1 Friday, 23 April 2004
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Case Number IT-00-39-T, the Prosecutor versus
7 Momcilo Krajisnik.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
9 Good morning to everyone. I did understand that the parties would
10 prefer first to have the cross-examination of Mr. Alic, and only after
11 that the cross-examination of Mr. Hidic. If that is true, then, Madam
12 Usher, would you please escort Mr. Alic into the courtroom.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Alic. Can you hear me in a
15 language you understand?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can. Good morning.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning. May I remind you that you are still
18 bound the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your
20 Mr. Alic, you'll now be cross-examined by counsel for the
21 Defence. That is Ms. Loukas.
22 Ms. Loukas, please.
23 WITNESS: MIDHO ALIC [Resumed]
24 [Witness answered through interpreter]
25 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Cross-examined by Ms. Loukas:
2 Q. Good morning, Mr. Alic.
3 A. Good morning, ma'am.
4 Q. Now, Mr. Alic, when you were giving evidence yesterday, you
5 indicated that there was a neighbour of yours, a Mirso Brkic, who you said
6 did not agree to wear the new Serb uniform. Do you recall that evidence,
7 Mr. Alic?
8 A. Yes, I do.
9 Q. What did this new Serb uniform look like?
10 A. I didn't see it.
11 Q. Now, you also gave evidence that on the 9th of May -- yes, you
12 were asked this question. Mr. Harmon was reading from your statement. "On
13 the 9th of May 1992, it was a Saturday, the Serbs announced over the
14 Bosanski Novi radio that all Bosniaks should turn over their weapons."
15 MR. HARMON: Mr. President, it would be helpful if I could get a
16 page number and a line number.
17 MS. LOUKAS: Page 58, Mr. Harmon.
18 MR. HARMON: Thank you.
19 MS. LOUKAS: I thought Mr. Harmon would remember asking the
21 Q. In any event, Mr. Harmon said to you: "I have two questions for
22 you, Mr. Alic. Did you personally hear that ultimatum on the radio?" And
23 you answered that yes, you had. And then you were asked this
24 question: "Did the ultimatum apply to Muslims only? Did it apply to
25 Serbs? Did it apply to Croats?" And you answered: "No, it only applied
1 to Muslims because Blagaj Japra was populated by Muslims alone."
2 So, Mr. Alic, I take it that from that answer that the answer was
3 not directed solely at Muslims, but that your answer is that it was
4 because Blagaj Japra was populated by Muslims alone. Is that correct?
5 A. It applied only to Muslims obviously. It didn't apply to anybody
7 Q. Why do you say "obviously," Mr. Alic?
8 A. Because they said so. They said that Muslims, Bosniaks, should
9 surrender their weapons. That was what the announcement said.
10 Q. So the actual announcement said it. It wasn't just because the --
11 your village was only populated by Muslims, Blagaj Japra?
12 A. It was not only on the radio. It was Ranko Gvozden who told me
13 that. His story was the same, that Muslims should surrender their
15 Q. All right. So you're saying it didn't apply to everybody?
16 A. No, it did not.
17 Q. And this particular radio station you're talking about, to your
18 knowledge, are you aware to whom that particular radio station broadcast?
19 A. It broadcast to everybody, Muslims, Serbs, Croats. Everybody
20 could listen to this radio station.
21 Q. I'm asking you what geographical area, Mr. Alic.
22 A. I don't understand. What do you mean by that?
23 Q. Right. I'm only asking you if you know to your knowledge this
24 radio station that you say you heard this announcement on, to what area
25 was it broadcast to. Do you know?
1 A. It could be heard in Prijedor, Bosanski Novi, Suhaca, Agic, Bihac.
2 Q. You also gave evidence describing an attack on a military police
3 vehicle. And of course, that attack was something that you'd been told
4 about by other people. That was not something that you'd seen.
5 A. I personally didn't see it, but other peoples did, and they told
6 me about it.
7 Q. Now, these people that -- I think you indicated that Izet and
8 Sifet told us what had been told to them, and that was that: "We wouldn't
9 be allowed to return to our homes." Do you recall that evidence,
10 Mr. Alic?
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. And you indicated in your evidence that they were not officers;
13 they just wore military uniforms. Do you recall that?
14 A. Yes, I do. I remember that.
15 Q. Can you describe the uniform.
16 A. It was just a normal camouflage uniform.
17 Q. Now, you also indicated that when you were put on the train that
18 the -- that your Serb neighbours were assisting in that process of loading
19 you on to these trains. Do you recall that evidence?
20 A. Nobody assisted us. They told us to get on the train. I don't
21 know why we should have been assisted with that.
22 Q. In any event, you were told, you say, to get on the train. Is
23 that correct?
24 A. That is correct.
25 Q. And you indicated that they were wearing camouflage military
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And that's, of course, all you remember about what they were
4 wearing. Is that correct?
5 A. They also carried weapons. I remember that.
6 Q. Yes, I understand that, Mr. Alic. But in terms of what they were
7 wearing, that's all you recall, isn't it?
8 A. They were not wearing anything else. They just carried rifles in
9 their hands.
10 JUDGE ORIE: The last answer seems not entirely logical to me, so
11 I'd like to clarify the issue.
12 The question was whether you knew anything more about the uniforms
13 they were wearing, apart from that they were carrying weapons. Do you
14 know any further details about the camouflage uniforms you just mentioned?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those were multicoloured uniforms.
16 They were not just one colour. They were multicoloured uniforms.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But you've got no further information about
18 insignia or...
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They did have eagles on their
20 sleeves. The eagles of the Serbian Republic.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
22 Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
23 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Q. Now, Mr. Alic, did anyone resist getting on to that particular
25 rail car?
1 A. Nobody objected, nobody resisted. When we realised that we had to
2 get going, we wanted to get going as soon as possible.
3 Q. So the situation is, Mr. Alic, that you all wanted to leave?
4 A. No, no. We did not want to leave. We wanted to return to our
5 homes. We didn't want to leave. However, when we realised that there was
6 no going back, then we just wanted to move somewhere, to survive, to go
7 somewhere where we would continue living. Nobody wanted to go of their
8 own will. They told us that we had to go, and then we realised that it
9 was better for us to go anywhere than to be killed there on the spot and
11 Q. It would be true to say, Mr. Alic, wouldn't it, that you all
12 wanted to leave, and that you were praying to God that you should leave,
13 and that you wanted to be allowed to go because you couldn't take it any
14 longer, and you realised you couldn't go on living there. That's correct,
15 isn't it?
16 JUDGE ORIE: That's five questions in one, Ms. Loukas. Would you
17 please take your questions one by one. And would you also not ignore that
18 you have a professional Bench in front of you. Yes, please.
19 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour. So, Your Honour, in what
21 JUDGE ORIE: In the sense that if you say -- well, let's just
22 assume that you're put in a situation totally unvoluntarily --
23 MS. LOUKAS: Oh, I see what you're saying, yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And then ask a witness whether a way out of such a
25 situation which he described is clearly not what they wished to say. So
1 you have chosen this way out voluntarily, that is a way of approaching a
2 situation which, well, might not very much assist the Chamber in really
3 assessing what was voluntarily and not. And that is also the reason why I
4 asked to you split up your last question.
5 MS. LOUKAS: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Because it's a sequence of events, and the Chamber
7 will certainly look at the sequence as a whole and not just every single
8 bit and piece. And to say if you have -- if you are in a situation where
9 you cannot return to your house and, as I say, that you -- well, let's say
10 that a choice was given whether to go by trucks or by a train, even if
11 that choice would be voluntary, that wouldn't make the situation a
12 voluntary one. And that's more or less what I noticed. You're taking out
13 tiny little pieces of whether there was a still a choice either to get on
14 the train or not. Although there were soldiers there, ordered you to get
15 on the trains, weapons in their hands, and you would have no weapons
16 and then you say, "So you went there voluntarily." That's at least what
17 you suggested to the witness. And this is a -- I ask you in that respect
18 to keep your mind that what is voluntary and what is not is, to some
19 extent, an assessment of a situation which would not perhaps entirely be
20 left in the hands of the witness, but should be assessed by the Chamber as
22 Please proceed.
23 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, I will, Your Honour. Except for the fact that I
24 didn't use the word "voluntary." That's your word.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let me just check what word you used, then.
1 I have to change from yesterday's transcript to today's. One
2 second, please. Yes, what you said. I do agree that you didn't say
3 voluntarily. You said: "So the situation is, Mr. Alic, that you all
4 wanted to leave," which I appreciate that you say "wanting to leave" is
5 not exactly the same as voluntarily leaving.
6 MS. LOUKAS: I understand that, Your Honour. But my purpose will
7 become abundantly clear if you'll allow me to continue.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'll allow you to continue.
9 MS. LOUKAS:
10 Q. Would it be true to say, Mr. Alic, that you all wanted to leave?
11 A. Nobody wanted to leave of their own will. All of us wanted to go
12 back home. However, at gunpoint, we had to leave. And then it became
13 clear to us that it was better for us to leave than to be killed. If
14 somebody told you at gunpoint, "You have to leave your village," would you
15 leave or would you stay?
16 Q. Now, Mr. Alic, the situation is that you were praying to God that
17 you should leave and that you should be allowed to go. That was the
18 situation, wasn't it? Would that be true to say?
19 A. We prayed to God to survive, to save our hide. We prayed to God
20 not to be killed there and then on the spot.
21 Q. But you wanted to be allowed to go. Isn't that the situation,
22 Mr. Alic?
23 A. We did not want to go. Once we realised that there was no other
24 choice, that we had to leave our homes, that we were being forcible
25 expelled from our village, then we said, "Okay, we'll go." The doors of
1 the carriages were open, and no more words were said. If we dared to say
2 one word, we would be killed.
3 Q. So then, it would be not true to say, would it, that, "We all
4 wanted to leave, even I was praying to God that I should leave, that I
5 should be allowed to go because we couldn't take it any longer." It would
6 be not true to say that, would it?
7 A. No, one cannot say that.
8 Q. And it wouldn't be true to say, "I realised we couldn't go on
9 living there." That wouldn't be true either, would it?
10 A. How was I supposed to go on living there once I was forcibly
11 expelled, when I was forced with a rifle to leave, when the door of the
12 carriage was open for me? Would you have stayed in my place?
13 Q. Now, Mr. Alic, do you recall giving evidence previously before
14 this Tribunal?
15 A. Yes, I do recall.
16 Q. And that was back on the 31st of January 2003?
17 A. Yes, I testified between the 27th and 31st of January.
18 Q. Now, in response to a question: "Was anyone resisting getting on
19 the rail car," you said the following: "Nobody wanted to, nobody
20 resisted. We all wanted to leave. Even I was praying to God that I
21 should leave, that I should be allowed to go. Because we couldn't take it
22 any longer. I realised we couldn't go on living there." Do you recall
23 giving that answer, Mr. Alic?
24 A. I don't. I'm telling you what I'm telling you now. It was
25 coercion. If I told you that I was praying to God to save my skin and not
1 be killed, I think you would do the same in my place. You would tell
2 them, "Let me go, because I see I can't live here," because the Serbs
3 won't let me, the Serb army won't let me. I don't want to argue with you
4 much longer about this. But it was the Serb army that forced us to go
5 into these trains and leave.
6 Q. So, Mr. Alic, this morning you've said that it wasn't true that
7 you wanted to be allowed to go; and yet, in your previous evidence, you
8 did say that. And you've heard me read that out.
9 MS. LOUKAS: That's at page 13941, for the record, Friday, the
10 31st of January 2003 in the Brdjanin case, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Ms. Loukas, would you please move to your next
13 MS. LOUKAS: I hope my purpose has become apparent to Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: The purpose is apparent. Effect is apparent as well.
15 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, with the greatest of respect,
16 actually stating that you wanted to be allowed to go is an important
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We took your point. We listened. We compared
19 the testimony. So to that extent, you reached the effect you wanted, to
20 draw our attention to the difference in wording between the testimony
21 given in Brdjanin and what happened now.
22 MS. LOUKAS:
23 Q. Now, Mr. Alic, a document has been presented to the Court.
24 MS. LOUKAS: If the exhibit of the record...
25 If Exhibit Number P84 might be presented to the witness.
1 Q. Do you have that exhibit in front of you, Mr. Alic?
2 A. I have. I can see it.
3 Q. Now, it's indicated there that two people are present. Nijaz
4 Ferizovic. Do you see that?
5 A. No, I don't see that. I only see my sister's signature. My
6 sister had this document issued to her in Bosanski Novi.
7 Q. Yes. If you look further up the document, there's a name, "Nijaz
8 Ferizovic." Can you see that now?
9 A. I cannot see the name. Nijaz Ferizovic. Authorised officer, or
10 simply officer. Yes, I can see that.
11 Q. You can see that. Now, do you know who Nijaz Ferizovic was?
12 A. No, I don't.
13 Q. That's a Muslim name, isn't it?
14 A. Yes, it is.
15 Q. And he is indicated there as being the official. Is that correct?
16 A. Yes, correct. That's what it says here. At Ranko Nikolic.
17 Q. Yes, that's correct, Mr. Alic.
18 Now, the situation is, Mr. Alic, that you were aware that on the
19 10th or 11th of May, military police patrol was attacked by armed Muslims
20 in the village of Blagaj Rijeka?
21 A. It was not attacked by Muslims. It was only alleged that it was
22 attacked by the Muslims. They orchestrated the whole thing and made it
23 look as if it had been attacked by the Muslims. But they did it
24 themselves, to blame the Muslims.
25 Q. But of course, you've already indicated in your evidence,
1 Mr. Alic, that you had no personal knowledge of that particular event, and
2 it was only what you had heard from other people.
3 A. Certainly, of course.
4 Q. Now, at the time, Mr. Alic, that you were placed on the train, did
5 anybody give you a reason at the time?
6 A. Mico Dolic said to me, "You are going to Zenica, to some Serb
7 villages, whereas people from Zenica, from these villages will go to
8 Blagaj Japra and the surrounding villages," including Dolic. But in my
9 view, it was actually ethnic cleansing because things didn't happen as he
10 had indicated.
11 Q. Yes, you previously indicated that, Mr. Alic.
12 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't understand this comment
13 by the witness.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Alic, could you please repeat what you just said
15 because the interpreters couldn't hear you.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Then I would have to hear the
17 question again. I don't remember the question.
18 JUDGE ORIE: After you said that: "It was actually ethnic
19 cleansing because things didn't happen as he had previously indicated,"
20 Ms. Loukas said: "Yes, you previously indicated that, Mr. Alic." And
21 then you added something. The interpreters couldn't hear.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that I shouldn't be repeating
23 this. I shouldn't have to repeat this because I already said that. Why
24 am I supposed to say things twice?
25 MS. LOUKAS:
1 Q. And, Mr. Alic, did anyone give you a reason for why you were being
2 held at the football stadium?
3 A. No. No reason was given. They only cursed our Ustasha mothers,
4 made -- ridiculed us, called us "Alija's troops" and used other derogatory
5 terms. But no reason was given.
6 MS. LOUKAS: No further questions, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Loukas.
8 Is there any need to re-examine the witness, Mr. Harmon?
9 MR. HARMON: I have one question, Your Honour. If I could have
10 the witness shown Prosecution Exhibit 78, and if Prosecution Exhibit 78
11 could be placed on the ELMO -- or not on the ELMO but on the monitor.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. HARMON: It's now appearing on the monitor.
14 Re-examined by Mr. Harmon:
15 Q. I just want to ask the witness a question once he is shown the
17 Mr. Alic, between Croatia -- the boundary of Croatia and the
18 boundary of Bosanski Novi, there is a river. What is the name of that
20 A. It is the Una River, U-n-a.
21 MR. HARMON: Thank you. I have no additional questions.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Harmon.
23 Mr. Alic, the Judges have no questions for you. That means that
24 this concludes your giving evidence in this Court. I'd like to thank you
25 very much for coming and answering the questions of both parties. And I'd
1 like to wish you a safe trip home again.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours. I would like to thank
3 you, too. And if necessary, I can come again.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
5 Madam Usher, would you please escort Mr. Alic out of the
7 [The witness withdrew]
8 Mr. Stewart, for planning purposes, could you indicate how much
9 time the cross-examination of Mr. Hidic would approximately take?
10 MR. STEWART: I might be able to finish before the time when Your
11 Honour usually has the break. That's -- I wouldn't be particularly
12 confident about that. It's possible.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You know that the tapes in this courtroom in
14 urgency situations would allow us to continue for ten minutes more than we
15 usually do. That means, I think as a matter of fact that the maximum
16 capacity of a tape is one hour and 45 minutes. So I leave it a bit up to
17 you. If you see at 10.30 that you would certainly not finish within 12 or
18 13 minutes, then perhaps we could have a break at 10.30. If, however, you
19 think that we could finish in 10 minutes on from 10.30, then we could give
20 it a try to see whether we can finish, and then finish for the whole day.
21 MR. STEWART: Yes. The only thing perhaps I should mention, then,
22 for planning purposes, Your Honour, is that I do have one or two other
23 issues to raise. So if Your Honour is thinking that we could then finish
24 for the day at that point --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then we would have to return anyhow to hear the
1 other matter.
2 MR. STEWART: So the value -- I understand the point of Your
3 Honour's suggestion but --
4 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues]... Yes. Even for
5 the witness --
6 MR. STEWART: Indeed, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: If you could finish him in ten minutes and then not
8 return after a break..
9 MR. STEWART: Yes. Your Honour is quite right.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I would ask you to keep that in mind.
11 Mr. Harmon.
12 MR. HARMON: Yes. We would seek admission of the exhibits that
13 were shown to Mr. Alic. Those are Exhibits 76 through 85.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we have not given a decision on that. I did not
15 hear any objection when they were presented to the witness.
16 Now since they are formally tendered -- these are the Mr. Alic
17 documents. Madam Registrar, would you then, please, read them so that we
18 can take a decision on admission.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit Number P76, witness statement dated
20 12 March 2000. And P76.1, the B/C/S translation.
21 P77, map of BiH with Bosanski Novi highlighted.
22 P78, map of Bosanski Novi.
23 P79, photo of destroyed mosque in Blagaj Japra.
24 P80, photo of front of Japra company.
25 P81, photo of Prijedor-Bosanski Novi Road running alongside the
2 P82, marked photo of Mlakve stadium.
3 P83, view of the football ground at Mlakve stadium.
4 P84, record declaration dated 09/1992. And P84.1, the English
6 P85, certificate dated 15 December 1993. And P85.1, English
8 JUDGE ORIE: In the absence of any objections, these documents are
9 admitted into evidence.
10 Madam Usher, would you then, please, escort Mr. Hidic into the
12 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, Mr. Hannis is en route. He is
13 descending the steps, I'm quite sure, as we speak, and when he arrives, I
14 and Mr. Gaynor will excuse ourselves with the Court's permission.
15 [The witness entered court]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hidic, may I remind that you are still bound by
17 the solemn declaration that you gave yesterday at the beginning of your
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: You may be seated.
21 Mr. Stewart, perhaps --
22 MR. STEWART: Sorry, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- if you could wait one second until Mr. Hannis
25 MR. STEWART: Sorry, I hadn't noticed.
1 Your Honour, since we're waiting for Mr. Hannis then, may I just
2 make this request. I'm sorry, I should have made this before the witness
3 came in and I forgot. I wonder if Ms. Loukas could be escorted out of
4 Court, if she would be allowed to leave Court because there is a
5 particular task that we wish for her to do.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I don't know what is needed to --
7 MR. STEWART: Something is needed.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Something is needed. First of all, Ms. Loukas has my
9 permission to leave the Court. But then I think it's a security matter
10 rather than anything else or...
11 MR. STEWART: That's what I -- well, I didn't believe Your Honour
12 would withhold permission. But I understand there is just that -- I think
13 there's a security aspect of opening the door to let her out, is there?
14 If there isn't, well --
15 JUDGE ORIE: There's a guard next to the door. So if there's any
16 problem, Ms. Loukas, if you try to leave the courtroom. You'll not be
17 detained in this courtroom.
18 MR. STEWART: Yes. When I suggested that Ms. Loukas should be
19 escorted out, I didn't mean that she was getting a red card from me, Your
20 Honour. In fact, I'm the one that's on a yellow card at the moment
21 anyway, so...
22 JUDGE ORIE: It's nice to see how lawyers can fill a few minutes
23 awaiting the arrival of Mr. Hannis who has now arrived. Ms. Loukas, if
24 there's any problem, please ask me.
25 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Could the interpreters please ask that
2 Mr. Stewart turns the microphone towards him.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, you're requested to turn the microphone
4 to yourself when speaking. And if you put your headphones on, then you
5 also receive all the instructions and requests from the interpreters.
6 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
7 WITNESS: AHMET HIDIC [Resumed]
8 [Witness answered through interpreter]
9 Cross-examined by Mr. Stewart:
10 Q. Mr. Hidic, can we just remind ourselves that the town of Bosanski
11 Petrovac, it's about 25 kilometres from the Croatian border. Would that
12 be correct?
13 A. If you want me to be precise, it's between 35 and 20 kilometres in
14 the direction of Bosanski Petrovac, Kulen Vakuf, in the valley of the Una
15 River. I think that it's the closest to the Croatian border.
16 Q. Yes. Well, you offered to be precise, and then offered a range of
17 20 to 35 kilometres when I had suggested 25. So we're going the opposite
18 direction from precision, Mr. Hidic. I don't need precision. Is around
19 25 kilometres, to the nearest point of the border, is that enough? Is
20 that correct?
21 A. Well, I couldn't say exactly. I told you the range that I believe
22 to be correct.
23 Q. So it's about 30 minutes by normal car, normal conditions?
24 A. Yes, around 30 minutes.
25 Q. And you referred to war fears beginning in 1992 earlier in your
1 evidence. But conflict in the border area with Croatia had been a feature
2 of life since well back into 1991, hadn't it?
3 A. I think that on the Bosnian side, there was no conflict. The
4 conflict was taking place in the territory of the Republic of Croatia.
5 That is, outside the borders of Bosnia and Herzegovina as far as the year
6 1991 is concerned. And the conflict was present mostly in the second half
7 of 1991.
8 Q. Yes, well, I think we can agree about the second half of 1991.
9 But, Mr. Hidic, when you say that the conflict was taking place in the
10 territory of the Republic of Croatia, I suggest to you that Croatian
11 forces, for example, in the course of conflict, they didn't come to the
12 border and say to themselves, "Well, excuse me, we must not cross the
13 border," because it's in the nature of that conflict and hostilities that
14 that is exactly what they did from time to time, isn't it?
15 A. I am not aware that in the area where I lived such situations
16 occurred wherein Croatian forces would come into the territory of Bosanski
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I'd very much like to hear an answer to
19 the question you first put to the witness; that is, whether there were any
20 war fears, where his answer related only to the existence of a conflict.
21 Would you please invite the witness to answer your first question.
22 MR. STEWART: Yes, indeed, Your Honour.
23 Q. In the second half of 1991, then, were there in any way war fears
24 in Bosanski Petrovac?
25 A. Could you be more precise. At what time in 1991? Was that the
1 year you said?
2 Q. I said the second half of 1991. And Mr. Hidic, I'm not prepared
3 to be more precise. That is my question. Was there at any time in the
4 second half of 1991, were there in any way war fears in Bosanski Petrovac?
5 That is my question.
6 A. Yes, of course. Of course. Already in that period, there was
7 fears. A certain number of Serb volunteers from the territory of Bosanski
8 Petrovac was involved in war operations in the territory of Croatia. If
9 you want me to be more precise, they were engaged in the area of Knin, in
10 the area of Plitvice, and even in the northern part of the Sava Valley, in
11 a part called -- around Jasenovac in any case, that area. As far as I
12 know, a certain number of volunteers from the territory of Bosanski
13 Petrovac were engaged in those activities, and they would return to
14 Bosanski Petrovac. And even then, you could feel the anxiety and the
15 psychosis and fear from those people who called themselves "Kninjas" and
16 various other names that were current at the time.
17 Q. But how would -- just pause. The word or the label "Kninjas,"
18 would you define that for the Trial Chamber?
19 A. Well, I wouldn't be able to say exactly, but I believe that this
20 place name combined with the Japanese word "ninja" produced this term, to
21 denote volunteers who were engaged in Knin.
22 Q. And the fears that you describe in various places, just a simple
23 question: The -- well, I'm sorry. I'll rephrase that. You said that a
24 certain number of Serb volunteers were engaged in, and then you mentioned
25 the area of Knin, area of Plitvice and so on. What is the nearest point
1 to the town of Bosanski Petrovac where you recall such activities?
2 A. In my previous answer, I think I answered this question. It is
3 the area of Knin, the area of Plitvice, and as far as I know those people
4 stayed precisely in those parts of the Serbian Krajina.
5 Q. Well, you're not quite answering my question, Mr. Hidic, unless
6 those places are the same distance away. Which of those areas that you
7 mentioned is the nearest to Bosanski Petrovac?
8 A. Outside of Bosnia and Herzegovina, I think that Plitvice are a bit
9 closer than Knin. But for the most part, those volunteers went and stayed
10 in Knin. Knin was a gathering point where preparations took place
11 involving those people who applied themselves to join; that is,
13 Q. So these were Serb volunteers who were engaged in activities
14 against Croats. Correct?
15 A. They went for training. And most probably, they were involved in
16 operations if there had been such operations. From mid-1991, these parts
17 were under the control of the Serbian Republic of Krajina. So if there
18 were operations, these people would be engaged in those operations.
19 Q. And it's correct, isn't it, Mr. Hidic, that for all practical
20 purposes, Muslims and, of course, Croats who were in Bosnia-Herzegovina
21 did not participate in such preparations and such operations that took
22 place involving Croats? Or Croat forces. That's correct, isn't it?
23 A. I was talking exclusively about volunteers. There were no
24 volunteers among the Muslim people. I've also said that a certain number
25 of Croats, an insignificant number, maybe 48 to be very precise, resided
1 in the territory of Bosanski Petrovac. So there were no Croat volunteers
2 at all.
3 Q. How precisely, Mr. Hidic, can you put the beginning of these war
4 fears in 1991?
5 A. Yesterday, I was talking about the year 1992, about April 1992
6 when one could feel these changes that emerged. In 1991, there were some
7 occurrences that instilled fear among people in Bosanski Petrovac, those
8 who the participated in such operations, when they returned to Bosanski
9 Petrovac, they started using weapons. They started shooting in the
10 evening. They wanted to make it known that they were volunteers, that
11 they belonged to a certain armed force. I hope this answer will be to
12 your satisfaction.
13 Q. Actually, it isn't, as it happens, Mr. Hidic. But Mr. Hidic, I
14 make full allowance for the fact that I have far more experience of asking
15 questions in Court than you do of answering them. It's only fair to
16 recognise that. But Mr. Hidic, you are not listening, with respect,
17 carefully enough to the questions. And please, will you do that. And
18 it's not a free-ranging discussion here, Mr. Hidic. If I ask you a
19 question, if you don't understand it, then of course, please, say so. But
20 if you do understand it, then please listen to it and give the answer to
21 that question.
22 So the question was and is, how precisely can you put the
23 beginning of those war fears in 1991? And I will simply add, then, if it
24 helps to clarify, I'm asking you to be as precise as possible as to the
25 date when those fears began to appear.
1 A. I believe that in my previous answer I have already given you most
2 of the answer. There's no precise date. If I tell you that during 1991,
3 from the very beginning of that year, there were already checkpoints on
4 the roads leading from and to Bosanski Petrovac, this points to the fact
5 that a war already started in this area.
6 Q. Now, you personally were not involved in any way in any such
7 military activity, potential military activity, or such preparations as
8 there might have been for any war or fighting. Is that correct?
9 A. No, no.
10 Q. It is correct. It is correct, is it?
11 A. Yes, yes. I confirm what you have stated. I personally was not
12 involved in any war activities. I was not militarily engaged during that
13 period. I was not a soldier. Therefore, I did not have an opportunity
14 to -- now you have put me in a situation that I don't know how to answer
15 your question. I was not militarily engaged, to put it simply.
16 Q. Mr. Hidic, there's no problem about this. It's the perfectly
17 natural point that sometimes a witness answers no or yes when it's
18 necessary to clear up the ambiguity for the record. That's not a
19 criticism of you at all, Mr. Hidic. It's just something that we sometimes
20 need to do. And we've done it. Thank you.
21 And it's also correct, is it, that as you said already that you
22 were -- in 1991 and 1992 you were not even a member of the SDA. Is it
23 correct that during 1991 and 1992, you were in fact involved in no
24 political activity of any sort whatever?
25 A. Absolutely correct.
1 Q. And is it correct that you never attended any of the meetings,
2 certainly not SDS meetings, but you never attended any of the meetings at
3 all mentioned in any of the documents which you have produced in Court or
4 provided to anybody in connection with this matter?
5 A. Again, you're talking about documents which were produced in 1992.
6 Those documents did not originate from 1991. Those are documents by the
7 Crisis Staff from 1992. In 1991, I still worked in Bosnaplast. I was not
8 engaged in politics. I was only engaged in my own profession.
9 Q. Thank you, Mr. Hidic. I think you are right. There probably
10 aren't any 1991 documents. I was just being cautious. So we have that
12 Is it also correct that you were never personally aware in 1992 of
13 any instructions by the SDS Main Board to any local board of the SDS?
14 A. Can you please repeat the question. I found it very hard to
15 follow it. I apologise. I really wasn't able to follow you -- the gist
16 of your question.
17 Q. Not at all, Mr. Hidic. I invited you to seek clarification, and
18 I'm very happy to give you the question again.
19 Is it correct that in 1992, you were personally never aware of any
20 sort of instructions given by the SDS Main Board to any local board of the
22 A. Of course I didn't know anything about such documents at the
23 beginning of 1992.
24 Q. Now, there was in the area of Bosanski Petrovac a rally organised.
25 I suggest to you it was in 1990. During a burial in -- excuse me. In
1 Krjneusa. Acknowledgments to my case manager. Krjneusa. Do you know
2 something about that rally?
3 A. In 1990, yes. This rally was accompanying the exhumation, that
4 is, the taking the bones from Risovack Jama, not far from Krnjeusa in the
5 direction of Bosanska Krupa. The distance is between 10 and 20
6 kilometres. So this is the location we're talking about, Risovacka pit,
7 between Krnjeusa and Bosanska Krupa. And this was a well-known event in
8 Bosanski Petrovac when this was happening.
9 Q. So you agree it was 1990, Mr. Hidic, don't you?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Do you remember what month or around what time of the year?
12 A. I can't remember, but I believe that this was in the second half
13 of that year.
14 Q. Now, you didn't personally attend that rally, did you, Mr. Hidic?
15 A. No, I didn't.
16 Q. But you came to hear from others about it?
17 A. Yes. There were a lot of comments by the Serbs who attended that
18 rally and who were there on that day.
19 Q. And it's correct that you were told, is it, that Dr. Biljana
20 Plavsic was there?
21 A. According to the testimonials of the Serbs who were there, the
22 entire Serbian leadership was there, and this included religious
23 officials, Patriarch Pavle. And on that day, when these bones were being
24 reburied, the complete leadership was there. I don't know what happened.
25 All I know is that this rally did take place, and this is the extent of
1 the information that I have.
2 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry, Your Honour. I wonder if we could have a
3 few minutes. I wanted Ms. Cmeric to ask Mr. Krajisnik a question, but
4 actually he has answered a different question.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, take your time, take your time.
6 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. Mr. Hidic, do you remember -- you had specifically mentioned
8 Dr. Plavsic in previous evidence that you have given before in this
9 Tribunal, in the case involving Mr. Brdjanin. Do you remember the names
10 of any other Serb leaders that you haven't mentioned that you were told
11 were present at that rally?
12 A. I don't remember. I know for sure that the patriarch of the
13 Serbian church, Pavle, was there. People talked about the way he spoke.
14 I know that all the local officials were there. And according to the
15 words of the people who were there, some Serb officials were also there,
16 delivered speeches, spoke to the people. But I can't remember who they
17 were. At that time, I worked in a cafe bar. It was at the main bus stop.
18 People who were returning from that rally were talking about the things
19 that had gone on in Krnjeusa.
20 Q. Is it correct, Mr. Hidic, that you never heard anybody say that
21 Mr. Krajisnik had been present at that rally?
22 A. No, I did not have any such information.
23 Q. Have you ever in your life met Mr. Krajisnik? You see him here
24 today in Court, of course. But have you ever met him before?
25 A. I know Mr. Krajisnik very well from TV. However, I never -- I've
1 never had an opportunity to meet with him and to talk to him face to face.
2 Q. And in 1991 and 1992, did you see Mr. Krajisnik from time to time
3 on television in his capacity, in the first place, as the Speaker or the
4 president of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Assembly?
5 A. I believe so. If you want me to be more precise, I remember
6 Krajisnik most from the war period and the post-war period when he held
7 certain posts at the level of Bosnia and Herzegovina. And that's when he
8 appeared on TV quite often. That's when I saw him on TV quite often.
9 Q. Yes. Talking about 1991 and 1992 for the moment, Mr. Hidic, and
10 casting your mind back, what did you know during those two years about
11 Mr. Krajisnik's position in the politics of Bosnia and Herzegovina and
12 subsequently Republika Srpska?
13 A. I believe that I have already said that I was not interested in
14 politics. I was not interested in any of the individuals who were engaged
15 in the politics. I just read newspapers and that it was all my
16 engagement. To be honest, at that time, I was not interested in
17 Krajisnik. I did not focus my attention on him. I never gave Krajisnik a
18 second thought. And I did not seek any particular information about him.
19 I knew about him as much as I could get from the media. At the moment, I
20 would just skim through the papers or just listen to the news, and I would
21 not make an effort to retain any of that information.
22 Q. Did you know, for example, that he was the -- in 1991, that he was
23 the Speaker or the president of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Assembly?
24 A. I wouldn't be able to say. I was not aware of his position. I
25 was aware of some other Serb officials who were members of the assembly
1 because you could read those names on a daily basis in the newspapers. It
2 would be -- it would not be fair for me to say anything about Krajisnik.
3 MR. STEWART: Excuse me one moment, Your Honour. We're just
4 trying to clarify something on the transcript.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please, take your time.
6 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour, Ms. Cmeric suggests that - and she
7 is nearly always right about these things - that in the answer to the
8 previous question where the transcript shows in English: "I was aware of
9 some other Serb officials who were members of the assembly because you
10 could read those names on a daily basis," that the word in the witness's
11 own language would be more aptly translated as "Presidency."
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, where it reads "assembly."
13 MR. STEWART: Yes, where it reads "assembly."
14 JUDGE ORIE: We could ask the witness again, because otherwise
15 we'll have to re-listen to tapes.
16 When you said, Mr. Hidic, that: "I was aware of some other Serb
17 officials who were members of," and then -- is that the line?
18 MR. STEWART: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: What did you then say? Members of what?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Presidency of Bosnia and
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, the matter has been clarified now. I
23 even could hear it in B/C/S.
24 MR. STEWART: Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
1 MR. STEWART:
2 Q. And Mr. Hidic, then, so having clarified that, you were aware of
3 some other Serb officials who were members of the presidency. That was
4 the position, was it, in 1991, your awareness?
5 A. Yes, yes, if that is the answer you have been expecting. Yes.
6 Q. Mr. Hidic, then, can you name any of those other Serb officials
7 who as far as you saw it at that time were members of the presidency?
8 A. I can give you one name. Nikola Koljevic. I also know
9 Mrs. Plavsic. I believe that this will suffice. I'm aware of these two
10 persons who were certainly members of the presidency in Bosnia and
11 Herzegovina while the presidency still consisted of representatives of the
12 three peoples. There were also other representatives who were the
13 so-called neutral members of the presidency who did not necessarily
14 represent any of the three peoples.
15 Q. Is it correct, Mr. Hidic, that you also have no knowledge whatever
16 of Mr. Krajisnik having been involved in any of the matters to which you
17 have previously referred in your evidence in this case or, indeed, in the
18 Brdjanin case?.
19 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I'd like to object to the form of the
20 question. "Involved in," is fairly ambiguous.
21 MR. STEWART: May I comment, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do, so Mr. Stewart.
23 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it is -- involved is very general, but
24 it is deliberately very general because that's the fair way of offering
25 the question to the witness because it's giving him the widest range of
1 opportunity to say yes, he is, and then, depending on his answer -- well,
2 I won't say any more because the witness still has to answer the question.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whether the witness has to answer the question
4 also depends on the following: Mr. Hannis, does the Prosecution present
5 the evidence of Mr. Hidic, including the documents you presented, as
6 evidence of the events in Bosanski Petrovac and people involved locally,
7 or does the Prosecution also draw any conclusions as far as the
8 involvement of Mr. - and I'm now using the word to, give you the widest
9 opportunity to respond - the involvement of Mr. Krajisnik specifically in
10 these events?
11 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honour, I guess what I'm concerned about
12 is that "involved in" in some sense perhaps involves a legal conclusion
13 that will be reached after all the evidence is in in this case.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand. Everything is related to
15 everything. But we now see that the Defence is seeking confirmation that
16 Mr. Hidic, who did not speak about the role of Mr. Krajisnik or any
17 specific involvement of Mr. Krajisnik. But I wonder, these questions are
18 only necessary, I would say, if the Prosecution would conclude from this
19 evidence that there was any specific involvement of Mr. Krajisnik. If
20 that's not the position of the Prosecution, we could then move forward.
21 MR. HANNIS: Well, Your Honour, what I would like to do at this
22 point is withdraw my objection to the question.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
24 MR. STEWART: That's very handsome of Mr. Hannis. Thank you.
25 Q. Let's give you the question again, Mr. Hidic. That's only fair in
1 the circumstances.
2 I've now lost it off the screen. But --
3 JUDGE ORIE: You can stop the screen, and then --
4 MR. STEWART: It depends which screen, I think, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, one of the screens. I'll read the question
6 again to the witness.
7 MR. STEWART: I'm obliged. Thank you.
8 JUDGE ORIE: The question to you, Mr. Hidic, was whether it is
9 correct that you also have no knowledge whatever of Mr. Krajisnik having
10 been involved in any of the matters to which you have previously referred
11 in your evidence in this case or, indeed, in the Brdjanin case. That was
12 the question to you.
13 Could you please answer the question.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you're referring to the local
15 level, the Bosanski Petrovac level, I really did not have any information
16 about any personal involvement by Mr. Krajisnik in the territory of
17 Bosanski Petrovac municipality.
18 MR. STEWART:
19 Q. Mr. Hidic, when you returned to Bosanski Petrovac late in 1995,
20 which is what you have told the Court, what -- it wasn't absolutely clear,
21 I think, from your evidence, but what particular function or
22 responsibility, if any, was it that led you to gather the documentation
23 that you have referred to?
24 A. I was engaged by the civilian body of government involved in
25 humanitarian issues. I have access to these documents. I could enter the
1 building of the municipality every day because I had my office there. And
2 from that office, I conducted the business that I was hired for.
3 Q. So was that your -- was that your full-time job then at that
5 A. I was not paid at first, so my working hours were not defined. I
6 worked as the need arose.
7 Q. Is this the position that -- you were still working, then, were
8 you, as a skilled locksmith or as a warehouse manager at that time? 1995.
9 A. No, no.
10 Q. Did you have a paid job at the time when you started work for this
11 organisation you've mentioned, this body?
12 A. You're asking me about 1995. In 1995, on my return to Bosanski
13 Petrovac, nothing worked. So I could not go back to my previous job. I
14 performed certain duties as needs arose. There were not enough natives of
15 Bosanski Petrovac at that time. The authorities were set up, and I was
16 appointed to be involved in humanitarian issues because that's something
17 that I had already done on behalf of the refugee community of Central
18 Bosnia during the war.
19 Q. What is the name of the civilian body of government involved in
20 humanitarian issues that you mentioned a few minutes ago?
21 A. Considering that there was no well-defined body or organisation
22 that would deal with it, we were sort of organised, sponsored by the Red
23 Cross and similar organisations. After the arrival of representatives of
24 UNHCR, the leaders of the local administration charged me with
25 coordinating these affairs in cooperation with humanitarian organisations,
1 including international organisations in the area of our canton. That
2 involved contact with local humanitarian organisations and international
3 ones, primarily the UNHCR which was based in the Sana canton.
4 Q. So you were specifically engaged, were you, to gather documents?
5 A. No. My task was not specific. But since I found a lot of
6 documents simply scattered around the premises, and they were accessible
7 to anyone who happened to enter the building, because at the time normal
8 life had not been restored in the municipal building. Those documents
9 were available to anyone, including me. And I told my co-workers not to
10 throw these documents away, that it's better to keep them. And they
11 started gradually to bring them to me.
12 I put them in order and safeguarded them. Of course, God knows
13 how many documents were lost or were taken away God knows where. But I
14 repeat, those documents at the time were available to anyone who happened
15 to come in. All the offices were open. All the cupboards were open. All
16 the shelves were there. Things were lying on the floor. And it is very
17 likely that during the withdrawal, somebody was looking for specific
18 documents and scattered the rest all over the place. And certainly, there
19 were other documents which were piled in neat stacks on the shelves in
20 certain offices.
21 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, if that's convenient for the Tribunal,
22 that's as convenient a point as any.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Hidic, we'll take a break of some 25
24 minutes. And do I understand how much time could Mr. Hidic expect more or
25 less to be further cross-examined by you, Mr. Stewart?
1 MR. STEWART: Something like about 15 minutes, Your Honour,
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hidic, we'll have a break until 11.00. And then
4 it might take another altogether half an hour, perhaps a little bit more.
5 I'm not talking about cross-examination.
6 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour's right.
7 JUDGE ORIE: There may be re-examination and perhaps some
8 questions from the Bench as well.
9 We adjourn until 11.00.
10 --- Recess taken at 10.36 a.m.
11 --- On resuming at 11.12 a.m.
12 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber apologises for being back late. It might
13 be of some comfort to the parties to know that it was because the Judges
14 conferred on a matter we discussed yesterday during our meeting, so that
15 caused the delay. I couldn't say that we have finished our internal
16 discussions yet, but I'm quite confident that we'll come up either late
17 this morning or early this afternoon with at least some clear messages.
18 And even if the parties would be available to briefly meet, then, again in
19 order to hear what the Chamber considers to do, that would be good.
20 Mr. Stewart.
21 MR. STEWART: Yes. Mr. Hannis is smiling at me because he can see
22 for the moment in the light of what I said to him a few minutes ago the
23 position this puts me in. I had indicated to Mr. Hannis over this break
24 just now that I would be making an oral motion to the Court in relation to
25 this area this morning. However, I don't want to make unnecessary
1 applications if the Bench is still conferring.
2 JUDGE ORIE: I'm quite confident if we would finish the
3 examination of Mr. Hidic in, let's say, approximately half an hour
4 altogether or 40 minutes, then the Chamber would further meet. And I am
5 confident that it will take us not more than 20 or 30 minutes to come to a
6 conclusion, and then invite the parties to meet and hear what the
7 conclusions of the Chamber are.
8 I leave it up to you whether --
9 MR. STEWART: That would give me -- may I just on a technical and
10 practical level, that meeting, would that be back in open Court then, Your
12 JUDGE ORIE: It could be in open Court, I think. There's no
13 problem with it.
14 MR. STEWART: Yes. I suggest that that would be --
15 JUDGE ORIE: It would give you an opportunity that if we come with
16 a message you wouldn't like, you could still make --
17 MR. STEWART: Your Honour is reading my mind and interpreting what
18 I've said. And there is also one other matter that we have to raise. But
19 it would make sense, then, in light of what Your Honour has said if we
20 leave that other matter to the very end so that Your Honours have the
21 opportunity of conferring straight away.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 Mr. Krajisnik, I take it that you're informed about meetings that
24 took place, and these are rather practical scheduling matters, trying to
25 meet the needs the Defence has expressed, and at the same time to keep --
1 you have no --
2 THE ACCUSED: Yes.
3 [Interpretation] Your Honour, I had very little chance to speak to
4 my Defence counsel. But I hope I will be able to get some information
5 once they are free, because they seem to be busy all the time.
6 JUDGE ORIE: It's good that they are busy, Mr. Krajisnik. Keep
7 them busy.
8 Perhaps when the Judges meet, if you would have an opportunity to
9 update Mr. Krajisnik, because -- I'm not interfering in your relationship
10 with your client. Of course not. But I'm also aware that we met
11 yesterday late, that there was hardly any time, I take it, to discuss
12 matters with him. But perhaps if you could use that time, that would
13 certainly save perhaps some time later to explain to Mr. Krajisnik the
14 course of events during our meetings.
15 MR. STEWART: You're right, Mr. Krajisnik does keep us busy. We
16 keep him busy as well. And of course we have spoken to him his morning on
17 other matters, but Your Honour is right. We simply haven't had the time.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. STEWART: Right.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I fully understand.
21 Then are you ready to finish the cross-examination of Mr. Hidic?
22 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. All I need is the witness.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Madam Usher is already finding the witness in
24 order to escort him into the courtroom.
25 [The witness entered court]
1 Mr. Hidic, please be seated.
2 Mr. Stewart, you may proceed.
3 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. Mr. Hidic, are you saying -- I wasn't entirely following the
5 answers you gave immediately before the break as to the nature or name of
6 this civilian government body that you had mentioned. Are you saying that
7 there wasn't a specific body or organisation that engaged you on this
9 A. Yes, of course. There was a body established in exile called the
10 War Presidency of the Bosanski Petrovac Municipality. And I think, to add
11 to my answer, I believe it was set up sometime in 1994.
12 Q. So the War Presidency of the Bosanski Petrovac Municipality is
13 that civilian body that you referred to earlier that had engaged you for a
14 number of tasks, one of which became this gathering of documents. Is that
16 A. No, no.
17 Q. Please explain.
18 A. This war body existed -- this wartime body, this presidency in
19 exile, its main role was to gather humanitarian aid and to provide for
20 displaced citizens from Bosanski Petrovac, for refugees. And it also
21 served as a link with those who were outside of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I
22 mean, primarily Croatia and other countries, because to this day there are
23 citizens of Bosanski Petrovac scattered all over the world. And it was
24 not solely focussed on war issues.
25 Q. Mr. Hidic, you're not quite answering my question in a specific
1 way. You referred earlier to a civilian body of government, I think, is
2 what came over on the transcript. A civilian body of government that had
3 engaged you on a number of tasks, and that was in the context of the work
4 that you had done in Bosanski Petrovac in gathering documents and
5 examining documents. I have in one way or another I think now asked you
6 several times to give the Trial Chamber the name of that civilian body.
7 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, if I may.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. HANNIS: I'm not sure - perhaps I remember incorrectly - but I
10 don't believe that the witness has testified that gathering documents was
11 one of the tasks for which he was employed. It was simply something that
12 he did in connection with his presence there when he was employed on other
14 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, I accept that up to a point. And
15 I think I recognise that it was really the clear implication of what he
16 had said that it included the gathering of documents.
17 Q. But just in case there's any doubt or difficulty about that, I can
18 leave that on one side, and I can simply ask you, forget about documents,
19 confining it. The civilian body of government that you referred to that
20 was involved in humanitarian matters that engaged you on a number of
21 tasks, what was its name?
22 A. In 1995, in September of 1995 when I arrived in Bosanski Petrovac,
23 that was still at a time when there was a war, a state of war in
24 Bosnia and Herzegovina. That is, September of 1995. In December of that
25 year, the Dayton Accords were signed, and civilian governments, transition
1 civilian authorities, were established. In those municipalities which
2 were unfortunate enough to have governments in exile, they could return
3 after September or December 1995. And governments were supposed to be
4 formed based on electoral results from 1991. Since at that time Bosanski
5 Petrovac was populated only by us, Muslims, this is the way this
6 transitional government was formed.
7 And it was -- if you allow me to say one more thing so that you
8 have a clearer picture. In September 1995 --
9 Q. Mr. Hidic, please pause now, then. I, with the Trial Chamber's
10 permission, will allow you to say one more thing, but that one more thing
11 that I would like you to say is the answer to my question.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart.
13 First of all, tell us the one thing you'd like to say. And I
14 might have a question of you as well.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in September of 1995,
16 upon arriving to Bosanski Petrovac for a four- or five-day visit, I
17 continued to travel to Zenica where I organised the return of Bosniaks
18 from Bosanski Petrovac to their municipality and that took me more than a
19 month. I lost that time organising the return of about 900 Bosniaks who
20 were at the time located in Central Bosnia.
21 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask you the following: When you returned, when
22 you had your office, when you saw documents scattered around which you
23 started gathering, by whom were you then employed, paid or unpaid? Was
24 that the transitional -- as you told us, the transitional government, or
25 by any other body?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had no specific task. Nobody gave
2 me that task. I simply got hold of certain documents --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You had an office where you saw these documents
4 in the same building lying around. Who gave you that office?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, of course it was the leaders,
6 the person who was in charge of the organisation and functioning of
7 civilian life in the area of Bosanski Petrovac after the war, after my
9 JUDGE ORIE: Is that what you call the transitional government?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. Absolutely.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm afraid I'm not satisfied with --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. I'm not -- if you have any addition questions,
15 MR. STEWART: Yes.
16 Q. You referred very --
17 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour, for pursuing that. When I
18 say I'm not satisfied, Your Honour understands what I mean, I hope.
19 Q. You referred to a civilian body. I'm just going to read it. The
20 precise phrase was, "Civilian body of government involved in humanitarian
21 issues." And this was some time ago.
22 That body, that was in your own language, that was your word, did
23 it have a name?
24 A. Please, it was not a body. And that body of civilian government,
25 I was in charge of humanitarian issues, humanitarian affairs. Since I had
1 already dealt with such affairs in exile, I helped accommodate and provide
2 for displaced persons from Bosanski Petrovac. That is why in that
3 transitional municipal authority I was given the same task. I was charged
4 with the same duties until the government started to operate fully.
5 Because it was not already by that time decided yet whether we belonged to
6 the Una Sana canton or some other canton. Our municipality had at that
7 time not been clearly defined yet as a unit of the Una Sana canton.
8 Q. If you were asked at the time, or if you had been asked at the
9 time when engaged in this humanitarian work, Mr. Hidic, who do you work
10 for, what would you have said?
11 A. Bosanski Petrovac, I would have said. And that's how I introduced
12 myself to people. Whenever I had to go to other towns on various
13 business, I was a man from Bosanski Petrovac dealing with humanitarian
14 aid. And that's how people knew me. Specifically if I had dealings with
15 the UNHCR or the Red Cross or the headquarters of the canton in Bihac or
16 the Merhamet charity organisation or any other organisation, I was the man
17 from Bosanski Petrovac in charge of humanitarian aid.
18 And if you allow me to expand, in Bosanski Petrovac at that time,
19 we had not a single humanitarian organisation that was registered as such,
20 fully in keeping with the legislation in the territory of the Una Sana
21 canton. Not a single one. Only later did they arrive. And I worked
22 together with those organisations that later arrived, humanitarian
23 organisations, as a contact person, as a coordinator.
24 Q. Mr. Hidic, we sometimes see on our televisions the man from
25 Del Monte, and everybody knows who he is. But when you were introducing
1 yourself to the Red Cross, for example, saying you were the man from
2 Bosanski Petrovac, now, Mr. Hidic, they would have wanted to know who you
3 represented before they sat down and talked to you.
4 Who did you represent when you went to meetings with the Red Cross
5 and the other organisations that you mentioned?
6 A. I believe that I've already answered that. I represented Bosanski
7 Petrovac, the municipality of Bosanski Petrovac.
8 Q. Did you -- have you ever had any connection with a Bosnian state
9 organisation called -- in English the acronym is AID, A-I-D?
10 A. No.
11 Q. What does it do? Sorry, what did it do in 1995 or subsequently?
12 A. I wouldn't know. I had no contacts with that body, and I wouldn't
13 know what that body was engaged in.
14 Q. When you gathered up or collected from people these documents in
15 1995 in Bosanski Petrovac in the way that you have previously described,
16 what was your own next task in relation to those documents?
17 A. I did not have any specific tasks with regard to these documents.
18 The documents of some interest to me dated from 1992, and that is the
19 period during which Bosniak Muslims were still in Bosanski Petrovac, up to
20 the moment of their exile. So that is the only thing that I was
21 interested in because the majority of the documents in the room where I
22 worked were from that period. And that's how actually my interest became
23 aroused, when I saw documents that concerned us, Bosniaks from Bosanski
24 Petrovac and the period of time that was relevant, the year 1992. That's
25 how I started gathering those documents.
1 Q. Did you know what topic you were interested in before you
2 collected the documents?
3 A. I was curious more than anything. And I wanted to compare the
4 things that I knew were happening with the statements of Bosniaks from
5 Bosanski Petrovac that appeared in various newspapers. In some way, I
6 just expanded on my knowledge of the events that I was aware of. In other
7 words, this just confirmed the things that I already knew that I had been
8 through during the period between April and September 1992.
9 Q. In 1991 and 1992, you've talked about a Crisis Staff of which in
10 your evidence, by and large, the members of the Crisis Staff were Serbs.
11 That was at page 111 of the transcript of yesterday.
12 At any point in 1991 or 1992, did the Muslim community and/or the
13 SDA have its own Crisis Staff?
14 A. I am not aware of that.
15 Q. Are you, in relation to appointments in 1991 and 1992, before the
16 war, appointments to the police, that those appointments were made by
17 order of the minister of the interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina [sic]?
18 A. I don't know which hierarchy was in place for the appointment of
19 police officers. At that time, I believe that there was a political
20 agreement on the candidates that would be given jobs in the police. I am
21 aware of the person who was the candidate of the SDA. He was not a member
22 of the SDA, but he had a degree in law. And this experience tells me that
23 the candidate for the chief of police was a Serb and the candidate for the
24 commander of the police was a Bosniak. This never came through in the way
25 it had been arranged, however.
1 Q. Can you remember who, before the war, the minister of the interior
2 of Bosnia and Herzegovina was?
3 A. No, I don't know.
4 Q. If I -- does it jog your memory, does it affect your answer if I
5 suggest to you it was Alija Delimustafic?
6 A. I know that in Bosanski Petrovac, things were what they were. I'm
7 aware of the complete situation in Bosanski Petrovac. Anything beyond
8 that just did not interest me. I was at the time a member of the working
9 class. The only thing I was interested in was work. Politics did not
10 interest me at all. During that period of time, I was ill for a certain
11 while. So I was really not interested in who was who in the politics of
12 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
13 MR. STEWART: No further questions, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Stewart.
15 Mr. Hannis, any need?
16 MR. HANNIS: No further questions, Your Honour. A couple of
17 housekeeping matters when we are completed with this witness.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I would have a few questions for you, Mr. Hidic.
19 Questioned by the Court:
20 JUDGE ORIE: You told us in respect of one of the documents we
21 discussed yesterday about Obrad Vrzina who you said was a military man.
22 Would you have any further details apart from that he was a military man?
23 Would you know which forces? What rank? Well, would you know anything
24 more than him being a military man?
25 A. I may have stated that he was a military man, but he was the chief
1 of the Territorial Defence. That was his position, something like that.
2 So by virtue of his position, he was invited to the meetings of the Crisis
3 Staff. I don't know whether he was its permanent member. But he did
4 attend some of its sessions, especially those dealing with mobilisation.
5 That's when he would attend sessions of the Crisis Staff.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 Then you, answering a question of Mr. Stewart, you said that an
8 organisation called AID, you had no contacts with them and that you didn't
9 know what they were engaged in. Did you know about the existence of such
10 an organisation, even when you had no contacts and even if you wouldn't
11 know what they were engaged in? Does the name ring a bell to you?
12 A. I heard, and I read in the newspapers and I learned from the media
13 that there was this AID. I myself did not have any points of contact with
14 this organisation. I did not cooperate with this organisation. The AID
15 was and has always been a body that was a point of interest in the media,
16 just like any other institution of that sort. The AID is still mentioned
17 in the press.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I've got no idea of the relevance of that
19 question. But could you tell us what the press says the AID is? Because
20 I've got no idea.
21 A. I believe that it was a service that was established within the
22 Muslim/Bosniak Corps as far as I know. I really wouldn't be able to tell
23 you more about this service.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer. Then finally about the
25 documents, the bundle of documents you gathered. In your statement you
1 say that you couldn't specifically say which document came from where.
2 Would that still be true? Do you know from certain documents which ones
3 they -- where they come from, even perhaps not knowing from all of them
4 where they came from? Could you give us a bit more detail? Could you
5 tell us, for example, 90 per cent came from the building in which I had my
6 office, or 50 per cent, or only those working in the building gave me
7 those documents? Well, I'd like to have some more details.
8 A. Most of the documents came from the offices of the president of
9 the Executive Board, secretary of the Executive Board of Bosanski Petrovac
10 Municipality during the times of war. The war president of the Executive
11 Board of Bosanski Petrovac Municipality and his secretary. Some of the
12 documents also originate from the office of the president of the
13 municipality of Bosanski Petrovac.
14 JUDGE ORIE: When you say they originate from the certain sources,
15 do you mean to say by that that they are related to those institutions, or
16 that you got them from a person related to that institution?
17 Do you understand what my question is? My question is it could be
18 the cleaner of the building that would given the document to you, although
19 it relates to the office of the president of the municipality. I'm making
20 a clear distinction by from whom you got them and what organisation might
21 have created the document.
22 A. Most of the documents were found in the aforementioned offices.
23 Somebody found them. They were either sitting on the desk or at the
24 places where one could see what kind of documents those were. That's how
25 some of these documents that I took an interest in when I saw them,
1 because they specifically described the period that was relevant to me,
2 and that is the period between April and September 1992. I was not
3 interested in any other documents that went beyond that period. And
4 that's how I gathered those documents.
5 There were documents covering other periods of time while these
6 bodies were operational, the year 1993 or 1994.
7 JUDGE ORIE: There are quite a lot of minutes of the sessions of
8 the Crisis Staff of Petrovac among the documents. Do you remember how you
9 got those minutes? Were they in binders or were they also scattered on
10 the floor? Because I see that we have some subsequent series, the
11 24th Session, the 25th Session, the 26th Session, the 27th Session. Do
12 you have any recollection on how you got those documents?
13 A. I believe that they were stored somewhere, but later on they were
14 scattered around. And that's how I found them. And they were not the
15 only copies. There were several copies of those documents which were
16 either in folders or binders or were scattered in the room or in other
17 places where I could get hold of them. Some of these documents were in
18 the office of the president of the municipality. Some were in other -- in
19 the other room or at other places where the former members of this body
20 had left them and stored them as documents that they would need or that
21 they had used during meetings.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Your personal markings on these documents, and
23 Mr. Hannis, I draw your attention to the fact that on some of the
24 documents the handwriting markings are translated and others are not.
25 That is not a very consistent way of presenting this evidence.
1 Would that give you any information on where you got them from, or
2 would that not assist you?
3 A. Your Honour, this just marks documents which were scattered, which
4 were not in any particular order. For example, I would have number 35,
5 and then number 45 would be found somewhere else. And that's how I marked
6 those documents, in order to prevent other people from getting hold of
7 them. And that's what inspired me to gather other such documents which
8 were in a certain sequence.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could the witness be given the set of
10 documents. That's -- Madam Registrar, P90 it is, yes.
11 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, if I may make a comment at this time.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. HANNIS: Regarding the documents, in his prior testimony in
14 Brdjanin and also in his prior ICTY statements, there is some detailed
15 discussion about individual documents and where he found the documents,
16 et cetera, that may be of assistance.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes. But there's also now and then an answer
18 that he doesn't know exactly on all documents.
19 So could I take you to document 21.
20 Mr. Hannis, 21, for example, doesn't give any translation of the
21 handwriting on the right top corner of the document.
22 Could you take the original, the B/C/S original in front of you,
23 and perhaps read the number on the right top corner stamped on it so that
24 we know for certain that we have the same document in front of us.
25 A. 11/1992, registered as evidence.
1 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask you to stop. Do you see stamped as a
2 number on the right top corner 02930159?
3 A. Yes, I do.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Could you then perhaps read your handwritten part on
5 top of that. You just started doing that. Could you please finish that.
6 A. 11/92 [Realtime transcript read in error "11/1992"], registered as
7 evidence, or recorded as evidence.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Does this give any clue to you in respect of where
9 you found it or from whom you got it?
10 A. Your Honour, this document was found in a manner that I explained.
11 As for its registration, we had a protocol that was in the office.
12 Unfortunately, the book has gone missing. And that was my motive for some
13 of these documents to be preserved, not to go astray, because these
14 documents were accessible to practically anybody.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So this document has been found in the building
16 where you had your office?
17 A. Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I then take you to Document 31.
19 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, just for complete accuracy, Ms. Cmeric
20 points out that the transcript records that the marking is 11/1992. Just
21 for the record --
22 JUDGE ORIE: It's 92, and that's -- of course, we can read that as
23 well. That's not -- it's not of vital importance to my question. The
24 most important is that the ERN number that we compared --
25 MR. STEWART: Absolutely, Your Honour. But it is, nevertheless,
1 as we suggest, it's important that as far as possible the transcript does
2 get these things absolutely a hundred per cent accurate.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you, Mr. Stewart, for assisting me.
4 Could I then take you to Document 31, which is a letter. And
5 under the signature, we see that the signature is -- should at least be
6 from Mr. Rajko Novakovic.
7 Could you tell us, since there is no handwriting on this document,
8 do you have any recollection or have you any clue from where you got that
10 A. This document is from the office of the president Novakovic, whose
11 signature is on the document. So it originates from his office.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is that just on the basis of the signature that
13 you conclude that it must have come from the office of the Crisis Staff
14 president, or do you have any further recollection of how you got it,
15 which confirms your conclusion?
16 A. The document was in the office. And I got it - how to put it -
17 from the president that occupied this office after the liberation of
18 Bosanski Petrovac. This document was accessible to everybody, again. But
19 this is how I got hold of it.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's clear. Thank you very much for your
22 Do the questions of the Bench raise any need to put further
23 questions to the witness? Mr. Hannis.
24 MR. HANNIS: No, Your Honour.
25 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Stewart.
2 MR. STEWART: Thank you.
3 Further cross-examined by Mr. Stewart:
4 Q. Mr. Hidic, you indicated in answer to His Honour's questions that
5 you were interested - I hope I'm paraphrasing pretty accurately - you were
6 interested in the period April to September 1992. It sounds as if you
7 were -- you had decided or somebody had decided for you in advance of
8 coming across these documents that that was your period of interest. Is
9 that correct?
10 A. I believe that this is not the motive that governed me. The
11 reason is that during that period of time I also kept my own diary, and I
12 just was curious to know whether I as an individual was able to record
13 accurately the events that were happening in the territory of Bosanski
14 Petrovac. In other words, I was just curious to see whether my
15 description of these events was really accurate. That was my only
16 intention. And I didn't have any other reason to collect these documents.
17 Within the context of my writing of the diary, I continued doing
18 that in the exile until the moment I returned home in the year 1995. I
19 described different situations, but I was mostly interested in Bosanski
20 Petrovac municipality because Bosanski Petrovac is the town where I was
21 born, where I grew up, where I was born and raised. And I was interested
22 solely in this period because I just wanted to complete the information
23 that I had in my own head. I wanted to complete it somehow with other
24 sources of information.
25 Q. Yes. We're talking about information, Mr. Hidic. There's a great
1 deal of information in the answer you've just given. Unfortunately, it
2 doesn't include an answer to my question.
3 The -- I asked you -- we take it that you were interested in the
4 period April to September 1992 because you've said that, and you've said
5 it more than once. I had asked you if, when you came across these
6 documents in the way you described, you had already decided or somebody
7 had already decided for you that April to September 1992 was the period
8 you were interested in. Is that or is that not correct?
9 A. I see where you're coming from. However, I did not have a task.
10 This was my own personal desire, my personal intention to compare these
11 things what -- with what I saw. Within that context, I can give you some
12 statements that originate from the beginning of the war that illustrate
13 the state that I was in. So there was no imperative. There was no
14 predetermined desire. It was all my personal desire to do things.
15 Q. Was your --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hidic, the question clearly was whether you had
17 in your mind when you started gathering these documents that you would
18 limit it to this period, or was it that you decided later to limit it to
19 that period? Was there any moment where you thought, well, let me
20 concentrate on April until September 1992. And if so, when?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe that there
22 were no documents that covered other periods. Most of the documents
23 covered the year 1992. As for the year other periods, there was just a
24 book of hand-recorded minutes of the meetings that took place in 1993,
25 1994, and 1995.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand you, then, that your choice of the
2 documents you collected was mainly determined by what you found and not by
3 a decision taken by yourself or by anyone else that you would limit it to
4 this period? Is that a correct understanding of your answer?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether I mentioned any
6 restrictions. I was personally interested in that period, April/September
7 1992. That documentation, Your Honour, does not include all the documents
8 covering all the events of that period. It means that they were not
9 found. They were no longer in that place where they had been stored. A
10 large number of documents for that period is missing.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You say it's not a complete set.
12 Any further questions, even if on this subject.
13 Mr. Stewart.
14 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. I think this is the only subject.
15 Q. You said you believed there were no documents that covered other
16 periods. So what we got from you is there were no documents that covered
17 any period other than April to September, but at some point, which still
18 remains not totally clear, you were only interested in April to September?
19 JUDGE ORIE: The witness said there were hand-recorded -- these
20 are documents as well. Hand-recorded minutes of the meetings that took
21 place in 1993, 1994, and 1995.
22 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: These are documents. And so he said one thing, but
24 the next line, he said -- he further clarified.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. STEWART: Yes, I'm coming to this, Your Honour.
2 Q. Before April 1992, do you say there were any relevant -- delete
3 relevant. Before -- for the period before April 1992, do you say there
4 were any documents?
5 A. I believe I understand what Defence counsel is driving at. Yes,
6 of course. In the second half of 1992, the so-called national or
7 people's -- I can't remember the exact name now, but I believe it was the
8 committee or board. What was the name of that body? The board for
9 people's defence, or the committee for people's defence, which also was
10 supposed to represent all ethnicities in different positions. Let's say
11 it was the national committee.
12 It functioned along the same lines as the Crisis Staff with the
13 proviso that there were two Bosniaks on that board. One was
14 vice-president of the municipal assembly and the other one was dealing
15 with military issues. He was head for national defence.
16 Q. Mr. Hidic, once again, your answer, though containing a certain
17 amount of information, doesn't appear to be linked in any intelligible way
18 to my question. I must confess for a moment I'm struggling. I'm reading
19 the answer, Mr. Hidic, and I'll trying to see if there's a link.
20 I asked you whether for the period - I'll add those words - for
21 the period before April 1992 you say there were any documents. And you
22 went on to tell us something about the second half of 1992. So I must
23 repeat it: Do you say that there were or were not any documents for the
24 period before April 1992?
25 A. Then it was a misunderstanding. I'm saying that until April 1992,
1 or more specifically, the second half of 1991, there was the People's
2 Council for Defence. I have just remembered the name of that body.
3 Q. So are you saying that in your previous answer where you referred
4 to the second half of 1992, that that was a slip, and that you meant the
5 second half of 1991? Is that what you're now saying?
6 A. I am not sure any more now. Either it was a slip of the tongue or
7 it is your mistake. But I was talking about the second half of 1991
8 because in your question you referred to the period before April 1992, if
9 I remember your question correctly.
10 Q. You do remember my question correctly, Mr. Hidic, certainly.
11 Did you conduct any examination yourself of any documentation for
12 a period before April 1992?
13 A. No, I didn't personally look for it. But there was such
14 documentation. It existed. And I got hold of it because people seemed to
15 think that I am some sort of amateur historian, a record keeper of our
16 times. So I got hold of the minutes of two meetings of the Council for
17 National Defence that took place in 1991, when this body was functioning.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, listening to your questions, I wonder
19 whether these are really issues that were triggered by my questions. I
20 asked specifically about how this witness received or retrieved the
21 documents that are in the binder. I didn't ask any question about periods
22 about other documents. If there's one or more questions, please put them
23 to the witness, but could you please keep this in mind.
24 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'll certainly keep it short. But I
25 understand the principle in this context not simply to be whether -- well,
1 the principle to be whether the issues were triggered by your questions.
2 So it's not, in fact -- it's not what your question was related to, Your
3 Honour, but what the answer was that came out.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do agree with you. But if that would be an
5 answer that is related to a lot of subjects that have been dealt with
6 during examination-in-chief or in cross-examination, then the mere fact
7 that an answer is given which gives a new tiny bit of information should
8 not open the door for a whole new line of questions which do not relate
9 that much to the clear subject of questioning on my side. If you have one
10 or more questions, please --
11 MR. STEWART: I think probably rather than debate the principles
12 with Your Honour, we would just have to deal with each specific matter as
13 it came up in the course of the case.
14 Yes, I don't think I'll attempt any more demolition of any more
15 brick walls, Your Honour. So I'll end my questioning there.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Stewart.
17 Before I'll ask the witness to leave the courtroom, I'd first like
18 to deal with the documents tendered in relation to this witness.
19 Madam Registrar, could you please read the list of exhibits
21 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar informs me that, now my recollection
23 as well, they were tendered yesterday. There was no objection in respect
24 of the set of documents. That's P90 containing I think it was 45 tabs of
25 documents. Yes.
1 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
2 JUDGE ORIE: And that also includes the statements of this
3 witness. And that I think there were four, if I'm not -- Madam Registrar,
4 would you please repeat the numbers of those four statements because --
5 and the dates so that it's clear what is in evidence.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit Number P86 is the witness statement dated
7 the 3rd of November 1999. P86.1 is the translation.
8 P87 is the witness statement dated 16 July 2000. P87.1, the
10 P88, Witness statement dated 21 May 2003. P88.1, the translation.
11 P89, amendments to witness statement dated 30 July 2001. And
12 P89.1 the translation.
13 P90 is a binders of documents containing 45 tabs.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Hannis, is there anything you would like to
15 raise in respect of the evidence?
16 MR. HANNIS: Two other matters relating to documents and this
17 witness, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. HANNIS: Yesterday you recall that the last exhibit I talked
20 about with the defendant [sic] on direct was tab 30 in Exhibit 90, which
21 was a document from my English translation at the time said the Bosanski
22 Petrovac country club, but we clarified with the interpreters that that
23 would be Bosanski Petrovac ex-patriots' club. Our language assistant has
24 made the corrections and changed country club to ex-patriots' club, and I
25 have that document to insert in the binders in the appropriate place.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's a bit of a waste of paper, Mr. Hannis,
2 because, if I'm not wrong, in the public hearing of the Brdjanin case
3 where this same witness testified, the attention was already drawn to the
4 fact that this was a wrong translation. So I do not see why it should be
5 tendered in a wrong version such a long time after that. But anyhow, it's
6 now there, the right translation.
7 Anything further issues?
8 MR. HANNIS: Second matter, Your Honour, was at the time we
9 introduced the defendant's [sic] written statements to the ICTY, he also
10 confirmed in his testimony that his prior testimony in Brdjanin as true,
11 correct and accurate, and we asked the Court to consider that under
12 Rule 92 bis (D) but we did not have copies of the transcript. Today we
13 have copies of the transcripts from his testimony on 22 May and 26 May
14 2003. And we propose to tender that into evidence as well.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart.
16 MR. STEWART: No objection.
17 JUDGE ORIE: No objection. Does that include the
18 examination-in-chief or also cross-examination?
19 MR. HANNIS: That includes his entire examination.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Entire examination.
21 Yes. Madam Registrar, would you please give the numbers to it.
22 THE REGISTRAR: The transcript of the 22nd of May 2003 is Exhibit
23 Number P91.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber will not decide on the admission of
25 this evidence at this very moment because Rule 92 bis, even Rule 92 bis
1 (D) has some tests in it. And since we have not read this, these
2 transcripts, the Chamber first has to satisfy itself that it's admissible
3 evidence, and it notes that the Defence has no objection against
5 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I -- sorry.
6 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think numbering needs a bit of attention
8 first. Madam Registrar.
9 THE REGISTRAR: And the transcript of the 26th of May 2003 is
10 Exhibit Number P92.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So we have got two numbers for the two
13 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, there's a small point, a few minutes
14 ago Mr. Hannis's slip of the tongue referred to, "At the time we
15 introduced the defendant's statements to the ICTY." And he meant it as
16 the witness.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's how I understood his words.
18 MR. HANNIS: I did.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Any further submissions in respect of the
20 admission into evidence of the documents, transcripts? I take it's an
21 oral submission now under 92 bis (D).
22 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honour.
23 MR. STEWART: Nothing on that -- in that area, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Then I would like to excuse the witness and ask Madam
25 Usher to escort him out of the courtroom, but not after having thanked
1 you, Mr. Hidic, for coming to this Tribunal and answering questions,
2 questions from both parties, questions from the Bench. And well, we're
3 still before the weekend. I don't know how your return is scheduled, but
4 I hope you're soon safe home again.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I also thank you, and I wish you a
6 lot of success in your work.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that, Mr. Hidic.
8 [The witness withdrew]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart.
10 MR. STEWART: Your Honour --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Could you put on your microphone.
12 MR. STEWART: I beg your pardon. Your Honour, a couple of points:
13 The first is this: Although I'm informed and understand that it's not the
14 normal practice, and indeed, it's apparent in this case it's not the
15 normal practice, we would wish transcripts of this case and of the
16 evidence to be available in B/C/S for Mr. Krajisnik. In a sense, the
17 reason is obvious. Mr. Krajisnik needs to follow the case.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Am I well informed if I think that there are no
19 written transcripts in B/C/S?
20 MR. HANNIS: That's my understanding, Your Honour. Only the
22 JUDGE ORIE: There are videotapes and audiotapes as well, I take
24 MR. HANNIS: Yes, and audiotapes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand your concern mainly to be that
1 Mr. Krajisnik also has access to evidence in this Court. I don't know
2 whether you would say that it should be necessarily be in writing or that
3 providing Mr. Krajisnik with audiotapes and/or videotapes which he can
4 check what the testimony is about which the other party seeks to be
5 admitted. I don't know whether you have given that some thought,
6 Mr. Stewart.
7 MR. STEWART: Well, I haven't, Your Honour, except in the last 30
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. STEWART: But on the other hand, the last 30 seconds is
11 really -- I don't claim it's enough for my brain to process all
12 possibilities, but it is enough for me to have some fairly solid thoughts
13 which are these: That audiotapes and videotapes don't come anywhere near
14 providing the equivalent of transcripts because it's absolutely familiar
15 to all of us that a person can read a transcript far, far faster than the
16 actual time taken on an audiotape or a videotape, by a factor of many. So
17 it doesn't provide the equivalent.
18 Therefore, that wouldn't do the essential task which is that it is
19 absolutely vital that as this case progresses and the evidence piles up,
20 that Mr. Krajisnik is -- and after all at some point we will get to the
21 presentation of Mr. Krajisnik's defence, his case, that Mr. Krajisnik is
22 able to read the evidence that has been given against him, well, for
23 practical purposes whenever he wants. And it simply won't be manageable
24 for him to do it by audiotape and videotape. I'm sure if anybody just
25 pictures that for a few seconds, one can see how impossible that will be.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I would say it's a very -- it's a matter of
2 principle. It's a fundamental issue you're raising here. It also has
3 great practical implications. So let me just confer.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, the Chamber finds that it would be
6 appropriate to raise this matter in writing, because it's a fundamental
7 issue, so that we can see and hear the response of the Prosecution. At
8 the same time, I think just raising the matter should make the Prosecution
9 start thinking, at least for 30 seconds, on the issue in respect of
10 perhaps limiting to the necessary the evidence presented which exists at
11 this moment on paper only in one of the official languages of the
12 Tribunal, but the matter is important enough to submitted to the Chamber
13 in writing so that it can read the response and perhaps you give the
14 sources and the case law of the Tribunal so that we are in a better
15 position to decide.
16 MR. STEWART: We will add that to our "to do" list, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We will see what comes out of this "to do" list.
18 MR. STEWART: Yes. Your Honour, I think it's the last thing
19 immediately, is that we have provided for the Tribunal a small batch of
20 correspondence. It actually needs additions of two items. It may be
21 Mr. Harmon's going to deal with both those additional items.
22 MR. HARMON: I have for purposes, Mr. Stewart, of completeness of
23 the package that you presented to me, I've given you already an extra set
24 of copies of one correspondence, and during the -- before Court started, I
25 went and got another complete set of copies of correspondence. So they
1 are available here.
2 MR. STEWART: So there are two additional letters. It was an
3 initial exchange of correspondence between myself and Mr. Harmon, one
4 letter from me to him and another letter from him to me. I've got -- I
5 think the practical position, I've got Mr. Harmon's letter to me of the
6 23rd, and that's going to come to Your Honours from the -- from
7 Mr. Harmon. And then my letter to him same day, I think.
8 MR. HARMON: Yes, I gave you all my copies --
9 MR. STEWART: Oh, you did. I beg your pardon.
10 MR. HARMON: -- of my response. And here's a copy for the Court
11 of your letter to me.
12 MR. STEWART: I see. In that case, Ms. Philpott, if we deluge you
13 with this stuff. These are Mr. Harmon's letter to me, and Mr. Harmon has
14 provided my letter to him.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that you want us to read this, and may I
16 ask you whether we need to deal with the matter before today 5.00.
17 MR. STEWART: Only this, Your Honour: The matter, in fact, goes
18 back to the beginning of the trial. But it has taken a little time to
19 sort out and get to this stage. I'm just reluctant to leave it very much
20 longer. But Your Honour I can't say that it's absolutely essential that
21 it gets dealt with today. But --
22 JUDGE ORIE: What we'll do, then. I had in mind that we would
23 have a break of half an hour in order to further discuss among the Judges
24 the item that was still on the agenda. That we'll now take 40 minutes --
25 well, let's say three-quarters of an hour. We'll then adjourn until 10
1 minutes past 1.00. And would have, then, some time to briefly discuss or
2 to inform you about the position of the Chamber in respect of the other
3 issues on the agenda.
4 But before deciding so, I'll just consult my colleagues.
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE ORIE: We'll adjourn until 10 minutes past 1.00. But the
7 fact that we are reading the material just provided to us doesn't mean
8 that the Chamber already agrees that it should be dealt with at such short
9 notice. So we'll read it, and we'll see.
10 MR. STEWART: I understand that, Your Honour. It's there to see
11 where we go.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We then stand adjourned until 10 minutes
13 past 1.00.
14 --- Recess taken at 12.16 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 1.14 p.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I take it, Mr. Stewart, that the Defence had
17 sufficient opportunity to discuss with Mr. Krajisnik the -- I would say
18 the ongoing discussions between the parties and the...
19 MR. STEWART: [Microphone not activated]
20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please use your microphone.
22 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry. He knows in bear outline, Your Honour.
23 We -- in fact, the issue has been under discussion for some time between
24 him and us.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay. That's then fine.
1 What we'll discuss or speak about on the next perhaps 15 to 20
2 minutes is an issue that would be usually raised during a Status
3 Conference but -- well, whether we call it a Status Conference or part of
4 this trial is not of major importance, I would say, but it's practical
5 matters rather than anything else.
6 First of all, before we start discussing any scheduling, the
7 parties are informed that the Judges have read the correspondence about
8 certain press publications and at this moment the Chamber finds that it's
9 sufficient to establish that the Chamber is now fully informed about the
10 ongoing discussions. We'll leave it to that at this moment.
11 Then I'd like to move to the subject of the scheduling of the
12 trial for the next month, up till the summer break. The parties have
13 discussed and even agreed upon getting some additional time from the
14 Chamber in order to have further meetings and to see whether what exactly
15 are the points that are most in dispute and where presentation of evidence
16 would not be really necessary because matters might not be in dispute.
17 The Chamber, first of all, has tried to analyse a bit what
18 happened over the last couple of weeks. And our findings are that the
19 evidence presented until now, as far as the Prosecution was concerned,
20 took approximately 17, 18 per cent less time than it was estimated.
21 The Defence cross-examining these witnesses stayed also
22 approximately within the -- I would say the guideline or at least the --
23 60 per cent of the time taken in chief, so that is not only 17 per cent
24 gained from -- in time -- Prosecution time but also in Defence time.
25 On the other hand, the 92 bis cross-examination takes a bit more
1 time than the Chamber calculated in the beginning. But overall the
2 parties are staying within the limits we calculated and the estimates they
3 have given to the Chamber. That is certainly an encouraging circumstance
4 for further accommodating the parties in what they're asking for.
5 The Chamber therefore is inclined to give some additional time to
6 the parties mainly for two reasons. I think they are combined reasons.
7 One of them is to give the Defence a better opportunity to get on the top
8 of the case, as it's often expressed, which would also include, of course,
9 discussions with Mr. Krajisnik himself and -- well, to be better prepared
10 than they feel they are now. At the same time this time could be used to
11 define those issues that are not in dispute and to see whether the parties
12 could agree on a presentation of evidence, avoiding the presentation --
13 unnecessary presentation of evidence. They have given the Chamber an
14 insight in a kind of a programme of negotiations on that. Of course, the
15 Chamber will not interfere with that, but at least the programme makes
16 sure that the parties are serious in their efforts to achieve such a
18 The parties have asked for nine additional weeks. As I indicated
19 before, I did not expect the Chamber would agree with nine weeks. I can
20 confirm now that the Chamber will not agree with nine weeks.
21 During these discussions, it also came up that time is one thing
22 but subsequent periods of time sometimes is even of similar importance,
23 and therefore the Chamber has tried to see how time could be granted and
24 at the same time how the Chamber could still keep some grip on the trial.
25 That means that the Chamber would like to -- if it grants time, that the
1 Chamber would like to receive reports during the period in which this time
2 is granted on any progress made as far as the effects on the trial is
3 concerned, because the -- an expeditious trial is, of course, one thing
4 the accused is entitled to and one of the things that is of -- certainly
5 of concern for the Chamber.
6 Now I have to ask the parties to take their pens and on the
7 calendar for proposed adjournment period, we examine that week 1, starting
8 on the 3rd of May, week 9 in this schedule starting on the 28th of June.
9 I will refer to those numbers when I give the parties two possible
10 solutions, two alternatives the Chamber at this moment is about to
11 consider, and the Chamber would like to hear the preference of the parties
12 for one of them.
13 Let me first start with alternative 1. Alternative 1 would be
14 that the break already scheduled, of course, we are not sitting; and then
15 in week 1 we would not sit; in week 2, we would not sit; in weeks 3, 4,
16 and 5, we would sit; week 6, we would not sit; weeks 7, 8, and 9 we would
17 sit; but - that's beyond the proposed calendar - week 10 we would not sit;
18 and then we would sit until the summer break. I can imagine the advantage
19 of this schedule would be that there are three weeks to start with
20 altogether in which we would not sit; that is, the break already scheduled
21 in week 1 and week 2.
22 Then the alternative schedule, which grants a bit more of time
23 but in a different way -- a little bit -- yes, a little bit more time but
24 in a different way, would be the following: After the break already
25 scheduled, in week 1 we would not sit; week 2 we would sit but not
1 necessarily on from Monday. We could start on Wednesday or -- or
2 Thursday. In week 3, we would also sit; in week 4, we would compensate
3 for the few days of week 2, where we were not sitting, so if we would
4 start on Wednesday in week 2, we would then sit on Monday and Tuesday in
5 week 4, unless in week 2, part of it, and week 3 we would hear evidence
6 which would have been anymore to compensate in the beginning of week 4...
7 calculated as normal for two whole weeks, so there's nothing any more to
8 compensate in the beginning of week 4. So there's some flexibility about
9 week 2 and 3. We could start a bit later. If we are really very
10 efficient in hearing evidence, it might be that we will need no
11 compensation any more in week 4 but, otherwise, we would sit for one or
12 two days in week 4 as well. Then the rest of the week 4, of course, we
13 would not sit; week 5, we would not sit; week 6, we would sit; the same
14 for week 7, we would sit; and would then not sit during week 8 and week 9
15 of the schedule; and then starting on the 5th of July, we would sit until
16 the summer break.
17 As I said before, these two schedules, we'd start with one of
18 them but on the basis of the reports we'll see whether we could finalise
19 them as we now provisionally have scheduled.
20 The parties are invited in their reporting, especially in the
21 early reporting, not to deal exclusively with the easy parts but also with
22 the more problematic parts. If, for example, I look at expert witnesses
23 in the beginning who are scheduled for 92 bis and are scheduled for
24 cross-examination for perhaps one hour, then of course five or six expert
25 witnesses would save only relative time. But let's not discuss the
1 details. But the Chamber would like to be informed about the progress
2 made, to receive reports on that or to meet in that respect, and we'll
3 certainly, then, also have a look on whether more problematic issues also
4 result in -- in identifying issues not in dispute.
5 So it's -- we'd make a start. And the Chamber is quite confident
6 that the parties will try to do their utmost best to achieve the aims.
7 At the same time, I have to emphasise that on from September the
8 Chamber expects that we would sit five days a week and apart from one week
9 off - and we still have to decide which one - but one week off in autumn
10 that we'd still at the regular basis. I also inform you that, just in
11 order to better be able to calculate what is advantageous and what is not,
12 that Monday, the 31st of May we would not sit anyhow because it's a UN
13 holiday. In the one schedule we would sit that week; that means that we
14 would not sit for five days but only four days that week. In the other
15 schedule, that week, which is week 5, we would not sit; so that would
16 include that UN holiday.
17 This is what the Chamber would like to bring to your attention at
18 this moment and ask whether the parties could express any preference for
19 one of these alternative solutions: The one resulting in a little bit
20 more time but not three weeks in the beginning; the other one a little bit
21 less time but three weeks in the beginning, and the last week not sitting,
22 being week 10, which was beyond the original schedule.
23 Whom of the parties could I...
24 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, the request was a Defence request, so I
25 would defer to --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. HARMON: -- hearing them first.
3 The Prosecution's response to their request was in -- so the
4 record is perfectly clear, we were more than willing to sit and engage the
5 Defence in identifying areas in which we could perhaps compress the
6 presentation of evidence as well as assist the Defence in other areas.
7 But so the record is clear, this was not our request, whether --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I understand. Yes.
9 Mr. Stewart.
10 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, the Defence position is very plain.
11 Neither of these proposals is remotely adequate. They are both hopelessly
12 inadequate, and we are not prepared to indicate any preference or any
13 election between them.
14 Now that -- we're grateful to the Tribunal for making the
15 position clear, and it is important that the matter is now brought into
16 open court --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. STEWART: -- after discussions, and we appreciate that.
19 It is quite plain that we, the Defence, have failed sufficiently
20 to explain and bring to the understanding of the Tribunal the state of
21 this case and the pressures and difficulties under which the Defence is
22 operating and the serious gap that still exists between any normal state
23 of preparation which Mr. Krajisnik is entitled to expect in relation to
24 such serious charges, and where we are or where we can prospectively be.
25 It's probably, therefore, not particularly valuable or sensible
1 for me to say more this afternoon because we have not, as Your Honour
2 acknowledged in the meeting we had yesterday evening, we have not made
3 full submissions in relation to this matter. We --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. STEWART: We wrote a fairly long letter.
6 Consequently, the right which Your Honour recognised all of us
7 had in our meeting yesterday evening, which is to formally bring the
8 matter before the Court by way of a motion for a more substantial
9 adjournment is a right which we will exercise.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. STEWART: And so that is our position.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. STEWART: May I say, Your Honour, just complete in one
14 sentence, that I did indicated this morning that I would therefore have in
15 those circumstances a more qualified motion today or application to at
16 least see us over the interim period while that matter is ventilated,
17 while the matter is fully decided, so that at least we do have some
18 practical course. And I would welcome the opportunity of doing that.
19 While I'm on my feet, may I also say, because I indicated
20 yesterday, that so far as the proposal from September onwards is
21 concerned, which is completely different issue, we do wish express here -
22 and would wish to ventilate this on a future occasion - the enormous
23 discrepancy between what the Defence team were led to believe was the
24 likely timetable when we were brought into this case on the basis of
25 specific information coming from this institution. It is not a question,
1 we believe, of anybody misleading us in relation to that information; it
2 is a question of this institution, it not being appropriate for this
3 institution as a whole, despite the demands and the pressures, to create
4 such an enormous gap between what counsel are told is going to be involved
5 in a case when they're brought into it and what actually happens.
6 I so say no more about that because it's important that I should
7 have chapter and verse, I should have that information, I should be able
8 to explain to the Tribunal exactly what the position was and exactly what
9 the basis was on which the case was presented to us and on which we came
10 into it, because it's not fair to expect the Tribunal to make any final
11 judgement on that without having that information, without feeling --
12 about having submissions. It's also a very delicate area because there is
13 a sentence in which it ultimately involves potentially some conflict
14 between the position of counsel and their own client, because some
15 balance -- after all, nobody sits seven days a week on these cases, some
16 balance has to be achieved. I do recognise that. But on the other hand,
17 nobody is without some legitimate interest in this matter.
18 So I simply put that on the record and reserve my position,
19 because it is a matter on which we are fully entitled to make submissions.
20 But it's obviously also a matter that we should very importantly discuss
21 with our -- our client.
22 But the fundamental aim here is to have a fair trial for
23 Mr. Krajisnik and to have him have the opportunity of presenting his case
24 fairly but in a way, of course, that is consistent with all the other
25 requirements of justice and is, to an appropriate extent, consistent with
1 fairness to all involved.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand, Mr. Stewart, your position.
3 Then the parties have also invited the Chamber to make clear
4 what's going to happen during the next few weeks, because the Prosecution
5 needs to further prepare the presentation of its evidence.
6 The Chamber was willing to -- either to decide on alternative 1
7 or alternative 2, where the Defence indicates that it will file a motion
8 for further time, I think it would be improper for the Chamber to now
9 decide on alternative 1 or 2 and only to decide on short term what's going
10 to happen, awaiting a submission by the Defence. I could indicate that as
11 matters stand now -- stand now the Chamber could be expected, then, to
12 decide that we would not sit in week 1, so that would mean that we would
13 not sit for the next two weeks, and that the Prosecution should prepare
14 for resuming on Monday, the 10th of May, which is the second week in the
15 schedule, and we would then, of course, by then have to consider the
16 motion filed, then, by the Defence; we would then consider the response
17 given by the Prosecution in that respect; and we would then give a
18 decision on whether any additional time, apart from the one week given
19 now, would be granted.
20 So therefore, the Chamber will -- one thing is for sure: Whether
21 we are in alternative 1 or in alternative 2 or in a position where the
22 Chamber has not decided because it expects a submission by the Defence
23 asking for more time, we'll not sit anyhow in the week of the 3rd of May.
24 As far as the week of Monday, the 10th of May is concerned, we
25 would not sit under alternative 1, we would at least, the second half of
1 the week, sit under alternative 2, and we would resume on Monday, the 10th
2 of May if we have to decide on a motion for further time to be granted.
3 If the parties are determined, even without consulting -- further
4 consultation of clients, that's the position as taken now, that
5 alternative 1 and alternative 2 are both unacceptable and no preference
6 could be expressed, then I will give a decision -- the Chamber will give a
7 decision now that would -- could be expected to be not to sit on the week
8 of the 3rd of May and then to restart on the 10th of May and see what
9 happens. If, however, the Defence would further -- would like further to
10 consult with Mr. Krajisnik and tell us, well, within -- say, within the
11 next hour, hour and a half, then we could give a decision later today,
12 which would be any -- I would say any of the three options.
13 Mr. Harmon.
14 MR. HARMON: Mr. President, Your Honours, I'm not offering a
15 suggestion as to an alternative, given this is not precipitated by our
16 request; this is a Defence request. I've heard the Defence, and therefore
17 I don't think it's my position to -- to at this point in time express a
18 preference. I've heard what the Defence has to say. I thank you very
19 much for your consideration, Mr. President, Your Honours, of the request
20 that has been made and taking the time to listen to us, and I will await
21 further decision from the Defence and then take my lead, in terms of
22 preparing the case and preparing the witnesses to show up at the next
23 scheduled trial session.
24 Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
1 Mr. Stewart, does the Defence want some additional time to
2 consider the situation, or do you say, "Well, no, it's clear to us."
3 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we don't -- we don't need additional
4 time to consider the situation, nor to consult Mr. Krajisnik. I merely
5 ask for the opportunity to make the submissions, which I've indicated I
6 wish to make, as to the short term, in the light of the fact that we
7 proposed to file a motion for a more substantial adjournment.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
9 MR. STEWART: Yes. The position is this, Your Honour: As far as
10 next week is concerned - not week 1 on the schedule but the week's break -
11 I -- I have arranged to stay in The Hague until Tuesday night. My
12 co-counsel and our case manager, I believe, are going to be in The Hague
13 the whole week. I can tell Your Honour that I shall not be in a position
14 to work on this case from Wednesday morning through to Sunday evening.
15 I'm perfectly happy to explain the reasons. They are essentially a
16 combination of professional and personal. They are in fact largely
17 personal, as it happens, over that period. I make no bones about that.
18 The -- and I -- my proposal is and was to come back to The Hague on Sunday
19 night. So it's -- it's not really a complete working week.
20 In the situation in which we are, such time as is available over
21 that very short period, the substantial amount of it will have to be
22 devoted to preparing this motion, which in a sense is sort of time wasted
23 but -- but anyway, it's -- it has to be done, and in fact the combination
24 of that and the immediate tidying up after a couple of weeks of sitting
25 is -- is going to take that period, and it will, for practical purposes,
1 probably take the week for the rest of my team -- assuming they take
2 absolutely no time off, a position which actually I would resist and
3 discourage them from adopting because they need it and are entitled to it.
4 That's why I didn't include next week as a numbered week in the schedule,
5 because I think it's unfair and unrealistic for us to count that as a live
6 working week anyway. So I started off at week 1.
7 Your Honour knows - and I have made it clear - that I do urgently
8 need to go to Bosnia. I was intending to go during the break. That was
9 the plan. But I couldn't. Ms. Loukas and my case manager went; I simply
10 did not have the time to go with them. I have been once for an extremely
11 short time with my case manager. It's essential for me to go largely to
12 consult with and give direction and to spend time with our team of
13 investigators out there, but also because I do actually need to see one or
14 two things out there anyway for myself. And before the case gets very far
15 along the line, I need to do that. It should have really happened before,
16 but needs must and it wasn't possible.
17 It won't make sense for me to go immediately after I get back on
18 Sunday night, to go straight off on Monday, because there will be
19 preparation to be done here to ensure that everything is in hand and in
20 shape for the period when I am away. It will also be necessary to make
21 preparation for that visit.
22 I should also add, Your Honour --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, may I just interrupt you. You know
24 that we are limited in time until quarter to 2.00. Part of what you said
25 is already in your letter, the function of the necessity of going to
1 Bosnia. Could you speed up and see whether we can -- I mean, the
2 interpreters --
3 MR. STEWART: I beg your pardon. Your Honour, I hadn't noticed
4 the time, as it happens. But the fact that it's in my letter is not
5 really a total answer, Your Honour.
6 I have to take Ms. Cmeric with me as well to Bosnia. For
7 practical purposes. I have to do that. There's no other way of doing
8 that. I don't speak the language myself and taking somebody else will not
9 enable me to establish rapport and to hold those meetings and she knows
10 about the case, so she has to come. Ms. Loukas will therefore be on her
11 own here.
12 If we go for one week, which is actually a realistic estimate --
13 we will be back sometime in the middle of week 2. If our trip is to be
14 valuable, we're going to have things to do in the light of that as well.
15 It is simply not realistic, we suggest, for us then to be
16 preparing for week 3, another week of evidence. Ms. Loukas will be here
17 on her own without our case manager for much of that period. There are
18 all sorts of other things to be done.
19 So the short-term proposal is this, Your Honour: We also --
20 another reason why we can't go to Bosnia until the middle of week 1 is
21 because we have to have this motion dealt with. We would apprehend that
22 the Prosecution's time for responding to the motion wouldn't take very
23 long because the Prosecution have adopted a -- I may say, a helpful
24 relatively neutral position, so I don't suppose they would have very much
25 to say.
1 What we're proposing Your Honour, is that we file that motion,
2 but that motion comes on for hearing and submissions very early in that
3 week, and we are entirely in the Tribunal's hands as to when that might
5 JUDGE ORIE: And that week would then be --
6 MR. STEWART: That's week 1. In week 1.
7 JUDGE ORIE: So that's the week of Monday, the 3rd of May.
8 MR. STEWART: Monday, the 3rd. That we should -- that that
9 motion should be heard, just that motion, that that should be dealt with
10 as early as the Tribunal saw fit in that week. As soon as that motion has
11 been dealt with, or within a day or so anyway, Ms. Cmeric and I would be
12 able to get off to Bosnia. We would be back sometime in week 2. We would
13 therefore ask for week 3 not sitting because it is excessively burdensome
14 and difficult for us to then been in a position to deal with week 3 in --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just try to write it down. Mr. Stewart, you
16 are asking to hear in week 1 your motion, in week -- in the beginning of
17 week 1 and then --
18 MR. STEWART: In the beginning of week 1.
19 JUDGE ORIE: And then no further sittings that week. And then in
20 week 2 you would like not to sit?
21 MR. STEWART: And week 3.
22 JUDGE ORIE: And week 3 as well, not to sit?
23 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour, because we won't even be back --
24 Ms. Cmeric and I won't even be back from Bosnia until sometime well into
25 week 2. And it will incidentally -- it is now quarter to 2.00, Your
1 Honour, but it's not as if nothing can be done. We do have -- Your Honour
2 knows we do have interns working on -- continuing to work on sorting all
3 the material. Ms. Loukas will be here. There will be all sorts of things
4 she can do. But for Ms. Loukas to then prepare on her own without the
5 case manager to be ready to deal with week 3 evidence would simply be
6 oppressive, and we won't be in a position to do that and make productive
7 use of this important trip to Bosnia.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. STEWART: [Previous translation continues]... spent time with
10 Mr. Krajisnik.
11 JUDGE ORIE: You've stressed several times the importance of the
12 trip to Bosnia. Of course, especially in alternative 1, that would give a
13 better opportunity to fulfil that job. And what flexibility there could
14 then be in weeks 3, 4, and 5 is a different matter. If that would be
15 something that you would like to further discuss, I'm willing to do that.
16 But --
17 MR. STEWART: Alternative 1, Your Honour?
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, as such -- let me just consult.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ORIE: As such, hearing a motion on the 3rd of May, if we
22 would have received by then also the response of the -- of the Prosecution
23 is a possibility the Chamber would not deny. But that does not mean that
24 you would have an opportunity then to go to Bosnia, because we'll then
25 have to decide on your motion.
1 And as I indicated before, the Chamber was determined that if
2 option 1 -- alternative 1 or alternative 2 would not be there, that we
3 would continue on the 10th of May. We're also willing to wait until the
4 10th of May to hear your motion. Meanwhile continuing, and then see
5 whatever schedule after we have continued, at least during that first
6 week, giving the Prosecution the opportunity to examine the witnesses
7 presented that week, what would be the outcome of that.
8 If you want us to hear a motion on the 3rd of May, you prevent
9 yourself from going to Bosnia any earlier.
10 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, Your Honour is forcing me to elect
11 between these two alternatives --
12 JUDGE ORIE: No.
13 MR. STEWART: -- without my having been given the opportunity of
14 making proper submissions on the matter. This --
15 JUDGE ORIE: No. You can make whatever submissions you want, but
16 it seems to be more or less included in your claim for making submissions
17 that you would then have an opportunity to go to Bosnia, which is, well,
18 preluding more or less on what our decision would be.
19 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I have to go to Bosnia. It's an
20 essential requirement of the case.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. STEWART: What I'm doing at the moment, Your Honour, is
23 presenting to Your Honour as fairly as we possibly can what are essential
24 requirements to provide a proper defence for Mr. Krajisnik.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. STEWART: I have already given up on the trip to Bosnia in
2 order to meet the -- the relentless timetable imposed on us by this
3 Tribunal before Easter.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. STEWART: And Your Honour knows how -- how very reluctant we
6 were to do that and how very cooperative we were in order to get this
7 trial started.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, in alternative 1 -- in alternative 1
9 you would have -- we would not sit in week 1, we would not sit in week 2,
10 and as I indicated, we could see how flexible we could be for the
11 beginning of week 3.
12 There's another possibility: That you file the motion and you
13 write down everything you would like to say, that we see what the response
14 of the Prosecution is, and that we would then give a decision on the basis
15 of the written submissions. That's another possibility that would not
16 make it necessary to be here on Monday, the 3rd of May.
17 What I'm saying is that if you do not express any preference,
18 we'll wait until we've received your motion, until we have received your
19 submissions, and we would then decide.
20 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, the problem with either of the
21 preferences is week 3 -- and in effect, all I am asking from the Tribunal
22 today is for you to add to the short-term position week 3, because it is
23 clear from what I'm saying that it is that that is the problem, because it
24 is -- it is the insistence by the Tribunal that we will sit in week 3
25 which is creating the problem. It's a single week in this whole exercise
1 over a trial estimated to last more than two years. This is creating the
2 problem, because it does not give Ms. Cmeric and I the opportunity to go
3 to Bosnia and to do the proper work in Bosnia and be back and for
4 everybody to be ready for week 3. It is one week.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just ask you: If we would not sit in week 3,
6 would you be willing to give up one of the later weeks we would not sit?
7 So week 10 in alternative 1 or week 8 or week 9 in alternative 2? Since
8 you're stressing so much week 3.
9 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we do not accept -- I think there's a
10 logical flaw.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. The answer is no.
12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it's not fair -- with respect, it's
13 not fair the way Your Honour puts the question, because we have already
14 indicated that we do not regard in the interests of a fair trial for
15 Mr. Krajisnik either alternative as acceptable. So for Your Honour to ask
16 me, once again, to trade off week 3 for some implicit election for one of
17 these two proposals, which Your Honour knows we don't accept, is with
18 respect not a fair way of approaching the matter.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Whether it's fair or not, I asked you a question. I
20 received an answer to that question.
21 We'll now adjourn.
22 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
23 JUDGE ORIE: I see that Madam Registrar already received the
24 translation of a document, but that's not very urgent at this moment, so
25 we'll deal with that after the break.
1 The Chamber will finally decide this afternoon when we'll resume
2 the trial, and for the time being the parties should be prepared to appear
3 on the 10th of May -- Monday, the 10th of May. And during the next hour
4 the Chamber will -- if there's anything else the parties would like to
5 discuss with the Chamber, the Presiding Judge is available and we'll then
6 further consider the matter and we'll decide.
7 MR. STEWART: I can make just two brief observations, Your
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. STEWART: First of all, the Defence had desperately wanted
11 this matter to be resolved before this break. And may we remind Your
12 Honour that our letter went astray for a week which has created enormous
13 difficulty, and we have been urging that this matter be dealt with.
14 And the second point is the suggestion that the whole matter
15 might be dealt with by submissions in writing. It is enormously
16 burdensome to have to cover such an issue entirely in writing, and it is
17 not, we suggest, appropriate either. It is absolutely appropriate that
18 this matter of what is required in order to enable Mr. Krajisnik to have a
19 fair trial should be openly discussed in court and not dealt with simply
20 in writing.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not going to respond to that, whether the letter
23 went astray for one week or whether the Chamber urged the parties to see
24 what additional information could be provided in order to make it easier
25 for the Chamber to decide on the issues raised in that letter. I'm not
1 going to respond on that.
2 The Chamber will give a decision this afternoon, and during the
3 next hour if there would be anything additional to be brought to the
4 attention of the Chamber, the Chamber is willing to receive that.
5 We'll adjourn, as far as it stands now, until 10th of May.
6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.56 p.m.,
7 to be reconvened sine die.