1 Thursday, 29 July 2004
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.24 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Case Number
8 IT-00-39-T, The Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
10 Before we resume the examination of the witness, Mr. Hannis, could
11 you please inform the Chamber about the position the Defence globally
12 takes in respect of the translation, interpretation issue raised by the
14 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honour. The Prosecution's global position
15 is that we oppose the motion. We have a concern about the amount of
16 resources it would require. We think that although it may not result in a
17 perfect trial for the defendant, it will result in a fair trial for him
18 having audios of, for example, the transcripts of testimony in this case
19 and the transcripts from the other cases.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether you would like to do it right
21 away, Mr. Stewart, or let's say just before the break. You have made
22 reference in your motion to the Luedicke case and to the Artico case.
23 And the Chamber is still wondering to what extent the factual situation in
24 these cases, apart from general statements in the decisions, would be
25 comparable to the present situation, and the same would, by the way, be
1 true for the Kamasinski case as well, which is a case later than the
2 Luedicke case and refers to the Luedicke case, but very specifically
3 enters the issue of translations and interpretations.
4 I don't know whether it was just a general reference to general
5 statements in these cases or that the factual situations in these cases
6 would in your view support the present motion.
7 MR. STEWART: No. The -- may I say straight away, Your Honour, by
8 the way just to introduce a new member of the Defence team.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, for the record.
10 MR. STEWART: Mieke Dixon, on my far left. The other faces I
11 think are pretty familiar.
12 JUDGE ORIE: It's not her birthday by any chance?
13 MR. STEWART: It was very recently, Your Honour. But she hasn't
14 got another one for nearly a year now.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Welcome in the courtroom.
16 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, as a matter of fact, we didn't consider
17 that the facts of those cases were at all close, but of course they're
18 there for anybody to look at, and naturally we can show them to
19 Your Honour to make that point. So it was certainly not that the factual
20 context of those cases was supportive, it actually made them -- in our
21 submission makes them really irrelevant as far as the particular
22 application of the facts in those cases are concerned, but the principles
23 are there.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the Artico case as far as I know is a counsel
25 which is I would say almost completely passive, doing nothing, and of
1 course this Chamber could not understand any relation to that case. The
2 Luedicke case mainly dealing with translation during trial and especially
3 imposing upon the accused the costs of that, whereas the Kamasinski case
4 came far closer to, as far as the issues are concerned, the issues being
5 to what extent an accused is entitled to receive translations, not only of
6 the trial proceedings during trial but also of supporting material,
7 indictment, et cetera.
8 But I do understand that the facts of these cases did not -- are
9 not specifically relied upon by the Defence.
10 The Chamber will consider whether to give a decision before the
11 recess, which might have some advantages, at least it leaves the Defence
12 not for a very long time in uncertainty. But we'll have to consider that
13 first. If we would give a decision, it would be an oral decision because
14 we find no time before tomorrow morning to write it down in sufficient
16 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, could I say that -- I haven't come
17 equipped this very second to deal with this motion at all, as I'm sure
18 Your Honours would appreciate. I haven't even brought a copy of it with
19 me into Court right now --
20 JUDGE ORIE: No, I understand.
21 MR. STEWART: So I would be very passive as far as that's
22 concerned, for the immediate future, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. STEWART: I just wonder whether at some point whether it might
25 be helpful - I want to check against the motion, and indicate to Your
1 Honour perhaps what the Defence would regard as the most helpful points to
2 have decided sooner rather than later because they're not all in the same
3 category, they don't all have the same impact.
4 JUDGE ORIE: The most important category, being the transcripts of
5 the hearings in this trial.
6 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour has it then. That would be the
7 most helpful of all to have decided. Thank you.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
9 Then, Mr. Margetts. You indicated that you would play a video
10 which would take approximately 15 minutes and then would have some
11 additional questions. Is that correct?
12 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, Your Honour. I just have one preliminary
13 matter with respect to translations, then there are three documents which
14 will be quite quick. And then the video.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. MARGETTS: The preliminary matter is that I have now obtained
17 revised translations of Exhibits P226.1 and Exhibit P230.1.
18 JUDGE ORIE: If you could please assist me, these are the new
19 ones? I haven't got it in my memory. The decision signed by Jovo Banjac
20 would be number?
21 MR. MARGETTS: P226.1.
22 JUDGE ORIE: P226.1. Then the joint official announcement of
23 which Mr. -- signed also by Mr. Egrlic would then be P230.1.
24 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much.
1 Before we resume, Mr. Egrlic, I would like to remind you that
2 you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning
3 of your testimony. I take it that's clear to you?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Margetts, if there are no other -- are
6 there any further preliminary matters?
7 MR. MARGETTS: No further preliminary matters.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
9 WITNESS: ASIM EGRLIC [Resumed]
10 [Witness answered through interpreter]
11 Examined by Mr. Margetts: [Continued]
12 Q. Mr. Egrlic, while you were in Manjaca, did you see any Serb
13 politicians in Manjaca?
14 A. There was one visit by one Serb politician.
15 Q. Who was that politician?
16 A. I can't remember his name.
17 Q. Do you recall the position that he held?
18 A. He was in a rather high place, maybe in the assembly or the Serb
19 autonomous region. I can't recall exactly which position.
20 Q. When did he attend Manjaca?
21 A. I believe it was in August.
22 Q. Did you hear anything that he had to say?
23 A. Yes. He went into every barn where prisoners were detained and
24 talked to people, saying that the day when they would be free is coming
25 soon, that the situation will be resolved very soon.
1 Q. Immediately following his visit, did anything change in Manjaca?
2 A. No. Nothing changed. Everything remained exactly the same.
3 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, I'd like to have the next three
4 exhibits marked and placed before the witness. The next exhibit is the
5 document dated 29 January 1993 with the ERN Y0017553. Then the document
6 dated 25 September 1992 with the ERN 01905109. And following that, the
7 exhibit that appears in the list as dated 1st July 1992 which is marked
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, they would have the numbers?
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the first document dated the 29th of
11 January 1993 gets Exhibit Number P249 and its English translation gets
12 Exhibit Number P249.1.
13 The second document dated 25th of September 1992 gets Exhibit
14 Number P250 and its English translation gets Exhibit Number P250.1.
15 The third document dated July 1992 gets Exhibit Number P251 and
16 its English translation gets Exhibit Number 251.1.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
18 Please proceed, Mr. Margetts.
19 MR. MARGETTS:
20 Q. Mr. Egrlic, could you please refer to the document with the list
21 of names on it, and could you identify whether or not your name is on this
23 A. Yes, in 36th place.
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Egrlic. I'll refer now to the next document.
25 Mr. Egrlic, this is a document signed by Vinko Kondic, and it's dated 25
1 September 1992. And it details matters that according to Mr. Kondic took
2 place in the Kljuc Municipality. Could I refer you to the second
3 paragraph, and in particular, the second half of that paragraph, and the
4 sentence that commences "the TO's main leaders were Asim Egrlic..."
5 Mr. Egrlic, how do you respond to the characterisation of you as
6 "the main leader of the alleged Territorial Defence"?
7 MR. STEWART: It doesn't say that, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: It says one of the main leaders.
9 MR. STEWART: Yes, the question must be more carefully put.
10 JUDGE ORIE: How do you respond to being described here as "one of
11 the main leaders," Mr. Egrlic?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was a member of the Territorial
14 MR. MARGETTS:
15 Q. When you refer to the "Territorial Defence," can you again inform
16 the Court as to what the state of organisation of the Territorial Defence
18 A. The commander of the TO staff had been appointed. After a while,
19 the whole staff was designated and was established to some extent. And
20 its main activity was to organise those village guards that were supposed
21 to evolve eventually into TO units; however, that did not happen because
22 of the circumstances under which the staff was working, as the Kljuc
23 Municipality had by that time been already taken over by the Serb army.
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Egrlic. I've finished now with that document. If
25 we could move to the next document, which is a report dated July 1992
1 headed: "Information on the work and activities of the Kljuc SJB." And
2 again, this is a document that purports to be signed by Vinko Kondic.
3 Mr. Egrlic, can I refer you to page 8 of that document, and in
4 particular, the paragraph that appears under the heading, "Section VI, the
5 course of armed operations." I'll just read that paragraph aloud and ask
6 you to respond to this paragraph. It states that "Armed operations in the
7 area of Kljuc Municipality began on 27 May 1992. On that day, Muslim
8 extremists and fundamentalists carried out several synchronised armed
9 operations against the police and the Serbian Army in an attempt to
10 destroy the main body of the police force and the RSM and to force the
11 withdrawal of our forces from the front line by attacking them, thus
12 weakening our positions in the direction of Kupres, Jajce, and Bihac."
13 Mr. Egrlic, is that a correct statement of the activities of any
14 units on the 27th of May 1992?
15 A. First of all, I have to apologise but I didn't find this paragraph
16 on page 6.
17 Q. My apologies, Mr. Egrlic. I meant to refer to page 8, and it's
18 under the heading denoting section VI, and that appears at the bottom of
19 page 8. Please take your time to read that paragraph and respond to any
20 part of that paragraph informing the Court whether or not it is accurate.
21 A. What is stated in this paragraph is not correct because on that
22 day it says here that the Muslim extremists and fundamentalists carried
23 out a number of synchronised armed actions against members of the Serbian
24 military police. There wasn't any action of any kind because the guards
25 until then had worked at night started working during the day, and they
1 were at their homes, in front of their thresholds. And the incident that
2 occurred in an area where these people lived. They didn't go anywhere,
3 and they didn't take any sort of action. They didn't attack anyone. They
4 were at home when the Serbian police and the army came with the intention
5 of disarming the citizens, entering their houses, et cetera. And this is
6 how and where the incident occurred.
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Egrlic. I've finished with that document. I'd
8 just like to ask you one further question and then show you some segments
9 of a videotape. That question is this: When you returned to the
10 Municipality of Kljuc in September 1995, did you attend any exhumation
11 sites; and if so, could you detail those sites to the Court and inform the
12 Court of what you observed?
13 A. I was present when almost all the exhumations were performed since
14 I was the presiding officer of the municipal council. But as a citizen,
15 it was my duty to go to all exhumation sites in the territory of the
16 Municipality of Kljuc. I was present and I went to two mass graves in
17 Laniste, one was called Babina Dolina, and the other one was called
18 Bezdana. That's a cave. And I went to the mass grave at Crvena Zemlja,
19 the red earth, and then there was a mass grave in a valley in the village
20 of Prhovo.
21 Q. And upon your attendance at those sites, did you learn how many
22 bodies were exhumed from those graves?
23 A. Yes, I did. The mass grave at Laniste, as far as I can remember,
24 there were about 188 bodies that were exhumed there. That's in a cave not
25 far from the barracks where the Serbian Army was located. The second mass
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 grave was at the place called Babina Dolina. There were about 130 bodies
2 exhumed there. In the first mass grave, there were the bodies of citizens
3 from the local commune of Biljani, which is about 18 kilometres from that
4 site. And in the second mass grave, the bodies of people from the Velagic
5 local commune were found. In the Prhovo mass grave, about 45 bodies were
6 exhumed, whereas in the Crvena Zemlja or Red Earth mass grave, about 30
7 bodies were exhumed as far as I can remember.
8 Q. What was the ethnicity of the people whose bodies were exhumed?
9 A. They were all Bosniaks.
10 Q. Mr. Egrlic, I'd now like to show you segments of a videotape if --
11 JUDGE ORIE: I would have one additional question on this point.
12 Mr. Egrlic, could you tell us whether the exhumed Bosniak bodies,
13 were they men, women? Do you know anything about age?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, they were mostly men, but
15 there were women and children, too. There were of different ages, between
16 a few months old up until the age of about 80.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Have you ever learned the identity of those
18 persons, those bodies exhumed?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Almost all of the bodies exhumed
20 were identified and buried in the local communes that they had lived in.
21 They were buried in the local cemeteries there.
22 JUDGE ORIE: To the extent that you have known these people, and
23 first of all, did you know one or more, and if more, how many
24 approximately of those persons whose bodies were exhumed?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I knew some of them, some of them
1 were my relatives or friends. I had known some of them for a long time,
2 whereas there were others whom I did not know.
3 JUDGE ORIE: To the extent known to you, do you know whether they
4 were members of armed forces or otherwise involved in armed conflict?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I am aware, they weren't
6 members of armed forces, and they didn't participate in conflicts of any
7 kind. These people were taken out of their houses and shot at various
8 locations, in Biljani near the school, and in Velagic they were shot in
9 front of the old school. And in Prhovo, this was done in the immediate
10 vicinity of the valley which is where they were subsequently buried.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
12 Please proceed, Mr. Margetts.
13 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, I'd like to now present to the witness
14 a transcript of a videotape that appears on the exhibit list marked with
15 the date 1 July 1992, the ERN for the English is L0068783. We do not
16 propose to play the entire video because it's in excess of half an hour.
17 What we do propose to do is to play six segments of that video and ask the
18 witness to comment on each of those segments. And the total time of those
19 segments will be about 14 to 15 minutes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, the transcript would have -- let's
21 first -- I take it that the video will be tendered as well. The video on
22 CD-ROM will receive --
23 THE REGISTRAR: The video will have the Exhibit Number P252. The
24 English transcript will have the Exhibit Number P252.A, and the B/C/S
25 transcript will have the Exhibit Number P252.A.1.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Is the original English or is the original B/C/S?
2 MR. MARGETTS: The original is B/C/S.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I suggest that the English translation
4 gets 252.A.1, and the B/C/S version of the transcript gets P252.A.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. MARGETTS: The first segment is the segment at the time
7 markings 20 minutes 36 seconds to 21 minutes 23 seconds. And that segment
8 could be played for the Court.
9 [Videoclip played]
10 COMMENTARY: [Voiceover] In Kljuc, the Crisis Staff takes over the
11 power. Many decisions have been passed, starting with the introduction of
12 a curfew, then the termination of work in all enterprises, and in most
13 institutions, which meant a transfer to typical wartime conditions of work
14 and life. It was only in the last several days that the Crisis Staff
15 issued an order that the citizens were allowed to move from 0700 up to
16 2000 hours, that the shops could be opened as well as restaurants and
17 caterers from 7.00 to 8.00 p.m. with the restriction that alcohol could be
18 served only until 1800. What is most important is that some decisions
19 were passed regarding the commencement of production in some enterprises,
20 primarily the largest Kljuc enterprise, SIP Kljuc. Annual service
21 activities will begin there a month earlier than previously anticipated.
22 As of 12th June, a regular bus line was established connecting Vrbljani
23 with Kljuc and Banja Luka via Sitnica, Sljicic, and Han Kol. Buses will
24 depart from Vrbljani at 5.30 and from Kljuc --"
25 MR. MARGETTS:
1 Q. Mr. Egrlic, what was depicted in the footage in that segment?
2 A. Certain parts of the town of Kljuc were depicted. It was possible
3 to see the bus station, the commercial area, the business premises of
4 Sipad enterprise, and it was possible to see the main street in Kljuc.
5 Q. Does the commentary accompanying that footage accurately reflect
6 what occurred in Kljuc?
7 A. As far as the first part is concerned, as far as the crisis staff
8 taking over power is concerned and with regard to the decisions to
9 introduce a curfew, et cetera, I can confirm that this is right. But as
10 to the buses and to their destinations, I know nothing about that because
11 I was already in detention at the time.
12 MR. MARGETTS: If the second segment could be played, and that is
13 the segment from 22 minutes and 4 seconds to 28 minutes and 9 seconds.
14 [Videoclip played]
15 COMMENTARY: [Voiceover] "Negotiations have been held with the most
16 extreme wing and the reply was that they did not wish civilian victims,
17 but they wouldn't give up at any cost, and they would rather die in battle
18 than give in their weapons. These are extremists I'm talking about, the
19 wing that is so close and gives an accurate picture of what Muslim
20 fundamentalism is about.
21 This leader of the extremists, was he here?
22 In the area of Kljuc Municipality, we proved it in our operations.
23 We proved, we ascertained that there was a bond between the official
24 leadership of the SDA and the Muslim Bosniak Party, the party, the
25 organisation, and that the leaders of these parties were directly involved
1 in supplying weapons, in establishing units, and that the whole process
2 was organised and realised through political parties.
3 Tell us what was going on when it was clear that they did not want
4 to negotiate, that they would not hand over their weapons in a legal
5 manner, that they wanted war? What did the other, Serbian side do, what
6 did the police do?
7 Well, we replied to such a challenge using our own violent method.
8 We set deadlines for them to surrender, as an ultimatum, and after that we
9 let them know explicitly that we would use combat means to destroy their
10 manpower completely. We would not be responsible in that case for the
11 civilians in the region of combat activities since there were cases we had
12 been aware of at the time, that they had threatened their own population,
13 and there are even cases in which they had shot at their own people not
14 allowing them to leave and find shelter in some other locations.
15 What villages are you referring to?
16 The core, the focus of activities was the region of the villages
17 of Pudin Han, Velagici, Gornji Ramici, Krasulje, and the area in the
18 direction of Donja Sanica bordering with Sanski Most Municipality, the
19 villages of Vrhpolje and Hrustovo that have for a long time had the
20 reputation of the most powerful strongholds of Muslim fundamentalists.
21 How many Muslims are there with permanent residence there?
22 In this part of Kljuc Municipality, there were some 12.500
23 Muslims, and they make up over 70 per cent of the total Muslim population.
24 I also would like to say that there are about 4.300 Serbs living in this
25 area, and in all their options, this region should be included in the
1 so-called Bosnian Municipality of Kljuc since the deputies of the SDA and
2 MBO, they call themselves the Muslim National Bloc, proclaimed a Bosnian
3 Muslim Municipality of Kljuc as early as in December. They were actually
4 the first ones to do so in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
5 What was the result of the activities of your police force and the
6 Serb Army, the Army of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
7 Actions were taken in an energetic way and in a very short period,
8 in a period of just a few hours, the units had been broken down. Most of
9 their members surrendered, either by handing over their personal weapons
10 or they surrendered without weapons. A small number of them, some 20 to
11 30 per cent of the extremists withdrew in order to resume their activities
12 in the region of the local Sanica community, and in the area of the
13 Sanski Most Municipality where they can still be found in small groups.
14 According to some information, some of them attempted to get to the
15 Prijedor Municipality or the Municipality of Bihac.
16 A great many houses have been pulled down. The population that
17 used to reside here has fled. Many have been taken prisoners. A
18 newly-built mosque has been destroyed, one that had not officially been
19 opened yet. Still the Serbian military and police were targeting only
20 houses from where resistance was coming. The new mosque in Velagic or in
21 Pudin Han was used as one of the most powerful Muslim strongholds. The
22 Muslims did not want to accept the peace offered by the Serbs, neither in
23 Krasulje, nor in Gornja and Donja Sanica, Plemenica, Prhovo, Ramici, and
24 Kamicka. Therefore, during the cleansing some of the houses in these
25 villages were destroyed and some other facilities as well, but a lot less
1 than in Velagici and Pudin Han.
2 What happened to the other Muslim villages?
3 Except for the part of the village where fortified facilities were
4 established and ambushes laid by the members of the Muslim Territorial
5 Defence and the Green Berets, in order to make themselves ready for combat
6 activities, we did not perform any other activities. In the town of Kljuc
7 itself, including the surrounding villages such as Sehici, Egrlici,
8 Velecevo, Dubocanin, the Zgon settlement which were populated exclusively
9 by Muslim people there was no destruction. In these regions not a single
10 bullet was fired. First because in some parts of these settlements, it
11 had not been possible to influence the Muslim population ideologically.
12 This is the reason why we had no need to destroy places where there was no
14 MR. MARGETTS:
15 Q. Mr. Egrlic, who was the person depicted in that footage?
16 A. The person depicted was Vinko Kondic, the chief of the Kljuc
17 police station.
18 Q. In your previous testimony before this Court, you have detailed
19 events that took place in the time period that Mr. Kondic is referring to,
20 and your testimony can be compared with the details of what Mr. Kondic
21 stated. But in general terms, how do you respond to Mr. Kondic's
22 description of events?
23 A. Well, as far as Mr. Kondic's comments are concerned, it is obvious
24 that he made these comments in view of a certain scheme that they had.
25 This was a programme that was shown in wartime conditions. So what we saw
1 is a certain way of justifying what had been done in that area. The
2 commentary states that the most extreme segment of the Bosniak Territorial
3 Defence had been destroyed, but the commentary doesn't mention the fact
4 that our villages were entered and that they killed the population and set
5 fire to almost all the buildings the Bosniaks lived in at the time.
6 It's obvious that this is a very biased depiction, the purpose of
7 which is to encourage the combatants of the Republika Srpska Army and to
8 demoralise the entire population in the area they lived in. Its purpose
9 was to depict matters from their own point of view. They wanted to depict
10 matters in a positive light. In my opinion, that is the objective of this
12 Q. Mr. Egrlic, do you agree or disagree with the depiction?
13 A. There are many things that were said here that I disagree with.
14 Q. In the course of your previous answer, you quoted the video and
15 stated that "the commentary states that the most extreme segment of the
16 Bosniak Territorial Defence had been destroyed." Was there an extreme
17 segment of the Bosniak Territorial Defence?
18 A. No, there was no extreme segment, and a Territorial Defence as it
19 has been referred to here did not exist. The fact that the entire
20 population was considered as the Territorial Defence and that there were
21 arrests and people were taken to school facilities and people were taken
22 to Manjaca, this all attests to the fact.
23 Q. The segment depicted a view from a car that was travelling along.
24 Were you able to identify the area that was being filmed?
25 A. Part of the Pudin Han and Velagici settlements were shown. And it
1 was possible to see some houses there which had been destroyed. And here,
2 it states that the mosque was destroyed since fire was opened from that
3 location. I don't know what the exact wording was. I won't look for it
4 here. But they claim that the greatest extremists were located in that
5 mosque. And that's quite simply a lie. This was just an excuse to
6 destroy other mosques, too, because in the territory of the Municipality
7 of Kljuc, 17 mosques were destroyed as well as one Catholic church. The
8 pretext was the same in all of these cases. 3.500 houses were also
9 destroyed, and the same excuse was given.
10 Over 5.000 individuals were tortured and questioned, but it's not
11 possible for women and children and toddlers to be members of the
12 Territorial Defence. And about 1.300 people ended up in Manjaca. All of
13 this was quite obviously calculated. These were lies, these were actions
14 that led to the destruction, the annihilation of the Bosniaks in that area
15 because later on the entire population was driven out, about 17.000
16 inhabitants were expelled from that area. And upon returning in 1995,
17 only 600 individuals remained in the area, most of them only because they
18 were unable to leave, and they lived there in extremely difficult
19 conditions. They were humiliated on a daily basis and were forced to do
20 labour. Some were forced to go to the lines to dig trenches there, and
21 others were forced to sweep the streets and to clean the streets. That's
22 how things were, and this has not been mentioned here.
23 And if it were possible to find this situation depicted in such a
24 manner in this wartime report, then we would have a more complete view of
25 the situation.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 Q. Were any mosques standing in Kljuc when you returned to Kljuc in
3 A. No, they had all been destroyed. All 17 mosques had been
4 destroyed as well as a Catholic church. They had been razed to the
5 ground. The town mosque had been cleared of debris, whereas the others
6 were in a state of total disrepair. They were ruins.
7 Q. What was the condition of your property when you returned to
9 JUDGE ORIE: Hasn't the witness not already answered that question
10 right in the beginning of his testimony just as the all 17 mosques being
12 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, if that is Your Honours' recollection, I will
13 accept that.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I think the witness testified, and I'm quite sure
15 that he found his house burned.
16 MR. MARGETTS: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. MARGETTS:
19 Q. Let us move to the next segment. And that is the segment that
20 appears at the counter marking 30 minutes 59 seconds to 31 minutes 41
22 [Videoclip played]
23 COMMENTARY: [Voiceover] In the course of combat activities in the
24 area, the formations of the Army of the Serb Republic of Bosnia and
25 Herzegovina arrived, and their units established full command and control
1 over the territory in the region, and there were no combat activities,
2 neither was there substantial firing going on. There were no attempts to
3 take over this section. There was occasional fire opened by fanatics from
4 the forests who didn't want" --
5 MR. MARGETTS:
6 Q. Mr. Egrlic, you've previously given testimony in relation to these
7 matters, so I don't intend you to ask you any questions about that
8 segment. Let's move to the next segment which is the segment that appears
9 at the counter reference 39 minutes 52 to 42 minutes 28.
10 [Videoclip played]
11 COMMENTARY: [Voiceover] Although Filipovic knows very well, and we
12 publicly state to his supporters to open their eyes and to open the eyes
13 of all Muslims who follow him, a toast to his health, and Omer Filipovic
14 heard this in prison somewhere because already on the 28th of May, only a
15 day after the outbreak of the war in the area of Velagici and Pudin Han,
16 he was led away by the Army of the Serb Republic of Bosnia and
17 Herzegovina, and he has no clue of the alleged arrest of 4.000 Serbs. It
18 is true that rather a lot of Muslim extremists were captured during the
19 cleansing of Velagici, Pudin Han, Krasulje, Ramici, Crljeni, Kamicka,
20 Plemenica, Prhovo and some other villages, and in the area of Kljuc. With
21 Omer Filipovic complete lists of the composition of the crisis and war
22 staff were found as well as of the military structure of the Green Berets
23 in this area, attack and retreat plans, lists which people should be
24 liquidated and how and where to get arms.
25 Most of the members of their crisis staff have been arrested.
1 They namely had a crisis staff and a war staff. The war staff was
2 commanded by Omer Filipovic, coordinators in the field were Amir Avdic and
3 Nevzad Djeric, and Asim Egrlic was responsible for political affairs. The
4 first three are JNA reserve officers. Filipovic is a lieutenant. He was
5 brought in as a commander and arrested together with Asim Egrlic, who had
6 been wounded on the first day in the course of combat actions. He was
7 brought in as well. The president of the Party of Democratic Action was
8 brought in, the other is president of the MBO party. Avdic and Djeric are
9 still on the run, and they constitute the harshest, most extreme part of
10 the Green Berets in the Kljuc Municipality. The crisis staff was composed
11 of a larger number of people. It consisted of Asim Egrlic,
12 Omer Filipovic, Iksan Zukanovic, Suad Mesic, Ibrahim Egrlic,
13 Muhamed Filipovic and a certain number of couriers and drivers which is
14 not that important. Most of the crisis staff members have also been
15 brought in and are being operatively processed so we will establish the
16 individual part and responsibility of each of them."
17 MR. MARGETTS:
18 Q. Mr. Egrlic, again, you have provided detailed testimony in
19 relation to matters relevant to the statements of Mr. Kondic. But in
20 general terms, and only in general terms, how do you respond to these
21 comments of Mr. Kondic?
22 A. Well, Mr. Kondic wanted to present things in a certain light here.
23 In his version, the Territorial Defence staff, or rather the majority of
24 its members, were arrested and taken into custody, which was correct. And
25 this was a way of boosting the morale of the Army of Republika Srpska so
1 that they step up their activities in terms of arresting, rounding up
2 people in the belief that this population was now left without their
3 leaders and they could do with them what they wanted.
4 MR. MARGETTS: If we could play the next segment, which is between
5 the time markings 49 minutes 25 through to 50 minutes 58.
6 [Videoclip played]
7 COMMENTARY: [Voiceover] We came across another one about whom
8 Sarajevo TV claims that he is in another world for a long time already, it
9 is Dr. Emir Kapetanovic.
10 What I have to say is that I and my brother Nermin Kapetanovic and
11 my family are safe and sound. Nobody from the authorities harassed us,
12 nobody bothered us, arrested us, or summoned us to the police. Most
13 likely because they had no reason to do so. Generally speaking, I have
14 nothing else to say. I don't go to town much due to the circumstances.
15 Every so often, I go out and play some ball, basketball. I socialise
17 How about the situation in the area of the hostilities? What
18 happened to your shop?
19 The shop, my practice, I'm a gynecologist by profession. My
20 practice is out of town. I moved there through a combination of
21 circumstances because I could not afford to pay for premises in town. You
22 know how high the rents are there. I was in the zone of war and
23 operations, and alas it was hit. The practice does not exist any more.
24 The bottom line is a lot has been destroyed. They called me, told me
25 later to go to the SUP to report the damage, which is normal as all other
1 citizens. I hope that of course some can be bought, repaired, acquired
2 from abroad, most likely at some other location when all calms down a bit.
3 The current authorities, of course, know who was involved and what to do
4 about it."
5 MR. MARGETTS:
6 Q. Mr. Egrlic, does that footage depict Mr. Emir Kapetanovic, and
7 what happened to Mr. Kapetanovic?
8 A. Yes. In this film, we see Dr. Emir Kapetanovic, who is shown
9 standing at the football pitch near a primary school, in fact, a
10 basketball pitch. And he was making this statement about the good life he
11 was leading there without any problems. However, after making this
12 statement, Dr. Kapetanovic was brought to the Manjaca camp where he was
13 beaten up, a beating that he barely survived. Most of his time in
14 Manjaca, he spent in the horseshed where he was found by the Doctors
15 Without Borders who had come together with ICRC representatives, and they
16 singled him out along with the most infirm and the most seriously ill and
17 saved him from Manjaca. He currently lives somewhere in the
18 United States.
19 What we saw in that film was an attempt to show the way the new
20 authorities were full of respect for human rights and international
21 commitments, to make it seem that everything was already for Muslim
22 citizens. They were even able to play basketball, which is a blatant lie
23 because all that time Dr. Kapetanovic was at Manjaca. This was a simple
24 propaganda tool, just as the entire television programme.
25 Q. When did Dr. Kapetanovic arrive at Manjaca?
1 A. He arrived, if I remember correctly, in mid-July, maybe late June
2 or mid-July 1992.
3 Q. On the basis of your knowledge as to the arrival date of
4 Dr. Kapetanovic and your knowledge in relation to the other events
5 depicted on this video, when was this video shot?
6 A. Well, judging by what he said about most of the extremists having
7 been taken into custody and arrested, the members of the Territorial
8 Defence village by village as enumerated there, I think this video could
9 have been made between the 20th of June and the 15th of July because that
10 part coincides exactly with a number of people who were brought to Manjaca
11 already at that time. They were already over 1.000 people from Kljuc in
12 the Manjaca camp.
13 Q. Mr. Egrlic, I have a final segment of the video to show you, and
14 I'll ask you for a brief comment on that. And that will be the end of my
16 MR. MARGETTS: The timing references are between 53 minutes 59 and
17 56 minutes and 6 seconds.
18 [Videoclip played]
19 COMMENTARY: [Voiceover] "The political and security situation in
20 the Kljuc Municipality is quite complicated. We can say today that in the
21 last ten days the situation has improved somewhat. One can say that the
22 situation is calming down, life is coming back to normal, and business is
23 picking up, and in future we will secure a normal life and business in the
24 territory of the whole municipality provided that certain systems, public
25 and economic institutions, start functioning as well.
1 Let me ask you frankly, do you think that it is possible after all
2 these events that Muslims and Serbs would live together in the area of
3 your municipality?
4 It is difficult to answer this question. I mean, how can one
5 assess something like that. I think that life has to be totally
6 ethnically separated and the areas ethnically cleansed of all those who
7 cannot live together.
8 Well, is this better done by war or by peaceful means?
9 In my opinion, the only solution would be peaceful. Never by war.
10 I think that we have not that much influence in small communities like
11 Kljuc. I think that the leadership on the level of the Republic of Bosnia
12 and Herzegovina, the former Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, together
13 with the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina have to do this job,
14 and we will do what we can on that level and pass it on to the level of
15 municipalities belonging to the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina
16 or the Autonomous Region of Bosnian Krajina.
17 If I understood you correctly, this means it is up to Dr. Karadzic
18 in the first place, the government of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and
19 Herzegovina to find a solution in talks with Alija Izetbegovic and with
21 In this case, with Izetbegovic because it concerns the Muslims of
22 your municipality.
23 I think that this is the only possible solution. If this solution
24 is not achieved soon, I am afraid that we will get into an even more
25 difficult situation, because the war is not over yet. The war goes on and
1 can easily turn into an war up to the extinction of one or the other
3 MR. MARGETTS:
4 Q. Who was the speaker in that segment?
5 A. The speaker was Jovo Banjac, president of the municipal assembly.
6 Q. In this depiction, he states, "I think that life has to be totally
7 ethnically demarcated and the areas ethnically cleansed of all those who
8 cannot live together in that area."
9 He is asked: "Well, is this better done by war or peacefully?"
10 He responds: "In my opinion, the only solution would be peaceful,
11 never by war. I think that we have not much influence on this in small
12 communities like Kljuc. I think that the leadership on the level of the
13 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Republic of Bosnia and
14 Herzegovina, together with the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina
15 have to do this job," and he continues.
16 Was that consistent with comments Mr. Banjac made to you?
17 A. It is.
18 MR. MARGETTS: Thank you, Your Honours. That's all the questions
19 I have.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Margetts.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Egrlic, you'll -- after a break, you'll be
23 examined by counsel for the Defence. At this moment, you are excused for
24 approximately 40 minutes. So we would like to see you back after that
1 No, we're not yet, Mr. Usher. There was a request by the accused
2 to address the Chamber for 10 to 15 minutes. That will be exactly the
3 time until the next break. So therefore, we would like to give an
4 opportunity to -- but perhaps you first escort the witness out of the
6 The Chamber prefers to use this moment, Mr. Krajisnik, to give you
7 an opportunity to address us because if there would be anything that would
8 need further thought, tomorrow being the last day before the recess, we
9 would rather not wait until then. So the next 10 to 15 minutes are yours
10 to address the Chamber.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, I wish to thank you,
12 Your Honours, for giving me this opportunity to address you briefly. I am
13 aware that you have precious little time at your disposal, and that's why
14 I'm even more thankful. I'll try to be as brief as possible.
15 I did not intend to make a problem out of the decision that you
16 have made. I am aware that the decision of the Trial Chamber is binding
17 for me, and I respect that. I mean, the decision not to extend this
18 trial, or rather, grant additional time for the preparation of the Defence
19 case. I hope that my Defence team will continue to cooperate with you
20 successfully and manage to adjust the time necessary.
21 What I wanted to emphasise in relation to this decision as well:
22 I wish to express my respect for the Trial Chamber because this trial is
23 an opportunity for me to find the truth, and I wish to come back to that
24 moment when you granted me leave to address you before the beginning of
25 trial. I asked you then, although I had pled not guilty, I had asked you
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 not to take me at my word, but just to help me bring the truth to light
2 because nobody's more interested in the truth than I.
3 Let me avail myself of this opportunity. After this decision
4 refusing leave to use up additional time for preparing my Defence case,
5 there was another problem. I respect my Defence team. I think
6 Mr. Stewart is defending me very competently and very well. He told me
7 that we have not yet mounted a good defence, we have not prepared
8 ourselves sufficiently for defending Mr. Krajisnik. I am not going to
9 give too many examples, but it is clear that witness testimony could have
10 been economised and the time of the Trial Chamber could have been saved in
11 proving certain things.
12 What can be done now? I hope you will bear one thing in mind. In
13 order to ensure a fair trial, I cannot really give any terribly wise
14 advice on how my Defence team should get ready. How can we help my
15 Defence team led by Mr. Stewart have the best preparation possible? You
16 know that this can be done with my participation, and in that
17 participation I'm rather handicapped. You saw on this example of
18 translation of transcripts that I cannot always help much. The transcript
19 would mean a lot to me if I can review what each of the witness's said.
20 Of course, I can take notes, but that's not the same thing.
21 Also, I don't have enough opportunity to have quality
22 communication with my Defence because I don't speak English and they don't
23 speak Serbian. Second, I don't receive the transcript. I can't receive
24 it. And third, there are a lot of documents coming in from the OTP with
25 B/C/S versions becoming available two or three days prior to being used.
1 What has been my problem so far? For instance, I had a chance of
2 contacting a lawyer at Pale in Republika Srpska. Through temporary
3 telephone communications, due to lack of means, that lawyer will not be
4 able to participate in my Defence, and I kindly ask you to allow me the
5 use of privileged telephone communication to secure some other lawyer who
6 could take part in my Defence.
7 Another thing, if you ruled that I don't have the right to receive
8 the transcript, could I then bring my computer here and take notes in the
9 courtroom so as to be able to take to my prison cell the transcript that I
10 created for my own purposes? And lastly, since you ruled as you ruled on
11 my financial contribution to my Defence costs, there are two small
12 requests concerning finances, and they are before the Registry. One that
13 you have seen is my request for the Registry to vary their decision on my
14 financial contribution.
15 And the second is as follows: In the course of attempts to
16 establish the truth, the Registry challenged certain documents because
17 they looked as if they had been created later than the date on them.
18 Since these documents were seized when I was arrested, we received
19 confirmation from the OTP that these documents were available and were
20 seized at the time of my arrest. And my request would be to review the
21 possibilities for helping me to participate in my Defence because I'm the
22 best witness in my Defence, if only I had a slightly better communication.
23 And your help would also be appreciated in my dealings with the Registry,
24 in getting them to approve me privileged telephone communications and in
25 getting them to reverse their decision on my financial contribution.
1 I don't know how things are developing in other trials, but I know
2 that you are very attentive in my trial.
3 Just one more thing: What looks like an attempt to adjust, to
4 harmonise the positions between the Defence and OTP, please, put a stop to
5 it. Please let the truth come to light. There are three truths here.
6 One is the truth of Serbian witnesses; another is the truth of Muslim
7 witnesses; and the third is in the middle. I am very surprised to see and
8 hear many things I've seen here. Let this end there. I really want the
9 real truth to be established, and I thank you for giving me this time.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Krajisnik. Briefly, I'll respond to a
11 few matters. The issue of privileged telephone conversations is primarily
12 in the hands of the Registrar. The Registrar is responsible for detention
13 facilities. If there ever is a decision taken by the Registrar which
14 could have an impact upon the fairness of this trial, then there is an
15 inherent power of the Trial Chamber to review that decision. That is not
16 to put its own assessment of the situation in the place of the assessment
17 made by the Registrar, but just a review on whether the decision of the
18 Registrar would make the trial unfair. So the first step always to be
19 taken is to address the Registrar.
20 As far as the use of a computer in this courtroom is concerned, as
21 such, the Trial Chamber is not inclined to make any difference on whether
22 you use a fountain pen, a pencil, or a computer. However, computers are
23 known to have sometimes an impact on security matters. If there is no
24 such thing at hand, then the Chamber will certainly seriously consider to
25 give you an opportunity to use a laptop computer here and to use your
1 notes, then, in the Detention Unit.
2 The written transcripts in a language you understand of this trial
3 is the subject of a motion, as you are aware of, filed by the Defence. We
4 heard a global position, a general position taken by the Prosecution this
5 afternoon. And as I indicated before, the Chamber will consider whether
6 or not still to give a decision before the recess.
7 Then you referred in -- at different moments to the financial
8 matters. You said that a lawyer in Pale could not assist you due to your
9 lack of financial means. You also referred to the decision on the
10 financial means to be varied by the Registrar. There, again, the first
11 authority to be addressed is the Registrar, and the Chamber can only play
12 a role after a decision is there and if the requirements are met for an
13 involvement of the Chamber in the matter.
14 Finally, you said something about documents that were created
15 not -- or at least I did understand you to say that documents that were
16 considered to have been anti-dated. If there were any new facts to be
17 submitted in that respect, then again it is the first and the primary
18 responsibility of the Registrar to deal with it, and only if all
19 requirements are met the Chamber can be involved in that.
20 Finally, you said something about the truth presented by the
21 Serbian witnesses, truth presented by Muslim witnesses, and the in-between
22 situation. The Chamber is not trying to achieve to a truth, but to the
24 We'll adjourn until a quarter past 4.00 when the Defence counsel
25 may start the cross-examination of the witness.
1 --- Recess taken at 3.49 p.m.
2 --- On resuming at 4.23 p.m.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Egrlic, you'll now be examined by counsel for the
5 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart, or is it Ms. Loukas?
6 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, two things very briefly, I wonder if
7 Your Honour would give me, that's to say the Defence team, five minutes
8 either immediately before or immediately after a break at some convenient
9 point this afternoon so that the witness need not be here at that time.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In relation to the motion filed or --?
11 MR. STEWART: It's two things, Your Honour, briefly. One is in
12 relation to my client's comments to the Court, and secondly, just one or
13 two observations on that motion.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I'll give you five minutes.
15 MR. STEWART: Yes. Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Either just before or after the next break.
17 MR. STEWART: I'm very much obliged. I've got one other thing to
18 say, Your Honour, which would be, in this particular instance, it would be
19 more suitable, if we could invite the witness to take his headphones off,
20 but following what I said yesterday, not to leave Court, I'd be entirely
21 content with him simply to remove his headphones.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps if we ever meet a similar situation, we
23 might ask prior to deciding -- determining what technique to use, perhaps
24 ask the victims and witness section for advice.
25 MR. STEWART: On which, Your Honour?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Especially on language knowledge. The question is
2 whether someone --
3 MR. STEWART: I see. His degree of understanding, Your Honour.
4 Yes, I'm obliged. I'm sorry, I was not understanding it was a language
6 JUDGE ORIE: It was a bit short, perhaps. Please proceed.
7 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. So may I invite the witness
8 to -- or would Your Honour please invite the witness to take his
9 headphones off.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Would you take your headphones off, Mr. Egrlic.
11 MR. STEWART: I'm obliged, Your Honour. Simply to say this, and
12 this is not intended to initiate some enormous great debate or submission
13 or motion this afternoon, but Your Honour the Defence do not feel ready
14 for this witness. But I'm not asking for an adjournment this afternoon in
15 order not to proceed to cross-examine him, but the basis is this,
16 Your Honour: We do not feel ready in the sense that we, and this does in
17 fact apply to every member of the team, we do not feel, and I don't want
18 to reargue the matter before Your Honour, but I must state what the
19 position is now in relation to each witness and each specific witness, we
20 do not feel that we have had, in relation to this witness, adequate time
21 to consider the relevant material and to sift the relevant material and to
22 read such material as one would wish to read in order to decide what's
23 relevant, what isn't relevant, simply to explore the material.
24 And I entirely endorse and accept comments and implications that
25 Your Honour has made. Of course, it's not real life that Defence counsel
1 or anybody reads every line of every document. That simply isn't the real
2 world, and that would be wasteful, and this team, we hope, is as
3 experienced as any other team and is able to form sometimes quite robust
4 judgements about what needs to be looked at and what doesn't need to be
5 looked at. This is not a perfect world, and we do frequently and normally
6 make those judgements, and of course we are very used to making them in
7 our professional life over many, many years. But we are put in a position
8 to having to make those judgements in circumstances often where it's not
9 the judgement we would make. We simply cannot absorb the amount of
10 material in the time available.
11 And Your Honour, I do wish to stress that we have -- we are
12 working just about all the time, and I've already said that we are working
13 beyond any sustainable level. It's only because we have been brought into
14 court for the very last week before the recess that what we are doing this
15 week is possible at all because Your Honour, with respect I would not
16 permit my team to sustain this level of work for week in and week out. It
17 is simply impossible.
18 But the position is this, Your Honour, the effects of not having
19 sufficient time are not identifiable in the sense that almost by
20 definition we cannot say, therefore, that there is important material or
21 there is relevant material that we have not looked at because ex
22 hypothesi, some of the stuff we have not been able to look at properly.
23 So we can't say that.
24 So the position, Your Honour, is that I do feel equipped to
25 cross-examine this witness on the main areas which I would regard as
1 appropriate for cross-examination, but the risk, and this is where in the
2 sense I want to put down, I hope it comes across in translation, we would
3 say put down a marker, but to record the position very clearly is that
4 while, of course, it is always the position that an application can be
5 made subsequently to a Trial Chamber for a witness to be recalled after
6 his evidence has otherwise been concluded, generally speaking, of course a
7 pretty high threshold has to be met, and there has to be a solid
8 explanation of why that is suggested to be necessary, with identification
9 of why it is that the points from which it is required to recall the
10 witness were points which could not have been dealt with first time round.
11 And Your Honour, it is only if, of course -- naturally it's only
12 if subsequently we come to the conclusion that are sufficiently sufficient
13 areas which have not been covered that we would ever make such an
14 application. But we would wish to make it clear, Your Honour, that in the
15 particular circumstances of this case, part of the foundation of that
16 application, if it were necessary, if there were significant matters,
17 would be that we simply do not have the normal time available to avoid
18 that difficulty first time round.
19 So that's what we wish to place very clearly and firmly on the
20 record, Your Honour, because it would not -- we see that as a reasonable
21 balance because it wouldn't, looking at the other direction, it wouldn't
22 be responsible of us to seek an adjournment in case that should arise
23 because it might not. And that would be very wasteful if we were to make
24 that application. But on the other hand, we distinctly would not wish it
25 to be thought, and we would to substantiate this, I won't waste the
1 Court's time in going into the painful details now, Your Honour. But if
2 that did come about, then of course, the Court, the Trial Chamber might
3 require more information, more details about why it was we felt we did not
4 have sufficient time and what the volume of material was and what the time
5 available was. I wish to place that firmly on the record, Your Honour.
6 And on that footing, to proceed.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, having put this on the record, then at
8 least you avoid that if you would later file any motion or submissions or
9 request for recall of this witness, at least you'll not be confronted with
10 the fact that you didn't pay attention to it at the time you
11 cross-examined the witness. That's point one.
12 The other observation I'd like to make, and not as a beginning of
13 a debate, is that the Chamber at least is aware that the Municipality of
14 Kljuc was the one on which it was provisionally reported that there was
15 almost a 95 per cent agreement on important facts. So therefore, it's at
16 least better to have Kljuc at this moment before the recess than any other
18 You may start your cross-examination.
19 MR. STEWART: Yes. I will reserve any response to that point for
20 the future occasion if it ever arises, Your Honour. Thank you.
21 Cross-examined by Mr. Stewart:
22 Q. Mr. Egrlic, I wonder if you could be given --
23 JUDGE ORIE: But now, he should put his headphones on again.
24 Otherwise he might miss some of your questions.
25 MR. STEWART: I wouldn't wish my questions to be wasted for that
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 reason, Your Honour. Thank you.
2 Q. Mr. Egrlic, could you be given, please, Exhibit 251, P251 I'm
3 talking about, of course. Now, we looked at this in the course of your
4 evidence earlier today, and we looked at a passage later on. It's on page
5 6 of the English version. From memory, I think it was page 8 of the B/C/S
6 version. But that's perhaps not critical, section VI, the course of armed
7 operations. But I wish to go back to the -- near the beginning of this
8 document, Mr. Egrlic. On the first page, there's an introductory note.
9 I'm not going to trouble you about the introductory note. Do you then see
10 a heading, "Fundamental causes that have contributed to the deteriorating
11 security situation." Do you see that? It's main heading number two.
12 A. Yes, I do.
13 Q. And under that heading, number 2, "Position on mobilisation." Do
14 you see that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And then of course, Mr. Egrlic, this won't be in dispute at all
17 between us, the presentation of this document is from a particular point
18 of view, so the third line comes across in English: "The games vis-a-vis
19 the justification and legality of mobilisation in the municipality began
20 with the first call-up at the end of June 1991. From September 1991, the
21 Muslim population completely stopped responding to the call-up into JNA
23 Mr. Egrlic, just to get this clear, you have in your evidence
24 dealt with and referred to the unwillingness of Bosniaks to respond to the
25 mobilisation call. Do you accept that that was for citizens of the
1 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia a form of unlawful civil disobedience?
2 A. I don't accept that.
3 Q. Is it not the position that under the law of the state of which
4 you were a citizen and of which Bosnia and Herzegovina was part, it was a
5 breach of the law to fail to respond to a mobilisation call?
6 A. Yes. At the time that the JNA was a multiethnic army.
7 Q. Is your answer to my question "yes," that you agree that it was a
8 form of unlawful civil disobedience?
9 A. I'm talking about the earlier period. That would have been a case
10 of civil disobedience when the Presidency of Yugoslavia was the commander
11 of the armed forces and when the army was a multiethnic army. But after
12 the war broke out in Slovenia and subsequently in Croatia, the Presidency
13 of Yugoslavia lost control. It was no longer the supreme commander. The
14 army was then an army that was composed of one ethnic group. And other
15 peoples could not find a place within that army. That was also the case
16 for the Bosniaks from Bosnia and Herzegovina.
17 Q. What, in your view, in 1991 was the status of the Croatian war?
18 Was it a war between two states? Was it a civil war? Or did it involve
19 an insurrection? Or how else did you regard it?
20 A. In my view, it was a war against the secession of Croatia from the
22 Q. And wasn't it your understanding that the state, the Federal
23 Republic of Yugoslavia, was entitled to take military action to prevent
24 such secession?
25 A. It would have had the right to do that if the conditions had been
1 normal and if all the peoples had been part of that army and that state,
2 if all the peoples had taken part in this action and if war hadn't broken
3 out in Slovenia. However, when Slovenia became independent, Yugoslavia
4 ceased to function as such. It no longer had command, or rather the
5 Presidency no longer had command over the armed forces. The armed forces
6 became a formation composed of Serbs alone. And that is my opinion of
7 this matter.
8 Q. So is this right, Mr. Egrlic: Bosniaks refused to respond to
9 mobilisation with the result that the army became monoethnic, and the
10 monoethnicity of the army was the reason for the Bosniaks not responding
11 to mobilisation. Is that your position?
12 A. The Bosniaks didn't respond to the mobilisation call-up because
13 they didn't want to go to the battlefields in Croatia and to take sides
14 with anyone in that war since it was obvious that certain national
15 problems as far as the Serbs and Croats are concerned hadn't been
16 resolved. This is the reason for which mobilisation was not accepted,
17 because the policies conducted and the political leadership, the policies
18 as a whole with regard to Bosniaks were such that the relationships within
19 Yugoslavia should be established through agreement and not by conducting a
21 Q. So is it fair to paraphrase what you've said as that this was a
22 war between Croats and Serbs which you, Bosniaks, I think is the word
23 we've used mainly throughout your evidence, regarded as "not your war"?
24 A. The Bosniaks thought that war was not a way to resolve the
25 problems that the Croats and Serbs had in the area. And we believed that
1 it wasn't necessary for the Serbian Army to go to Croatia. The Bosniaks
2 believed that it was necessary to find a peaceful solution to the
3 relationships between the republics that had previously constituted
5 Q. Mr. Egrlic, by the second half of 1991, there simply was a war,
6 wasn't there?
7 A. There was a war in the territory of the Republic of Croatia.
8 First of all, volunteers, Serbs, went there from Bosnia and Herzegovina
9 and from Serbia. Later on, there were units that were mobilised, too. So
10 there was a war in the territory of Croatia.
11 Q. Yes. So what I'm suggesting to you, Mr. Egrlic, is that rather
12 than avoid the question by appealing to the perfectly natural wish for a
13 peaceful solution, once a war had started, then the position was that you
14 simply regarded it, Bosniaks, as "not your war"?
15 A. The position was that no one needed a war. We didn't need it, and
16 no one else needed a war. The position was that problems should be
17 resolved via peaceful means. It's not just that this wasn't our war; it
18 shouldn't have been anyone's war.
19 Q. Was it your war in your view?
20 A. It wasn't our war, it wasn't anyone's war. Nothing has ever been
21 solved by conducting a war. That was the position of the Bosniak
22 politicians. It was believed that it wasn't necessary to go to the
23 battlefield in Croatia and fight a war there.
24 Q. Mr. Egrlic, did the Serb community in your part of Bosnia and
25 Herzegovina regard the Croatian war as at least "their" war?
1 A. Well, given the action taken and the fact that volunteers were
2 first sent off and then units were mobilised, on this basis, one could
3 conclude that they believed that it was necessary to get involved in that
5 Q. You were there, Mr. Egrlic. Was it your observation that the Serb
6 community where you lived certainly regarded the Croatian war as "their
8 A. I think they thought it necessary to help the Serbs in Croatia,
9 and that's why they went there. Whether they thought of that war as
10 theirs or not is a difficult question to answer. But judging by the
11 trouble they took and the fact that they went to fight in Croatia,
12 obviously they thought it necessary to wage that war. Whether a war can
13 be something that can be appropriated as one's own is arguable.
14 Q. Mr. Egrlic, it was bitterly resented, wasn't it, by the Serb
15 community where you lived in 1991 that the Muslims, Bosniaks, clearly and
16 quite deliberately wished to avoid taking part in that war, wasn't it?
17 A. Serbs believed, as I have already said once, that the failure to
18 respond to mobilisation calls on the part of Bosniaks amounted to their
19 siding with Croats, which was not true. It was a result of the
20 developments I had already described and their belief that war would not
21 lead to anything, that instead it was necessary to reach an agreement on
22 the future of Yugoslavia.
23 Q. Their attitude was the well-known one, Mr. Egrlic, wasn't it,
24 during a war, that who is not for us is against us? That was their
25 attitude, wasn't it?
1 A. That's the way they acted.
2 Q. And Mr. Egrlic, you have described peaceful relations over a long
3 period in your community, and what we have just been considering and the
4 fundamentally different reaction and attitude towards the Croatian war as
5 between the Serb community and the Bosniak community effectively shattered
6 those good relations, didn't it?
7 A. Yes, it did lead to their deterioration.
8 Q. Do you -- Mr. Egrlic, I take it you do your regard yourself to
9 some considerable degree as having been a political animal, a political
10 person in the early 1990s?
11 A. [No Interpretation]
12 Q. Sir, you may have answered so softly, Mr. Egrlic, it wasn't picked
13 up. I thought I heard you.
14 A. I said yes.
15 Q. And did you have a general interest in politics which caused you
16 to attempt to follow and to take an intelligent interest in the political
17 currents affecting Yugoslavia and its various constituent parts?
18 A. As far as politics was concerned, I was at the level of municipal
19 authorities, and I did not have a political education or qualifications
20 that would enable me to act as a politician on a larger scale, especially
21 on pan-Yugoslav issues.
22 Q. So although you were an active local politician, your own focus
23 and your own interest was on your locality?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And you -- is this right, then: You only concerned yourself with
1 any wider pictures so far as it had an impact on your locality where you
3 A. You could put it that way.
4 Q. Well, I just did. Do you agree, Mr. Egrlic?
5 A. I do.
6 Q. Can we look back at the document, please, in front of you. Under
7 the heading "war operations," do you see that? It's number III, item
8 III -- it's under the main heading "Fundamental causes that have
9 contributed to the deteriorating security situation" and then in English,
10 of course, it's "War operations," item III. Do you see that?
11 JUDGE ORIE: It's on page 3 of the B/C/S version.
12 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I see that.
14 MR. STEWART:
15 Q. It says: "The standpoints" -- and the document has talked about
16 mobilisation. We looked briefly at that a few minutes ago. "The
17 standpoints became completely polarised when the issues of attacks on the
18 Serbs and the defence of the Serbian People on the territory of Croatia as
19 well as provocation in the Bosanska Krajina basin of the River Sava were
20 raised. A considerable number of Serbian nationals became volunteers. We
21 also established through intelligence that some Muslim nationals actively
22 took part in enemy formations of the Republic of Croatia." Now, "enemy
23 formations" is clearly talking about Croats, Mr. Egrlic. There can't be
24 any doubt about that.
25 Do you have any knowledge about whether or not that last point,
1 that "some Muslim nationals actively took part in Croat enemy formations"
2 is true?
3 A. I think this is not accurate.
4 Q. Well, first of all, Mr. Egrlic, my question - and I'm being
5 careful about the question -- well, I'm trying to be careful, so I would
6 invite you please to be careful to listen to them and answer them.
7 My first question is whether you have any knowledge as to whether
8 that is or is not true.
9 A. As for this last assertion, if that's what the question refers to,
10 it is not true to the best of my knowledge.
11 Q. And you know something about it, do you, Mr. Egrlic, which gives
12 some weight or value to your own view?
13 A. I have information to the effect that in the former Croatia, there
14 was a certain number Bosniaks working from Kljuc Municipality, Bosniaks
15 who happened to be there when the war started. And I don't rule out the
16 possibility that a number of them had been mobilised and thus found
17 themselves in the ranks of the Croatian Army. But to say that there were
18 Bosniak volunteers from Kljuc Municipality who took up arms and went to
19 Croatia to fight would absolutely not be true. That's my assertion.
20 Q. Can we stick to what's in the document, Mr. Egrlic, rather than
21 you raising your own questions which you then go on to answer. The -- if
22 I understand it, you were saying that the proposition here that some
23 Muslim nationals actively took part in enemy formations of the Republic of
24 Croatia is true?
25 A. I said it was possible that a number of people who had been
1 working in the territory of Croatia took part. It's possible that they
2 were mobilised by the Croatian Army and participated in that way. As for
3 Bosniak volunteers, or mobilised Bosniaks, there were certainly none in
4 the Croatian theatre of war. If the Bosniaks who worked in Croatia were
5 subject to the obligatory military service, if they were conscripts, then
6 it's possible they were mobilised.
7 Q. So there was -- well, first of all, Mr. Egrlic, are you saying
8 that you simply don't know anything about that, that it's possible, or
9 that you do, in fact, know something about conscripts who worked in
10 Croatia becoming soldiers in the Croatian Army?
11 A. I don't know anything about it. Those are just my assumptions
12 that maybe if they happened to be there anyway, it was one of the
14 Q. Well, you said in an earlier answer: "I have information to the
15 effect that in the former Croatia, there was a certain number of Bosniaks
16 working from Kljuc Municipality, Bosniaks who happened to be there when
17 the war started." And you say, "I don't rule out the possibility." Now,
18 Mr. Egrlic, I don't want to be unfair. You're talking about information
19 that there were a number of Bosniaks working in Croatia but that wasn't a
20 mystery, was it?
21 Let's start from the beginning. It was perfectly obvious, a
22 perfectly well-known fact that there were Bosniaks working in Croatia?
23 Everybody knew that.
24 A. They worked there. But please, it's not the same thing to work
25 and to wage war. I already answered. You needn't ask the same question a
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 thousand times. I said there were Bosniaks working in Croatia. There is
2 a possibility of which I know nothing actually that they were mobilised
3 and took part in that theatre of war. As for Bosniaks in the Municipality
4 of Kljuc, none were mobilised and there were no volunteers who were sent
6 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, it's the Prosecution's submission that
7 the witness is completely correct. This matter has been asked and
8 answered, if the Defence could move on.
9 MR. STEWART: Well, I invite the Prosecution to indicate what it
10 is that has been asked and what it is that's been answered.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Your first question was whether the witness has any
12 knowledge. The witness has by now answered the question that he had no
13 knowledge. You then confronted him with his answer where he said that he
14 had information, not that -- let me just check that. In my memory, it was
15 not only that Bosniaks were living and working in Croatia, but even
16 Bosniaks from Kljuc, if I'm well informed.
17 And then he at the beginning said he didn't rule out that they
18 might have participated in Croatian units. I do agree with the
19 Prosecution that the question has been put in different forms to the
20 witness a couple of times, and unless you have a new question on the
21 subject, that the matter has been dealt with sufficiently. So I'm not
22 saying that you couldn't ask any questions about the subject any more, but
23 until now this question is whether he had any knowledge; and the second,
24 whether it was true what he said here what has been put to him a couple of
25 times. Thank you.
1 MR. STEWART: Yes, very well, Your Honour.
2 Q. When you're talking about information you had about people working
3 in Croatia, do we take it you weren't talking about any special
4 information that you had, but it was simply a well-known fact? Is that
6 A. It was a well-known fact.
7 Q. Do you have any knowledge that enables you to explain or comment
8 on the fact that Bosniaks where you lived regarded this as a war in which
9 they did not wish to take part, but it seems possible that Bosniaks living
10 in Croatia did respond to a mobilisation call there and participate in
11 that very war? Do you have any knowledge that enables you to comment on
12 that apparent difference?
13 A. I have no such knowledge.
14 Q. And do you agree that if the Serb community in your area came to
15 believe that Muslims were fighting for the Croatian Army while refusing to
16 respond to mobilisation for the JNA, that that would have further
17 embittered relations between the Bosniak and the Serb community where you
19 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, this --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Margetts.
21 MR. MARGETTS: This calls for speculation on behalf of the
22 witness. And more than that, it calls for speculation on behalf of the
23 witness in respect of facts that have not been established. So we would
24 ask the Defence again to move on.
25 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. STEWART: I prefaced my question very carefully asking the
3 witness -- my first question.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's a hypothetical question, "If the Serb
5 community in your area came to believe that ..." That's a hypothesis.
6 And --
7 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, I don't feel it necessary to
8 pursue it and --
9 JUDGE ORIE: No, that was as a matter of fact would be my
10 question, what exactly the point is, because I was about to ask the
11 Prosecution whether there's any disagreement on that the relations between
12 the two ethnic groups became more and more bitter for, well, whatever
14 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I don't need to pursue the question.
15 It can be a comment in a hundred years from now. It doesn't need to be a
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. STEWART:
19 Q. Mr. Egrlic, the document in front of you that we were looking at a
20 few minutes ago, moving right on to the passage that you were asked about,
21 section VI, the course of armed operations, I'd like you to find that
22 heading, please. I think it was page 8 of the B/C/S version. I hope
23 that's not misleading you.
24 Do you see that heading, "The course of armed operations"?
25 A. I do.
1 Q. I just want to use that as a marker. I want you to look one
2 paragraph up from that at the paragraph that begins: "All of our findings
3 point to the fact that the Muslim TO ..." Do you see that?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Can you find it, Mr. Egrlic? It's the part that
5 starts --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've found it.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
8 MR. STEWART:
9 Q. "All our findings point to the fact that the Muslim TO was
10 primarily set up for defence purposes. However, investigations through
11 operational work later established that several meetings were held in
12 Prijedor and Sanski Most in May where they adopted the decision to
13 commence armed rebellion in order to achieve their already mentioned
14 goals. The decision to change the concept from defensive to offensive
15 operations had a catastrophic effect on the Muslim population in the area
16 of Kljuc Municipality. The attacks they launched on 27th May 1992 of
17 Kljuc Municipality. The attacks they launched on 27th May 1992 gave
18 proper cause to the members of the Bosnia-Herzegovina Serbian Republic
19 Army to settle accounts by taking determined action against the
20 perpetrators of and participants in these acts."
21 Now, first of all, Mr. Egrlic, do you agree with this observation
22 that the Muslim TO was primarily set up for defence purposes?
23 A. I have spoken about this already. And the Muslim Territorial
24 Defence, as you like to call it, was the Territorial Defence of the State
25 of Bosnia and Herzegovina that was set up as an organised TO staff. It
1 was getting ready to set up some units. However, in view of the late
2 appointment of that staff, the units were never established. Therefore,
3 there was no concept even of what kind of war should be waged, a defensive
4 one or a conqueror's war.
5 Q. All right. Now, Mr. Egrlic, you were asked about the first
6 paragraph under heading VI beginning: "Armed operations in the area of
7 Kljuc Municipality began on the 27th of May 1992." You were asked about
8 that paragraph. I would like you, please, to look at the words at the end
9 of that paragraph, "The following occurred on that day." And then to --
10 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I hope it's acceptable to say to the
11 witness to read to himself. It's rather a long passage. I'm in Your
12 Honours' hands. I wasn't proposing to read it all out. But of course, if
13 Your Honour feels I should, I will.
14 JUDGE ORIE: No. Up to where would you like him to read?
15 MR. STEWART: I would like him to read the whole passage. It's
16 about 20 or 30 lines. It just goes over the foot of the page.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Item 1.
18 MR. STEWART: Item 1, under the heading: "Setting up an ambush in
19 the Gornji Ramici sector."
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. STEWART: I'm in Your Honour's hands as to how I deal with it.
22 JUDGE ORIE: So the witness is now invited to read for himself
23 what appears in the English translation on page 6 under heading VI.1,
24 "Setting up an ambush in the Gornji Ramici sector" up to the second
25 paragraph on page 7 where it starts "setting up an ambush in the..."
1 Mr. Egrlic, once you've finished reading -- I take it you're
2 reading page 9 in the B/C/S version entirely and the first three lines of
3 page 10. Once you've finished, please tell me.
4 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've read it.
6 MR. STEWART:
7 Q. Mr. Egrlic, do you say that none of that is true?
8 A. It's true this incident happened.
9 Q. Is there any significant error in the account which you have just
11 A. I don't know about these details. But I don't [as interpreted]
12 know that it happened on the 27th of May, that much I heard. I don't know
13 the exact details of what happened so I can't say anything with any
15 Q. Yes --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Just for the transcript, it reads "I don't know about
17 these details." And then it continues "but I don't know that it happened
18 on the 27th of May." Did you want to say that you do know that it
19 happened on the 27th of May? It might be a translation problem.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that I did know that it
21 happened, but that I didn't know all the details. I didn't know many
22 details about that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: According to your knowledge, it happened on the 27th
24 of May?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This is just to correct the transcript which,
2 of course, we receive your words in translation, and sometimes there is
3 some confusion. It's not due to you.
4 But please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
5 MR. STEWART: I'm obliged, Your Honour.
6 Q. The next item, it's mercifully much shorter, item 2, "Setting up
7 an ambush in the Busije and" - well, it's illegible. Perhaps it doesn't
8 matter too much - "sectors." Again, could you read that and let
9 His Honour and the rest of the Court know when you're finished reading it.
10 A. I've read it.
11 Q. Did those events happen as they are described there?
12 A. As to whether they occurred on the same day, I had information
13 about that. But I don't know about these details because I wasn't
14 involved in this. I wasn't present.
15 Q. So is it the position that you can't say that any of it is false,
16 but you don't know yourself of whether all of it is true. Is that a fair
17 summary, Mr. Egrlic?
18 A. Yes, I can't say whether it's true or not, whether it's correct or
19 not. But I know that this occurred.
20 Q. Leaving aside details, it's essentially true; an incident broadly
21 as described here did occur?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Could I invite you, Mr. Egrlic, to read 3, 4, 5, and 6 all at one
24 go, because they're pretty short passages. So following on from where we
25 just got to, could you read the next passages, 3, 4, 5, and 6, and let
1 His Honour know when you've done that.
2 JUDGE ORIE: While the witness reads, could I ask the Prosecution
3 whether it would change anything in their case if these, I would say,
4 lists of incidents even if committed by Bosniaks as they were called
5 recently had occurred?
6 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, shouldn't the witness take his
7 headphones for such a question, we suggest.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Certainly to hear the answer.
9 MR. STEWART: Given where we are at the moment, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Margetts.
11 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, our case is not concerned with combat
12 operations. And whilst I'm not in a position to comment in an informed
13 way about each of these alleged events, insofar as combat operations took
14 place in the municipality, that's not the focus of our case.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you consider these to be combat operations
16 or ...?
17 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, I'm unable to say whether or not they
18 are because I haven't had the opportunity to investigate whether or not
19 they occurred or any other corroborative or contradictory information.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm just wondering whether this seems to be at
21 least not the core of the case of the Prosecution, how important it is
22 that we spend quite a lot of time on it, especially where the witness has
23 I think for the first two incidents said that they may well -- that they
24 occurred; whether or not with all the details. If the witness would say
25 the same for the next three or four, of course, I do not know whether he
1 will, but would that cause the Prosecution to take any further procedural
2 action on it?
3 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, this is certainly not the core of our
4 case, and we don't know whether or not the tu quoque defence is something
5 that the Defence is considering raising.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Well, Mr. Stewart.
7 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I suggest that -- because we do get an answer,
9 but not exactly on the question I put to the Prosecution. Perhaps just as
10 some guidance, next time you could have just asked: "This report
11 describes a couple of actions which are described as attacks by Muslims
12 including this, this, and this, and do you agree they took place? Yes or
13 no." That would have approximately the same result especially since it's
14 not in the core of the case. I mean, this case is not about who fired the
15 first shot and at what moment and against whom, but mainly on what
16 happened later.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, with respect, I agree. I simply say
19 this, Your Honour, first of all, I couldn't ask the witness to give that
20 answer without giving him an opportunity of reading what it was he was
21 being asked to answer upon. The second observation, Your Honour, is that
22 we could have had his answer on points 3, 4, 5, 6 in less time. And the
23 third point, Your Honour, as far as first shots are concerned, the
24 Prosecution asked about the introductory paragraph of this section. If
25 they had not asked about the introductory paragraph which leads us naively
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 to suppose it might be part of their case, we might not have found it
2 necessary to go on to ask questions about the rest.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please put your headphones on again.
4 Have you read the relevant parts, Mr. Egrlic?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've read parts 3, 4, 5, and 6, yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 Mr. Stewart.
8 MR. STEWART:
9 Q. Are they true?
10 A. What is stated under item 3, 4, and 5, I couldn't say. I've heard
11 about the event described under number 6.
12 Q. So you've heard it described in, for practical purposes, the same
13 terms as you see under item 6, have you?
14 A. Yes, yes.
15 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, I certainly can leave that topic
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. STEWART: I'm entirely in Your Honour's hands as to whether
19 the break will come. I can never quite remember when it's half past or 25
20 past that Your Honour favours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Now, you've got the morning schedule in your mind.
22 MR. STEWART: Top of the hour. Wishful thinking.
23 JUDGE ORIE: We'll adjourn anywhere between 20 minutes to 6.00 up
24 till a quarter to 6.00. After 20 minutes' break, we'll have another hour
25 to go.
1 MR. STEWART: I think Your Honour is right. It's that bit of the
2 clock I was thinking of in morning hours.
3 JUDGE ORIE: It took me two years as well, Mr. Stewart.
4 MR. STEWART: Your Honour has helped me to get there quicker.
5 I'll try and remember another day.
6 Q. Mr. Egrlic, you were -- I wonder if you could be given a document.
7 It has not so far been an exhibit in the course of this witness's evidence
8 or in this case, Your Honour. We have copies in both B/C/S and English,
9 of course. The original is in B/C/S.
10 JUDGE ORIE: The next number, Mr. Registrar, would be, for the
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the number will be D24.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: And D24.1 for the English translation.
15 MR. STEWART: Would Your Honour give me one moment, please.
16 [Defence counsel confer]
17 MR. STEWART: Yes, Ms. Loukas reminds me very reasonably Your
18 Honour that perhaps I should say is the only reason we haven't supplied
19 this in advance is that our reading of it and our decision to use it has
20 been so recent that the opportunity simply didn't arise. So with that
21 apology, here it is.
22 Q. Yes, Mr. Egrlic, I -- the simplest thing is for me to invite you
23 first of all just to have a quick look at this document. And before
24 we -- just sufficiently to answer the question whether you have ever seen
25 this document or a copy of this document before?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, as a matter of fact, what has been
2 presented to us are actually two documents.
3 MR. STEWART: Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: So therefore -- and they very much look the same. So
5 if you're asking about a document, could you please guide the witness to
6 look at what exactly.
7 MR. STEWART: Yes. In fact, Ms. Loukas had just helpfully
8 reminded me that there were the two B/C/S versions.
9 Does the witness at the moment just have -- perhaps he can have
10 both. They are quite similar.
11 Q. Mr. Egrlic --
12 MR. STEWART: It's the same -- as far as we can see, it's the same
13 document, but it has been transmitted on different occasions, so towards
14 the top of the page it bears different markings indicating that it has
15 been transmitted. Is that --
16 JUDGE ORIE: It also has different markings in the text,
17 Mr. -- If you would look at the underlining, you would see that there are
18 differences as well. So could you please tell us whether you would like
19 the witness to look at the copy with two underlined segments on the bottom
20 or the one underlined?
21 MR. STEWART:
22 Q. My question, Mr. Egrlic, is just have a fairly quick look, please,
23 at both of them, and please tell Their Honours whether you remember seeing
24 either of these documents, or a copy of either of these documents before.
25 A. This is the first time I've seen these documents.
1 Q. Just to make it clear, it's in fact, with some differences of
2 underlining and some markings towards the top of the page, in its
3 essentials, the text is the same? It's basically the same document? You
4 can see that, Mr. Egrlic, can't you?
5 A. That's what one would say on the basis of the contents.
6 Q. Well, I take the one, just for convenience, so that we're all
7 working from the same one, Mr. Egrlic, I invite you to take the one that
8 has got two lots of underlining. So in items 4 and 5, in each of those
9 you will see some underlining. If you take that one and if everybody
10 looks at that one for the moment --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Can we get rid of the other one.
12 MR. STEWART: I believe we can, Your Honour. It really isn't
13 going to -- certainly, Your Honour got rid of it in comprehensive terms.
14 That's the sound of copies being got rid of that's being recorded.
15 Q. Mr. Egrlic, it's -- I'm, of course, now reading from the English.
16 But it's headed on the top left, leaving aside the stuff that's to do with
17 it being faxed backwards and forwards "Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
18 Ministry of National Defence, Territorial Defence staff, Sarajevo."
19 There's a date, 29th of April 1992. "Very urgent. Order to carry out the
20 decision of the Presidency of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina."
21 And I did ask you to look quickly at it a few minutes ago, Mr. Egrlic.
22 But just taking a little bit more slowly now, then, "On the basis of the
23 Presidency of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina's decision of 27th of
24 April 1992 on the withdrawal of JNA/Yugoslav People's Army units from the
25 territory of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and because
1 of the violation of this Presidency decision and because the former JNA
2 has begun to steal and plunder the property of the Republic of Bosnia and
3 Herzegovina, I hereby issue the following..."
4 And taking it in summary rather than reading it all out subject to
5 His Honour's direction, mount a blockade of all roads, number one; number
6 two, mount a blockade of the wider and make use of natural obstacles;
7 three, to prevent unannounced columns of units of the former JNA
8 unescorted by the MUP from leaving their barracks; four, speed up combat
9 activities. I'm summarising. And then finishing up, combat operations,
10 plans should include extensive measures for the protection of the
11 population and the material goods of the citizens of the Republic of
12 Bosnia and Herzegovina. And it's signed by Commander,
13 Colonel Hasan Efendic.
14 Now, in April 1992, you knew who Mr. Efendic was, didn't you,
15 Mr. Egrlic?
16 A. I knew because he had designated a commander of the
17 Territorial Defence in Kljuc.
18 Q. Now, you were informed by Mr. Omer Filipovic of the contents of
19 this document, weren't you?
20 A. He didn't inform me about the contents. This is the first time
21 I've seen the document.
22 Q. So you're saying, Mr. Egrlic, two not exactly the same things.
23 You've never seen this document before, and are you saying that you'd
24 never even heard about it before?
25 A. I heard about it when I came here and read Mr. Filipovic's
1 statement according to which there was some kind of a document. But I
2 never had the opportunity to examine the document. This is the first time
3 I have seen it.
4 Q. Well, let's look again, please, at Mr. Filipovic's statement,
5 which is the one you just mentioned you read.
6 MR. STEWART: That is an exhibit in this case. That's P245, if
7 the witness might be handed that.
8 Q. And Mr. Filipovic --
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
10 MR. STEWART:
11 Q. Mr. Filipovic had a position within the TO, Territorial Defence,
12 didn't he, in April 1992?
13 A. Yes, he did.
14 Q. He was the commander in -- he was the commander in Pudin Han. Is
15 that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Which we know is within the Municipality of Kljuc. Look again at
18 his statement at -- excuse me.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that you would lead the witness to page 2,
20 the last five lines to start with, and then to continue page 3.
21 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. It's the last paragraph on
22 page 2 of the English version. I was just inviting Ms. Cmeric to tell me
23 exactly where it was in the B/C/S.
24 JUDGE ORIE: It's the same.
25 MR. STEWART: It's in the middle of page -- slightly higher up,
1 isn't it?
2 JUDGE ORIE: It's the last --
3 MR. STEWART: It's about five lines from the bottom of page 2.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's what I referred to.
5 MR. STEWART: I thank you. Your Honour is ahead of me getting my
6 information from my left. Thank you.
7 Q. But I think perhaps we better start just a little higher up at the
8 beginning of that -- well, that's where you are in the B/C/S version.
9 "Among the mentioned written instructions that I can remember..." Do you
10 see that paragraph, Mr. Egrlic? First of all, whether you see the
11 paragraph, Mr. Egrlic, and then I shall feel happier if I know you've got
12 the right paragraph.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps the witness starts reading the paragraph
14 where on the first line "the 29th of April" appears.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, which page is that on?
16 MR. STEWART: On page 2 --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Page 2.
18 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Q. On page 2, His Honour is suggesting, Mr. Egrlic, that you begin at
20 a paragraph on page 2. It's somewhere in the bottom half of page 2 that
21 has the date "29th of April" in the first line. It says "after a short
22 period of time, I think it was on 29th April this year ..." Do you see
23 that? You're being helped to it, Mr. Egrlic. You've got that, have you?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. So "after a short period of time, I think it was on the 29th of
1 April I sent the proposal or I received a fax message addressed to the
2 vice-president of the Kljuc Municipal Assembly."
3 THE INTERPRETER: Counsel, please slow down for the interpreters.
4 MR. STEWART:
5 Q. "But it was by mistake given to the president of the municipal
6 assembly and the executive committee. I think that the copy of this fax
7 is filed at the information centre. I lost my copy. It is stated in the
8 fax that by order I" - that's Filipovic - "am appointed commander of the
9 TO staff of the Kljuc Municipality, the order on my appointment was signed
10 by TO Bosnia-Herzegovina commander Colonel Hasan Efendic. All my contacts
11 with the TO BH staff involved only a few of my telephone calls and a few
12 of their telephone messages and orders."
13 And then it goes on: "Among the mentioned written instructions
14 that I can remember are instruction or something else - I do not recall
15 exactly the name of the document - for work of the TO units. I think also
16 directive for disabling and preventing unannounced military columns,
17 former JNA, to pass and some other less important instructions. We were
18 ordered to prevent and disable unannounced persons and persons without
19 escort of the BH MUP police to pass. I cannot recall the exact words of
20 the order, but I think it said that all devices at our disposal should be
21 used to implement the task."
22 Now, would you agree so far, Mr. Egrlic, that that document just
23 described there by Mr. Filipovic is about as clearly as can be the
24 document we've just been looking at?
25 A. The conclusion one would draw on the basis of this description is
1 that this is the document in question.
2 Q. Yes. Thank you. It then continues: "Directive and other
3 documentation can be found in the centre in the village of Pudin Han. I
4 informed the president of the executive committee, Asim Egrlic, about the
5 contents of the directive."
6 So, are you now saying that he is wrong about that?
7 A. As I have already said, he didn't inform me about this, and today
8 is the first time I've seen this document.
9 Q. So just to get it clear, he is wrong about that, then, in that
11 A. He's wrong.
12 Q. Do you -- that statement is dated 29th of May 1992. Mr. Egrlic,
13 you were asked specifically by the Prosecution whether you'd had an
14 opportunity to read this statement. This was at page 62 of yesterday's
15 transcript. You said, "Yes, I have." And you were asked: "In general
16 terms to the best of your knowledge and matters you had knowledge on, is
17 this statement accurate?"
18 And your answer was: "For the most part, the greatest part of the
19 statement, it is."
20 Can you explain why you gave that confirmation to the
21 Trial Chamber yesterday when this particular point in the statement
22 involving yourself is wrong?
23 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. MARGETTS: If we could refer to the bottom of page 63 of the
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 transcript of yesterday, you'll see that the answer the witness gave
2 yesterday is entirely consistent with the answer he has given today.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I think that this was exactly the spot he referred to
4 as being incorrect in the statement of Mr. Filipovic, Mr. Stewart. But we
5 could check.
6 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, Your Honour. It's at the bottom of page 63,
7 and the answer is given at the top of page 64.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Just checking.
9 MR. STEWART: Well, I've no answer to that one, Your Honour.
10 That's obviously -- what Mr. Margetts says is clearly correct.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. STEWART: Yes, my apologies. I'd simply overlooked it, and
13 that's absolutely right.
14 Good point for a break, Your Honour, perhaps.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This needs some reflection.
16 We'll have a break until 5 minutes past 6.00.
17 --- Recess taken at 5.46 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 6.10 p.m.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, please proceed.
20 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Q. Mr. Egrlic, you -- jumping to a different topic altogether, you
22 told the Trial Chamber on Tuesday when you gave your evidence, and this is
23 at page 35 of the transcript, that you had first heard of the crisis staff
24 of the Autonomous Region of Krajina around mid-1991. And my question is
25 how sure you are of that particular time period, mid-1991?
1 A. Well, I said I thought it was in mid-1991.
2 Q. You say you thought. So would you be surprised, then, to know
3 that there was no Autonomous Region of Krajina Crisis Staff at any time
4 during 1991?
5 A. I don't know whether I would be surprised, but I think that it was
6 already established in 1991.
7 Q. But if I suggest to you that it wasn't actually established until
8 April 1992, is it that you wouldn't be in a position to say that was
10 A. I wouldn't be because after all many years have passed since. All
11 I was able to say was that I thought it happened in that period.
12 Q. Yes. In fact, I meant May, but I don't think that affects your
13 answer, Mr. Egrlic.
14 The -- you talked about Mr. Brdjanin, and you described him
15 communicating with the SDS representatives in Kljuc by using the fax, et
16 cetera, is what you said -- well, on the phone, by using the fax, et
17 cetera. And then you were asked about a particular document, the one with
18 the 14 points which we'll come to in due course. But is that particular
19 communication, the document that we looked at with the 14 points - do say
20 if you feel the need to see it right now - is that the only specific
21 communication that you know of between Mr. Brdjanin and the SDS
22 representatives in Kljuc?
23 A. As for written documents, it is the only document attesting to the
24 fact of communication.
25 Q. Do you have any specific recollection, knowledge of any other
1 communication between Mr. Brdjanin and the SDS representatives in Kljuc?
2 A. I don't remember.
3 Q. I wonder if you could be handed, please, the document which is
4 Exhibit P228. Now, you said that the contents of the document seem to
5 amount to introducing a state of emergency which was only appropriate in a
6 time of war. That was your answer. That's page 38 of Tuesday's
8 Do you agree that on the 29th of October 1991, this was a document
9 which was produced in a time of war?
10 A. In the area of Kljuc Municipality and in the territory of Bosnia
11 and Herzegovina, this was not wartime. The war was going on in Croatia.
12 Q. But this document is -- talks about the war in Croatia, doesn't
13 it, Mr. Egrlic? See point 14.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. That's an express reference to Croatia. Look at point 3, "Form
16 units for the front and designate their replacements." What "front" do
17 you say was being referred to there?
18 A. This is a reference to the Croatian front, but it was
19 necessary -- not necessary for that purpose to form a command in our place
20 and abrogate the power that belonged to local authorities. And that was
21 in item 1.
22 Q. So let's get it clear, then, Mr. Egrlic: The answer you've just
23 given implies your disagreement [Realtime transcript read in error
24 "agreement"] with the authors of this document about what was necessary
25 at the time. That's right, isn't it?
1 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. MARGETTS: That question fails to accurately specify what the
4 witness said. Defence counsel has characterised one element of the
5 witness's answer, but has neglected to characterise the second element of
6 the answer. The second --
7 JUDGE ORIE: The answer of the witness is not properly summarised
8 by only referring to what he deemed to be necessary. He also said that
9 this was within the power of local authorities and not to, I take it, at
10 least, the persons or authority that sent this document.
11 MR. STEWART: With respect, Your Honour, partly. One difficulty
12 is I think there's an error in the transcript because I say: "So let's
13 get it clear, then, Mr. Egrlic, the answer you've just given implies your
14 agreement with the authors of this document" and I think the word should
15 be "disagreement". Just to clear that up.
16 JUDGE ORIE: That's what I heard you say.
17 MR. STEWART: That's a side detail, but just to make that clear.
18 But Your Honour then there's nothing unfair or inappropriate about my
19 question because I'm not attempting and I don't need to summarise the
20 whole answer. The point which I then ask in my further question is an
21 entirely fair point to take from the answer because the answer contains
22 two limbs. And I'm not -- there's no distortion and there's no unfairness
23 in my concentrating a further question on that particular element of the
24 previous answer.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Margetts.
1 I do agree that you said, "This answer you've given implies" which
2 of course is a rather vague thing. Would you say include or -- yes,
3 Mr. Margetts.
4 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, the Defence has characterised the
5 witness's disagreement with the authorities to be in respect of the
6 necessity; the witness has clearly said that the disagreement is in
7 respect of the necessity and in respect of the illegality.
8 MR. STEWART: That demonstrates that my question is an entirely
9 fair one because I'm entitled to take those points separately.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But -- well, it's a bit -- Mr. Stewart, let me
11 perhaps use an example that's not directly related to this one, although
12 it was very recently. When the witness said it was -- there was no war,
13 look at number 14. There they're talking about war. This, of course, is
14 a way of questioning -- I mean, if I would put it to you that wherever war
15 is reported on the radio that would equal more or less a situation of war,
16 you will certainly agree with me that that's not a fair way of putting it
17 to a witness. I mean, it's perhaps within the art of cross-examination
18 which, as you may know, is not appreciated in all its aspects in all
19 systems. Therefore, I'd like to ask you to make clear if you're dealing
20 with one part of the answer of the witness or another part because it
21 could confuse the witness, and we want to avoid that.
22 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, with all due respect, I think it's the
23 objection and the exchange which has confused the witness because there
24 wasn't apparently any confusion on the part of the witness before --
25 JUDGE ORIE: I said I was afraid it might confuse the witness.
1 And you may now proceed.
2 MR. STEWART:
3 Q. It's your belief, Mr. Egrlic, that the steps set out in this
4 document were not necessary at that time in Kljuc. Is that correct?
5 A. Correct.
6 Q. The answer you gave on Tuesday was that a state of
7 emergency -- well, it amounted to introducing a state of emergency which
8 was only appropriate in a time of war.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Is it then your -- is this a fair summary of what you're saying,
11 that you didn't regard Kljuc as being in a time or state of war?
12 A. It wasn't. I said so several times.
13 Q. You said in your evidence on Tuesday that on the basis of this
14 document, a number of steps were taken by the SDS, the Serbian Democratic
15 Party so that in the forthcoming period these items were implemented. And
16 by "implemented," did you intend to mean implemented in Kljuc?
17 A. In Kljuc, yes.
18 Q. And in fact, in your evidence, you were asked, "Were most of the
19 items listed numbered 1 to 14 implemented by the Kljuc SDS?" And you
20 said: "Yes." And you stand by that answer, do you, Mr. Egrlic?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. So item 1, "Immediately form a command of the town and set up
23 round-the-clock duty," was that done immediately after the 29th of October
25 A. Yes, it was. Soon after.
1 Q. How soon after?
2 A. I think a couple of days later, the command of the town was
4 Q. Did you know that?
5 A. I knew that the crisis staff had been formed. That's what I mean
6 when I mentioned this command of the town, because by establishing the
7 crisis staff, they took upon themselves all the functions of the municipal
8 assembly and the legally elected authorities.
9 Q. So that was done within a couple of days. And was round-the-clock
10 duty set up at the same time?
11 A. Round-the-clock duty was introduced with relation to executive
12 authorities, the police, and the army. The number of troops on the
13 streets, the number of personnel on the streets was increased, and duty
14 service was stepped up.
15 Q. Let's be very specific, Mr. Egrlic: When do you say that you
16 first heard about or knew that a command of the town, in the sense that
17 you've described it, had been set up by the SDS?
18 A. I heard that even before this date. The War Presidency had been
19 established, or rather, the Crisis Staff of the Serbian Democratic Party
20 which later evolved into the War Presidency.
21 Q. In Kljuc?
22 A. In Kljuc, yes.
23 Q. Please let's be very specific about the question and the answer,
24 of course, Mr. Egrlic. You are telling the Tribunal that within a couple
25 of days - that was your phrase - after this document, a command of the
1 town - I'm just using the phrase in the English translation which I
2 suppose gets translated back to the original Serbian - you say that was
3 formed. When did you first know that that had happened?
4 A. I thought that these other items had been implemented within a
5 couple of days. As far as the command of the town is concerned, or
6 rather, the crisis staff, I know that the crisis staff existed even before
7 this date. And when I say "crisis staff," I imply the command of the
9 Q. Did anything change then so far as crisis staff, command of the
10 town? Did anything change after the 29th of October 1991?
11 A. What changed is that mobilisation call-ups of the Territorial
12 Defence became more frequent. Units began to be sent to Croatia
13 officially. It was no longer volunteer units --
14 Q. Mr. Egrlic, I'm going to stop you and invite you to stick to the
15 questions. We have been for some minutes now very clearly talking about
16 item 1 on this list. And it was your evidence before this Trial Chamber
17 that these items on the list were implemented, most of the items number 1
18 to 14 were implemented. And I was careful to make it clear that at this
19 point I was talking specifically about item 1, and you specifically said
20 "a couple of days later." If you want to change your answer, Mr. Egrlic,
21 you've given the solemn declaration, you must change your answer if you
22 feel that's the right thing to do.
23 So far as item 1 on that list as you understand it, was there any
24 change within a few days or a couple of weeks after the 29th of October
25 1991 in Kljuc?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And what was that change?
3 A. Mobilisation of conscripts became more frequent. There was
4 takeover of power in enterprises in the social accounting service, the
6 JUDGE ORIE: I'll stop you for a second, Mr. Egrlic. Mr. Stewart
7 has asked you to concentrate exclusively on item 1 which reads:
8 "Immediately form a command of the town and set up round-the-clock duty."
9 That's what Mr. Stewart asked you about. And the core of his question is
10 that where you said that this was implemented a couple of days later, in
11 an answer a few lines further, you said, well, actually there was already
12 something like that. There was already a command or there was a crisis
14 What Mr. Stewart wants to know from you, was this formation of a
15 command of the town and the setting up round-the-clock duty, was that
16 implemented a couple of days later or was that already in existence when,
17 on the 29th of October, this order was delivered? That's the core of his
18 question. Could you answer to that, please.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As for the command of the town, it
20 had already been formed.
21 JUDGE ORIE: So therefore, his question then was what did then
22 change after the 29th of October if it was already formed? Exclusively on
23 formation of the command of the town, the setting up round-the-clock duty,
24 did anything change in that respect?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the command of the
12 Blank page inserted to ensure the pagination between the English and
13 French transcripts correspond
1 town was not formed just for the sake of forming it. I'm talking about
2 the activities that followed after.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do I then understand your testimony until now
4 where you twice started saying that the mobilisation that became, as you
5 said it -- let me just have a look. That that became more frequent, that
6 you wanted to tell us that the command of the town already in existence
7 took measures as we find them, other measures we find on that list in view
8 of mobilisation, you said, and the takeover of power in enterprises, is
9 that how I have to understand your answer?
10 So already in existence, but the other items, at least you
11 mentioned two, that changed after the 29th of October.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
14 MR. STEWART:
15 Q. And so item 2, the "Establish full mobility of the Territorial
16 Defence," when do you say that happened?
17 A. This, too, had been underway even before the order. The order
18 only contributed to the building up of the mobilisation and establishment
19 of units.
20 Q. And did -- had you -- you had been aware of that, had you?
21 A. All the citizens were aware of that. People went to the
22 battlefield by bus. They would go there and return. People were released
23 from companies on paid leave. That was not a secret in Kljuc, not at all.
24 Q. And when do you say that that happens? When do you say it began?
25 A. It began in August and continued after that date.
1 Q. And what in your view was wrong with that, as a step to have been
3 A. It was all wrong. First of all, people would leave their jobs.
4 Secondly, it was a way of arming Serbian soldiers. Weapons weren't
5 returned. They would take the weapons home with them. Thirdly, the peace
6 was disturbed in Kljuc because they would go to the front with the
7 weapons, and when they returned they would disturb and unsettle the
8 citizens. There was nothing good about it.
9 Q. Those were the consequences, Mr. Egrlic. But your answer: "All
10 the citizens were aware of that people went to the battlefield by bus." I
11 take it this is correct, when you say "the battlefield," you mean the
12 battlefield in and with Croatia. Correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. I don't want to go over the same old ground again, Mr. Egrlic.
15 But there was a war on, so people were going to the battlefield, weren't
17 A. They went to the battlefield, but it was in a different republic,
18 and the Municipality of Kljuc is in the Republic of Bosnia and
19 Herzegovina. I'm talking about the situation in the Municipality of
20 Kljuc, and I'm talking about the consequences of frequent mobilisation,
21 the consequences of the citizens being disturbed. I'm not talking about
22 some sort of municipality in Croatia. I'm talking about a municipality in
23 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
24 Q. The third item, "Form units for the front and designate their
25 replacements," was that done?
1 A. Yes, it was.
2 Q. And when was that done?
3 A. It was done immediately after this decision was made. And earlier
4 on, too, as I have said. This decision only reinforced this matter and it
5 continued in this manner until May.
6 Q. How was the war in Croatia to be fought without units being formed
7 for the front?
8 A. That's a question you should put to the people who fought in the
10 Q. Let me rephrase the question, then. In your view, because you
11 have commented quite a lot on this document, and it's part of your
12 evidence, your comments, in your view, how was the war to be fought
13 without forming units for the front?
14 A. In my view, there shouldn't have been a war at all. I have said
15 this on a number of occasions. And I didn't support this war, nor did the
16 policies of the Bosniak people because this is what caused the war in
17 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
18 Q. Item 4, "All men under the age of 40 to be reassigned from
19 civilian protection to Territorial Defence and Territorial Defence to be
20 subordinated to the corps as wartime units." Did that happen?
21 A. Yes, it did.
22 Q. You know that, do you?
23 A. I do.
24 Q. How do you know it?
25 A. Well, I know that because in the secretariat for national defence,
1 there was a clerk who was still working there. He was a Bosniak, and he
2 told me that as far as the cards, et cetera, were concerned, this should
3 be done, and these units for fighting in the battlefield in Croatia should
4 be formed.
5 Q. And when did you first come to know about that?
6 A. I came to know about that sometime in November 1991.
7 Q. Item 5 on the list: "Take over management in public enterprises,
8 the post office, SDK public auditing service, bank, judiciary, and by all
9 means" - is the translation - "the media." Did that happen?
10 A. Well, in some of the companies, it did happen. In others, it
11 didn't because Serbs already occupied the posts there. I said that
12 yesterday or the day before yesterday. I don't remember when. As far as
13 the media is concerned, Asmir Burzic was replaced and a Serb took his
14 place. In the SDK, the public auditing service, a Bosniak was similarly
15 replaced and a Serb took his place. So the Serbs replaced the Bosniaks,
16 and this decision is one that was implemented.
17 Q. When did this process as described in point 5 then -- when did it
18 first begin?
19 A. Well, it started after this order, immediately after the order.
20 And as there weren't Bosniaks in these places, it was quite easy to bring
21 it to an end.
22 Q. When did the process -- when was it completed? Point 5, we're
23 still talking about.
24 A. It was completed on the 7th of May 1992 when all the Bosniaks were
25 brutally dismissed from all their jobs in the territory of the
1 Municipality of Kljuc.
2 Q. What about 6, "Proclaim a wartime programme schedule on radio
3 stations." Was that done?
4 A. Yes, it was.
5 Q. When?
6 A. Immediately after the radio station was taken over and when the
7 editor was replaced, this wartime programme began to be implemented. And
8 this occurred at the very beginning of 1992.
9 Q. Point 7: "In each municipality, call a meeting of all directors
10 and agree on the means of supplying the population with everything from
11 electricity to consumer goods." Did that happen?
12 A. Yes, it did.
13 Q. When did it happen?
14 A. At the beginning of 1992, all the directors were summoned, and
15 they were issued orders and instructed about what they should do. This
16 depended on the type of trade concerned, and they were told what they had
17 to provide, to supply the troops, citizens, et cetera.
18 Q. Were you present at any such meeting?
19 A. Yes, I was.
20 Q. Can you say when you -- well, how many meetings between October
21 1991 and -- end of October 1991 and beginning of May 1992, how many such
22 meetings did you attend?
23 A. I only attended one such meeting.
24 Q. Point 8: "Place a moratorium on the issuing of construction
25 permits, sale of plots of land, election of directors where the absence of
1 reservists is being abused and halt all changes of ownership of
2 enterprises, et cetera." Did that happen in Kljuc?
3 A. Yes, it did.
4 Q. Was there -- specifically, was there an abuse of the absence of
5 reservists in Kljuc?
6 A. Yes. This started when they returned from the battlefield with
7 their weapons. They started shooting from their weapons and entering
9 Q. Point number 9: "The employment of" - well, there were two
10 elements top point number 9. I will deal with both. "The employment of
11 able-bodied persons from war regions is strictly banned." So that's point
12 number 1. And then coupled with that, "if there are any such already
13 employed, they should be fired immediately and returned to the front."
14 Did that happen in Kljuc?
15 A. Yes. There were refugees in Kljuc who had found accommodation in
16 the hotel. They were from the territory of Croatia. Able-bodied men were
17 mobilised and sent back to the battlefields in Croatia together with other
19 Q. So there was a strict ban, was there, and all such able-bodied
20 persons were fired immediately in Kljuc, were they?
21 A. They weren't employed. They had been mobilised. As they were in
22 the hotel, that is where they were staying, and they were mobilised for
23 the purposes of the war.
24 Q. Point 10: "All weapons and equipment to be collected from
25 deserters." Did that happen?
1 A. That didn't happen.
2 Q. Were there deserters?
3 A. Yes, there were.
4 Q. Number 11: "Make lists of surplus goods as well as shortages and
5 inform SDS Sarajevo, Mr. Ilic, about this." First of all, were such lists
7 A. There were lists in shops. And yes, such lists were made.
8 Q. Who made them?
9 A. They were made by commissions from trading companies.
10 Q. Did you ever see any such list?
11 A. No. But I do know that lists were made.
12 Q. Do you know who Mr. Ilic was?
13 A. No, I don't.
14 Q. Do you know whether he was ever given any information about any of
15 this stuff in point 11?
16 A. No, I don't.
17 Q. Number 12 is "Paramilitary formations, if they exist, to be
18 disbanded immediately and reassigned to the Territorial Defence. This
19 must be carried out without fail." Were there paramilitary formations on
20 the 29th of October 1991 in Kljuc?
21 A. Not on that date. But after the new year, some sort of
22 Bijeli Orlovi or White Eagles arrived. I don't know whether they were
23 resubordinated to the Territorial Defence, but they were present in the
24 territory of the Municipality of Kljuc.
25 Q. How long after the new year did they arrive?
1 A. Well, perhaps it was in February. Before them, some sort of
2 Red Beret formations came to that area.
3 Q. After the new year, but before them?
4 A. Yes. The White Eagles came after the new year. But the
5 Red Berets were there before them.
6 Q. Yes, but before or after the new year, Mr. Egrlic?
7 A. Before the new year. The Red Berets came before the new year,
8 whereas the White Eagles came after the new year.
9 Q. How long before the new year did the Red Berets arrive?
10 A. It was around November.
11 Q. Were they disbanded at any point after their arrival?
12 A. No, they weren't. They remained in the territory of the
14 Q. Point 13: "Impose also war taxes for greater success of the
15 entire operation." Did that happen in Kljuc?
16 A. Yes, it did.
17 Q. When?
18 A. This item is closely linked to item 7 where it says: "Summon all
19 directors in the municipalities and agree on how the population should be
20 provided with supplies. Work organisations had the duty to assist the
21 Serbian Army by providing them with certain supplies. And I think that
22 this concerns the so-called war taxes.
23 MR. STEWART: Your Honour can see that I'm coming up to item 14.
24 I did ask to have five minutes please at some point.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, as I a matter of fact I promised before or after
1 the last break. And of course, when you were halfway, I thought there
2 would be five minutes left until 14. But I don't know how important 14
3 for you is. But I would give you five minutes now.
4 Since I assume that it's important for you to have the five
5 minutes now and not tomorrow morning.
6 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand.
8 Mr. Egrlic, we're not finished yet as you may have understood. We
9 would like to see you back. But tomorrow we are sitting in the morning
10 again, so that would be at 9.00 tomorrow morning. And I again instruct
11 you not to speak with anyone about the testimony you've given in this
12 Court or you're still about to give although you might not know what it is
13 about. But speak with no one about your situation as a witness.
14 Mr. Usher, may escort Mr. Egrlic out of the courtroom. We would
15 like to see you back.
16 [The witness stands down]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart.
18 MR. STEWART: Yes, I'm much obliged, Your Honour. Of course, it
19 would have been neater if I had finished the 14. It's not important.
20 It's really just like having pencils in a row on the desk. Your Honour,
21 there are two points I wanted to raise. The first one was very brief. It
22 was in relation to the observations made by my client Mr. Krajisnik
23 earlier. Simply to say that of course it's not appropriate and the
24 Trial Chamber wouldn't expect it to be privy to discussions in any detail
25 that take place between Mr. Krajisnik and myself, but just to tell
1 Your Honour that we have given no advice -- I can say this, we have given
2 no advice to Mr. Krajisnik which is inconsistent with the outline that
3 Your Honour gave as to the various responsibilities and so on.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I've understood all the observations made by
5 Mr. Krajisnik as an expression of his own concerns about several aspects
6 of his own involvement in the preparation of the Defence.
7 MR. STEWART: Yes. But I wanted to assure Your Honour for the
8 purposes of, if you like, good order of such matters and how they will be
9 dealt with, Your Honour can see how they would be likely to be dealt with.
10 Your Honour, the second observation, it is the only other
11 observation on what Mr. Krajisnik says is then linked to the question of
12 the motion that Mr. Krajisnik offered or suggested what might be an
13 alternative if he were not able to have the transcripts. I do wish to
14 emphasise, Your Honour, that we on Mr. Krajisnik's behalf actually regard
15 that as a most unsatisfactory alternative, whether it's a second-best,
16 third-best or fourth-best, the idea that Mr. Krajisnik, by bringing a
17 computer into court, that in any way remotely solves the difficulty which
18 we say can only be fairly solved with the transcripts, we don't endorse
19 that, and we really understand Mr. Krajisnik to be saying that. But his
20 observation was if you like in pessimistic anticipation of the possibility
21 that the motion might not succeed on that.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, we never understood this observation of
23 Mr. Krajisnik to replace or to be second-best to having, but I did
24 understand it, and I think my fellow Judges also did to say that if the
25 motion would fail, then it would certainly assist me if I would at least
1 have a laptop computer in court so that I could at least process whatever
2 I'd like to process, information, in a better way as I'm able to do now.
3 That's how I understood. So it's not -- the Chamber will certainly -- you
4 don't have to fear, Mr. Stewart, that the Chamber will say, well, since a
5 very nice alternative has presented by Mr. Krajisnik himself, that
6 could -- that convince us that otherwise we would do as well.
7 MR. STEWART: Yes, I'm grateful, Your Honour. Clearly a laptop is
8 better than no laptop from Mr. Krajisnik's point of view. I'm very happy
9 to hear Your Lordship - whether that's a promotion or demotion, I'm not
10 sure, Your Honour. I'm sure it's greatly merited in any case.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's clear.
12 [The Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. STEWART: I beg your pardon. On what you call the B/C/S
15 motion for shorthand, Your Honour, we, of course, have indicated that it
16 would be -- it would be most helpful to have a decision particularly on
17 the point about the transcripts. On the other hand, of course, we are
18 primarily concerned about getting what we regard as the right decision,
19 that's our submission, Your Honour, of course. And if the
20 Prosecution -- if the position is the Prosecution have simply asserted
21 their global position and that's all it is, and it's not particularised in
22 any way, we therefore don't have any opportunity to respond, which would
23 be the normal course, to any points they make, it doesn't become an
24 entirely satisfactory way of dealing with this very important point,
25 Your Honour. We would have a preference, although we would like it dealt
1 with as soon as possible, but we would in fact have a preference if it is
2 necessary to have the matter thoroughly ventilated and to know exactly
3 what the points are, and so far as resource implications are relied upon
4 by anybody, what those implications might be, we would prefer it to be
5 later rather than sooner, if I might say that. Our preference is to have
6 it thoroughly aired rather than have it dealt with very urgently.
7 JUDGE ORIE: You may take it from the questions I put at the
8 beginning of this hearing to you that the Chamber has, of course, already
9 paid a lot of attention to your motion and I expect that the Chamber will
10 be able to give an oral decision by tomorrow. But of course, finally, we
11 have to reach a final decision. And if it could not be a full decision,
12 then at least on the most important elements of the motion you indicated
13 before to me.
14 Yes. We'll then adjourn with, again, thanks to the interpreters,
15 but also to the technicians, and we'll adjourn until tomorrow morning,
16 9.00, same courtroom.
17 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.06 p.m.,
18 to be reconvened on Friday, the 30th day of July,
19 2004, at 9.00 a.m.