1 Tuesday, 9 November 2004
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.21 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, could you please call the case.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Case Number
7 IT-00-39-T, The Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
9 Good afternoon to everyone. Mr. Stewart, are you ready to
10 cross-examine the witness? Then Madam usher, could you please escort
11 Mr. Cengic into the courtroom.
12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, while the witness is coming in, may I
13 just say that we would like to express our appreciation for the fact a lot
14 of work went into the transcript after court yesterday to deal with the
15 problem that I mentioned of continuous prose without identifying the
16 speaker. And we very much appreciate that. Mr. Harmon and I have been
17 discussing possibilities to streamline the procedure in future which is
18 going to be mentioned, I think, in due course.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harmon.
20 MR. HARMON: I was going to have Mr. Hannis raise the issue, but I
21 can address it frankly right now. In respect of the --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Should we not first start with -- Mr. Cengic is now
23 here, and I was informed that solutions had been found, or at least that
24 hard work had been done on it. So perhaps we first -- Mr. Cengic, good
25 afternoon. Perhaps we first start the cross-examination of the witness.
1 If there's any need to do it early, then we better take off five minutes
2 at the end rather than let Mr. Cengic wait.
3 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour, I didn't have in mind that we
4 should deal with it. I just wanted to express my appreciation for the
5 work that went on last night while the witness was coming into court.
6 JUDGE ORIE: So a development of good relationship continued after
8 Mr. Stewart, you may proceed.
9 WITNESS: ISMET CENGIC [Resumed]
10 [Witness answered through interpreter]
11 Cross-examined by Mr. Stewart:
12 Q. Mr. Cengic, good afternoon. Mr. Cengic, it's right, is it, that
13 Mr. Krajisnik was a member of something called the initiative board of the
14 SDS in Novi Grad, at least up to the November 1990 elections? Do you know
16 A. Well, every political party had their own initiative boards, so he
17 probably was. But I'm not sure.
18 Q. Mr. Cengic, is it right that Mr. Krajisnik took part in two or
19 three meetings after the November 1990 elections of the type that you
20 described, to negotiate division and allocation of positions in the
22 A. I think that several meetings were held, but yes, there were more
23 than that.
24 Q. How many more do you say?
25 A. Five or six.
1 Q. So if Mr. Krajisnik's recollection is two or three, you would
2 dispute that?
3 A. I remember there were about five or six.
4 Q. Five or six at which Mr. Krajisnik was present, or five or six all
6 A. I'm sure that he was at the last meetings. Now, whether he was at
7 the first one, too, I can't say. Perhaps he wasn't at the first one.
8 There were four or five after that. I'm not sure that he was at the first
9 meeting. At the first meeting, I made a proposal that all power should be
10 shared among all the parliamentary parties. Then there were
11 representatives --
12 Q. I don't want to go into the content of the meeting unless it's
13 helping you to recall the answer to my question. Can we try and put it
14 this way: You're not in a position to say with any confidence that
15 Mr. Krajisnik attended more than two or three of those negotiating
16 meetings, are you?
17 A. My assertion is that he was there at at least four meetings.
18 Perhaps he did not attend the first meeting.
19 Q. And you know that he became -- perhaps you don't, but that he
20 became president of the Bosnia and Herzegovina parliament sometime in
21 November 1990? Do you know that?
22 A. I know that he was elected to the parliament, but the constituent
23 assembly was held after we had reached all those interparty agreements;
24 that is to say, that at the moment when the negotiations were taking
25 place, Mr. Krajisnik had not been elected president of the parliament yet.
1 Q. Do you know when Mr. Krajisnik was elected president of the Bosnia
2 and Herzegovina Assembly?
3 A. I know for sure that during the negotiations, the talks, he had
4 not been elected. I don't know exactly when he was elected, but it was
5 certainly after the negotiations.
6 Q. So if I put it to you that Mr. Krajisnik became president of the
7 Bosnia and Herzegovina Assembly on the 18th of November 1990, you say
8 that's wrong, do you?
9 A. I wouldn't say anything because I cannot claim what the date was
10 exactly when these meetings were held. But I do know for sure that at the
11 time when the meetings were held, Mr. Krajisnik had not been elected
12 president of the assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina yet.
13 Q. Let's get it clear, Mr. Cengic: You're not suggesting that these
14 meetings to negotiate allocation of positions were all concluded by late
15 November 1990, are you?
16 A. That they were all finished before Mr. Krajisnik was elected
17 president of the parliament of the Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
18 Q. Please, let's not fence around, Mr. Cengic. I'm asking you
19 specific dates. Are you suggesting that those negotiating -- negotiation
20 meetings were all concluded by the 18th of November 1990?
21 A. Yes. If that's the date of Krajisnik's election of president to
22 the parliament of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
23 Q. So it is your recollection, and is it possible then that the at
24 least four meetings that you asserted took place in the course of no more
25 than a couple of weeks?
1 A. Well, approximately. The documentation, the minutes of these
2 meetings were at Mr. Hadzic's, and he got killed. It was perhaps lost
3 subsequently. But I did not take any notes.
4 Q. Please, may I simply remind you, Mr. Cengic, that you're here
5 giving evidence on the basis of a solemn declaration. So what you
6 remember, you remember; and what you can't remember, please tell the
7 Trial Chamber you can't remember. That, I do believe the Trial Chamber
8 would endorse as a proper approach to evidence.
9 So are we saying or are you saying, then, Mr. Cengic, that you
10 actually don't have any clear recollection of the period over which these
11 negotiating meetings took place?
12 A. I know for sure that before Mr. Krajisnik's election as president
13 of the Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina, these negotiations took place,
14 before that. That's what I remember for sure. I did not remember the
15 dates, and I never thought I would need the dates.
16 Q. And had been concluded before his election as president of the
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina Assembly? Is that what you're saying?
18 A. The last meeting was held before Mr. Krajisnik was appointed
19 president of the Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
20 Q. After the elections in November 1990, would you accept
21 Mr. Krajisnik's recollection that he hardly ever went to Novi Grad and
22 went, in fact, before the start of the war only once to the SDS
23 headquarters which is about 12 kilometres from Zabrdje? Would you dispute
24 that recollection?
25 A. As far as I know, and this is what the doorkeeper told me, it's
1 not that it was that way. It wasn't that way. Mr. Krajisnik was seen
2 very often at the municipality building at the SDS offices.
3 Q. By you?
4 A. On the basis of the records that the doorkeeping service has. I
5 did not state last time that I had seen him either.
6 Q. In your evidence yesterday, and this is page 78 of the transcript,
7 you said in relation to this point, you said, "First of all, this is my
8 impression that Mr. Krajisnik was very often the guest of the SDS offices
9 in the town hall." And then you were asked by Mr. Harmon: "Was it
10 reported to you that he appeared at the town hall by others?" And you
11 said: "It was customary for record to be taken of anybody who wasn't an
12 employee of the town hall entering and leaving the building, and such
13 information should have been kept by the janitor." So you're now saying
14 today not just that it should have been kept by the janitor, but that it
15 was kept by the janitor and that you specifically discussed with the
16 janitor Mr. Krajisnik's to-ings and fro-ings from that building. Is that
18 A. I did not only ask about Mr. Krajisnik's entrances. After office
19 hours, I would usually ask who came and went. I thought that
20 Mr. Krajisnik and everybody else were equal. I was simply asking about
21 who came and who went. It's not that I was particularly following what
22 Mr. Krajisnik was doing, and that was not what I had targeted. Every day,
23 I had occasion to see these records as to who came in the afternoon.
24 Q. So yesterday when you gave this evidence, you could have -- you
25 could have added yesterday that you'd actually seen the records of who had
1 gone in and out of the building. But you didn't add that yesterday.
2 That's right, isn't it?
3 A. No one ever asked me.
4 Q. Yesterday, you were telling the Court it was your impression, and
5 now today you're telling the Court that you actually saw written records,
6 aren't you?
7 MR. HARMON: Excuse me, Your Honour. The question that was put to
8 Mr. Cengic yesterday, and was referred to on page 78, was: "Was it
9 reported to you that he appeared at the town hall by others?" Not a
10 question as to whether he saw records.
11 MR. STEWART: Well, it's not one of Mr. Harmon's finest
12 interventions, Your Honour, because -- I'll continue with this questioning
13 as far as I need to, which is not very far, I think, actually.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harmon, Mr. Stewart put to the witness his answer
15 about an impression he had. Since Mr. Stewart did not refer to any
16 question, of course, you could have asked the witness in redirect any
17 further questions on that. But I think it was more appropriate not to
18 intervene at that moment.
19 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
20 MR. STEWART: Yes, thank you, Your Honour. I think in any case
21 I've got to the stage where anything further would be comment rather than
22 useful questions on this topic, so I'll move on.
23 Q. The lead negotiator in the meetings that you've described to
24 allocate and divide functions in the municipality, the lead negotiator for
25 the SDS was Radislav Unkovic, wasn't he?
1 A. At the first meetings?
2 Q. You say the first meetings, Mr. Cengic --
3 A. And also, I was not the person in charge at the first meetings.
4 As our work progressed, some people from the different political parties
5 gained more confidence from the others, and then they led. On behalf of
6 the SDS, that was Mr. Krajisnik. On behalf of the SDA, it was me.
7 Q. You effectively took the lead for the SDA?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Who did you take over from as the lead negotiator for the SDA?
10 A. The first meeting that Mr. Krajisnik attended was chaired by
11 Mr. Mrahorovic. A lot of dividing and multiplying had to be done in order
12 do have a fair distribution of positions. This required quite a bit of
13 math, and Mr. Mrahorovic was not very good at this math, and the fact that
14 I was a mathematics teacher was probably helpful, and that contributed to
15 my prominence. Mr. Safet Hadzic authorised me on behalf of the SDA. He
16 was present, and he gave me power on behalf of the SDA.
17 Q. You said about Mr. Krajisnik, and this is page 15 of yesterday's
18 transcript, you were asked by Mr. Harmon: "Can you tell us very
19 succinctly what positions the SDS took in respect of the positions that
20 were subject to negotiations."
21 And you said: "Well, at the first option that Mr. Krajisnik
22 wanted was to get more than the election results would reflect so we could
23 not reach agreement straight away."
24 Mr. Cengic, I suggest to you there that there was nothing in the
25 least bit unusual about that position. That was part of the cut and
1 thrust of the negotiating exercise you were engaged in. Do you agree?
2 A. That's what I said yesterday, that I did not find this unusual.
3 Q. And you were asked, it was just slightly higher up the page at
4 page 15, you were asked specifically "in the end, Mr. Cengic, were the
5 negotiations that your delegation had with the SDS delegations
6 successful?" You said, well, they were, they were successful. We managed
7 to sign an agreement and distribute executive positions among these three
8 parties. That's to say, the SDA, the SDS, and the HDZ."
9 So the overall picture was that they were no doubt quite tough
10 negotiations, but they actually worked out with a compromise which
11 everybody signed up to. Correct?
12 A. Well, it is correct, and that's what I said yesterday, too.
13 Q. Mr. Krajisnik was a contributor to and in the end a supporter of
14 exactly that compromise, successful agreement that was reached?
15 A. Had he not been in favour of this kind of agreement, he wouldn't
16 have signed it.
17 Q. Now, you say that you proposed, and you personally you had in
18 mind, that the other parties who had gained votes of the elections, that's
19 to say, outside the main three, the SDA, the SDS, and the HDZ, that the
20 other parties should also have positions. That's at page 11 of
21 yesterday's transcript. And you -- that the purpose -- well, I beg your
22 pardon. That was your personal suggestion right at the beginning, wasn't
24 A. That was at the first meeting, that proposal was turned down.
25 That's correct.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. Was it, in fact, supported by your own SDA colleagues?
2 A. This proposal was not discussed at all. I did not consult anybody
3 beforehand, so I just spoke off the cuff.
4 Q. So the picture is, then, it was your own idea which you produced
5 there and then at the meeting, but from what you've said, it seemed that
6 it didn't fall on fertile ground because it didn't lead on to any
7 discussion at all. Is that right?
8 A. Precisely.
9 Q. You also referred, and this is at page 16 of yesterday's
10 transcript, to an agreement which you say Mr. Krajisnik reported to you,
11 an agreement that you say he said he had made with Muhamed Cengic, who was
12 at that time vice-president of the SDA, that the municipality of Novi Grad
13 should get one more position than justified by the election results with
14 compensation of a position in the Municipality of Cajnice. I hope I
15 pronounced that even approximately right.
16 You agree, that's a summary of your position, Mr. Cengic, on this
18 A. What you said is correct, but I said, and that's the way it was,
19 that someone from the SDS - it didn't have to be Krajisnik - I think that
20 I didn't mention that it was Krajisnik who was discussing things with
21 Muhamed Cengic, but somebody else from the SDS, that they had reached this
22 kind of agreement at a high level, at a higher level, that they agreed on
23 these exchanges.
24 Q. It may be that we can get agreement, Mr. Cengic, on this, then,
25 because what you actually said in your evidence yesterday, and this is at
1 page 16, you said at one point in time, Mr. Krajisnik made an offer, he
2 said, that he had agreed with Muhamed Cengic that the Municipality of
3 Novi Grad should get one more position and so on. But what I put to you,
4 Mr. Cengic, is that in fact agreement had been reached between
5 Mr. Velibor Ostojic on the one hand for the SDS and Mr. Muhamed Cengic for
6 the SDA. Does that now sound right to you?
7 A. I believe that this is right, yes. Actually, yes, that's right.
8 Q. And -- but in the end, it didn't come to anything because the SDS
9 representatives in your negotiations at your local level failed to
10 persuade you and your colleagues to carry out any such swap of positions.
11 That's right, isn't it?
12 A. The reason for that was that the following day, I went to talk
13 with Mr. Muhamed Cengic, and he told me that there was no such agreement.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, may I ask you to clarify one thing which
15 is totally unclear. The answer of the witness included one more position
16 than merited. One more position in what exactly? Because there seems to
17 be a swap between municipalities. It's not entirely clear to me what
18 positions we are talking about.
19 MR. STEWART: Yes, I'll try and clarify that, Your Honour.
20 Q. Mr. Cengic, this is right, is it, that - leaving aside your last
21 answer - what was reported to you, you say, by Mr. Krajisnik was an
22 agreement that Novi Grad should get one more position than -- the SDS,
23 rather, should get one more position in Novi Grad in these negotiations
24 than would otherwise be justified by the election results, and that in
25 compensation, according to you, you were told that the SDA would get one
1 more position in the Municipality of Cajnice. That's right, is it?
2 A. The whole point was as follows -- that is, you were correct in
3 what you're saying. But I then said how could you draw a comparison
4 between a locality which has 100.000 voters and another locality that has
5 less than 5.000 voters? But nevertheless, I did approach
6 Mr. Muhamed Cengic and asked him whether there was such an agreement
7 really, and the answer was that there was no such agreement. Now, at the
8 next meeting, I said that there was not going to be any swapping of
10 Q. Because, in fact, I put it to you that Cajnice was never mentioned
11 by Mr. Krajisnik or anybody else in relation to any such agreement?
12 A. Cajnice? Yes.
13 Q. That it was never mentioned? It wasn't part of --
14 A. Cajnice was being offered as compensation for Novi Grad. However,
15 of course, there was no agreement to that effect because Cajnice is a
16 small locality. One street in Novi Grad is larger than Cajnice itself.
17 Q. When you were dealing with this point in your evidence yesterday,
18 you said, and this is page 16, that you checked at the SDA headquarters
19 whether there was any such agreement with regard to this kind of an
20 exchange of mandates, and then I'm quoting. And then the next bit is now
21 a direct quote. "But they said that the answer was no, that no such
22 agreement was reached."
23 So Mr. Cengic, when you were referring yesterday to "they said
24 that the answer was no and the people you checked with at the SDA
25 headquarters," then are you saying that according to your evidence today
1 that actually it was Mr. Muhamed Cengic himself that you asked?
2 A. When I said "they," I meant in any case Muhamed Cengic. I meant
3 the person mentioned as having had an agreement with the SDS, having
4 signed the agreement with the SDS. I went to the staff, and that's where
5 Muhamed Cengic was, and I talked to him. And that was the answer I got
6 from him.
7 Q. So the difference between your evidence yesterday and the evidence
8 today is that you specifically mention Mr. Muhamed Cengic, but,
9 Mr. Cengic, I also put to you --
10 A. Precisely.
11 Q. -- that the difference between the evidence you have given in this
12 hearing this week and what you said in the statement that you signed in
13 1998 is that in that statement, you said nothing whatever about having
14 checked with anybody about this agreement. And I think perhaps in
15 fairness, you should be shown this statement.
16 MR. STEWART: Could the witness have the B/C/S version of his
17 statement which the rest of us have in English dated the 22nd of January
19 JUDGE ORIE: I think it's not in evidence, is it?
20 MR. STEWART: It's not in evidence, Your Honour. But I'd assume
21 that it was readily available. It has been on provisional lists for --
22 JUDGE ORIE: I just want someone to provide it to Madam usher.
23 MR. STEWART: Indeed, Your Honour, absolutely.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Whether it's you or whether it's the Prosecution. Is
25 there a copy available? Otherwise, mine could be used.
1 MR. STEWART: It's a fairly short passage, Your Honour. I just
2 want to be fair to the witness in having him see it, but he can have that
3 opportunity in a moment if it's necessary.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. STEWART:
6 Q. The particular passage, Mr. Cengic, it's just that you -- it's in
7 paragraph 13 - it's been numbered now - of your statement. And you say:
8 "One day I recall Krajisnik saying that Velibor Ostojic informed him that
9 he had just made an agreement with Muhamed Cengic," so that confirms what
10 you said this morning -- this afternoon, rather, "to give one more leading
11 position in the executive bodies of Novi Grad to the SDS in Novi Grad and
12 in return give the SDA one more position in Cajnice." And then you go on.
13 And it's just the next couple of sentences which are key here. "I didn't
14 believe that because Cajnice is a small town with some 3.000 inhabitants.
15 It would have seemed much more likely if they had arranged a swap between
16 positions in Novi Grad and Banja Luka. Krajisnik's tactic didn't change
17 anything, and we continued to assign positions as I will describe below."
18 Mr. Cengic, what I'm suggesting to you is it's extremely
19 surprising if, in fact, you took the clear simple step of checking this
20 with Mr. Muhamed Cengic himself, that you didn't say exactly that when you
21 gave your statement in 1998. Why didn't you mention it then?
22 A. When I was giving my statement in 1998, I didn't even think that I
23 was going to come here and that everything would have to be stated exactly
24 word by word. And this was a matter of establishing truth, and already
25 four years had elapsed. It was difficult to establish how exactly things
1 went. I only know that the agreement failed, and when I went to
2 Muhamed Cengic, I did not really think that that was an important matter.
3 The important matter to me was that the agreement had not been reached as
5 Q. Yes, Mr. Cengic, it comes to this: That in your statement that
6 you gave in 1998, you gave your reasons for inferring that that agreement
7 could not have taken place in those terms, instead of simply saying as a
8 matter of fact that you had checked with one of the parties to the
9 agreement and had been told that it hadn't, that's what I'm putting to
10 you. That it's surprising that you go in for reasoning and inference and
11 you now tell the Trial Chamber that you actually checked with the person
12 involved and there was no need for reasoning and inference. That's what
13 I'm putting to you. What do you say?
14 A. I can tell you the following: Even if Muhamed Cengic had said at
15 the time that this matter had to be pursued, I would not have -- I would
16 not have done so because having been responsible for Novi Grad, I would
17 have criticised Muhamed Cengic for having discussed such important
18 matters. I went there not because I was in a dilemma as to whether this
19 should be implemented or not; but rather, to verify whether what
20 Mr. Krajisnik was saying was true or not. Indeed, it would have been
21 highly inappropriate to reach such an agreement because Muhamed Cengic was
22 a person who could have erred in his assessment. I could not afford that,
23 being at the municipal level and referring back to the comparison that
24 I've already talked about.
25 Q. All right. Let's move on, Mr. Cengic. Yesterday at page 17 of
1 the transcript, you described how during the negotiations that took place
2 in the municipality building, there was only a wall separating the SDA
3 offices from the SDS offices. And you said sometimes you would go to
4 your --
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. -- The SDA rooms with your delegation, but more often you would
7 stay in the hall and wait for the SDS to return. And then you said:
8 "When we went downstairs, I heard on several occasions Mr. Krajisnik,
9 since the walls are thin, talk to someone called Radovan or Raso."
10 Mr. Cengic, it's not a hundred per cent clear, so I would ask you to make
11 clear, when you talk about when you went downstairs, are you talking
12 about -- does that mean going to the SDS rooms, or does it mean going to
13 the hall?
14 A. The corridor ran throughout the building. The negotiations took
15 place in the room number 327. Now, when I say "downstairs," I meant that
16 we were descending from the third to the first floor, and the SDA, SDS,
17 and HDZ office were side by side on the first floor. That's what I meant
18 when I said downstairs, from the third to the first floors.
19 Q. So to put it in an absolute nutshell, when you were talking about
20 going downstairs, you were talking about going down to those offices where
21 there was only a wall separating the SDA and SDS rooms. Correct?
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. And it was on those occasions then that you would on several
24 occasions you say hear Mr. Krajisnik talking to someone called Radovan or
1 A. Yes, and this was not unusual to me at all.
2 Q. Are you saying that you could actually follow the conversation, or
3 just that you pick up odd phrases and words?
4 A. It was not my intention to eavesdrop, nor did I ever do that in my
5 life. Simply while I was having a cup of coffee and a cigarette, I could
6 hear this conversation going on. Of course, we would keep talking about
7 the matters that we had to discuss. I never even thought of things
8 happening that did happen and that ever anybody would ask me questions to
9 that effect. If these conversations were followed, they were probably
10 followed by the services in charge of that.
11 Q. So the typical pattern there was that you and your colleagues were
12 naturally talking about what you had got to talk about while there was
13 discussion and you're presumably talking about telephone calls taking
14 place in the room next door?
15 A. Yes, yes, telephone calls, right. But since I did not enter the
16 premises, I didn't enter the offices, these could have been live
17 conversations. I cannot say. Although the offices were one next to each
18 other, I never entered their office.
19 Q. Well, Mr. Cengic, if you were not hearing sufficiently well to
20 distinguish between a live conversation and a telephone conversation, then
21 I suggest to you that you weren't hearing very much of these conversations
22 at all. Do you see what I'm saying? What I'm putting to you it's
23 terribly easy to tell the difference between a telephone conversation
24 going on on the other side of a wall and a live, two-person conversation
25 where the people are in the same room. It's just easy. So I'm putting it
1 to you that you weren't able to draw that distinction, you were not really
2 following all that closely these conversations?
3 A. I was not following the conversations at all. When people greet
4 each other, they tend to speak a bit more loudly, saying hi, hello, how
5 are you doing. And of course, that was something I did not pay any
6 attention to, nor would I do that today. I would hear them greet each
7 other, and then would not hear what went on in their conversation. I had
8 no intention of eavesdropping on anyone. I merely heard someone greeting
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Cengic, I do not know whether you
11 understood the question rightly. But what Mr. Stewart puts to you is the
12 following: If you are able to hear a name, then at least you should be
13 able to hear whether one person is just speaking, waiting for an answer
14 not given directly to him, but through a telephone, and then continue to
15 speak just on his own.
16 Mr. Stewart puts to you that it should be quite clear that if you
17 are able to hear the name of the other participants in the conversation,
18 that at least you should also hear whether that person is speaking alone,
19 waiting for an answer, then speaking again, or whether someone else is
20 heard to answer whatever he says.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my intention was not to
22 listen to other people's conversations. It was simply while I was
23 entering my office, I heard this name that I mentioned being mentioned,
24 and then I entered the office. I was not there listening to
25 conversations. Of course, since Mr. Krajisnik was receiving a lot of
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 delegations, he could have talked to many different people. I don't know
2 what was going on behind the door. I'm just saying that on several
3 occasions, I could hear the name Radovan or Raso mentioned, but I cannot
4 go into any details. I wish to emphasise once again Your Honour that
5 never in my life had I eavesdropped on anyone, nor would I wish to.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
7 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Did you ever hear the name Ostojic or Velibor being mentioned in
9 the course of any of these conversations, conversations of Mr. Krajisnik's
10 that you --
11 A. I did not. I didn't hear.
12 Q. Do you know that so far as Mr. Krajisnik consulted anybody else in
13 relation to these negotiations, that the person that he consulted first or
14 most would normally have been Mr. Ostojic? Do you know that?
15 A. How would I know it? I wouldn't even know if I was downstairs or
16 in the offices. No, no, I don't know.
17 Q. You've answered the question. Thank you, Mr. Cengic. Different
18 issue, then, this proposal for a separate Zabrdje commune, just to
19 identify the topic because we're moving on, it's right, isn't it,
20 Mr. Krajisnik was not involved in that process, that project, that idea at
21 all, was he?
22 A. I've never said that he did participate in that idea.
23 Q. So what I just put to you is correct: He wasn't involved in that
24 process, project, idea at all? That's correct, isn't it?
25 A. How should I know? I know for a fact that Boro Bjelica came and
1 said that they were going to establish a local commune. Whether
2 Mr. Krajisnik was abreast of what Boro Bjelica was saying and in view of
3 the fact that his house was in Zabrdje and in view of his influence, I
4 don't think anything could have happened without his knowledge. But
5 Mr. Krajisnik did not appear at these meetings in person to say that.
6 Q. You described, and this is at page 40 of yesterday's transcript,
7 you described a meeting that you held in July 1991, you say, in an attempt
8 to resolve this problem, you were asked: "Did you call Mr. Momcilo
9 Krajisnik to assist you?" Now, Mr. Cengic, the position is this, isn't
10 it, there was a meeting between and you Mr. Krajisnik - that's
11 acknowledged - around that time. But the meeting was at Mr. Krajisnik's
12 request specifically to deal with the question of legalisation of the
13 construction of his house. That's right, isn't it?
14 A. No. The meeting was convened at my request. I invited them to my
15 office. Prior to that, I thought that Mr. Krajisnik was not aware of that
16 problem at all. When I started presenting the problem, I realised that
17 Mr. Krajisnik was familiar with the matter. We did not talk about this
18 problem for a long time at all because simply Mr. Krajisnik changed the
19 topic and starting dealing with this other issue. When we're talking
20 about the request contained in that document by Bjelica, then he sees the
21 opportunity of being there at the municipality, and he asked me to call a
22 lady professional dealing with the legalisation of buildings, and she was
23 doing her job very properly. She was a daughter of the chief of the
24 Novi Grad police.
25 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction, she was the wife of
1 the chief of Novi Grad's police.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] She came downstairs, and she
3 explained to Mr. Krajisnik how much he had to pay for the legalisation of
4 the house. He smiled and said, well, this is a very hefty amount. I
5 won't be able to pay that amount, and let alone the others. How are they
6 going to pay such amounts?
7 As for the issue of the local commune, nothing was resolved. The
8 situation remained as before except for the fact that on that occasion I
9 saw for myself that Mr. Krajisnik was as informed about it as I was, that
10 he knew about it.
11 MR. STEWART:
12 Q. Well, we've already established, Mr. Cengic, there's a clear
13 difference between your recollection and Mr. Krajisnik's as to who
14 requested the meeting and why it was called. So we won't go over that
15 ground again.
16 Do you agree, then, that any discussion of any other issues apart
17 from Mr. Krajisnik's house was very short and in the end rather incidental
18 to the discussion that took place between you and him on that day?
19 A. I would like to go back to this other issue. I would like
20 Your Honours to see an interview given by Mr. Krajisnik for Novogradsko
21 Oko where it says that I had come to Novi Grad upon the invitation of
22 Cengic, and that's what confirms what I said, that it was upon my
23 invitation that he came there. So I think you were discussing that paper
24 already. You could take a look at it there.
25 Q. Mr. Cengic, I'm sure Mr. Harmon can handle the Prosecution case,
1 if we just confine ourselves to questions and answers in the course of
2 your giving evidence.
3 The -- you said in your evidence yesterday, page 41, about this
4 meeting, "we did not talk about it that much," it being the question of
5 Zabrdje. "We did not talk about it that much."
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And you said also that he supported -- in a way, he supported the
8 sponsors of that proposal. Mr. Cengic, if you had asked him specifically
9 to come to a meeting to discuss this issue, it's a bit strange, isn't it,
10 that you didn't even talk about it that much and that the most you can say
11 is in a way he supported the sponsors?
12 A. I concluded that his position was identical to that of the
13 proposing party, the party that proposed the idea. What else was there to
15 Q. Who were the sponsors of that proposal, to use, well, your phrase
16 as it comes across in English?
17 A. I only saw the proposal of Bjelica. I did not see the petition.
18 I didn't see the citizens either. I just saw Boro Bjelica, who submitted
19 this request in writing, and he said that there are 400 signatures. I
20 never saw these signatures. I mean...
21 Q. Mr. Krajisnik never suggested to you anything to be done in any
22 context, other than according to proper law and procedures, did he?
23 A. Well, Mr. Krajisnik knew how to speak very nicely. I noticed one
24 word in the interview. He used the word "violence" in the conversation,
25 and I never thought of violence being a way of attaining any objectives.
1 We had to act in accordance with law and order. And he knew in advance
2 that the proposal did not meet all the requirements set forth by the law.
3 Q. Well, I was going to ask you about that, so I might as well ask
4 you now: Your reference to his use of the word violence is to the article
5 in Novogradsko Oko, which was dealt with particularly at page 43 of the
6 transcript yesterday.
7 A. Yes, yes.
8 Q. We noticed, Mr. Cengic, as it happens that there appears to be an
9 interview or an article relating to an interview with you in the same
10 issue of that publication which -- we don't have the complete issue, but
11 do you remember that, that there is also in the very same issue an article
12 relating to you?
13 A. It was a long interview. On the second, third page of that
15 Q. I don't suppose you happen to have it with you, do you,
16 Mr. Cengic?
17 A. Maybe. Maybe I do have it here.
18 Q. You have it here. Wonderful. Where is it, Mr. Cengic, then?
19 A. Either here or the hotel. But it's in The Hague for sure. I
20 don't know if I put it in my bag this morning. I mean, whether I put this
21 newspaper into my bag this morning, but I did bring the newspaper along
22 just in case. During the break, I'll check whether I have it right here.
23 There is a high degree of probability that it is here.
24 MR. STEWART: Excuse me one moment, Your Honour.
25 [Defence counsel confer]
1 MR. STEWART: Sorry, Your Honour, it was just a transcript point
2 that I think we'll leave to sort out in a different way.
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Cengic. I would be grateful if I might ask through
4 the Trial Chamber, Your Honour, if Mr. Cengic could make that check during
5 the next break.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If it would not be here, Mr. Cengic, how much
7 time would you need to get it from your hotel room approximately, if you
8 would not have it here?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think 10 or 15 minutes at the
10 most, if a car is provided to me. I'd need 10 or 15 minutes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would you be willing to give up part of the
12 time you are entitled to for a break to spend that on going to your hotel,
13 if needed, of course?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For the sake of the truth. I came
15 here to tell the truth. I took an oath that I would tell the truth, so by
16 all means.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well, thank you very much.
18 Could I ask you, Mr. Registrar, to be the point where the victims
19 and witness section, to be the point where Mr. Cengic report whether the
20 newspaper article is here or whether he has to fetch it from his hotel
21 room. Yes. If you would please prepare that.
22 Mr. Stewart, have you finished with -- well, at least, this part
23 of the newspaper we have at this moment on our desk?
24 MR. STEWART: No, I haven't, Your Honour. I was going to --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
1 MR. STEWART: The witness has raised this question, so I jumped
2 forward to deal with this point.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
4 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. In relation to the article about the interview with Mr. Krajisnik
6 for the moment, you had referred -- or I think Mr. Harmon in his question
7 actually referred to the last paragraph in the English translation which
8 was Mr. Krajisnik quoted as saying, "I promised to Ismet Cengic that I
9 would do everything to prevent the use of violence and to make sure that
10 changes are carried out as determined by the constitution and according to
11 the decision of the municipality."
12 I just want to get clear, Mr. Cengic, are you suggesting that
13 Mr. Krajisnik in some way was stirring up thoughts and fears of violence
14 that weren't already there in the air?
15 A. One and the same thing in my opinion. After all of what happened,
16 my opinion is different in terms of what -- compared to what I thought
17 then. I thought then that there would be no violence. As a matter of
18 fact, in that article when I read it, when it was published before the
19 war, I didn't even notice the word. I did not find it striking in any
20 way. However, after all the violence that did happen, the word gained in
22 Q. Yes. What I'm really putting to you, Mr. Cengic, is this: I
23 believe I'm entitled to ask this, that if you are going to say something
24 like that about Mr. Krajisnik, it shouldn't be by innuendo. So I'm
25 inviting to make very clear whether you are or aren't saying that
1 Mr. Krajisnik was in any way, in any way, stirring up thoughts or feelings
2 of violence or fears of violence that weren't already there in the air in
3 February 1992?
4 A. This was a time when intensive negotiations were still taking
5 place. I didn't say anything. I just said that I noticed that he used
6 the word violence. I was not saying that he was trying to promote
7 violence in any way. I just said that he used the word. We can have a
8 look at the newspaper itself.
9 Q. Mr. Cengic, what it comes to is this: If your evidence comes to
10 no more than drawing attention to the word violence in the text of the
11 article, then, with the greatest of respect, I'm not trying to be funny or
12 insulting, Mr. Cengic, the Trial Chamber can read the article for
13 themselves. Anybody can read the article themselves. So I'm inviting to
14 tell the Trial Chamber whether you're evidence -- you're proposing to add
15 anything to the simple fact that we can read that in that newspaper?
16 A. Well, I have nothing to add except for the fact that later on,
17 there was violence.
18 Q. I'll add this question, Mr. Cengic, because I do questions and you
19 do answers. That's the deal. That Mr. Cengic, in February 1992, you
20 would -- nobody could have failed to know that there was the potential for
21 violence in the air in Bosnia and Herzegovina, could they?
22 A. In 1991? Are you talking about 1991 or 1992? Which year? 1992?
23 Q. February 1992.
24 A. Oh, 1992. Well, Croatia's not far away. Croatia's not far away.
25 Dubrovnik is not far away. Vukovar is not far away from Bosnia. Every
1 day on the news, we heard about what was going on there, and we saw what
2 was going on there.
3 Q. And in fact, Mr. Cengic, you correctly point out the obvious
4 geographical fact that Croatia's not very far away. It wasn't very far
5 away in 1991, and of course we know there was violence within Yugoslavia
6 from well back into 1991, wasn't there? That's serious violence.
7 Mr. Cengic, I'm suggesting we don't need to dwell on this. The answer is
8 yes, isn't it?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And is it right just to confirm, then, Mr. Krajisnik never made
11 any suggestion that you heard to you or that you heard or you're aware of,
12 never any suggestion before the outbreak of the war that anything should
13 be done according to proper law and procedures? That's right, isn't it?
14 A. I saw Mr. Krajisnik that time when we had those discussions. And
15 when I went to the republican parliament as a guest, then we would see
16 each other the way I'm watching you now. Sometimes we would exchange
17 greetings, too. In passing, we would nod at each other. We're from the
18 same municipality. And there were different levels of government
19 involved, so we did not really meet. Everybody dealt with their own
20 problems at the level of government that they were at.
21 Q. I want to ask you, Mr. Cengic, in your statement it was -- it's
22 the same statement, again, it's a relatively short passage that I'm going
23 to refer to.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I hope you allow me because otherwise we
25 might lose track. I've one question for the witness at this moment.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Earlier, you said that the interview with Mr. Krajisnik confirmed
2 that he came to you, that he even, as you said it, "I had come" - and
3 these were the words according to you in the interview spoken by
4 Mr. Krajisnik - "I had come to Novi Grad upon the invitation of
5 Mr. Cengic." Could you please -- could the witness be presented with
6 P388, and could you point exactly to that part of the interview. It's the
7 second page -- no, it's the last page, the second of the B/C/S version.
8 Yes, next one. Next -- yes, this one. Yes. That's fine.
9 Mr. Cengic, could you tell me where exactly you read that
10 Mr. Krajisnik invited you to come -- that at least Mr. Krajisnik says that
11 he was invited by you to come to Novi Grad?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this section where my name is
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please read that slowly. Is that the
15 part where it starts Ismet Cengic...? Could you please read that slowly.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. "Ismet Cengic, president of
17 the Municipal Assembly of Novi Grad, sought the assistance of
18 Momcilo Krajisnik, president of the Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina, who is
19 also a person who lives in Zabrdje, in order to resolve this problem."
20 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand that requesting the assistance, you
21 understood that to be "invited Mr. Krajisnik to come to"? I'm just trying
22 to find out what exactly you used as a basis for your testimony.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
25 Mr. Stewart.
1 MR. STEWART:
2 Q. Yes, Mr. Cengic, it's slightly artificial to express this as a
3 question, but you see, don't you, that that particular part of the
4 interview is, in fact, the journalist's words and not a quote from
5 Mr. Krajisnik?
6 A. It is an article written by a journalist.
7 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. I was taking you, Mr. Cengic, to your statement that you gave in
9 1998, January 1998. You described -- it's in paragraph 27. It's a fairly
10 short passage again. You say: "As regards the TO, Territorial Defence,
11 when I first took office as president of the municipality, the head of the
12 TO was a Captain Osman Dzamalija. In May 1991, the SDS suggested their
13 candidate for this position, but his rank was lower than Dzamalija's. The
14 Sarajevo TO command had to approve the nomination of a new TO head, and
15 they refused the SDS candidate. They reported that they were quite
16 satisfied with the captain and that they didn't intend to change him.
17 Then the SDS started to pressure TO command in Sarajevo for their man. I
18 recall that sometime in September 1991, I received a document from the TO
19 headquarters in Sarajevo that they were prepared to accept the SDS
20 candidate. I filed that letter away deep in my desk. The war in Croatia
21 was going on at that time, and I wanted to keep Dzamalija in place. The
22 SDS learned, however, that I had received authorisation to confirm the
23 nomination of their man, and they pressured me to show them that document.
24 As a result, the SDS man was finally appointed."
25 Now, that's the entire passage that I've read. Do you agree,
1 Mr. Cengic, that was obviously and grossly improper conduct on your part
2 to have filed the letter away, as you did?
3 A. Well, not in that sense that I wouldn't give it. The assembly was
4 supposed to appoint a commander. There was a standstill in the work of
5 the assembly. In order to prevent anyone from getting this document, in
6 order to prevent the document from going missing, the assembly was
7 supposed to meet every month. And sometimes we would meet a few times a
8 month, and we could not agree on an agenda. And that's why I put it aside
9 so that no one could find it or so that the document would not go missing.
10 Q. Well, Mr. Cengic, can we be clear which of those two very
11 different things it is. You've referred to filing it away so the document
12 would not go missing. Can we be clear first of all whether you are or are
13 not saying that you put the document deep in your desk for safekeeping so
14 that there was no risk of it disappearing or falling into the wrong hands?
15 Is that your evidence?
16 A. The assembly that was held in February elected Mr. Guzina
17 according to the proposal that was made. So if I had the intention of
18 hiding that document, I never had to show it ever.
19 Q. That doesn't answer my question at all, Mr. Cengic. I'm asking
20 you either to confirm or eliminate one possibility which you have raised,
21 which is that you put the document away, filed it deep in your desk
22 to - I'm paraphrasing here - but to keep it safe, to prevent it from
23 disappearing or falling into the wrong hands. Are you saying that?
24 A. For safekeeping, in order to keep the proposal.
25 Q. I'm asking questions, Mr. Cengic. Are you saying that?
1 A. I wanted to keep it, and it was kept safely.
2 Q. Mr. Cengic, in your own statement that you signed in 1998, you
3 make it clear that you filed that letter away to hide it so that other
4 people wouldn't see it so that you would be able to stop the change in
5 head of the TO. That's why you did it, wasn't it?
6 A. The head of the TO at that moment did not represent anything in
7 view of the fact that the Territorial Defence was directly subordinated to
8 the Yugoslav People's Army. So it was nothing. It didn't mean a thing.
9 They didn't have weapons except that it had its own members, but only on
10 paper. Before that, the JNA had taken over all the weapons of the
11 Territorial Defence. Command was taken over by the JNA, too. The head of
12 the TO was a person who was only a formal commander of some
13 Territorial Defence without weapons, without any kind of weapons. They
14 didn't even have infantry weapons.
15 Q. Mr. Cengic, in your own statement, you said: "The war in Croatia
16 was going on at that time, and I wanted to keep Dzamalija in place." So
17 whatever you just said, the position and Mr. Dzamalija in your eyes was
18 sufficiently significant for you to want to take active steps to prevent
19 his replacement. That's right, isn't it?
20 A. From August until the present day, not a single session of the
21 municipal assembly was held. So there could not have been any
22 replacement. A decision would have to be made in order to have the
23 replacement take place. Several sessions were scheduled. They would go
24 on for an entire day, and nevertheless the agenda would not be agreed
25 upon. I remember well in November and December that the European Monitors
1 were there and --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cengic, I'll stop you here. Your statement
3 reads: "I filed that letter away deep in my desk. The war in Croatia was
4 going on at that time, and I wanted to keep Dzamalija in place. The SDS
5 learned, however, that I had received authorisation to confirm the
6 nomination of their man, and they pressured me to show them that document.
7 As a result, the SDS man was finally appointed."
8 This statement gives a firm impression that you did not want to
9 show the authorisation to the SDS since you were afraid that it could
10 result in the replacement of Mr. Dzamalija. Is that a correct impression?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My assessment was that it was
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did you keep the document away because at that
14 time you thought the replacement of Mr. Dzamalija was not -- it was not
15 the right moment to have him replaced and that you were therefore opposing
16 against his replacement?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Both. In order for it to be kept
18 safely and that the replacement take place in due time. I refused
19 mobilisation then of the unit that was supposed to be sent to Dubrovnik,
20 the tank unit that was supposed to go against Dubrovnik.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Is putting a letter somewhere in the bottom of your
22 desk the normal procedure for dealing with letters you received? Or
23 should they have been filed and registered in the ordinary way? Whatever
24 the reasons were there, whether they were good or less good reasons to do
25 that, is this against normal procedure?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. This was an exceptional point
2 in time. It was hard for me --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Whether you had good reasons or not, the question was
4 whether it was the ordinary procedure that letters you received --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, no.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
7 MR. STEWART:
8 Q. Your view that it was premature, Mr. Cengic, the right and proper
9 and responsible course in your position was for the matter to be discussed
10 in the correct political processes by all the interested parties and for
11 you to argue for your point of view and then see whether your point of
12 view prevailed or not according to the proper democratic process. That's
13 correct, isn't it? You agree?
14 A. Yes.
15 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, would that be -- that finishes that
16 line of questioning.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's a quarter to 4.00.
18 Mr. Cengic, you're invited to look whether the other part of the
19 newspaper is with you in this building, and otherwise, I take it that
20 preparations have been made to transport you to your hotel in such a way
21 that the newspaper article would be there. Would it be possible to make a
22 copy already? Otherwise I foresee that the newspaper is travelling
23 through this courtroom five or six times. Yes, I see that you are nodding
24 yes, Mr. Registrar.
25 We adjourn until a quarter past 4.00.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's the way it will be.
2 --- Recess taken at 3.45 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 4.21 p.m.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart --
5 MR. STEWART: As Your Honour may be aware, you may already have
6 the article.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I see that there's something on our desk at
8 this moment. You said something about -- here we have the original. Let
9 me just have a look.
10 MR. STEWART: I'm, of course, entirely dependent on Ms. Cmeric and
11 Mr. Krajisnik to tell me whether there's anything of any interest in it.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, seriously what's happening, Ms. Cmeric
14 and Mr. Krajisnik are reading it, so by the time I finish my few remaining
15 questions, I should know whether there's anything arising from this
17 JUDGE ORIE: The witness brought it. I can imagine he would like
18 to keep the original. If you would like to inspect whether this is a copy
19 from the original, then it's available to you.
20 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. And I don't suppose there
21 will be any need to trouble the witness to leave the original.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I take it that the Prosecution would also agree?
23 MR. STEWART: May we just check it, then, please.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if you would give it to the parties.
25 And Madam usher, if at the same time -- not at the same time, but
1 if you could subsequently escort the witness into the courtroom.
2 MR. STEWART: Yes, that would be beyond the skills even of our
3 ushers, Your Honour, wouldn't it?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cengic, I do understand you didn't even have to
5 travel to produce -- to bring us the -- a copy of the newspaper we
6 discussed before. It's now -- the parties will inspect it, and whether
7 there will be any questions about it, we'll hear that later. But
8 Mr. Stewart, please proceed.
9 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Q. Mr. Cengic, thank you for bringing the newspaper.
11 In that same statement that I was referring to a few minutes ago,
12 the one that you signed in 1998, a different paragraph altogether, I've
13 finished with that point on paragraph 27. What's number 35, it's the last
14 paragraph on page 5, it's about a dozen lines, but I better give it to
15 you. You said: "In August 1991, somewhere around the 17th, I was in
16 Croatia on holiday when my deputy called me and told me that somebody from
17 the State Secretariat for Territorial Defence had called from Belgrade
18 asking to come pay an official visit to the municipality. I cut my
19 holiday short and returned to Sarajevo. We had a meeting with the
20 officials who came from Belgrade, four colonels from the JNA. They came
21 with a request to completely take over the secretariat of national defence
22 and put it under the control of the JNA. They wanted all documentation.
23 Suad Berbic was present at that meeting as well as Milosevic. The
24 proposal these colonels made was a verbal one. I told them that when they
25 brought me a written document from the Government of Bosnia and
1 Herzegovina, then I would entertain their request. They left. They
2 really needed that documentation if they wanted to call up army and
3 reservists for the war in Croatia. And the government had already decided
4 that we were not to respond to such a call. We removed the secretariat
5 for national defence documentation from the municipality office where we
6 stored it in a safe place. They needed that documentation to be able to
7 call up soldiers."
8 Now, first of all, Mr. Cengic, when you say "the government had
9 already decided that we were not to respond to such a call," the
10 government being talked about there is the Government of Bosnia and
11 Herzegovina, isn't it?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And the "we" that were not to respond to such a call, who is
15 A. I'm not certain whether it was the government or the Presidency,
16 but I definitely referred to a higher level, not perhaps the Presidency of
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina but I meant at the level of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
18 Q. That's going back to the previous question. I moved on to the
19 question, to the next bit that "we were" not to respond to such a call, to
20 ask you just make clear who you mean there by "we."
21 A. Sometime in June 1991, the highest level of authority, whether the
22 Presidency or the government, I'm not sure which one, issued a decree to
23 the effect that military conscripts and reservists should no longer be
24 assigned to the JNA. I abided by that decree.
25 Q. So "we" was everybody, was it, who was liable to call-up in
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
2 A. Whoever it was who respected the legally elected authority in
3 Bosnia and Herzegovina, the legally elected government.
4 Q. And then when you say that you removed this documentation to store
5 it in a safe place, the purpose here was to throw an obstacle in the way
6 of implementation of the call-up, wasn't it?
7 A. Correct. By the JNA.
8 Q. And was the justification for your action that you took the view
9 that the call-up was illegal?
10 A. My immediate superiors in the authority I respected, which were
11 the authorities, and these were the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
12 the presidency and the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
13 Q. What you say, Mr. Cengic, that you were ordered to remove this
14 documentation and store it somewhere else?
15 A. The recommendation was that documentation should be safely stored
16 because at that time the SDS had, together with the JNA, forcibly taken
17 away the documentation, such documentation.
18 MR. STEWART: Could the witness have Exhibit P390, please, 3-9-0.
19 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't catch the comment.
20 JUDGE ORIE: You said something. Could you say it so loud that it
21 can be translated.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am familiar with this matter, with
23 this letter sent to me by the SDS.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
1 MR. STEWART:
2 Q. You saw this letter yesterday, so I don't want to go all through
3 it. But the particular complaints that are listed there towards the
4 bottom of the page, by this we mean primarily, and then it says the first
5 dash: "Unauthorised and illegal removement of military documentation and
6 direct violation of federal laws and other regulations; failure to
7 initiate procedure to relieve of duty the municipal secretary for national
8 defence and his deputy; failure to implement the conclusions of the
9 executive board regarding the analysis of unlawful housing construction in
10 our municipality; and making possible the further unlawful building of
11 houses." And then: "Failure to put on the agenda the citizens'
12 initiative to separate and establish the local commune of Rajlovac." And
13 it was correct, wasn't it, Mr. Cengic, that whatever your own personal
14 justifications for doing it, there was substance in all these charges,
15 wasn't there?
16 A. No, there wasn't. Not in a single one of these. Because our
17 children, our army, and our reservists were sent by the JNA to the battle
18 front in Croatia.
19 Q. So, Mr. Cengic, I'm going to have to invite you perhaps explain
20 what the point is in your last answer.
21 A. Every day, coffins carrying dead soldiers arrived in our area.
22 These were people who were killed at the front in Croatia and were called
23 up by the JNA.
24 Q. So your position is that you were -- is this fair, that you were,
25 if you like, conscientiously entitled to obstruct call-up and obstruct men
1 going to the Croatian front?
2 A. Had I not had the -- this possibility allowed for by the law, I
3 would not have done that because the position of our government, of the
4 presidency, was not to send recruits to the JNA.
5 Q. All right. I'm going to move on, Mr. Cengic. In your evidence
6 yesterday, and this is at page 87 of the transcript, you were asked by
7 Mr. Harmon where you would rank Mr. Krajisnik in the hierarchy of the
8 Bosnian Serb leadership. And you gave an answer that in your opinion and
9 the opinion of your friends, Mr. Krajisnik and Mr. Karadzic were at the
10 same level within this hierarchy, whereas all the others are far away from
11 them in the line, far down the line.
12 No date was put on either question or answer. Does your
13 assessment there of the position of Mr. Krajisnik and Dr. Karadzic for
14 that matter in the hierarchy, does that relate to the whole period through
15 to post-Dayton, in other words, 1996?
16 A. Before the Dayton Accords, Mr. Karadzic was not part of the
17 authorities. He was just president of the SDS. Whereas Mr. Krajisnik was
18 president of the parliament of Bosnia-Herzegovina. As for Novi Grad, in
19 view of the fact that Mr. Krajisnik lived in the area of Novi Grad, a far
20 greater influence was wielded in Novi Grad by Mr. Krajisnik. And keeping
21 in mind this entire situation, I stated that he was there at the top in
22 terms of the hierarchy.
23 I never had occasion to hear that Karadzic ever came to the
24 territory of the Novi Grad Municipality.
25 Q. You said that before the Dayton Accord, Mr. Karadzic was just
1 president of the SDS. Do you know of any other positions held by
2 Mr. Karadzic?
3 A. Prior to the aggression, prior to the war. Prior to the outbreak
4 of the war. And then later on, I cannot say which were the functions that
5 Mr. Karadzic exercised in Republika Srpska. It seems to me that he was
6 the president, but no elections were held. I don't know how that came to
7 pass. I only know what the substance of the 1990 elections was. Karadzic
8 was not on any of the lists at the time.
9 Q. Do you know of any other positions held by Mr. Krajisnik apart
10 from president of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Assembly, and then also
11 subsequently the Serb Assembly and Republika Srpska Assembly?
12 A. I know that he was a member of the presidency, of that first
14 Q. When was that?
15 A. After the signing of the Dayton Accords.
16 Q. Where would you place -- not now, of course, but where would you
17 place Dr. Nikola Koljevic in the hierarchy?
18 A. He was a member of the presidency but was not held high. He was
19 not highly esteemed by the people as a politician.
20 Q. He's one of the ones who's far away from Mr. Krajisnik and
21 Mr. Karadzic in the line; he was far down the line, was he?
22 A. In my opinion, but that does not necessarily have to be true for
23 the other side.
24 Q. What about Dr. Plavsic? Where would you place her in the
1 A. Somewhere in between.
2 Q. In between whom and whom?
3 A. Between Karadzic and Krajisnik, who were on one and the same
4 level, and she would then be second, although a bit further down, but
5 above Koljevic. Somewhere at Mladic's level.
6 Q. What presidency do you say Dr. Koljevic was a member of?
7 A. Koljevic was a member of the state presidency.
8 Q. When?
9 A. He was elected in the 1990 elections.
10 Q. You said in your evidence yesterday, and this is at page 89.
11 Well, it starts at page 88 actually. You described a meeting that you'd
12 had with a delegation, representatives of the Serb community, from
13 Rajlovac, and that meeting you said was on the 26th of February 1996. So
14 it was shortly post-Dayton. And you said that --
15 A. No, no. I meant -- that is to say, the meeting took place three
16 days before the integration, the Rajlovac meeting. Before -- that is to
17 say, before the integration meaning the integration at Rajlovac, not the
19 Q. Well, you gave a specific date, the 26th of February 1996. You're
20 sticking with that date, are you?
21 A. 26th of February 1996, that was the day of integration.
22 Q. I see. Right. That's simple. So at the foot of page 87 --
23 A. And I had that meeting three days earlier. I happen to have here
24 with me an excerpt from the papers about that particular meeting.
25 Q. When you say "the papers," what papers do you mean?
1 A. Oslobodjenje. I'm not sure whether it's Oslobodjenje or
2 Vecernje Novine because I used to store all the clippings from the papers
3 that talked about me or the municipality because I had this idea of
4 writing a book that would relate to that area.
5 Q. When you say you've got it with you, do we mean again back at your
6 hotel, in your bag, in your pocket?
7 A. Here, here.
8 Q. Here in the building?
9 A. In the building. I have something in my pockets as well.
10 Although my pockets are quite small, I do have something there.
11 Q. You certainly come supplied, Mr. Cengic.
12 A. I have another interview published in the Oko newspaper. Perhaps
13 it would be a good idea for me to say that this paper, the paper that we
14 referred to earlier, was privately owned by Janis Tadic, a Croat. The
15 editor-in-chief was a Bosniak, and the general manager was a Serb. The
16 board of editors was in the same building where Mojmilo was. It was
17 destroyed later on. They published a wartime edition. I think there were
18 editions 1 and 2. I have a part of it here. Perhaps for the purposes of
19 truth, it would not be a bad idea to photocopy this as well, as part of
20 the documentation.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cengic, if it's just two copies of wartime
22 publications, that as such doesn't make it relevant yet because we're not
23 here writing the history of the war, but we're hearing a case. If you
24 would however, give an opportunity to the parties to look at it, they
25 always could decide that it is relevant or is not relevant for them.
1 And now I see that the Defence is in an advantageous position at
2 this very moment. So if you would give it to Madam usher, and perhaps
3 first give it to the Defence so that it could be read. And I leave it to
4 the parties whether there's any relevance in those documents he has.
5 I see that you're coming --
6 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters cannot hear the witness.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Cengic, first of all, the sound of the paper
8 prevents the interpreters from hearing what we are saying. If you would
9 not mind to leave it for inspection if the parties would like to see it,
10 that would be good. But at this moment, spontaneous reading out of these
11 documents is not something the parties have asked for and not something
12 the Chamber would decide that it was proper to do.
13 Nevertheless, the Chamber appreciates your most willingness to
14 contribute to our finding of the truth.
15 MR. STEWART: I wonder whether the witness will start producing
16 them from behind his ear. I may have started to worry.
17 Your Honour, from a practical point of view, may I simply ask this
18 through the Trial Chamber.
19 Q. Mr. Cengic, are you leaving The Hague today, or are you going to
20 be staying overnight?
21 A. I don't know. I am not in charge of my comings and goings.
22 You'll have to ask the people who invited me to come here. I don't know.
23 Q. Yes.
24 MR. STEWART: All I had in mind, Your Honour, was of course if
25 something does come up, and then we did -- it doesn't seem at all likely,
1 but if Mr. Cengic were at least still in The Hague, that would --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Wouldn't it be wise to ask Mr. Cengic to leave
3 whatever he has and don't confuse magic with the administration of
4 justice, Mr. Stewart, that whatever he would have, that he gives it to the
5 Registry, that copies are made, and that the parties could have look at it
6 and find out whether there is any relevance in it. And since I do not
7 expect Mr. Cengic to leave this evening, there might be a possibility to
8 ring a bell and see whether it would be of any use to ask Mr. Cengic to
9 stay. But that's not my starting point.
10 Mr. Cengic, usually the parties know exactly what they would like
11 to ask from a witness. But you come with your own initiative. And as I
12 said, it's highly appreciated. Would it be possible to leave the
13 originals so that they can be copied over the next break and that the
14 parties could have a look at it and see whether they find it useful or not
15 to ask any questions about it. Would you be willing to --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's why I brought it here.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 Mr. Stewart, you may proceed.
21 MR. STEWART: Yes.
22 Q. I'm going to show you a newspaper article, Mr. Cengic.
23 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it's a couple of paragraphs. It's
24 quite a short article. We supplied copies in Serbian to the interpreters.
25 It's from Glas Srpska, 23rd of January 1996.
1 Q. And what I'm going to do --
2 MR. HARMON: Excuse me, Your Honour. I need a copy of it.
3 MR. STEWART: Oh, I'm so sorry. I hoped and thought that was
4 being provided right now. My apologies.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. They did cost only one and a half dinar,
6 Mr. Harmon, so I take it that...
7 MR. STEWART: If Mr. Harmon's Serbian is like mine, it will be
8 worth every dinar to him, Your Honour.
9 Q. Mr. Cengic, I'm going to invite you to read two particular
10 paragraphs, but of course I'm not preventing you -- I wish to read through
11 the intermediate paragraphs as well so that you're happy with the context.
12 Would you read, please, the very first paragraph, it says Sarajevo, 22nd
13 January. The first paragraph, if you wouldn't mind reading, that then
14 that can be interpreted.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Sorry. I meant read aloud. I beg your pardon, Mr. Cengic. If
17 you read it aloud, our interpreters do wonders, but they need it to be
18 read aloud.
19 A. Although it's written in Cyrillic, I know Cyrillic. There would
20 be other people who would ask for it to be rewritten in another language.
21 But fortunately, I know this.
22 "The President of the Republican Assembly of Republika Srpska,
23 Momcilo Krajisnik, addressed an appeal today to the population of Serb
24 Sarajevo not to move out, and he called upon those who had already left to
25 come back." That's the section you meant, right?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. Yes. And then I'd invite you to read to yourself the next few
2 paragraphs, but then read out loud if you would the last paragraph in the
3 third column.
4 A. Yes. I've already read that, and now I'm going to read this to
5 you. "I appeal to the Serb people to remain at their homes, and I call
6 upon those who had already left to come back so that we can build our
7 Sarajevo together." That is what the president of the NS RS said.
8 Oh, is it New Sarajevo or is it Republika Srpska? I don't know
9 what NS is. NS is the abbreviation I see here. Do you want me to go on
11 Q. Yes. We suggest that NS means "People's Assembly." Would you
12 accept that?
13 A. Possibly, possibly. Since he was president of the assembly, yes.
14 "Our policy has not changed at all, and we enter the" --
15 Q. It's all right, Mr. Cengic. I just want to ask you, do you
16 remember such public pronouncements being reported from Mr. Krajisnik in
17 early 1996 of this nature?
18 A. In the newspapers that were published in Sarajevo, I did not have
19 the opportunity of seeing this kind of thing. In all fairness, I did not
20 buy all newspapers, and they didn't come out that often. However, in this
21 period of time, I certainly did not have that kind of opportunity. Some
22 of these newspapers are here, too, but this particular position of
23 Mr. Krajisnik was never mentioned.
24 Q. You also gave some evidence on what you had heard through the
25 media, through the public media, of Mr. Krajisnik's views as to
1 multiethnic life was the way it was put. And at paragraph -- I'm sorry,
2 it was at page 90 of the transcript. But -- you were asked about this.
3 You have said nothing about any private statements by Mr. Krajisnik made
4 to you or anything said in any meeting where you were present with
5 Mr. Krajisnik. Can we take it that Mr. Krajisnik never did express in
6 your presence any views about multiethnic life in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
7 A. I have already pointed out that I had only that one meeting with
8 Mr. Krajisnik in connection with resolving the problem of the local
9 commune of Rajlovac. We had no other meetings.
10 Q. So it follows, you would agree then, that everything that you ever
11 heard directly or indirectly from Mr. Krajisnik in relation to multiethnic
12 life is -- was through some public outlet in some public way?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And you --
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. -- mentioned Mr. Krajisnik's anger at the Dayton Agreement, that
17 he expressed anger at the fact that the agreement had been signed. He
18 was, do you remember he was angry and frustrated at what he saw as the
19 giving up of Sarajevo to the Muslim community, wasn't he?
20 A. Well, yes.
21 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I wonder if I might have just a minute.
22 I don't think I will need a longer break, but just briefly to consult
23 Ms. Cmeric the article which we were handed after the break.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we first ask the -- do you want to
25 tender this document into evidence?
1 MR. STEWART: I'm so sorry. Yes, please, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That would then have number... ?
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Defence Exhibit D32,
4 the newspaper article from Glas Srpska.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that we receive a translation of the whole
6 of the article, Mr. Stewart, because I see that --
7 MR. STEWART: Yes, indeed, Your Honour. We will arrange that.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Although I do not read any Cyrillic, I see that
9 Dayton is mentioned and --
10 MR. STEWART: Yes. It will --
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- Sarajevo is mentioned. So there seems to be a
13 MR. STEWART: We'll take care of it, Your Honour. We should have
14 the context.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Harmon.
16 MR. HARMON: I don't know, Your Honour, if it would be
17 helpful - it certainly would be helpful to me - if this whole article
18 could be read. It's not a very long article, and in order to properly
19 examine the witness about a piece of evidence that's tendered before the
20 witness leaves. It's still a possibility today.
21 JUDGE ORIE: I see that Mr. Stewart agrees with you by nodding.
22 MR. STEWART: Certainly, Your Honour. It's entirely in
23 Your Honours' hands whether the witness reads it or whether Ms. Cmeric is
24 asked, for example --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Cmeric might be well equipped to know what the
1 speed of the interpreters is. So we would like to invite Ms. Cmeric to
2 read the whole of the article of which you just read parts, Mr. Cengic.
3 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, may I invite Ms. Cmeric to read from the
4 top of the article including the article, the date, line, et cetera,
5 because that's also something that I do not read.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand that you start reading just from
7 the top, the name of Mr. Krajisnik is one of the first that's mentioned.
8 MS. CMERIC: I will start from the very top of the page,
9 Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MS. CMERIC: [Interpretation] "A daily newspaper of
12 Republika Srpska. Glas Srpski, Banja Luka. Tuesday, the 23rd of January
13 1996. Number 7877. Year, illegible. LII, I believe. Price, 1 and a
14 half dinars.
15 "Appeal of Momcilo Krajisnik, President of the Assembly of the
16 RS." The headline is: "Stay, so we can build our Sarajevo." Subheading:
17 "We enter the forthcoming period with much more optimism and hope that the
18 injustice done in Dayton can be redressed, says Momcilo Krajisnik.
19 "Sarajevo, the 22nd of January (Crna).
20 "The President of the People's Assembly of Republika Srpska,
21 Momcilo Krajisnik, addressed an appeal today to the population of Serb
22 Sarajevo not to move out and called upon all of those who had already left
23 to return. `Many things have already been achieved the way we had planned
24 them, and have had a pacifying effect on the Sarajevo Serbs.' That was
25 Krajisnik's assessment at today's session of the staff for the
1 implementation of the Dayton Agreement in Serb Sarajevo held in Vogosca.
2 He pointed out that `in the latest talks, the representatives of the
3 international community have been promising a great deal, not because they
4 understand the Serb position, but because concrete moves have to be made'.
5 And he expressed the hope that these talks would soon yield visible
7 "`I think that this solution will be quite good and that it will
8 have a positive effect on the Serbs in Serb Sarajevo, and that it will
9 contribute to the return of many people who left this area,' President
10 Krajisnik pointed out. In his view, the Serbs in Serb Sarajevo 'have
11 prospects for the future and have no reason to move out or to be afraid.'
12 'I appeal to the Serb people to remain at their homes, and I call
13 upon those who have already left to return so that we can build our
14 Sarajevo together,' said the President of NS RS, and then added, `nothing
15 has changed in our policy, and we enter the coming period with much more
16 optimism and hope that the injustice done in Dayton can be redressed.'
17 "From the session held in Vogosca today, an appeal was addressed
18 to professional people who had left the area and who were scarce to begin
19 with to return as soon as possible to work. The staff also looked at the
20 problems of supply and maintaining law and order in the area of Serb
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I? May I give you the right
24 JUDGE ORIE: The right answer to what exactly?
25 MR. STEWART: To what question, Your Honour?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Firstly, if you would like to add anything,
2 Mr. Stewart, are there any questions -- further questions in relation to
3 this newspaper article?
4 MR. STEWART: No, Your Honour, not from me.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then I'll allow the witness who wants to -- who has
6 listened to the whole of the text, whatever you would like to say about
7 it, please go ahead, Mr. Cengic.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I read this, I did not go to
9 the very core of the matter. Reference is made to Serb Sarajevo all the
10 time, not Rajlovac and what is supposed to belong to the federation. So
11 that has to be borne in mind. There's a part of Republika Srpska that was
12 no longer Republika Srpska, so this was an appeal to Serbs in
13 Republika Srpska not to move out, not to Serbs in the federation, if I
14 understand this correctly.
15 MR. STEWART: Just give us one moment, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 [Defence counsel confer]
18 MR. STEWART:
19 Q. In your statement that you signed in 1998, and this was paragraph
20 43, it's a very short paragraph, Mr. Cengic, it's the penultimate
21 paragraph on page 6, you just referred to the date Friday, April the 3rd
22 when Mr. Milosevic, that's the local Mr. Milosevic, of course, came to
23 your office and said, "see you after the war," took a car and left and you
24 never saw him again. And then you say, SDS deputies and municipality
25 employees continued to come to work, but some of them that I had contact
1 with began to come to work wearing firearms." In fact, you turned up
2 yourself for work at that date carrying a gun, didn't you, Mr. Cengic?
3 A. That is correct. After a meeting -- of course, some SDS officials
4 came. My secretary did not come, and he said that he was sick and
5 therefore he could not come. Mr. Milosevic came on Friday, and he said
6 "see you after the war." I could not believe that a war would actually
7 happen. There were some excesses, but I was hoping that reason would
8 prevail and that there wouldn't be a war.
9 When I was at one of the meetings of the executive board, I don't
10 know whether this was an accident or not, but one of the members of the
11 executive board moved his jacket this way, and I saw guns on both sides.
12 I can tell you that in response to that, I brought a gun along to our next
13 meeting. But it bothered me, and that was the only time I did it. It's
14 heavy. It's a heavy thing, a gun, to carry around like that. And anyway,
15 if shells start falling, a gun cannot be much protection.
16 Q. Mr. Cengic, I'd just like to return for a moment --
17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
18 MR. STEWART: Thank you.
19 Q. Mr. Cengic, I'd just like you to return for a moment to that
20 article from Glas Srpska that we were looking at a few moments ago where I
21 asked you to read a couple of paragraphs. It was D -- whatever it now is.
22 I wonder if you could just read out for us again, please, the top
23 paragraph of the last column, it's to the left of the photograph,
24 immediately to the left of Mr. Krajisnik's photograph, the top paragraph.
25 A. "Nothing has changed in our policy, and we enter the coming period
1 with much more optimism and hope that the injustice done in Dayton can be
3 Q. And what -- do you understand what is being referred to there by
4 the "injustice done in Dayton"?
5 A. I think that the gentleman meant -- well, injustice, I mean there
6 is no doubt about that. Both sides can talk about injustice. This is an
7 agreement that was reached, nevertheless, and that has to be observed.
8 But I think that Mr. Krajisnik meant that it can be redressed by way of
9 the compensation of that part of Dobrinje that had not been reintegrated
10 in that period. It was reintegrated only later on. Of course, I cannot
11 make any assertions. I can't say it's actually that way.
12 Q. Yes, I see. So you --
13 MR. STEWART: Yes, I won't pursue this any further with the
14 witness, Your Honour.
15 Yes, I have no further questions, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harmon, do you have some questions?
17 MR. HARMON: I do have some questions, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please put them before the witness.
19 Re-examined by Mr. Harmon:
20 Q. Mr. Cengic, the Defence exhibit that is before you, I hope it is
21 still before you, D32, the article in Cyrillic. If it's not, if could be
22 given to the witness.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Madam usher, could you... ?
24 MR. HARMON:
25 Q. As I understand this article, and I was trying to take notes as
1 quickly as I could, this article is dated the 23rd of January 1996. Is
2 that correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. This article was published a little bit more than a month before
5 the meeting you had with the Serb representatives from Rajlovac at which
6 time the Serb representatives from Rajlovac told you that they had been
7 ordered by Krajisnik to move out. Is that correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. As I listened to the translation of this article, I noted the
10 following, and you can help us perhaps. What I wrote down was
11 "Momcilo Krajisnik addressed an appeal to the population of Serb
12 Sarajevo." What is "Serb Sarajevo"? Can you enlighten us as to what that
13 means in terms of the geographical configuration of Sarajevo?
14 A. You know that according to the Dayton Peace Agreement, Sarajevo
15 was divided into two parts. One part belonged to the federation and the
16 other part to Republika Srpska. The part that was allocated to
17 Republika Srpska is Serb Sarajevo. And that is a part that has a border
18 with the area that belongs to the federation, and the border is Dobrinje.
19 Q. Is this --
20 A. And further on, the other parts of other municipalities that were
21 outside the nucleus of Sarajevo, that is Pale, part of the Stari Grad
22 Municipality, Novo Sarajevo - New Sarajevo - part of the centre and so on.
23 As for the nucleus of the town itself, the Municipality of Novi Grad was
24 allocated to the Serb part. Parts 1 and 4. And that is where the Dayton
25 boundary ran.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. So is this an appeal by Mr. Krajisnik to the people who -- the
2 Serbs within Serb Sarajevo not to move out, such as -- not to move out to
3 the federation --
4 A. Of Sarajevo, yes.
5 Q. -- is that correct?
6 A. Yes, yes. Precisely. Precisely. Serbs from the part of the
7 federation -- I mean, I'm describing it now. Grbavica, Novo Sarajevo,
8 then Nedzarici, then Dobrosevici, Atovici, and Reljevo, Rajlovac, they
9 belonged to the federation from then on. In the other part, there were
10 Serbs who were in the part where Republika Srpska was, and they started
11 moving out. So this is an appeal addressed to Serbs who started moving
12 out from the part that was Republika Srpska. This was not an appeal to
13 the Serbs in the part that was supposed to belong to the federation. Now,
14 that's exactly what it says here, appeal to the population of Serb
15 Sarajevo, that's what it says. This part exists even now. It's not
16 called Serb Sarajevo any longer, but it is still that territory. It's
17 called Eastern Sarajevo now.
18 Q. The population -- the Serb population from Rajlovac that you met
19 with in late February were Serbs who resided in the federation portion of
20 Sarajevo. Correct?
21 A. The area that under the Dayton Agreement was part of the
22 federation, yes.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. HARMON: I have no additional questions, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart.
1 MR. STEWART: Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: No further questions?
3 MR. STEWART: No.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I've got one or two questions to you.
5 Questioned by the Court:
6 JUDGE ORIE: Were there any Serbs that had fled prior or during
7 the war to Republika Srpska and had returned to the Rajlovac federal
8 territory after the war?
9 A. I am not familiar with anyone returning during the war. But I do
10 know that in the aftermath of the Dayton Agreement, those who had left
11 were returning. Now, almost everyone has returned unless they sold out
12 their property because there were many cases of people selling their
13 property. But a large majority of them have returned.
14 JUDGE ORIE: And did Serbs who returned after the war as you said,
15 did they start returning already in the first two months after the
16 Dayton Agreement?
17 A. Successively as they grew more confident about what I had said at
18 the meeting, that I was guaranteeing them peace and that we were going to
19 share the little that we had, they started returning. So in greater and
20 greater numbers. To this day, not everyone has returned. Many of them
21 have been handed the keys to their apartments and houses, but have not
22 returned yet, and these houses stand empty. In the advertisements, there
23 are many houses and apartments on sale.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that answer.
25 May I - unless this question has raised any need to put further
1 questions to the witness - may I invite you not to -- not say to empty
2 your pockets, but at least to provide the Chamber with the newspaper
3 articles, the clippings, you have in order to have them copied during the
4 break. I'll take care that the originals will be returned to you. And
5 then I'd like to give copies to the parties so that the parties can
6 consider whether it's of any use to ask you to stay and answer any
7 questions in relation to those newspaper clippings.
8 I take it, Mr. Registrar, that this message will be conveyed to
9 the victims and witness section so that they're aware of the situation.
10 Yes. Could I ask you -- yes, please, Mr. Cengic.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yesterday, after I had left the
12 courtroom, I was thinking about a recording that I had heard but not
13 thought about. It refers to the territory of the Rajlovac Municipality as
14 it was supposed to be. And I tried to put it down on a map. When I said
15 that it had some 20.000 inhabitants, I said it in that particular moment.
16 But the territory has even more than 35.000 inhabitants. I drew a map
17 using the light of a lamp in the hotel. I tried to copy this diagram
18 having a map underneath. This meant that all the temporary
19 capacities -- facilities, the important features would have been included
20 in this municipality, and these are important features for the entire
21 Sarajevo, not just for the Rajlovac Municipality.
22 I did mention some of these features to the Right Honourable
23 Chamber here. Actually, none of the vital companies except for maybe a
24 couple of cinemas would have been left for Sarajevo. They would all have
25 come under the Rajlovac Municipality, even the television. So if you're
1 interested, I would like to show that map to you on the basis of the
2 recording we listened to yesterday. I didn't have a chance of analysing
3 it earlier, so I did it yesterday.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand that you say it was not 20.000,
5 but it was 35.000 even. That relates to the --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A lot. Because these were many
7 local communes. It would have come under the municipality. These would
8 have been Reljevo, Rajlovac, Atovici, Brijesce Brdo, Boljakov Potok,
9 Alipasin Most, Buca Potok, Dolac, the Alipasin Most railway station, all
10 the factories there, the public transport company, the military
11 industries, Zrak, the Halilovic barracks. This was the second most
12 important venue, that is the storage place for all the companies. I have
13 it here on the map.
14 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cengic, I think you gave further comment to your
16 testimony of yesterday where you talked about the Serb Municipality of
17 Rajlovac being established, at least in principle, by February the 22nd.
18 And whether you were aware of that, and then you answered: "No, I was
19 not. But if I may, I should like to comment a portion of this
20 conversation where it is indicated that the area is not densely populated,
21 that there are not many inhabitants living there. Now, I've heard" - you
22 continued - "this conversation for the first time these days, but now I'm
23 able to understand it better. The fact that they counted the population,
24 although the number was not precise, in light of that, I can claim that
25 there's over 20.000 inhabitants living in the area, and more than 70 per
1 cent of them are Bosniak. The area described here includes several local
2 communes, Reljevo, Rajlovac..." That's how you continued.
3 I do understand that you now comment that it was more than 20.000,
4 that it was up to 35.000, and that that area included important
5 facilities. Is that a correct understanding of your comment?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Precisely.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think even without the map, this further
8 specification would be sufficient. Thank you very much for your further
10 Then I'd like you to give to the usher at this moment the
11 clippings you've brought with you in order to have them copied during the
12 break. I think it's of no use to ask the witness to remain in the
13 building at this very moment because you might not have an opportunity to
14 read -- to read through it all. So therefore, could -- if one of the
15 parties would find any specific issue, and it should be an important one,
16 not just a small one, but a relevant issue which the Chamber should hear,
17 could I ask the parties then to inform the victims and witness section
18 first thing tomorrow morning so that you have time this evening to go
19 through the material and to see whether there's any need to put further
20 questions to the witness.
21 So Madam usher, if you could please -- perhaps we first return the
22 original of the newspaper provided. I take it, Mr. Stewart, that the
23 additional pages copied are not -- will not be tendered into evidence, so
24 we just have I think it's 390 -- it's 388, I think.
25 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay, that's clear. So only the selected
2 portion. That means the part is tendered into evidence. Mr. Harmon.
3 MR. HARMON: From a procedural point of view, Your Honour, I'm
4 wondering whether if we review these materials Mr. Cengic at some point in
5 time needs to go home, and will he come back into court and will he be
6 then formally excused from his completed testimony?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, what I'd like to do I is provisionally excuse
8 Mr. Cengic from this Court and ask him to be available if he gets a
9 message tomorrow morning to return to this Court, if asked to do so and
10 the parties are therefore invited to inform the victims and witness
11 section whether they would like to put additional questions to
12 Mr. Cengic. Of course, we can never exclude that reading the newspaper
13 articles would cause the parties to do any further investigations. If
14 that would lead to a situation that Mr. Cengic, who then perhaps already
15 has left, would be required to return, then the Chamber would like to know
16 first of all what the compelling reason is to ask further questions on the
17 basis of those newspaper articles.
18 That's what is in the mind of the Chamber at this moment. If this
19 would be a procedure on which the parties would like to comment, they have
20 an opportunity to do so.
21 MR. HARMON: To be perfectly clear, when the parties agree that
22 Mr. Cengic's testimony is no longer required, then he's -- based on that
23 agreement excused from further Court appearances? Does that formally end
24 his court appearance?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'll tell Mr. Cengic what his situation is. And
1 then if that leaves any questions, you can put them.
2 Mr. Cengic, you have answered all the questions put to you by the
3 parties, by the Bench. You have surprised us with some new material
4 which, of course, the parties will have to look at. As it stands now, the
5 parties will look at this material this evening, and then decide whether
6 it would be of any use to ask additional questions to you in relation to
7 that material. I invited the parties at the latest to inform the victims
8 and witness section who accompanies you, more or less, to inform them by
9 tomorrow morning. If you do not hear anything from the victims and
10 witness unit that would require you to return into this courtroom by
11 tomorrow in the afternoon, you're excused. That means, you're free to go.
12 This does not for the full hundred per cent exclude that, upon more
13 precise inspection of that material, the need might be felt by one of the
14 parties to ask the Court's permission to recall you, to call you again to
15 appear in The Hague.
16 So therefore, even if you don't get a message tomorrow that we
17 would like to see you back at quarter past 2.00 in the afternoon, there
18 is, although a small chance, that at a later stage you might be needed
19 again. So for the time being, you're excused. I thank you very much for
20 coming. If I would not see you again tomorrow in the afternoon, I'd like
21 to thank you very much for having come this far away. I'd like to
22 instruct you not to speak with anyone about your testimony you've given in
23 this Court, at least for the next 24 hours.
24 And I'm addressing now the parties. I think it would be -- if
25 there's no reason to assume that Mr. Cengic will return, that to oblige
1 him not to speak with anyone even after these 24 hours. Mr. Harmon.
2 MR. HARMON: I only dilemma is if Mr. Cengic is no longer required
3 to testify before this Court, normally the prohibition of having a contact
4 with a Prosecutor ends and I would like to say thank you to Mr. Cengic at
5 the conclusion of the day. If we notify him in the morning, that his
6 testimony is no longer required, and if there is a 24 hour prohibition,
7 Mr. Cengic may be on a plane before I can say thank you for --
8 JUDGE ORIE: At least, Mr. Cengic, you now heard that the
9 Prosecution would like to thank you for having responded to their call to
10 appear as a witness in this Court.
11 If that would do, Mr. Harmon, if that would solve the matter,
12 otherwise I would invite Mr. Stewart to ask whether until tomorrow morning
13 10.00 would do. If the witness will not appear again --
14 MR. STEWART: Yes, that seems perfectly suitable, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harmon [sic], you are supposed not to talk to
16 anyone about your testimony until tomorrow morning 10.00. If you receive
17 a message that the Court --
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've understood.
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- in the afternoon, then you still should not speak
20 with anyone about your testimony. But if you do not receive any message
21 at all, then on from 10.00 tomorrow morning, you're free, although I do
22 not advise you to discuss in full-length your testimony given in this
24 MR. HARMON: I'd only like to correct the record, Your Honour. On
25 line 10 at page 62, it says "Mr. Harmon, you are supposed not to talk to
1 anybody about your testimony..." Whereas the record should say
2 Mr. Cengic.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I don't know what I said. I take it that it
4 should say Mr. Cengic.
5 MR. STEWART: I oppose that correction, Your Honour, because I
6 want to cross-examine him.
7 JUDGE ORIE: So Mr. Cengic, therefore, wait until tomorrow morning
8 10.00. Thank you again if we do not see you again. If you would come
9 back, I would thank you again after the conclusion of your testimony.
10 Thank you very much. Madam usher, would you please escort --
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just one more thing. I have some of
12 the material here with me, and other materials are in the hotel. I would
13 not wish to assess by myself the relevance of all these materials. I
14 would like to hand over everything that I have with me here in The Hague.
15 The hotel is not very far away from here. The driver could perhaps take
16 the papers and that way the thing could be done the way it should be.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Is there a lot of material, Mr. Cengic? How much is
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will make a selection of a sort,
20 of course. There are maybe some 10 more articles here with me. But of
21 course, I have a stack this high of documentation at home because I have
22 the documentation relating to the entire wartime period. But it's not
23 here with me. I've just taken some of the things that I thought might be
24 useful. So I will make a selection of a sort, and then send the rest
25 through the driver. Maybe some ten articles or so.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cengic, I would rather not ask you to make a
2 selection because that -- whatever material you have with you at this
3 moment, I would invite you to give that to Madam usher to be copied. I
4 take it you have taken with you what you consider to be most relevant.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: It's all newspaper articles, all public source. So
7 I'd rather leave it to that, and that will then be distributed to the
8 parties and the originals will be returned to you. Just leave it to the
9 material with you at this very moment.
10 MR. STEWART: I just wonder in light of Your Honour's observation,
11 it may very well be, and it might be as well to ask the witness so we're
12 clear before he leaves that it isn't all newspaper articles, that it's
13 actually a mixture of different types of material. It might be better to
14 clarify that right now.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any other material than newspaper clippings,
16 Mr. Cengic?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, mostly newspaper articles. I'm
18 referring to the material I have here. There's just maybe two or three of
19 them that are not newspaper articles.
20 JUDGE ORIE: What are they, if they are not newspaper articles?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There's a brochure of the Novi Grad
22 Municipality talking about the structure of the municipality, and that
23 wouldn't be of relevance to you. And then I have some statistics as to
24 the number of those who were killed during the war, the number of houses
25 wrecked, damaged, and so on and so forth. This is basically an official
1 document containing a current map of the municipality, the structure of
2 the government up until the elections and so on.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber would invite you to provide the newspaper
5 articles and not the other documents you just mentioned to Madam usher.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Madam usher, could you escort Mr. Cengic out of
8 the courtroom.
9 [The witness withdrew]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harmon.
11 MR. HARMON: I have one other article that the usher passed me
12 that was provided by Mr. Cengic. So I'll just pass that up.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so that that could be copied as well.
14 MR. HARMON: If this is an appropriate time to discuss very
15 briefly the issue of the interpretation, I can describe what solutions we
16 propose, and the Court can make a decision it deems appropriate.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
18 MR. HARMON: I had a conversation with the head of the language
19 service section for the booths, and we talked about this issue last night
20 and this morning. What has been agreed on for the time being and is
21 proposed is that the language assistants in the booth would have a
22 transcript of the intercept and would read that at a normal pace rather
23 than trying to compress the reading into the time allotted for the actual
24 playing of the intercept, which means that they would read from the
25 transcript only. It would not be an interpretation. It would overlap
1 most likely the conclusion of the tape-recorded statement.
2 A second interpreter in the booth would be listening to the actual
3 tape itself, and to the extent that there are significant corrections that
4 have to be made in the transcript that has been provided, the language
5 booth will notify the parties as to where those significant changes are,
6 and we will bring these changes to the Court's attention if we deem them
7 to be relevant. That's the proposal, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Stewart.
9 MR. HARMON: There's one other aspect to the proposal,
10 Your Honour, and that is this: That the language assistants would read
11 the speaker. So if the intercept is between Mr. Krajisnik and
12 Mr. Karadzic, it might say Karadzic, and then they would read, Krajisnik,
13 and that way the record would be more complete.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart.
15 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we agree completely with that. Just to
16 clarify, we suppose that while the interpreters are reading at the normal
17 pace so it can all be properly taken down, that nevertheless the actual
18 tape will be played, won't it? Because Ms. Cmeric and Mr. Krajisnik would
19 like to listen to it.
20 MR. HARMON: Yes, the tape will be played. Both the parties from
21 the Defence will have an opportunity to listen to it, as will all people
22 in the booth have an opportunity to listen to it. And as I say, if they
23 find that it is necessary to augment what is the written transcript that's
24 been read by the people in the booth, they'll notify us.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So if I then well understand you, what we'll
1 then have at the end is an audiorecording of the B/C/S text which is
2 played, which is the part of the audiorecording of this trial. We'll then
3 have an English text which is, as a matter of fact, the translation of the
4 transcript of the B/C/S transcript of that intercept and which is subject
5 to amendments if the English transcript does not fully reflect the
6 translation of the original B/C/S spoken words. And then finally, we'll
7 have a French translation which is a translation of the English text
8 spoken by the interpreters on the basis of the B/C/S transcript. So the
9 English interpreters translate the B/C/S transcript rather than the
10 original spoken B/C/S words. And I also do understand that in the English
11 booth, one of the interpreters will then translate the B/C/S transcript,
12 whereas the other interpreter will not read but will follow the words
13 spoken in B/C/S in order to identify any significant difference between
14 the transcript and especially the English translation of the transcript
15 and the words spoken in B/C/S. Is that a proper understanding of your
17 MR. HARMON: It is, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber adopts your suggestion,
21 Mr. Harmon, and the parties -- and not only the parties but also the
22 interpreters and those who are responsible for the interpretation in this
23 Court are -- deserve a lot of thanks for thinking with the parties and the
24 Chamber to resolve this problem.
25 MR. HARMON: I will tomorrow, Your Honour, submit to the Court one
1 intercept where we have -- we talked about that yesterday where there was
2 a break, and there was the addition of the word "fantastic." I've had
3 that looked at by language assistants in my office. We have a now-revised
4 text. I will submit that. And indeed, on that intercept there was a
5 break, and I will confirm that and make a suggestion tomorrow.
6 JUDGE ORIE: After the break, Mr. Harmon, is the Prosecution ready
7 to call its next witness?
8 MR. HARMON: We are, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And that is -- no protective measures?
10 MR. HANNIS: Boro Bjelobrk, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Bjelobrk, it is. Then we'll adjourn until 5
12 minutes past 6.00, but not until Mr. Registrar has guided us through all
13 the exhibits, if at least the tape still allows us to do so.
14 Yes, Mr. Registrar, could you please read for us the exhibits.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Prosecution Exhibit P382, map of
16 Sarajevo; Prosecution Exhibit P383, 1991 consensus [sic] data for Bosnia;
17 Prosecution Exhibit P384, minutes from the meetings of the citizens of
18 the local commune Rajlovac held on 16 July 1991; Prosecution Exhibit P385
19 are the excerpts from the minutes of the citizens' meeting in Zabrdje,
20 Smiljevici on 2nd July 1991; Prosecution Exhibit P386 is a map of Rajlovac
21 Zabrdje local commune with a legend; the legend of the map will be
22 Prosecution Exhibit P386.1; and B/C/S of the legend will be Prosecution
23 Exhibit P386.2.
24 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask you to change that numbering and to make it
25 P386.A for the legend and P386.A.1 for the translation into English.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, it has been carried out.
2 Prosecution Exhibit P387, the results of the survey in Rajlovac
3 local commune on separation; Prosecution Exhibit P388, the article "What
4 to do with Sarajevo" by Ankica Posavljak from the Novogradsko Oko, first
5 issue, Sarajevo, February 1992; Prosecution Exhibit P389.A is the binder
6 containing 11 intercepts authenticated by the witness Ismet Cengic;
7 P389.A.1 1 would be the English translation of the same; Prosecution
8 Exhibit P389B is a CD-ROM of 11 intercepts authenticated by Mr. Ismet
9 Cengic; Prosecution Exhibit P390 is a letter from the SDS committee
10 members's club from the municipality Novi Grad Sarajevo dated 27 December
11 1991; and Prosecution Exhibit P391 is a letter from the Municipal Assembly
12 Novi Grad Sarajevo, group committee members of 23rd December 1991 to the
13 municipal assembly.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then we have one Defence exhibit.
15 THE REGISTRAR: As far as Defence Exhibits, Your Honours, Defence
16 Exhibit D32 is a newspaper article from Glas Srpska, 23rd January, 1996.
17 JUDGE ORIE: And then could the description of P388 be changed in
18 "What to do with Zabrdje," rather than Sarajevo. And then 388 is the
19 front page of Novogradsko Oko, and page 6 on which this appears. This is
20 just to clarify because we have had other pages of that same newspaper in
21 front of us which are not tendered into evidence. So it's just
22 page -- the front page and page 6.
23 Mr. Harmon.
24 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, on line 8, page 68, the description of
25 the exhibit is erroneously recorded. It should be census data and not
1 consensus data.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then census with a C rather than an S.
3 Having dealt with it, we'll adjourn until 10 minutes past 6.00.
4 --- Recess taken at 5.49 p.m.
5 --- On resuming at 6.16 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, just for the record, I state that you're
7 now appearing for the Prosecution, and you're ready to call your next
8 witness which will be Mr. Bjelobrk.
9 MR. HANNIS: That's correct, Your Honour. We are ready.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Madam usher, would you please escort
11 Mr. Bjelobrk into the courtroom.
12 [The witness entered court]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Mr. Bjelobrk. Before you give
14 evidence in this Court, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require you to
15 make a solemn declaration that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth,
16 and nothing but the truth. And the text is now handed out to you by
17 Madam usher. May I invite you to make that solemn declaration.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
19 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much. Please be seated, Mr. Bjelobrk.
21 You will first be examined by Mr. Hannis, counsel for the
23 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 WITNESS: BORO BJELOBRK
25 [Witness answered through interpreter]
1 Examined by Mr. Hannis:
2 Q. Sir, can we begin by having you state your name for the record,
4 A. Boro Bjelobrk.
5 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, I intend to employ Rule 89F with this
6 witness, so I would like to begin by having his ICTY statement marked as
7 an exhibit and handing him the B/C/S version of that document.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Prosecution Exhibit
11 MR. HANNIS:
12 Q. Mr. Bjelobrk, do you have a copy of that in front of you? Not
13 yet, I'm sorry.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. We're going to hand you an official copy. Do you recognise that
16 as a copy of a statement you made to OTP personnel relating to this case?
17 A. Yes, this is my statement.
18 Q. And did you have a chance to review it before coming to Court
19 today? The difference with that statement being that certain portions of
20 your original statement were deleted by me for purposes of your testimony
21 today. Apart from that, can you confirm that that is your statement and
22 your evidence in this case?
23 A. I confirm that this is my statement.
24 Q. Thank you. Now, sir, in addition to that statement, in
25 preparation for your testimony today, did you have an opportunity to
1 listen to a number of tape recorded intercepted telephone conversations?
2 A. I confirm that I did have an opportunity of doing so.
3 Q. And were you able to identify a number of those speakers where you
4 were able to do so and comment on the contents of certain of those
6 A. Yes. I did recognise the speakers, and I provided you with some
8 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, could I just remark that Mr. Hannis did
9 ask the witness whether he had a chance to review his statement before
10 coming to Court today. It was perfectly normal question to ask. But it
11 doesn't appear from the transcript that the witness actually did
12 answer that question. He was asked: "And did you have a chance to review
13 it before coming to Court today?" And then he went on. The answer,
14 Your Honours, is a barely there one. It might be better for the record to
15 be clear on that.
16 JUDGE ORIE: When you said that you confirmed that this was your
17 statement, you did not answer yet the question whether you had an
18 opportunity to review that statement during the last few days.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did have the opportunity of
20 reading the statement, and I do confirm that it is my statement.
21 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, counsel and Your Honour. The next item I
22 would like to have marked and shown to the witness is an intercept
23 authentication record. If we could give that the next number and show it
24 to him, please.
25 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Prosecution Exhibit P393,
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Your Honours.
2 MR. HANNIS:
3 Q. Mr. Bjelobrk, do you recognise that as a document you were able to
4 look at which contains a record of those conversations where you were able
5 to identify certain of the speakers and your comments about the contents
6 of some of those conversations that you listened to?
7 A. Yes. This document includes what I said in view of the
8 conversations that I had the opportunity of hearing, and I confirmed this
9 by my own signature.
10 Q. And initialled the other two pages as well?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, at this time, I would propose to read
14 the Rule 89F summary of this witness if that's agreeable to counsel and
15 the Court. I know we've done it sometimes at the beginning of a witness's
16 testimony and sometimes at the end.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps you'd better do it at the beginning so we
18 know what's the starting point for further questions.
19 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I noticed but that's a very technical
21 issue that Mr. Hannis asked whether the witness had had a chance, then I
22 asked him whether he had had an opportunity, but of course neither of us
23 asked whether he took that chance or -- I saw you hesitating. But the
24 answer is understood to be that he has reviewed the statement.
25 MR. STEWART: Your Honours, that's right. I made that comment to
1 Ms. Cmeric, and there was -- one of our judges often used to say when
2 counsel asked me if he'd had the opportunity, yes, then he would add after
3 a pause that he hadn't taken the opportunity, but we assume the witness
4 had, yes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I saw you discussing this with Ms. Cmeric. Please
6 proceed, Mr. Hannis.
7 MR. HANNIS: Thank you.
8 Q. Mr. Bjelobrk, for right now, I'm just going to read a summary of
9 what is in your written statement and then I will have some questions for
10 you after that.
11 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, counsel, this witness was a member of
12 the Social Democratic Party of Bosnia-Herzegovina. I'll use the initials
13 SDP where it occurs again. And was a member of the national assembly of
14 Bosnia and Herzegovina. In this capacity, he negotiated with
15 representatives of the SDS in respect of the future of Bosnia and
16 Herzegovina. He explains the SDS national platform and his party's
17 response to the SDS platform. The witness also relates how in 1991 the
18 SDS was engaged in the process of establishing parallel state structures,
19 discussing the resettlement of the population, organising Serb
20 municipalities, and forming Serb autonomous regions.
21 Bjelobrk describes the accused's public persona as being quite
22 different from the way he acted in a nonpublic meeting that the witness
23 attended as a representative of the trade unions.
24 The witness describes Momcilo Krajisnik's role as the president of
25 the assembly, noting that the position is a more powerful one than that of
1 the president or speaker in other European parliaments. He describes the
2 legislative process in existence at the time and gives examples of how the
3 accused used his authority to promote the agenda of the SDS. The witness
4 will comment on intercepted telephone conversations related to these and
5 other relevant matters.
6 Mr. Bjelobrk recounts an October 1991 meeting at the Lukavica
7 barracks during which a JNA major offered him the opportunity to command a
8 group of 150 people in the village of Miljevici.
9 The witness recounts the October 1991 BiH Assembly session in
10 which Radovan Karadzic made his infamous speech about the possible
11 disappearance, extinction of the Muslim people, and the walkout by the SDS
12 representatives. He describes subsequent efforts by the other legislators
13 to reach a political solution to avoid a war.
14 Mr. Bjelobrk describes his October 1991 visit as a representative
15 of the assembly to inspect the Posavina front line and a related meeting
16 with local leaders, including Radoslav Brdjanin and Predrag Radic. The
17 witness comments on a January 1992 interview given by Krajisnik and on a
18 March 1992 press report about the so-called variant A/variant B document.
19 Mr. Bjelobrk also recounts a March 1992 conversation that he and
20 another Serb had with Krajisnik in which the accused asked why they did
21 not want to support the SDS. Krajisnik talked about Serb intellectuals
22 not being able to live with other nationalities in the same country.
23 His testimony is relevant to paragraphs 7, 8, 12, 17, and 19 of
24 the indictment, and to all the counts of the indictment.
25 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, the only comment I have on that is
1 something maybe I should have noticed before because I had been supplied
2 with this before by Mr. Hannis, ut for the future, because it's a bit late
3 on this, for the future we suggest that words like "infamous" should be
4 edited out. We occasional see a little bit of, well, I occasionally
5 mentioned the word journalism from time to time in this case.
6 JUDGE ORIE: As a matter of fact, Mr. Stewart, I was surprised to
7 hear that word to be used. I thought about taking off the "in."
8 MR. STEWART: That wouldn't quite did the trick, would it,
9 Your Honour?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, the Chamber has heard a lot of evidence on
11 this Assembly meeting and there's no need, in whatever way the witness
12 would describe, there would be no need to refer to it as infamous or
13 famous or whatever.
14 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I take note of that, and we'll follow
15 that in future 89F summaries.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MR. HANNIS:
18 Q. Mr. Bjelobrk, next I want to just briefly summarise partially some
19 of your background information. I'll read this out and ask you if that's
21 You were born in Ilidza in 1949. You obtained a bachelor's degree
22 in electrical engineering. You became a member of the communist party in
23 1968 which later became the Social Democratic Party, the SDP of BiH.
24 Since 1991, you were a member of the SDP main board and currently a member
25 of its presidency at the time of your statement. And in the 1990
1 elections, you were elected to the Council of Ministries and became a
2 member of the BiH Parliament or National Assembly. And you are a Yugoslav
3 by ethnic background. Is that all correct?
4 A. All of it is correct except for the detail that in 1990 I was
5 elected to the Council of Municipalities of the Assembly of
7 Q. Thank you for that correction.
8 Now, your statement is going to be evidence in this matter, so I
9 just want to go to certain portions of it and ask you to explain or
10 elaborate on a few matters. The first paragraph I have a question for you
11 about for Court and counsel, is at paragraph 20 of your statement. There
12 you talk about beginning in mid-1991, there were many speeches in the
13 assembly, stating that Serbs from various regions "had to protect
14 themselves." And you go on to say that you could see that the idea came
15 from the top leadership of the SDS. I want to begin by asking you, first
16 of all, what or who did you consider the top leadership in the SDS to be?
17 A. The top of the SDS would be first of all the people who have the
18 top positions in nominal terms, so that is the president and the members
19 who have important positions in the state like members of the presidency,
20 prime minister, et cetera. Also, I believe that members of parliament are
21 important because in public, the SDS paid great attention to the role that
22 the members of parliament from the ranks of the SDS were supposed to play.
23 Q. Were there others that you considered to be in the top leadership
24 other than those who held the nominal positions that you've just
1 A. Of course. According to the statute of that party, those are the
2 members of its executive organs, like the main board, the presidency, et
3 cetera. However, I believe that in terms of importance, the persons who
4 held the positions I referred to were persons who were considered to be
5 people of authority and perceived as such by the public.
6 Q. Okay. And in your position as a member of the assembly, did you
7 have occasion to deal on a regular basis with the SDS representatives, the
8 other members of the national assembly?
9 A. Of course. The system of work in the parliament calls for
10 constant communication starting from the official communication, if I can
11 call it that, during the actual sessions of parliament. Then work in
12 assembly commissions and other committees. And of course, the standard
13 conversations taking place in the couloirs of the assembly. So this is
14 all activity that took place within the assembly. Of course, there were
15 also personal contacts outside the assembly.
16 Q. And as a result of that contact with members of the SDS, the
17 assembly members who were in the SDS, did you gain an impression of who
18 they considered to be the most important members of the SDS or their top
20 A. I think that without question, the highest authority was wielded
21 by the SDS president, and in time the president of the assembly's position
22 also gained in importance because the SDS paid great attention to the role
23 of the representatives in the public. Members of the presidency did not
24 have such authority in the public, although they did exercise important
25 functions. And this would round off the circle of the people who were
1 given much importance by the public.
2 Q. And in 1991 and early 1992, can you tell us who was the president
3 of the SDS?
4 A. The president of the SDS was Radovan Karadzic.
5 Q. And the president of the assembly?
6 A. The president of the assembly was Momcilo Krajisnik.
7 MR. HANNIS: Your Honours, next, I would like to play an intercept
8 and have this given the next exhibit number. And we propose to use the
9 new procedure that Mr. Harmon described.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution Exhibit P394, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it that the interpreters are ready to
12 start the first experience with the new system.
13 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, and to assist in that, I would like to
14 direct the interpreters, Court, counsel, and the witness to the starting
15 point. I'm not going to play the whole intercept; I'm going to play a
16 portion. In the English, it begins on page 3, the fourth box down.
17 Mr. Milosevic is speaking. In the B/C/S, it begins on page 2 of that
18 document, three boxes up from the box where Mr. Milosevic is speaking.
19 If that gives everyone a moment to find where we're starting,
20 we'll begin playing the tape.
21 [Intercept played]
22 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note they don't have obviously
23 the right text in front of them.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you, Mr. Hannis. The interpreters tell
25 us they have not the right text in front of them. Let me just...
1 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters have found it.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Then we could restart.
3 [Intercept played]
4 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover]
5 Slobodan Milosevic: You just called at the right time. There, I
6 have scribbled down some letter.
7 Radovan Karadzic: Uh-huh.
8 Slobodan Milosevic: There. I would address it to all that we are
9 calling, and then I would say in the whole process of the Yugoslav crisis,
10 neither in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Serbia, none of the
11 decisions were made or proclaimed about the secession and independence.
12 This is the best indication that the interest and the preference of all
13 the people and of most of the population living in these republics is that
14 Yugoslavia be saved as joint state of all equal people and republics, and
15 that for its successful development the conditions be made. In that way,
16 particularly emphasised is the responsibility of all the highest bodies of
17 these republics to find solution for a peaceful and democratic outcome of
18 the Yugoslav crisis. That is why I think that the agreement between the
19 presidents of the republics and presidents of the republics' national
20 assemblies on the most important questions about resolving the Yugoslav
21 crisis would be a good basis for our joint initiative that in the Yugoslav
22 bodies, the public as well as in other republican bodies in the interest
23 of finding the solution which will be in favour of the interest for the
24 solution which will establish the interests of all the Yugoslav people.
25 And then I will add now because I haven't, I only started to write, to
1 suggest that on Monday, presidents of the republics and the national
2 assemblies, presidents meet up and I ask them to --
3 Radovan Karadzic: To confirm it, yes.
4 Slobodan Milosevic: What do you think?
5 Radovan Karadzic: To confirm. Excellent, excellent. Good.
6 Slobodan Milosevic: Well, all right then.
7 Radovan Karadzic: Yes. And all of them will arrive. Or maybe
8 all of them or almost all of them.
9 Slobodan Milosevic: Well, all of them could arrive. Only Alija
10 might miss.
11 Radovan Karadzic: Yes, yes.
12 Slobodan Milosevic: Because be aware the key figure there is
14 Radovan Karadzic: Yes, yes, he is.
15 Slobodan Milosevic: If Krajisnik did not arrive, then the
16 representatives of Bosnia-Herzegovina did not arrive as well.
17 Radovan Karadzic: Yes, yes.
18 Slobodan Milosevic: If Krajisnik arrives, I don't give a fuck if
19 Alija did not arrive.
20 Radovan Karadzic: You do that directly to all of them separately,
21 address it in their name.
22 Slobodan Milosevic: Yes, yes, in the name, in the name.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, may I ask the English booth
24 whether there were any differences in what was heard and what was read in
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 THE INTERPRETER: No substantive differences that we could notice,
2 but it was very fast and very hard to follow.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, at least at this moment no differences
4 have been identified.
5 Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
6 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. Mr. Bjelobrk, this intercepted is dated August or July -- August
8 of 1991. At that time in the former Republic of Yugoslavia, as I
9 understand it, there were six republics that made up Yugoslavia. Is that
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And each one of those had its own president, a republican
13 president of each of the six?
14 A. The constitutional orders in the republics were such that in five
15 of these republics, the highest function was the presidency which at that
16 time numbered three or six members. The only difference in
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina was that unlike the other republics that had their
18 presidents, the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina was governed by a
19 collective body.
20 Q. And each of the six republics had its own republic assembly?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. Now, in terms of republic-level business, who or in which body was
23 invested the power to deal on an equal level, republic to republic, if you
24 understand my question?
25 A. This authority under the republican constitutions was vested with
1 the presidents of the republics; that is, in the case of the Republic of
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina with the presidency. The assemblies did not have that
3 sort of authority because earlier on you had these discussions by the
4 presidents of the republics who were trying to find a joint solution to
5 the Yugoslav crisis.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, one of the previous answers confuses me a
7 bit, the answer where the witness said the constitutional orders in the
8 republics were such that in five of these republics, the highest function
9 was the presidency which at that time numbered three or six members.
10 And then a bit further in that answer, it says that Bosnia and
11 Herzegovina was different because unlike the other republics that had
12 their presidents, the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina was governed by a
13 collective body. I would consider a body consisting of three or six
14 people as a collective body. So I have difficulties understanding this
16 MR. HANNIS:
17 Q. Mr. Bjelobrk, did you understand what the Judge said and can you
18 help resolve that conclusion?
19 A. Of course. Out of the six Yugoslav Republics under the
20 constitutional provisions of these republics, the five republics, namely,
21 Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, and Macedonia, had presidents,
22 whereas the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina had the presidency, and that
23 was the difference compared to the other republics that I was mentioning.
24 JUDGE ORIE: That was three to six members, the presidency?
25 I even did hear that you had answered, but not loud enough for the
1 interpreters to translate it. Your answer was yes?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Hannis.
4 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, now I need to ask a question because I
5 may be a little confused.
6 Q. In the five republics other than Bosnia-Herzegovina, there was an
7 individual president in each of those five republics?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. In Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time, you had a collective
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you. Now, in the intercept you just listened to where
13 Mr. Milosevic seemed to be arranging some kind of meeting at which he was
14 going to invite the presidents from the six republics as well as the
15 presidents of the national assemblies of those six republics to a meeting,
16 did you see any significance in that particular list of invitees?
17 A. Yes, I did. Prior to the 7th of August, these discussions aimed
18 at finding the solution to the Yugoslav crisis were carried on by the
19 presidents of the republics. Now, this conversation proposes that
20 presidents of the assemblies be also involved in these discussions. We
21 had such an initiative before on the agenda in the assembly, and some of
22 us thought that the introduction of the presidency of the assembly into
23 the discussions was an attempt after the failed session of the assembly in
24 the summer of 1991, which failed primarily due to the president of the
25 assembly who obviously gained in authority, and Milosevic was keeping this
1 option in mind and wanted to have this option set aside as a reserve
2 option for the speaking up of the mind of the Republic of
3 Bosnia-Herzegovina with regard to the solution to the Yugoslav crisis.
4 Q. Thank you. I want to go back to -- I started asking you about
5 paragraph 20 and the Serb speeches about having to protect themselves,
6 your statement that the idea -- you could see the idea came from the top
7 leadership of the SDS. How could you see or what led you to conclude that
8 that's where this idea came from?
9 A. First of all, the general mood in the spring and in mid-1991 was
10 such that there were no significant incidents calling for any sort of
11 protection. Secondly, we had heard of these ideas for establishing some
12 regional forms of government. And interestingly enough, they were
13 formulated in Romanija in Eastern Herzegovina and Krajina where the Serb
14 population is in the majority. And obviously, therefore, this system,
15 this mechanism of protection was being formed in the areas where the Serbs
16 were a majority, where the SDS was. Now, if you wanted to create a system
17 of protection, it would be logical to create it in the areas where a
18 certain ethnicity is in a minority in relation to the others. However,
19 time will show later on that this was a practice applied by the SDS until
20 the formation of the assembly of the Serbian people and until the
21 anti-constitutional takeovers started taking place there.
22 In my opinion, this was an idea developed by the leadership, first
23 of all, because the common citizens on the ground did not have any special
24 purposes for protection. And secondly, as you will see from one of the
25 transcripts here, that the drawing of the map in this sense was being done
1 by a very narrow circle of the people -- from among the leadership of the
3 Q. Thank you. Also in paragraph 20, you talk about -- or you say:
4 "The process of regional organisation and protection progressed from this
5 grouping of municipalities in Romanija and the creation of SAO, Serb
6 Autonomous Regions in Herzegovina and Krajina, et cetera, all the way
7 through to the establishment of the Republika Srpska." And you end by
8 concluding that this was "very well organised and was a progressive
9 strategy aimed toward the ultimate conclusion of national separation."
10 What led you to that conclusion? What did you base that
11 conclusion on?
12 A. There are several elements that would logically point to such a
13 conclusion to any active participant in the events. First of all, the
14 development of the SDS policy through the assembly and municipal bodies
15 was in a way defensive. They were formulating their responses to the
16 initiatives of others, and they merely had to the need to respond to that
17 in defence. When the crisis was on the table already, people were trying
18 to find compromise. And typically for them, they were trying to find a
19 compromise through this defensive policy. Secondly, in 1991, there was a
20 thesis according to which each ethnicity will have its own government and
21 run its own government, which means that you will have government
22 mechanisms in individual areas, and you will separate the ethnicities
23 along these lines.
24 There were no problems in the areas where the three ethnicities
25 could reach an agreement. However, wherever they could not, that's where
1 the problems arose. That's where the SDS professed that their position
2 was the position of the Serbian people. Now, when we're talking about the
3 grouping of municipalities along this SAO regionalisation policy and in
4 view of the fact that the assembly proclaimed to have a legitimate
5 majority in the areas where the population was predominant, this was a
6 process lasting for some 10, 11 months. And you could see the way
7 this -- the issue of the majority areas progressed.
8 Q. All right. Thank you, sir. Now, in paragraphs 21 to 25, and also
9 in paragraph 50 of your statement, you discuss in some detail how, in your
10 view, Mr. Krajisnik used his authority as president of the BiH Assembly to
11 actually obstruct the functioning of that body. And in paragraph 22, you
12 describe an example of that related to a particular proposal that you and
13 your party wanted to get on the assembly agenda.
14 First of all, can I ask you, do you recall what was that proposal
15 that you were seeking to get on the assembly agenda?
16 A. Prompted by the failed negotiations in Split where all the
17 presidents of the republics tried to reach an agreement, the
18 Social Democratic Party, that is, its representatives, came out with the
19 proposal to find a solution for Bosnia-Herzegovina within the entire
20 crisis, and there were two aspects of the proposal. First of all, that
21 Bosnia-Herzegovina should be placed in an equidistance in relation to
22 Serbia and Croatia. In view of the fact that Bosnia-Herzegovina was
23 composed by people of Serbian, Croat, and Bosniak ethnicities, it would be
24 unnatural and unrealistic to seek for a solution that would not create a
25 symmetrical type of relationship vis-a-vis Croatia and vis-a-vis Serbia.
1 The second aspect was the securing of human rights, not only ethnic rights
2 of all the peoples of Bosnia-Herzegovina. This was the basis of this
3 platform that had some other points as well. We put forth this proposal
4 to the assembly.
5 From the ranks of the SDS representatives, we met with opposition
6 as early as -- at the point of the adoption of the agenda. Mr. Krajisnik
7 voted for the item to be inserted into the agenda, and it was at this
8 particular session that the SDS representative walked out of the session.
9 In order to have such a proposal adopted, we needed some 120 or 121 votes,
10 which made up 51 per cent. We lacked one vote, and the key vote that was
11 lacking because of which our platform was not adopted was Mr. Krajisnik's
12 who opposed the idea.
13 I have to admit that he implemented the whole procedure in a fully
14 democratic way. However, if the SDS stance was to even walk out of the
15 session rather than vote on that platform, he did not do that. He stayed
16 there. For us, it was normal to at least expect some sort of a debate.
17 The only thing that happened was that we basically lacked one vote.
18 And in general, any idea that was not of -- that was not to the
19 liking of the SDS representatives would be met either with the walkout of
20 the SDS representatives or with the obstruction by Mr. Krajisnik at the
21 end of the entire procedure. And this happened regardless of the topic,
22 be it the number of intervals to be taken during a session or be it other
23 topics that -- like, for instance, the voting system that would manage to
24 circumvent the obstruction by the SDS representatives. As it was, we had
25 the sessions either interrupted or we had the walkout of the SDS
2 Finally, when there was some hope of the assembly being able to
3 vote for proposal, the SDS representatives said that only those items
4 could be placed on the agenda where consensus would be achieved by all the
5 three ethnicities, and the second proposal was that 51 per cent of the
6 vote was not going to be enough for a proposal to be adopted because one
7 ethnicity was, in their words, too loud. In the end, all this meant that
8 the work of the assembly had to be obstructed.
9 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, this would be a good time for me to
10 break if it's not too early.
11 JUDGE ORIE: It's not too early.
12 Mr. Bjelobrk, we'll adjourn for the day. I'd like you to return
13 tomorrow at quarter past 2.00 in this same courtroom. I, however, have to
14 tell you that there's a -- although small chance that we would have to do
15 another thing first, the chance is small, as I said, but it's still there,
16 and I just wanted to let you know in advance. May I instruct you not to
17 speak with anyone about the testimony you've given today and you're still
18 about to give in this Court.
19 Madam usher, may I ask you to escort Mr. Bjelobrk out of the
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
22 [The witness stands down]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hannis, just for our information, this witness
24 was scheduled even on the last sheet, which is of the 9th of November,
25 2.00, so that's rather recent, for six hours. At the same time, the -- I
1 may take it that under Rule 89F that you have another estimate which is
2 more realistic.
3 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honour. I spoke with Mr. Stewart before I
4 began, and I hope I can complete this witness in three hours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. All together. So you would say tomorrow you
6 would need a little bit over two hours.
7 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then now I better understand that the parties
9 still are confident that we can finish the witnesses scheduled for this
10 week. We adjourn --
11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, just two points if I may. First of
12 all, I'm not quite sure when we're going to be receiving material from the
13 previous witness who was going back to conduct his search?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, let me ask Mr. Registrar.
15 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
16 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that it has already been copied, that
17 it's on the corner of that table, and that you'll receive it immediately
18 after this hearing.
19 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Anything else?
21 MR. STEWART: Two points, Your Honour. The other one is we
22 noticed this witness has with him, we didn't bother about it just now
23 because it was a short time and he didn't seem to be referring to it, but
24 he did apparently have in front of him some sort of fairly thick diary or
25 agenda. We wonder whether it can just be checked tomorrow before he goes
1 into the witness box because he really ought not to take anything with
2 him. We've had this before.
3 MR. HANNIS: I will check on that, Your Honour. From my
4 observation, I think it's a copy of the statement and a copy of the
5 exhibits that were proposed to be shown to him, but I'll address that
7 JUDGE ORIE: If you would first advise the witness to keep that at
8 a sufficient distance and not to be consulted.
9 MR. HANNIS: I will.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Any further issue?
11 MR. STEWART: No, thank you, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll adjourn until tomorrow, quarter past 2.00,
13 same courtroom.
14 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.03 p.m.,
15 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 10th day of
16 November, 2004, at 2.15 p.m.