040602ED

Page 3265

1 Wednesday, 2 June 2004

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.07 a.m.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, could 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. Good morning to

9 everyone. If there's nothing else to be discussed at this moment, we

10 could ask Madam Usher to accompany Mr. Kirudja into the courtroom.

11 [The witness entered court]

12 WITNESS: CHARLES KIRUDJA [Resumed]

13 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Kirudja.

14 THE WITNESS: Good morning, sir.

15 JUDGE ORIE: May I remind you that you're still bound by the

16 solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your testimony.

17 Mr. Harmon.

18 MR. HARMON: Good morning, Mr. President and Your Honours; good

19 morning, counsel; good morning, Mr. Kirudja.

20 THE WITNESS: Good morning, Counsel.

21 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, I have no questions of Mr. Kirudja.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Judge El Mahdi has one or more questions for you.

23 Questioned by the Court:

24 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Kirudja. I

25 would like to ask you some further questions. First of all, you told us

Page 3266

1 that your mandate, i.e., the UN mandate, was split between four sectors

2 and that you were in charge of Sector North. Did you hold meetings

3 between various sector representatives?

4 A. Thank you. Yes, we did. My counterpart -- there were CACs, civil

5 affairs coordinators, for each sector. Once every so on, it wasn't as

6 regular as it might look, but we were invited by the director,

7 Mr. Thornberry, back to Zagreb as heads of those sectors, and we would

8 discuss matters that were common to all sectors. More often, however - I

9 forget the frequency but it was much more frequent - the force commander

10 held meetings in Zagreb where more than civil affairs coordinators would

11 meet, where all the heads, the military, the civilian, and police, will

12 meet in a much bigger conference chaired by the force commander.

13 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [No interpretation]

14 [Interpretation] The departure of the non-Serbs from neighbouring

15 areas and the areas bordering Sector North had been planned, so to speak.

16 Did the sector representatives of the other sectors share your point of

17 view, because you exchanged your views, didn't you, with others?

18 A. Yes, we did exchange our experience, our analysis, and our

19 comments with the other representatives from other sectors. Your question

20 also contained the question that did the other sectors share similar

21 points of view or analysis.

22 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right.

23 A. The other sectors had quite different experiences, mainly because

24 of their locations, especially Sector East. If you remember the first map

25 that we presented, its location had different dynamics.

Page 3267

1 Sector West had even more special issues. Sector South again had

2 a different issue. So when you look at it overall, we ended up being

3 unique in regard to the issues we discussed the last few days over the

4 forced evacuation of massive numbers of refugees.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but may I just intervene for a very technical

6 reason. I see on my screen that from 9:14, that means that a few words of

7 your last question were not translated on the screen. Since I was

8 listening to the live channel rather than to the English translation, I do

9 not know whether it was actually translated and just not on our screen or

10 that it has not been translated. That was --

11 THE WITNESS: Your Honour?

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

13 THE WITNESS: The first part wasn't but I understood it in French,

14 the part that wasn't translated.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I saw from your statement, Mr. Kirudja, the

16 language is not a problem for you, but we need a full transcript. I

17 wonder whether this will be recovered from the tapes. Yes, Mr. Stewart.

18 MR. STEWART: May I suggest, Your Honour, that it may be, with

19 respect, that His Honour Judge El Mahdi could repeat his question.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's what I had in mind. If there are no

21 other ways --

22 MR. STEWART: It seems the more sensible thing. I believe he

23 knows his question.

24 JUDGE ORIE: Well, Judge El Mahdi, just once again.

25 JUDGE EL MAHDI: Thank you, Mr. President. [Interpretation] I

Page 3268

1 shall repeat my question. It concerned those meetings which you held with

2 those people mandated by the UN and in charge of the other sectors

3 the eastern sector, the western sector, and the southern sector. And in

4 the course of these meetings, did you have the opportunity to discuss

5 these matters and to exchange your views and to hear assessments of the

6 situation from other people, and did their assessment of the situation,

7 was it in line with yours? In other words, was there any kind of system

8 or plan that aimed at deporting or at inciting non-Serb people to leave

9 part of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kirudja, may I ask you whether this would, with

11 the question being repeated, whether your response -- whether your --

12 whether you would have testified anything different or you just keep to

13 what you said just.

14 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I will keep to what I said. I trust

15 Judge El Mahdi had already understood my answer, but I would defer to him

16 if he would like me to repeat.

17 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] No, not at all. I'd just like

18 one further clarification, please. If I look at the map that is in front

19 of me, Sector West is very close to your sector, Sector North, and it

20 seems to me that you said that Sector West was facing other difficulties,

21 not the ones you mentioned. Now, as concerns Sector West, was a similar

22 question ever raised concerning Sector West? In other words, any form of

23 deportation or expulsion of a segment of the population?

24 A. I was often in contact with my counterpart in Sector West,

25 Mr. Gerard Fischer. As a matter of fact, on my way to assignment on

Page 3269

1 Sector North, I did spend time in Sector West, in Daruvar, and then down

2 to the other areas that were troublesome in that sector.

3 There were, if my memory is correct, similar attempt for movement

4 of refugees, not as massively as we discussed and not for similar reasons

5 that we discussed, but the details there I don't have as I would have had

6 for Sector North.

7 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] In that case, can one not assume

8 that this method was being applied in those municipalities which were

9 adjacent to yours, to your sector? In other words, it wasn't a very

10 widespread system.

11 A. Judge El Mahdi, recall part of the testimony that was heard here

12 was the what I call collusion or working in partnership between the mayor

13 in Sector North and Sector South, particularly the mayor in Dvor. The

14 local Serbs, meaning the Serbs, Croatian Serbs located in Sector West, had

15 a totally different dynamic --

16 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Please allow me to interrupt you.

17 Yes, I remember this very well. I remember the conversation you had with

18 the mayor of Dvor and that he wanted you to contact the mayor in Bosnia

19 over the phone, but this was not my question. Was this something which

20 prevailed in some municipalities? In other words, was it a matter of --

21 of asking the non-Serbs to leave, or was this a more widespread system,

22 something which was being applied to a larger part of Bosnia and

23 Herzegovina? I don't know if my question is clear enough and if you

24 understand my subject of concern.

25 A. I understand your question to mean was this phenomenon widespread

Page 3270

1 and especially in Sector West.

2 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes.

3 A. What I was beginning to respond to you was that the Sector West

4 had local leadership engaged in a different manner than the local

5 leadership in Sector North. Specifically, the Serb leadership in Sector

6 West had approached their own issues very differently, and I didn't

7 understand them, from talking to my counterpart, wanting to facilitate

8 control of the area of Sector West. In other words, they had earlier than

9 us in Sector North even come to a better understanding with the Croatian

10 authorities about autonomy in the area. So their perspective in what

11 would be happening in the sector was, at least in the early part of the

12 month, very different from the perspective in Sector North. And by that I

13 mean that towards the end of my testimony I did refer to the Republic of

14 Serbian Krajina now becoming a very well recognised reality. That

15 recognition was much more strong in Sector North and Sector South than it

16 was in Sector West. Therefore, the ability to -- to organise massive

17 movement from inside Sector North and across the border in Sector West, I

18 never understood that to be as strong as it was in Sector North.

19 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Fine. So in the course of your

20 meetings, the assessment of the situation and the conclusions you drew,

21 had these been vetted and well understood by your colleagues and -- in

22 other words, did their points of view and your point of view tally? Did

23 you assess the situation in the same way?

24 A. Certainly in those meetings in Zagreb when we met collectively I

25 did explain to them in full about as much as I did explain to this Court

Page 3271

1 about what we were experiencing, and I recall the -- both the force

2 commander and my colleagues in other areas listening attentively but not

3 offering any different views from what they were hearing from me.

4 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Thank you. I should now like to

5 move on to another topic briefly. In your written statement, and I shall

6 quote you in English: [In English] "The fact that we had no mandate in

7 Bosnia increasingly became a flashpoint and a point of friction both on

8 the front lines where we operated and at the UN headquarters to whom we

9 reported."

10 [Interpretation] My question concerns what do you understand, what

11 do you mean when you talk about friction at the UN headquarters?

12 A. It was a sad thing for me in the sense that while I knew they

13 understood my report, meaning those -- some of which you have seen here,

14 including the ones with the titles like "Humanitarian Disasters in the

15 Making," including the outlining of those places we called concentration

16 camps and what was going on there, I knew they understood that this was

17 going on, but because there was that obvious lack of mandate, the UN not

18 at a certain point mandated to operate across the border, rather than

19 respond in the manner I hoped they would, meaning go up the chain from

20 Zagreb and go to where the mandate are created, meaning back at the

21 headquarters, and bring these matters there, I got warnings that you're

22 spending too much time dealing with these issues. In other words, don't

23 look, don't see.

24 The human situation being what it was, I never had that

25 alternative not to see or not to hear what was being brought at the front

Page 3272

1 door of where we were located. Indeed, when they said to me don't get too

2 involved in matters across Bosnia, part of my response was, "We don't even

3 have to go to Bosnia. They come to us inside the sector." That's the

4 friction I'm referring to.

5 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Did you feel the

6 weight of the SDS party in the course of those meetings which you held

7 with various members and when you tried to assess the situation?

8 A. Beg your pardon, Judge, weight, or pressure, or what exactly?

9 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Did you feel in any way that the

10 SDS was playing a part in the events that were unfolding? And if you felt

11 and came to realise that the SDS was playing a part, what kind of part was

12 it actually playing?

13 A. Yes. In the testimony I gave, you will recall mentioning that I

14 would ask the people coming to see me to tell me who they were, and

15 therefore I noticed that -- I mean, I did indicate so-and-so presented

16 themselves as representative of the SDS or representative of the SDA, or

17 the mayor would represent himself as the president of the Crisis

18 Committee. The police who came along, of course they were in uniform and

19 they just said they were the chiefs of police.

20 As those conversations went on and after they were repeated a

21 number of times, it became clear that these people were not acting as

22 individuals in their individual capacity to dream up these plans to

23 evacuate massive people. And as you recall the testimony, at certain

24 point we did make them admit this thing was not a voluntary thing. And

25 you will also recall towards the end we had given them no doubt that

Page 3273

1 something you are doing, that the international community will view it in

2 strict displeasure and indeed it could be considered a crime. Even with

3 that warning, they seemed not to be able or willing to stop the process.

4 In other words, they did appear to have all the signs of being driven to

5 undertake this. And the only way, to my mind, they could be driven is

6 they were acting on instructions under a policy drawn by somebody. And

7 since they identified themselves as SDS or members of the militia or what

8 they called, for better terminology, new reality going on and that reality

9 called Republic of Serbia, it was, towards the end, inescapable for me to

10 conclude they were acting under policy or instruction.

11 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes. My last question relates to

12 paragraph 38 of your declaration. Let me quote you. You said it was

13 evident, and you were talking about a particular family which spent the

14 night in a hotel under the protection of the UN police officers. And you

15 said: [In English] "It was evident that the Serb authorities not only did

16 not tolerate their presence, but they also would not guarantee the

17 security of the family..."

18 [Interpretation] Where did you reach this conclusion? When did

19 you reach this conclusion? You said it was evident. How did you reach

20 this conclusion?

21 A. Yeah. The evident was almost natural. They were only attempting

22 to cross over by a road through Sector North in the direction of Karlovac.

23 The fact -- the simple fact that they were stopped and couldn't proceed on

24 the road is itself the evidence that they were in jeopardy of being hurt,

25 and they drove off the main road into Tapusko, seeking assistance and

Page 3274

1 saying, "We feel -- we've been stopped too many -- the militia is chasing

2 us, we need protection, and we also need to be escorted out of the

3 sector." That was the evidence.

4 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] In other words, that is what they

5 told you. In -- according to you, if the authorities wanted to detain

6 them, don't you think they could have done so if they had wanted to?

7 A. Indeed. As a matter of fact, they could even have forcefully

8 removed our own police and taken them, because our police were not armed.

9 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] In other words, perhaps it was

10 the mob or paramilitary groups that did not report to the authorities that

11 were involved.

12 A. Inside the sector, that would not have been possible because the

13 authorities that were from the militia and the others had total control of

14 the area, as I recall I mentioned to you. This was the situation after

15 the war: They had taken control; there were checkpoints almost every few

16 kilometres around, both for ordinary people as well as -- I mean ordinary

17 local people as well as checking any kind of crime. So movement in the

18 sector was quite controlled by the -- by the forces. So the question of

19 irregular -- the crowd doesn't arise inside the sector.

20 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kirudja, I have a few -- a few questions as well.

22 The first one about the same family, the Cakar family that you just

23 mentioned -- well, you didn't mention but you spoke about in your response

24 to one of the questions of Judge El Mahdi. You testified that they were

25 under duress. I'd like to have a clarification on the following question:

Page 3275

1 Is my understanding correct that they were confronted with a situation

2 they experienced as duress once they had decided to leave, that is to say

3 on their way out, or were they also under duress when they decided that

4 they wanted to leave? So was it at the basis of their departure or was it

5 that they faced it during their -- during their trip?

6 A. Yes. A very precise question, Your Honour. At the very beginning

7 of their trip, I wouldn't have the details because the trip originated

8 from across the border.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

10 A. So that part of your question I'm not privy to what might have

11 happened. But --

12 JUDGE ORIE: Unless they said something.

13 A. Unless they said something. But it's also important, Your Honour,

14 you bear in mind the timing of this incident. This is very early. It is

15 almost the first two weeks, and it took us by surprise. We didn't expect

16 a woman and a child and a man just merely trying to pass through the road

17 to be in such kind of despondency when they arrived literally outside our

18 office first. It drew our attention not merely to the issues you're

19 asking, how they felt in distress, it drew our attention as to who are

20 they and why. And as soon as we established the fact that they are not

21 from here, they are -- and if you use the word "alien" to this group of

22 people here, then the next question was, why not let them out? And then

23 when we started talking to them when they had calmed down, I remember they

24 were in panic, they began to hint that they had been stopped so many times

25 once inside, even between the border to the headquarters - and the only

Page 3276

1 one who could have stopped them were the authorities manning those

2 checkpoints - so we then asked them -- I just went to the authorities and

3 said, "What's the matter with this woman? Why couldn't she continue, or

4 this family, and go where they wanted to go?" And that's when I began to

5 get the idea, and they told us, "These are foreigners. These are

6 non-Serbs, and they shouldn't be here." And that's when then the matter

7 began focusing on their car. The first hint was they can leave but the

8 car cannot leave. And I say, "How can they leave without their own

9 assets?" They would say, "Why don't you put in your UN car and take her

10 out?"

11 "Yes, but these are our properties." And then the issue began to develop

12 around that point.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yesterday a question was put to you - this is a

14 different subject - on who you would accept as the responsible parties to

15 receive responses to. Especially you talked about the people at the

16 opstina level and the RSK level, and I did understand from your answer

17 that there was some hesitations to receive the point of view of the RSK

18 level where you rather oriented yourself to the people at the opstina

19 level. This was, as far as I understand, mainly about, well, obstruction

20 of or at least non-compliance with what you deemed necessary to perform

21 your duties.

22 If at the RSK level you would have got a unison response to the

23 extent that everyone below that level would meet your requests, would you

24 have had similar hesitations? I mean, was it that you were hesitant

25 because you'd rather have the point of view of each opstina before you

Page 3277

1 would accept that one would not meet your request or your requirements, or

2 would the same have been true if they would have -- at the RSK level they

3 would have said, "We fully agree with you, everything's fine, we'll do

4 whatever you ask." Would you have had similar hesitations?

5 A. Interesting question, since I never had that last option.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

7 A. It didn't all happen very naturally that the RSK had whipped all

8 these other units into their line and policy. This is something they did

9 over time, including changes, very rapid changes for mayors and chiefs of

10 police who were not in compliance to whatever they issued from their RSK

11 headquarters in Knin, which was in Sector South. Indeed, part of the

12 testimony you have in front of you talks of the killing of one of the very

13 independent mayor of Vrgin Most, who had exhibited what I call a sort of

14 independence in dealing with the -- with us, dealing with the issues that

15 were in the Vance Plan and understood that the Vance Plan gave him, the

16 mayor, and the police the only recognition of authority. In an attempt to

17 act that way, we read it that he was eliminated. And soon thereafter, we

18 got into that position that your last question implied, that the RSK did

19 gain total authority over the opstina leadership. And having recognised

20 that de facto they had gained such authority in all opstinas, if I wanted

21 something done, therefore it was impractical for me to insist to deal with

22 the opstinas where I know they will not cross the line coming from Knin,

23 and consequently, I was often in Knin myself talking directly to where I

24 thought the responsible individuals were.

25 JUDGE ORIE: So if I do understand your answer correctly, you tell

Page 3278

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

Page 3279

1 us that it was of no use any more to stick to who you consider to be the

2 proper counterparts because the -- you were, as the French say, before a

3 fait accompli that the RSK had taken over the authority.

4 A. Exactly, it's fait accompli.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Then I have a very small question. Let's not spend

6 too much time on it. You said yesterday that from Petrova Gora you could

7 see the city of Zagreb. On the map you provided it seems to be a distance

8 of some 60 kilometres with quite a lot of elevations, even close to the

9 city of Zagreb, I would say a distance of ten to 15 kilometres, and there

10 is an indication on this map that one of the elevation points in Petrova

11 Gora was 572 metres. And if you find close to the city of Zagreb

12 elevations to -- up to 265 metres, I wondered just how this, at this

13 distance and with this terrain, whether you really could see it.

14 A. Good reading. I take it you look like a military person reading a

15 map.

16 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not.

17 A. No. Petrova Gora was both a location, but there is a tall

18 building. In Serbian I believe "Gora" also means mountain or something

19 like that.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

21 A. There's a building, a tall building like a tower. It's up, up the

22 building. When you climb the building, which I did, where the radio

23 station was located, you can see Zagreb from there.

24 JUDGE ORIE: You would say from the radio tower which adds to the

25 elevation.

Page 3305

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 MR. STEWART: May I raise one other matter, Your Honour, which is

22 this --

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

24 MR. STEWART: -- we have, of course -- of course we discussed with

25 Mr. Krajisnik -- of course we meet Mr. Krajisnik regularly, and we

Page 3306

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

Page 3307

1 naturally discuss with him what happens in court and occasionally

2 naturally have to explain to our client certain aspects of what happens in

3 court. We also have to report, naturally, it's part of our duty, report

4 and explain to Mr. Krajisnik anything which happens in -- at the meetings

5 or sessions at which he's not present.

6 We have had some difficulty and therefore would very much

7 appreciate some clarification from the Tribunal. We have had difficulty

8 in slightly in understanding ourselves but therefore difficulty in

9 explaining to Mr. Krajisnik how it was that the -- this case, Krajisnik,

10 appeared on the schedule which was published by the Tribunal on the 24th

11 of May, which was last Monday, as listed for hearing on Monday morning,

12 the 7th of June. I first saw that schedule later in the week, actually, I

13 can't remember exactly when, but I think it was Thursday or Friday, and it

14 was in general circulation, as that schedule is, of the various

15 courtrooms. I now realise that on the 26th, so between the publication of

16 that schedule and in fact, as it happens, when it came into my hands, the

17 official spokesman for the Tribunal, and I think the Trial Chambers, I

18 think that's the way he's described, had issued a press statement

19 announcing - and it's on the website for the Tribunal - that the

20 sentencing hearing for Mr. Babic would be at 10.00 a.m. on Monday the 7th,

21 and this was alluded to by Your Honour, and you were able to give us a

22 certain amount of information, but I think it's -- it was acknowledged not

23 complete information in relation to this matter last Friday. But I would

24 appreciate clarification, because as a matter of something affecting

25 Mr. Krajisnik, and as it's slightly puzzling, I confess it is slightly

Page 3308

1 puzzling to us what happened here, and I would appreciate any

2 clarification. I have only realised over the weekend - I didn't know

3 before because some things just pass me by - I had not realised that the

4 identity of the Trial Chamber and in fact the three Judges dealing with

5 Mr. Babic's sentencing hearing, when we had the meeting on Friday I'm

6 afraid I didn't appreciate that Your Honours were the same Judges in

7 relation to Mr. Babic as well, but I hope Your Honour sees that it would

8 be helpful and set minds at rest if we were to understand how all that

9 came about and what the -- what the arrangements have been, because I

10 appreciate Your Honours are in that slightly difficult position of being,

11 if you like, the Babic Trial Chamber with one hat on, as we say in

12 English, but the Krajisnik Trial Chamber with another hat on, but, Your

13 Honours are human beings, so --

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

15 MR. STEWART: -- with one brain each.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you very much for establishing the fact

17 rather than what I did.

18 MR. STEWART: It's just my evidence, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE ORIE: I'd rather discuss that during -- we'll call the

20 Babic Defence counsel, who has asked to be present, first because we call

21 Mr. Babic in, and then I'd rather deal with that matter in his presence

22 because --

23 MR. STEWART: That would seem to absolutely make sense that

24 Mr. Mueller should be present in relation to this sort of matter, Your

25 Honour. We agree with that, with respect.

Page 3309

1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Stewart.

2 Before we ask Mr. Mueller to come in, we have two issues. First

3 of all, 89(F), the evidence which will be submitted under -- the written

4 statement which will be submitted under Rule 89(F) can be expected to find

5 no opposition from the Chamber.

6 At the same time, the motion in respect of 92 bis, which I think

7 the same matters 89(F) and 92 bis are dealt with in the same motion, we

8 will not decide at this moment on the admission of the 92 bis evidence.

9 We'll delay our decision until we have heard the viva voce testimony,

10 especially since the Chamber gave some guidance as to how to -- to use

11 statements or transcripts in relation to the viva voce evidence. So we'll

12 not decide on that issue.

13 Then I'd like Mr. Mueller to be accompanied into the courtroom.

14 Mr. Mueller, welcome. Our apologies for the delay. Mr. Mueller,

15 you have asked to be present during the testimony to be given by your

16 client, Mr. Babic, in the Krajisnik case. You may be seated, it will take

17 a couple of minutes.

18 MR. MUELLER: You want me to be seated?

19 JUDGE ORIE: At this moment. I'm not saying -- at this moment,

20 yes.

21 MR. MUELLER: Okay. You want me to maybe -- the microphone. You

22 want me to use the microphone.

23 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't invite you yet to speak.

24 MR. MUELLER: I'm sorry.

25 JUDGE ORIE: We have dealt with the situation before when another

Page 3310

1 witness testified in this case, and we then spent a lot of attention to

2 what would be the role of Defence counsel in respect of the witness. I've

3 asked the Prosecution before whether there was any intention to prosecute

4 Mr. Babic on new elements that would come up, and there's a commitment

5 from the Prosecution that there is no intention whatsoever to come up with

6 new indictments against Mr. Babic even if he would say a few matters which

7 might be incriminating in respect of him. So therefore, that could hardly

8 be a reason to -- to intervene.

9 I also have to emphasise that of course a charge under a joint

10 criminal enterprise covers a lot, so to start new proceedings on the basis

11 that there's another -- that other charges should be brought against

12 Mr. Babic is very unlikely to happen.

13 Then in the -- it was about Mr. Deronjic. In the -- with

14 Mr. Deronjic we also discussed whether he had to fear any prosecution by a

15 domestic authority. At that time, there was a commitment by the

16 Prosecution that they would prevent, to the extent possible, to support

17 whatever domestic prosecution against the then-witness but then potential

18 accused in the domestic system. The primary jurisdiction the Tribunal has

19 certainly gives powers to prevent domestic jurisdictions to proceed

20 against someone, of course as long as it concerns facts which are within

21 the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. So therefore, if Mr. Babic, during his

22 testimony, which I do not expect on the basis of his statement, suddenly

23 confessed a horrible crime in 1988 in a third country, then of course the

24 primary jurisdiction of the Tribunal could not protect him. But that's

25 also an event which is very unlikely to happen.

Page 3311

1 Finally, in -- prior to the testimony of Mr. Deronjic, we

2 discussed whether -- whether his testimony could be unfavourable for the

3 ongoing sentencing proceedings against at that time Mr. Deronjic, but the

4 same might be true in respect of Mr. Babic. There was some discussion

5 then as to whether Rule 90(E), which allows a witness to indicate that

6 answering a question would incriminate himself would -- whether that would

7 also be applicable if the answer would worsen his situation in view of

8 sentencing. We then decided that we would cross that bridge as we came to

9 it, and we didn't come to it at that time. So that's just for your

10 information what the position is.

11 We allowed at that time Defence counsel for Mr. Deronjic to be

12 present but under the strict condition that he should clearly keep in mind

13 the very, very limited -- the very, very limited circumstances under which

14 the Chamber would -- oh, yes. You could have used -- I'm sorry, yes.

15 MR. MUELLER: Much easier with the headphones on. Thank you.

16 Much better.

17 JUDGE ORIE: To clearly keep in mind the very limited

18 circumstances under which the Chamber would consider any intervention

19 appropriate. That's point one.

20 And the second is that there would be no direct contact between

21 the witness and counsel. That's the reason why I said for the time being

22 I'll ask you to sit there, but as a matter of fact, I just -- there's a

23 microphone also at the bench and this courtroom layout is a bit

24 unfavourable, there are nicer solutions in other courtrooms, but I would

25 invite you then to sit there, just next to the door, and to use that

Page 3312

1 microphone if necessary.

2 That's as far as the Rules are concerned in respect of your

3 presence.

4 Then we have another issue. That is -- I have two more issues.

5 The first one is the Defence of Mr. Krajisnik has inquired into the court

6 schedule since the published court schedule indicates that next Monday we

7 would pronounce sentence against Mr. Babic and at the same time would hear

8 the Krajisnik case. First of all, court scheduling is an administrative

9 matter, but the Chamber has issued a Scheduling Order to pronounce the

10 sentencing judgement against Mr. Babic next Monday, but that's not going

11 any more. The parties -- you will be informed about it, it will be later.

12 And just to -- to inform you that the reasons are mainly logistical ones.

13 The Chamber is, of course, as you might not be surprised of, preparing the

14 sentencing judgement, and as every experienced lawyer knows, that there

15 are two issues: One is to make up your mind on the basis of all the

16 arguments exchanged, and the second one is to get it on paper in such a

17 way that it can be pronounced. I can assure you that the second issue is

18 mainly on our minds at this moment, and together with logistical problems,

19 the delivery of the sentencing judgement will be considerably delayed, as

20 I said, both for logistical reasons and for finally finalising the

21 decision.

22 This answers to some -- so therefore it's not made public yet, but

23 it will be made public either today or tomorrow that there will be no

24 sentencing judgement delivered in the case of Mr. Babic next Monday.

25 Mr. Stewart, this also, I would say, clarifies to some extent what

Page 3313

1 you asked for.

2 MR. STEWART: Yes, it does indeed. Thank you to -- with one or

3 two caveats which are expressed in what Your Honour has said. This is a

4 fast-moving situation as far as the Defence are concern. We've gathered

5 all sorts of bits of information over the last two or three days in

6 relation to the position of Mr. Babic.

7 Talking about and putting it all together, two points do occur to

8 us now. One is that in all the open sessions over the last week or so,

9 there has been constant reference to Mr. Babic being the next witness.

10 That has been said many, many times, and we have discussed --

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I checked it, yes.

12 MR. STEWART: -- in quite some detail. Coupled with that, which

13 seems to be the situation anyway, if Mr. Babic -- if the Krajisnik case is

14 -- no disrespect to Mr. Krajisnik, I always refer to him

15 as Mr. Krajisnik --

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

17 MR. STEWART: -- but if the Krajisnik case is seen to be listed and

18 heard on Monday in closed session, after two or three days of evidence

19 with a witness in closed session, and Mr. Babic's sentencing hearing

20 publicly announced by a press spokesman for the Tribunal last week as

21 scheduled for Monday the 7th of June does not take place on that day, we

22 simply ask, isn't it becoming blindingly obvious to anybody in the world

23 outside with half a brain that it's Mr. Babic giving evidence?

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, well --

25 MR. STEWART: So what is this all about?

Page 3314

1 JUDGE ORIE: Everyone who looks at the transcript of last Friday

2 would know exactly when he was about to start, et cetera, but that

3 decision has been taken, and we were aware of the whole of the public

4 knowing -- that's also the reason why I asked Mr. Tieger just in the

5 beginning whether it was just the fact that Mr. Babic would testify or

6 not, but that's a matter which has been decided, and we will not reopen

7 the debate on that.

8 MR. STEWART: Is the position this, Your Honour -- may I just ask

9 this -- Mr. Mueller is in court, so perhaps it's appropriate to say it now

10 -- clearly the Prosecution are -- I'm not resiling from the degree of

11 non-opposition which I indicated to Mr. Tieger yesterday, it's just that

12 we do see these other aspects of the matter coming along. Not all of

13 them. The Trial Chamber no doubt was more fully aware of all these

14 different elements than the Defence team has been because we've had to

15 gather information as we go along. So that's why we make in effect these

16 supplementary submissions. We understand entirely, of course, the

17 Prosecution in their own interests and as their duty make these

18 submissions and make these applications in relation to witnesses such as

19 Mr. Babic, but we assume that, after all, it all stems from a request by

20 Mr. Babic.

21 We therefore suppose that in the end, now Mr. Babic is represented

22 in court, that the continuation of this protection of Mr. Babic by closed

23 session would only be thought to be necessary to continue so long as

24 Mr. Babic, through his counsel, wished it to, and we understand that at

25 the moment they do wish it to, but that, we understand, must be the

Page 3315

1 position, that if at any point Mr. Babic through his counsel, who is now

2 in court, were to say, "Well, it's pointless because it's going to be

3 obvious," to Mr. Babic, then he would make that submission.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mueller, I'm addressing you now as -- I would say

5 as counsel for a witness and not counsel of someone who still has to be

6 sentenced in this Tribunal. The Defence is not informed about the facts

7 underlying the motion of the Prosecution that ask for protective measures

8 to the effect that Mr. Babic would testify in closed session. I just

9 inform you about this before what we discussed during the long time would

10 be, just become ineffective because of any of your remarks, but the

11 question of the Defence of Mr. Krajisnik is whether you'd say, since

12 everyone knows anyhow, at least could know on the basis of transcripts of

13 public hearings, that Mr. Babic is testifying now, whether it still makes

14 any sense or not to ask for the protective measures. If you would say,

15 "We don't need them," fine, we'll hear it. If not, please tell us.

16 MR. MUELLER: Your Honour, the answer shall not be done within one

17 phrase. We have learned about circumstances a couple of days ago which

18 make it very reasonable that protective measures are taken -- are being

19 taken.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but the explanation is clearly --

21 MR. MUELLER: Explanation --

22 JUDGE ORIE: -- is clearly in --

23 MR. MUELLER: Mr. Babic -- I'm sorry. I'm sorry. May I continue?

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

25 MR. MUELLER: Thank you. Mr. Babic is still insisting on

Page 3316

1 protective measures.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.

3 MR. MUELLER: And I do not see any reason why I could circumvent

4 his intention.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.

6 MR. MUELLER: Thank you.

7 JUDGE ORIE: That's clear then, at least --

8 MR. STEWART: Indeed, Your Honour. That's unequivocally clear.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Then finally I have another issue, and I waited with

10 this until Mr. Mueller had arrived because it concerns him as well. Our

11 court schedule for this week --

12 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Trial Chamber has been exploring

14 possibilities, also for logistical reasons, to sit longer during Thursday

15 and Friday. As a matter of fact we would have preferred to sit an extra

16 three hours on Thursday but I have just been informed this is not

17 possible, but we could gain another one hour and a half tomorrow. Similar

18 possibilities for Friday still have to be investigated first, whether

19 there are teams of translators available. Therefore, if the parties would

20 be unable to continue tomorrow in the afternoon for one and a half

21 additional hours, I would like to be informed. That's point one.

22 The second issue is that, when talking about Friday, Mr. Mueller,

23 I am informed that you will not be available on Friday, but although the

24 Chamber allows you to be present or to send someone to substitute you, the

25 Chamber is not willing to adapt the court schedule where we have major

Page 3317

1 problems in trying to finalise the testimony of the -- of Mr. Babic by

2 next Monday, the Chamber is not willing to postpone the Friday hearing to

3 any other moment. This doesn't affect the acceptance of the presence of a

4 counsel for Mr. Babic, but your unavailability, however regrettable it may

5 be, is not a reason for us to postpone the Friday session.

6 Then having said all this, I think, Mr. Mueller, it would be the

7 proper time to take your strategic position.

8 MR. MUELLER: Thank you.

9 JUDGE ORIE: And to ask Madam Usher to escort Mr. Babic into the

10 courtroom.

11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, the --

12 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes, the -- yes.

13 MR. STEWART: You invited you said -- you asked whether the

14 parties would be unable to continue tomorrow in the afternoon for one and

15 a half additional hours, you'd like to be informed.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

17 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm not beginning by saying that there

18 is some physical unavailability of our team. There isn't. That's not a

19 problem. We're here in The Hague. We seem to be here quite a lot. The

20 -- but we do just wonder what the -- in the light particularly of the

21 observations and discussions that took place last week about the form in

22 which Mr. Babic's evidence would be presented --

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

24 MR. STEWART: -- I know that this is also a fast-moving situation

25 for Mr. Tieger. I wonder if Mr. Tieger is able just to give us a brief

Page 3318

1 indication of where we think we might be going in terms of timetable on

2 Mr. Babic, how long he's going to take in chief and so on.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, without inviting you to speculate, if you

4 could give information, please do so.

5 MR. TIEGER: I'll try to dampen my impulse to speculate and -- I

6 -- I'm hoping that we can conclude the examination-in-chief within six

7 hours. It's a bit difficult for me to assess the pace at which we'll

8 move, but if that's -- I think it is at least a realistic prospect that we

9 could conclude on Thursday so that Friday would be cross-examination.

10 Now, my estimate may be more than partially off, but that's --

11 that's the fairest estimate I can make at this point.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

13 MR. STEWART: The reason, Your Honour, is this -- that's very

14 helpful. We have been trying to do our scheduling, subject, of course,

15 always to the Trial Chamber's directions and decisions. Up to a few

16 minutes ago, I had been under the clear impression, as a result of

17 discussions between the Prosecution and including Mr. Harmon and myself,

18 and also knowing the position of Mr. Mueller, that we would -- excuse me

19 -- that Mr. Biskovic would be the witness giving evidence on Friday.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that has been suggested, and when I saw that for

21 the first time, and it was I think yesterday because we first had

22 Mr. Babic on our list and there was no ruling yet on whether we would

23 postpone or adopt to the schedule of Mr. Mueller, it may have been quite

24 clear that -- well, even if it's not clear, the Chamber has given

25 preference to first finish the testimony of Mr. Babic.

Page 3319

1 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I finish?

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

3 MR. STEWART: I understand, of course, that -- we know the Trial

4 Chamber's position on that, and I suppose that everybody in principle

5 likes to start from the position that it's better if a witness goes

6 straight through from start to finish uninterrupted. That's normal court

7 practice in the whole world, I think. But that was our understanding. We

8 didn't understand from all the various discussions there'd been that there

9 was any special difficulty then about Mr. Babic's evidence continuing on

10 Monday. Your Honour's indicated something a moment ago which suggests

11 that that's difficult. We did know that difficulties emerged then in the

12 course of next week, and we understand those, but --

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but there's always a risk. If I look at the --

14 if I look at the experience we have gained in respect of the examination

15 of witnesses, there would be a risk that we might not conclude by Monday,

16 and that's a risk I would at all costs want to avoid.

17 MR. STEWART: When Your Honour says "at all cost" --

18 JUDGE ORIE: Well, of course not at all cost.

19 MR. STEWART: I'm not meaning to --

20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I think during one of the meetings I

21 hinted to -- I would say to the private agendas of Judges. I think I said

22 something I might have to see my psychiatrist in Moscow, as you may have

23 noticed. This was, of course, just an allusion to matters not to be

24 discussed anywhere --

25 MR. STEWART: Of course. We understand that entirely.

Page 3320

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

Page 3321

1 JUDGE ORIE: -- and the Chamber wants, to the extent possible,

2 hear the evidence of Mr. Babic by all three Judges. That's it.

3 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we would certainly wish that to be the

4 position, naturally.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but you know there are rules sometimes that

6 allow for specific reasons one of the Judges not to be present but we want

7 to avoid at all -- not at all cost but we certainly have a strong

8 preference to hear the testimony of Mr. Babic with all three Judges, and I

9 wouldn't know that if we wouldn't finish by Monday whether that would be

10 possible. Let's leave it to that.

11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we could cross the bridge whether it

12 might be appropriate --

13 JUDGE ORIE: The earlier we start with the testimony of Mr. Babic,

14 the better the chance.

15 MR. STEWART: I understand that, Your Honour, but there are many,

16 many difficulties in changing situations and bits of information that the

17 Defence has had to cope with in relation to this, and the point I'm

18 getting at is this: Your Honour, I do not know whether we will be ready

19 to cross-examine Mr. Babic within this time scale, so when Your Honour

20 says "at all costs," one of the costs which we always understand the Court

21 would not regard as an acceptable cost is a cross-examination where the

22 party was genuinely, for good reason, not ready.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Let me be quite clear: Last Friday we discussed when

24 to start with the testimony of Mr. Babic; in the middle of this week. We

25 also discussed whether we would be able to finish him next Friday or

Page 3322

1 whether we would need Monday, and I think I clearly expressed I didn't

2 hear anything at that moment as far as another witness is concerned. I

3 was confronted with that, a change in order, a suggestion, only yesterday

4 for the first time, so not only for the Defence matters are changing but

5 sometimes for the Chamber as well. We want to start the testimony of

6 Mr. Babic at this moment and we'll see where it ends, and it's for the

7 first time that I'm confronted with this situation, but let's start and

8 see where it ends.

9 Madam Usher, could you please -- no, no. I think it's security

10 who should escort Mr. Babic into the courtroom.

11 MR. STEWART: Sorry. May I make one further observation which --

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

13 MR. STEWART: -- because -- which is this: It is so far as

14 tomorrow afternoon is concerned. Part of the exercise of preparing for

15 any witness, of course, and this applies to Mr. Babic, involves

16 Mr. Krajisnik. When we add time to a hearing such as tomorrow, we also

17 take away time from any spare capacity, of which there is virtually nil

18 anyway in the Defence team, to consult Mr. Krajisnik. So, Your Honour, I

19 must say I think I'm expressing this --

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

21 MR. STEWART: -- we are very unhappy about an extended day at this

22 point.

23 JUDGE ORIE: If we would sit tomorrow in the afternoon there might

24 be a suggestion to have an opportunity, and I'm just informed that the

25 same would be possible on Friday, so I take it that during the lunch break

Page 3323

1 Mr. Krajisnik would stay in this building if we would sit in the afternoon

2 as well, which might give more opportunity to speak with Mr. Krajisnik.

3 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, this is becoming oppressive. This is

4 becoming distinctly oppressive. Mr. Krajisnik sits in court here as the

5 defendant on trial for several hours a day, and to suggest that in

6 relation to the voluminous material in relation to Mr. Babic, an important

7 matter, that we then, in addition to everything else we have had to do and

8 everything else Mr. Krajisnik has to do, that we are then to take that

9 break, which for Mr. Krajisnik, apart from us, because we are deemed to be

10 superhuman often for these purposes, though there are limits as far as

11 counsel are concerned, but, Your Honour, we -- I think that's -- I've

12 probably said enough now. I've registered the various points --

13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, you do not find my suggestion a good

14 one. I do understand you.

15 MR. STEWART: I think that's got across, thank you, Your Honour,

16 yes.

17 JUDGE ORIE: All right, then Mr. Babic, who might be waiting,

18 ready behind the door, can now enter the courtroom.

19 [The witness entered court]

20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Babic, before giving evidence in this court, the

21 Rules of Procedure and Evidence require you to make a solemn declaration

22 that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

23 May I invite you to make that declaration. The text will be handed now to

24 you by Madam Usher.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak

Page 3324

1 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Please be seated, Mr. Babic.

3 WITNESS: MILAN BABIC

4 [Witness answered through interpreter]

5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Babic, we allowed to -- we allowed Mr. Mueller,

6 your counsel, to be present in this courtroom. If you just look over all

7 this paperwork there, you'll see he's sitting there. May I instruct you

8 that that is also the last time you look at him, because you're supposed

9 not to seek any contact, any direct contact, not even eye contact with

10 Mr. Mueller. Mr. Mueller has been instructed on what his role could be.

11 You could entirely leave it to Mr. Mueller.

12 If there's at any moment a situation where you would like to seek

13 the advice Mr. Mueller, although as the Chamber has explained to

14 Mr. Mueller, there are hardly any situations imaginable where there would

15 arise something that would ask anything else from you than just to give

16 answer to the questions, but if such a moment would, nevertheless, in view

17 of you arise, you may address me. You may not address Mr. Mueller

18 directly. Is that clear?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Tieger.

21 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.

22 Examined by Mr. Tieger:

23 Q. Good morning, Mr. Babic.

24 A. Good morning.

25 Q. Let me quickly address a few background facts with you. You were

Page 3325

1 born in 1956; is that right?

2 A. Yes, it is.

3 Q. You obtained a medical education, studying dentistry in Belgrade,

4 and you were appointed director of the health centre in Knin in Croatia;

5 is that right?

6 A. Yes, it is.

7 Q. During the period from 1990 through 1995, you occupied certain

8 positions, political positions, in Croatia, and I'd like to enumerate

9 those now and ask you at the end of that enumeration whether those are

10 accurate.

11 First you became a member of the regional committee of the Serbian

12 Democratic Party, the SDS, for Krajina in February of 1990.

13 A. For Knin.

14 Q. You later became -- you later became the president of the Main

15 Committee in Knin, also in 1990. You became the president of the regional

16 committee for Krajina. You occupied the position of the president of the

17 Knin municipality for four years, beginning in 1990. You became president

18 of the Association of Municipalities of Northern Dalmatia and Lika. You

19 became president of the Serbian National Council, president of the

20 Executive Council for SAO Krajina, the Serbian Autonomous District of

21 Krajina. You became president of SAO Krajina in 1991, President of the

22 Republic of Serbian Krajina, the RSK, in 1991 until February of 1992. You

23 were president of the SDS party Croatia after the death of Jovan Raskovic.

24 You were the minister of foreign affairs of the RSK in 1994 and were

25 briefly the Prime Minister of RSK in 1995. Is that correct, sir?

Page 3326

1 A. It is correct, except that I wasn't the president of the SDS for

2 Croatia but, rather, for Krajina. That's what it was called, the SDS for

3 Krajina, not for the entire territory of Croatia. The rest is correct.

4 Q. In 2001, is it correct that you contacted the Office of the

5 Prosecutor of the ICTY after learning that you had been named in the

6 indictment of Slobodan Milosevic and made that contact in order to explain

7 your role in the events and to clear up the truth about that role and the

8 events surrounding the war in Croatia?

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. And you participated in interviews with the Office of the

11 Prosecutor at length without promises or immunity after you made contact

12 with the OTP. Is that correct?

13 A. Yes, it is.

14 Q. Is it also correct that on the 27th of January, 2004, you entered

15 a plea of guilty to a crime against humanity, persecutions, for your

16 participation in a joint criminal enterprise which had as its purpose the

17 permanent forcible removal of the majority of the Croat and other non-Serb

18 populations from approximately one-third of the territory of the Republic

19 of Croatia in order to make it part of a new Serb-dominated state?

20 A. Yes, as described in the indictment.

21 Q. And that plea was accepted by the court the following day, on the

22 28th of January; is that right?

23 A. That's right.

24 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, at this time may I ask that the plea

25 agreement and factual basis be marked Prosecution's next in order.

Page 3327

1 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number P152.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, just to inform you, since we have a bit

3 of a different schedule today, I'd like to have a break at approximately

4 quarter past twelve.

5 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour. And may the exhibit be

6 presented to the witness. I see it is being.

7 Q. Mr. Babic, do you recognise that document as the plea agreement

8 and the factual basis in your case?

9 A. Yes, I do. I do recognise it.

10 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I understand it is the Court's practice

11 to defer tendering of the exhibits until the conclusion of the

12 examination.

13 JUDGE ORIE: Well, tendering, we usually give a decision at the

14 end, but numbers are always attributed to the documents.

15 MR. TIEGER:

16 A. Mr. Babic, next I'd like to place before you a document that was

17 introduced in a case you testified in, the case involving Mr. Milosevic,

18 and I'd like that marked next in order, which I believe would be P153.

19 First of all, Mr. Babic, did you have an opportunity before your

20 testimony in the Milosevic case to listen to a series of intercepted

21 telephone conversations in order to determine whether you could identify

22 the participants?

23 A. Yes, I did, quite a lot of them.

24 Q. And does the document before you reflect your declaration that you

25 had listened to the attached intercepted telephone conversations and

Page 3328

1 identified the voices of the participants as indicated?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. And was that a true and accurate declaration?

4 A. Yes, it was. I apologise, but in the Serbian text it says that I

5 was eavesdropping. I wasn't doing that. I was simply listening to them.

6 The inference is a bit different in the Serbian version.

7 Q. Well, the English translation which you -- well, the English

8 version which you signed states as you have indicated, that you listened

9 to the following intercepted telephone conversations, and I advise you,

10 therefore, that the clarification you offered is reflected in the English

11 version which you did sign.

12 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, next I'd like to have the witness

13 presented with a copy of the statement which was submitted pursuant to

14 89(F). Your Honour, I ask that be marked. I believe it would be P154.

15 Q. Mr. Babic, is the document before you, Prosecution's number 154, a

16 statement provided by you to the Office of the Prosecutor on the dates

17 indicated?

18 A. That's right.

19 Q. And do you confirm that it is true and accurate?

20 A. I do.

21 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, prior to -- prior to moving the

22 statement into evidence, we'll provide the Court with binders of the

23 attached intercepts.

24 Q. Mr. Babic, we're going to ask you momentarily to set that document

25 aside. You have had an opportunity to review the positions that you held

Page 3329

1 in Knin and in Krajina during 1990 to 1995. Let me turn you for a moment

2 to 1990 and ask if you attended the founding rally of the SDS party

3 Croatia in February 1990?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And is it also correct that you joined the SDS believing that a

6 new party was needed to represent the special interests of the region

7 which was overwhelmingly Serb?

8 A. Yes, that's right, in the Knin region.

9 Q. In the ensuing election, is it correct that the SDS party won a

10 majority in four municipalities in Croatia, including your whole

11 municipality of Knin, and after a second election, won a majority in

12 another municipality?

13 A. Yes, that's right. The second round of elections, yes.

14 Q. Is it correct that in July of 1990 the SDS party in Bosnia and

15 Herzegovina was founded?

16 A. Yes, that's right, on St. Peter's Day, which is celebrated in the

17 Orthodox church.

18 Q. And did the head of the Croatian SDS party, Dr. Jovan Raskovic,

19 support the Bosnian SDS party during its electoral campaign?

20 A. Yes. The election of the president of the SDS in Bosnia and

21 Herzegovina, Dr. Karadzic, as well.

22 Q. Now, was there an initial conflict or dispute about the membership

23 of the parties in different municipalities in Bosnian Krajina, or Bosanska

24 Krajina, which was resolved with the decision that those committees would

25 belong to SDS Bosnia-Herzegovina rather than SDS Croatia?

Page 3332

1 finding time to see Mr. Krajisnik.

2 JUDGE ORIE: In the -- in the Detention Unit.

3 MR. STEWART: At the Detention Unit tomorrow.

4 JUDGE ORIE: We'll see whether we can solve that problem. If

5 after this court hearing we could be informed, then we'll try to do

6 whatever we can. So write down what the problem is, perhaps in one or two

7 lines, and write down what your wishes would be and we'll see whether we

8 could solve this problem.

9 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. And the only other point I

10 will make, and I'll keep it very, very short, particularly in light of the

11 fact the witness is already in court, the potential difficulty which I

12 mentioned about 45 minutes ago, to put it as a piece of English

13 understatement is certainly not made any less difficult by the proposals

14 that the Trial Chamber has just put forward for the next two days.

15 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber is aware of that.

16 Mr. Tieger, you may proceed.

17 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.

18 Q. Mr. Babic, before we adjourned, you had referred to the

19 establishment of the SDS Croatia and the subsequent formation of the SDS

20 in Bosnia and Herzegovina, both in 1990. Did these events occur at a time

21 when there was increasing concern about the potential disintegration of

22 Yugoslavia?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Were you familiar or did you become familiar - excuse me - with

25 the position of Slobodan Milosevic regarding the status of Serbs and the

Page 3333

1 position to be taken by Serbs in the event of the dissolution of

2 Yugoslavia?

3 A. Yes, I did.

4 Q. And can you tell us what that was, please.

5 A. The position was that all Serbs -- that Serbs have the right to

6 remain within Yugoslavia, in one state.

7 Q. Mr. Babic, I'd like you next to look at a map that I would ask to

8 have marked as Prosecution's next in order, including an accompanying

9 translation.

10 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number P155.

11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I be excused [Realtime transcript

12 read in error "executed"] from court?

13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

14 MR. STEWART: Thank you.

15 JUDGE ORIE: The record says that you will be executed from Court.

16 MR. STEWART: I thought it would come to that as well, frankly,

17 but --

18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, we'll see you back later.

19 MR. TIEGER:

20 Q. Mr. Babic, before I ask you specific questions about the map, it

21 may be helpful simply to indicate what it depicts in a more general

22 manner. First of all, is it correct that the upper portion of the map,

23 including the block that extends down to the bottom of the page at the

24 left, depicts the territory of the Republic of Serbian Krajina?

25 A. Yes.

Page 3334

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

Page 3335

1 Q. And the block we see in the middle of the map at the lower

2 portion, does that indicate the territorial situation of Serbs in Croatia

3 according to suburbs, done with regard to the census carried out on March

4 31, 1981?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Turning next to the block next to it, which is depicted in yellow

7 at the lower -- at the lower portion of the map to the right side but

8 excluding the legend at the bottom, is that indicated as a map of the

9 Ustasha genocide upon the people of Serbia on the territory of the

10 Independent State of Croatia between the years of 1941 and 1945?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. And the points depicted on the map are various points of genocide

13 committed by Ustashas, concentration camps, and so on?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And turning finally to the block at the lower right-hand portion

16 of the map, which is presently shown on screen, does that indicate the

17 population of Krajina in numbers?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And as of 1993, as indicated by the italicised portion at the

20 bottom of the second column?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Let me focus your attention on that particular block for just a

23 moment. Looking first at the first indicated area in the upper left-hand

24 portion of that small block, Eastern Slavonia, Western Srem, and Baranja,

25 does it indicate the democratic composition of that area in 1993?

Page 3336

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. And that would be 95 per cent Serbs, 4 per cent Croats, and 1 per

3 cent others?

4 A. That's what it says.

5 Q. Turning quickly to some of the others. Banija, which is listed

6 below, is that 97 per cent Serb, 2 per cent Croat, and 1 per cent others?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Kordun, 98 per cent Serb, 2 per cent Croat?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And quickly, Lika an Northern Dalmatia have, respectively, 93 per

11 cent Serb, 5 per cent Croat, 2 per cent others; and Northern Dalmatia 90

12 per cent Serb and 10 per cent others.

13 A. Yes.

14 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, just in relation to this map and the

15 evidence that's being adduced, it's not immediately apparent if Mr. Babic

16 is in a position -- from what position he comments in relation to the

17 demography. I don't believe a foundation has been laid for any expertise

18 in relation to population numbers in the area.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger.

20 MR. TIEGER: Let me ask a couple of questions in relation to that.

21 Q. First of all, Mr. Babic, do you know who produced this map?

22 A. The map was made by the military institute in Belgrade. I don't

23 know if that's the exact name of the institution. Perhaps it's stated

24 somewhere. I had the original of the map. It's the military publishing

25 institute or something like that. Generally -- well, it's the military

Page 3337

1 publishing institute in Belgrade. The information is as stated in the map

2 from the military headquarters of Krajina from June 1993.

3 Q. And is the demographic breakdown of the areas just discussed as

4 indicated in the map consistent with your understanding of the demographic

5 breakdown in 1993?

6 A. Yes, more or less. I didn't know the exact data, but I assume

7 that based on what I saw, that could be so or approximately so.

8 Q. Now let me turn your attention back to 1990 and again to those

9 specific areas. Can you tell the Court what the approximate demographic

10 breakdown was in Eastern Slavonia in 1990?

11 A. According to my estimate, half of the population were Serbs and

12 Yugoslavs, and the rest, or the other half, were Croats and others.

13 Q. And according to your best estimate, what was the demographic

14 breakdown of Banija?

15 A. Banija had about 75 per cent of Croats and 30 per cent of others.

16 More or less.

17 Q. And Kordun, what was the demographic breakdown of Kordun in 1990?

18 A. It was probably about 80 per cent of Serbs and the rest were

19 others.

20 Q. Let me refer you back quickly to your previous answer. According

21 to the transcript it indicated that Banija had about 75 per cent of Croats

22 and 30 per cent of others, more or less. First of all, I wanted to know

23 if that's -- the demography is correct, and second if you could reconcile

24 the addition.

25 A. No. No. I think the interpretation was not good. I said 75 per

Page 3338

1 cent Serbs, 30 per cent others. Perhaps I made a mistake previously.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that still leaves the 105 per cent as a result,

3 but it was "about", Mr. Tieger.

4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

5 MR. TIEGER:

6 Q. And --

7 A. 25 per cent. I apologise. More or less. I just went by the

8 percentage of the Serbs and then I assumed about the -- how many we would

9 have of the rest.

10 Q. Can you also indicate to us the approximate demographic breakdown

11 of Lika in 1990?

12 A. I think there were about 80 per cent Serbs in Lika and 20 per cent

13 were others, and the same goes for Northern Dalmatia. Approximately.

14 Q. Mr. Babic, what --

15 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour --

16 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas.

17 MS. LOUKAS: If there are to be any more questions of this nature

18 in relation to demographics, my objection would be that I don't think it's

19 particularly probative coming from somebody who is not a demographer, and

20 I would -- I would object on that basis.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Let me ask a question to Mr. Tieger.

22 Mr. Tieger, is the establishment of demographic figures or are you

23 establishing what the understanding of the witness was in view of

24 political positions he might have taken? What is it about?

25 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, the rough or relative accuracy of the

Page 3339

1 demographic description provided by the witness is a matter of -- is part

2 of the Prosecution's evidence, and clearly it's not intended with -- to

3 have the same precision as a demographic expert might be, but we're

4 talking about --

5 JUDGE ORIE: It's the perception of the witness of what the ethnic

6 or demographic figures were, what he understood them to be. Do I

7 understand to get later a more detailed report -- because this is mainly

8 about the situation in Croatia rather than in Bosnia and Herzegovina, do

9 we get further -- further evidence on demographic issues?

10 MR. TIEGER: It was not my intention to do so, Your Honour. My --

11 JUDGE ORIE: Not with this witness, but later on, wasn't there a

12 report of Ms. Tabeau to be --

13 MR. TIEGER: I can't say at this moment the extent to which it

14 addresses population changes in Croatia. However, the point of addressing

15 this issue at this time --

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

17 MR. TIEGER: -- is again not about the specific numbers or the

18 precise breakdown but about a population change of such significance that

19 a witness in this -- or a person in this witness's position would be able

20 to recognise that.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Ms. Loukas, if you would ask in general a

22 Dutchman whether it's in the north or in the south that most of the

23 Catholics are living, you'll get a 99.9 per cent answer that's in the

24 south. I would give that example. I would even, without ever having done

25 any demographic studies, I would fully guarantee that the answer is right.

Page 3340

1 It's not only on the basis of demographic studies that you could

2 tell something about demographic issues.

3 MS. LOUKAS: I appreciate that entirely, Your Honour, but it was

4 not apparent from Mr. Tieger's questioning what the point was of this

5 evidence, and it didn't appear immediately apparently probative on any

6 particular issue that's before the Tribunal at this point, and I wanted to

7 make that point so we knew where this evidence was aimed.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Could you assist a bit more, Mr. Tieger, apart from

9 giving a global idea on then of course the relevance of that global idea

10 on how the demographic issues in Croatia were.

11 MR. TIEGER: It may be of assistance for the Court to know that

12 I'm about to ask the witness what exactly accounted for that demographic

13 change.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed.

15 MR. TIEGER:

16 Q. Mr. Babic, can you tell us, please, and tell the Court, please,

17 what accounted for the change in the demographic character of these areas?

18 A. In the course of 1991, there was an armed conflict in Croatia

19 during which a large number of the population from this area, Croats, were

20 expelled.

21 Q. Can you tell -- can you tell us, please, what forces were involved

22 in this effort to expel Croats from the area?

23 A. During the military operations, the JNA, the Territorial Defence,

24 and units under the control of the police, including also the Krajina

25 police forces, took part in the armed conflict, and they are responsible

Page 3341

1 for the expulsion.

2 Q. Now, during the course of your testimony in the Milosevic case and

3 also in your factual basis, you were -- used a term "a parallel

4 structure." Can you tell us, please, what the parallel structure was?

5 A. A parallel structure is a parallel structure of power and

6 authority in the territory of the SAO Krajina, which was formed by the

7 service, the State Security Service of Serbia. If was a parallel

8 structure in relation to the Krajina authorities and included members of

9 the Serbian state security, members of the Krajina police, members of the

10 Serbian Democratic Party. At the top of the structure, of course, was

11 Slobodan Milosevic as head of the state security, as a controller,

12 according to what I know.

13 Q. Can you tell us, please, who were some of the principal figures in

14 the parallel structure?

15 A. These were the officials of the state security in Serbia; Jovica

16 Stanisic, Frenki Simatovic, Captain Dragan, and so on. They were the key

17 figures in -- at the time, as well as Milan Martic.

18 Q. You mentioned that at the top of the parallel structure was

19 Slobodan Milosevic. What was Jovica Stanisic's relationship to

20 Mr. Milosevic?

21 A. He was his subordinate.

22 Q. And you also mentioned Franko Simatovic. What was his

23 relationship to either Mr. Milosevic or Mr. Stanisic?

24 A. Subordinated.

25 Q. And the relationship of Simatovic to Stanisic?

Page 3342

1 A. According to what I know, subordinated. When I said that Stanisic

2 was subordinated to Milosevic, I don't know how it came out in the

3 interpretation, but that is what I meant.

4 Q. And apart from Mr. Milosevic, what was Mr. Stanisic's position

5 within the authority figures of the parallel structure in Croatia?

6 A. He was the head.

7 Q. Now, you mentioned Milan Martic. Did he occupy -- as a member of

8 the parallel structure, did he also occupy formal positions of authority

9 within the governmental structures of the Serbian authorities in Croatia?

10 A. He did have functions, posts. Formally he was part of the

11 authority of the Krajina, but actually he was part of the parallel

12 structures.

13 Q. When did you first become aware of figures involved in the

14 parallel structure beginning to play a role in events in Croatia?

15 A. In August 1990.

16 Q. And what happened at that time to make you aware of that?

17 A. The so-called log revolution took place. So it was a conflict

18 between the local Serbs around Knin and the Knin police with the Croatian

19 authorities. That was called the log revolution by the Croatian press,

20 media. At the time when those events were taking place, I met Jovica

21 Stanisic, who was maintaining contacts with Martic. That was when I began

22 to find out about the parallel structure.

23 Q. Can you describe briefly the events surrounding the so-called log

24 revolution and the role of Mr. Martic or Mr. Stanisic in that.

25 A. The events were a consequence of the political conflict in Croatia

Page 3343

1 between the Croatian authorities, the Croatian government, which was

2 changing the constitution of the Republic of Croatia, and between the

3 Serbs, the political representatives of the Serbs, SDS in particular, who

4 opposed those constitutional changes, believing they were to the detriment

5 of the Serbian people.

6 The political conflict culminated in the decision of the Serbian

7 National Council to hold a referendum on Serb autonomy in Croatia and also

8 in the decision of the Croatian government to prevent the holding of this

9 referendum. All the other incidents took place after this, and especially

10 the incident related to the participation of local police in Knin and

11 Milan Martic in these events, which was actually the distribution of

12 weapons to the reserve police and the erecting of the barricades as well

13 as armed opposition. That, again, was a beginning of all those events.

14 Q. You indicated -- you indicated earlier that the JNA and the TO

15 were also involved in the effort to expel the population from portions of

16 Croatia. Who was in command or in control of the JNA?

17 A. In the operational sense, it was the General Staff of the Yugoslav

18 People's Army in Belgrade and the headquarters of the Supreme Command in

19 conditions of imminent threat of war and state of war, and the Presidency

20 of Yugoslavia as the collective Supreme Commander. According to my

21 information, in such circumstances, Slobodan Milosevic as well as the most

22 influential political figure in Serbia who did have control and influence

23 over the JNA in the events of autumn 1991.

24 Q. And during the course of your dealings with Mr. Milosevic during

25 the period 1990 through 1991, did you have occasion to see him indicate

Page 3344

1 his control over the JNA?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. First of all, on approximately how many occasions did you meet

4 with Mr. Milosevic from -- or during the period 1990 through 1995?

5 A. Several times. In 1990.

6 Q. Let me ask you this question: On how many occasions overall had

7 you met with Mr. Milosevic?

8 A. Approximately 20 times.

9 Q. When did you first make contact with Mr. Milosevic?

10 A. I made a contact in August of 1990.

11 Q. Did you initiate that contact on your own or were you encouraged

12 to do so by others?

13 A. Others urged me to seek contact with Milosevic.

14 Q. Who was it that encouraged you to do so?

15 A. Milan Martic, Bogoljub Popovic from the Serbian Democratic Party,

16 and some other people from Krajina. They urged me to go and meet with

17 Milosevic and asked for protection from him, especially at the time of the

18 events that I just described, which were in fact political conflicts

19 with the Croatian government and the announced referendum on Serbian

20 autonomy, and counter-announcements by Croatian government that it would

21 use force, if necessary, to prevent that referendum. That was under those

22 circumstances.

23 Q. And were you able to make contact with Mr. Milosevic at that time?

24 A. I did establish contact in Kupari, near Dubrovnik, which was where

25 Mr. Milosevic was at the time.

Page 3345

1 Q. And did Mr. Milosevic indicate to you whether he would support

2 Serbs in Croatia; and if so, in what manner?

3 A. He did send me that message indirectly through Borisav Jovic. He

4 sent Borisav Jovic, who was then the president of the Presidency of the

5 SFRY, to go and meet with us and tell us what kinds of measures would be

6 undertaken.

7 Q. And can you tell us what Mr. Jovic indicated to you?

8 A. Jovic said that with the assistance of the JNA, he would support

9 any political action on our part in Croatia, that he would support any

10 political effort of ours in Croatia.

11 Q. Now, before moving on to other matters, I want to quickly identify

12 some of the political steps taken from the time of the election to the

13 declaration of the Republic of Serbian Krajina in December of 1991. Was

14 the first step, Mr. Babic, that an association of municipalities of

15 Northern Dalmatia and Lika was formed which expressed the wish of the

16 Serbian population in the area to introduce Serbian autonomy in Croatia?

17 A. That was one of the first political events.

18 Q. Which municipalities were included in the association of

19 municipalities?

20 A. That was the Association of Municipalities of Northern Dalmatia,

21 in Lika, and later on municipalities from Banija and Kordun also joined

22 in.

23 Q. And did the association initially include the municipalities of

24 Knin, Benkovac, Gracac, Donji Lapac, Obrovac, and Titova Korenica?

25 A. Yes.

Page 3346

1 Q. On July 25, 1990, did the SDS Croatia proclaim the autonomy or

2 declare the autonomy of the Serbian people in Croatia?

3 A. That wasn't declared by the SDS but, rather, by the Serbian

4 Assembly held in Srb, which was held at the initiative of the SDS.

5 Q. And was the -- was a Serbian National Council also established at

6 that time?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And on the same day, were members of the Serbian National Council

9 elected?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And as I believe you indicated earlier, you became president of

12 the Serbian National Council.

13 A. Yes, at the next following session.

14 Q. At the first meeting of the Serbian National Council, did it vote

15 to hold a referendum to determine the vote in favour or against a

16 declaration on autonomy?

17 A. Yes. The decision was adopted to hold a referendum on Serbian

18 autonomy or, rather, to implement it.

19 Q. Was that referendum ultimately held?

20 A. It was.

21 Q. And is it correct that the vote taken was overwhelmingly in favour

22 of autonomy?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Subsequently on September 30, 1990, did the Serbian National

25 Council declare the autonomy of the Serbian people on ethnic and historic

Page 3347

1 territories on which they live and which are within the boundaries of the

2 Republic of Croatia as a federal unit of the SFRY?

3 A. Yes, based on the results of the referendum.

4 Q. A few months later, in late December 1990, did the Association of

5 Municipalities of Northern Dalmatia and Lika transform itself into another

6 entity?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And was that entity into which it transformed the Serbian

9 Autonomous District of Krajina, SAO Krajina?

10 A. Yes. That was the Serbian Autonomous Region of Krajina.

11 Q. And is it correct that the statute of SAO Krajina, among other

12 things, called for territorial autonomy within Croatia?

13 A. Well, we couldn't say that it called for, but that it rather

14 established it.

15 Q. And then, as indicated earlier, it was in December of 1991 that

16 the Republic of Serbian Krajina was declared; is that correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Now, Mr. Babic, I'd like to turn now away from the political steps

19 that were taken during that period to some of the factual backdrop to the

20 conflict that emerged in August of 1991, or the more intensified conflict

21 that emerged in August of 1991. Paragraph 16 of your factual basis you

22 indicate, as you have here, that a parallel structure began to emerge from

23 August 1990, comprised of members of the Ministry of the Interior of

24 Serbia, the State Security Service of Serbia, the SDS of Croatia, and

25 policemen in the Serbian municipalities in Croatia, which ultimately

Page 3348

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

Page 3349

1 answered directly and exclusively to Slobodan Milosevic. You've indicated

2 some of the central figures in the parallel structure, as you have here.

3 A. I'm not receiving interpretation.

4 Q. Mr. Babic, can you hear the interpretation now?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. I don't know when the interpretation stopped, but I had directed

7 your attention and the Court's attention to paragraph 16 of your factual

8 basis in which you describe the emergence of the parallel structure in

9 August of 1990, indicate its membership, and the fact that it ultimately

10 answered directly and exclusively to Mr. Milosevic, and in which you

11 describe some of the central figures of the parallel structure.

12 Now, paragraph 16 goes on to indicate that through the parallel

13 structure Milosevic manufactured incidents which provoked reaction and

14 fear among the Serbs and intensified intervention by the Croatian police.

15 This spiraled up into intolerance, violence, and eventually war.

16 Let me ask you first about the nature of some of the incidents

17 which were conducted by members of the parallel structure. Did those

18 include the blowing up of shops and kiosks owned by Albanians and Croats?

19 A. Among others, yes.

20 Q. And can you provide the Court with some general indication of the

21 nature of the incidents that were conducted by members of the parallel

22 structure and that provoked reaction and fear among the Serbs?

23 A. Well, I can say that that was a reaction to attempts by myself and

24 some other presidents of municipalities from the area to reach an

25 agreement with the representatives of Croatian government on peaceful

Page 3350

1 resolution to the problems and on -- on finding -- on finding mutual

2 ground, and as a result of that Council of People's Resistance was set up.

3 It was opposed to peaceful solutions, and the parallel structure was

4 responsible for various incidents on the ground; mining of -- blowing up

5 of railways, destroying various stands, kiosks, abuse of citizens, and so

6 on, attempts to knock down power lines. They even managed to disrupt the

7 power supply in order to create greater disturbance. The aim of all this

8 was to provoke the intervention of the JNA into introduce a state of

9 emergency in Croatia.

10 Q. During the period of -- from 1990 through 1991, were Croatian

11 Serbs provided with arms by members of the parallel structure or others

12 from outside Croatia?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Did Mr. Milosevic himself provide arms to the Croatian Serbs?

15 A. To the Serbs in Croatia, yes.

16 Q. How did you learn that?

17 A. From him personally and also from his minister of police.

18 Q. Can you describe for the Court the meeting or meetings during

19 which you learned from Mr. Milosevic personally that arms -- that he was

20 providing arms to the Serbs in Croatia?

21 A. That was in a meeting in March of 1991. The situation was quite

22 tense. I can't remember who exactly proposed that we should go and see

23 Milosevic to ask him what his plan was to protect the Serbs in Croatia.

24 That was what prompted us to ask for the meeting.

25 I went there together with some other people from Krajina.

Page 3351

1 Milosevic told us that he had already purchased 20.000 weapons in Hungary

2 for us. We were surprised. We looked at each other. It was unusual for

3 us to know that Milosevic was buying weapons for us in Hungary when the

4 media reported that it was Croatia that was doing that. Then he invited

5 Radmilo Bogdanovic and Jovica Stanisic -- Radmilo Bogdanovic was a former

6 minister of police, and Radmilo Bogdanovic said that they had already sent

7 500 weapons to Banija.

8 Later on, sometimes in May, I saw -- I was shown the weapons in a

9 warehouse and was told that the weapons had arrived from the TO warehouse

10 in Serbia and that it had been organised by Mihalj Kertes, a man who was

11 very close to Milosevic and Jovica Stanisic.

12 Q. Mr. Babic, who showed you the warehouse with the weapons in May of

13 1991?

14 A. Milenko Zelenbaba, chief of police in Knin, an assistant of

15 Martic.

16 Q. What kind of weapons were you shown?

17 A. Long-barrelled weapons; rifles and mortars.

18 Q. You mentioned Mr. Kertes. Did he have a nickname?

19 A. Braco.

20 Q. If I understood you correctly, you learned during the course of

21 that conversation with Mr. Zelenbaba that the source of the weapons was TO

22 warehouses or TO defence -- or TO warehouses in Serbia.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Mr. Babic, you've already indicated that during the course of your

25 testimony in the Milosevic case you provided a -- you -- or during your

Page 3352

1 preparation for that you were able to listen to a series of intercepts

2 which are reflected in the declaration that you looked at earlier today.

3 I'd like to turn your attention to one of those.

4 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, this -- the transcript of this

5 particular intercept will be found or can be found at page 5 of the

6 attached list of the intercepts. It is a conversation that took place on

7 June 24, 1991, between Radovan Karadzic and Braco.

8 Q. First of all, Mr. Babic, let me ask you if you're familiar with

9 that intercept, if you recall it.

10 A. Yes. I remember listening to it. It was also presented in the

11 courtroom.

12 Q. Let me ask you a question, then, about a portion of the contents

13 of that. There are references in the intercept to food and supermarket,

14 and if I recall correctly, salt.

15 A. Yes. Batteries and so on.

16 Q. Flour, I also see on page 3 of the English translation. Were

17 those the commodities with which Mr. Kertes, to your knowledge -- with

18 which Braco, to your knowledge, was concerned?

19 A. I didn't know at the time that he was involved in this. I know

20 that he was exclusively involved in delivering weapons from Serbia and

21 Krajina.

22 Q. And can you help us then understand the references to flour and

23 salt and supermarkets and so on? Are those references to those items or

24 do they have another meaning in the context of this conversation?

25 A. I think that this is a superficially coded conversation. It has

Page 3353

1 to do with the delivery of weapons.

2 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, just in relation to the questioning on

3 the -- the intercepts generally, I would be objecting, and I do object

4 generally to questions which call for speculation on the part of the

5 witness in relation to what other people might be talking about. I would

6 submit it is of fairly limited value to the Trial Chamber. Generally

7 intercepts are there for the Trial Chamber to determine what weight they

8 might be given and what approach might be adopted in relation to their

9 meaning, and asking someone else to comment on other people's

10 conversations when it hasn't actually been established on what precise

11 basis he can determine the meaning on a particular conversation, I think

12 there has to be some caution in that regard, Your Honour, because it can

13 lead to speculation, and I just sound that warning out.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, is this a warning that tells you

15 something or --

16 MR. TIEGER: Well, Your Honour, I fully accept that as a general

17 matter it's the Court's prerogative and responsibility to draw conclusions

18 from the evidence presented to it. On the other hand, I think it's a very

19 common area of inquiry to someone from a certain milieu to identify

20 aspects of conversations which may be better illuminated by someone who

21 operated within that particular context, particularly if it involves some

22 form of coded conversation.

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Tieger, you may proceed. It's not

25 inappropriate to ask from a witness if two political leaders are -- or at

Page 3354

1 least, political figures are discussing flour, salt, or perhaps

2 cauliflower or whatever vegetables to try to find out what that might

3 stand for if not for salt, flour, or cauliflower.

4 Ms. Loukas, just for your information, if a witness would say this

5 is about drugs instead of weapons, the Chamber might not follow that

6 witness in establishing that it was about drugs. So the -- it's not pure

7 speculation, but on the other hand, it is some interpretation which will

8 be looked at very cautiously by the Chamber.

9 MS. LOUKAS: [Microphone not activated]

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

12 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, I just wanted to sound that warning at

13 this point because there can be a tendency for there to be tendentious

14 explanations of intercepts, particularly a person who has pleaded guilty

15 and is awaiting sentencing.

16 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber is aware of the risks, and the Chamber is

17 aware of the very specific situation in respect to this witness.

18 Mr. Tieger, I don't know what questions you would have liked to

19 have put to the witness during the last two minutes, but they have gone.

20 Therefore, unless there would be one or two questions that you would

21 consider to be necessary at this very moment and they couldn't wait until

22 tomorrow, then we will adjourn until morning, 9.00, in this same

23 courtroom.

24 I've forgotten one thing: Mr. Babic, I should instruct you not to

25 speak with anyone about the testimony you have given or you're still about

Page 3355

1 to give. That also includes members of the Office of the Prosecution,

2 Defence team, friends, visitors, whoever; not to talk about it with

3 anyone. Yes.

4 Then we will adjourn until tomorrow morning, 9.00.

5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.46 p.m.,

6 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 3rd day of June,

7 2004, at 9.00 a.m.