you are." Then he

    19 asked additional questions, and I responded that if he

    20 had anything against my brother or something with him,

    21 that he should solve that with him and I was not going

    22 to be a go-between.

    23 Then he ordered this soldier, Slavko, to take

    24 me in a Jeep to the cinema building, and immediately

    25 after that we were taken there and I was taken to the

  15. 1 basement of the building.

    2 Q. Could you be more exact? Could you tell us

    3 who was your brother and what position did he hold?

    4 A. My brother is Sefkija Djidic, who at the time

    5 was commander of the staff of the Territorial Defence

    6 in the Vitez municipality.

    7 Q. You told us that you were taken to the

    8 cinema. At least this is how it is in the French

    9 transcript. Is it that you were taken to the cinema

    10 building directly or were you first taken to the

    11 basement of the building which housed the Workers'

    12 University?

    13 A. It is the same entrance. The cinema/theatre

    14 and the Workers' University shared the same entrance,

    15 so I was taken in and then down into the basement.

    16 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) I will now

    17 show you two photographs, Mr. Djidic. This document

    18 was already produced, admitted, for a previous

    19 witness. These documents are from Z2202, and these are

    20 the photographs accompanying that document. Please,

    21 usher, show this to the witness.

    22 Q. Will you please look at all those documents

    23 and tell us if they are showing the building that we

    24 are talking about?

    25 A. The first picture, yes.

  16. 1 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) Could the

    2 witness be shown the second photograph, please?

    3 A. Yes. This is also that picture.

    4 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation)

    5 Q. The next one?

    6 A. Yes, this is the building, but a view from

    7 another side.

    8 Q. Can one see the basement in which you were

    9 detained?

    10 A. You can see the window of the basement here

    11 (indicating).

    12 Q. Thank you. The next photograph, please. Do

    13 you recognise this photograph?

    14 A. This is the cinema/theatre which is located

    15 in that building.

    16 Q. The next photograph, please.

    17 A. This is another view of the cinema/theatre

    18 from a different vantage point.

    19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Djidic. And this photograph,

    20 the last one?

    21 A. It's the same building and another view from

    22 another vantage point.

    23 Q. And --

    24 A. I think again a different vantage point.

    25 Q. Thank you. So these photographs show the

  17. 1 building which you call the Workers' University.

    2 Others say it's the Workers' House, the Workers'

    3 Centre, and other people would call it the cinema?

    4 A. Yes, this is the building, because the

    5 cinema/theatre was also located or housed in this

    6 Workers' University building.

    7 Q. Thank you. So you told us that you were

    8 taken to the basement or to the cellar of the cinema or

    9 the Workers' University, and there you found other

    10 persons who were already there?

    11 A. Yes. There were a number of people there, my

    12 Bosniak neighbours. They were all there in this

    13 basement.

    14 Q. Were the people, I mean people who were

    15 already in the cellar, were they wearing uniforms?

    16 A. Those who were prisoners did not wear

    17 uniforms, but those who were guards did wear them.

    18 Q. The detainees were the civilians; is that

    19 what you are telling us?

    20 A. Yes, yes, that is correct.

    21 Q. Were they only men?

    22 A. These were men of different ages, from 17,

    23 18, up to 65 and above.

    24 Q. After the detention, were perhaps some new

    25 detainees brought to the same place?

  18. 1 A. This process was ongoing, so the number of

    2 people kept rising so that by the night-time, the room

    3 could barely hold all the people who were there.

    4 Q. Was there enough room for you in that place?

    5 A. No. There was not even enough space to sit

    6 down, let alone lie down, and it was also a space which

    7 was very badly neglected. There was slag there. It

    8 was part of a boiler room. It was where the Workers'

    9 University was getting their heat from.

    10 Q. Could you tell us something about the

    11 conditions of detention in that place? How about food,

    12 how about hygiene?

    13 A. As I said, it was a very cramped space,

    14 taking into account all the people who were brought

    15 there. As far as food was concerned, nobody even

    16 thought about it, but later on we started receiving

    17 some food.

    18 As far as the hygiene was concerned, it was

    19 really substandard. It was also not allowed that we go

    20 to the toilet when we needed, so that people had to go

    21 to the toilet in a hallway.

    22 Q. How would you define the conditions in the

    23 place of your detention?

    24 A. Because we had to use this adjacent little

    25 room to go and relieve ourselves, the next day there

  19. 1 was already this stench coming through, and also there

    2 was mud that was brought back into the room in which we

    3 were staying, so there was a danger of some disease

    4 spreading.

    5 Q. You were detained with those other men in

    6 this place for several days, weren't you?

    7 A. Yes. We stayed there for several days, until

    8 the room became too stuffy and too dirty, and then we

    9 were able to move to the cinema hall itself, where the

    10 sanitary conditions were better, so that the majority

    11 of detainees were then transferred there, where we

    12 could sit down and get some rest too.

    13 Q. Mr. Djidic, I will now show you four

    14 documents.

    15 JUDGE MAY: Are you going on to another

    16 topic, Mr. Lopez-Terres?

    17 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) Well, it

    18 still concerns the detention conditions.

    19 JUDGE MAY: Very quickly, as it's 1.00, and

    20 then we will adjourn.

    21 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) These

    22 documents are Z767, Z805, Z807, and Z807/1.

    23 Q. Mr. Djidic, will you please have a look at

    24 these four documents? They are, as you can see, the

    25 documents signed by the commander for the HVO forces in

  20. 1 Central Bosnia, Colonel Tihomir Blaskic. The first one

    2 is dated 21st April 1993. There are two documents on

    3 the 24th of April, and the last one is on the 27th of

    4 April, 1993. Tihomir Blaskic suggested these documents

    5 to the units subordinated to him. The last one on the

    6 27th of April is addressed specifically to the

    7 commander of the Vitez Brigade.

    8 Can you read these four documents,

    9 Mr. Djidic?

    10 A. Yes, I did have a look at these four

    11 documents. They are fine. But at that time, they were

    12 not of much use to us.

    13 Q. I will ask you, Mr. Djidic, you say these are

    14 documents, the orders and calls to obey the request

    15 that order be obeyed. Could you tell us, since you

    16 were also detained in Vitez during the time at which

    17 these orders were issued, could you tell us if you

    18 think that these orders, and again invitations to obey

    19 orders and reminders of the Geneva Conventions, were

    20 they complied with, were they obeyed, at the time when

    21 you were detained?

    22 MR. STEIN: With respect, I think that's a

    23 conclusion only the Court should only draw. More

    24 germane, the orders were dated 24 April, 23 April, and,

    25 I think, 21 April. The confinement that we've know

  21. 1 about thus far is 19 April.

    2 JUDGE MAY: As far as the dates are

    3 concerned, there's no difficulty about that.

    4 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) But the

    5 witness was detained between the 16th and for a time,

    6 so at the time when these orders were issued, the

    7 witness was still in detention.

    8 JUDGE MAY: Yes. We'll deal with this after

    9 the adjournment. The witness can be asked about the

    10 conditions which existed, but can we do it as briefly

    11 as possible, because he won't be familiar with these.

    12 When you go over the page in the statement,

    13 we've had a lot of evidence now about the negotiations

    14 involving Dr. Mujezinovic, so those paragraphs could be

    15 taken very quickly down to 27.

    16 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) Very well,

    17 Mr. President.

    18 JUDGE MAY: When we get back, you could

    19 briefly ask the witness about these documents and about

    20 the conditions in the detention centre.

    21 We'll adjourn now. We'll return five minutes

    22 later, 25 to 3.00.

    23 Mr. Djidic, would you remember, please,

    24 during this adjournment and any others, don't speak to

    25 anybody about your evidence, and that includes members

  22. 1 of the Prosecution. Don't speak about it until it's

    2 over. Could you be back, please, at 25 to 3.00.

    3 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.05 p.m.

    4 --- On resuming at 2.40 p.m.

    5 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Lopez-Terres.

    6 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation).

    7 Q. Mr. Dzidic, before the break, you were shown

    8 four documents signed by Colonel Blaskic. You were

    9 able to look through those documents, which have to do

    10 with the order addressed to brigade commanders

    11 regarding the treatment of detainees. Could you tell

    12 us whether, during the time you were detained in Vitez,

    13 between the 17th of April and the beginning of the

    14 month of May 1993, you personally noted a change in the

    15 difficult detention conditions that you explained to us

    16 this morning.

    17 A. I didn't notice any particular change, and

    18 having looked through these documents, I see that they

    19 were issued with some delay, because the worst things

    20 that happened in Vitez were in the first three or four

    21 days. As regards the conditions in the prison, they

    22 remain more or less the same as they were at the

    23 beginning. The prisoners were frequently taken to dig

    24 trenches. Sometimes a prisoner would not come back.

    25 By way of an example, let me say that Almir

  23. 1 Gadjun, a young man in his 20s, was killed during the

    2 labour he was taken to do. There were some other

    3 cases, but now I'm referring to this particular young

    4 man.

    5 Q. Thank you. I'm going to show you a document,

    6 Mr. Dzidic, which is a death certificate. It is

    7 document number 4 among those given to the registrar,

    8 with the reference number Z2229.

    9 Mr. Dzidic, could you examine this document

    10 and tell us whether the person that you referred to as

    11 having lost his life while digging trenches is indeed

    12 this person whose name appears on this certificate?

    13 A. Yes, it is.

    14 Q. Thank you. Mr. Dzidic, during your stay in

    15 the detention centre in the Workers' University and the

    16 cinema hall, you were chosen to participate in

    17 negotiations with representatives of the HVO together

    18 with other members of the Muslim community of Vitez. I

    19 should like us to refer to those negotiations, and

    20 especially the telephone call that you were asked to

    21 make. Could you tell us, in connection with those

    22 telephone calls, whether you were forced to make them,

    23 or whether you had the possibility to refuse to make

    24 those telephone calls?

    25 A. First of all, like the other participants in

  24. 1 the negotiations, we were people from the basement;

    2 that is how Mr. Jozic frequently referred to us.

    3 People from the basement, as you know, have to be

    4 obedient. After these conversations, I was assigned

    5 the task to talk to Mr. Ramiz Dugalic, who was the

    6 liaison officer of the 3rd Corps of the BH army in

    7 Zenica. Until that conversation ended, until the

    8 morning, from that conversation until the morning,

    9 myself, like the others, had to call anyone we knew in

    10 order to stop what they described as the advance of the

    11 BH army. I did whatever I could. I understood the

    12 gravity of the threat. I realised that all those

    13 people held in detention could become victims in that

    14 prison, including myself.

    15 Q. You speak of threats, the seriousness of the

    16 threat. Could you specify the nature of that threat?

    17 What exactly did you expect before making those

    18 telephone calls, or during those telephone calls?

    19 A. I expected even murders to take place,

    20 because in prison, we heard amongst ourselves that some

    21 people had been killed on the first day, in their own

    22 apartments, at their thresholds, and in the street. My

    23 life was no more valuable than that of those people.

    24 Q. Thank you. You have said that among the HVO

    25 representatives with whom you negotiated, there were

  25. 1 people whose names you mentioned a moment ago: A

    2 gentleman called Bozic, and another person, that is,

    3 Mr. Zvonko Cilic. Is that correct?

    4 A. Yes.

    5 Q. Did you know which HVO units these two

    6 persons belonged to?

    7 A. I did not know.

    8 Q. I am now going to show you two documents,

    9 Mr. Dzidic, and I'm going to ask you to examine them.

    10 They are documents -- Prosecution Exhibits Z703 and

    11 Z694.

    12 Could you examine the document with the

    13 number Z694; it's a document dated the 17th of April,

    14 1993. Do you have it before you?

    15 A. Yes.

    16 Q. Could you tell us who signed this document?

    17 A. Zvonimir Cilic.

    18 Q. Could you also tell us which is the

    19 information appearing in the heading? That is, who

    20 issued this document? In the top left-hand corner.

    21 A. The Croatian Defence Council, the Republic of

    22 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and then the command of the Vitez

    23 Brigade, reference number 02, et cetera.

    24 Q. Thank you. As for the second document, Z703,

    25 I hope you have a good copy in the Serbo-Croatian

  26. 1 language. It is a document also dated the 17th of

    2 April. Could you tell us who signed this document and

    3 on behalf of whom?

    4 A. It's not legible enough. It says four. I

    5 think it says Josic Borislav here.

    6 Q. The document in the Serbo-Croatian language

    7 is indeed a poor copy, at least the one I have, but in

    8 the English-language version, the signature part is far

    9 clearer.

    10 Could you tell us, in any event, regarding the

    11 heading in the left-hand corner, who issued this

    12 document?

    13 A. The command of the Vitez Brigade, Vitez.

    14 Q. Thank you. I should like to draw to the

    15 attention of the Trial Chamber that indeed, the

    16 document that I have, in the signature, in the English

    17 version, a name appears which is preceded by the name

    18 of the accused, and it is much clearer in the English

    19 translation than in the Serbo-Croatian version.

    20 JUDGE MAY: I don't think we are helped by

    21 these documents. I'm going to hand them both back.

    22 Hand them in.

    23 Let's move on, Mr. Lopez-Terres, please. I'm

    24 not admitting those documents.

    25 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) I thought,

  27. 1 Mr. President, that there may be some interest in

    2 establishing that the two persons conducting the

    3 negotiations belonged to the command of the Vitez

    4 Brigade. I shall pass on to the next document, and I

    5 shall continue with the examination of the witness.

    6 Q. Mr. Djidic, at the end of the month of April

    7 1993, you were visited by senior representatives of the

    8 HVO and the BH army, after which your release

    9 occurred.

    10 I should like to show you another document,

    11 dated the 29th of April, 1993, issued by Colonel

    12 Blaskic. It is document Z852.

    13 Mr. Djidic, as you are able to see, this

    14 document is intended to effect the release of all

    15 detainees, particularly civilian detainees, as

    16 indicated in paragraph 2 and dated the 29th of April.

    17 You explained that you, yourself, and other people were

    18 not released then; is that correct?

    19 A. Yes. Yes, 13 of us were taken out from the

    20 cinema hall in the early hours of the morning and taken

    21 to the chess club. The others, I think, were released.

    22 Q. Could you explain to the Tribunal why, in

    23 your opinion, your release and that of the other people

    24 did not take effect, in spite of this order?

    25 A. I cannot explain that, I never discovered,

  28. 1 but when I reviewed the group of people with me, at

    2 least ten of them were highly-qualified people who held

    3 certain executive posts either in the factory or in the

    4 local administration, which was an indication for me

    5 that they were detaining people who meant something. I

    6 hope this will not sound immodest on my part. People

    7 who had a certain standing in town.

    8 Q. Thank you. You have told us that you were

    9 transferred to the building of the chess club?

    10 A. Yes.

    11 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) I'm going

    12 to show another document, document Z2164. Could this

    13 document be shown to the witness? It is the photograph

    14 of a building.

    15 Q. Mr. Djidic, this building, is it the chess

    16 club that you mentioned and where you were detained?

    17 A. Yes, that is the chess club building. I was

    18 detained, I think, here (indicating) in this second

    19 section of the building, in the basement of that part

    20 of the building.

    21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Djidic. You told us that you

    22 stayed in this building for several days and then you

    23 were transferred to the Kaonik camp, together with

    24 other people.

    25 During the first days of detention in the

  29. 1 Kaonik camp, were you exposed to any threats by the

    2 soldiers who were guarding the camp?

    3 A. The first two days, there were all kinds of

    4 threats that were spoken through the slit in the door.

    5 I didn't see who it was, but my impression was whoever

    6 passed by the door launched a curse at us, swore at us.

    7 Q. Did you receive any death threats during

    8 those days?

    9 A. Yes, certainly. There were death threats to

    10 the effect, "You will be killed," or, "You will be

    11 forced through minefields," and all kinds of things

    12 like that.

    13 Q. Thank you. During your detention in the

    14 Kaonik camp, you told us that personally you did not

    15 suffer any violence, but did you note that other

    16 detainees were exposed to physical abuse?

    17 A. I was not mistreated in the sense of being

    18 beaten. Others, for example, Fuad Kakjno, was taken

    19 out and mistreated and, after that, brought back to the

    20 prison. Alija Basic was also taken out of the cell.

    21 He was threatened, and after all that he didn't feel at

    22 all well. As for the others, I cannot say.

    23 Q. Were there, among the detainees in the Kaonik

    24 camp, somebody called Smajo Kavazovic?

    25 A. There was this person, Smajo Kavazovic, and

  30. 1 during a lunch break I saw him eating at a table. We

    2 heard of him that he was most probably dead. However,

    3 I met him in prison. There were many traces of

    4 violence on his face and body.

    5 Q. Around the 15th of May, 1993, you and other

    6 detainees of the Kaonik prison were taken to Vitez,

    7 taken back to Vitez. Upon your return to Vitez, you

    8 met several persons, representatives of the HVO, didn't

    9 you?

    10 A. I didn't meet them. They came to the hall

    11 where we were being detained. Among them was Mario

    12 Cerkez, Ivica Santic and Pero Skopljak. They expressed

    13 regret should those of us there present decide to leave

    14 Vitez, because they offered us every security, assuring

    15 us that we should stay, and that Vitez would be the

    16 loser if the intellectuals left.

    17 However, in view of what had happened before

    18 that was not an indication that these people could be

    19 trusted, especially so as my family had a day or two

    20 previously been expelled in the evening and most of the

    21 other people's families had also been driven out.

    22 Q. Do you remember when, upon your return to

    23 Vitez, one of you was hit by a soldier?

    24 A. Yes. I think that was the last day that we

    25 spent in the cinema hall, when a soldier entered the

  31. 1 hall, looking for Suad Salkic. He was carrying a

    2 wooden bat, and he beat him with it so that there were

    3 traces of blood on his head. The police were present

    4 and did nothing.

    5 Q. When talking about the police, are you

    6 talking about the civilian or the military police?

    7 A. I think it was the military police.

    8 Q. You and the majority of the other members of

    9 the group decided to leave Vitez and to go to Zenica.

    10 At the moment of your departure, you were asked to sign

    11 a document?

    12 A. Yes. We were asked to sign a document saying

    13 that we were voluntarily and of our own free will

    14 leaving Vitez. I signed it, as did the others.

    15 Q. This document had been prepared in advance,

    16 hadn't it?

    17 A. Yes, of course.

    18 Q. All you had to do was sign it?

    19 A. Exactly.

    20 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) I have the

    21 last document, Mr. President, I should like to show the

    22 witness. It is Z2712.

    23 Q. Mr. Djidic, will you please look quickly

    24 through this document dated the 24th of May, 1993, and

    25 entitled, "The Report On The Work Of The Commission To

  32. 1 Date"? I should like you to focus in particular on the

    2 last part of the first page, where your name appears.

    3 A. Yes.

    4 Q. The names of the persons appearing below

    5 yours, does that coincide with the people who were

    6 detained with you in Kaonik?

    7 A. Yes, but this "Emir Pezer" here who was added

    8 to us because he was already in prison when we got

    9 there.

    10 Q. Thank you.

    11 A. "Atif Omerovic" is a name I do not know.

    12 Q. The next paragraph after the list of names

    13 that you have just spoken about, there is a report

    14 regarding the conditions of the release of a group of

    15 14 people who wished to leave Vitez. You see that

    16 paragraph? On page 2, the paragraph after the names.

    17 Page 2, at the top.

    18 A. Yes, I see it.

    19 Q. Could you confirm that this report does

    20 indeed relate to the release of you and the others that

    21 occurred on the 16th of May, 1993?

    22 A. I think that that is the report, because

    23 Fehim Beso remained in Vitez; probably Ramo Karajko as

    24 well, but I'm not quite sure about that.

    25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Djidic.

  33. 1 Before concluding, Mr. Djidic, I should like

    2 to ask you, you left Vitez and you then went to join

    3 your family which had been driven out of their

    4 apartment, as you have already told us, haven't you?

    5 A. Yes. Actually, my family was expelled to

    6 Travnik, and I was transferred with the others to

    7 Zenica. Then I managed to join up with my family after

    8 a period of time in Zenica, because it took time to

    9 find accommodation for all of us.

    10 Q. Were you able to take with you any personal

    11 belongings when you left Vitez?

    12 A. No, I was not able to do that, nor can one

    13 carry much going on foot. I tried to get my car back,

    14 which was with the police, but I didn't get it. So

    15 with a blanket under my arm and some of the things I

    16 had in prison, I left and went to Zenica.

    17 Q. You were never able to regain your apartment,

    18 were you?

    19 A. No, for the present, that is still not

    20 possible. I have submitted a request for restoration

    21 of my apartment and property. When that will be

    22 achieved, I don't know.

    23 Q. At the beginning of your testimony this

    24 morning, Mr. Dzidic, you said that you were still a

    25 teacher and that you were practising your profession in

  34. 1 Zenica. Could you tell us whether today you would have

    2 the possibility of practising your profession in

    3 Vitez?

    4 MR. STEIN: On relevance grounds, I object.

    5 JUDGE MAY: It may not take us very much

    6 further, but the witness can answer.

    7 A. The school I used to work in, I would

    8 probably not be elected a teacher, because as far as I

    9 know, there is not a single Bosniak working there with

    10 children living in Vitez.

    11 Q. And the programmes, educational programmes,

    12 in Vitez are the same as those in the rest of the

    13 Federation, the teaching programmes?

    14 A. As far as I know, in the Croatian part, the

    15 programme is closer or identical to the school

    16 programme of the Republic of Croatia. Attempts are

    17 being made to agree on a common programme. What the

    18 outcome of those negotiations will be, I cannot

    19 forecast now.

    20 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) I have no

    21 further questions, Mr. President, of this witness.

    22 JUDGE MAY: Cross-examination, I hope, in

    23 short order, Mr. Stein. Much of this matter has been

    24 gone over before.

    25 MR. STEIN: I hope you'll be pleasantly

  35. 1 surprised.

    2 Cross-examined by Mr. Stein:

    3 [Witness answers through interpreter]

    4 Q. Mr. Dzidic, let me introduce myself. My name

    5 is Bob Stein; I represent Dario Kordic. If there's any

    6 question that I ask you that you don't understand, let

    7 me know.

    8 Did you hear my question -- did you hear my

    9 statement, sir? If there's any question that I ask you

    10 that you don't --

    11 A. Yes, I heard you, yes.

    12 Q. All right. Now, how long have you been a

    13 teacher?

    14 A. Since 1973.

    15 Q. So roughly 25 years?

    16 A. Plus.

    17 Q. Were you trained to be a teacher?

    18 A. Yes.

    19 Q. Is it fair to say that the majority of your

    20 teaching has been under the communist system that

    21 existed in Yugoslavia before the war?

    22 A. Yes, that is incontrovertible.

    23 Q. And do I take it, because you were a teacher,

    24 you were addressed as "Professor"?

    25 A. Yes.

  36. 1 Q. And if I may, I'll address you as

    2 "Professor," if that's all right with you.

    3 A. My diploma states that I'm a professor of

    4 physics.

    5 Q. Very good. Professor Dzidic, let me ask you

    6 this: Was there a curriculum for the schools which was

    7 imposed throughout the nation of Yugoslavia?

    8 A. There was a curriculum for the Republic of

    9 Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    10 Q. And that curriculum stressed the communist

    11 doctrine; isn't that fair to say?

    12 A. Physics does not distinguish between

    13 communist or any other doctrines.

    14 Q. I accept that. And having miserable grades

    15 in physics, I'll accept whatever you say about it. My

    16 question to you, sir, is: You are aware, however, of

    17 the rest of the curriculum in the schools; fair

    18 enough?

    19 A. You know, I taught physics, and my interest

    20 in the rest of the curriculum was limited.

    21 Q. All right. Let me try it another way: Is it

    22 fair to say that under the communist system, the

    23 teachings of the communist system required that all

    24 people living within the republic be considered

    25 brothers and sisters?

  37. 1 A. Brotherhood and unity was a slogan which was

    2 a guiding thing in the system, and we were taught to

    3 take care of each other.

    4 Q. And you were taught to be tolerant of each

    5 other's religions and ethnic origins as well; correct?

    6 A. I was taught in my house to be tolerant of

    7 all religions and of all people.

    8 Q. All right. And that was also part of the

    9 communist doctrine as well, to be tolerant of all

    10 religions and all people; correct?

    11 A. Well, yes.

    12 Q. And in fact, if anyone spoke out against an

    13 ethnic group, they would be punished?

    14 A. Yes, there were such occurrences.

    15 Q. Now, let me ask you this: Do you know a

    16 woman named Emina Kaknjo? And that's E-M-I-N-A

    17 K-A-K-N-J-O.

    18 A. Emina Kaknjo was a child of Fuad Kaknjo.

    19 Q. And she was present when you were interviewed

    20 by investigators from the ICTY; correct?

    21 A. This person is an interpreter. By

    22 coincidence, Fuad Kaknjo has a daughter whose name is

    23 Emina; but I believe that the interpreter who was

    24 interpreting when I gave the statement happened to have

    25 that same name.

  38. 1 Q. Fair enough.

    2 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: (Interpretation) If I may,

    3 Mr. President --

    4 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

    5 MR. LOPEZ-TERRES: There may be a confusion.

    6 There is an interpreter with whom the Prosecutor's

    7 office cooperates and whose name is Emina Kaknjo, and

    8 to my knowledge, she has nothing to do with Mr. Fuad

    9 Kaknjo.

    10 MR. STEIN: I accept that; I wanted the

    11 mystery cleared up.

    12 Q. Sir, let me ask you this question: I want to

    13 talk about the meeting that you had, that we've heard

    14 so much about, that ended up with Dr. Mujezinovic

    15 making a public statement over the television. You

    16 were left alone in the office and asked to use the

    17 telephone to call some BiH officials to stop the

    18 fighting; is that correct?

    19 A. Yes.

    20 Q. Your current apartment, is that owned -- was

    21 that, before you had it, used by a Croat?

    22 A. No, it is an apartment of which I was the

    23 first occupant, if you're referring to the apartment in

    24 Vitez.

    25 Q. The current apartment where you live.

  39. 1 A. The current apartment in Zenica is an

    2 apartment where a person lived with his family. He is

    3 a mix of Slovene and Croat, and his wife was an ethnic

    4 Serb.

    5 Q. All right. And last, when you were released,

    6 you were exchanged for Croat civilians; isn't that

    7 correct?

    8 A. Yes.

    9 MR. STEIN: Nothing further.

    10 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Kovacic?

    11 Cross-examined by Mr. Mikulicic:

    12 [Witness answers through interpreter]

    13 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Dzidic. My name is Goran

    14 Mikulicic.

    15 A. Good day.

    16 Q. I am an attorney from Zagreb, and I represent

    17 Mr. Mario Cerkez's Defence in this case. I'm going to

    18 ask you several questions, and kindly respond to them

    19 to the best of your recollection.

    20 Mr. Dzidic, you gave us some personal data; I

    21 would just like to clarify a couple of points. Would

    22 you please tell us, until the sovereignty of

    23 Bosnia-Herzegovina was proclaimed in April of 1992,

    24 what was your citizenship?

    25 A. Until the proclamation of sovereignty, I was

  40. 1 a citizen of SFRY.

    2 Q. And after April 1992?

    3 A. I assumed the citizenship of Bosnia and

    4 Herzegovina.

    5 Q. Do you assume, or are you sure of it?

    6 A. I should be sure of it.

    7 Q. Mr. Dzidic, do you practice your religion?

    8 A. Yes.

    9 (Trial Chamber confers)


    11 Q. Does that mean that I can conclude that you

    12 regularly go to mosque to pray?

    13 A. I go occasionally.

    14 Q. Mr. Dzidic, we heard from you that you worked

    15 as a teacher in school for a number of years. Given

    16 that position of yours, I assume that you knew quite a

    17 few people. Would you happen to have known the family

    18 of Mario Cerkez, his parents?

    19 A. I knew most of the citizens of this small

    20 town, at least from passing, and I met and contacted a

    21 number of people. I knew the parents of Mr. Cerkez,

    22 mostly in a businesslike fashion. They were very

    23 polite.

    24 Q. Did you also have an opportunity to meet

    25 Mario Cerkez?

  41. 1 A. I think I only met him in passing, and I

    2 don't think we ever sat down to have a drink together.

    3 Q. Mr. Dzidic, in your contacts with Mario

    4 Cerkez's parents, and perhaps superficial contact with

    5 Mario Cerkez himself, did you form an impression of

    6 that family as a family who had any ethnic or other

    7 prejudices?

    8 A. No, I could not conclude any such thing.

    9 Q. Mr. Dzidic, you described to us the events,

    10 the unfortunate events of 16 April, 1993, when you were

    11 awakened by an explosion. Then you went to the

    12 apartment of your neighbour, who was an ethnic Croat

    13 woman, and there you took shelter, so to speak. Did I

    14 conclude that right?

    15 A. Yes, exactly.

    16 Q. Am I correct in saying that you actually

    17 trusted this woman where you took shelter?

    18 A. Yes.

    19 Q. Mr. Dzidic, after that, you said that some

    20 soldiers arrived who banged at the door of your

    21 apartment, and then you showed them into the apartment

    22 of your neighbour, and you recognised two of them. You

    23 sat down and had coffee. Mr. Dzidic, can you tell us

    24 what type of uniform these soldiers wore?

    25 A. Those were camouflage uniforms.

  42. 1 Q. Do you perhaps remember, did they have any

    2 insignia?

    3 A. I think that they had none.

    4 Q. Does that mean that you cannot tell us to

    5 what unit they belonged?

    6 A. Exactly.

    7 Q. Mr. Dzidic, you then said that the following

    8 day, you were taken to Darko Kraljevic, and of him you

    9 said that he was the commander of Vitezovi? That's how

    10 you said it?

    11 A. No, I did not say that he was the commander

    12 of Vitezovi, but it is true.

    13 Q. So he was a commander of Vitezovi?

    14 A. Yes.

    15 Q. You said that you were taken to a coffee bar?

    16 A. Yes.

    17 Q. Do you recall the name of that place?

    18 A. It is called 072. It is right below my

    19 apartment.

    20 Q. Given the proximity of it, could you tell us

    21 whether this place was some kind of a headquarters of

    22 the unit commanded by Darko Kraljevic?

    23 A. I cannot say, because I never entered it.

    24 Darko Kraljevic was in front of it, where there were

    25 some tables where guests would sit. That's where I met

  43. 1 him.

    2 Q. Mr. Dzidic, does this part of town where you

    3 lived have a name, Kolonija?

    4 A. Yes.

    5 Q. Mr. Dzidic, where is the coffee bar called

    6 "Benz"?

    7 A. Next to that bar in the neighbourhood.

    8 Q. You mean next to this 072 coffee bar?

    9 A. They're either one next to another or very

    10 close by one another.

    11 Q. Is it true that these two coffee bars share

    12 an outside terrace, a garden?

    13 A. No, I cannot tell you because I never went

    14 there.

    15 Q. Mr. Djidic, you said that Darko Kraljevic had

    16 ordered you arrested and taken to the cinema/theatre;

    17 is that correct?

    18 A. No, I said that he said that I should be

    19 taken to the cinema building when I was arrested.

    20 Q. To whom did he say this?

    21 A. It was to his brother, Slaven, and another

    22 man. I believe his name was Krizanac.

    23 Q. But would I be wrong in saying that these two

    24 soldiers were of the unit commanded by Darko Kraljevic?

    25 A. I'm not sure, but they may have been.

  44. 1 Q. Mr. Djidic, you talked to us about conditions

    2 in the basement where you were placed, and then you

    3 said that you were invited to make certain telephone

    4 calls. I believe we're referring now to 19 April

    5 1993. Is that correct?

    6 A. I cannot specify the date, but I was made

    7 part of the team which was to conduct negotiations.

    8 Q. My question was about the telephone calls to

    9 the BH army commanders.

    10 A. Yes. After the conversation with the HVO

    11 officials, I was given a task of talking to the liaison

    12 officer of the 3rd Corps of the BH army.

    13 Q. I must ask you again, because I'm not sure

    14 that I understood it right. Were you in any way forced

    15 to make those telephone calls or was it suggested to

    16 you?

    17 A. A moment ago I mentioned that we were the

    18 people from the basement, and this was often pointed

    19 out during this time, which also meant that, "You

    20 better be quite careful if you want to see your family

    21 survive."

    22 Q. On 18th of April, 1993, a cessation of all

    23 hostilities was arranged between the leadership at the

    24 very top, that is, the HVO and the BH army?

    25 A. I was not familiar with the outcome of these

  45. 1 negotiations.

    2 Q. But did you hear something about it?

    3 A. Later on, but not at that time.

    4 Q. Did you ever think that in a situation where

    5 a day before a cease-fire had been negotiated,

    6 arranged, that you would be invited to have it

    7 implemented?

    8 A. I did not know about it, but my overall

    9 opinion was that all this should come to an end.

    10 Q. Well, that is clear. But, Mr. Djidic, who,

    11 in that first building where you first found yourself,

    12 took you to the chess club?

    13 A. There were soldiers in a van.

    14 Q. Were these members of the military police?

    15 A. I wouldn't know. They were in uniforms. I

    16 don't know whether they were policemen or officers or

    17 what.

    18 Q. But do you know who took you from the chess

    19 club to Kaonik?

    20 A. They were also soldiers, and I believe that

    21 the driver was civilian.

    22 Q. Do you know members of which military units

    23 were guards in Kaonik?

    24 A. No. How could I know that?

    25 Q. So you don't know anything about members of

  46. 1 these units?

    2 A. I was on the other side of the door.

    3 Q. Mr. Djidic, while you were in the cellar, as

    4 you put it, could you ask and get medical assistance?

    5 A. At that time, I did not need any, even though

    6 I already had papers to go to the hospital. But only a

    7 few days later, a physician arrived, and he told me

    8 that I didn't, after all, need to go to the hospital.

    9 Q. Do you remember who that doctor was?

    10 A. Dr. Franjo Tibolt.

    11 Q. Did he examine you on that occasion?

    12 A. No. We only talked.

    13 Q. During that time, were you made to engage in

    14 some manual labour?

    15 A. No, I was spared the trench digging.

    16 Q. Who spared you? Who gave you the paper

    17 sparing you from that?

    18 A. Dr. Franjo.

    19 Q. Mr. Djidic, at the time of your release you

    20 said you had to sign a statement. Is that true?

    21 A. Yes.

    22 Q. I will now show you a document. Will you

    23 please try to identify it and tell us if that is the

    24 statement?

    25 MR. MIKULICIC: (Interpretation) Will the

  47. 1 usher please take care of these documents?

    2 THE REGISTRAR: The document is marked D28/2.

    3 A. This is my signature.

    4 MR. MIKULICIC: (Interpretation)

    5 Q. Will you tell us the number under which your

    6 signature figures?

    7 A. Number 13.

    8 MR. MIKULICIC: (Interpretation) Thank you.

    9 Usher, you can take those documents, you can collect

    10 those documents.

    11 Q. Do you remember, Mr. Djidic, at the time when

    12 you were released with other people, did the television

    13 make a record of this and were there journalists

    14 present there?

    15 A. There was a television crew there, as far as

    16 I remember.

    17 MR. MIKULICIC: (Interpretation) Thank you

    18 very much, Mr. Djidic. I have no more questions.

    19 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

    20 JUDGE MAY: Any questions?

    21 THE INTERPRETER: We're sorry, we could not

    22 hear the Prosecutor. The microphone was switched off.

    23 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Djidic, thank you for coming

    24 to the International Tribunal to give your evidence.

    25 It is now concluded, and you are released.

  48. 1 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

    2 MR. MIKULICIC: (Interpretation) Your Honours,

    3 before the next witness is called in, I should like --

    4 (The witness withdrew)

    5 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. Mikulicic.

    6 MR. MIKULICIC: (Interpretation) Thank you,

    7 Your Honours. I shall be very brief.

    8 During the examination of an earlier witness,

    9 I believe it was Dr. Mujezinovic offered a photocopy of

    10 a document. Now we have the original of that same

    11 document, and I should like to tender it into evidence

    12 for authenticity. It was 20/2, that is, D20/2.

    13 So will the usher please take this document

    14 from me? I have it for him.

    15 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

    16 MR. NICE: Your Honour, as you know from this

    17 morning, I was expecting to move to procedural matters

    18 after this witness and therefore didn't bring another

    19 witness here for the afternoon. I understand that the

    20 Defence aren't in a position to go ahead with the

    21 procedural matter because Mr. Smith isn't here, which

    22 is unfortunate. I haven't been served in advance with

    23 any notice of what their position is going to be, but

    24 they've only had since yesterday to look at the

    25 statement, although they've had over a week, I think,

  49. 1 to look at the dossier.

    2 JUDGE MAY: Yes.

    3 MR. NICE: It seems to me that it's very

    4 unfortunate to waste even 20 minutes of time if we can

    5 use it to good purpose.

    6 Before I return to the subject of the

    7 dossier, the Court may recall, may have before it, or

    8 may indeed, want to remind itself of my printed

    9 arguments for procedural possibilities at some stage

    10 before the argument is advanced by the Defence, because

    11 the pressure of time on the last occasion we visited

    12 this problem, or not problem, this issue, was such that

    13 I had to take you through it very quickly. It's

    14 probably not with you on the bench at the moment, but I

    15 would ask that you obtain the opportunity, if you find

    16 it helpful, to consider it or reconsider it before

    17 starting again on this issue.

    18 It's probably helpful if I just also set the

    19 scene for procedure. It's been a long time coming

    20 because we've always put the taking of evidence ahead

    21 of everything else, and very sensibly, if I may

    22 respectfully say so.

    23 But right at the beginning, the Chamber

    24 raised the issue of the witness list, not on the basis

    25 that it was going to make any cuts at that stage or

  50. 1 anything of the like, because it said specifically just

    2 because of its wanting to know what the position was.

    3 I then set out our position, subject to further

    4 procedural developments, and although it was a matter

    5 between -- effectively, it's a matter between the Bench

    6 and the Prosecutor, each defendant had an argument on,

    7 or was allowed an argument on, the witness list

    8 generally at that stage, and subject to my reply, that

    9 was really an end of it.

    10 What happened then was that I raised

    11 specifically the issue of the dossier in my procedural

    12 paper as one solution to the problem, and it's

    13 obviously not inappropriate that the Defence should be

    14 allowed to discuss that in general terms in the same

    15 way as if I sought to call the witness, they would be

    16 able to object to the witness being called.

    17 That's, I think, the way things stands at the

    18 moment.

    19 Outstanding procedural matters, apart from

    20 the dossier, include, I suppose, timetable matters

    21 arising from the modest change to the timetable of the

    22 availability of seven more half days.

    23 I had set out in my paper, and I'll remind

    24 you of this, that as to experts, I had hoped to be able

    25 to serve you with two more of the total of four

  51. 1 intended expert reports of a general nature by the end

    2 of this week, and I hope that's still going to be

    3 possible. I then invited the Court to consider the

    4 possibility of reading those expert reports between the

    5 end of this week and the next sitting of this Chamber

    6 in order that we could take the experts really very

    7 swiftly.

    8 I had raised as a possibility a practice that

    9 saves time in certain jurisdictions and is wholly

    10 unobjectionable, so far as I'm concerned, which is that

    11 competing experts, experts from opposing sides, can not

    12 only be called back to back, if that's a course

    13 acceptable to all, but that indeed the experts can be

    14 put together outside court, before they ever come to

    15 give evidence, so that they can narrow the issues that

    16 exist between experts on one side and another. I have

    17 no doubt that those who have tried any form of

    18 conventional case involving expert witnesses will know

    19 how long expert evidence can take if it is all explored

    20 in detail in court, how all too frequently when that's

    21 done --

    22 JUDGE BENNOUNA: (Interpretation) Mr. Nice,

    23 you are saying that several experts could be together.

    24 Not too general, but let us take a case, for

    25 instance, an expert opinion about an area or about a

  52. 1 town. Would that be within the framework of your

    2 proposal regarding the dossier? Is this related to the

    3 presentation of the dossier or is it a proposal which

    4 goes over and above the question of dossier, because

    5 this would be within the context of the dossier,

    6 wouldn't it?

    7 MR. NICE: This, Your Honours, is entirely

    8 separate from the dossier I mentioned in my procedural

    9 paper. It relates to experts who are experts in

    10 particular fields, and so that in this case we have

    11 historians and we intend to have a constitutional

    12 expert in matters of that sort, and those are the

    13 experts I had in mind.

    14 I think experience does show that if you take

    15 experts who are experts in a narrow field, coming to a

    16 court to give evidence on a narrow range of topics,

    17 time can frequently be saved by them being invited to

    18 consider the extent to which they truly disagree and

    19 the extent to which they agree.

    20 I've raised this in my paper. I haven't had

    21 any response yet from the Defence. I don't know what

    22 their attitude to it is.

    23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I don't have your

    24 paper in front of me. There's one aspect of it that I

    25 recall had to do with the question of

  53. 1 cross-examination.

    2 MR. NICE: Yes.

    3 JUDGE ROBINSON: You quoted the relevant

    4 provision of International Covenant on Civil and

    5 Political Rights, which speaks of the right to examine

    6 and to have examined. Thereafter, you, I think,

    7 pointed to a commentary on it, and I think you are

    8 suggesting that that comment made the point that the

    9 formulation that I have referred to is the way it is to

    10 take account of differences in the two legal systems or

    11 in different legal systems.

    12 What I wanted to find out from you is whether

    13 you are suggesting that the right to examine and have

    14 examined witnesses as a right of the accused, whether

    15 the International Covenant is satisfied in some systems

    16 without the accused actually having the right to

    17 cross-examine. I don't know whether that is the point

    18 that you are getting at, that the right to examine and

    19 have examined does not necessarily mean, in some legal

    20 systems, that the witnesses have to be cross-examined

    21 by the accused person.

    22 MR. NICE: Your Honour's recollection of the

    23 detail of the paper is very accurate. It's certainly

    24 the case using the word "witness" in the way which Your

    25 Honour does, that some systems do not demand or require

  54. 1 that the defendant should have the right to

    2 cross-examine the witness when the word "witness" is

    3 used in that way.

    4 May I respectfully submit that, first of all,

    5 this Tribunal itself, in its general acceptance of

    6 hearsay, of course acknowledges that the defendant

    7 doesn't have the right to cross-examine everyone who,

    8 as it were, might be able to give evidence against him

    9 or her, and may I suggest that one of the interesting

    10 issues that this problem throws up is the real

    11 difference between the two systems, the common law and

    12 the civil system, and it shows the difficulties that

    13 practitioners on one side or the other have with

    14 dealing with the other system's approach to evidence.

    15 It's probably a good idea, if I can presume

    16 so to say, to use the word "witness" only in respect to

    17 people who come to court or, alternatively, who give

    18 evidence by video link, and to find and uniformly to

    19 use another word for people whose evidence would be

    20 given through that witness.

    21 Sometimes, I think, in the jurisprudence with

    22 which we are familiar, when looking at the famous

    23 common-law concept of hearsay, wholly unknown to the

    24 civil lawyers, the word "declarant" is used, the

    25 declarant of a statement. One could use that word.

  55. 1 One could use the word "observer" for somebody who

    2 observes events, whose observations are then

    3 transmitted to the Court through the witness who brings

    4 them.

    5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Can I just interrupt you:

    6 I'm not too concerned, overly concerned about the

    7 jurisprudence of the Tribunal, which I know, and which

    8 obviously, if it comes from a certain body, is binding;

    9 but I would be very much helped in my appreciation of

    10 the entire problem that we are looking at if I could be

    11 persuaded that the International Covenant, which I

    12 consider the basic human rights document, certainly

    13 next to the Universal Declaration, if it could be shown

    14 to me that that instrument legitimises or authorises a

    15 situation in which an accused person does not

    16 necessarily have a right to cross-examine a witness,

    17 but that that witness -- or declarant or maker or

    18 provider of information; it doesn't matter to me what

    19 you call that person -- but that person is examined or

    20 -- in some other way, you know?

    21 My concern is to satisfy myself that the

    22 norms in the Covenant, which, in my view, reflect

    23 customary international law, are satisfied in that kind

    24 of situation. And I wondered -- my thoughts were

    25 provoked when I saw the comment in your paper that I

  56. 1 think the Covenant was formulated in the way it was to

    2 meet the variations, the vicissitudes in different

    3 legal systems.

    4 MR. NICE: Well, my understanding of the

    5 question is that the answer is yes. To some extent,

    6 the answer is particularised by the examples we give

    7 from the civil system, as understood by us, and

    8 proposed. It's helpful to have your question

    9 overnight. I will attempt, if I may, to bring further

    10 chapter and verse to show that such systems fall within

    11 the Covenant for you first thing in the morning, if

    12 that would help.

    13 But it's certainly the case, under the civil

    14 systems that we have summarised -- and they're not all

    15 the same -- that witnesses bring information from

    16 declarants or observers, and that there is no automatic

    17 right to have each and every observer or declarant --

    18 absent some particular exception: death, or

    19 whatever -- there is no absolute right to have those

    20 people brought before a court, although in certain of

    21 the jurisdictions, as we understand it, there is a

    22 strong presumption that important ones will, of course,

    23 be made available.

    24 But it appears, for example, in the French

    25 system -- and Mr. Lopez-Terres will correct me if I'm

  57. 1 wrong, or probably Judge Bennouna -- but in the French

    2 system, the Court decides the degree to which the

    3 defendant's case requires that there should be

    4 witnesses available for cross-examination, assuming the

    5 witnesses are available, but nevertheless is free to

    6 draw on other material, providing that material is read

    7 out, so that it's part of the public record, for its

    8 final decision. And that must accommodate the Covenant

    9 and must fit within it. But if you can give me until

    10 tomorrow morning, now that your question is completely

    11 articulated, I'll hope to be able to bring you some

    12 more specific answers to that problem.

    13 Certainly, if we aren't able to fit such

    14 practices within the Covenant, then there's the general

    15 policy of the Tribunal, and its approach to hearsay

    16 would present a difficulty. But that's for another

    17 day, maybe, because that issue is clearly resolved.

    18 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, moving on, you

    19 mentioned experts and a suggestion about experts.

    20 MR. NICE: Yes.

    21 JUDGE MAY: Now, has there been any

    22 discussion between the parties about this suggestion?

    23 MR. NICE: I haven't heard back from the

    24 Defence on that.

    25 Before I close what I have to say about

  58. 1 experts, there's the outstanding issue of the

    2 constitutional expert. Just to remind the Chamber, the

    3 constitutional expert we originally hoped to be able to

    4 call gave evidence and was extensively cross-examined

    5 in Blaskic. Well before the trial, I summarised, in a

    6 digestible way, his evidence, served it for admission,

    7 but it was rejected. That witness, in light of what

    8 happened to him after he gave evidence in Blaskic, is

    9 not prepared to come in person to help us, and we are

    10 attempting -- I think we have identified a substitute

    11 expert.

    12 It's plainly a witness that has to come, not

    13 least because of the very detailed account given of

    14 constitutional matters in the Defence pre-trial brief,

    15 which, although not identified as to its author, would

    16 appear to be the content of an expert's report.

    17 One of our problems in identifying a

    18 substitute expert has been the hope that the

    19 Prosecution's case will finish within a reasonably

    20 short period of time. Therefore, if an expert is

    21 available but only available next year, we've had to

    22 rule him out. I think we have now identified an

    23 expert, but I'm not sure how long it's going to take me

    24 to have the report prepared for service.

    25 That apart, there will be three, I think, by

  59. 1 the end of this week or the very beginning of next

    2 week. You've seen one of them already. The second one

    3 comes from Mr. Cigar and the third from Mr. Allcock.

    4 I'm anxious that their testimony can be taken in the

    5 most concise and useful way possible.

    6 JUDGE MAY: But unless there's agreement by

    7 the Defence on this matter, you'll have to call them in

    8 the conventional way.

    9 MR. NICE: Yes, of course. I accept that.

    10 JUDGE MAY: Your suggestion would be that the

    11 experts should meet, or something of that sort, or

    12 should correspond, and try and thrash out what is in

    13 dispute and what is agreed between them?

    14 MR. NICE: Yes, because it's a practice that

    15 in other areas works very well.

    16 JUDGE MAY: It seems a sensible suggestion

    17 and limits the amount of evidence. The time which is

    18 necessary given to it can be given to it outside.

    19 Well, we'll put that matter to the Defence in due

    20 course.

    21 Looking ahead, since we've got another five

    22 minutes, as I've said, we have to fix the calendar for

    23 the rest of the year. I'm sorry that hasn't been done

    24 already, but it's because of the difficulties of other

    25 cases impinging on this one. I do recognise that for

  60. 1 those involved, it does cause an inconvenience if you

    2 don't know what you're supposed to be doing in the

    3 autumn, so we shall come to it as soon as we possibly

    4 can.

    5 I think it likely -- although it's not yet

    6 decided -- that we shall be sitting from the 13th of

    7 September. To start with, I shall be engaged in

    8 another case in the morning, for some of that time, and

    9 we shall run through until October. We hope fairly

    10 soon to be able to give you some finalised dates.

    11 What I think would be helpful, from the point

    12 of view of the Trial Chamber, from the Prosecution, is

    13 an estimate of how long they are going to be, because

    14 we may want to take a view about that. How long is it

    15 going to take for the rest of the Prosecution case?

    16 Given, for instance, if you had full court time, how

    17 long would it take for you to finish your case, having

    18 in mind, for instance, how long Blaskic took?

    19 MR. NICE: As you know, I have always hoped

    20 that our case, although similar in overall scale of

    21 issues to Blaskic, would take a very substantially

    22 shorter period of time, not least because we have the

    23 advantage of being able to learn lessons from what's

    24 happened in Blaskic.

    25 My belief is that if the dossier approach

  61. 1 finds favour -- and if it's something that we can

    2 accomplish, because it's very labour-intensive on our

    3 side, I have to say, but if it's acceptable, we'll find

    4 the resources to do it -- then that will immediately

    5 save a very considerable amount of time.

    6 My further belief is that the techniques that

    7 I've been developing for taking evidence in chief are

    8 paying off, I think quite handsomely, in the time that

    9 evidence is taking, not only because evidence in chief

    10 is getting shorter, but it seems to me that there is a

    11 corresponding focus by the Defence that is shortening

    12 cross-examination.

    13 I would like a day or so to look, with my

    14 team, at the witness list, with those various

    15 possibilities in mind, and in a sense, I'd be helped by

    16 knowing what the response to the dossier issue is,

    17 although that may take some time to come from the

    18 Chamber; I recognise that. But I would think that if

    19 you give us a couple of days, I can give you, one way

    20 or another, some target periods of time that I estimate

    21 our case will take.

    22 I have to say that there are always going to

    23 be odd problems along the way. We are, for example,

    24 encountering some difficulty with witnesses generally,

    25 rather more than we'd expected, including in respect of

  62. 1 witnesses who were very recently willing. That always

    2 creates difficulties for us because we've got to decide

    3 what our response to their attitude is, and our

    4 response may itself be sometimes time-consuming, or it

    5 may be simply the response of choosing other witnesses,

    6 and so on.

    7 So there are always going to be unexpected or

    8 developing difficulties, but I think things are in

    9 hand, and within a few days I could give you an

    10 estimate of time.

    11 JUDGE MAY: Tomorrow, you propose, Mr. Nice,

    12 hearing one witness; is that right?

    13 MR. NICE: No, the Defence have indicated an

    14 hour and a half, I think, for the procedural

    15 discussion. I have no idea of the time it may take; I

    16 will obviously require -- or may need to say things in

    17 reply. But if it's an hour and a half out of the

    18 morning, that would take us till -- well, I would hope

    19 not only to do one witness, but two witnesses, by

    20 Friday lunchtime, is the short --

    21 JUDGE MAY: Why is it suggested that the

    22 procedural matters should take precedence tomorrow

    23 morning over the evidence?

    24 MR. NICE: Only because, if you remember,

    25 this morning, you had suggested procedure tomorrow

  63. 1 afternoon, and I had suggested that we take procedure

    2 because it had been partially agreed after Dzidic, and

    3 you said that was satisfactory. I'm quite happy to

    4 start a witness, or Mr. Scott's quite happy to start a

    5 witness at 9.45 tomorrow morning and to take him as

    6 swiftly as may be, and that will then leave a witness,

    7 perhaps, for Friday, who I would hope could be taken in

    8 -- completely, start to finish -- in the morning.

    9 JUDGE MAY: Yes. Well, we'd better resolve

    10 this procedural matter tomorrow morning first thing,

    11 one way or another.

    12 Mr. Stein, can I address you on behalf of the

    13 Defence, in the absence of Mr. Smith?

    14 MR. STEIN: Certainly.

    15 JUDGE MAY: It may be that one approach to

    16 this problem of the dossier is having seen it -- and

    17 we'll hear your objections, although I think we can

    18 probably anticipate them -- one approach may be to test

    19 the system, as it were, further, with one dossier, and

    20 see how that works or doesn't work in practice. I

    21 don't expect a response to that now, but that may be a

    22 suggestion which is made tomorrow.

    23 I can tell you, thinking aloud, myself --

    24 this is a purely personal opinion about it -- there is

    25 in the dossier a great deal of material which, under

  64. 1 our Rules, is potentially admissible; that would be the

    2 documentary material and the photographs and the like.

    3 That leaves the issue of the witness statements, which

    4 I suppose is the nub of the matter, and about that

    5 there can be argument. But one approach might be, your

    6 having had the summary, is to ask you what's in dispute

    7 here, what is the real issue about this village, and

    8 then determine what, if any, witnesses should be called

    9 on that issue.

    10 I put that forward for your consideration,

    11 and we'll hear your submissions on it tomorrow.

    12 MR. STEIN: I won't preclude those or preview

    13 them now, except to say that I believe sincerely that

    14 the dossier approach will lengthen and not shorten this

    15 trial.

    16 JUDGE BENNOUNA: (Interpretation) Mr. Stein,

    17 what has been proposed by the Court is an experiment;

    18 it is not a question of faith and what we believe in.

    19 We should rather like to go into juridic science and

    20 experiment a little. It is not a question of what we

    21 believe in or not. That will not help us to make

    22 progress.

    23 This being so, if we pass from the area of

    24 beliefs to the area of science and practice and

    25 experimentation, we all have in mind the rights of the

  65. 1 accused, the rights of the Defence. I think that is

    2 essential, and that is the reply to what was said a

    3 moment ago by my colleague, Judge Robinson, about the

    4 Covenant on Civil Rights. That is the respect of the

    5 rights of the Defence. There are different ways of

    6 respecting the rights of the Defence, but it is

    7 essential that those rights be respected.

    8 If we go through this dossier and you tell us

    9 that for such-and-such a person mentioned, or statement

    10 mentioned, we need to hear them, then there will be no

    11 problem; but as for others, there is no reason to bring

    12 them, because they will be repeating what other people

    13 have said. There may be witnesses who will be

    14 repetitive. In that case, we will be economising, all

    15 of us, and that is the spirit in which we are working.

    16 Respect for the rights of the Defence:

    17 Nothing should be done that would infringe upon that

    18 right. But on the other hand, we must respect the

    19 institution, not to waste time and resources without

    20 any cause. And I think, with a certain degree of an

    21 open mind, we may go ahead with this kind of an

    22 experiment, and that is the spirit that I wish to

    23 convey to you.

    24 MR. STEIN: Judge, perhaps it's because I'm a

    25 New Englander; I have a reputation for being

  66. 1 conservative. But in fact we have many experiments

    2 going on in our jurisdiction. I have tried civil cases

    3 in which we've put on our damage evidence before we got

    4 to our liability evidence. I've tried cases to summary

    5 juries, where you make an offer of proof of your case,

    6 and they give you an opinion. We have many novel

    7 experiments. I must confess the idea of duelling

    8 experts in the back room, while I've heard it before,

    9 just intrigues me intellectually, but I'm not sure

    10 we're going to agree to that in this particular

    11 instance.

    12 So it's not that we're afraid to make

    13 innovative techniques, and I'm sure the Chamber, as do

    14 we, weigh the balance of that innovative technique to

    15 not only the search for truth, but the defendants'

    16 rights as established under our process. Mr. Smith

    17 will address that, as only he can, and I will address

    18 it, hopefully, tomorrow, on a more practical level --

    19 having put my foot in it, I'll just leave it there.

    20 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Nice, if you could have the

    21 witness here at a reasonable hour tomorrow, I hope we

    22 won't be too long with this argument.

    23 MR. NICE: We'll have him here straight away,

    24 first thing in the morning, I think, for safety.

    25 MR. STEIN: Can we know who the witness is?

  67. 1 MR. NICE: One of them is seeking some

    2 protection. I'll tell my friends the order I propose

    3 to take them, unless they've got any objection. If

    4 not, it's the next two witnesses on the list, because

    5 the last three I cancelled, as they will remember. The

    6 only other evidence that I might seek to lead this

    7 week, if time allows, is the two witnesses who took the

    8 statement from Dr. Mujezinovic which has been the

    9 subject of such heavy complaint.

    10 MR. STEIN: And to the extent we can have

    11 their summaries ahead of time, it certainly is helpful.

    12 MR. NICE: Yes, that's not a problem.

    13 JUDGE MAY: Very well. Tomorrow morning at

    14 quarter to 10.00, please.

    15 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at

    16 4.05 p.m., to be reconvened on

    17 Thursday, the 17th day of June,

    18 1999, at 9.45 a.m.