1 Friday, 18 March 2005
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number
7 IT-00-39-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
9 Good morning to everyone.
10 Madam Usher, could I ask you to escort the witness into the
12 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, just before the witness comes into the
13 courtroom, there was a matter that I was going to respond to in relation
14 to the proofing session of November last year and that was in relation to
15 a comment that the witness had made that he had informed the Office of the
16 Prosecutor in relation to a correction.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. MARGETTS: As it turns out, I've had an opportunity to review
19 the notes. There's no record of any such communication taking place.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That leaves two possibilities, either the
21 record is not complete or it has not been corrected. So it's better to
22 have a full -- of course I can't say what it is, neither can Ms. Loukas
23 and I'm afraid neither can you but thank you for the information.
24 Ms. Loukas, you are informed. Whether this is satisfactory or not
25 is another matter or not.
1 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you. Your Honour, there's just one matter I
2 also need to raise very briefly before the witness comes in and that is
3 that our interpreter is not present in court at the moment.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I'm informed about that. He will come soon but he
5 has to go through all the bureaucracy, is that ...
6 MS. LOUKAS: Well, precisely, Your Honour. The situation was as I
7 was coming through the foyer he was there, but as Defence counsel we're
8 not able to bring people into the building; it's only the Prosecution or
9 the registry.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I take it he will arrive soon. Measures have been
11 taken to bring him into the courtroom.
12 MS. LOUKAS: It is just unfortunate that there is that systemic
14 [The witness entered court]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Djokanovic, please be seated.
16 WITNESS: DRAGAN DJOKANOVIC [Resumed]
17 [The witness answered through interpreter]
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning. Thank you.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Djokanovic, I remind you that you are still bound
20 by the solemn declaration that you gave before your testimony on Monday.
21 Ms. Loukas, first of all, the 60 per cent rule if you look
22 realistically at what happened, doesn't bring you to five hours.
23 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour. I mean, I reviewed the
24 transcript, and I realised that mathematics is not my strong suit.
25 JUDGE ORIE: But I think you've received the message that you get
1 a half an hour after the first break.
2 MS. LOUKAS: That's correct, Your Honour. I have received the
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 Cross-examined by Ms. Loukas: [Continued]
7 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, when you were giving evidence on Tuesday, you
8 gave evidence in relation to -- that's at page 29 of the transcript on the
9 15th of March for the benefit of the Court and counsel. You were saying
10 that at that point in time --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Margetts.
12 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, we have the paginated version not the
13 LiveNote version so if I could just do a reconciliation of that to see
14 when each of the sessions commences on the final version.
15 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, the Prosecution is in a luxurious
16 position because we have not received a paginated version.
17 Let's see, page 29, the 15th of March commences on the --
18 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, the records here reveal that the
19 paginated version, the first page is page 10534 and if we can just do a
20 simple addition --
21 MS. LOUKAS: Well, I'm sure you can, Mr. Margetts.
22 Your Honour, I have very limited time for cross-examination and I
23 would be grateful if --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed. I'll find the relevant page.
25 Mr. Margetts, does that mean that you have not the LiveNote
1 version at all? It's available to the Prosecution as well, isn't it? On
2 your computer?
3 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay.
5 MR. MARGETTS: We do not have it with us, no.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Not on your computers?
7 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, we'll make the arithmetical
9 JUDGE ORIE: You do it as you wish.
10 Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
11 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Q. Now when you were giving evidence on Tuesday, Mr. Djokanovic, you
13 indicated you were giving some evidence in relation to decision makers in
14 relation to Mr. Karadzic, Professor Koljevic, Professor Plavsic, and
15 Mr. Krajisnik, and you were giving them a ranking in terms of one to four;
16 you recall that evidence?
17 A. Yes, I do.
18 Q. And also in relation to this -- you were also giving evidence in
19 relation to the influence of various people. That was at page 32 of the
20 LiveNote transcript for the benefit of Court and counsel.
21 You recall giving that evidence in relation to political
22 influence. I think Judge Hanoteau asked you some questions about what you
23 meant by influence. You recall all of that, of course?
24 A. Yes, I do recall.
25 Q. And you also gave some evidence in relation to the position of
1 Speaker of the Assembly or President of the Assembly being the second most
2 important position in the state and that was at page 34 of the LiveNote
3 transcript. And you recall, of course, giving that evidence?
4 A. Of course.
5 Q. And I think that you were asked about this question of influence
6 at page 36 of the transcript from Tuesday, and Judge Hanoteau asked you a
7 question about where does this power, where does this influence come from,
8 in essence. And your answer was: "From the ignorance and the mediocrity
9 of those who accept that, Your Honours."
10 You recall that answer, of course. Mr. Djokanovic?
11 A. I do, of course, but I would like to add a few sentences at this
13 Q. Well, Mr. Djokanovic, what I'm going to do is ask you a few more
14 questions and I'll then invite you after I finish with the matters that I
15 need to deal with to add a few points, Mr. Djokanovic.
16 Now, firstly, in terms of the Speaker's roles and powers, you are
17 aware, of course, that the duties of the President of the Assembly or the
18 Speaker of the Assembly is that he presides over the Assembly sessions;
20 A. Of course.
21 Q. And he allows various politicians to speak in order; correct?
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. And matters are proposed for voting by the Assembly?
24 A. Exactly.
25 Q. And in essence, of course the Speaker himself only has one vote?
1 A. That, too, is correct.
2 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
3 A. Of course it does not.
4 Q. And in relation to --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, the question is missing on page 6,
6 line 2, where the witness answered of course it does not. The question
8 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Would you repeat the question. There's no need -- I
10 take it if you put the same question, we expect the same answer.
11 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.
12 Q. Of course the Speaker does not have a casting vote. That was that
13 question where it wasn't recorded on the transcript.
14 JUDGE ORIE: You've answered that already.
15 Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
16 MS. LOUKAS:
17 Q. Now, in relation to that question, the Speaker, of course, does
18 not control the agenda. He has to put forward whatever is put forward by
19 the various Deputies' Clubs. Correct?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. And he has to present these matters on the agenda whether he
22 agrees with them or not; correct?
23 A. That's right.
24 Q. And of course in terms of the way that we look at the
25 parliamentary system in both Bosnia-Herzegovina and the separate Serbian
1 Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina, there were different state functions. You
2 look at the Presidency, the Assembly, and the government. Correct?
3 A. [No interpretation]
4 Q. Now, in relation, for example, on the 14th and 15th of October,
5 1991, when the independence proposal was put forward by the Bosnian Muslim
6 and the Bosnian Croatian politicians, Mr. Krajisnik of course had to put
7 that on the agenda because that was his role as a speaker; correct?
8 A. Correct, of course.
9 Q. Now, so in terms of this influence that you were talking about,
10 and the power, you'd agree with me, would you not, that Mr. Krajisnik, in
11 many ways, was perceived to be, in fact, more powerful than he was because
12 he was on the television and the media a lot because the parliamentary
13 sessions were constantly televised and, of course, as presiding over the
14 Assembly, he got a lot of media coverage. You'd agree with that, would
15 you not?
16 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, these are five questions in one. Would
17 you please split them up.
18 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, certainly. I'm more than happy to split them
19 up. It's just that I'm very conscious of my limited time, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But at the same time you suggested that it was
21 perception by televisions which of course that some Members of Parliament
22 would not only obtain knowledge of what happens in parliament -- or in the
23 Assembly by television.
24 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.
25 Q. Now, in terms of Mr. Krajisnik's generally perceived power and
1 influence, a lot of that was due to the fact that the parliamentary
2 sessions were televised and he got a lot of media coverage. That's
3 correct, isn't it?
4 A. That is correct.
5 Q. And in relation to what you've said about the ranking of various
6 people and their perceived influence, that, of course, is your view and of
7 course you allow for the possibility that other people would -- could form
8 different views?
9 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, there's -- it's not very helpful to
10 the Court for Mr. Djokanovic to speculate on what other people could
11 possibly form views on.
12 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. It's not a matter of speculation.
13 Ms. Loukas, it's whatever the witness answers. If he says: "You
14 asked whether there's a possibility that other people would form different
15 views. If it's witness says no, this doesn't mean that this is an answer
16 one could logically accept. If the witness says yes, it is common
17 knowledge because on every subject, other people can always take different
18 views. So it's -- certainly I would agree with Mr. Margetts that it
19 doesn't assist the Chamber.
20 I mean, if I ask you whether I have a certain view on a certain
21 matter, whether there's a possibility that someone else has a different
22 view -- how could I ever exclude that other people have different views?
23 MS. LOUKAS: Well, one could not, Your Honour. But I would submit
24 it is a proper matter for cross-examination. The witness --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But we are not -- I mean, of course this
1 Chamber is aware that if, in the context of questions on power not
2 resulting just merely from official functions, but of course you could
3 have different views on how far or how strong that power would be. That
4 goes without saying.
5 But please proceed. I just wanted to let you know that it's
6 not -- your question was not asking for speculation, but the answer is
7 yes, whatever the witness says, the possibility is there.
8 MS. LOUKAS: I take it that Your Honour is therefore prepared to
9 make a finding at this point that these -- this evidence in relation to
10 perceived influence and rankings in terms of position is merely this
11 witness's view and of course other views are possible on the same
13 JUDGE ORIE: Of course the Chamber will consider those matters in
14 the context of all of the evidence presented and of course it's the view
15 of this witness and either it finds support in other evidence or it's not
16 supported by other evidence, and then finally, the Chamber will make the
17 determinations it will have to make.
18 MS. LOUKAS:
19 Q. So Mr. Djokanovic, in terms of the opinions that you've expressed
20 in relation to Mr. Krajisnik as a main decision-maker, that is purely and
21 simply your view; correct?
22 A. Well, you have asked me a couple of questions there. I will try
23 to respond in a couple of sentences although it was all formulated as one
25 Mr. Krajisnik was the President of the Assembly of Bosnia and
1 Herzegovina, and he was the second in rank in power, and this is a
2 position that he inherited by inertia. His principle task entrusted him
3 by the Serbian side was to prevent the passage of any document that would
4 disrupt interethnic relations in Bosnia-Herzegovina which would be in
5 contravention of the SFRY constitution and the B and H constitution and
6 ultimately in the couldn't vision of the rules of procedure of
7 Bosnia-Herzegovina. Of course he adhered to form and he never violated
8 it, but he did not actually carry out his political task and that is a
9 historical fact.
10 However, he did not finish his political career by his defeat in
11 the Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, but he very carefully and
12 systematically built his political image until the end of the war, so that
13 the last amendments to the constitutions of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia
14 and Herzegovina was quite clear. The President of the republic together
15 with the President of the Assembly of the Republika Srpska, i.e., the
16 president of the republic in consultation with the President of the
17 Assembly of Republika Srpska was the one to appoint the prime minister
18 designate to actually form the government of Republika Srpska. So
19 practically his activity as the President of the Assembly was, after all,
20 defined under the constitution.
21 On the eve of the war by forming this National Security Council
22 [Realtime transcript read in error "National Council"], the influence of
23 Professor Koljevic and Professor Plavsic who, in the '90s had been elected
24 in a democratic way to the Presidency of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia
25 and Herzegovina actually failed to third place.
1 Q. I really don't want to interrupt you there, but I have to explain
2 to you that I have very limited time for questions.
3 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Margetts.
5 MR. MARGETTS: I would -- it's our submission that the point at
6 which counsel has interrupted the witness is the very point that was the
7 butt of her question, and we'd suggest that it be appropriate for the
8 witness to finish his answer.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The witness may finish his answer although he
10 should be aware that -- not to take too much time.
11 The last part of your answer was about the activity of
12 Mr. Krajisnik as the President of the Assembly as defined under the
13 constitution, and that on the eve of war by forming this National Council,
14 the influence of Professor Koljevic and Professor Plavsic who, in the '90s
15 had been elected in a democratic way to the Presidency of the Socialist
16 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina actually failed to third place.
17 Could you finish what you were telling us.
18 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, just a correction on the transcript,
19 Your Honour at page 10, line 20, there's a reference to the National
20 Council. We heard it as the National Security Council.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Could you finish that answer and at the same
22 time, keep in mind that time is limited.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think the name is council for
24 national security, yes.
25 It was referred to at the session of the National Assembly at
1 Pale, I believe, on the 24th of March. There was a proposal to appoint
2 Dr. Karadzic as president of the council. The second place was to go to
3 you were telling us.
4 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, just a correction on the transcript,
5 Your Honour at page 10, line 20, there's a reference to the National
6 Council, we heard it as the National Security Council.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Could you finish that answer and at the same
8 time, keep in mind that time is limited.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think the name is council for
10 national security, yes.
11 It was referred to in the session of the National Assembly at
12 Pale, I believe, on the 24th of March, there was a proposal to appoint
13 Dr. Karadzic as president of the council. The second place was to go to
14 the President of the Assembly of the Serbian People, and the third to the
15 member of the Presidency. So I objected. I asked why they were doing
16 this because they -- I thought that this was yet a step further towards
17 making the situation even more illegitimate.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
19 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, just on that point about the National
21 Security Council, of course there was a debate about that as you've just
22 referred to in Pale on the 24th of March, 1992 and you'd agree with me,
23 would you not, that in relation to that issue, Mr. Krajisnik took the same
24 view that you did, that it would merely be a consultative body; correct?
25 A. Yes. That Assembly, Mr. Krajisnik adopted the same position as I
1 myself and all this was postponed by several days, so I lost sight of the
2 further activities of this council; in fact, I thought that it will never
3 been actually established. But after I came to Pale from Belgrade, I
4 could see that this Presidency hierarchy that I found at Pale actually
5 reflected the relations that I spoke about in my previous statement.
6 President Karadzic was man number one and -- in the Presidency, and
7 Mr. Krajisnik was almost on an equal footing as Mr. Karadzic.
8 Mr. Koljevic and Mrs. Plavsic wielded significant influence in
9 that period, but certainly second to that of Mr. Krajisnik. That is my
10 opinion and I also believe that many people share this view of mine,
11 especially those people who came to Pale on any business whatsoever.
12 Q. Okay. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, I understand that this is your view
13 but you, of course, can see that not everybody held the same view as you;
15 A. I have not, so far, heard a different opinion.
16 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, you're not seriously telling the Court that
17 another view is not possible, are you?
18 A. No, absolutely not. I just said that until now, I haven't heard
19 or read that anyone said that Mr. Krajisnik was not second in influence
20 after Dr. Karadzic.
21 Q. And you'd agree with me assessments of this nature are necessarily
22 impressionistic; correct?
23 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, again, the witness has been asked to
24 contemplate matters of psychology.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Ms. Loukas, this witness has told us that he
1 had not heard any other view. There's nothing impressionistic about that.
2 That's just a fact, whether you heard that or not. Ask one additional
4 Mr. Djokanovic, you said, "And I also believe that many people
5 shared this view of mine." At the same time that you said that you did
6 not hear any other view. Did these other people, these many people, did
7 they express to you explicitly that they were of that view, that they
8 shared your view, or was it just that they did not express any other view?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I never heard from a
10 single personality in the area who might say that Mr. Krajisnik was --
11 wielded much less influence than Mr. Karadzic. In fact, it was the
12 generally shared view in the territory of the Serbian republic that he was
13 as influential as Karadzic if not more so in that period of time.
14 JUDGE ORIE: That still does not answer my question because you
15 told us already that you did not hear any different opinion. What I asked
16 you is whether people explicitly expressed to you that they shared your
17 views either in factual terms or in their assessment of the power of
18 Mr. Krajisnik. So that no one said something different is clear to me
19 now, but did they in a positive way say, This is how we look at it?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Koljevic, in those days, spoke
21 to me explicitly about the situation in the Presidency and the influence
22 of Mr. Krajisnik. Mrs. Plavsic spoke along the same lines. And certain
23 people who were commissioners, such as Mr. Poplasen and Mr. Radovanovic,
24 Mr. Vucabic [phoen], all of them discussed the issue with me and they all
25 agreed that Mr. Krajisnik, next to Mr. Karadzic, was the most influential
1 person. And when I say "influential," influential over the deputies, the
2 political situation, and also when it came to making important decisions.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
4 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, just in relation to this question of
6 Mr. Krajisnik's influence, I put it to you, Mr. Djokanovic, that what
7 you're saying is just not true.
8 A. You are being remunerated to defend your client.
9 Q. Well, Mr. Djokanovic, I think that that sort of comment is
10 thoroughly inappropriate, and I'm sure the Trial Chamber would agree with
11 me that that sort of answer is completely inappropriate from a witness.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Djokanovic, Ms. Loukas puts it to you that what
13 you said is not true. Rather than to comment on why she puts this to you,
14 the Chamber would like you to answer the question. So whether you agree
15 with her or you disagree with her or whatever shade of grey is between
16 black and white.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Ms. Loukas said that I was not
18 telling the truth. I am telling the truth and nothing but the truth, and
19 I took an oath to that effect at the beginning.
20 Ms. Loukas is entitled to present all arguments in -- to
21 contradict my statements and my comments, and it is up to the Trial
22 Chamber to weigh both and to tell me -- but rather than telling me that
23 I'm not telling the truth.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 Ms. Loukas, there might be some misunderstanding with the witness
1 if you are not used to the -- I would say to the techniques of the
2 examination-in-chief and cross-examination, putting something to a
3 witness, it might confuse a witness. I do understand from his answer that
4 he disagrees with you.
5 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour, and I can understand that as
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
8 MS. LOUKAS:
9 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, let's get one thing straight here, okay? Firstly,
10 the whole thing here is to find the truth; you understand that, don't you?
11 A. [No interpretation].
12 Q. And neither you or I are going to make the ultimate decision;
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. And of course that entire process of justice, as you understand
16 it, is that both sides get to present their perspective and the Trial
17 Chamber ultimately determines; correct?
18 A. Yes, correct.
19 Q. So I'd be grateful if you could assist me in that process of
20 finding the truth by answering my questions and not making comments. Do
21 we understand each other?
22 A. I think everyone in the courtroom noticed that yesterday, I
23 provided very brief answers to all questions without wishing to waste any
24 of your time. That is my intention still. However, there's not -- no
25 reason why I shouldn't comment on certain things if I feel I have to.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Djokanovic, you certainly can comment on the
2 subject matter of questions but you are supposed not to comment on why a
3 question is put to you, whether Ms. Loukas is -- whether it's her duty,
4 whether she fulfills her duty, that's not something we need any comment
6 At the same time, Ms. Loukas, I think the witness in his previous
7 answer sufficiently made that clear that he understands what we are doing
9 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour, and I'm happy to proceed.
10 Q. Now, in relation to the evidence you've given, Mr. Djokanovic,
11 that you were answerable to Mr. Krajisnik in relation to War Commissions
12 from July 1992 and specifically in relation to Novo Sarajevo, I put to you
13 that that's not true. You can answer yes or no.
14 A. That is not true what you have just said because Mr. Branko Radan,
15 after talking to me, went to see Mr. Krajisnik and agreed with him that I
16 should come to Novo Sarajevo to assist them in nominating municipal
18 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness approach the microphone,
20 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please come a bit closer to the microphone.
21 Perhaps, Madam Usher, you could assist.
22 May I just ask for one clarification, Mr. Djokanovic. Ms. Loukas
23 asked you whether or not your answer about Mr. Krajisnik in relation to
24 War Commissions and specifically in relation to Novo Sarajevo. In your
25 answer, you explain that you were sent to Novo Sarajevo after Mr. Radan
1 had consulted Mr. Krajisnik and had agreed with Mr. Krajisnik, but being
2 answerable is not exactly the same as being sent after a consultation
3 with. I mean, the next step is what do you do when you went to
4 Novo Sarajevo and to who do you report back.
5 So the answer - but perhaps, Ms. Loukas, you could pursue the
6 matter - does not exactly fit to the question.
7 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Your Honour. I'm going to move on to another
8 topic and come back to that one, Your Honour.
9 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, in your evidence on Tuesday, you gave
10 evidence in relation to telling Mr. Krajisnik and various members of the
11 leadership about certain matters. Now, when we were going through your
12 statement yesterday, you agreed that what you'd told the investigators was
13 that you conveyed general information about the situation and the places I
14 had visited to the War Presidency informing them that "many bad things
15 happened." And of course that was a matter that was also dealt with in
16 court yesterday at page 54. And your answer was: "Yes, that bad things,
17 ugly things were happening in the field and that they looked like war
18 crimes. I was quite clear in what I said. I said that action needed to
19 be taken. That we needed to organise a meeting with those people as soon
20 as possible to see what was actually happening in the field."
21 That was your answer in relation to this question of reporting
22 when I was asking you about your statement. You agree with that, correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Now, in answer to His Honour's question on Tuesday --
25 MS. LOUKAS: Sorry, Your Honours, if I might have a moment. I'm
1 just looking for the particular page reference. Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: If you give us the literal text, we will be able to
3 find it in a second.
4 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. It was page 73, Your Honours, of Tuesday.
5 Q. Now, your response in relation to a question from the Presiding
6 Judge was that: "And that's what you told the members of the Presidency
7 upon your return to Pale, that people were killed and driven out on a mass
8 scale and that was the information you got. Is that a correct
9 understanding?" And you said in response to that question to the
10 Presiding Judge that: "Yes, you have understood me precisely."
11 You recall that interchange, Mr. Djokanovic?
12 A. Of course I remember. That's right.
13 Q. And yet at the same time, in cross-examination, you agree that
14 what you basically said was that many bad things happened; correct?
15 A. I said that too.
16 Q. Well, Mr. Djokanovic, it seems to me -- or I put it to you that as
17 a witness, you tend to give the answer that you think your audience wants?
18 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. MARGETTS: My learned friend is juxtaposing the evidence that
21 Dr. Djokanovic gave yesterday and I'd invite her to describe fully that
22 evidence and that evidence in part was to adopt the statement that he
23 provided and that statement provides a more detailed description of
24 matters that were reported than my learned friend has, in fact, put in her
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Whether there is a sound basis for your
2 question, Ms. Loukas, is another matter, but you put it to the witness.
3 Mr. Djokanovic, Ms. Loukas puts it to you that you give the
4 answers you imagine those who are questioning you would like to hear.
5 That's what she puts to you and you may respond to that position.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. When Mrs. Malone at the
7 beginning of 2003 started talking to me about the events in
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina in the period from 1990 to 1992, she told me at the
9 very beginning that the investigators were fully aware of my activities in
10 that period of time, that I was absolutely clean in all that, and she told
11 me at the very beginning that I didn't have to give statements to the
12 investigators of The Hague Tribunal if I don't wish to.
13 I told Mrs. Malone that due to various circumstances, I happened
14 to have such a role in that -- those turbulent times and that in my
15 opinion, it is a duty of a witness of the time to testify. And when in
16 December, 2003, we were completing my second statement here in The Hague,
17 only upon the end of that statement was the name mentioned as to whose
18 trial I might appear at. And I told Mr. Margetts, who was talking to me
19 at the time, and his colleague whose name I can't recall, I inquired about
20 him, I was told he went to the United States, and I said that we haven't
21 discussed names and now suddenly a name has cropped up, and I would have
22 one request to make: May I be a witness of the Court rather than a
23 witness of the Prosecution. That was my question. And I was told with
24 precision that they would have consultations and they would let me know
25 the next day.
1 The next day, I was told that there had been certain precedents to
2 the effect that some people had been granted such a status but as for my
3 case, there was no need to decide in that way because I was just expected
4 to be a witness of the truth, not the witness of the Prosecution or the
5 Defence or the Trial Chamber, but a witness of the truth, and I accepted
7 And then they asked me in connection with protective measures. I
8 said that there was no need for any protective measures because I was
9 ready to speak about this in court and in public, and that is why I said
10 that there was no need for protective measures. And when I returned home
11 that I would send a fax to that effect. And after the new year holidays,
12 I did send this fax message saying that I would speak clearly in public
13 and frankly about everything I knew, that I didn't need any protective
15 My statement may be of assistance to someone, it may have the
16 opposite effect, too, but that is life.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, the last answer has been finished so --
18 MS. LOUKAS: I was waiting for the last answer to finish, Your
19 Honour. I thought that there was still interpretation.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, I didn't notice interpretation. But the last
21 lines were, "My statement may be of assistance to someone, it may have the
22 opposite effect too, but that is life."
23 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, you, of course, have never said anything
25 like, We should go to war, have you?
1 A. What period are you referring to in connection with my statement
2 and words to that effect?
3 Q. In 1991.
4 A. I don't remember. I may have said it.
5 Q. Would you -- you certainly would never have said anything like
6 that in a political debate, would you?
7 A. Throughout that period, 1991, 1992, and this is clear from all my
8 public statements and speeches in the Assembly, I always favoured attempts
9 to find the best solution by peaceful means.
10 Q. So in terms of your political stance, it was always, We should not
11 go to war. Correct?
12 A. In every possible -- all possible means should be sought to avoid
14 Q. That was always your position; correct?
15 A. That was my position from the moment I appeared on the political
16 stage until the beginning of the war.
17 Q. And of course that was the position that you took in political
18 debates in the Assembly; correct?
19 A. Obviously.
20 Q. That was the position that you took when you attended SDS Deputy
21 Club meetings; correct?
22 A. I did not attend deputy club meetings of the SDS.
23 Q. So on the 18th of October, 1991, you did not attend a SDS
24 Deputies' Club meeting?
25 A. You are probably talking about members of the Serbian deputies who
1 left the Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina to discuss the possibility of
2 forming the Assembly of the Serbian People. I probably did attend that
4 Q. Well, of course, this was just after the 14th and 15th of October,
5 1991; correct? Those tumultuous days of the 14th and 15th of October,
6 1991, all the Serb deputies got together to have a meeting, did they not?
7 A. That's right.
8 Q. And there was a meeting on the 18th of October, 1991, correct,
9 which you attended?
10 A. Probably. I think that in that period of time, I attended all
11 meetings held in Sarajevo of deputies, consultations on multi-party
12 cooperation, a narrow group of people in the office of the President of
13 the Assembly, so it's quite possible, but I don't remember precisely which
14 that meeting you are referring to was.
15 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honours, the Court, I'm about to refer to
16 P65, folder 3, tab 50.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed..
18 Q. Just to prompt your memory, Mr. Djokanovic, it was held in the
19 Blue Hall of the Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina, does that prompt your
21 A. As I was saying, -- there was no meetings in that period of time
22 that I did not attend but as there was so many, I can't remember exactly.
23 I do remember a meeting between the time the deputies walked out of the
24 Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the constitution of the Assembly of
25 the Serbian People in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I think that meeting was in
1 the Blue Hall, if that's the one you're referring to.
2 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, if the document might be shown to the witness.
3 Q. Now, if you look at that document, Mr. Djokanovic, you'll see that
4 you're noted as speaking at point 28. Do you have the relevant portion?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Do you want to read out to the Court what you say there? Will you
7 please read that out to the Court?
8 A. Your Honours, this is what it says here: "Dr. Djokanovic,
9 the 28th in order. Had we had a plebescite three months ago, things would
10 be easier now. They don't have a constitution. The Serbian people must
11 vote for the constitution of the Serbian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
12 I think we should go to war right away."
13 That is what it says here.
14 Q. Yes, so you agree with me you're recorded as saying, "We should go
15 to war right away." Correct?
16 A. That is what it says here, but my overall political activities
17 show that these were not my sentences. At the very next Assembly meeting
18 at the constituent meeting of the Assembly of the Serbian People, a number
19 of deputies spoke about war, but reason prevailed and the position was
20 that a political solution should be sought. A single word could be left
21 out to change the whole meaning. Maybe I actually said, I don't think we
22 should go to war, just to make it negative. And Mr. Toholj [phoen] on one
23 occasion when we met in Belgrade, when we spoke about those times, he
24 said, We've cleaned it all. What had they cleaned? What documents were
25 they referring to when saying that they had cleaned it? And also I
1 noticed in a number of other places in the minutes of Assembly meetings
2 that some things had been slightly changed. I must say slightly.
3 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... agree with me you're recorded
4 as saying "We should go to war right away," correct? That's my question.
5 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, he's answered that question.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think the question has been answered where
7 the witness said that is what it says.
8 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: So therefore, I mean, he accepts that his words have
10 been recorded in this document as saying, "I think we should go to war
11 right away." And then next, he explained that this could not be his words
12 and he gives an explanation for that.
13 MS. LOUKAS: Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then he supports that by he referring to his overall
15 political attitude.
16 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: But just to avoid whatever misunderstanding had --
18 from your explanation, should I conclude that it is still possible that
19 you've spoken those words or that you even have spoken them or do you say:
20 No, it must be a misrecording?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was probably a misrecording. It
22 was inadvertent, perhaps. The only way the sentence could he had read is
23 that I do not think we should immediately go to war. And it was obviously
24 in the ensuing sessions of the Assembly that I was always advocating a
25 peaceful solution of the problems in Bosnia and Herzegovina, that there
1 was light at the end of the tunnel, and that we should pursue that kind of
2 an end, in this period.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
4 MS. LOUKAS:
5 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, I just want to go back to your proofing
6 session with Mr. Margetts. You told us in court that you had certain
7 matters that you thought needed correction in your statement and you told
8 Mr. Margetts about it. That's basically the position, is it not?
9 A. Yes. There were a couple of things which did not change anything
10 in terms of substance but were commented upon. In fact, I did not even
11 insist on it.
12 Q. Nevertheless, of course the lawyers from the Prosecution noted
13 down what you were saying when you were talking to them?
14 A. Yes. But I wasn't aware, actually, of the -- that fact.
15 Q. Well, obviously when the lawyers are with you in a proofing
16 session, Mr. Djokanovic, they have pen and paper and they're taking notes
17 of what you're saying; correct?
18 A. When he talked to me, Mr. Margetts always had a pen and a notebook
19 of course, but we discussed so many things. My account was very
20 exhaustive so it is indeed difficult to put on paper everything,
21 everything that I say. I never set great store by that because I knew
22 that if I appeared in court one day that that would be the moment where I
23 would say what I had to say, that the courtroom was the venue to discuss
24 all these things in detail.
25 Q. Are you saying Mr. Margetts was not taking notes when you
1 indicated there were slight changes from your statement?
2 A. No, no. What I said was that I didn't know what it was that
3 Mr. Margetts was putting down. As far as I can recall, he was jotting
4 down what we were talking about.
5 Q. Of course when you told him there were changes, he was taking
6 notes; correct?
7 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, the witness has answered that
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, the witness said that during his
10 conversations with Mr. Margetts, Mr. Margetts was taking notes. He had a
11 pen in front of him and a piece of paper, so that's -- that question has
12 been answered.
13 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I think it's a little unfortunate
14 that Mr. Margetts is actually the person doing the objection in the
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do agree with you that that's an unfortunate
18 Mr. Margetts, could I ask you to not object unless -- of course
19 this objection was a question asked and question answered issue which is a
20 relatively neutral issue even if the question was about Mr. Margetts. But
21 may I give you the guidance that to the extent necessary, even if the
22 question has been asked and answered, then it's not dramatic if the
23 question would be put again and perhaps you -- your position at this
24 moment to ask for some -- well, not stepping back, but perhaps to go down
25 to the -- what really is basically needed for the Prosecution.
1 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, Your Honour, if I could suggest possibly that
2 Mr. Harmon could --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If Mr. Harmon feels that he is in a position
4 that he can take over, then on this -- on objections, that would certainly
5 be appreciated.
6 MR. MARGETTS: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: But of course Ms. Loukas I should have asked you
8 first because it's not usual that another counsel takes over on a specific
10 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour. I think it's appropriate at
11 this moment that Mr. Djokanovic remove his headphones. There is just a
12 matter I want to raise.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now I try to resolve the matter. You
14 repeatedly said that you have not much time.
15 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Then I heard questions like, Is it true that the 18th
17 of October, 1991, is a couple of days after the 14th of October. Even
18 this Chamber is in the position to, if something happens on the 18th of
19 October, that knowing what happened on the 14th and the 15th, there's
20 really no need to -- but -- he has taken off his earphones already.
21 Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
22 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Your Honour. The point I want to make is this,
23 and this is why I've asked Mr. Djokanovic to take off his headphones.
24 What is emerging, of course, is a credit issue between Mr. Margetts and
25 the witness. This, of course, is rather unfortunate, but it places the
1 Defence in the position of perhaps having to call Mr. Margetts in relation
2 to the question of the witness's credit.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether that would help us out. But of
4 course if any such a request will be put before this Chamber, we'll decide
5 on it. At the same time ...
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE ORIE: The importance and relevance of the issue is limited
8 in view of the changes made.
9 Ms. Loukas, please proceed.
10 MS. LOUKAS: In view of the ... Sorry?
11 JUDGE ORIE: In view of the changes in the statement we are
12 talking about.
13 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, it is a matter that goes to the
14 credit of the witness.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. As I said, the importance and relevance is
16 limited, I said. I did not say that it's irrelevant. I did not say that
17 it had no importance at all but -- please proceed.
18 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.
19 Now, if Mr. Djokanovic might have his headphones reinserted.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MS. LOUKAS:
22 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, in relation to your relationship with
23 Mr. Krajisnik, if I can put it that way --
24 MS. LOUKAS: If Mr. Djokanovic might be shown his second statement
25 of 2003.
1 JUDGE ORIE: The page in English would be, Ms. Loukas?
2 MS. LOUKAS: The page in English, Your Honour, would be page 10.
3 That's the December statement.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And in B/C/S, that would be ...
5 MS. LOUKAS: We're just checking with the interpreter now, Your
7 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, you have your statement before you, page 10
8 in the English and we're just checking the B/C/S paragraph.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, I'm not -- of course I'm not a native
10 speaker but if it would be in page 11, it would not surprise me. The
11 bottom of page 10 in English and -- in the middle of page 11 in B/C/S.
12 MS. LOUKAS: I see. So yes, it starts at the bottom of page 10 in
13 the B/C/S and continues on page 11.
14 Q. Do you have that before you, Mr. Djokanovic?
15 A. Yes, I have pages 10 and 11 before me.
16 Q. Now, in that paragraph, have you read through it?
17 A. Are you talking the -- about the last paragraph on page 10 in
18 which then goes on on page 11; right?
19 Q. That's correct.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Have you read through that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. So that is talking about the time when -- well, in fact, the
24 previous paragraph as well. You might want to have a look at that
25 previous paragraph as well.
1 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, we're having some difficulty locating
2 the paragraph that Ms. Loukas is referring to.
3 JUDGE ORIE: English text is last three digits ERN is 185 and on
4 that page is the second and the third paragraph.
5 MR. MARGETTS: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 MS. LOUKAS: So, yes, in the English on page 10, it's the second
7 full paragraph. I'm now referring to the first full paragraph and the
8 second full paragraph.
9 Q. So, Mr. Djokanovic, if you can have a look at both of those
10 paragraphs. Have you read them both?
11 A. Yes, I have. I've also read the one before.
12 Q. Okay. So what we've got there is that you say that Djeric,
13 Mr. Branko Djeric asked you to become a member of the government; correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And then you give the opinion that: "Someone obstructed the
16 voting so that I did not become a member of the government." Do you see
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 Q. And then your very next sentence is: "At this time, Mr. Krajisnik
20 had established his position very firmly." Correct?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. So what you say is that you hold Mr. Krajisnik responsible for you
23 not becoming a member of the government; correct?
24 A. No, no. No, I do not hold him responsible for that.
25 Q. Well, let's look a little bit further down in that paragraph. You
1 said that: "It was possible for the prime minister to suggest that I
2 should become his minister and the Assembly rejects that." Do you see
3 that portion there?
4 A. Yes, yes.
5 Q. And you say: "They could not do it openly. They could not vote
6 me out openly because they did not have firm arguments against me,
7 however, they created the situation where they did not have enough people
8 to vote." Correct?
9 A. That is what it says here. These are my answers to a number of
10 the investigator's questions. So the entire story actually latches on to
11 my talks with Mr. Djeric regarding the situation in Zvornik. When
12 Mr. Branko Djeric, who was the first prime minister of the Serbian
13 republic, when he heard that Brano Grujic had attacked me at the previous
14 meeting, he said, I was accused of war crimes by Alija Izetbegovic and now
15 I'm being accused by our own official Dragan Djokanovic for these very
16 same things.
17 This talk with Mr. Djeric took place in the Kikinda building where
18 the Presidency was, and Mr. Djeric and I talked in some detail about
19 certain issues and after he had offered me a member -- a position on the
20 government, I asked him, Mr. Djeric, do you really want the government to
21 control more space than only the parking lot in the front of the Bistrica
22 hotel at Mount Jahorina? And he said Yes. So I asked him, Are you ready
23 to crack down on crime which is being increasingly talked about? And Mr.
24 Djeric responded, Yes, then you can count on my support. I will accept to
25 be a member of your government. Although we did not talk about the
1 specific department. And, I will try to elicit the support of the members
2 of the Presidency, and I'm quite sure that you will have the support of
3 two Presidency members. And I was talking about Mr. Koljevic and
4 Ms. Plavsic at that time.
5 So this is the subject that we were discussing, and I also
6 reckoned that I would be able to ensure the support, the sure support of
7 Biljana Plavsic and Mr. Koljevic because we had already talked about
8 problems in the field and the crime before that and I knew what their
9 position was. But I was also counting on this fact: That if Mrs. Plavsic
10 and Mr. Koljevic so opted that Mr. Karadzic would also accept it.
11 Truth to tell, I did not count on Krajisnik's support knowing that
12 he was in close ties with two ministers who, in that period, were actually
13 the ones at whom the finger was being pointed the most, that was
14 Mr. Mandic, the minister of justice, and the interior minister, the
15 minister of the police, Mr. Stanisic.
16 That summer, at the Assembly meeting in the Bijeljina which I did
17 not attend, but let me describe the political situation that reigned at
18 the time. The prime minister was unable to form a cabinet at that time,
19 the Assembly actually elected individual --
20 Q. That's not answering my question.
21 Your Honour?
22 JUDGE ORIE: I beg your pardon.
23 Mr. Djokanovic, let me just reread your question, exactly,
24 Ms. Loukas, so that we ... The answer at least was that long that it is
25 not on our screen anymore.
1 The quote put to you was: You say they could not do it openly.
2 They could not vote me out openly because they did not have firm arguments
3 against me. However, they created the situation where they did not have
4 enough people, I think it says, to vote.
5 Ms. Loukas, you're asking the witness whether this is correct.
6 You put five, six or seven elements to him and say if it is correct.
7 MS. LOUKAS: It is a quotation, Your Honour, from his statement.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand. But -- well, if the witness --
9 I think that witness thinks that it needs more explanation because that
10 would -- otherwise there would be no need to put that question to him.
11 So therefore, if you would have more precise answers, you are
12 invited to put more -- less complex questions to him. Because you could
13 have split it up. You could have said openly, why not openly? Or is that
14 true? The second is the firm arguments, what arguments might there have
15 been. I mean, then we come to the core. But if you give him a full range
16 of -- I see you're looking at the clock, please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
17 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour. The only reason I'm looking at the
18 clock is because I'm going to run out of time for cross-examination.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's why I give you an opportunity to -- where
20 I give you the guidance that if you put questions in a different way, you
21 more easily get the answer instead of the witness not knowing exactly what
22 to tell you.
23 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, it's a balancing exercise.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please take your time to put the questions to the
25 witness rather than to debate with me.
1 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I'm happy to continue with the
2 questioning on this point.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
4 MS. LOUKAS:
5 Q. Now, getting back to your statement, Mr. Djokanovic, you say
6 there: "They could not do it openly. They could not vote me out openly
7 because they did not have firm arguments against me. However, they
8 created the situation where they did not have enough people to vote."
9 Who is the "they"?
10 A. This specifically refers to the entire Assembly of the Serbian
11 People because what I talked about in relation to the problems in Zvornik
12 was a non-political issue among the politicians in the Serbian Bosnia and
13 Herzegovina. So if I were to become a minister that summer, and
14 Mr. Djeric wanted me to become one and some of the deputies actually
15 stated positive views on my appointment - in fact, some of them voted for
16 my becoming a minister - that would mean affirming what I was saying at
17 that time, namely, that the prime minister should form his cabinet, should
18 be answerable for his work, that the government should do its work in
19 keeping with the constitution and that would mean asserting me as a person
20 who was talking about war crimes in that period.
21 It is well known in politics if one talks about these issues, one
22 actually is nominating oneself to actually work in that particular
23 department, and by saying this, I was actually nominating my own self to
24 work in the department of the rule of law and the activities to be
25 undertaken by the Republika Srpska in addressing the issue of war crimes.
1 Q. Okay. So let's have a look at the next paragraph, all right?
2 You've got in relation to this issue about you becoming a
3 minister: "However, instead of voting immediately a break was called and
4 when the members returned, there was no longer a quorum and the vote could
5 not take place."
6 Now, the person of course who called the break was Mr. Krajisnik,
7 correct, because he was the Speaker. We are in agreement there, are we
8 not, Mr. Djokanovic?
9 A. I was not at that Assembly session but I -- but knowing what had
10 transpired there, I was told what had happened, I asked the person from
11 the Presidency to give me a couple of pages from the stenogramme which
12 referred to precisely that issue. I believe I have given the
13 investigators this document. If not, I have it here -- not here in the
14 courtroom but I do have it.
15 Needless to say, I also listened to the audiotape recording of the
16 Assembly session and I could see that something unusual was happening in
17 the conference room.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Djokanovic, the question put to you whether you
19 agree with Ms. Loukas that it was Mr. Krajisnik who called the break. So
20 either you agree or you disagree. If further explanation is needed,
21 Ms. Loukas will certainly ask for it.
22 Please proceed. Perhaps first, on the basis of what you saw in
23 these pages of the transcript, do you agree with Ms. Loukas that it was
24 Mr. Krajisnik who called for the break?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Krajisnik chaired the Assembly
1 session. It was up to him to adjourn or to reconvene the session.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So you do agree.
3 Please proceed.
4 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, you blame Mr. Krajisnik for not becoming a
6 minister, don't you?
7 A. In principle here, I'm just describing the situation that obtained
8 in the Assembly, I do not even know whether Mr. Krajisnik voted in favour
9 or against, at all. I do not know how he opted and I do not blame him for
10 whatever position he took.
11 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... two paragraphs of your
12 statement talking about this issue. Do you see that, Mr. Djokanovic? You
13 agree with me, don't you, that you spent two paragraphs of your statement
14 talking about this issue of you not becoming a minister?
15 A. As far as that is concerned, an entire statement would have been
16 necessary here to describe that entire period because that was a period
17 when I knew policy could have emerged inside the Serbian Republic of
18 Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is not only associated with my own involvement
19 and work in the government, it is also associated with that but it is --
20 it has to do about with Mr. Djeric's remaining and forming cabinet as
21 someone who is capable to actually grapple with matters at hand and
22 someone who was ready to grapple with all the difficult problems. It was
23 a very difficult period and to my surprise and to the surprise of all
24 well-meaning people. Already the next session which was in Zvornik,
25 Mr. Djeric had to tender in his resignation.
1 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, I put to you that you bear a grudge against
2 Mr. Krajisnik?
3 A. Mr. Krajisnik and I had correct communication throughout that
4 period while I was minister, and after the war I was once at Pale and he
5 was a member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina and before that,
6 he had gone to see my parents which actually I thought was very nice of
7 him. So after that, I returned this visit and we talked and we had a very
8 pleasant conversation and there were no tensions of any kind between me
9 and Mr. Krajisnik.
10 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, you're biased against Mr. Krajisnik because you
11 hold him responsible for not becoming a minister; that's correct, isn't
13 A. No. I did become a minister later on. I consider Mr. Krajisnik
14 as a politician to be responsible because he wasn't fully concentrated and
15 in the memorandum about Bosnia-Herzegovina, he was a politician that the
16 people had a great deal of regard for and he could have done much more
17 than he actually did, than what happened. But that is just my political
18 opinion about that Assembly meeting.
19 When talking about that, I think there are very -- various views
20 as to Mr. Krajisnik could have done more or not. I personally think he
21 could have. I think he was much more capable than he demonstrated that
22 evening but the things you said absolutely don't stand because I became a
23 minister a couple of months later. I mention this just as a detail which
24 could have marked the beginning of a new policy and I think we would have
25 all fared better and there would have been no trial at The Hague, most
2 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Mr. Djokanovic, it's now time for the break and
3 I'm about to move on to a new topic so I'll continue my questioning after
4 the break, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we'll have a break until five minutes to 11.00.
6 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.
7 --- On resuming at 11.03 a.m.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I do understand that you'd like to
9 respond to the request in respect of protective measures in view of
10 Witness KRAJ 60.
11 MR. STEWART: I'm entirely in Your Honour's hands whether it's
12 dealt with right now or -- whatever is more convenient for the Trial
14 JUDGE ORIE: I did not know whether you wanted to stay or whether
15 you wanted to leave so I would like to give you an opportunity right now
16 and that's reason why --
17 MR. STEWART: If it's convenient.
18 JUDGE ORIE: If we could do it in private session.
19 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, can I say straight away that I
20 was -- I did propose to make some introductory remarks on this issue which
21 wouldn't require private session but at the point where it requires
22 private session then of course conscientiously to draw attention to that
23 and ensure that we don't trespass on ...
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, how much time do you think you would need for
25 both introductory remarks and -- I'm just asking your assessment.
1 MR. STEWART: I really don't think I'm going to need more than
2 about five minutes for each, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: That's quite a lot of time.
4 MR. STEWART: I didn't quite catch what Your Honour said.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I said that's quite a lot of time.
6 MR. STEWART: Ten minutes, Your Honour. Yes, that's my assessment
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed and try to keep it as brief as
9 Mr. Harmon.
10 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, I was -- I was told that we would
11 proceed with this issue afterwards. Mr. Gaynor is going to deal with that
12 issue. I just excused Mr. Gaynor two minutes ago so I can call him down
13 to --
14 JUDGE ORIE: The reason why that I wanted to deal with it right
15 away is that I did not want to put Mr. Stewart in a position where he had
16 to wait for an hour and --
17 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may -- may -- may I -- my -- my -- my
18 point in some conversation before Your Honour came in, my point was that I
19 did come down now specifically this -- for this but on the other hand,
20 Your Honour, I am proposing to stay for this session so I'm totally -- I
21 appreciate Your Honour's concern for my --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll wait -- then we'll wait until a later
23 moment because that was the one and only reason why I did not want to ...
24 MR. STEWART: I understand, Your Honour, I had come down in
25 accordance with the arrangements agreed the other day but I'm -- I'm -- I
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 wouldn't miss it for the world, Your Honour, now.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please escort the witness into
3 the courtroom.
4 [The witness entered court]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Djokanovic, Ms. Loukas will continue
7 Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
8 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.
9 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, let's go back to some evidence you were
10 giving just prior to the break. And it's at page 35, line 8 for the
11 benefit of the Court and counsel. And that is that you were saying that,
12 in essence, this specifically refers to the entire Assembly session,
13 Assembly of the Serbian People because what I talked about in relation to
14 the problems in Zvornik was a non-political issue among the politicians in
15 the Serbian -- in the Serbian Bosnia and Herzegovina, so if I were to
16 become a minister that summer and Mr. Djeric wanted me to become one and
17 some of the deputies actually stated positive views on my appointment, in
18 fact some of them voted for my becoming a minister, that would mean
19 affirming what I was saying at that time, namely that the prime minister
20 should form this cabinet, should be answerable for his work, that the
21 government should do its work in keeping in the constitution and that
22 would be asserting me as a person who was talking about war crimes in that
24 Now, you remember that evidence you just gave before the break,
25 Mr. Djokanovic?
1 A. More or less, yes, that is what I said.
2 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, you are, of course, putting yourself forward
3 as somebody who, during that period, we're talking about from June
4 onwards, is a person who was talking about war crimes; correct?
5 A. In that period of time, I was talking about War Commissions, but
6 what I saw in the field I conveyed to members of the Presidency and I
7 spoke about it with the prime minister. That situation should have
8 prompted everyone to do something. I did what I did, what I could as far
9 as my possibilities allowed and the influence I wielded and I had
10 considerable influence, especially as I cooperated very well with members
11 of the Presidency. Dr. Koljevic and Dr. Plavsic so in that period of
12 time, I was highly influential and initiating a new kind of policy in the
13 territory of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
14 Q. So, Mr. Djokanovic, you, during that period, are now putting
15 yourself forward as some sort of war crimes hero, aren't you?
16 A. No. I wouldn't put it like that. I tried, as I have explained, I
17 wanted a new executive body to be formed which would act in accordance
18 with the constitution with respect to war crimes and general crime that
19 was being talked about among the people. The fact -- it is a fact that I
20 spoke about it and I didn't avoid coming to grips with such a problem, and
21 Mr. Djeric offered me the position of minister for questions of veterans
22 and victims of war.
23 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, the fact is you were not talking to everybody you
24 could in that period from June onwards about war crimes, were you?
25 A. I spoke to people who -- close by, with people that I thought
1 could effect a change.
2 Q. Well, one of the organs in our society that can effect a change
3 is, of course, the media. Did you speak to the media about what you were
4 talking about?
5 A. I did not. I didn't feel that all possibilities had been exhorted
6 been the political establishment of the Serbian republic. I believe that
7 if I had the support of members of the Presidency, that is Koljevic and
8 Plavcic for a new policy, and also from the prime minister, especially as
9 he was the first prime minister, I thought that many things could be
10 achieved through the institutions. I was always aware that there was no
11 statute of limitations for war crimes so there would be time to talk about
12 that in the media too, but I did everything I could through the
13 institutions of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina to have a
14 state system developed. I must say that this was a period of time when
15 all the state elements were not fully functional, and my policy was based
16 on the constitution of civilian authorities in the municipalities to have
17 vertical communication between the municipalities and the Presidency for
18 the Assembly and the government to play their part in accordance with the
19 constitution and that all this should be in accordance with our policies.
20 I had only two pieces of paper in my pocket for this trial which I
21 thought was important and that is an original minutes from a meeting. I
22 think you have that among the documents. The proclamation to the peoples
23 and citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina dated the 5th of November, 1991.
24 When we called on all citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina to take part in
25 the plebescite and vote in favour of Yugoslavia.
1 Q. I'm going to stop you there. This doesn't appear to be an answer
2 to my question.
3 A. I am answering your question. In that proclamation, and I have
4 the original signature of Dr. Karadzic, and he agrees with my initiative
5 that we call on all the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina to vote for
6 remaining in Yugoslavia. So Serb policy was very clear in that respect.
7 We all wanted to go to the plebescite so that we would remain in
8 Yugoslavia. The Serbs did not want to live alone. And we also had the
9 constitution of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Djokanovic, if I understand Ms. Loukas well, then
11 she was mainly saying that the last part of your answer was not an answer
12 to her question anymore.
13 But I take it, Ms. Loukas, that the beginning of the answer was in
14 response of your question.
15 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Your Honour, I'm just checking my question now.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Your question was about the -- you started saying
17 the media could have affected and whether he did go to the media and then
18 he explained why he did not. That he did not and why he did not.
19 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. But now I think we've moved on to the
20 plebescite of 1991.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That seems to be rather far away from ...
22 MS. LOUKAS:
23 Q. In any event, Mr. Djokanovic, you were a person, and you've given
24 evidence of this, who thought that Mr. Krajisnik's reliance on the
25 constitution and the legality of the Assembly process on the 14th and 15th
1 of October, 1991, was not enough; correct?
2 A. His engagement at the time was not sufficient, but that is not
3 important in my opinion. I wanted to tell you that we wanted to develop a
4 healthy environment.
5 Q. You can either agree or disagree with my proposition. I don't
6 have a lot of time.
7 A. But I have answered that question. Mr. Krajisnik, that night,
8 respected the form. He fully respected the constitution of the SFRY and
9 the rules of procedure of the Assembly. That is quite clear. I have said
10 that several times during my testimony. But as a politician, I said that
11 he could have done even more in view of his abilities. That is my
12 subjective opinion. But as I was saying, that was not important in my
13 view. I wanted a legal environment to be created. And on the basis of
14 that plebescite and on the constitution we proclaimed, we copied many
15 paragraphs from the International Human Rights Charter, and we should have
16 respected what was contained in our constitution and all the organs.
17 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Now, please answer my
19 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, if you ask a witness whether he is a
20 person and whether he has given evidence of this who thought something,
21 then you are asking about whether he's a person and whether he gave
22 evidence on it and then it's also on the subject matter. I mean, you
23 can't blame the witness for not saying yes or no to that. Is he a person,
24 did he give evidence on it, he might be a person but not have given
25 evidence on it, he might have given evidence on it but wrongly. You are
1 putting questions in such a way that you should not be surprised that the
2 witness takes a bit more time, and you are certainly in a position to
3 avoid that.
4 Please proceed.
5 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, I do not accept that, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, nevertheless, proceed.
7 MS. LOUKAS: I wasn't asking the witness if he was a person.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Well, that's what your question says.
9 MS. LOUKAS: No, it doesn't, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Let me then just -- that's what the transcript says.
11 Let me then say the following. "In any event, Mr. Djokanovic, you were a
12 person, and you have given evidence of this who thought that
13 Mr. Krajisnik --
14 MS. LOUKAS: The person who thought, yes, that continues. It's
15 the same thought, Your Honour, through the thing.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so you say he was -- he has thoughts and has
17 given evidence on it.
18 MS. LOUKAS: That's correct. That he gave evidence of what his
19 thoughts were at the time, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's proceed and not lose more time.
21 MS. LOUKAS:
22 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, the situation is that your view is that
23 Mr. Krajisnik should have gone beyond parliament and to a press conference
24 and extra-parliamentary demonstrations; correct? That is your evidence,
25 is it not?
1 A. We have discussed this. I wouldn't place further emphasis on
2 this. Mr. Krajisnik respected the form that evening. My opinion as a
3 participant, and I have already said in court that he did not avail
4 himself of all the possibilities. There were other democratic
5 possibilities, demonstrations, press conferences, to inform the people and
6 the international public what was being prepared in the Assembly. He kept
7 quiet about that and that is what I'm reproaching him for.
8 But I don't think that this should give the impression that I have
9 anything against Mr. Krajisnik. It's something I absolutely wish to
10 avoid. That is not true. Mr. Krajisnik and I, as I was saying, had very
11 correct communication between us, and whatever I did in that period was to
12 contribute to peace and respect the constitution. It says: "Human rights
13 and freedoms. The citizen of Republika Srpska are equal in freedoms,
14 rights, and duties before the law. They enjoy equal legal protection
15 regardless of ethnicity ..."
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Djokanovic, listening to your answer, it seems
17 that you confirm that is what your evidence. That's what Ms. Loukas asked
19 Please proceed, Ms. Loukas.
20 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, and I'm talking her about June 1992, all
22 right? You kept quiet about war crimes, didn't you?
23 A. I spoke about it where I could with people in Zvornik, cautioning
24 them clearly that they might be held responsible tomorrow. I spoke about
25 it with members of the Presidency. Of course I didn't broadcast it. I
1 believe that all these people were sufficiently intelligent. In a few
2 sentences, I made myself quite clear.
3 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, you didn't go to the media about war crimes in
4 June 1992, did you?
5 A. I didn't have the possibility to talk about it in the media. I
6 was at Pale and the only media was the television of Republika Srpska,
7 which was in embryo form at the time, and it was our service, a service of
8 the Presidency. So I didn't see any need for me to go on television when
9 I thought it was up to the Presidency, the legal bodies to do something
10 about it.
11 Q. How about newspapers?
12 A. We didn't have any. I could have gone to Sarajevo, that's true.
13 THE INTERPRETER: Can Ms. Loukas please repeat the question, we
14 didn't hear it because of the overlap.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, you are invited to repeat your question
16 because of the overlap.
17 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, thank you.
18 Q. How about -- [B/C/S on English channel].
19 MS. LOUKAS: Yes.
20 A. Yes. Glas Podrinja is a local newspaper from Sabac. And when I
21 was in Zvornik, a journalist from that newspaper came to talk to me and I
22 have kept that interview. It's a local newspaper so I forgot to mention
24 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, the -- [B/C/S on English channel].
25 [Previous translation continues] ... English but that has been
1 restored. Your question was what Glas Podrinja was.
2 MS. LOUKAS: Exactly, yes, thank you.
3 JUDGE ORIE: And the question has been answered so you may move
5 MS. LOUKAS:
6 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, I show you a document.
7 MS. LOUKAS: I believe the Prosecution have been notified that I
8 will be using this document, Your Honours, and I have copies for Your
9 Honours and the registry in English.
10 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, do you have the document in front of you?
11 A. Yes, yes.
12 Q. And there's, in fact -- now, Mr. Djokanovic, you have before you
13 an interview with you as republican commissioner for a number of
14 municipalities of the Bihac region of the Serb Republic of
15 Bosnia-Herzegovina. That's a document you have before you?
16 A. Yes, that's it.
17 Q. And in that interview there's, of course, a photograph of you
18 there, you see that?
19 A. [No audible response].
20 Q. And of course when giving this interview you were telling the
21 truth; correct?
22 A. I always spoke the truth. And this interview with journalist
23 Petkovic, I have two comments to make. I did not authenticate this text.
24 She spoke to me. She never showed it to me afterwards as we had agreed,
25 and I searched for it for several months and I have kept this article to
1 see what she wrote. And my second comment is I had some doubts when I saw
2 her sitting with Marko Pavlovic about an hour after my conversation with
4 Q. But of course, Mr. Djokanovic, you never asked for a correction at
5 the time, did you?
6 A. No, it was published in the press, and talking to the
7 investigators, I said that this was not for local paper in Bratunac. I
8 didn't authorise it. There are a few words which were added and which
9 changed the substance of my interview.
10 Q. Well, Mr. Djokanovic, the question you were asked by the
11 journalist was this: "The war in Bosnia and Herzegovina made the
12 coexistence of constitutive peoples almost impossible because peoples do
13 not wish to live together as it is stressed more and more."
14 Now, would you care to read out to the Court what you said in that
16 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters do not have a copy. Could it
17 be placed under the ELMO, please?
18 A. You're referring to my answer to the last question?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, in view of the previous answer of the
20 witness, you can invite him either to read what the newspaper says or to
21 tell us what he said during the interview. You asked him to read what he
23 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's in view of the previous answer a too
25 complex question. But of course we can read what is written down.
1 MS. LOUKAS: Okay.
2 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, this is what you said, according to the
3 journalist Z. Petkovic: "In municipalities where the Serb Republic of
4 Bosnia and Herzegovina is functioning, everybody is allowed free movement.
5 That is the situation in the Serb municipality of Zvornik. Muslims who
6 wish to go away and take refuge from the region which is, after all,
7 endangered by the war are allowed to leave peacefully. Buses are provided
8 from Zvornik, and everyone who wished to be transported to a destination
9 in an organised way were allowed to do so. Most of them go to Subotica
10 the right of every man is to protect his family. We confirm once again
11 that the Serbs respect humanitarian principles and do not oppress anyone
12 in the territories under their authority. Everything I say can be
13 checked. Serbs care about peace very much and respect of the rights of
14 all the peoples, even the right of the Serb people to have their own
15 state, and to arrange it according to the law and democratically."
16 Now, tell me, Mr. Djokanovic, what, about that answer do you not
17 agree that you said?
18 A. I think everything is correctly conveyed, but what is important is
19 the following: My interview with this reporter was an interview after I
20 had seen people from the Crisis Staff, so my comments are based on my
21 conversations with people from the Crisis Staff and before I had spoken
22 with certain citizens about the situation in Zvornik. So I came there
23 with the platform of the commissions, and the reporter is talking about
24 the platform and our policies. Never for a moment did I have any
25 suspicions regarding the intentions of the local authorities to respect
1 human rights.
2 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, --
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, microphone, please.
5 MS. LOUKAS: Certainly.
6 JUDGE ORIE: If you put your headphones on, you will hear it
7 immediately from the interpreter.
8 MS. LOUKAS:
9 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, this interview is dated June the 25th; correct?
10 A. It was published by the newspaper on the 25th of June, but the
11 actual interview took place on the day I came to Zvornik with the three
12 documents. And the minute I arrived, I went to the municipal building and
13 I barged into the Crisis Staff session. I told them that on coming to
14 Zvornik, I could see old people crossing the bridge to Mali Zvornik and I
15 asked them why are these people going there, and they told me they are
16 probably seeking shelter with their in-laws and relatives in Mali
17 Zvornik. And then I could see people leaving by buses to Subotica. So I
18 mentioned all this in my interview with the journalist, trying to
19 understand all this and to explain what I had seen with my very eyes why
20 these people were crossing the bridge to go to Serbia. Namely, at that
21 particular moment, I did not doubt for a minute the good intentions of the
22 people in Zvornik.
23 Q. Well, when you say you got further information later,
24 Mr. Djokanovic, why didn't you contact the media after that?
25 A. Well, as I was saying, I had no possibility to talk to the media.
1 This lady reporter is one that I knew from before. She used to work for
2 Radio Zvornik, so we started talking on the subject spontaneously as it
3 were. I did not seek out the journalist. I wanted to talk about it all
4 when I returned to Pale with people in the Presidency. Why would I jump
5 the gun and talk about it before talking to the people in headquarters?
6 So I had the technical possibility to go to Belgrade and seek out the
7 journalists of the different newspapers and talk to them about it but I
9 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, did you tell this journalist what they thought --
10 what you thought they wanted to hear?
11 A. It would be the best thing if the original record of the interview
12 with me was found. After we finished the interview, I saw this lady
13 reporter in the company of Marko Pavlovic, a man from the Crisis Staff,
14 not later than half an hour after that.
15 JUDGE ORIE: The question was whether you told this journalist
16 what you thought, I take it, she wanted to hear.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I mainly told her what I wanted to
18 say and to respond, of course, correctly to her questions. And I also
19 expected the reporter to treat me in a fair fashion and to talk to me when
20 preparing the actual text for the publishing, given the circumstances,
21 rather than talk to Marko Pavlovic, a Crisis Staff member.
22 I saw them talking on the balcony and I was suspicious, in fact,
23 about it.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, I do understand his answer to be that the
25 witness, at that time, says he was not guided to please the journalist but
1 rather to answer the questions.
2 Please proceed.
3 MS. LOUKAS: Indeed, Your Honour.
4 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, you're just not telling the truth about
5 reporting war crimes, are you?
6 A. I did not report the war crimes to the media. I didn't do it
7 then, I would not do it now. It was much more logical for me - and I
8 would do the same thing now - to go to the Presidency and talk about the
9 issue with members of the Presidency. There is no doubt about that.
10 I can answer all your questions with yes or no, but when we talk
11 about such crucial issues, I have to give you an explanation. Simply we
12 talked about it at Pale with all the members of the Presidency. I cannot
13 recall whether Branko Djeric was there on the evening of the 16th, but if
14 he wasn't, we talked about it, that is to say, he and I, alone, about this
16 Q. Mr. Djokanovic --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, may I ask you one thing.
18 MS. LOUKAS: Sure.
19 JUDGE ORIE: The witness apparently understood your question about
20 reporting war crimes as reporting to Pale. Is that what you meant? Then
21 of course the question has been answered. If it was wider than -- you are
22 just not telling the truth about reporting war crimes, are you? That was
23 your question. And that followed immediately on all the press issues.
24 But from his answer, he -- it appears that he understood your question as
25 reporting to political figures or to -- well, at least not to the press.
1 Is that what you meant, then the question has been answered. If you had
2 something different to mind ...
3 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour, I'm talking about reporting to Pale.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
5 MS. LOUKAS:
6 Q. Now, Mr. Djokanovic, you could have done more than you did; that's
7 correct, is it not, at the time, in relation to war crimes?
8 A. Yes, I could have done more. I certainly could have done more.
9 Q. And you didn't?
10 A. Perhaps I did not know how to go about it at that time. Perhaps I
11 was not aware of all the avenues available to me to make it public.
12 Now, with hindsight, I'm aware that I could have done many other
13 things, and I should have turned to the media and I could have done that,
14 I think. I had ties -- the roads to Zvornik were clear, I could go to
15 Belgrade and talk to the media there about it, but we had some business to
16 finish in the leadership of Republika Srpska to form the new government
17 after the resignation of Branko Djeric. And I was hoping that the new
18 government would indeed pursue a new policy and that as a system we could
19 counter war crimes. I didn't want any kind of publicity for myself or the
20 halo of a hero, but I did want to grapple with these problems even though
21 I was fully aware of how unpopular a job that was. And everyone who heard
22 me talk about it knew that it was highly unpopular. It was much more
23 popular to be an opportunist at that moment.
24 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, you, in your interview and the two statements you
25 gave to the Office of the Prosecutor and in your evidence in chief this
1 week -- your evidence, your statements, are all coloured by the fact that
2 you want to shift responsibility away from yourself as republican
3 commissioner. And what I'm putting to you is this: Your efforts to put
4 Mr. Krajisnik in the picture in relation to being informed about crimes
5 and in relation to the War Commission, that is so you can ensure that you
6 are not held responsible by giving the Prosecution what they want. What
7 do you say about that?
8 A. Throughout the interview with the Tribunal's investigators, I kept
9 saying that I was a part of that leadership, that it was my life and that
10 is something which still attends me today. I'm not talking about these
11 things as about something peripheral and something that's that just so
12 happened and I'm now remembering it. It is a part of me.
13 Can you imagine what -- how it feels to be in a situation that I
14 am in right now, that I am sitting here and my political ally and I would
15 say my friend, Mr. Krajisnik, is sitting on the other side? Not for a
16 single moment, never, at any time, did the -- and the investigators know
17 this did I try to clear my name of anything or to justify my actions. I
18 was a part of it. I was a part of that politics. I am trying to tell you
19 what it was that I did and what it was that I wanted to do. If I bear any
20 blame in all that, of course I will accept it.
21 You ask me whether I could have done more. Now in hindsight I
22 told you I could have done more, I should have done more, I really should
23 have actually put my life at stake in order to do it.
24 MS. LOUKAS: I have further questions, Your Honour.
25 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas, if your microphone would have been on, we
2 would have heard that you had no further questions.
3 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, Your Honour.
4 In fact, before I finish, just to finalise under 90(H), I should
5 also put that the evidence in relation to Mr. Krajisnik being part of the
6 Presidency, Mr. Krajisnik being informed of crimes, Mr. Krajisnik's
7 position of influence in the political hierarchy, and Mr. Krajisnik's
8 position in relation to the war crimes, all these aspects of
9 Mr. Djokanovic, you, Mr. Djokanovic, trying to put Mr. Krajisnik in the
10 picture is just to get yourself out of the picture and save your own skin.
11 That's what I'm putting to you, Mr. Djokanovic.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Do you expect Mr. Djokanovic to answer to that at
13 this moment?
14 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I'm happy to -- I do expect him to
15 answer it and -- Your Honour, I can indicate -- I can further add to the
17 Q. I take it that you would disagree with me, Mr. Djokanovic.
18 A. I did my very best as much as I could within the system of
19 Republika Srpska. When I saw that everything had been exhausted, I
20 resigned and left the political scene. Of course I stayed on for a while
21 because under the constitution, I had to continue doing that particular
22 job for a while. But in respect of war crimes, I repeat, I should have
23 done more then, already then, I should have.
24 And you referred to the media. I should have gone to the media
25 where I could have organised press conferences and talked on the subject.
1 I should have also gone to the camp near Prijedor, at least tried to go
2 there when I heard from the media that there existed one. I should have
3 done all those things but I did not.
4 Q. Mr. Djokanovic, you did not discuss war crimes with Mr. Krajisnik.
5 That's what I'm putting to you, and I take it that you disagree with me,
6 and all I need is a yes or no answer.
7 A. I talked about these questions with Mr. Krajisnik and after all,
8 we all had occasion to talk about it at a session of the Assembly of the
9 Serbian Republic.
10 MS. LOUKAS: No further questions, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you.
12 Ms. Loukas, I, although I'm not have a common-law tradition, I
13 always understood Rule 90(H) that you put to a witness the nature of the
14 case for the party. You do that not at the very end of the questioning
15 but somewhere when you confront him with the inconsistency of the answers
16 he gave. But let's -- it's a technical matter which I'm glad to hear that
17 I am wrong in understanding Rule 90(H).
18 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, I can indicate that in relation to
19 that it's a matter purely within the per view of the advocate as to when
20 the matter is put.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Even after he has said that has no further
22 questions. I have some difficulties in putting that moment in part of the
23 cross-examination. But let's not --
24 MS. LOUKAS: Oh, I see.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I don't think it's a vital and important matter, but
1 just perhaps at another moment, we might find a way how to deal exactly
2 with that.
3 MS. LOUKAS: Well, Your Honour, my only point is this.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MS. LOUKAS: That when one is dealing with matters of this nature.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MS. LOUKAS: I just wanted to ensure that in terms of 90(H) that I
8 had crossed the Ts and dotted the Is, Your Honour, and that was my
9 purpose. And I probably at that point --
10 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand. I'm talking about the timing, but
11 we don't have -- at this moment, it's not a matter which I would think
12 that the Chamber would keep off from evaluating the evidence given by the
13 witness under Rule 90(H).
14 MS. LOUKAS: No, indeed, Your Honour. But of course it's a rule
15 of the Tribunal but it's important that we ensure as the Defence that we
16 cannot be seen --
17 JUDGE ORIE: I would rather not continue since we --
18 Mr. Margetts, do you have any questions in re-examination of this
20 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, Your Honour, we do.
21 Re-examined by Mr. Margetts:
22 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, yesterday you were asked by my learned friend in
23 relation to the Crisis Staffs and their actions whether or not they wished
24 to yield their authority anywhere else. And for the assistance of the
25 Court and Defence, that's recorded at pages 57 to 58 of yesterday's
2 In response to that, you said that in the municipalities you
3 toured, they accepted the decisions to form commissions.
4 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, if Dr. Djokanovic could be shown his
5 statements, both statements.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do we have them nearby?
7 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, instead of taking time with showing
8 him the statements.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. MARGETTS: What I will do is just read from the statement.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
12 MR. MARGETTS: I'm referring to page 15 of the English statement
13 and the fifth paragraph and the first two sentences.
14 JUDGE ORIE: First one or the second one?
15 MR. MARGETTS: The first one.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MR. MARGETTS:
18 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, in your statement you said this, and I'm going to
19 read it to you, and it will be translated to you and then I invite your
20 comment as to whether or not you consider this accurate or not.
21 You stated: "When I went to the municipalities, I presented the
22 formal decision signed by Karadzic and the representatives of the Crisis
23 Staff were ready to comply with Karadzic's order. The local
24 representatives listened to me and they reorganised themselves as I
1 Is that correct?
2 A. Although the situation that I found was one of quite a high level
3 of autonomy of the Crisis Staffs, I must say that there was no opposition,
4 at least not any public opposition, or in talking to me to the
5 implementation of the decision on the establishment of commissions.
6 However, obviously they had done everything before that in respect of the
7 decision on the establishment of War Presidencies which had been published
8 in the Official Gazette, namely, not to implement that decision.
9 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, on what day was the decision in relation to War
10 Presidencies published in the Official Gazette?
11 A. The decision published in the gazette was the decision on the
12 establishment of War Presidency which was not respected by the Crisis
13 Staffs. And Mr. Karadzic was saying in that regard that he didn't have
14 good communication with the field.
15 As regards the decision on War Commissions, that differed because
16 a physical person from Pale would go to the field and constitute an organ
17 which would then be endorsed by the parliament. I didn't have time for --
18 to wait for that decision to be published in the Official Gazette, so I
19 took the original of that decision on my tour of the field.
20 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, what was your opinion of the decision of the
21 Presidency to establish War Presidencies?
22 A. I thought that this was just window dressing, that nothing
23 substantially changed, just the label of the Crisis Staff would be
24 removed, the designation from the door; it would no longer stay Crisis
25 Staff but War Presidency. And this is probably how it was perceived by
1 people in the terrain, and they really were not inclined to change the
2 title of their firm which was indicated on the door.
3 I wanted to do something essential, something substantial to form
4 at the municipal level an organ which would be directly entrusted by the
5 republican Presidency with the establishment of these organs at the
6 municipal level.
7 Q. Yesterday, you were asked about the level of autonomy of the
8 Crisis Staffs, and you were specifically asked about what you heard when
9 you went to the Presidency in relation to the communications between the
10 Crisis Staffs and the Presidency that preceded your arrival in Pale on the
11 10th of June, 1992.
12 I'd like to show you three documents.
13 MR. MARGETTS: Those documents are the following, Your Honour, two
14 of them are Exhibit 529, one of them is tab 158, and the other is tab 193.
15 The other document is Exhibit P54.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Could the English version be put on the ELMO.
17 MR. MARGETTS: We do have copies for the Judges, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if so.
19 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honours, the document that I wish to refer you
20 to first is currently being distributed. Yes. The second document I'll
21 refer to is the 6 May document, and the third one is the 5 June document.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Margetts.
23 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, the document that I wish to refer to
24 first is the document from Exhibit 529, tab 193.
25 Your Honours, I take it you have a copy of that document? It's
1 the National Security Council minutes dated 28 April, 1992. I have copies
2 here if you do not.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's the only one we have not in front of us.
4 You have distributed a lot of documents but not this one, as far as I can
5 see. It certainly is preferred that you first distribute the documents
6 you deal with first and then ...
7 Now, we have in front of us the 28th of April, 1992, minutes of
8 the meeting of the National Security Council and the government of the
9 Serb Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
10 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, Your Honour.
11 If the witness could have that document placed before him.
12 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, if I could refer you to the heading on the
13 document before you, and can you confirm that that's the minutes of the
14 meeting of the National Security Council and the government of the Serb
15 Republic of BH held on 28 April, 1992. And can I then refer you to --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Margetts, may I ask you, do you expect the
17 witness to say that these are the minutes, has he been present during that
18 meeting or ...
19 MR. MARGETTS: No, he hasn't.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I read the title.
21 MR. MARGETTS: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: And now you ask the witness whether these are the
23 minutes of which I just said it was. That's what the document says.
24 There's no need to put this kind of questions.
25 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
2 MR. MARGETTS: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, can you please turn to the last page of the
4 document before you. Could you read there that it is signed by
5 Dr. Radovan Karadzic, can you see that?
6 MS. LOUKAS: Your Honour, I'm just wondering if I could have a
7 copy of the document as well.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course, you are entitled to.
9 MR. MARGETTS:
10 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, did Radovan Karadzic ever show you any copies of
11 any of the minutes of the National Security Council?
12 A. No, never. I saw this document for the first time talking to the
13 investigators of the Tribunal.
14 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, you refer you to paragraph 9 of that document and
15 I note that it says that: "Reports were adopted on the work of Crisis
16 Staff and municipal authorities."
17 Did Radovan Karadzic ever tell you that any reports were received
18 from -- on the work of Crisis Staffs in the National Security Council?
19 A. No, we never spoke about that subject. It was only what I found
20 out when I came to Pale and that at the previous Assembly, and
21 Mr. Karadzic said they had discussed problems of communications, but we
22 never discussed the National Security Council problems.
23 Q. Thank you, Dr. Djokanovic.
24 If I could refer to the next document which is a document dated
25 6 May 1992.
1 MR. MARGETTS: If that document could be placed before
2 Dr. Djokanovic.
3 THE REGISTRAR: The Exhibit number, please.
4 MR. MARGETTS: It's Exhibit P54, tab 529, which I think is also
5 Exhibit 529, tab 200.
6 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, in the opening paragraph of this document, it says
7 that: "On the basis of the decision of the National Security Council of
8 the Serbian Republic of BH, certain decisions have been taken."
9 Did Radovan Karadzic ever tell you, or did anyone else ever tell
10 you, that the Bratunac Crisis Staff took decisions implementing decisions
11 of the National Security Council?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, I refer you to the next document, which is a
14 document dated 5 June, 1992, marked to the attention of the President of
15 the Presidency of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the
16 authors of which are the Novo Sarajevo Crisis Staff. And this is Exhibit
17 number 529, tab 158, and the heading on that document is "Report on
19 Did Radovan Karadzic or anyone else tell you that the Presidency
20 received a report from the Novo Sarajevo Crisis Staff only days before you
21 arrival in Pale?
22 A. No. We didn't discuss it.
23 Q. Having seen those three documents, Dr. Djokanovic, do you consider
24 that Radovan Karadzic informed you fully in relation to communications
25 with Crisis Staffs?
1 A. There are just two points that can be important. Novo Sarajevo
2 has direct territorial communication with Pale and representatives from
3 the Crisis Staff in Novo Sarajevo could physically reach Pale. And this
4 does not apply to those from Bratunac.
5 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, can you just tell me whether or not, having seen
6 those documents, and having told the Court what you have in relation to
7 your prior knowledge of them, do you now consider that Radovan Karadzic
8 fully informed you in relation to communications with Crisis Staffs?
9 A. When I look at these documents, then it is quite correct to say
10 that he didn't inform me fully before I went out into the field.
11 Q. Dr. Djokanovic, I'd like to move to another matter, and I'd like
12 to refer you again to your statement, and that is your second statement.
13 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honours have a copy of the second statement
15 JUDGE ORIE: We have.
16 MR. MARGETTS: It's at page 13, and it's the third last paragraph.
17 And for Dr. Djokanovic, it's at page 14 in the B/C/S, and it's the third
18 paragraph from the bottom. Again, Dr. Djokanovic doesn't have that
19 statement so I will proceed to read it into the record.
20 Q. The paragraph reads as follows, Dr. Djokanovic: "The Presidency
21 was the supreme commander over the military and the police. When I
22 arrived in Pale from what I observed, I understood that there were
23 contacts between the Presidency and the Main Staff every day in respect of
24 various questions."
25 Is that correct?
1 A. That was my impression.
2 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, I'd like to present Dr. Djokanovic
3 with one further document and that is Exhibit P65.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Could we perhaps first ask the witness the following:
5 You said this was your impression and your statement says: "From what I
6 observed, I understood that there were contacts between the Presidency and
7 the Main Staff every day." What observations make you understand that
8 such daily contacts existed?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the building of the Presidency,
10 we were together all day from morning till night, and it was simply
11 impossible in those days not to discuss questions such as, Where is
12 Mladic? Where is the generals from the Main Staff as they were in
13 Han Pijesak and we were in Pale. So there was no problems in terms of
14 physical communication. It was possible to communicate. And also there
15 were telephone lines that were functioning. So that was my impression.
16 But I can't remember a particular detail to be able to tell you I know
17 that they spoke on that particular day, but my impression was that they
18 did communicate daily.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I have telephone lines with the whole of the world,
20 that doesn't mean that I call all of them. I mean, you say there was
21 daily communication on the basis of your observations. Could you be a bit
22 more precise? Would you see people walking into rooms or did you hear
23 people making telephone calls? I mean, I'm seeking facts because you
24 said, "On the basis of my observations, I understood ..." So I'd like to
25 know what those observations were.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In that period of time, I was
2 present on a number of occasions when Dr. Karadzic spoke on the phone with
3 Mr. Mladic. I spoke with Mr. Mladic several times on the phone. So if
4 members of the Presidency went to attend peace negotiations, then I would
5 be left alone in the Presidency and I would answer the phone when the
6 people from the Main Staff called up. So I spoke to General Mladic on a
7 number of occasions. On one occasion, General Mladic and his associates
8 came to the Presidency, so I'm afraid I couldn't say more than that.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Now, you have told us that you attended telephone
10 conversations, that sometimes even people came, that you were involved in
11 these communications yourself.
12 The next question is you said it was every day. What observation
13 supports that understanding? If I didn't have such an impression, I would
14 have said, "I don't think it was on a daily basis," but I'm not able to
15 provide evidence that it was on a daily basis but it was my impression.
16 10 or 15 days after my testimony, I would say that I had been in court
17 every day even though Wednesday was a free day, but the impression I would
18 have would be that I had been in the courtroom every day.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand your testimony correctly if you say
20 that on the basis of the frequency of these observations, you were left
21 with the impression that it was if not every day, then at least at such a
22 regular basis and such a frequent basis that that led you to understand it
23 to be on a daily basis?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely so, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Margetts.
1 MR. MARGETTS: Thank you, Your Honour.
2 I'd like now to present the witness with the document,
3 Exhibit P65, tab 217 and we do have copies here for the Court and the
5 Q. This document is a declaration of the ending of the war, and it's
6 dated 17 December 1992 and it's signed by Momcilo Krajisnik.
7 Dr. Djokanovic, were you present at an Assembly session on the
8 17th of December, 1992, when this decision was reached?
9 A. If we are talking about the Assembly meeting in Zvornik, and I
10 think we are, then I was present.
11 Q. Do you recall this decision being made?
12 A. I don't really remember it.
13 MR. MARGETTS: Thank you, Your Honour. That's all my questions.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Margetts.
15 Is there any question arising from re-examination, Ms. Loukas.
16 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: No. Then ...
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Since there's a fair chance that the questions by the
20 Bench could not be answered within the -- yes, Mr. Krajisnik.
21 Ms. Loukas, Mr. Krajisnik asks our attention. I don't know what
22 he wants, I don't know whether you are aware -- of course you have an
23 opportunity to consult with him, if you would like, having an interpreter
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to ask in line with
1 the request I have addressed to you at the beginning of this testimony to
2 be allowed to show certain things to this witness. I think it will be
3 very useful. I think there is some misunderstanding here.
4 JUDGE ORIE: First of all, Mr. Krajisnik, as I said, in
5 exceptional circumstances, we would allow it but always after consultation
6 with counsel. So if you would consult with counsel at this very moment,
7 or if I would hear from counsel that there's no objection, then -- and
8 then I would not allow you to just show matters to a witness but to put
9 questions and, if necessary, for those questions to show something to the
10 witness, you would be allowed to do so.
11 But at first, you are to consult with counsel whether this is a
12 matter that could not be dealt by counsel.
13 Mr. Harmon.
14 MR. HARMON: I only stand, Your Honour, because I think
15 exceptional circumstances is what is required, and I haven't seen any
16 exception circumstances offered at this point. Second of all,
17 Mr. Krajisnik has two able counsel at his disposal.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harmon, we have given a ruling that not under all
19 circumstances we would exclude it, and if I would say no right away then
20 of course that would not be fair in view of that ruling.
21 So Mr. Krajisnik, you are first of all invited to consult with
22 counsel. Perhaps it's even better to see whether that could be done
23 during the break and then I'll hear from counsel and from you whether
24 there's any need for any further questions and to confront the witness
25 with any further documents.
1 We will adjourn until 20 minutes to 1.00.
2 I would like to add to that, Mr. Krajisnik, that of course your
3 questions do not add to the time available for cross-examination, and
4 since until now it's by far more the 60 per cent rule, the time that has
5 been taken, it's not some additional time granted to the Defence.
6 Please discuss it with counsel, we adjourn until 20 minutes
7 to 1.00.
8 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, could I just ask before Your Honours
9 go. Could I just ask for a question of management and time table when
10 Your Honours were proposing to deal with the particular issue which was
11 mentioned earlier in relation to protective measures?
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we could deal with it now, but Mr. Gaynor is now
13 not present anymore. So then I suggest that we do that immediately --
14 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I have a couple of -- with respect, I
15 apologise for interrupting, Your Honour, but I am trying to be helpful
16 here. I have a couple of other practical matters which I could deal with
17 while Mr. Gaynor is finding his way here.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. These practical matters are of such urgency
19 that they are more important than to finish the testimony of this witness?
20 MR. STEWART: Very important to deal with today, Your Honour. I
21 was just saying if Mr. Gaynor is finding his way through the building, I
22 could helpfully use the time.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's be very practical. The witness may
24 leave the courtroom. After the break, Mr. Djokanovic, you will be invited
25 to answer some further questions.
1 And, Mr. Stewart, please proceed.
2 [The witness withdrew]
3 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it's just this: That the witness
4 timetable for the coming week has changed quite significantly, and I do
5 understand that the Prosecution of course have considerable difficulties
6 sometimes in obtaining the witnesses they want on the date they want them.
7 The basis --
8 JUDGE ORIE: May I just ask one question.
9 MR. STEWART: Yes, of course, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: This is a matter which requires discussion in open
11 court because otherwise it would be available to the parties immediately
12 after the session at the very moment we stop. I'm available to further
13 discussion practicalities.
14 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, with respect, these matters should be
15 discussed in open court. They -- they -- they --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
17 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it's this: The basic switch has been
18 that there were originally going to be three witnesses in relation to one
19 particular municipality, Ilijas. For various reasons that's become
20 impossible, and in the last few days it's got switched around, and of
21 course I understand Mr. Harmon is doing his best, I'm not quarrelling with
22 that. We've ended up with -- programmed for next week two witnesses from
23 Ilijas, one from Kljuc and one from Prijedor. The ones from Kljuc and
24 Prijedor being 92 bis witnesses coming for cross-examination.
25 Your Honour, that's more than a superficial change because the way
1 that we divide up the work between ourselves on our side, and Your Honour
2 in another decision commented that the Trial Chamber doesn't wish to
3 become too much involved in time management issues as within the Defence
4 team, is that I am doing all these witnesses next week, and Your Honour it
5 is simply not practical for us on this side to unscramble that time
6 management issue. So I am doing next weeks' witnesses.
7 Dealing with two witnesses from Ilijas, another witness from
8 Kljuc, where there have been several witnesses who have already given
9 evidence, and then the first witness we've had in this case from Prijedor,
10 is a totally different picture from dealing with three witnesses from a
11 single municipality. And just to mention, without going into too much
12 detail, Your Honour, the Prijedor witness, 92 bis, there is absolutely
13 hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages of previous transcript. He's
14 given evidence on -- I think it's four, I would be corrected if it's
15 three, but I believe it's four previous occasions.
16 Your Honour, the reason I mention it now is this: That I'm in a
17 quandary. If I say to Your Honours today that there is a severe risk, or
18 if I were to say I would not be able to deal with all these witnesses in
19 the course of next week, then based on past experience Your Honours would
20 say to me, well, it's only Friday and you've got several days, do your
21 best, and we expect you to be ready. If I leave it until next week then,
22 Your Honours will say to me and the Prosecution will say, well, this
23 witness is already here, he's come all the way from Bosnia, we must deal
24 with him, he can't go back.
25 So I'm conscientiously putting the risk before the Trial Chamber
1 now, Your Honour, because I am saying that there is a severe risk that I
2 will at some point next week have to say to Your Honours, No, this is
3 simply too much, we have not been able to deal with it. We cannot be able
4 to proceed with all these witnesses but ...
5 Your Honour, that's all I'm saying right now.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then about -- then we should turn into
7 protective measures for KRAJ 60.
8 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, I specifically indicated earlier
9 when this first came up that there was a certain element that I wish --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes. You wanted to do it in open. I'd forgotten
11 that. Please do so.
12 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 May I also say -- just to take 10 seconds on timing, Your Honour.
14 Would Your Honours respectfully please remember that this is our response,
15 this is not an oral supplement of another response. This is our response
16 to the motion.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm aware.
18 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, my first question with respect for the
19 Bench is whether the Trial Chamber has had the opportunity, or has taken
20 the opportunity which is the key point, to look at the UNHCR report which
21 was cited in the Prosecution motion in relation to this and other
23 JUDGE ORIE: I don't think that we had the whole of the report
24 presented; is that correct, Mr. Gaynor?
25 MR. GAYNOR: That's correct, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Just the quotations.
2 MR. GAYNOR: That's correct. I have a copy here if Your Honours
3 wish me to submit it.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please provide it to the Chamber.
5 MR. STEWART: In fact, Your Honour, what the -- what the
6 Prosecution did was they very helpfully gave the -- the -- into that --
7 web reference -- the -- in the footnote, so it was -- it was possible to
8 track it down that way. But anyway, Your Honours now have it.
9 Your Honour, I wanted particularly just to draw attention to a
10 couple of items in that report in relation to the citations and the
12 If we look at paragraph 6, and of course we're talking about the
13 public elements of this motion right now, if we look at paragraph 6 of the
14 motion, "special attention" is where that passage starts and Your Honours
15 find that at page 2 of the -- the main report. But there, Your Honour, I
16 simply wish to remark that the incidents on the fifth line, for example,
17 in 2002, ICT [sic] witnesses were on at least two occasions the target of
18 violence. I'm not minimising it Your Honour, if I simply point out that
19 that was three years ago. Those are the specific examples adopted.
20 And the further example given in May 2004, the brother of a war
21 crime suspect, et cetera, et cetera, two points there. One is the -- that
22 is put in terms of it is being argued that the informer was targeted in
23 order to silence him. So that's the highest it's put there. But
24 secondly, this is plainly from the nature of the description, what you
25 might call a high-level matter, relating specifically to Dr. Karadzic and
1 relating to an informant. It's an utterly different category.
2 So far as this -- without in any way disparaging the fine work in
3 these reports of the UNHCR, when it comes to that sort of matter it is
4 this Trial Chamber and the experience of this Tribunal which is much more
5 pertinent than that sort of report from a body which, with much wider and
6 different responsibilities.
7 So far as paragraph 7 of the motion is concerned, it is worth
8 looking at introductory sentence before the passage cited because in the
9 report at 2.2 on page 3, we find four lines into that paragraph the
10 sentence beginning "However, as evidenced" and that's where the citation
11 and the motion picks up. And what has been significantly omitted from the
12 citation is the preceding sentence, "in most return locations, the
13 security situation has steadily improved and many returning communities
14 report that relations with local residents are good and that the local
15 police are acting professionally."
16 And that's a pretty significant sentence to have omitted, be --
17 given that the basis of this public -- of the motion is to draw the
18 Court's attention to continuing security difficulties in Bosnia. Coupled
19 with that observation, a phrase about four or five lines into the cited
20 passage is "serious incidents continue to occur in certain areas."
21 Now again, the UNHCR report is dealing with that in reasonably
22 general terms. It's the obligation, we submit, of the party who is
23 applying for protective measures, in this case, to be more specific in
24 relation to such matters and to indicate whether, indeed, this area is one
25 of those areas.
1 The -- so far as the citation in paragraph 9 is concerned -- I
2 only skip over paragraph 8 because I don't want to take time on something
3 there which is not specifically -- the citation in paragraph 8 is nothing
4 specifically to do with evidence before a Tribunal, evidence certainly
5 before this Tribunal, it's a general -- a remark in relation to some
6 violent incidents, and such incidents are not unknown in many, many
7 countries in Europe, let alone parts of the world.
8 Paragraph 9, the citation there, the introductory sentence there,
9 it's at page 8 of the report itself, the introductory sentence makes it
10 quite clear that it's dealing with a particular question of relocation or
11 what is called internal flight or relocation alternative. It's the first
12 large paragraph on page 8 of the report. "The victims of war crimes or
13 for witnesses testifying before local courts or the ICTY, the concept of
14 an internal flight or relocation alternative should not in UNHCR's view be
15 considered relevant."
16 They're dealing with, in essence, the fact that in a small
17 relatively small country like Bosnia and Herzegovina, just moving somebody
18 to some other part of the country doesn't reliably solve the problem, if
19 there is a problem in the first place. But it doesn't tell you whether
20 there's a problem in the first place.
21 I would also comment that in its reference there in the cited
22 passage where it talks about, "Because of the number of indicted war
23 criminals still at large, insufficiencies of the rule of law system
24 generally and in view of the absence of effective witness protection in
25 particular, a victim or witness of war crimes who is being returned to BiH
1 would be exposed to serious risk of safety even in the" --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel slow down a little, please.
3 MR. STEWART: I will slow down. "A victim or witness of war
4 crimes who is being returned to BiH would be exposed to serious risk of
5 safety even in the area of relocation."
6 That is, for the purposes of this Trial Chamber, with respect --
7 which is not the purpose for which this report is written, of course, that
8 is far too broadly stated. It cannot be universally true. It's also not
9 easy to see why a victim who is not a witness or prospective witness is at
10 this point then especially exposed.
11 So those are some remarks in relation to the report which is put
12 forward as, if you like, a general foundation for this specific
13 application. We'd also like, before I then move very quickly into the
14 area where it would be appropriate to go into private session, to just
15 stress what the Defence does strongly urge is the correct approach which
16 is incumbent upon the party seeking protective measures to give as far as
17 possible the whole picture to the Tribunal and not to -- to the Trial
18 Chamber and not to give a selective picture which then puts the onus on
19 the other party of coming back and saying, Well, that's not right. This
20 should not be treated, applications for protective measures, as a simple
21 adversarial process. It is the duty of all concerned in this matter -
22 Prosecution, Defence, and of course the Trial Chamber - to ensure that the
23 cutting down of the public nature of the trial is confined in the absolute
24 minimum so with those prefacing remarks --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, also have the French side, I receive a
1 message whether you'd slow down.
2 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, I will. I apologise for that.
3 I'm always anxious not to take any more time than necessary, but I realise
4 that going too fast doesn't help anybody. So I'm slowing down, Your
5 Honour, and I'm slowing down as I then indicate that this is the point at
6 which it would be appropriate, in my submission, to go into private
8 JUDGE ORIE: We'll turn it to private session.
9 [Private session]
11 Page 10792 redacted. Private session.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
11 Page 10794 redacted. Private session.
11 Page 10795 redacted. Private session.
6 [Open session]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The application just made in the absence of the
8 witness needs some more attention, so therefore I ask the witness to leave
9 the courtroom but remain standby.
10 The issue of scheduling for next week and protective measures for
11 Witness 60 will be considered the Bench immediately after this session.
12 That means that you'll know even if the decision have not issued in open
13 court yet, and even if it would be an oral decision that you will at least
14 be aware of what the consequences of our decision will be.
15 Then the Chamber first wants to finish the examination of this
16 witness. But one pending question was whether Mr. Krajisnik had any
17 additional questions. I also understood that he wanted to confront the
18 witness with certain documents.
19 Mr. Stewart, you have been consulted by Mr. Krajisnik.
20 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour, certainly. Thank you for the
22 Yes, Your Honour, the position is this: May I say straight away
23 because this is once again a situation where I am in public and open
24 conflict and difference with my client, and I apologise to him and he
25 understands that manfully and we've agreed to differ in a sense. But here
1 we are differing, Your Honour, it's most unfortunate. But I applied, in
2 my submissions to Your Honour here, this criterion: If Ms. Loukas, having
3 finished the cross-examination, had then -- we'd had a break and she had
4 come to me, as she often would and I to her as well, of course, to get her
5 views on these things. If she had come to me and said, Well, how about
6 exploring these other areas? If cross-examination had been not quite
7 finished and we were in a break, and she said, Shall we explore these
8 other areas and how about putting these further documents. And she had
9 suggested to me doing exactly what it is that Mr. Krajisnik is now
10 proposing that should be done and explored, I would have said to
11 Ms. Loukas, I would have said, No, this is one of those occasions where we
12 leave it where it is. And that's our judgment and that's the way we run
13 the case. I wouldn't in fact expect any disagreement to arise between
14 Ms. Loukas and me as it generally doesn't between two experienced counsel
15 in relation to these matters.
16 So that's my criterion, Your Honour. And on that criterion, I
17 have the conduct of the case with Ms. Loukas's able assistance, and it's
18 not in a situation, with respect, which we believe that the conduct of the
19 case should be rested away from us in that way, despite these strong and
20 in many ways understandable anxious concerns of a defendant who is on
21 trial for such serious charges. We understand those concerns of our
22 client extremely well, we hope, Your Honour, but we don't agree with him.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, is there anything you'd like to add to
1 what Mr. Stewart said?
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I would
3 not like it to be seen that I am dissatisfied with the way my counsel are
4 working. I believe Ms. Loukas did an excellent job and I think that
5 today, she was perhaps sidetracked, and please let the Prosecution bear
6 with me, when she was cut short on a number of occasions by the
8 She has failed to cover some important areas, therefore. I assure
9 you that this witness is quite certain of what he is saying, but he is
10 also proceeding under a misconception. So in order to ascertain the
11 truth, which I believe we all believe is important, it will be beneficial
12 to all. That is why I am suggesting this. We fail to see whether someone
13 actually took any action after his reporting on any crimes, so we need to
14 assess whether everything that could have been done at a certain point in
15 the past could have -- was done. Then we want to see whether
16 Mr. Krajisnik was indeed a member of the Presidency at that point or
17 wasn't because basically everything which is in the Prosecution's case is
18 something which is reflected in the statement of this witness, and I
19 appreciate that, but the whole job has not been finished properly today.
20 And I believe that you, Your Honours, could also see that for yourselves.
21 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, this is an appalling situation. If we
22 take the hypothesis that I put forward where Ms. Loukas and I were having
23 a discussion and we decided not to proceed with cross-examination, we
24 would then not come into the Trial Chamber and lay before the Trial
25 Chamber and the Prosecution those areas which we had decided not to
1 explore. The position that the Trial Chamber has put us in with this
2 ruling that even in exceptional circumstances is creating constant
3 conflict and constant difficulty, and we do urge Your Honours to retract
4 this destructive ruling.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I invited Mr. Krajisnik because he had requested to
6 put questions and since he had consulted, I wanted actually to know
7 whether he persisted to do that. I do understand that you are not happy
8 with the situation. We'll consider whether the ruling should change.
9 But, Mr. Krajisnik, let me be quite clear on one issue. That is,
10 that when we considered that, under certain circumstances, we would allow
11 you to put some questions, that it was in the situation where your
12 knowledge of the area would more -- be more practical for you to present
13 these questions. But what now happens is a totally different situation,
14 that is, the situation where it's not more practical that you perhaps add
15 one or two questions in specific fields because of your special knowledge,
16 but we are now in a situation where you seem to disagree with counsel on
17 what's the best way to deal with certain aspects of the case.
18 You've chosen to be represented by counsel, and especially in view
19 of what you've said before, and apart from whatever opportunities you'll
20 get, if it ever comes to that, to present your own case, that it's either
21 of the two, apart from practical problems that could be easily overcome by
22 one or two additional questions such as: Do you still remember the number
23 plate of that car? Or would you know what the colour was of that
24 building? Where of course if the witness says it's blue and you know it's
25 a different colour, then it would be easier for you to put the next
1 question, was the whole of the building white or blue?
2 But this, we have now come to a situation where two Defence
3 strategies in respect of this particular witness seem to emerge, and it's
4 for you to resolve that with counsel, and we are in no way in a situation
5 the Chamber has envisaged when it would not, under all circumstances,
6 exclude you to put some additional questions to a witness.
7 Therefore, your request is denied.
8 Yes, Mr. Krajisnik.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this is not a
10 question of a change in strategy. For were it a question of a strange of
11 strategy --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, there is a ruling. That means we'll
13 proceed with this witness and it's not -- I'll not give you an opportunity
14 to reopen the debate on the matter we just ruled on.
15 So therefore, we'll ask Madam Usher to escort the witness into the
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 [The witness takes the stand]
19 Questioned by The Court:
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Djokanovic, Judge Canivell has one or more
21 questions for you.
22 JUDGE CANIVELL: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
23 Very briefly. When you returned from Zvornik to Pale and you
24 communicated to the members of the leadership who were in Pale about what
25 you learned in Zvornik, what was the reaction of the people to whom you
1 communicated all this? What did you, yourself, Witness?
2 A. They did not approve of what had happened in Zvornik. It was
3 agreed that I go there as soon as possible to take the documents on
4 appointments of commissions, and those documents were signed on the 17th
5 in the mornings. So I returned on the 16th in the afternoon, spoke to the
6 Presidency, and by the 17th, these documents on the appointment of
7 commissions were issued and then these documents were taken to those
9 I also spoke to Mr. Karadzic prior to the meeting all the
10 commissioners in the mentioned municipalities, Dr. Karadzic, General
11 Mladic and myself, and I said to Dr. Karadzic that he must pay close
12 attention when talking to the people down there that all kinds of things
13 had happened in the field. I don't believe that they are not aware of
14 what had actually happened there - meaning the commissioners - and that
15 this joint meeting will one day be of the greatest importance.
16 Dr. Karadzic accepted all this. He took a Dictaphone to that
17 meeting, and I remember well that he carefully chose his words as he spoke
18 at that meeting.
19 JUDGE CANIVELL: [Interpretation] At that what you saw at that
21 A. We were together. We were sitting next to one another,
22 Dr. Karadzic, General Mladic and myself. Dr. Karadzic in the middle,
23 Mladic on one side, and me on the other of Mr. Karadzic. We were the
24 state delegation that went to talk to representatives of the mentioned
1 JUDGE CANIVELL: [Interpretation] I don't know whether we are
2 talking about the same. When you returned from Zvornik in mid-June, 1992,
3 you reported to the persons who were there, the leaders, the leadership of
4 Republika Srpska, among whom, of course, Mr. Krajisnik as well, and did
5 you notice any particular reaction on their part to what you were telling
7 You simply said that Mr. Krajisnik took a machine to record what
8 you were saying, that's all.
9 A. I was quite sure that the gentlemen in the Presidency fully shared
10 my opinion and views about these matters in the field. Never for a moment
11 did I notice anything else and that is why I had the energy to go back
12 into the field.
13 JUDGE CANIVELL: [Interpretation] I'm sorry for interrupting you.
14 But that means if they shared their opinion, it means that they already
15 knew what had happened. Maybe not in every detail, but they knew what had
16 happened in Zvornik.
17 A. I don't think they were aware of the details. I think they had
18 some news as to what was happening in the field.
19 JUDGE CANIVELL: [Interpretation] Thank you. That's sufficient.
20 MS. LOUKAS: Just in relation to that, it seems there may be some
21 confusion there. At page 87, there's -- that's right, page 87, line 9,
22 Dr. Karadzic accepted all, he took a Dictaphone to that meeting, referring
23 to Dr. Karadzic. And then when you look at page 87, line 25, Your Honour
24 is saying: You simply said that Mr. Krajisnik took a machine to record
25 what you were saying. That's all.
1 So there seems to be a reference to Mr. Karadzic having a
2 Dictaphone and then a reference to Mr. Krajisnik having a Dictaphone, and
3 there does seem to be some confusion there because the first reference is
4 to Dr. Karadzic.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Would you clarify that issue? You have heard what
6 Ms. Loukas said about who exactly had the Dictaphone.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I noticed on the screen, it was
8 Dr. Karadzic who had the Dictaphone. I was speaking about Dr. Karadzic.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Judge Hanoteau has one or more questions for
11 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Could you please look at your
12 witness statement number 2, could it be placed on the ELMO, please?
13 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Judge Hanoteau, please.
14 JUDGE HANOTEAU: Statement number 2, page 6, please.
15 [Interpretation] Do you have page 6 in front of you?
16 A. Yes, I do.
17 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] In the English version, in the
18 third paragraph, it is stated, that: "The attitude of the deputies...
19 [In English] ... to the abuses that occurred in the field meant that this
20 issue was not raised as an agenda item at the republican Assembly."
21 [Interpretation] Are you saying that the deputies had knowledge of
22 what was happening in the field and that they preferred not to talk about
24 A. It would be almost unbelievable if they hadn't known. Most of
25 those deputies were either members of Crisis Staffs later commissions, and
1 they were doing their work as peoples's deputies. They were elected in
2 1990 when there were elections by constituencies, so it was exactly known
3 where each deputy had come from, and it was his job to take care of the
4 situation in his constituency where he had been elected.
5 So when I was discussing the fact that I was not appointed to the
6 government, that was the whole point, not whether I should be a minister
7 or not.
8 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] My question is: In your opinion,
9 did they make the deliberate choice not to speak about it publicly? They
10 were aware of what was happening but they made the choice not to speak
11 about it.
12 A. I'm quite certain of that.
13 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Second point, please. Please
14 look at page 8. In the one but last paragraph, you say, [In English] "The
15 rest of the leadership did not react strongly enough to the war crimes.
16 If at that time, 10 people that were involved in things would have been
17 put on trial, things would have taken a different course."
18 [Interpretation] I would like you to clarify this statement. Does
19 this mean that at this particular point in time, the leaders, Karadzic and
20 the other leaders, still could have informed the courts, undertaken
21 arrests, and have those guilty of war crimes taken to justice. Was it
22 possible to use the judicial apparatus to judge the culprits straight away
23 to set an example which would have stopped further violence.
24 A. I'm quite certain that they did have the support of the people,
25 had they taken such a step. Because in the plebescite, the people said
1 that they wanted to live with the people of other ethnicities, and it was
2 on that basis that we adopted the constitution which is explicit saying
3 that all citizens are equal before the law. So they had the support of
4 the people, they had the support of the constitution, but they chose to be
5 opportunist, supporting a smaller radical group of politicians and
6 probably a radical segment of the population as well.
7 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] You haven't quite answered my
8 question. It had to do whether there was a judicial apparatus at that
9 time that could have functioned and that could have been informed. Were
10 there trials that could have taken these cases?
11 A. At that point in time, there was the Prosecutor's office, there
12 were courts, there was the Ministry of Justice. Now, in which stage of
13 constitution municipal courts, district courts and the Prosecutor's office
14 were, I don't know, but I do know that these existed. The courts, the
15 police, the Ministry of Justice and the constitution which regulated all
16 these matters as well.
17 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Another point, please, sir.
18 During your testimony or rather the first statement, the other document
19 that you have in front of you, [In English] statement number one,
20 [Interpretation] You have the document in front of you, turn to page 11,
21 please. Page 11 of the English version.
22 The one but last paragraph, you said: [In English] "In June 1992,
23 Karadzic and Krajisnik had the most authority in the War Presidency. I
24 think Krajisnik controlled the majority of the deputies in the Serb
25 Assembly. I considered that he had established a non-legal parliamentary
2 [Interpretation] Could you comment on what you meant by "non-legal
3 parliamentary party," please?
4 A. A large number of peoples' deputies at that point in time did not
5 enjoy prestige in the municipality in which they lived. They were accused
6 of various affairs such as arms struggling [as interpreted] and even arms
7 smuggling and, as such, instead of leaving politics, they were awarded and
8 they climbed up in the hierarchy. They became republican commissioners,
9 they became professional deputies in the assemblies, and they became a
10 part of a lobby which in its later political activities relied mostly on
11 the President of the Assembly.
12 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you. Another point. I'd
13 like to be quite clear about your answer. You said a moment ago - and I
14 think that was what I gathered from your whole testimony - that all the
15 deputies in the Assembly were also members of Crisis Staffs. Is my
16 understanding correct or am I mistaken?
17 A. Of course I don't have the precise data, but I said that most of
18 the deputies in the People's Assembly were in their constituencies also
19 members of Crisis Staffs and commissions. A large number of them were
20 republican commissioners in the second half of 1992, they were responsible
21 for constituting municipalities in a part of the republic.
22 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] And by whom were they
23 designated? To be members of these Crisis Staffs they must have been
24 appointed by someone.
25 A. Of course they couldn't appoint themselves. This was a period
1 when a part of the authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, one of the
2 ruling parties in the territory in which it is majority appoints a Crisis
3 Staff. If we're talking about the Serb Republic, the ruling and only
4 influential party at that time was the one that appointed Crisis Staffs.
5 Of course they didn't have time to think about each individual member of
6 the Crisis Staff. They didn't have the references for these people, so
7 that there were many omissions and I don't think they were intentional.
8 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] In the War Commissions that came
9 after the Crisis Staffs, were the same deputies members of these new
11 A. In accordance with a decision on the formation of municipal
12 commissions, they would be composed of a president of the leading
13 municipal party, a deputy, a prestigious businessman and a prestigious
14 figure, so when such commissions were formed, deputies had to be a member.
15 Then some deputies were actually republican commissioners and were
16 involved in these activities as well.
17 After the municipal -- municipalities were established, I don't
18 know whether they held positions in the executive powers. I don't know.
19 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] My last point: In these Crisis
20 Staffs, first of all, and in the War Commissions as well, was there
21 someone representing the army and the police or the army or the police,
22 either the army or the police?
23 A. Absolutely not. I have explained the formula. The republican
24 commissioner, the national deputy, president of the municipal board of the
25 party, a prominent citizen and a prominent businessman.
1 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
2 MR. MARGETTS: I'm not sure on that last question. It seems that
3 there's a reference to both Crisis Staffs and War Commissions. I'm not
4 entirely certain that the witness's answer addresses both of those bodies.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you have understood the doubt expressed by
6 Mr. Margetts whether your answer covers both Crisis Staffs and War
7 Commissions or just War Commissions.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I was speaking about the
9 formula regarding the commissions, I was explicit; I was talking about the
10 War Commissions.
11 MR. MARGETTS: Yes, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: And then was there someone representing the army and
13 police in the Crisis Staffs? Because that was the other part of the
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the commissions, no member of
16 these institutions were there. I would know if in a municipality one of
17 the brigade commanders or his assistants may have been nominated; no.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you there. The question was whether
19 there were such representatives in the Crisis Staffs, so that's in an
20 earlier stage.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were certainly representatives
22 of the police but not the army because the army had still not been
23 constituted. Something close to the army would be secretariats for
24 national defence, so someone from that secretariat would probably be a
25 member of that Crisis Staff because that is a segment of the executive in
1 the municipality. So someone from the secretariat for national defence
2 and someone from the police would be in the Crisis Staff. Who in the
3 hierarchy, I don't know.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you for that answer.
5 I've got a few questions for you as well.
6 First of all, in one of your statements, you're referring to what
7 I would call the Velibor Ostojic incident where he was removed from his
8 car by paramilitaries, and then your statement reads, "Only after ..."
9 "Ostojic told me about this incident and I think this was the drop that
10 overfilled the cup and caused the Republika Srpska to intervene."
11 Could you tell us, when did this happen?
12 A. I cannot recall with precision but we were deep into the second
13 half of 1992.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that means after the summer. Or could you be a
15 bit more precise because "deep into the second half" could be Christmas
16 but could be the end of August as well. Where would I have to ...
17 A. Well, if there was reference to grass, there was no snow.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That is a logical answer and perhaps my
19 reference to Christmas is also a bit unlucky one because Christmas is not
20 at the same date everywhere.
21 So you would say late summer, is that a ...
22 A. [No audible response]
23 JUDGE ORIE: From this incident, could we draw any conclusions in
24 respect of the power to intervene the republican -- the Republika Srpska
25 power to intervene and to end -- put an end to situations that were not
1 welcome or can we not? I mean, to what extent is this an example or is
2 just not an example of such power?
3 A. Both the local authorities were in a position to do so because
4 they have a quite sizeable reserve police force. They could have sorted
5 out things in the municipality, but the opportunity was missed out on and
6 these paramilitary units were actually throwing their weight about. In
7 fact, one -- it was possible for one of those groups to actually force a
8 member of the government out of his car and force him to do what you have
9 just now described, and I was told this by Velibor Ostojic.
10 As for Republika Srpska, of course they had an intervention
11 special police unit that could actually deal with this matter and actually
12 did deal with such matters after such a decision, a decision to that
13 effect had been taken in the Assembly, but it could have been done earlier
14 also, yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Was the decision taken in the Assembly, you said, for
16 such an intervention?
17 A. I think -- no, not by the Assembly, but by the Presidency or the
18 government, but I'm not sure.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you for that answer.
20 Then I have, again, some questions about reporting on the 16th of
21 June, 1992, to Pale. I heard three elements by now that you reported that
22 war crimes had been committed, that you reported that many bad things had
23 happened, and that you reported that there was massive killing and people
24 being driven out.
25 Let me first ask you about the last part. Was there any specific
1 ethnicity victimised by this killing and being driven out?
2 A. There was no doubt that it was the Muslims.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. My next question is your statement reads, "When
4 I went back to Pale, I informed Karadzic and Krajisnik of all the
5 observations that I made on my visits to the municipalities and all of the
6 events that I learned of."
7 Was your report on Zvornik - because we have spent a lot of
8 attention to Zvornik - was that exceptional? Was that different from the
9 other municipalities? I think it were five you visited, so therefore, was
10 the information about the other municipalities similar or was it
12 A. Well, in principle, there was a difference because one of the
13 municipalities, Sekovici, which had a majority Serb population, is one in
14 which I therefore did not notice anything. The last municipality which I
15 visited was Skelani where there was a lesser number of Serbs and they were
16 exposed to constant attacks from the Muslim part of the municipality who
17 controlled some of the villages and they had to defend themselves at all
18 times. So I went there to help them constitute to their municipality and
19 finish that business and have this verified by the National Assembly.
20 On the 16th of January, 1993, there was a tragedy that befell this
21 small municipality when a part of the municipal leadership was killed by
22 units of Naser Oric, and generally speaking, they had constant losses in
23 the part of territory which they controlled.
24 In Bratunac, after I was appointed, they were also exposed to
25 constant attacks from the direction of Srebrenica, so that in this period,
1 I actually devoted more attention to that, to the casualties of such
2 attacks. It was my impression, however, when I arrived at Pale from the
3 field that in Vlasenica, Zvornik, and Bratunac, similar things were
4 happening, but I focused on Zvornik because I knew Zvornik better. I had
5 worked as a physician there and I had established more contacts with the
6 people there who told me about the heinous things that had happened,
7 things that had happened.
8 So I tried to quote from I heard from other people, it is not what
9 I myself saw. Representatives of the local authorities told me that they
10 were not forcing anyone to leave, that the people were leaving of their
11 own volition, and I asked them, "Why are the old people leaving? No old
12 people leave their houses," and I told them, "Do everything to keep them
13 in -- at home."
14 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that the situation was different in
15 the different municipalities and you mentioned as one of the elements to
16 what extent Serbs were in a small minority or -- and you say at least for
17 two out of the five, the situation was quite different, and for the other
18 three you got the impression that it was more or less like in Zvornik,
19 although in Bratunac there was a lot of defence needed to attacks coming
20 from Srebrenica. Yes.
21 These were my questions. I note the time but nevertheless, would
22 like to see whether there is any urgent matter that has come up.
23 MR. MARGETTS: No further questions, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Loukas.
25 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour, save -- no, Your Honour, I don't
1 have any questions arising.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you. Then ...
3 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
4 JUDGE ORIE: This, then, Mr. Djokanovic, concludes your
5 examination in this courtroom. You've been here for a whole week,
6 although not on a daily basis.
7 I'd like to thank you to have answered all the questions, both
8 from Prosecution, Defence, and the Bench and I wish you a safe trip home
10 Ms. Loukas, I take it that we do not need the witness for
11 tendering the exhibits -- no, we can do that.
12 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: At a later moment.
14 Then Madam Usher, could you please escort the witness out of the
16 [The witness withdrew]
17 JUDGE ORIE: I intended to issue the decision on the third batch
18 of 92 bis witnesses this morning, but if the parties could wait until the
19 beginning of next week, it's -- there are quite a lot of details in it.
20 It takes us five to seven minutes again which I would not ask at this
21 moment from the interpreters.
22 So the parties will be informed about two subjects this
23 afternoon: That is, first, whether the Chamber is willing to follow, if
24 even, provisionally at this moment, the scheduling as suggested by the
25 Prosecution; and the second one is a decision on the -- on Witness KRAJ 60
1 as far as protective measures are concerned.
2 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, Mr. Stewart made a number of submissions
3 in respect of KRAJ 60.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course you would like to respond, yes.
5 Mr. Gaynor is not here.
6 MR. HARMON: As I speak, he enters the courtroom, Your Honour. So
7 he's prepared to make some brief submissions to Your Honours.
8 JUDGE ORIE: With the indulgence of our interpreters, could
9 Mr. Gaynor please do it brief as possible.
10 MR. GAYNOR: Thank you, Your Honour. I propose to deal with this
11 in two parts, the first part in public and the second part in private
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed. I take it that you will start
14 with the public part.
15 MR. GAYNOR: I'll start with the public part, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then you can start.
17 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, may I be excused, I have a commitment at
18 1.45 that I must attend to. Thank you.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. GAYNOR: Your Honour, very briefly, Mr. Stewart said in his
21 submissions he basically attempted to draw -- to play down the importance
22 of the UNHCR report, and he said without disparaging the fine words of the
23 report: "It is this Trial Chamber and the experience of this Tribunal
24 which is much more pertinent than the report" --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Played down is I don't know.
1 MR. STEWART: Fine work, not fine words, Your Honour, was what I
3 MR. GAYNOR: I apologise. I was reading from the transcript.
4 MR. STEWART: No, no. It's a mistake there. I said "fine work."
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. GAYNOR: Your Honours, our position is simply this: We want
7 to emphasise the neutral professional and authoritative status of UNHCR.
8 Under annex 7 of the Dayton Peace Agreement, UNHCR is expressly named and
9 it is the lead agency and trusted with supervising the return to Bosnia
10 and the reintegration of refugees and internally displaced persons. It's
11 been operationally based in Bosnia since 1991. It has four regional
12 offices and 10 field offices.
13 In our submission, UNHCR is about as authoritative
14 source as exists in relation to providing information about the current
15 security situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
16 Second we'd like to emphasise that this is not an out-of-date
17 report; it was issued in January of 2005. It does indeed refer to some
18 incidents in 2002 and 2003. It also refers to a considerable number of
19 incidents in 2004.
20 The assumption that threats against witnesses will decrease as
21 time goes on is not necessarily correct. As Your Honours will know, the
22 new war crimes Chamber is opening in Sarajevo. There will be indictments
23 and trials issued by those -- by that Chamber. The security risk for
24 potential witnesses might well increase rather than decrease as a result
25 of the opening of that chamber.
1 Mr. Stewart also mentioned in his submissions that the security
2 situation in Bosnia is not perfect but it's not perfect anywhere. It's
3 more imperfect in Bosnia than in many other places. We'd just like to
4 make a very brief submission on that. The sort of underlying message
5 there is that ten years have passed since the war. Bosnia and the region
6 is moving towards EU membership. The whole situation is normalising.
7 It's quite clear from the UNHCR report that that's absolutely not the
8 case. Security situation in Bosnia is considerably more serious than in
9 any western European country, and to suggest that it's simply imperfect is
10 a considerable understatement of the true security risk.
11 I'd like to move now briefly into private session.
12 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
13 [Private session]
11 Page 10817 redacted. Private session.
11 Page 10818 redacted. Private session.
24 [Open session]
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If there's nothing else to be raised at this
1 moment, and I hope there is not, we'll adjourn. And Madam Registrar gave
2 me all the information on when we resume, that is next Monday and I think
3 it's 9.00 in the morning -- no, it's not. You see, I already -- 2.15 in
4 this same courtroom next Monday.
5 We adjourn.
6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.59 p.m.
7 to be reconvened on Monday, the 21st day of March,
8 2005, at 2.15 p.m.