1 Monday, 11 April 2005
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.45 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: Good morning to everyone. Unfortunately, we have a
9 late start due to the malfunctioning of the LiveNote system.
10 Are you ready -- no, I have to look at the other side.
11 Mr. Stewart, are you ready to continue the cross-examination of
12 Mr. Kljuic?
13 MR. STEWART: Yes. The great English phrase is, up to a point,
14 Your Honour.
15 The answer is yes, I am, subject to this, and it is a point to be
16 raised before the witness comes into court in the first place.
17 Your Honour knows that Mr. Kljuic was specifically asked to bring
18 or to send in advance preferably material to which he had specifically
19 referred in his, and it was a considerable quantity according to him of
20 notes taken by him in the course of numerous meetings. Your Honour, the
21 amount of material received from Mr. Kljuic so far is really very tiny
22 indeed in relation to what he said.
23 Now, Your Honour, he has been requested specifically by the Trial
24 Chamber I think within the last week, from memory, but I think originally
25 perhaps about a week ago or slightly less, perhaps, and then there was a
1 follow-up communication which Your Honour has probably seen which attached
2 a short note from me suggesting practicality which apparently was then
3 helpfully adopted by the Trial Chamber. So Your Honour, I don't know at
4 the moment what is the response and the reaction to that, and I don't
5 know - and perhaps none of us knows without Mr. Kljuic being asked -
6 what, if anything, he has brought to The Hague with him.
7 So that's the starting point, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps you ask him, Mr. Stewart, and if there's any
9 need of support by the Chamber, then we'll do that.
10 As far as the number of pages, he indicated at that time it was at
11 least -- by rereading the matter it was not entirely clearly whether that
12 would be only of the relevant period, that is the period covered by the
13 indictment, because the couple of hundred pages he talked about was, as
14 far as I remember, over a larger period. But you may ask him.
15 And Mr. Usher, could you escort Mr. Kljuic into the courtroom.
16 [The witness entered court]
17 Witness: Stjepan Kljuic [Resumed]
18 [Witness answered through interpreter]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Kljuic.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning to all.
21 JUDGE ORIE: From your response, I understand that you do hear me
22 in a language you understand?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Keeping in mind, Mr. Kljuic, the reasons why
25 you are not at all times available over the last couple of weeks or month,
1 I'm glad to see you as far as I can see but that's just the amateur's eye
2 in good health. Welcome back in court, Mr. Kljuic.
3 Mr. Kljuic, on the 27th of September, 2004, you have made a solemn
4 declaration that you would speak the truth -- that you would tell the
5 truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I'd like to remind you
6 not only of the fact that you made the solemn declaration but also of the
7 text of it, which I just pronounced, and I'd like to remind you that in
8 the examination that will follow, you're still bound by that solemn
10 Mr. Stewart, please proceed.
11 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Cross-examined by Mr. Stewart: [Continued]
13 Q. Good morning, Mr. Kljuic.
14 Mr. Kljuic, did you receive in the course of the last week or ten
15 days a communication in relation to -- a communication from The Hague in
16 relation to the bringing by you, or sending by you to The Hague of
17 material which might be relevant to this case?
18 A. No, I didn't receive any communication.
19 MR. STEWART: Excuse me, Mr. Kljuic.
20 Your Honour, that's a very unsatisfactory start, is it not, I ask
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Kljuic, at the end of the hearing on the
23 29th of September last year, you were invited to send to us and to bring
24 with you upon your return the notes you had made. We received some of it
25 through the Victims and Witnesses Unit. There was a limit number of
1 notes. Did you bring remainder?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when I told Mr. Stewart
3 that I had some notes, I also told him that I did not keep a diary in any
4 serious manner but that periodically, I made note of some details that I
5 believed were significant at that time. I sent you some material that, in
6 part, was typed out and in part was in handwriting. I have brought here
7 with me some other texts from 1990, 1992, 1995, and these are indeed
8 contemporaneous documents from the period, and I have also taken a copy of
9 the material that I sent to you. However, my luggage has been lost during
10 my journey; I'm expecting it to be delivered to me.
11 I also have to tell you that in -- while writing my book on
12 Bosnia, and I will convey to you what the structure of the book is
13 tomorrow when my luggage arrives, then you will see which parts are
14 relevant because as I was completing some chapters, I was going through
15 the written documentation. Therefore, whatever I was able to send over to
16 you, I did, whatever I believed would be of interest to you. For the
17 rest, what is contained in my testimony, I still adhere to that and of
18 course you are welcome to ask further questions.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Kljuic, the problem is that this court,
20 this Chamber would like to make its own assessment of what is relevant and
21 to some extent, of course, one could accept, perhaps, that material from
22 1994 would be -- especially if it deals with contemporaneous issues, that
23 it might not be that relevant, although sometimes people are looking back
24 in 1994 to what happened in 1992, so it's not under all circumstances
25 irrelevant. So I do understand that you have got the material with you
1 but it's temporarily lost with your luggage.
2 Could you tell us what -- but briefly, if you say the other
3 material what was not relevant, I mean of course we have seen the material
4 you brought which is certainly not complete and very much are personal
5 impressions rather than anything else. Could you tell us on the basis of
6 what you thought the other material, and let's concentrate on material
7 from 1991, 1992, why that was not relevant?
8 I mean what type of material did you exclude from your relevance
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not radically exclude
11 anything, I simply had some items and I didn't have others. However, when
12 I will present the structure of my book to you, which I will do tomorrow,
13 you will see that the book contains 16 chapters, starts with the fall of
14 the Berlin Wall and ends with the trial before this Tribunal.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, you came - and we are quite happy you
16 came - to answer questions. If one of the questions would be about the
17 structure of a book that has not yet been published, you are invited to
18 answer that question, but this is not a place to present an overall view
19 but this is a place, rather, where you give answers to the questions of
20 the parties and questions of the Bench.
21 But do I understand that you have got all the material brought
22 with you? Would you mind if it would be copied if it's here, once it has
23 been retrieved, of course?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You see, I haven't brought all the
25 material, only some fragments. I don't know what -- where your interest
1 lies. On the other hand, I don't have all of the material. I only have
2 parts that I made note of, that I took press clippings of, and it is just
3 an overview of the times in which we lived. So what I can do is I can
4 make a photocopy of all the material I have. What I do not know, however,
5 is what you're interested in. I was compiling material for my book and
6 not, of course, for the purposes of the Tribunal.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, that's exactly the reason why we asked
8 you to bring and to send everything so that we could assess what would be
9 relevant or that the parties could assess what was relevant. But I do
10 understand that you do not mind if photocopies are made tomorrow of the
11 material which I brought, although it still has to be retrieved.
12 Yes, Mr. Stewart.
13 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I ask for the witness to leave
14 court, please.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 Mr. Kljuic, could you ...
17 [The witness stands down]
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Stewart.
19 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I don't know whether to laugh or cry,
21 Your Honour, this is a deeply unsatisfactory situation, but I do
22 have an immediate practical suggestion which is this, and I've made
23 contingency plans Your Honour because I foresaw this sort of difficulty.
24 Your Honour, my proposal is I can get Ms. Loukas here at very short
25 notice, that the court proceeds with Mr. Omeragic's evidence, I understand
1 that the Prosecution are ready to proceed with Mr. Omeragic. Ms. Loukas
2 is ready to proceed with Mr. Omeragic, all I've got to do is ask her to
3 get here from not very far away quite quickly.
4 Your Honour, we must have, with respect, Mr. Kljuic's material.
5 We must have his luggage and we must have the opportunity of exploring
6 this. It is quite impossible to consider that it's right to proceed with
7 Mr. Kljuic until we sorted this out. This was the part of the very -- it
8 was the very thing, as Your Honour has indicated, it was the very thing
9 that Mr. Kljuic was asked and has been consistently asked to do. He has
10 plainly, without even any exploration, in questioning of him, he has
11 plainly signally failed to do what is clear he should do, and this
12 material is potentially important. Because he doesn't produce it, we
13 don't know how important, but it is certainly impossible to discard it as
14 not being potentially of very great significance to his evidence and his
16 So My Lord -- Your Honours, that's my practical suggestion.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 Mr. Harmon.
19 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, I do not know if we're ready to proceed
20 with Mr. Omeragic or if he's even in the building at this point in time so
21 I'm making an inquiry right now. It seems to me, there is another
22 solution and that is that we proceed as best we can with Mr. Kljuic's
23 continued cross-examination tomorrow when he produces the information to
24 the Court and to the parties. It can be he reviewed, and should
25 Mr. Kljuic be required to come back, I'm quite sure he would come back.
1 We can make that inquiry of Mr. Kljuic as well.
2 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I had understood -- I had understood
3 from what inquiries I've been able to make that everybody had assumed that
4 Mr. Omeragic might come on quite soon, everybody was ready, but I can
5 understand that just as we have to physically get people here, the
6 Prosecution may face the same issue.
7 But, Your Honours, going to the other issue: Your Honour, it is
8 simply not practically possible to proceed with Mr. Kljuic's
9 cross-examination in two stages; one in the absence of the very material
10 he was invited to bring; and then to review that material and carry on.
11 That is absolutely not the right way to proceed with a serious
12 cross-examination of a really quite important witness in this case.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will take one or two minutes to consider
15 the situation.
16 I've got one question for you, Mr. Stewart. If that material
17 arrives, let's just assume that it would arrive this afternoon, what,
18 then, after we have dealt with Mr. Omeragic, what would then be the
20 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, to some extent, I've got to say,
21 that depends on the material but when the material arrives, we will, as we
22 have done already with the material which he provided, we will review it,
23 and we includes of course such B/C/S speaker as we have on the team, we
24 will review it as speedily as possible, Your Honour, and then I will -- I
25 would then proceed with whatever areas of cross-examination first thing
1 tomorrow morning, I could proceed with in the light of that material.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Another short question: Would you agree with
3 me that what we have seen until now is material which mainly consists of
4 very personal impressions hardly containing any facts, very incomplete.
5 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, broadly speaking yes, which is
6 precisely my complaint because what we have is a tiny amount of material,
7 we have no idea how that -- how representative that is of the material
8 that Mr. Kljuic has got and no idea of what questions might arise out of
9 what has got lost on the way, apparently, in relation to anything else
10 he's got. Your Honour puts your finger, in effect, on what is very much
11 an element of our very complaint.
12 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will consider the matter for one moment.
13 --- Break taken at 10.03 a.m.
14 --- On resuming at 10.08 a.m.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, the Chamber has considered the present
16 situation. There was no order for the witness to bring, there was a
17 request for the witness to bring his material. He did send a smaller part
18 and made it available to the parties. The Chamber, although it's not in
19 evidence, has seen it and also gained the impression that it was material
20 which very much reflected personal impressions rather than anything else.
21 The witness is invited to make available to the parties what he
22 has brought, and from what I understand he's willing to do so. That
23 material, again, is not in evidence. We hope that it arrives soon for the
24 parties. If at any later stage the Defence, on the basis of that
25 material, would consider it necessary to further cross-examine the
1 witness, we'll consider that at that moment if a motion is filed whether
2 oral or written motion but at this moment, the Defence is given an
3 opportunity and invited to cross -- further cross-examine the witness.
4 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I -- may I ask for a certificate to
5 appeal that ruling under 73(B).
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. STEWART: It's a shocking decision, Your Honour, and we --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Well, Mr. Stewart, you may ask for a certificate.
9 You are not allowed to comment in these words on the decision taken by the
11 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry, Your Honour, it was my submission; I
12 withdraw it.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 Mr. Usher, could you escort Mr. Kljuic into the courtroom.
15 MR. STEWART: Sorry, Your Honour, what is the answer, please to my
16 application for a certificate.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We'll consider that most likely during the next
19 MR. STEWART: The only thing is that I need to know because if I
20 am to appeal the matter -- the witness should leave court, Your Honour,
21 and not have been brought in.
22 JUDGE ORIE: No. Mr. Stewart, the situation is a 73(B)
23 certificate, is a certificate, we will decide on it. It has no --
24 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I was just immediately saying the
25 witness shouldn't be brought into court in the middle of these
1 submissions. That's my immediate point, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, as a matter of fact, you started making
3 submissions when the witness is brought into court.
4 Mr. Kljuic, would you have one more minute of patience and follow
5 the usher again. We have, unfortunately, I might have been a bit early to
6 ask you back into court.
7 [The witness stands down]
8 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 The only problem with it is this, Your Honour, that an appeal on a
10 matter like this is really -- the word we always use in England is
11 nugatory, but much of the point of an appeal in relation to a matter like
12 this is completely removed if, pending the resolution of the matter, one
13 has to proceed anyway. So Your Honour, I would invite the Trial Chamber
14 at least to tell me whether my application for a certificate under 73(B)
15 is granted or refused because then I know where I am.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, you say you make your application, you'd
17 like to have a decision?
18 MR. STEWART: Yes, indeed, Your Honour, I would.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then absence of any reasons underlying your request
20 for a certificate, it is denied --
21 MR. STEWART: Your Honour --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart --
23 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, you have not invited me to give any
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart --
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 MR. STEWART: I haven't been given an opportunity. Of course,
2 Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart --
4 MR. STEWART: I didn't say I wasn't giving any reasons because I
5 haven't --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart. Mr. Stewart, you insisted on an answer
7 on a motion which consisted just of one line and that is you wanted a
8 certificate. I then said: "Was that your motion? Was that all?"
9 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, it's quite true that I simply
10 asked for an answer. But, Your Honour, I am asking for a brief
11 opportunity to give reasons, and to shut me out from giving reasons on the
12 basis of what, in this extremely unusual situation, to hold me to what
13 I've said on the transcript as if it was some sort of legislative
14 provision, Your Honour, is not, with respect, a fair way of dealing with
15 it. I do wish to suggest reasons.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, the Chamber gives you an opportunity to
18 file in writing the reasons for your certificate you asked, and the
19 Chamber sees no reason at this moment to discontinue the proceedings in
20 respect of the cross-examination of Mr. Kljuic.
21 So therefore, although a decision has been given, we'll not take
22 that as the final moment. You didn't give any reasons, but if you intend
23 to give any reasons, you may file them in writing and we'll then consider
24 whether those reasons should lead to a decision that a certificate will be
1 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I can give the reasons in less than two
3 JUDGE ORIE: No, Mr. Stewart. Mr. Stewart, you will not --
4 MR. STEWART: And the public would then know what the reasons were
5 and we could have dealt with it. And Your Honours would be in a position
6 to rule then at the earliest possible opportunity, because I can't deal
7 with the written submissions until the next break.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, we'll now continue with the
9 cross-examination of the witness and we'll -- during the next break, we'll
10 consider whether you will be given two minutes to give your reasons.
11 Mr. Stewart.
12 MR. STEWART: I'm obliged for that, Your Honour.
13 May I make one practical request while the witness is coming into
14 court. If I were to give somebody Ms. Loukas's number, I wonder if
15 somebody could bring and try to prevent her from making an unnecessary
16 journey now and head her off, so she can continue what she was working on.
17 That would be a favour, if anybody was able to get a hold of her which I
18 can't right now.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Philpott offers to contact Defence counsel.
20 MR. STEWART: That's very kind, Your Honour. Because I'm sure
21 Your Honour will appreciate that --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course. You anticipated that matters would
23 take a different course.
24 MR. STEWART: I made contingency plans so I could be as helpful as
25 possible to the Court, Your Honour. That's what I did.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Usher, you can escort Mr. Kljuic into the
3 [The witness entered court]
4 MR. STEWART: Sorry, Your Honour, I was just explaining to
5 Ms. Philpott, we do not have people in the Defence room at the moment. We
6 just don't have anybody else in the building apart from me.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any mobile phone on which Ms. Loukas could
8 be reached?
9 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Stewart, you may proceed.
11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, am I --
12 JUDGE ORIE: I -- Ms. Philpott gets the assistance of my secretary
13 in order to reach Ms. Loukas on her mobile phone in order to inform her.
14 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm obliged for that. That is
15 certainly helpful to the use of Defence resources.
16 Your Honour, my first question, with respect -- excuse me,
17 Mr. Kljuic, may I address it to Your Honour, is am I permitted this
18 morning to pursue any questions in relation to the material or
19 non-provision of material or the circumstances in relation to the material
20 which was discussed at the previous hearing and has been under some
21 consideration this morning?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you may ask ...
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber does not object to such questions. Of
25 course I do not know what the position of the Prosecution is. Also I'd
1 like to -- you to keep in mind a few words I said about the position of a
2 witness in this respect in bringing the material.
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. STEWART:
5 Q. Mr. Kljuic, I don't have in mind this morning -- perhaps I also
6 communicate this to you with respect to Their Honours, I don't have in
7 mind to conduct some extensive exploration of what notes and what material
8 you have, given that there is some material in a suitcase that hasn't
9 found its way here, so any such detailed exploration I will reserve until
10 having had a chance to look at that.
11 But may I ask you simply as a practical matter, the -- there's a
12 lost suitcase, is there, that you checked in in Sarajevo, did you, that
13 hasn't arrived in The Hague. Is that the position?
14 A. No. My luggage was lost en route from Vienna to Amsterdam. I did
15 not receive any written request to submit more material except for what I
16 already submitted to your administration in Sarajevo, but I did bring
17 along this part so that I could respond.
18 Q. Mr. Kljuic, on this practical matter, it would be helpful if you
19 could just specifically deal with what I'm asking.
20 It seems to come to the same thing. You checked in a bag at
21 Sarajevo, you flew via Vienna and apparently -- is it a suitcase or more
22 than one suitcase has got mislaid between Vienna and Amsterdam. Is that
23 the current situation?
24 A. It is a suitcase, exactly, that is the situation, one suitcase.
25 Q. And you have reported it in the usual -- it is the usual way
1 unfortunately with the particular airline which I guess you travelled
2 with. You have reported it in the usual way to the airline and the
3 baggage handlers ...
4 A. Yes, I did.
5 Q. And you have all the usual bits of paper with reference numbers
6 on; correct? Just say yes or no.
7 A. Yes, I have it here.
8 Q. What has the airline said to you or the people responsible for
9 baggage delivery, what have they said to you about the expectation of
10 delivery of your bag?
11 A. They said that they would do everything in their power to find it,
12 to locate it, and perhaps they have already located it, so it will be here
13 on the next flight of Vienna. That is what they told me.
14 Q. You haven't been told so far that it's been located; that's what I
15 understand. You haven't been told that they have located it; is that
17 A. No, I haven't been told. But the woman who is in charge of me,
18 the lady at the hotel. Said that it was -- they are going to find it and
19 that it is being dealt with properly.
20 Q. Mr. Kljuic, did you bring any papers that might be of any possible
21 relevance to this case in your hand luggage?
22 A. I do not believe that that is relevant for this -- for these
23 proceedings. I have brought some of my notes by way of illustrations, and
24 I have brought fragments of my book that have already been finished.
25 Q. Forgot about the book for the moment, and not dismissive of it at
1 all, Mr. Kljuic, except for immediate purposes, forget about the fragments
2 of your book. So far as the other material is concerned which you did
3 bring in your hand luggage, first of all, what is the quantity of that
4 material, roughly speaking?
5 A. All told, with what I have already submitted to you, it's perhaps
6 100 pages. Actually, I submitted 37 pages to you before and there is
7 another quantity, up to 100.
8 Q. So it's about 60 pages -- it doesn't matter to 10 or 15, it's
9 about 60 pages or something like that, is it?
10 A. I haven't counted, but yes, I guess that is more or less so.
11 Q. Mr. Kljuic, you frequently shrug your shoulders in answer to my
12 questions. May I simply remind you that the only person who has firsthand
13 knowledge of this is you which is why I'm asking the questions.
14 The -- so Mr. Kljuic, this 60-odd pages, this is -- this does not
15 include the draft chapters of your book; is that correct?
16 A. We have to clarify one thing first. You are asking me what the
17 number of pages is. I did not count the number of pages in Sarajevo nor
18 did you ask me to. So now I can only tell you approximately and you want
19 me to tell you -- you don't want me to tell you precisely the number. In
20 fact, I'm not sure what it is that you are asking me to do. I have given
21 you my notes for your inspection.
22 Q. Mr. Kljuic, please, what I'm asking you to do is specifically what
23 I asked in my question. I asked you for an estimate of the amount of
24 material. You have given an estimate. I have not pressed you for any
25 more detail. I have accepted your estimate for the moment. And then I'm
1 simply asking you of that 60-odd pages that you estimate, I'm simply
2 asking you whether that -- those papers exclude draft chapters of your
3 book. That's the only question I'm asking right now, please.
4 A. No. They also contain excerpts from my book.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, how many pages have you brought which are
6 not draft passages of your book but which are the kind of notes as you've
7 sent them before, the type of notes, handwritten or typed out?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 37.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's what you sent us.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. And I have taken along a copy
11 for me, for my use. And also another -- I have taken along another number
12 of pages, but I don't know what number.
13 JUDGE ORIE: How much additional pages did you bring apart from
14 what you've sent us of a similar nature?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is not of the same nature; it is
16 of a different nature. It is about different developments, different
17 events. I cannot tell you the exact number of pages because I have not --
18 THE INTERPRETER: I'm speaking into the microphone. Can you hear
19 me now? I'm speaking into the microphone. Can you hear me now?
20 JUDGE ORIE: I do read your transcript, the answer was --
21 MR. STEWART: The interpreter was asking whether we can hear
22 her --
23 THE INTERPRETER: Yes. I was asking because the microphone of the
24 interpreter is on and I did the translation.
25 MR. STEWART: Yes, that's what I thought was happening, Your
1 Honour. Because I could hear her, that was -- naturally, it follows from
2 what I've just said.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Did everyone receive English translation. Am I the
4 only one who did not receive it or...
5 Mr. Stewart, did you receive an English translation of the last
6 answer of the witness?
7 MR. STEWART: I got to, "I cannot tell you the exact number of
8 pages because I am not," and the interpreter asked her question as to
9 whether we were hearing her. So the answer then of course has finished so
10 far because the interpreter raised that question.
11 JUDGE ORIE: But the lines on page 18 and following, where the
12 witness answers the question, did you hear that or...
13 MR. STEWART: Yes, I heard it down to "because I have not ..."
14 That was what happened and then the answer got broken.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Then I have a problem, it seems.
16 Could you speak a few words?
17 THE INTERPRETER: Yes. Can you hear me now? Can you hear me now?
19 JUDGE ORIE: It is better without hearing sometimes what you say
20 yourself. It seems to be better now.
21 THE INTERPRETER: One, two, three.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I can hear you. I'm afraid it was a problem of
23 my earphones. Now I have to reread it.
24 You said the additional material was not of the same nature
25 because it dealt with different subjects. When I said "of the same
1 nature" I meant to refer to the type of notes, that is, handwritten or
2 typed out personal impressions. How many pages of this type of material
3 you would have brought, approximately?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure, but there is more than
5 the number of pages that I submitted to you previously.
6 JUDGE ORIE: But do you have any idea, is that 20 or 50 additional
7 pages or ...
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't say, Your Honour. I really
9 can't say. I'll bring this file tomorrow and I'll show it to you once my
10 suitcase comes. I haven't counted it because I really did not expect this
11 type of questions.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Would you be willing to give it to the Victims and
13 Witness Unit even before tomorrow, as soon as your suitcase has been
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely. The moment it arrives,
16 you will get it.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
18 Mr. Stewart, please proceed.
19 MR. STEWART: I'm a little confused, Your Honour.
20 Q. Mr. Kljuic, before that practical interjection, I had been asking
21 you about the material that you have brought with you and have got here in
22 The Hague in your hand luggage, and you referred to 37 pages which seemed
23 to be a completely different 37 pages. But Mr. Kljuic, I was really
24 trying to get from you of the 60-odd pages that you say you actually have
25 got here in The Hague, how much of that is not draft chapters of your
2 A. Please, Mr. Stewart. It is not true that I have anything in
3 The Hague. I had to sleep in my shirt, and I did not change my suit
4 because everything except my glasses and my phone is in my baggage.
5 Q. Mr. Kljuic, I asked you absolutely specifically about five, ten
6 minutes ago, specifically if you had got papers with you in your hand
7 luggage. Your hand luggage wasn't mislaid on the way, was it?
8 A. No, no. No, it wasn't. But only the telephone, my drugs and my
9 glasses are in my hand luggage. Everything else is -- was in the
10 suitcase, and I have come here without my suitcase. I checked into my
11 hotel in this suit and here I am in this suit today. So no papers
12 whatsoever were in my hand baggage, hand luggage. I only had my drugs, my
13 medicaments, my telephone and my glasses. At the moment the suitcase is
14 found, however, of course, the person, whoever wants to, whoever is in
15 charge, can have all my papers. There's no reason why that shouldn't be
17 MR. STEWART: Excuse me, Your Honour, one moment.
18 Q. I asked you Mr. Kljuic, page 16, line 16: "Mr. Kljuic, did you
19 bring any papers that might be of any possible relevance to this case in
20 your hand luggage?"
21 You said: "I do not believe that that is relevant for this -- for
22 these proceedings. I have brought some of my notes by way of
23 illustrations, and I have brought fragments of my book that have already
24 been finished."
25 I said: "Forget about the book for the moment, not dismissive of
1 it at all except for immediate process, forget about the fragments of your
2 book. So far as the other material that is concerned that you did bring
3 in your hand luggage, what is the quantity of that material roughly
5 And you answered: "All told with what I have already submitted to
6 you, it's perhaps 100 pages. Actually, I submitted 37 pages to you
7 before, and there is another quantity up to 100."
8 And then I sought to clarify whether you meant there was 100 in
9 addition to 37 or the balance of the 100 after we had taken away the 37.
10 But I do suggest it was very clear at that point that I was asking you
11 about hand luggage.
12 I just want to get it straight now, Mr. Kljuic. You said a moment
13 ago that you did not have any papers in your hand luggage. So, please,
14 which -- just to be clear now, not forget, but -- we're moving forward
15 rather than into the past.
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. What is the position? Have you brought any papers in your hand
18 luggage that are now in The Hague? Please.
19 A. No, I haven't. My hand luggage is, in fact, here in the waiting
21 Q. So is this right, then: That the 100 pages that you were talking
22 about, first of all, includes -- I understand it's not exact, Mr. Kljuic.
23 The 100 pages includes the 37 pages that have already been submitted; is
24 that correct?
25 A. More or less.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. The numbers may not be exact by the point you agree with; is that
2 what we're saying?
3 A. Absolutely.
4 Q. So the number of pages that is in the lost -- sorry, mislaid - I
5 hope they'll find it for you, Mr. Kljuic - the number of pages that is in
6 the mislaid suitcase is somewhere around 60; is that correct?
7 A. Probably.
8 Q. Mr. Kljuic, did you -- I sound like a work for an airline. Did
9 you pack your suitcase yourself?
10 A. I did pack the administrative and the male part, as it were. And
11 the underwear and the rest was packed by my wife.
12 Q. Did anybody else give you any papers to bring with you to
13 The Hague?
14 A. No.
15 Q. So that's your personal estimate of your own papers that you put
16 into the suitcase, it's around 60-something pages; is that correct?
17 A. It is possible.
18 Q. Mr. Kljuic --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, Mr. Stewart has asked you how many pages
20 there were approximately. You said about 100, including the 37 you
21 already gave to us. What makes you say that it's probable or it's
22 possible that 60 are new? Because most people that deduct 37 from 100
23 would come to 63, approximately 60. What makes you so cautious?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because I don't know the precise
1 JUDGE ORIE: The probable and the possible is -- might not have
2 been necessary because, Mr. Stewart, you expressed yourself in terms of
3 approximate, of around. Let's, before we come to, I suspect, the socks of
4 Mr. Kljuic, let's proceed.
5 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, leaving socks aside, I'm just not sure,
6 apart from the act that it's pretty obvious everybody could do with one,
7 but I'm not sure what the Tribunal has in mind as far as a break now is
8 concerned, given the rather --
9 JUDGE ORIE: We had a late start, so if you would say this would
10 be a suitable moment for you for a break then we would adjourn until five
11 minutes past 11.00.
12 MR. STEWART: It's as suitable as any, Your Honour. So if it
13 suits the Trial Chamber.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll adjourn until five past.
15 --- Recess taken at 10.40 a.m.
16 --- On resuming at 11.12 a.m.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Before we continue, Mr. Stewart, it is not my
18 pleasure but for the completeness of the transcript, it's necessary that I
19 repeat what my decision was on your application for a certificate
20 because I was interrupted before it was translated and transcribed.
21 So the decision was that your request was turned down. We
22 promised you that you would know whether or not and when and whether oral
23 or in writing you would get an opportunity to give the reasons for your
24 application. You said you could do it in two minutes.
25 You have two minutes from now on -- to give the reasons for your
1 oral application, but if you'd prefer to do it in writing of course, you
2 are free to do so.
3 MR. STEWART: Your Honour what I have done is I have --
4 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, for Mr. Stewart.
5 MR. STEWART: Sorry.
6 Over the break, I have prepared written reasons. May I simply
7 supplement them with what might be less than two minutes of just a couple
8 of points of explanation. May I do that straight away, Your Honour,
9 or --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
11 MR. STEWART: Yes. As far as --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Within the time limit set, yes.
13 MR. STEWART: Starting now, Your Honour?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. STEWART: Point number one I have in mind particularly what
16 the Trial Chamber said this morning at page 9, lines 22 to 20-something
17 23-27, but the next few lines, Your Honours's characterisation, it's
18 page 9, line 18, I think, something like that, and then those next few
20 Secondly, number two, look at the transcript of the last occasion
21 when Mr. Kljuic was here will make that good.
22 Thirdly, the failure by the Tribunal in which I include the
23 different arms of the Tribunal because after all, the Defence is relying
24 on the Trial Chamber, the Victims and Witnesses Unit. It was out of our
25 hands, and we were assured it would be taken care of, and it clearly
1 hasn't been. The communication has been late and has not got through to
2 Mr. Kljuic.
3 So far as the rest of the matters are concerned, Your Honour, I
4 don't think there's anything that I can add. Just to say overall that of
5 course these do not constitute refined grounds of appeal. They've been
6 knocked out in about 10 minutes over the break as the basis for a
7 certificate, so of course we would reserve our position. But, Your
8 Honour, it is, we submit, important that this is clearly a matter of
9 interlocutory appeal. It's absolutely pointless if it's left until final,
10 and as an interlocutory appeal, it is also, we submit, pointless if
11 Mr. Kljuic's evidence proceeds for any material time.
12 Point number 9 does seem to be the position. We brought
13 Ms. Loukas here. She got all the way here but she had to go all the way
14 back again, but thank you for the attempts -- or the successful attempts
15 to contact her.
16 But on balance, Your Honour, we submit that there was no possible
17 reason why Mr. Omeragic's evidence couldn't have proceeded. It wouldn't
18 have inconvenienced anybody and in fact would have been a help to him.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Stewart.
20 Then one final, but this is just in order to assist you, we spent
21 a lot of time on relevant pages of approximately 60 in hand luggage. I,
22 of course, ask myself why this went wrong. At least there were two
23 questions and one you asked about relevant material in the hand luggage.
24 Apart from that I do understand the hand luggage in English or cabin
25 luggage is not exact -- but let's stay away from that.
1 The witness answered to your question on the relevance of, it
2 seems, all material he thinks he has. There were clearly two questions in
3 one which caused a lot of confusion. Therefore, I think in general terms,
4 dealing with one issue in one question saves us a lot of confusion.
5 This is just to assist you, because I think you find it a pity
6 that you couldn't use your time and have this clarified immediately
7 instead of spending so much time on it, and so does the Chamber. So I
8 think we have a shared interest.
9 MR. STEWART: I certainly did, Your Honour. I certainly accept
10 the basic principle throughout the case that as far as possible, two
11 questions in one should be avoided. I will, perhaps Your Honours will
12 understand not as an absolute top priority, because I shall look at what I
13 did this morning to see whether my technique in eliciting simple answers
14 to simple questions in that sort of area can be improved.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 Then Mr. Kljuic may be brought into the courtroom again.
17 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I simply say before Mr. Kljuic
18 comes in that I am going to invite Your Honours' very firm assistance, may
19 I put it this way, in improving Mr. Kljuic's technique in giving a
20 straight answer to a straight question.
21 JUDGE ORIE: I feel this as an encouragement to -- not to wait too
22 long to intervene if the answers do not come.
23 MR. STEWART: I think Your Honour has correctly understood a very
24 important element of my ...
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Usher, could you escort the witness into the
2 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I suppose the strict technical position
3 is that I am still awaiting Your Honours' ruling, strictly speaking, on my
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we have now -- let me just ...
6 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it's obviously all three of Your
7 Honours will need the opportunity of reviewing my reasons as set out on
8 the piece of paper.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I first ask the Prosecution whether they
11 take any position on this.
12 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, we do not.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we'll read what you have written down
14 and -- what you have submitted in writing and what you have added orally,
15 and we'll give a decision after the next break.
16 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, Mr. Stewart will continue to
18 cross-examine you.
19 May I direct you to carefully listen to the question and to focus,
20 in your answer, exactly on what was asked.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
22 MR. STEWART:
23 Q. Now, Mr. Kljuic, I suppose I should ask: Any news from the
24 airline front over the last half an hour about your bag?
25 A. No, none. But the lady who is waiting for me in the waiting room
1 told me that they were going to sort this thing out today. And of course
2 I kindly asked the staff here to assist me once I get hold of my luggage
3 to go and have photocopies made of the material.
4 Q. And Mr. Kljuic, I -- it seems an obvious common sense thing to do
5 which I'm sure you have in mind, but you will follow this up as best you
6 can with the airline or whatever appropriate contact numbers you've been
7 given during the next break, will you?
8 Did you hear me, all right? The microphone's been ...
9 A. No, I haven't really been the one doing this but rather the escort
10 from the Victims and Witnesses Section. He met me there, and he said he
11 was going to take care of things.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I'll ask Madam Registrar to send an additional
13 message to the Victims and Witness Section that whenever there's any news
14 about the luggage that we'll be informed, and first of all that the
15 witness gets it as soon as possible and that copies are made on the
16 request of the request of the witness.
17 MR. STEWART: Could I just supplement that, Your Honour, by
18 request, with respect, that the Victims and Witnesses Unit take the utmost
19 care to ensure that this matter doesn't fall between two stools, with
20 somebody thinking that Mr. Kljuic is to contact the airline Mr. Kljuic
21 thinking that somebody else is going to. This is -- this is a matter of
22 considerable practical importance.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that is included.
24 MR. STEWART: Yes, thank you. And I'm sure Mr. Kljuic heard that
25 and the Victims and Witnesses Unit will be hearing it or will understand
1 it as well.
2 Q. Mr. Kljuic, you did not meet Mr. Krajisnik during the pre-election
3 campaign in 1990, did you?
4 A. I cannot tell you really, but I believe that perhaps on the
5 occasion when we were meeting, and when I say "we" I mean the SDA, the SDS
6 and the HDZ, our paths might have crossed. I cannot tell you though
7 precisely, I only know that the communication between these parties was a
8 very intense one at the time.
9 Q. And such occasions on which you spoke to Mr. Krajisnik in 1990 and
10 1991 were mainly by accident in passing between a deputy and somebody who
11 was himself a deputy and the president of the Assembly. That's right,
12 isn't it?
13 A. These were not accidental encounters. The two of us were
14 discharging high officials -- high officers. Mr. Krajisnik was Speaker of
15 the Assembly and I, myself, was a member of the Presidency of Bosnia.
16 These were, therefore, posit meetings either in the Assembly or in the
17 Presidency or on the occasion of formal meetings with representatives of
18 the Yugoslav Peoples' Army and representatives of the international
20 Q. Now, you described Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Krajisnik as having been
21 friends. But what do you know, Mr. Kljuic, from your own firsthand
22 knowledge which supports the view which you have expressed that they were
23 very close in politics?
24 A. This was obvious to all, their positions in the setting up of the
25 SDS party and in the operation of the SDS party were the leading ones.
1 Besides, even before, they were working together in a process that I do
2 not wish to speak of here, but they were together.
3 Q. What do you know, Mr. Kljuic, then, about Mr. Krajisnik's work in
4 the setting up of the SDS party?
5 A. I can say that everybody was under the impression that the main
6 office or rather the central figure of the party was Mr. Krajisnik because
7 of his seriousness, his approach to the work, unlike Mr. Karadzic who was
8 more of a spokesperson who liked to appear in public. These were the
9 impressions that we got as we were participating in politics, but also
10 this was the way they were perceived by the public.
11 Q. Mr. Kljuic, just I hope a one-sentence introduction to my next
13 You have, on many occasions in giving evidence before this Trial
14 Chamber, answered questions by referring to the way in which somebody was
15 seen by the public, the impression given. I want to make it clear my
16 question there in asking you what you know about Mr. Krajisnik's work in
17 the setting up of the SDS party, that is one question; it means exactly
18 what it says. I'm not asking you to tell us about others' impressions.
19 I'm asking you to tell the Trial Chamber what you, Mr. Kljuic, know.
20 A. I believe that Mr. Krajisnik was the driving force of the party.
21 Q. What do you know, Mr. Kljuic, please.
22 A. I have to tell you the following: On the occasion of interparty
23 meetings, there would be several representatives participating in these
24 meetings on behalf of the Serb side; like for instance, Ms. Biljana
25 Plavsic, the late Professor Koljevic, one Dukic from Han Pijesak.
1 These meetings were efficient and valid only if they were also
2 attended by Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Krajisnik.
3 Q. From what point in time does the answer that you've just given
5 A. This applies to the period in advance of the elections. I mean
6 the period in which we were developing as peoples' parties before the
7 elections. The Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina comprised seven
8 members: Two Serbs, two Croats --
9 Q. Mr. Kljuic, just for the moment, I'm going to ask you not to take
10 us into the composition of the Presidency and stick with what I'm asking
11 you. The elections were in November 1990, we know that, don't we?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. When do you recall the SDS party being established?
14 A. It was established in late spring or early summer. First, the SDA
15 was established in May, and then the SDS followed suit in June, I believe.
16 Q. Or July?
17 A. [In English] Or July maybe.
18 Q. The meetings that you have described a moment ago, then, the
19 interparty meetings where there would be several representatives
20 participating in these meetings on behalf of the Serb side, like, for
21 instance, Mrs. Plavsic and so on, are you talking about meetings that took
22 place between July 1990 and November 1990?
23 A. [Interpretation] The first meetings were not attended by
24 Ms. Plavsic but rather by Mr. Karadzic. However, these meetings were very
25 frequent in the period between August and November. There's one detail
1 concerning the agreement that is very significant that I wanted to talk
2 about just a moment ago when you interrupted me. There was the tendency
3 to change the structure of the Presidency --
4 Q. Mr. Kljuic, is what you're about to say an answer to my question?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic.
6 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 A. Yes, precisely. I wanted to tell you where we had the decisive
8 support of Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Krajisnik. This is just an illustration
9 of the case if you want to hear it. If not ...
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Kljuic. The question was whether you were
11 talking about meetings between July 1990 and November 1990. You answered
12 that question by saying that it was frequent in the period August to
13 November. So the time frame which Mr. Stewart was asking for has been
14 answered. If he wants to know other matters, he'll ask you.
15 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
16 MR. STEWART:
17 Q. So when you talked earlier about Mr. Krajisnik's role in the
18 setting up of the SDS, you agree that must be talking about a period
19 before July 1990?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So what do you, Mr. Kljuic, know about Mr. Krajisnik's role in the
22 setting up of the SDS before July 1990?
23 A. To tell you the truth, I wasn't particularly interested in that.
24 Q. Very nice, Mr. Kljuic, but what is the answer to the question
25 then? Does it follow because you weren't interested, the answer is you
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 know nothing?
2 A. I did know because we perceived him as one of the founders.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic. Mr. Kljuic. Mr. Stewart is asking you
4 what knowledge you have about the role of Mr. Krajisnik prior to the date
5 where the SDS was established. If you say, "We perceived," tell us what
6 you observed that made you believe that.
7 Please tell us.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The SDS gathered a large number of
9 eminent Serbs. Once their convention was held, it was reported about in a
10 newspaper called Javnost. From these papers --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Did -- were conventions held before the party was
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The convention was taken as the date
14 of the official establishment of the party.
15 JUDGE ORIE: What did you observe about what Mr. Krajisnik did
16 or -- well, what his role was before that date?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is why evidently he was the
18 central figure: From each party, we would pick out an operative, so to
19 speak, who would prepare certain -- a certain position paper. I chose
20 Mr. Tomislav Obrdalj from the HDZ. There was Amila Omersaftic on behalf
21 of the SDA, and they often went to see Mr. Krajisnik to coordinate their
22 views and positions.
23 JUDGE ORIE: You are talking now about party activities. The
24 question was before the party was established. So what did Mr. Krajisnik
25 do before the convention held in July before the party was established?
1 What did you see him -- did he send the invitations? Did he draft the
2 statutes? Did he appear on television and announce that such a thing
3 would happen? What did you see, what made you believe that he was such an
4 important person in that stage?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] While Karadzic talked about
6 political matters to a larger extent, Mr. Krajisnik was definitely the
7 person who worked on the party's documents because that is also how he
8 made his public addresses. Whatever he talked about at the time was very
9 acceptable because --
10 JUDGE ORIE: You say he was definitely the one who worked on the
11 documents. Could you give an example of that? Could you tell us about a
12 document you know he worked on and tell us how you know that.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Before the establishment, I don't
14 know which documents he worked on; probably on the Statute. But
15 Mr. Karadzic did not regard this with a favourable eye. Later on when he
16 was -- later on as Speaker of parliament, Mr. Krajisnik worked on all the
17 key documents.
18 JUDGE ORIE: But you should be aware that Mr. Stewart is asking
19 you about that period before July. You say, "He probably worked on the
20 Statute, but Mr. Karadzic did not regard this with a favourable eye."
21 What do you know -- how do you know that he worked on the Statute of the
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I definitely know that
24 Karadzic did not and there was nobody else. Mr. Krajisnik was the most
25 suitable person for it.
1 JUDGE ORIE: So he was suitable; Karadzic didn't do it; no one
2 else could have done it; so therefore it must have been Krajisnik. Is
3 that your testimony?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I suppose so. I cannot claim with
5 any certainty. This was a period of time when I was not yet interested in
6 seeing how they worked. It was later on when Krajisnik became Speaker of
7 the parliament that I became interested in him.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand. What Mr. Stewart did is he
9 tested, more or less, your testimony on the role of Mr. Krajisnik in
10 setting up the SDS party. This Chamber is aware that sometimes
11 conclusions and observations come close to each other but we'd rather hear
12 facts, observations, than, I would say, impressions or conclusions.
13 Mr. Stewart, you may proceed. At the same time, setting up, of
14 course, is a -- the ambiguity of setting up is at least from my
15 understanding of the English could be establishing, setting up, making
16 something function. But I leave that to you.
17 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, two comments on that, Your
18 Honour. One is the phrase came from the witness's answer.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. STEWART: Secondly, actually although -- well, I'm reasonable
21 expert at the English language now, Your Honour, there's very ambiguity in
22 the phrase "setting up" in this context, as far as I'm concerned.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
24 MR. STEWART: I don't know whether Mr. Harmon would suggest some
25 startling ambiguity in the same phrase. They speak a similar language to
1 us on his side of the Atlantic.
2 Q. Mr. Kljuic, you said that Mr. Krajisnik -- I'm sorry, Dr. Karadzic
3 did not view favorably, I think, was your phrase. You
4 said: "Mr. Krajisnik probably worked on the Statute but Mr. Karadzic did
5 not regard this with a favourable eye."
6 What do you mean there?
7 A. No, that's not what I said. That -- there must have been a
9 Q. Well Mr. Kljuic, it's precisely what you're recorded as having
10 said. It's at page 34 -- you don't have this page, but for everybody
11 else, it's at page 34, line 18: "Before the establishment, I don't know
12 which documents he worked on, probably on the Statute, but Mr. Karadzic
13 did not regard this with a favourable eye. Later on, when he was -- later
14 on, as Speaker of parliament, Mr. Krajisnik worked on all the key
16 Now, what -- Mr. Kljuic, if you wish to correct that answer,
17 please do so first.
18 A. I said that Mr. Karadzic did not have the ability to deal with
19 that -- he did not -- he wasn't inclined to that sort of work because he
20 was interested in politics and he dealt with politics, whereas the
21 drafting of the Statute requires some sort of an ability to do such work.
22 I never said that Karadzic and Krajisnik were at odds in this respect.
23 Q. Yes, so just to clarify then, you're saying your answer wasn't
24 intended to suggest that Mr. Karadzic had any objection to Mr. Krajisnik
25 working on such a document. That's what you're saying.
1 A. Absolutely, yes. Absolutely.
2 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm not challenging that explanation,
3 Your Honour, which I just say straight away that I acknowledge that
4 Mr. Kljuic's explanation there is reasonable on his previous answer. When
5 I do challenge his previous answers, then obviously I will do, clearly.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. STEWART:
8 Q. Mr. Kljuic, whatever it was, Mr. Krajisnik was -- Mr. Krajisnik
9 was not a lawyer, was he or is he? Correct?
10 A. I believe he has a degree in economics and he held a very high
11 position in the industrial sector.
12 Q. Mr. Kljuic, I have a degree in economics but I'm a lawyer. The
13 answer is no, he is not a lawyer. Correct? You agree? I'm just trying
14 to get that straight; it's a simple point. You know that, don't you, that
15 Mr. Krajisnik is not a lawyer.
16 A. I don't know.
17 Q. Were there lawyers in the SDS party?
18 A. There were very many of them.
19 Q. Anyway, this work by Mr. Krajisnik on any documents - let's get it
20 clear - you have absolutely no knowledge at all, do you, of any work by
21 Mr. Krajisnik on any documents relating to the SDS before its foundation
22 in July 1990.
23 A. I have never really said that I do have information about it, that
24 I know about it.
25 Q. The meetings that you described then, interparty meetings between
1 August 1990 and the election in November 1990, you say, do you, that
2 Mr. Krajisnik was present at at least some of those meetings?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. How many such meetings were there during that period, August to
5 November 1990?
6 A. I don't know how many, but there were several.
7 Q. Mr. Kljuic, we're in the same territory we were last September. I
8 know, or I accept, Mr. Kljuic, that often such estimates will have to be
9 only that and that you may very well not be able to say there were nine
10 meetings or seven meetings, but we had a lot of exchange in September
11 about very loose words like "several." So as best you can estimate with a
12 number rather than a word, how many such meetings do you say there were
13 between August and November 1990?
14 A. I don't know exactly. There were days when two meetings were held
15 depending on the day.
16 JUDGE ORIE: It's perfectly clear that you do not know an exact
17 number. No one asks an exact number. What we're asking is the fairest
18 estimate you could make of the numbers of meetings in that period of time.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, you allow Mr. Stewart
20 to put to me questions about a number, and then when I give an approximate
21 number, I have to substantiate it. I could tell you, of course, that I
22 had hundreds of meetings with Karadzic.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Just answer the question. If there were hundreds,
24 tell us that there were hundreds, which I take then to be anything between
25 100 and 200 or 300. If you say there were approximately 20, I will
1 understand that there is most likely between 15 and 25. Tell us.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is possible that there were 10
3 meetings where we were -- where there were two parties, the HDZ and the
4 SDS, or where there were all three parties, HDZ, SDS, and SDA.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
6 MR. STEWART:
7 Q. And an estimated number, Mr. Kljuic, please, only? How many of
8 those meetings do you say were attended by Mr. Krajisnik?
9 A. I was only referring to those meetings where I believed
10 Mr. Krajisnik was present as well.
11 Q. Well, Mr. Kljuic, I wasn't. My question -- you referred to these
12 interparty meetings. I did not qualify by reference to Mr. Krajisnik's
13 presence. I asked you how many such meetings.
14 So including -- I'll have you ask you again then, Mr. Kljuic,
15 including all these meetings, how many estimated number during that
16 period, August to November 1990?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, just to make it quite simple: Interparty
18 meetings, Mr. Krajisnik present, you said approximately 10. Yes?
19 Interparty meetings Mr. Krajisnik not being present in that period of
20 time, how many, approximately?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have to explain something first in
22 order for you to understand me. We had daily contacts between Karadzic,
23 Izetbegovic, Jure Pelivan and myself. Now, the question is what do you
24 consider to be an official meeting, and what is a meeting when we sit at a
25 desk and have coffee together and discuss issues, what it is to be called
1 because the latter types of meetings were more frequent. There were
2 meetings where we were one on one, there were meetings when we were
3 talking about the elections, what sort of joint statements we would make,
4 and of such meetings, there were perhaps 10.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And of that kind of meetings, but now without
6 Mr. Krajisnik present, interparty meetings where you would make joint
7 statements of the meetings, that seems to be rather formal meetings, how
8 many of them without Mr. Krajisnik?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpertation] Of meetings between Karadzic and
10 myself, there were a much greater number as well as of working groups.
11 That is, there was a larger number of working groups. But you have to see
12 what the atmosphere was that prevailed in the period of the collapse of
13 communism when they were allowing political parties for the first time.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Tell us first how many approximately of those
15 relatively formal meetings, as you described them, of which there were 10
16 with Mr. Krajisnik present and how many were there of similar meetings
17 approximately Mr. Krajisnik not being present?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Of official meetings of
19 delegations not attended by Mr. Krajisnik, there were only a few. And as
20 for official contacts between individuals from the SDS and the HDZ, there
21 were very many of those.
22 JUDGE ORIE: And would those very many be the ones Mr. Krajisnik
23 present or Mr. Krajisnik not present?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He was not present.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
1 MR. STEWART:
2 Q. So you do specifically recall 10 of these relatively formal
3 meetings between August and November 1990 at which Mr. Krajisnik was
4 present; is that correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Well, Mr. Kljuic, I put it to you that is just wrong, that
7 Mr. Krajisnik did not attend such meetings at which you were present
8 during that period. I'm asking you to agree or disagree with that
9 proposition I just put to you.
10 A. Dear gentlemen, I have come here on the basis of a law signed
11 between my country and the Tribunal. It is my civic duty --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, the question put to you is quite simple.
13 You gave an answer of 10 of those meetings. Mr. Stewart says it's the
14 position of the Defence that this is not a true answer. Do you agree or
15 do you not agree? It's quite simple.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please, you first asked me to give
17 you an approximate estimate so I said it was approximately 10. Now you
18 are strictly saying was not 10. What would I have to do? Seek out
19 witnesses. There were very few witnesses attending those meetings. I do
20 not claim that there were 10.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, the only question put to you is whether
22 the answer you gave was with all the approximation in it, whether it was a
23 correct answer. You answered the question; Defence says it's not the
24 right answer. You agree or you disagree; it's as simple as that. I take
25 it from what you said until now that you disagree with that.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do not agree with that.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That was asked to you two minutes ago. If you
3 would just have said, "I disagree with you." That would be enough. Yes?
4 Please proceed.
5 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 Q. Mr. Kljuic, you're referring to your civic duty. Can I
7 understand, is it your -- you're regarding it as your civic duty, are you,
8 to come to this Tribunal, give this Tribunal all the help you reasonably
9 can in relation to the facts relating to Mr. Krajisnik's case, and to tell
10 the truth? Is that a fair summary what you regard as your civic duty?
11 A. Yes. It is not only in respect of Mr. Krajisnik. I have been in
12 this capacity in regard to a number of cases.
13 Q. And specifically in relation to this case where Mr. Krajisnik is
14 on trial, you regard it as your duty to give all the help you reasonably
15 can to get to the truth; correct? You're nodding. Please say yes.
16 A. Yes. Yes.
17 Q. So if all the help you reasonably can includes requests to you to
18 provide documents that anybody involved in this case might regard as
19 relevant, then you would loyally and conscientiously comply with that
20 request, would you?
21 A. We solved this last time, you know. Although this does invade my
22 privacy, I did agree to disclose the documents that I have in my
23 possession. What other documents do you want from me?
24 Q. What I'm just wanting to get clear, Mr. Kljuic --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, the matter of the documents does not
1 need any revisiting at this moment.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. STEWART: I have a short submission in relation to that, Your
4 Honour, but it will wait rather than inconvenience everybody with inviting
5 the witness to be taken out of court. But I would like just to reserve
6 that I do have a very short submission in relation to the reason for that
7 question. But it will wait, Your Honour.
8 Q. The -- Mr. Kljuic, you're recorded by yourself, as it happens, in
9 relation to Mr. Karadzic as saying: "I simply cannot explain but I had a
10 special kind of superiority over Karadzic. It exactly corresponded to a
11 superiority that a gentleman from the city would have over a little
12 peasant from the Dermitor mountain."
13 They're quite graphic. Do you agree that those are your own
14 words, Mr. Kljuic?
15 MR. HARMON: If Your Honour -- counsel could direct us to the page
16 in the transcript or another reference, it would be helpful.
17 MR. STEWART: It's actually in one of the documents which was
18 supplied by Mr. Kljuic to the Tribunal since the last hearing. I've got
19 it as a number 15, but then that may be simply the numbering in the note
20 I've been given. It's been described as it's a -- it's four pages of
21 typewritten material.
22 Your Honour, I don't have copies of all this right now but it's
23 one of Mr. --
24 MR. HARMON: That's helpful, thank you.
25 MR. STEWART: Good, I'm always delighted to help.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 So we could find it, Your Honour, easily, if necessary.
2 Q. Mr. Kljuic, first of all, do you agree that -- accept or agree
3 that those are your own words?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And you stand by them, do you?
6 A. I certainly do.
7 Q. Did you, in those -- any meetings or discussions you had with
8 Dr. Karadzic between August and November 1990, did you convey to him or
9 did you hide that feeling of superiority?
10 A. Why should I hide it from Mr. Karadzic seeing that we had known
11 each other for between 25 and 30 years? Mr. Karadzic was, a priori,
12 against any kind of a Bosnia and Herzegovina, and on a number of times he
13 tried to get my involved in such a conversation.
14 Q. Mr. Kljuic, did you feel a similar special kind of superiority
15 over Mr. Krajisnik?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Now, Mr. Krajisnik, is, of course, not by any possible factual
18 basis a little peasant from the Dermitor mountain. But leaving that
19 aside, have you felt and do you feel any intellectual superiority over
20 Mr. Krajisnik?
21 A. No. We are two totally different persons. And another thing: In
22 our communication, in our interchanges, Mr. Krajisnik was always very
23 correct, which was not the case with Karadzic. And thirdly, with
24 Mr. Krajisnik, we never discussed the subjects that we discussed with
25 Karadzic. I, in fact, think that, formally observed, our relations were
1 very correct, apart from the several key meetings where we disagreed on
2 the issue of the general policy to be pursued in respect of Bosnia and
4 Q. When you say in that last bit of that answer that you think that
5 "formally observed, our relations were very correct," you're talking
6 about the relations between you and Mr. Krajisnik, are you, there?
7 A. Yes, I am.
8 Q. Do we understand that you do not take the view that your relations
9 with Dr. Karadzic were very correct?
10 A. Well, I have to tell you that Mr. Karadzic's behaviour was very
11 often infantile, rude, and needless to say, as such, it necessarily
12 elicited a reaction on my part. He would say, "There will be no Bosnia
13 and Herzegovina. We shall kill you all." And then I would tell him, "No,
14 there will be a Bosnia and Herzegovina as it has existed up until
15 now." And this is the way in which I had to talk to Mr. Karadzic. With
16 Mr. Krajisnik, I did not have that kind of relationship.
17 Q. Mr. Kljuic, I'm going to try and English phrase and see if it
18 comes across to you in with an appropriate meaning in your own language.
19 Did Dr. Karadzic have a tendency to shoot from the hip? Does that
20 come across as a clear question?
21 A. You could put it that way. You could put it that way. But
22 Mr. Karadzic did not have a vision of a "denouement" regarding the future
23 of Yugoslavia, or the future of Yugoslavia.
24 For instance, he would not adopt -- accept the norms of the
25 Helsinki Conference, for instance.
1 MR. STEWART: Was the word that came across in English
3 I think that's rather a question to the interpreters, Your Honour.
4 That's what I thought I heard.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The interpreters are invited, the missing
6 part on the transcript.
7 THE INTERPRETER: That is the word, "denouement," the unravelling.
8 MR. STEWART: It's a wonderful French word, and I just wanted to
9 check that that was incorporated in that English sentence.
10 JUDGE ORIE: From what I do know is that not in English is the
11 same as in French.
12 THE INTERPRETER: It is in the English dictionary.
13 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry, I should make it plain: It is very
14 normal to use it in English, Your Honour, and I applaud the interpreter's
15 use of it. I just wanted to be clear what the word was. That was all.
16 Q. The -- I hesitate to use the phrase "these meeting." But meetings
17 between August and November 1990, at least some of the meetings that you
18 have referred to are among the meetings of which you made notes, are they?
19 A. No, not from those meetings.
20 Q. Were they not sufficiently important to take notes?
21 A. No, they were in a sort of a transition, you know. Everything was
22 actually subordinated to the problem of how to win the elections, how to
23 conquer communism. And there were no major disagreements on that score.
24 Where there were disagreements, there was a disagreement is where they
25 wanted actually to reduce the number of Croats on the Presidency.
1 The idea was three Muslims, two Serbs, one Croat, and one for the
2 rest, for others. And I have to tell you that at the time, we supported
3 the SDS --
4 Q. Mr. Kljuic, you're very keen to tell us about something I haven't
5 asked you about at the moment. Thank you.
6 Do you know who else was elected for the Sarajevo region at the
7 1990 -- who else apart from Mr. Krajisnik was elected for the Sarajevo
8 region in the 1990 elections?
9 A. You mean to parliament? I'm not quite clear what you are asking
11 Q. Yes, I do mean that, Mr. Kljuic.
12 A. Well, there were a number of SDS deputies. They had 72 in the
13 parliament from Sarajevo --
14 Q. Sorry, Your Honour. Thank you.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, the question was whether you know who
16 else apart from Mr. Krajisnik was elected from the Sarajevo region.
17 Nobody is asking you how many deputies there were in general, just do you
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, there were a number of them.
20 One of them was the lawyer Bosinic.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Any other names?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Maksimovic, perhaps.
23 MR. STEWART:
24 Q. Mr. Kljuic, I don't want to spend along time trying to dredge up
25 the names. I'm going to put a number of names to you then.
1 Maksimovic and the person you have just mentioned are the only
2 ones that immediately come to mind for you, are they?
3 A. Yes. Bosinic and Maksimovic.
4 Q. Najdanovic; is that right?
5 A. Najdanovic, yes, yes. That's quite possible. Yes, he was a
7 Q. From the Sarajevo region elected at the 1990 elections. Nodding.
8 Please confirm a nod with a yes for the record.
9 A. Yes, yes.
10 Q. Mijanovic?
11 A. Yes, Professor at the faculty of political sciences, Mijanovic.
12 Q. Buha?
13 A. Yes. Professor at the faculty of philosophy, Buha.
14 Q. Trbojevic?
15 A. Yes. And I think he was a lawyer, Trbojevic.
16 Q. And Mr. Krajisnik, do you remember, was in fact in ranking of
17 votes was the last elected. He got the last -- the last place from the
18 Sarajevo region; do you recall that?
19 A. No.
20 Q. You're saying you don't dispute it you're just saying you don't
21 remember it. Is that the position?
22 A. I'm saying that I don't remember how many votes who got. I did
23 not consider that important.
24 Q. When Mr. Krajisnik was the president of the Bosnia and Herzegovina
25 Assembly, do you agree that he ran that Assembly as Speaker in a fair and
1 efficient manner?
2 A. Neither fair nor efficient.
3 Q. Was that -- we'll look at those separately. But do you say --
4 since clearly you're saying he didn't run it either fairly or efficiently,
5 do you say that that was the position right from the outset when
6 Mr. Krajisnik first took the position or was elected to the position of
7 president of the Assembly?
8 A. No. Because initially, the problems of Bosnia and Herzegovina
9 were not topical.
10 Q. I'm not sure that's a completely clear answer, Mr. Kljuic. You
11 started off "no," so are you saying that he conducted --
12 A. Well, can I try --
13 Q. Well, I'll just be clear what I'm looking for. Are you saying
14 that Mr. Krajisnik conducted the Assembly -- the Bosnia-Herzegovina
15 Assembly unfairly and inefficiently from the moment he became the
16 president of the Assembly?
17 A. No.
18 Q. So his unfairness and inefficiency emerged sometime later; is that
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Are they, for these purposes -- can we take it -- tell us if
22 they're separate, but there came a point at which in your view he began to
23 conduct the affairs of the Assembly unfairly and inefficiently, did there?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. When was that point?
1 A. The problem of the work of parliament as well as of other state
2 institutions was actually emerged when the debate started on the future of
3 Bosnia and Herzegovina. The SDS advocated the view that we had to remain
4 in Yugoslavia, a part of Yugoslavia, and after everything that Milosevic's
5 regime had done in Croatia, and then also afterwards, in parts of Bosnia
6 and Herzegovina, the majority of the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina
7 would not remain in Yugoslavia, did not want to remain in Yugoslavia.
8 Q. Mr. Kljuic, you've already given some evidence about these
9 underlying currents, important currents, in the politics of Bosnia and
10 Herzegovina. I am asking you, specifically as you can manage, when
11 Mr. Krajisnik began to conduct the affairs of the Assembly as president
12 unfairly and inefficiently.
13 A. When we were to condemn the aggression of Milosevic and the JNA on
14 Croatia; when we were to stop the mobilising of the citizens of Bosnia and
15 Herzegovina into the Yugoslav Peoples' Army; when we needed to embark on
16 the preparation of a referendum for the independence of Bosnia and
18 Q. So are we taking it -- does it begin around the middle of 1991, is
19 that what you're saying, around the summer of 1991?
20 A. Yes. Yes.
21 Q. The SDA and the HDZ, between them, had a majority in the Bosnia
22 and Herzegovina parliament, didn't they?
23 A. They did.
24 Q. And do you agree that those parties quite frequently wished to
25 curtail discussion and debate and move to a vote?
1 A. That may have been so. But no one's speeches in parliament were
2 curtailed, and perhaps that was the reason for the parliament's
4 Q. Mr. Kljuic, I should make it clear straight away, I don't
5 challenge in the least your last answer that speeches were not curtailed.
6 Was that, in your view, one of the main pieces of inefficiency in the
7 running of the Assembly from mid-1991 onwards?
8 A. The reason probably was the -- that the peoples' parties did not
9 have a united stand in relation to the coming out of the crisis, the
10 resolution of the crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina. But the manifestation
11 of disunity was in evidence in parliament because many deputies
12 deliberately spoke, often debating unimportant issues, in order to block
13 the work of the Assembly.
14 Q. And you regard that as an inappropriate thing for a
15 democratically-elected deputy to do, do you?
16 A. Well, I believe that to have been an abuse. But the manner in
17 which Mr. Krajisnik presided over Assembly sessions was inefficient also
18 because sometimes he failed to sanction very vituperative insults based on
20 Q. Mr. Kljuic, I want to ask you about a number of points in your
21 evidence already given in this case.
22 So Your Honour, I --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
24 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. We'll be looking at the
25 transcript, which I hope Your Honours have conveniently available. The
1 transcript begins, the whole session with Mr. Kljuic begins around
2 page 6.060 of the continuous transcript.
3 JUDGE ORIE: If you could give us the dates, Mr. Stewart.
4 MR. STEWART: Yes, of course, Your Honour. Monday, the 27th of
5 September, 2004, and then the following few days, I think, continuously.
6 Q. Mr. Kljuic, you said, and the reference for everybody's note here
7 is 6.088, beginning at line 17. Mr. Kljuic, obviously I'm going to read
8 out the relevant passages to you so you fairly understand the context.
9 What you had said, and this is your own evidence, you said: "One
10 day President Tudjman asked me why I wasn't cooperating with the Serbs,
11 probably because of the time that he had already established contact with
12 Milosevic. I think that they had a telephone line in constant use. I
13 arranged for a meeting of the Serbian and Croatian leadership in Bosnia
14 and Herzegovina. On the Serbian side there was the late Koljevic, there
15 was Krajisnik and Karadzic. The meeting was held in Krajisnik's office in
16 the Assembly. On our side, in addition to myself, there was the minister
17 Jerko Doko and Ivko Stanic, my vice-president. That was a key moment at
18 which it was possible to see the balance of forces we, who were in favour
19 of an independent Bosnia and Herzegovina, wanted to recognise the borders
20 of Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro, because if we did so, then Bosnia
21 wouldn't be an issue because no one would have any territorial desires.
22 On the other hand, the SDA and Mr. Izetbegovic recognised Serbia,
23 Montenegro and Croatia. As president, I recognised Serbia, Montenegro,
24 and Croatia."
25 Now, that, as I understand the context of your evidence,
1 Mr. Kljuic, that meeting took place, didn't it, in the autumn of 1991?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Can you remember more specifically than that? If you can't, you
4 can't; I'm just asking.
5 A. About the meeting itself?
6 Q. Just if you can be more specific about the date than autumn of
7 1991. If you can't, you can't.
8 A. I cannot. But there is a written record of it somewhere.
9 Q. Did you make any sort of note yourself of this meeting?
10 A. I did not. But I drew up a summary of it after the meeting.
11 Q. Now, you say that this meeting was held in Mr. Krajisnik's office
12 in the Assembly and I --
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. -- put it to you very specifically, Mr. Kljuic, that it did not.
15 So if I put it to you that it did not, well, your choice is to agree with
16 what I'm putting to you or to stick to your previous evidence that the
17 meeting was held in Mr. Krajisnik's office.
18 A. I stand by my testimony. And this Honourable Chamber, if Their
19 Honours want to double-check this, they can all Jerko Doko and Ivko Stanic
20 as witnesses. They are alive and well.
21 Q. So you are, as far as one can be, you are sure that that's right.
22 There's no doubt about your recollection of it being in Mr. Krajisnik's
23 office. Is that what you're saying?
24 A. It was in the Assembly building in the office of the Speaker of
25 the Assembly.
1 Q. And you are sure, are you, that -- well, on the Serb side, you're
2 sure that Dr. Karadzic, Mr. Koljevic, and Mr. Krajisnik were all present?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. When you made your note, as you describe afterwards, did your note
5 record who was present?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Is that note a note that you still have?
8 A. If the note is not among the papers that I have brought over here,
9 I will retrieve it for you in Sarajevo.
10 Q. How quickly would that be possible, Mr. Kljuic, just as a
11 practical matter?
12 A. I cannot say. When I return home, I first have to locate it, make
13 a photocopy of it, and then hand it over to an officer of the Tribunal. I
14 don't know what your source is and even less what your intention is, but I
15 do know that there are these people who can confirm what I'm saying. You
16 can invite them here.
17 JUDGE ORIE: May I understand it that your answer is that you need
18 a couple a days, a week, to retrieve it and to copy it? Because that was
19 what the question was.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Even less than that.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
22 MR. STEWART: Yes.
23 Q. Mr. Kljuic, may I simply invite you very briefly not to concern
24 yourself, please, with my intentions which may cloud your view of my
25 questions and lead you to stray from a direct answer. Please, Mr. Kljuic.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 You -- the same day of your evidence that was given in September,
2 you were shown a transcript and the -- of an intercepted conversation
3 between Mr. Ratko Mladic and Mr. Krajisnik. And the intercepted
4 conversation was played to you, of course it was in your own language.
5 First of all, Mr. Kljuic, just an introduction, do you have any
6 particular recollection of that conversation as it was replayed to you
7 when you gave evidence in September?
8 A. I don't remember specifically because I listened to several such
9 intercepts. I don't know which one you have in mind.
10 Q. Yes, I'm just trying to keep it as short as possible not to have
11 to go through the whole thing again. If I read the first few lines?
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Harmon.
13 MR. HARMON: Your Honour, may I intervene and attempt to be
14 helpful. There is a note that was provided by Mr. Kljuic, it has a note
15 number 14 and it does describe a meeting that took place in the office of
16 Mr. Krajisnik, and it does refer to the people who he has referred to. So
17 that may be of some assistance to Mr. Stewart in -- and it may be of some
18 assistance to the Chamber as well.
19 MR. STEWART: Yes, well that would -- that is and potentially
20 could be of very great assistance. Thank you for that. I will
21 double-check that straightaway in what's probably the fairly imminent
22 break, Your Honour. Thank you for that. Perhaps I'll come back to that.
23 Q. We can proceed to the conversation between Mr. Mladic and Mr.
24 Krajisnik. There's a certain amount of introduction - I'm trying to short
25 circuit it, Mr. Kljuic - there is a certain amount of introduction and
1 then Mr. Mladic says and this is at the foot of page 6.094, Your
2 Honour. "I have given Tolimir some instructions at the fronts and
3 elsewhere everything is all right. Here, I still don't have exact
4 information on the area towards Ivan Sedlo but I hope we'll manage. How
5 to" --.
6 And then there's a reference to robbery of cars in Vogosca. And
7 then a little later on, middle of the page, 6.096, Mr. Mladic
8 says: "Civilian police should take care of this. I told that same thing
9 to that guy in Vogosca. They told me people from the Ministry of the
10 Interior should take control of this."
11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm trying to do it without going
12 through the whole transcript again.
13 Q. Your conclusion, Mr. Kljuic, which is at page 6.098 of the
14 transcript. You were asked by Mr. Harmon at line 20, "Could you tell me
15 your views as to what Mr. Krajisnik's knowledge of the situation on the
16 ground reflects?"
17 Answer: "Well, obviously he was well informed if the chief
18 commander of the Serb army was reporting to him and seeking instructions
19 or at least very often if not every day."
20 And then Mr. Harmon concluded his questions of that intercept.
21 Mr. Kljuic, where do you get, and if you need to refresh your view
22 by reference to the contents of the transcript, then please say so, but
23 where do you get the last bit of that, that the chief commander of the
24 Serb army was reporting to Mr. Krajisnik and seeking instructions or at
25 least very often, if not every day?
1 So far as the frequency is concerned, where do you get that from?
2 A. Firstly, the relationship between Mr. Mladic and Mr. Krajisnik is
3 very clearly manifested in this conversation. During the war, the
4 intelligence services in Bosnia-Herzegovina engaged in shadowing Serb
5 leaders. That included tapping their conversations. So very often, they
6 would intercept the conversations between General Mladic and his
7 command -- like the one that is best known is "We should shell Pofalici
8 because there are no Serbs there."
9 Several other conversations indicate that Mr. Krajisnik was well
10 informed. For instance, Mr. Mandic --
11 Q. Mr. Kljuic, it seems that we're not getting very directly towards
12 an answer to the question. From what knowledge of yours do you draw your
13 conclusion as expressed to the Trial Chamber that the commander-in-chief
14 was reporting to and taking instructions from Mr. Krajisnik very
15 frequently if not every day?
16 A. When I said every day, that was just an assumption of mine. As
17 for the rest, they are based on the intercepts that I had occasion to
18 listen to here in The Hague and some of them I also listened to in
20 Q. So far as that particular intercept is concerned - and I have to
21 repeat my invitation that if you can't answer without refreshing yourself
22 as to its overall contents, please say so - are you able to add any
23 additional facts from your own knowledge which supplement the intercept in
24 the sense of giving more explanation of the contents of the intercept than
25 can be got from reading it?
1 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm feeling the difficulty. Although
2 it's time consuming to do it, I'm feeling the difficulty that it's not
3 entirely fair to the witness to ask him questions here on something that
4 he hasn't read and haven't looked at for several months.
5 JUDGE ORIE: It would be a good idea to give to the witness the
6 transcript in B/C/S of the intercepts during the next break. We're anyhow
7 close to our next break. And ask him to read it and then answer your
9 Are there any other intercepts you would like to deal with, Mr.
11 MR. STEWART: Yes, there's one other, Your Honour, and that's the
12 intercept of a telephone conversation between Mr. Krajisnik and Mr. Mandic
13 which is referred to at page 6149.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would it be possible to, because if we want to
15 provide the witness with the transcript, of course, the transcript of the
16 hearing is usually not the best -- is not the clearest source for that
17 because it's all in lines-- it's just spoken words whereas it's not
18 clearly separated off who is speaking, who is -- the two sides of the
19 telephone conversation are not always clear on the transcript.
20 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I think we -- can I just comment on
21 that Your Honour. First -- there are two points, really. One the
22 intercept as it appears on the transcript is what we have got and what is
23 in evidence there.
24 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. There's also the transcript in evidence
25 under the tab number --
1 MR. STEWART: No, I -- Your Honour, I understand that. But it's
2 what we actually have to work from.
3 But the other thing is, Your Honour, I think in accordance with
4 some discussion then a direction, in fact considerable care from this
5 point before this point in the case, considerable care was taken in the
6 transcript to make that identification of speakers because previously, we
7 had run into difficulty. So it does cope with that, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Let's see. If you could provide the registry with
9 the tab numbers where she could find it, that would be most easy. If not,
10 then perhaps a -- that part of the transcript could be copied, the
11 relevant portion highlighted and then given to the witness.
12 Mr. Kljuic, would you be willing during the next 20 minutes to
13 read those transcripts so that you have it fresher in your mind when
14 questions are put to you?
15 Then we'll adjourn until 1.00 and I take it together with Madam
16 Registrar that we'll practically solve the problem. Could I ask the
17 witness for this reason -- do you transport it to him or how is this
18 practically done?
19 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
20 JUDGE ORIE: The material will be brought to the witness so --
21 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: If you sort that out. We will adjourn until 1.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 12.40 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 1.06 p.m.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I promised you that you Chamber would
1 consider your written submissions and your oral submissions in addition to
2 that. We have done so. This is our decision on the application that you
3 have made pursuant to Rule 73(B) to appeal the Chamber's oral decision of
4 this morning on the matter of Mr. Kljuic's notes.
5 The Chamber this morning ruled that the Defence was given an
6 opportunity to continue its cross-examination of the witness immediately
7 and that there would be no delay to await the receipt of Mr. Kljuic's
8 notes before proceeding to the cross-examination. The Chamber recalled
9 that none of Mr. Kljuic's notes were in evidence and informed the Defence
10 that once the Defence had received the notes and has had them translated,
11 the Defence would then be in a position to decide whether any additional
12 submissions are needed.
13 The Chamber instructed the Defence that if finally it wished to
14 make additional submissions including perhaps a request for further
15 cross-examination of the witness, it should do so in a written motion to
16 the Chamber.
17 In the course of the short coffee break this morning, the Defence
18 prepared a list of reasons in support of its application for a certificate
19 to appeal the Chamber's decision and I'll make further references to those
20 reasons below.
21 The Prosecution did not express an opinion on the application.
22 The Chamber recalls the words of Rule 73(B), namely, that the Chamber may
23 grant certification "if the decision involves an issue that would
24 significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings
25 or the outcome of the trial, and for which, in the opinion of the Trial
1 Chamber, an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber may materially
2 advance the proceedings."
3 In the Chamber's view, the Defence has not succeeded in meeting
4 this test. In the first place, the Defence has not specifically addressed
5 the test in the Rule. It mostly gave reasons why it disagrees with the
6 Chamber's decision.
7 The Defence does not know at this stage whether any of Mr.
8 Kljuic's personal notes are relevant to the Court's understanding of the
9 witness's evidence or his credibility. This is, of course, acknowledged
10 by the Defence as can be seen in the second and the fifth item in its list
11 which talk about the potential relevance of the notes.
12 The Chamber, of course, does not disagree with the Defence that
13 the notes are potentially relevant. In the Chamber's view, however, to
14 delay the proceedings just in case something might turn out to be usefully
15 relevant and probative is not acceptable. This observation goes to the
16 expeditious conduct of the proceedings.
17 Moreover, the Defence is not correct to suggest that the delay
18 would have been a brief one, as it does in points four and nine of its
19 list. The documents would have to be translated for the Defence but also
20 for the Prosecution and the Chamber before their use court could be
21 practical. That entails a longer delay.
22 As for the fairness of the proceedings, the Defence refers to the
23 detriment to the Defence of having to proceed without the material but
24 gives no further reasons. In the Chamber's view, the fairness proceedings
25 is not compromise the by the Chamber's decision since the Defence is
1 entitled to make further submissions on the notes if need be. The Defence
2 is in a position to cross-examine the witness on the basis of the evidence
3 on the record. This is not an issue for which an immediate resolution by
4 the Appeals Chamber is required.
5 This concludes our decision on the Defence application.
6 Mr. Stewart, are you ready to continue cross-examination of
7 Mr. Kljuic? Then I'll ask Mr. Usher to escort him into the courtroom.
8 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. While that's happening, may I --
9 nothing to say about that; Your Honours have decided. But while
10 Mr. Kljuic is coming in --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Usher, could you ...
12 MR. STEWART: May I ask this. It's not intended to be a sour note,
13 Your Honour, it's a practical one. There clearly has been a breakdown in
14 communication over the last few days, and Your Honour, we suggest that it
15 would be appropriate for the Trial Chamber very specifically inquire how
16 that happened, because we do all rely upon -- and specifically the Defence
17 were in effect invited to rely upon those channels of communication by the
18 Trial Chamber and through the Victims and Witnesses Unit. And something
19 has gone wrong, Your Honour and the Defence apart from anything else would
20 like to know specifically what it was.
21 JUDGE ORIE: We'll certainly pay attention to that because it's --
22 whatever else it is, it would have been better if the communication would
23 have been successful. But we do not know the reasons yet.
24 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
25 MR. STEWART: Yes, Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Q. Mr. Kljuic, before we go to those intercepts, I just want to ask
2 you, you -- about the note or whatever it is of the meeting which you have
3 described in your evidence in September or in the autumn of 1991, the
4 meeting that was held at the suggestion of Mr. Tudjman.
5 Your Honour, the reference in the transcript was 6.088.
6 And item 14 of the documents which, 17 documents, I think it is,
7 which you did supply in the interim between your last appearance and this
8 week does relate, on its face, to that meeting but I want to ask you about
10 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, apart from my initials and
11 Mr. Krajisnik's initials to indicate that I handed it over to him, I have
12 an unmarked copy of the B/C/S handwritten version.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please. Give it to the usher so Mr. Kljuic is
14 able to look at it.
15 MR. STEWART: All I've marked on it is NS/MK and my initials and
16 today's date.
17 MR. HARMON: I have a cleaner copy if the Court finds it helpful.
18 MR. STEWART: Well, if it's even cleaner, then that's marvelous.
19 And then I can have my sullied version back.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 Q. First of all, without going to the contents in any detail at all,
22 Mr. Kljuic, can I just invite you to just cast your eye down it and
23 confirm that it does relate to that meeting that was under discussion in
24 the last session in the autumn of 1991 at the suggestion of Mr. Tudjman.
25 A. Yes, I've looked at it. I remember this document.
1 Q. So you agree, it does, on its face, relate to that meeting?
2 A. Yes, I do.
3 Q. But it looks, Mr. Kljuic, and please confirm whether this is so,
4 it looks as it is -- as if it is a draft section for your proposed book;
5 is that right?
6 A. Well, you could put it that way. This is a text which was drawn
7 up after that meeting, several days after that meeting, because that same
8 evening when the meeting took place, I went to Zagreb. And this fragment
9 will certainly be given a prominent place in my book.
10 Q. Well, Mr. Kljuic, I'm suggesting a little bit more specifically
11 than that. Let's look at it on the English, it's at the bottom of page 1,
12 and I hope you can pick it up. Do you see the reference to AVNOJ borders.
13 There's a paragraph, a couple of lines paragraph as something Mr. Koljevic
14 is reported as saying, "Tell us, Stjepan," and then a quite long
15 paragraph, do you see that? I'm just asking you to find the paragraph at
16 the moment.
17 A. Yes, yes, yes, here it is.
18 Q. There's a long paragraph ends: "I would present this in Zagreb as
19 my personal achievement and say that the BH SDS does not support war and
20 that you too truly want peace and the quickest possible end to the war in
21 Croatia. There was a hush. And then all three of them got up from their
22 armchairs. We cannot do that and we should never agree to it. I stood
23 up too and said, 'I'm very sorry, I do believe'..."
24 Mr. Kljuic, it's very clear, isn't it, that this is not a note of
25 a meeting. This is written to be a passage in a book, isn't it?
1 A. This is the way it happened at the meeting. I fail to see any
2 difference between how it was at the meeting and how it will be in the
3 book and how it is on this piece of paper.
4 Q. That's not my question, Mr. Kljuic.
5 A. This corresponds to the truth.
6 Q. That's not my question, Mr. Kljuic. I'm specifically not asking
7 you at the moment about the contents. I'm just asking you so as to
8 identify what it is.
9 Do you accept that it is written to be -- no doubt subject to
10 finalisation and editing and so on, it is written to be a passage in your
12 A. No -- yes and no. This was written post festum, after the events
13 that took place.
14 Q. We'll agree about that, Mr. Kljuic, that's absolutely obvious.
15 If we look about four paragraphs from the end, there's a paragraph
16 that says: "Two days after these failed negotiations, I went to see
17 Tudjman in Zagreb."
18 Do you see that paragraph?
19 A. Yes, I do.
20 Q. So this was written at the very, very least after the two days
21 after the failed negotiations. So the very earliest it could possibly
22 logically have been written is three days or so after the meeting;
24 A. Possibly. It's quite possible. And perhaps even ten days after
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. Well, Mr. Kljuic, that's where -- we're together so far on that
2 then. Have you, in fact, any idea how long after these events this
3 particular document was written?
4 A. No, I have no idea.
5 Q. Mr. Kljuic, was it written straight from your recollection of the
6 meeting or was it written from some note that you had prepared after the
7 meeting but before you wrote this document?
8 A. No. This was written straight from my recollection. This was so
9 important a meeting that it is still today etched in my memory.
10 Q. So the -- just to get it straight, you don't know from what you
11 said exactly how long after. It could have been three days, it could have
12 been ten days. Absolutely nothing in between the meetings recorded --
13 between the meeting and this document recorded in writing. That's what
14 you're saying?
15 A. That is what I'm saying, probably. You're asking me about things
16 that took place 14 years ago, whether there had been any other meetings or
17 events between this meeting, this particular meeting and my notes. This
18 is the way I perceived that meeting. It was a painful meeting for me, and
19 it heralded in a way that there would be no peace in Bosnia and
20 Herzegovina, and it also heralded everything that was to transpire there
22 Q. So when you record people in this document as having said
23 something in direct speech, that is not, then, and cannot be an exactly
24 correct representation of what -- of the words they said, can it?
25 A. Mind you, what they said was, "We can never and we will never
1 recognise it," and this is the authentic way it happened. And they speak
2 in unison, the three of them.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, that was not the question. The question
4 was where you quote people in these notes that since you may have written
5 it somewhat later, that these does not necessarily are the literal words
6 spoken by those persons. I'm not talking about the gist of their
7 observations but about the literal words.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I tried to portray, to reflect
9 as faithfully as possible, the words. But talking about the three of
10 them, talking about the three of them specifically, I can claim with a lot
11 of certainty that I portrayed what they said quite faithfully because it
12 was very short and very clear.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I take it from your answer that it might not be the
14 literal words of them but that it reflects the gist of what they said.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. What they said, I wrote that
16 down. I definitely did.
17 Your Honours, this is not just your ordinary dialogue or your
18 regular sentence. This is the sentence, the sentence that determined the
19 future and the further course of events.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, the issue is: Whether after three, five,
21 seven or ten days, whether a memory would allow someone to reproduce
22 literally the words spoken or whether the memory, the human memory, would
23 allow someone only to give, to reflect the gist of what was said coming,
24 perhaps, close to these literal words but not necessarily being the
25 literal words. That's the only thing that's asked of you.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that is an academic
2 debate and we can have such a kind of debate on the entire text. But
3 their response, "We cannot do that. We can never agree to that," is
4 definitely quite correctly reflected.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
6 MR. STEWART:
7 Q. So all three of them got up from their armchairs, "We cannot do
8 that and we should never agree to it." I'm trying not to be too flippant,
9 they didn't then say that in unison, Mr. Kljuic, so you've got it as
10 direct speech. Who said it?
11 A. All three of them.
12 Q. To music? Mr. Kljuic ...
13 A. I don't know whether they were exactly synchronised, but all the
14 three of them did say that. And that is something that I will remember
15 for as long as I live.
16 Q. Mr. Krajisnik is not otherwise recorded except as part of that
17 supposedly harmonious group, Mr. Krajisnik is not otherwise recorded as
18 having said anything at this meeting. Is that correct? Well, it's clear
19 he's not recorded as saying anything. Is it correct that he didn't say
20 anything then himself of any significance?
21 A. Mr. Krajisnik was presiding over the meeting. He was sitting in
22 the middle. On his left sat Karadzic -- was sitting, rather, and on his
23 right, Koljevic was sitting.
24 Q. Mr. Krajisnik didn't say anything of significance then; is that
1 A. He did not say anything significant but he did speak. He gave
2 introductory remarks about the needed cooperation, the exchange of views,
3 joint positions on the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina. There were
4 different platitudes there; there was a lot of it. But when we came to
5 the in medias res point, when we came to the essence of things, his
6 response -- sorry.
7 THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, the interpreter corrects herself.
8 A. The response was clear and short.
9 MR. STEWART:
10 Q. You refer to the defence minister Jerko Doko - is it correct -
11 what we've got in English, this is the first large paragraph in this
12 document, the one that begins with "Franjo Tudjman constantly put pressure
13 on me."
14 Do you see that, that big paragraph at the beginning of the
15 document? I'm just asking you to see the paragraph first.
16 A. Yes, I do.
17 Q. And near the bottom of that paragraph, you say, what we got in
18 English is: "My defence minister Jerko Doko checked this with the Konjic
20 Do you see that?
21 A. Yes. Yes.
22 Q. It's correct, is it, in your own language, it says, "My defence
24 A. Yeah, yes.
25 Q. Why did you describe him as "my defence minister"?
1 A. Well, you have to know that in the government, there were Serbs,
2 Bosniaks, Croats, and that the Minister of Defence was a Croatian, Jerko
3 Doko, and he was my man in a very special way.
4 Q. So he was just to get this straight, he was the defence minister
5 for Bosnia and Herzegovina but you described him here as "my defence
6 minister" because he was a Croat?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. That's why you were readily able to use him to check up on the
9 truthfulness or otherwise of your vice-president Boban's excuse for not
10 attending the meeting?
11 A. Jerko Doko was a man in whom I placed special trust and he was
12 there with me every day. It is only natural that I asked of him to
13 double-check the reasons for Mate Boban's failure to show up. On the
14 other hand, Boban went to Sarajevo only rarely and regardless of the fact
15 that I was the president of the HDZ until the 2nd of February in 1992,
16 Boban pursued parallel relations not only with Karadzic but also with some
17 of the Muslim leading figures.
18 Q. Let's just try and short circuit this, Mr. Kljuic. You clearly
19 didn't trust Boban; correct?
20 A. To tell you the truth, I never paid much attention to it because I
21 was the president and he was only a deputy in the parliament.
22 Q. Mr. Kljuic, you had your defence minister, as you have described
23 him, check up specifically on Boban's excuse and found out that he'd lied
24 to you, didn't you? He, Boban, had lied to you. That's what happened,
25 wasn't it?
1 A. Well, I did not know that he was lying at that point in time.
2 That's why I sent Mr. Jerko Doko to check up on that matter. I merely
3 realised that he failed to appear for a scheduled meeting.
4 Q. Let's move down the page. Back to that paragraph, it's a
5 different point though, before that there was a hush, the paragraph
6 containing the reference to the AVNOJ or Anti-Fascist Council of National
7 Liberation of Yugoslavia.
8 Do you see that?
9 A. No -- oh, yes, I do, here it is.
10 Q. What was that group?
11 A. First of all, the Serbs in Belgrade and in Sarajevo, had they
12 recognised the AVNOJ borders, there would have been no border. The AVNOJ
13 borders were recognised under the Yugoslav constitution from 1974 and the
14 Badinter's commission.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kljuic, could you carefully listen to the
16 question and focus on the question while answering and not making
18 MR. STEWART:
19 Q. The we was what was that group. Who were they, where did they
20 come from. I think the question is clear, Mr. Kljuic, what was that
21 group? Simple.
22 A. Which group?
23 Q. That group, the Anti-Fascist Council of National Liberation of
25 A. Mr. Stewart, this was the session of the parliament of the
1 citizens of Yugoslavia fighting against fascism at which session the
2 Federative Peoples' Republic of Yugoslavia was established. This was held
3 on the 29th of November, 1943 in Jajice. It was then that Yugoslavia
4 containing six republics was constituted. Its borders were defined that
5 are still recognised as valid borders of the republics which once formed
7 Q. Mr. Kljuic, what was AVNOJ?
8 A. AVNOJ was the wartime parliament of the Anti-Fascist Council of
9 the National Liberation of Yugoslavia.
10 JUDGE ORIE: When you say "wartime," you're referring to the
11 Second World War?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
14 MR. STEWART:
15 Q. But, sir, the AVNOJ, I think you said, AVNOJ borders were the
16 actual borders of Croatia as recognised within the federation of
17 Yugoslavia before Croatia's declaration of independence; is that right?
18 A. Yes. Not only Croatia's borders but those of all the republics.
19 Q. So in shorthand, then, they were the official recognised borders
20 before all this conflict broke out in early 1991?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Though the request here was for the Bosnia and Herzegovina SDS to
23 recognise -- to recognise this secession of Croatia simply in toto as
24 it -- as it existed with its established recognised borders?
25 A. Since both Milosevic and the Bosnian Serbs did not recognise these
1 borders, but rather sought that the borders be revamped, redrawn, we
2 insisted that they accept the borders as they were because just as Bosnian
3 Croats and Muslims had recognised Slovenia, Croatia and sought for
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina as well, then there would no longer be any motive for
5 any conflict, war and aggression.
6 Q. So this was a request to the Bosnian Serbs, well, particularly the
7 people at this meeting, that this was a request to them, in effect, to
8 accept and recognise the independence of Croatia entirely as Croatia
9 wanted it in accordance with the declaration and decision made by the
10 Croatian parliament around the spring of 1991. Is that right?
11 A. A request was sent to them here to recognise the AVNOJ borders but
12 not the independence of Croatia. This was to become an issue later on.
13 But it is true that the declaration on independence had been passed in the
14 Croatian parliament earlier on.
15 Q. Well, Mr. Kljuic, I'm just looking at what you write here in that
16 paragraph. This is you quoting yourself as best you recalled it: "In
17 keeping with our joint efforts to put an end to the war in Croatia as soon
18 as possible and to prevent it from spreading to Bosnia and Herzegovina,"
19 you, and that's the Bosnian Serbs, of course: "You would make a splendid
20 move as the Bosnia and Herzegovina SDS if you recognised the Republic of
21 Croatia with its AVNOJ borders."
22 Now, Mr. Kljuic, that plainly, as it's written, contains two
23 elements: Recognition of Croatia and with its borders, doesn't it?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And recognition of the Republic of Croatia, if it had any sense at
1 all in the context of this meeting, meant recognition of the independence
2 of Croatia, didn't it?
3 A. That's correct.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, I'm looking at the clock. If you could
5 find a suitable moment within the next one or two minutes.
6 MR. STEWART: How about in the next one or two seconds, Your
7 Honour, I can do it.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 Mr. Kljuic, we have not finished yet your cross-examination. We'd
10 like to see you back tomorrow, and I take it that you will give your full
11 cooperation for the copying of the material that is not yet handed over to
12 the Tribunal. It will be given to -- through the Victims and Witness Unit
13 to the registrar and will be available for consultation by the parties.
14 I do understand that most likely, the lost suitcase might be
15 retrieved before 3.00 today - that's the expectation - which is in line
16 with my experience with lost suitcases. Let's hope that it will.
17 May I instruct you not to speak with anyone about your testimony,
18 either given or still to be given.
19 THE WITNESS: [In English] May I ask you.
20 [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will now proceed to my hotel, and
21 may an officer of this Tribunal join me there. We will there make
22 photocopies of the material which will then be distributed here.
23 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
24 JUDGE ORIE: As soon as your suitcase has been retrieved, you will
25 be informed and of course you will receive the suitcase. If you would not
1 mind to give the material, because copying in a hotel sometimes is a bit
2 more difficult, it is in the hands of the Registry, of no one else. It
3 will first go to the Registry. They'll copy it. We have of course the
4 facilities here; it will not be lost. It will then be given to the
5 parties and will be returned to you after that. Then we would like to see
6 you back tomorrow morning.
7 [The witness stands down]
8 JUDGE ORIE: I have two small issues.
9 The first one is Mr. Trbojevic. Mr. Trbojevic, we would like to
10 see him back next Friday viva voce -- yes, this Friday. When I say next
11 Friday, I mean the first one to come. I do understand that Mr. Trbojevic
12 is or will be approached by the Victims and Witness Unit. We hope that
13 all the arrangements can be made in order to have him in Court Friday.
14 Then, Mr. Stewart, the Chamber still awaits your submissions in
15 relation to Mr. Bjelobrk.
16 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour, I was going to mention that. I am
17 aware of that, and Your Honour will receive those in the course of the
18 afternoon. I hope that's in accordance with Your Honour's direction.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it is today, it is Monday, yes. We'll then wait
20 for it and we'll look at that as soon as it has been filed.
21 MR. STEWART: Thank you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Any other issue at this moment?
23 If not, we will adjourn until tomorrow morning, 9.00, same
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.,
1 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 12th day of April,
2 2005, at 9.00 a.m.