1 Wednesday, 18 January 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.22 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
7 Mr. Josse, I do understand that you would like to raise two
8 issues, one very brief procedural one, another one taking a bit more time
9 and necessarily raised in private session. Would you agree if we do that
10 after the first break?
11 MR. JOSSE: Certainly, Your Honour. In fact. . That would suit
12 Mr. Harmon, who needs to be present for at least one of those issues.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then let's do it after the first break. But I
14 had forgotten to ask the registrar to call the case.
15 Mr. Registrar, would you --
16 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case number
17 IT-00-39-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik. Thank you.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much, Mr. Registrar. So therefore at
19 this moment we could continue the examination-in-chief of Mr. Kapetina.
20 Mr. Kapetina, I'd like to remind you that you are still bound by
21 the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your testimony
22 that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
23 Mr. Josse, would you please proceed.
24 WITNESS: DRAGAN KAPETINA [Resumed]
25 [Witness answered through interpreter]
1 Examined by Mr. Josse: [Continued]
2 Q. Mr. Kapetina, the first thing I want to ask you about this
3 morning -- or this afternoon, more to the point, relates to international
4 law and your role in advising the army to respect, for an example, the
5 Geneva Convention. What personally did you do in that regard?
6 A. I said that after the National Assembly session on the 12th of May
7 in Banja Luka was held, we started drafting the regulations and provisions
8 with regard to respect for international war law. And within the
9 frameworks of that activity the ministry prepared three provisions, the
10 first of which was an order on the application of the provisions on the
11 international war law with the president of the republic of the head of
12 the country, and also two further instructions and guidelines by the
13 president of the republic about conduct on prisoners of war and
14 instructions with respect to the application of the Geneva Conventions.
15 And I took part, of course, in the elaboration of these provisions. All
16 the provisions were passed by the end of June that same year.
17 Q. Are you able to help at all as to how, if at all, these provisions
18 were disseminated among the army?
19 A. Yes. Those provisions were urgently distributed right up to the
20 level of the Main Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska, and the duty
21 everybody had was that the commander -- or rather, the commander of the
22 Main Staff had the obligation of issuing orders that those provisions
23 reach every man down the chain of command to the lower formations and
24 units. This set of instructions - they weren't long instructions, they
25 covered just one or two pages - that they should reach each and every
1 member of the Army of Republika Srpska, and that's what was done.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse, may I seek, in order to better understand
3 the testimony of the witness, some clarification.
4 You used the words "international war law" several times in one of
5 your answers, and you referred to the Geneva Conventions and the
6 applicability of the Geneva Conventions. Is it your testimony that
7 because the armed conflict ongoing was of an international character that
8 the Geneva Conventions would apply, or would they apply for any other
9 reasons, apart from the character of the armed conflict? Could you be a
10 bit more specific in that respect before we continue with how these
11 decisions and how these regulations were conveyed to the troops.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We did not pass those provisions
13 because the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina had the character of an
14 international conflict; it was in fact a war conflict and the rules, and
15 regulations of international war law provide for conduct within a war and
16 the conflicts in war. So that's why we incorporated that law into the
17 conflict that we had. It wasn't of an international character, but
18 nonetheless the international war law does provide for and prescribe for
19 conduct in conflicts generally. So we decided to apply those provisions
20 to the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm afraid it has not fully clarified my
22 question, because again you are talking about international war law, which
23 seems to be a reference to the law applicable in international war. Or
24 would you say the international law applicable in domestic or in armed
25 conflicts of a non-international character? Because there, of course, the
1 international law -- at least the Geneva Conventions would not fully
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I said that we otherwise in
4 our army, in the Yugoslav People's Army, that is, respected the special
5 rules governing conduct in a war conflict. We had special manuals with
6 these rules written down, and from the conventions I mentioned we took
7 over the sections dealing with conduct towards prisoners of war and
8 civilians and the rights of civilians during a war and the rights of
9 civilian protection during a war. So we incorporated all that, took them
10 into account, and drafted our own provisions and instructions for the
11 army's behaviour and conduct, which means that we didn't take over the
12 entire code of the international war law, but just what could be
13 applicable to the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina. We took that over and
14 incorporated them into the three provisions that I spoke about earlier on.
15 Perhaps there was something additional, but I can't think of that at the
17 They weren't any broad provisions; they were very succinct ones
18 and fitted in the space of two pages, the instructions and provisions, so
19 that they could be used as a pocket edition, if I could put it that way,
20 which every soldier could carry in his pocket. And the basic premises of
21 war law and how soldiers behave towards civilians, towards prisoners of
22 war, towards the members of the civilian protection, civil defence system,
23 and so on and so forth, towards international organisations or
24 representatives thereof. And I think I've clarified that now.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whether it has been fully clarified is another
1 matter, but I'll -- I'll refrain from asking further opinion. You have
2 not been called as an expert on legal matters, and apart from that there's
3 an old Latin saying "ius curia novia," which means the Court knows the
5 Judge Hanoteau.
6 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Maybe you've already said this
7 earlier yesterday but I forgot, who took the initiative to write down this
8 regulation and who took the initiative of circulating it? Maybe you're
9 going to repeat what you said already, but I don't remember what you said.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't think I mentioned it. I
11 don't know where the basic idea came from, who it came from, but I do know
12 that the task was set by the minister of defence, who was Bogdan Subotic.
13 So most probably it was his idea or whether it was perhaps suggested to
14 him by somebody else, I really can't say.
15 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Yes, but could you tell us
16 exactly. You said that you weren't many in the ministry, maybe two only,
17 two people. So how were you asked to do it? Were you called? Did you
18 get a written instruction to do it? Or did you just talk with the
19 minister, you know? Could you please elaborate on this, if you remember,
20 of course.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I said was that the minister
22 said that we should urgently undertake the preparation of these
23 provisions. Of course we had very scant literature on the subject at
25 However, as I say, from the previous systems, that is to say, the
1 system on -- in the Yugoslav People's Army, those rules and regulations
2 did exist. Provisions about international war law, the Geneva
3 Conventions, and so on. So with the scant literature that we had at our
4 disposal at that time, we undertook to prepare those three provisions with
5 the material we had at hand. I think that at that time we had a number of
6 people in the ministry, five to ten people, who were engaged in the
7 implementation of the provisions, but they worked in Sarajevo in the
8 ministry there, like I did myself.
9 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] So there was no need for the
10 Assembly to intervene; it was just circular letters that were sent,
11 regulations, and it was under the mandate of the ministry, right, it was
12 their competence?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes. It was the Ministry of
14 Defence that had the duty of preparing the regulations. The first order
15 was signed, as I said, by the president of the republic, Mr. Karadzic, and
16 then we distributed all those regulations up to the level of the Main
17 Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska. And the commander of the Main
18 Staff further issued orders for the distribution to call units lower down,
19 and to each and every rank-and-file soldier. I think those regulations
20 exist. I don't think they've been lost. And you can see all the
21 provisions and regulations.
22 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Josse.
24 MR. JOSSE:
25 Q. Perhaps you should make this clear, Mr. Kapetina. You've already
1 told the Chamber that you are a political scientist by training. Is that
3 A. Yes. I graduated from the faculty of political science in the
4 department for defence.
5 Q. You've had no formal legal training. Is that right?
6 A. I did not have any formal training, but I was included in the
7 drafting of provisions, both at federal and republican level, mostly
8 provisions within the field of planning.
9 Q. And it's also clear from your evidence that you have spent the
10 whole of your professional life working as a civil servant in the field of
12 A. Precisely. For almost 20 years I worked in the state
13 administration, and all my work -- years of work I devoted to matters of
15 Q. Now, you have given some evidence a few moments ago about the
16 drafting of various documents and directives in relation to international
17 law. I now want to ask you about what information came to your knowledge,
18 and indeed the knowledge of the ministry, in 1992 about crimes being
19 committed by soldiers in the field?
20 A. In that whole year of 1992, you had different periods and
21 different situations in which the state administration of the Serb
22 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina had to work, and the Bosnian
23 Herzegovinian government and Serbian republic thereof. For example, the
24 period of May, when I came to Pale, and perhaps until the end of July or
25 perhaps even the end of August, the territory on which the government --
1 in which the government worked and its departments of the Serb Republic of
2 Bosnia and Herzegovina was to all intents and purposes cut off from the
3 other parts which were under the control of the Army of Republika Srpska.
4 I, of course, am not in a position to demonstrate this to you on the map,
5 but I'll try and do my best to explain it to you. The government from
6 Pale controlled practically the entire area up to the Sokolac municipality
7 and Vlasenica as well. The Serbian municipality in Sarajevo could not be
8 controlled because they were cut off. The roads had been cut off, and
9 there was a by-road that was being built. But Podrinje and all this area
10 was cut off, and you had to -- could only reach those municipalities via
11 Serbia and Montenegro.
12 Now, as to the municipalities in the Banja Luka region,
13 Banja Luka, Prijedor, Doboj, that general area, you could only communicate
14 with that area when the corridor was broken through at Brcko. So that was
15 the period, May, June, July 1992.
16 And I spoke about the communication road network. I said that all
17 the other communications were down as well, all the other means of
18 communication, so that the government during that period of time did not
19 have a complete insight into the situation on the ground, nor did any
20 reports come in on any regular basis about the situation in the areas
21 under the control of the Army of Republika Srpska so that the government
22 didn't know, in fact, about many of the events and crimes that had been
23 committed. It was just not informed about those things. When I say "the
24 government," of course I mean that in addition to the government and its
25 departments at Pale, there was also the Presidency that was located at
1 Pale and the president of the National Assembly.
2 So as I say, that was the objective situation that reigned during
3 those three or four months; of course later on the situation improved.
4 But throughout the year of 1992 that was how it was. For example, the
5 government didn't have any links in connection with Herzegovina at all
6 during that time. There was no road communication; you couldn't reach the
7 area by road. You couldn't get to the municipalities in the Herzegovina
8 region. As I say, the situation improved later on by the end of 1992 and
9 especially in 1993 when there was a greater compactness in the area under
10 the control of the Army of Republika Srpska.
11 Q. And you've given a long - the Chamber will think - useful
12 background to communication problems. How did that impact on knowledge of
13 what was going on in the field? Perhaps I should be a bit more specific.
14 So far as crimes are concerned?
15 A. Well, I forgot to mention in my answer to your question the fact
16 that the army was actually being created in the second half of June and in
17 the month of July. It was under creation, so that the army wasn't fully
18 organised yet either. It didn't have all the formations and units that
19 the law provided for --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kapetina, I'm going to stop you. You spent a
21 very, very long answer by giving all kind of circumstances which might
22 have prevented information to reach Pale. The question was whether any
23 information reached. You made a distinction between what roads were
24 closed, what routes to go, et cetera. You told us that in June -- May,
25 June, July the situation was different; and then you said later on that
1 it remained the same during the rest of the year.
2 The question is quite simple: What information was received about
3 crimes committed? And perhaps, since you made the distinction, what
4 information was received in May, June, July? Any information, yes or no?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm going to speak in concrete
6 terms. Throughout 1992, from May when I started working in the ministry
7 until the end of 1992, not a single piece of information reached the
8 ministry about war crimes committed in the field, not one single piece of
9 information. We had certain instructions, of course --
10 JUDGE ORIE: I was not asking about instructions. I was, at this
11 moment, seeking to find out whether any information reached you. You
12 said: "It did not reach the ministry."
13 Are you aware of any such information reaching the government,
14 apart from specifically the ministry you worked in?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What I know is that there was a
16 problem with the government as well because the government had no
17 information --
18 JUDGE ORIE: No --
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- on the ground.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not asking whether there was a problem for the
21 government. I wanted -- I asked you whether your answer specifying that
22 the Ministry of Defence in May, June, July did not receive any
23 information; whether, as far as you know, the same is true for the
24 government as a whole.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, this related to
1 the whole government.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Now we go to the remainder of the year. We are now
3 in August up till December. Was any concrete information received by your
4 ministry, to start with, about crimes committed in the field?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Ministry of Defence to the end
6 of 1992 didn't receive a single piece of information coming into it from
7 the field about any crimes having been committed nor about any prisons.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Now, same question as far as the whole of the
9 government is concerned. August and following months, 1992. Any
10 information received on crimes committed or, as you said, prisons? And if
11 I could extend that to camps as well. Any information for the whole of
12 the government?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I remember, when the
14 Ministry of Justice was formed of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and
15 Herzegovina, and when a man was put in charge of penitentiaries and
16 supervising penitentiaries, he did submit a report to the government. And
17 that's when that question started to be debated at government meetings.
18 So this assistant in the Ministry of Justice compiled a report, which I
19 didn't read, I'm afraid, on the situation in penitentiaries and
20 correctional centres. And then the government was informed about such
21 things for the first time, about the situation in those facilities, in
22 prisons, the existence of prisons, and so on. But I didn't have that
23 information to hand. And I don't know which period this applied to.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And would this information not reach the
25 ministry in which you worked, apart from you personally?
1 MR. JOSSE: Can I interrupt, Your Honour. Does Your Honour mean
2 and did this information or should it have done -- would this
3 information --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, perhaps --
5 MR. JOSSE: It's not clear in that respect.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I should be more specific.
7 Are you aware of this information you just talked about, which was
8 then, as you said, subject of debate, did that reach your ministry as
9 well, apart from whether it reached you personally at that moment?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If the information was prepared and
11 a report was prepared for a government meeting and was on its agenda, then
12 my minister would have had an information of that kind because he attended
13 government meetings. I, myself, could not ask to be given that material,
14 material from government meetings, and as the minister offered to give
15 them to me myself. So I didn't have an insight about it and I didn't read
16 the report, but I did hear that it was up before a government meeting.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So where you earlier said that the Ministry of
18 Defence to the end of 1992 didn't receive a single piece of information
19 coming into it from the field about any crimes having been committed nor
20 about any prisons, then that would not necessarily include information
21 that came through this report. Is that correct?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Josse.
24 Judge Hanoteau has a question for you.
25 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] What I don't understand in your
1 testimony is the following: The ministry you were working for, what
2 connection was there between the -- your ministry and the army? You said
3 there was no information provided on the crimes that were committed or on
4 the prisons that existed. However, was there any regular contact between
5 your ministry and the army in those areas where it was difficult to
6 communicate? In other words, let me be more specific. Does this mean
7 that the military was totally cut off from the field and cut off from
8 their men in the field, or was nonetheless one way of communicating or
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Ministry of Defence was not in
11 the chain of command of the military, so the minister of defence did not
12 make any decisions relating to command in the army. The ministry did have
13 a relationship with the army as far as logistics was concerned, and also
14 there was some relations in the army that were under the authority of the
15 Ministry of Defence.
16 I don't think that the commander of the Main Staff informed the
17 defence ministry about everything. Some things they probably informed the
18 president of the republic directly. So we did not receive all the reports
19 from the Main Staff commander; the minister of defence did not receive
20 them. We had reports from his assistants regarding logistics requirements
21 in the army, also perhaps some things relating to promotions, appointment
22 to certain posts, and so on and so forth. So we were not cut off from the
23 army. We did communicate on these matters, but we were not authorised to
24 command. That was in the jurisdiction of the president of the republic,
25 but we did have duties in regard to the logistics matters and supplying
1 the army.
2 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Which means you did not
3 communicate over any such matters as combat operations or military
4 assignments that were -- or military operations that were unfolding at
5 that time. In other words, the Ministry of Defence did not receive any
6 such reports?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely. We did not receive any
8 reports about operations, about battles. And under the law, the army was
9 not obliged to give us these reports. There was no General Staff section
10 within the Ministry of Defence; that section was in the Main Staff. And
11 that section was directly responsible to the president of the republic.
12 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse, I apologise, but I'd like to ask a
14 question related to this to the witness.
15 Witness, you extensively explained to us that no reports about
16 what happened in the field as far as crimes are concerned were received,
17 and you explained extensively that that was because of communications and
18 transportation problems. You also told us that the instructions as how to
19 behave in the conduct of warfare were disseminated up to the lowest
20 levels. What I do not fully understand yet is that communication seems to
21 be working, at least -- and if you give these instructions that it
22 reach -- that it reaches the lower levels, whereas the communication in
23 the other direction would be totally blocked, as -- from what I
24 understand. Could you explain -- so apart from whether you had any
25 authority in -- in the operational sense why instructions could be
1 communicated to the lowest levels and why there was no way of receiving
2 any information, whatever that information would have been, from the lower
3 levels up again.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I will try to explain.
5 Instructions that I spoke about, which you mentioned, were sent only up to
6 the Main Staff, and the Main Staff was at Han Pijesak and the
7 communications went to Han Pijesak. So those regulations or those
8 instructions, we would copy them, multiply them, and then send them to the
9 Main Staff. And then the Main Staff was supposed to distribute that using
10 its own lines down to the corps, and then the corps was going to pass that
11 on to the lower-ranking units and so on and so forth.
12 The Main Staff was obliged to send it to seven points, which is
13 where the corps were. And then the corps was supposed to pass them on to
14 lower-ranking units. This wasn't a perfect system. There were problems
15 there, but the army had helicopters, other means; the state did not. I
16 know that all the communications that we had with Herzegovina were carried
17 out by choppers via Montenegro and not through Bosnia and Herzegovina.
18 That's how these communications proceeded.
19 I would like to explain something else, too. In peace nobody
20 commits a crime publicly; crimes are always concealed. That's why we
21 didn't have any information about these crimes. Nobody publicly committed
22 any crime and then announced that through the media. Crimes were
23 generally committed covertly. Nobody publicised that. If we knew about
24 such problems, we would -- had we known that, we would have informed the
25 military prosecutor's office and the military courts, and then we would
1 have been --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In your explanation you now give a totally
3 different reason for not receiving that information, because, as you say,
4 it was concealed. Earlier you said that the instructions were signed by
5 Mr. Karadzic, and then we distributed all those regulations up to the
6 level of the Main Staff of the army. And the commander of the Main Staff
7 further issued orders for the distribution to call units lower down, every
8 rank and soldier.
9 When I asked why messages would not go up through the same
10 communication channels, I now understand your testimony to be - but please
11 correct me if I'm wrong - that it was not that there were no communication
12 channels, but people would -- that those who may have been committed
13 crimes would have concealed those crimes, and that for that reason it did
14 not go up in the same communication channels. Is that a correct
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that we didn't have
17 information about crimes until the end of 1992. I assume why this
18 information was not reaching us. It's an assumption. We practically did
19 not have a single piece of information or any insight about what was going
20 on in the field regarding crimes or any camps; that is the truth. I
21 assume why information, specifically about crimes, were not reaching the
22 ministry or the organs of power.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's be clear that assumptions should be known
24 as such, because you came up with the assumption first that communication
25 channels and road transportation would have prevented these -- this
1 information to reach the other levels, whereas now we have a totally
2 different assumption, and that is that the -- those who were committing
3 those crimes would have concealed them. I'm not saying that either of
4 them is true or not true, but let's not forget that these now are
5 assumptions and should not be confused with facts.
6 Please proceed, Mr. Josse.
7 MR. JOSSE:
8 Q. I want to ask you about one specific area in this regard, and this
9 might be outside of 1992. Do you have any knowledge of Mr. Subotic
10 visiting Bratunac at any time during the war?
11 A. I really don't have the information that Minister Subotic visited
12 the Bratunac municipality, so I really cannot talk about the time frame
13 either. I don't have that information. I don't know that he visited the
14 Bratunac municipality.
15 Q. Well, did he ever discuss with you the fact that he had been
16 there and been shown at least one Muslim grave?
17 A. Minister Subotic never told me about his visit to Bratunac or any
18 details relating to that.
19 Q. And what about him visiting Muslim graves in general? Can you
20 help about that at all?
21 A. I don't have any information about that.
22 Q. I asked you yesterday about an expanded Presidency, and you told
23 us what you knew of the Presidency of the republic through 1992. I want
24 to ask you how, as far as you understand it, Mr. Djeric fitted in to the
25 scenario, and in particular the expanded Presidency, if at all.
1 A. Branko Djeric was the prime minister. He wasn't a member of any
2 expanded Presidency, neither the regular Presidency or the expanded
3 Presidency. He was simply the prime minister.
4 Q. Could you be given the bundle, please, and turn to tab 8. This is
5 the decision on establishment of the supreme command of the RS army. It's
6 dated the 30th [realtime transcript read in error: "13th"] of November of
7 1992 and signed by Dr. Karadzic. It's being exhibited in this case as
9 Firstly, Mr. Kapetina, what was the supreme command as you
10 understood it? What -- by that I mean the supreme command set up by this
12 A. The supreme command established with this document was an advisory
13 body of the president of the republic or presidents of the Presidency at
14 the time. So it advised the president of the Presidency relating to
15 command matters and the army. So the command is exclusively an advisory
16 body of the president or the president of the Presidency.
17 Q. What makes you say that it was purely an advisory body?
18 A. I say that because it was not authorised to make any command
19 decisions. According to the law, it was an advisory organ of the
20 presidents of the Presidency. After the supreme command there was a
21 supreme council that was established that also had an advisory function.
22 Q. This political command structure was set up for what reason?
23 A. It was established for the purposes of consultations and advice to
24 the Presidency and the president of the Presidency so that we would be
25 able to make decisions relating to army command. Although I never
1 attended a supreme command session, but I did attend sessions of the
2 Supreme Defence Council and mostly some topical issues were discussed.
3 The question of command was discussed least of all. Matters that were
4 discussed were some civilian matters, relations between the civilian and
5 the military parts, and so on. Any decisions that were in the sphere of
6 command were never discussed at the sessions which I attended.
7 Q. I'm not quite clear there. You were talking about the sessions of
8 the Supreme Defence Council that you attended. Is that right?
9 A. That's correct. I did not attend sessions of the supreme command,
10 but I think in 1993 it was when the Supreme Defence Council was formed.
11 And whenever I attended these sessions, I know that questions relating to
12 military command were never discussed.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Hanoteau would like to ask a question.
14 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Yes. I'm a little bit lost,
15 Mr. Josse. I would need some further explanation.
16 This Supreme Defence Council was established in what year and who
17 were the people or the members of this defence council?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know exactly when, but
19 during the war, during the conflict, instead of the supreme command, the
20 Supreme Defence Council was established. It was more or less of the same
21 composition as the supreme command. Occasionally I attended those Supreme
22 Defence Council meetings, and I said that at the meetings there was never
23 any discussion about command of the military. The supreme command was
24 practically not functioning. This was a very brief period. Later the
25 president of the republic took over the command of the military.
1 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] I'm not totally convinced by this
2 answer. Mr. Josse gave us -- submitted a document which is dated 12th of
3 November, 1992. Is that correct? Tab 8.
4 MR. JOSSE: 13th of November, Your Honour. The transcript's just
5 said "13th," I said "30th," 3-0.
6 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Very well. So this body is
7 called "the supreme command of the RS army." Is that correct?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.
9 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [In English] Of the RS army -- [Interpretation]
10 There was another body and a similar body which was established. I think
11 that's what you were saying, wasn't it?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the end of the conflict the
13 supreme command grew into the Supreme Defence Council; this is what I
14 wanted to say. And the Supreme Defence Council had the same function as
15 the supreme command. In item 5 of this decision, it says what the role of
16 the supreme command is.
17 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] And did it include the same
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Supreme Defence Council and the
20 supreme command, completely identical.
21 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 MR. JOSSE:
23 Q. Up till the 30th of November of 1992 when the supreme command was
24 established, who had jurisdiction over operational matters within the
25 armed forces of the Republika Srpska?
1 A. The supreme commander of the military until the adoption of this
2 decision and on the adoption of this decision was the president of the
4 Q. And to clarify that. When you say "on the decision," you mean
5 after the decision the position was the same. Is that right or have I
6 misunderstood you?
7 A. That's correct. Until the adoption of this decision and after the
8 decision was adopted, the supreme commander was the president of the
9 republic, one person. And of course this applied throughout the whole
11 Q. Are you able to comment on the power and influence the president
12 of the republic had over operational matters in the field?
13 A. I wasn't in the president's cabinet, so I assume that he did
14 receive reports from the Main Staff commander. And then based on those
15 reports, he was probably able to and had an overview of the situation in
16 the field, the situation in the army, what was going on at the front, and
17 so on. These reports were not sent to the defence minister, however.
18 Q. What power did the Assembly of the republic have over its armed
20 A. The republican Assembly didn't have any power over the military,
21 the Army of Republika Srpska. The only thing it did was to adopt the law
22 on the army and the defence. It did not have any direct competencies over
23 the Army of Republika Srpska.
24 Q. What about the president of that Assembly? What power did he have
25 over the armed forces?
1 A. The president of the Assembly also did not have any competencies
2 or power in relation to the Army of Republika Srpska. He was simply a
3 part of the Assembly, and he presided over the Assembly. The Assembly and
4 the president of the Assembly had the same competencies. So as president
5 of the Assembly, he didn't have any authority over the Army of
6 Republika Srpska. The function of the Assembly was purely legislative.
7 Q. Specifically I want to ask you about what involvement, if any,
8 Mr. Krajisnik had in the passing of the law on defence that you were, for
9 the most part, responsible for writing?
10 A. The Assembly -- or the deputies had no influence over the law
11 during its drafting stages. The draft laws were submitted by the
12 government. The government was proposing them. The Assembly simply
13 adopted them. I wasn't at the Assembly sessions to know what the debate
14 was like. I know that there were amendments to this law, but in the
15 drafting stage I know that the Assembly had no input at all on these two
17 Q. Well, my question relates specifically to Mr. Krajisnik. Is the
18 position the same for him as the answer you've just given?
19 A. Of course the president of the Assembly and also the deputies.
20 None of the deputies took part in the drafting stages of this law. The
21 Assembly receives a draft for its consideration, and they can also submit
22 or propose amendments to this draft.
23 Q. A number of specific questions about Mr. Krajisnik. Did you have
24 any personal dealings with him prior to your arrival in Pale in 1992?
25 A. No, we didn't have any person dealings.
1 Q. After your arrival in Pale, did you have any dealings with him,
2 again personally, in 1992?
3 A. No, I did not. I had no personal or official dealings with
4 Mr. Krajisnik. My first contact with him was - I don't know exactly what
5 period this was - was when the Assembly concluded that it was necessary to
6 adopt an urgent law on military courts and military prosecutors.
7 Q. Tell us about that, please.
8 A. As I said, I don't know the time period, but I know that I was
9 invited to President Krajisnik's office and that I was told that there
10 were these conclusions, that we needed to quickly adopt laws on the
11 military courts and military prosecutor's office, that this was a matter
12 that had to be brought urgently before the Assembly. There were already
13 some questions about competencies in relation to military personnel and
14 soldiers. So this needed to be done as soon as possible. What the
15 competencies were of military courts and prosecutor's offices and what
16 were the competencies of civilian-such organs, this had to be done
17 together with the justice ministry. The draft proposals for these two
18 laws had to be done very urgently.
19 Q. What about dealings that Mr. Krajisnik had with the Ministry of
20 Defence in general in Pale in 1992, rather than with you specifically?
21 Can you help us about that, please?
22 A. Well, I don't know of any dealings or specific relations between
23 the president of the National Assembly with the ministry. I think that he
24 did not have any dealings or special relations vis-a-vis the defence
25 ministry. I even know that Minister Subotic told me that he had some
1 relationships and was being invited by President Krajisnik. And if we --
2 actually, if we received invitations, they were from the president of the
3 republic to deal with the situation in the army. And I and Mr. Subotic
4 never said they were invited by Mr. Krajisnik, the president of the
5 National Assembly, whether they were called by him to discuss any
6 problems. So that was -- he -- they were not called --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And I had nothing to do with
9 dealings with the ministry of the army.
10 MR. JOSSE:
11 Q. Well, similar to the correction, you just quoted to saying: "I
12 even know that Minister Subotic told me that he had some relationships and
13 was being invited by Mr. Krajisnik."
14 Is that what you just said, please?
15 A. I didn't understand your question.
16 Q. Well, you are quoted in English as having just said, and I
17 quote: "I even know that Minister Subotic told me that he had some
18 relationships and was being invited by President Krajisnik."
19 Did you just say that?
20 A. I did not say that. I said that Minister Subotic never told me
21 that he was called by President Krajisnik. And I said that the ministry
22 had no relationships and dealings with the president of the National
24 MR. JOSSE: Well, Your Honour, that's what I had -- that's how I
25 have been so advised, that's why -- obviously why I asked the question.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's perfectly clear, Mr. Josse.
2 MR. JOSSE: Yes.
3 Q. In short, in 1992 what power did Momcilo Krajisnik have over the
4 Army of Republika Srpska?
5 A. No authorisations, no power.
6 Q. I want to ask you briefly, if I may, about what happened at the
7 time of the Dayton Accords and the departure of the Serbs from Sarajevo.
8 Were you involved in a commission at that time dealing with this issue?
9 A. Yes. On behalf of the Ministry of Defence I was a member of the
10 board for the implementation of the Dayton Accords for the Sarajevo
12 Q. And you liaised, among others, with Mr. Krajisnik in that regard?
13 A. Yes. Well, I don't know what function. Possibly President
14 Krajisnik was in that board or -- well, he was either a member of it or
15 a -- the president of it. I don't know what his post was. I, myself, was
16 a member.
17 Q. What stance did you personally take on the Serbs' departure from
18 Sarajevo? Specifically, did you try and persuade Serbs to leave?
19 A. Do you mean my personal attitude?
20 Q. Yes. I'm, first of all, asking you about your personal attitude.
21 A. Well, I know what the attitude of the board was, what stance it
22 took. I could have any separate stance with regard to the board.
23 Q. Fine. What stance did the board take, please?
24 A. The board's stance was that all avenues be explored and see if the
25 people couldn't be kept in the Sarajevo area.
1 Q. And what, as far as you are aware, was Mr. Krajisnik's stance on
2 this issue?
3 A. Well, precisely the same as the board, to exhaust all
4 possibilities and to keep the Serb people in Sarajevo or, rather, in the
5 municipalities in the area of Sarajevo and Serb Sarajevo.
6 MR. JOSSE: Would Your Honour give me a moment, please?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Take your time, Mr. Josse.
8 [Defence counsel and accused confer]
9 MR. JOSSE: That concludes my examination. Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
11 Mr. Tieger, are you ready to cross-examine the witness?
12 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I hope it won't be seen as too
13 lawyer-like if my answer is yes and no. And to give you a full response,
14 I would ask to address the Court briefly in the absence of the witness.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 Mr. Kapetina, Mr. Tieger would like to address the Court in your
17 absence. It must be some kind of a procedural matter, I take it. May I
18 invite you to follow the usher but to remain standing by until we have
19 heard what Mr. Tieger tells us.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you.
21 [The witness stands down]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger.
23 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 I raise again the issue of the 65 ter summaries. Let me say this
25 in brief. With respect to those matters brought to our attention through
1 the 65 ter summary or through subsequent e-mails, indeed, no matter how
2 terse or non-detailed, I'm prepared to proceed and intend to do.
3 With respect to the issue raised in this session, in particular
4 about communications and knowledge of crimes, to the best of my
5 recollection and re-confirmed to the extent that I could by a review of
6 the 65 ter summary and any subsequent e-mails, that matter was not brought
7 to our attention. For that reason, I want to reserve the right to review,
8 at least overnight, the testimony and prepare for any appropriate
9 cross-examination on those subjects.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse.
11 MR. JOSSE: Well --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Let's perhaps first establish, does the information
13 about crimes committed in the field is included anywhere, in your view, in
14 the 65 ter?
15 MR. JOSSE: No, I'm going to concede that.
16 My only observation is that I do contend -- it's slightly bizarre
17 that the Prosecution are not in a position to cross-examine a witness
18 about an issue as central as that in a case such as this.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger.
20 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Mr. Josse tempts me to say it's slightly bizarre
21 to hear a witness like this come in and deny any knowledge of crimes. It
22 takes a considerable amount of effort to amass the materials that are
23 available to cross-examine properly on that subject.
24 JUDGE ORIE: If I would have asked you, Mr. Tieger, whether you
25 were ready to start cross-examining the witness, the answer would have
1 been yes, I take it. Let's be very practical at this. Let's start the
2 cross-examination. Let's see how far it brings us, and let's see whether
3 nature resolves the problem.
4 MR. JOSSE: Could I assist in --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. JOSSE: -- one regard. This probably isn't assistance at all
7 to anyone. But the next witness will not be in this building today. In
8 other words, I won't be in a position to call him until tomorrow. He will
9 be available to begin his evidence tomorrow afternoon but not today.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That makes it even more serious in terms of
11 waste of time, Mr. Josse. Because if Mr. Tieger would finish his
12 cross-examination on all the other subjects, we would be forced to wait
13 until tomorrow before we could continue, if the Chamber would grant the
14 request by Mr. Tieger.
15 But at the same time, Mr. Tieger is invited to consider how solid
16 the information was on whether or not information was received either by
17 the Ministry of Defence or by the government, as a whole. I mean the
18 following: That if you would confront the witness with information that
19 has reached, well, let's say the government or whatever document, the
20 witness said, as far as he knows -- and one could not expect a witness to
21 know everything that happens in the Ministry of Defence, although it was
22 small, neither to know everything that happened in the government.
23 But please think it over. Let's get started with the
24 cross-examination for the first ten minutes, and let's then see whether
25 your request still stands, whether the matter is resolved already by time,
1 and the Chamber will then give a decision.
2 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour. Of course.
3 MR. JOSSE: Could I --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. JOSSE: Could I just ask. Would Your Honour like arrangements
6 to be made for the next witness to be brought to this building?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I couldn't say anything without knowing what
8 Mr. -- how much time Mr. Tieger thinks he would need.
9 MR. JOSSE: Could I say, Your Honour, I would much rather call him
10 tomorrow, but I'm determined, we're determined, not to lose any more time.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. JOSSE: Our time is extremely precious, and if need be, I will
13 get him here. Or arrange for him to be brought here, I think is a better
14 way of putting it.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, we will need some time for the procedural
16 issues after the first break. How much time do you think you would need
17 for the cross-examination of this witness?
18 MR. TIEGER: It's a bit difficult to say, Your Honour, but
19 certainly a session.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. TIEGER: And --
22 JUDGE ORIE: If it's a session, that would fit -- if I would look
23 at what's not a rule, but the 60 per cent guidance, that would bring you
24 to approximately two hours, that's a little bit over one session. Then
25 noting that we would have another -- we'll have another -- let me just
1 see. We'll have two -- another two and a half hours. You might need some
2 time for the procedural issues.
3 MR. JOSSE: We will need to fully explore one of the procedural
4 issues before the next witness begins, commences his evidence.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. JOSSE: That becomes a certainty.
7 JUDGE ORIE: There's little chance -- I take it that there's a
8 fair chance that you would approximately finish this witness, even having
9 heard the procedural issues, by today.
10 Let's proceed for this moment. And, Mr. Josse, the Chamber does
11 not require you to take any additional measures at this moment for the
12 next witness to arrive in this building.
13 MR. JOSSE: Very helpful, thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, just so the Court is aware, I'll try to
16 make an assessment at the end of the next session or at any relevant point
17 during that about how much progress I'm making in light of the --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
19 MR. TIEGER: -- issues intended to cover as well as an ongoing
20 assessment of the need for additional time related to the issue I
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And the parties are invited both to intervene
23 when a witness seems to dwell on a lot of subjects, apart from the
24 subjects that is the core of the question. I did it a couple of times,
25 Mr. Josse. I think that there have been moments where you might have
1 considered to do it yourself.
2 MR. JOSSE: I'll try harder.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 Then we'll --
5 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please escort the witness into
7 the courtroom.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 [The witness entered court]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kapetina, thank you for your patience.
11 Mr. Tieger, counsel for the Prosecution, will start his cross-examination.
12 Mr. Tieger, please proceed.
13 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Cross-examined by Mr. Tieger:
15 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Kapetina.
16 A. Good afternoon.
17 Q. Yesterday you described in response to questions by Mr. Josse the
18 problems that you say you encountered at the Ministry of Defence in 1991,
19 and specifically with the minister of defence. And you indicated in your
20 testimony that as a result you decided to go public with that -- with
21 those problems and those issues. Is that right?
22 A. I said that I wrote a written warning for the Presidency and
23 cautioned the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the government of
24 Republika Srpska --
25 Q. Excuse me. I'm not asking you, I apologise if I was misunderstood
1 to recount your testimony again, simply to confirm with a yes or no
2 whether that summary was correct.
3 I would note for the record that at page 27 of the transcript
4 yesterday you indicated that you decided to go public with that
5 information, as I understood it, in the fashion you just began to
6 describe. Is that essentially right?
7 A. I don't think I said it was my aim to inform the public about it
8 all, but that the public did attend my warning. Yes, it did.
9 Q. In any event, you indicated to the Court yesterday that you did so
10 because of your concern as a professional, that you did so independent of
11 others without being told to do so or pressure to do so by others. Is
12 that correct?
13 A. Precisely.
14 Q. And in fact, it seemed that you wanted to stress that
15 professionalism and independence as a way of assuring the Tribunal about
16 the accuracy of your assessment of the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina
17 at that time. Is that also accurate?
18 A. May I ask you to repeat that comment of yours, please?
19 Q. I'll move on in the interests of time. We really are getting very
20 close to the break.
21 Mr. Kapetina, isn't the real fact of the matter that it was not
22 your idea to send the letter, but it was the idea of the SDS and SDS
24 A. No. The real truth of the matter is that it was my initiative and
25 my letter. I just held consultations with the vice-premier Dr. Simovic.
1 Q. Isn't it also a fact, Mr. Kapetina, that you were effectively
2 activated by the party in 1991 and thereafter followed party instructions
3 and engaged in performing tasks for the party?
4 A. No, that's not true that I was activated by the party in 1991 and
5 that I performed any tasks for the party. And pursuant to instructions
6 from the party in 1991, I was not a member of the party, that is to say,
7 of the Serbian Democratic Party.
8 Q. Well, membership of the party, Mr. Kapetina, and activities in
9 pursuit of party objectives can be two different things, as we shall be
10 discussing after the break.
11 And finally, Mr. Kapetina, isn't it also a fact that you have not
12 been fully accurate in describing to the Court the circumstances
13 surrounding the mobilisation and recruitment issues that prompted -- that
14 were the subject of your letter in 1991 or the circumstances that prompted
15 the decisions by the Bosnian government in connection with mobilisation
16 and recruitment in 1991?
17 A. I don't think that I did explain that to the Trial Chamber
18 yesterday. I didn't enter into the substance of the warning, and I didn't
19 deal with questions of mobilisation and recruitment -- I didn't only deal
20 with questions of mobilisation and recruitment in the warning, and I
21 didn't explain that to the Court yesterday. I didn't even wish to comment
22 the comments made in the journal Narodne Novine either.
23 Q. We'll talk about that shortly, but let me just before the break
24 recall your testimony yesterday.
25 You testified at length about your discussions with Minister Doko,
1 or at least the discussions you say you had with Minister Doko in 1991.
2 You testified at length about your alleged submission of inspection plans
3 and his rejection or refusal to act on those plans. And then you said,
4 again at page 27 of the transcript, that you decided to go public with
5 this information by sending a letter and so on. Correct? I see you
6 nodding, so I assume that that's a fair summary.
7 A. Let me warn you again. Maybe I said that yesterday, although I
8 don't remember saying it, I didn't want to go public. I wanted state --
9 to caution state institutions about the implementation of the law. Now,
10 the fact that this gained publicity is another thing. I personally didn't
11 provide it to the media, to any of the media.
12 Q. Let's not quibble in that case about the term "going public."
13 We'll let the record speak for itself, along with your explanation now.
14 Irrespective of that, what I've just recounted is essentially how you
15 related the background to your letter. Isn't that right?
16 A. Well, it's like this, you see: The situation in Bosnia and
17 Herzegovina at that time in the field of defence was far worse than I
18 depicted it in my letter. It was much worse.
19 Q. I'm not talking about the substance of your letter. I just want
20 to ask you whether or not it's correct that in describing the
21 circumstances that gave rise to your letter, that is what you explained to
22 the Court, that it was fundamentally your discussions with Minister Doko
23 that triggered your determination to send a warning letter to the organs
24 of government you described, that they were acting illegally.
25 A. Of course. And my conversation with Mr. Doko and the overall
1 situation in the field of totally national defence motivated me to write
2 this letter to the Presidency and government because they were the most
3 responsible organs for defence matters.
4 MR. TIEGER: And when we return after the break --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
6 MR. TIEGER: -- we will explore our submission that that's a
7 fundamentally misleading characterisation of the circumstances.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At the same time, Mr. Tieger, before we have a
9 break, would it not be fair to -- if you confront the witness with the
10 reasons he gave to write the letter, that he gave two reasons, the one
11 being the unlawful and unconstitutional behaviour of -- of his minister,
12 who said that he would not respect the laws; and at the same time he also
13 told us that he -- the witness feared that he might end up having problems
14 if he did not inform the highest republican organs that there was no
15 inspection in the republic, which is not exactly the same as that his
16 personal problems that would result from that. Would it be fair to put
17 that to the witness as the two reasons he gave?
18 MR. TIEGER: By all means, Your Honour, and I think the witness
19 heard what the Court said and is certainly in a position to confirm or
20 reject that.
21 JUDGE ORIE: These are the two reasons you gave, yes, because
22 that's more complete than what you've confronted him with.
23 We'll have a break, and we'll restart at a quarter past 4.00, but
24 not for you.
25 Mr. Kapetina, we, again, need some time for procedural issues. So
1 the break presumably will take at least 10 to 15 minutes, if not even a
2 bit more for you.
3 We stand adjourned until quarter past 4.00.
4 --- Recess taken at 3.51 p.m.
5 [The witness stands down]
6 --- On resuming at 4.20 p.m.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse, if we would start with the one-minute
8 issue, that could be done in open session?
9 MR. JOSSE: Yes please.
10 I've had a chance to talk to Mr. Stewart about the general
11 procedural remarks in terms of where the Defence case is going that Your
12 Honour made yesterday. He's anxious for an opportunity to respond in
13 person. He would invite the Court to set aside a short period of time at
14 the beginning of proceedings on Friday, if that meets with the approval of
15 the Court. That is my request.
16 JUDGE ORIE: We'll consider the matter and we'll let you know, or
17 would you need an answer right away?
18 MR. JOSSE: I don't need an answer right away.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then you'll hear from us -- unless there's
20 you'd like to add.
21 MR. JOSSE: Say if there is another time that is more convenient
22 to the Chamber, then of course Mr. Stewart will make himself available,
23 but he is anxious to address the Court orally on the subject.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll consider it. If we would choose for
25 another time, we will not do so without consulting Mr. Stewart first.
1 MR. JOSSE: Thank you very much.
2 Could I mention one other matter in open session --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. JOSSE: -- to some extent that has arisen during the break
5 and it relates to scheduling in one sense.
6 The witness after next, not Mr. Kapetina, not the witness
7 thereafter, but the witness after that who is not seeking protection, and
8 I am not going to mention him by name for reasons that will be clear in a
9 moment. He is in The Hague. We were aware that he had bouts of ill
10 health. That had made his attendance a little bit uncertain. He's
11 arrived here, mentions health problems to us. A member of our team was
12 speaking to him at some length today, broke that meeting off so that the
13 witness could have a break, which was thought necessary. The victims and
14 witness service have contacted -- well, me personally during the break to
15 say that he is no longer fit for further proofing today. They have said
16 that he is sufficiently unwell, if I can put it like that.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. JOSSE: That may have some affect on the schedule. He'll
19 undoubtedly need more breaks than normal when he gives his evidence; I had
20 already been advised of that. That's all I can say. I don't suppose it's
21 very helpful, but at least I'm forewarning the Court.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Josse, it goes without saying that -- and even
23 with full respect for the privacy of the witness, of course the Chamber is
24 more inclined to be very flexible if it knows a bit about the background,
25 about the source, if there's any objective support for what is presented
1 as a -- not feeling well. I'm not saying that we could not accept that,
2 but of course it's better for us to assess to what extent we should take
3 that into consideration if we have more information about it.
4 MR. JOSSE: We will work on that. The reason I mention it is
5 because the information is coming in one sense from an objective source,
6 namely the witness assistant who has been looking after him for the last
7 couple of hours.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Although perhaps not medically trained, but
9 being a human being.
10 MR. JOSSE: Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: And if there's -- I take it that if there's any need
12 for medical assistance, that the Victims and Witnesses Unit will provide
13 that or at least to --
14 MR. JOSSE: In my limited experience, Your Honour can rest assured
15 about that.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's good to have that re-affirmed in court.
17 Then we turn into private session.
18 [Private session]
11 Pages 19994-20010 redacted. Private session.
10 [Open session]
11 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
13 Mr. Tieger, once the witness has entered the courtroom and has
14 taken his seat, you may continue.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 [The witness entered court]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kapetina, as I feared, it took a little bit
18 longer. Again, thank you for your patience.
19 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
20 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Q. Mr. Kapetina, let's begin by taking a look at the intercepted
22 telephone conversation that you listened to yesterday, the one involving
23 Dr. Karadzic and yourself on July 1st, 1991. That's found at tab 4 of
24 the Defence binder.
25 Mr. Kapetina, before I direct your attention to any particular
1 portion of that conversation, let me ask you: That was not the --
2 yesterday was not the first time you had a chance to see the transcript of
3 this conversation. Correct?
4 A. Yes, it wasn't the first time. I saw it when I had the interview
5 with the investigators of this Tribunal.
6 Q. And at that time, before they -- the investigators showed you the
7 intercept, they asked you about contact you had with the SDS leadership in
8 connection with the issue of the letter you sent, and you indicated to
9 them, did you not, that you had not had contact with the SDS leadership in
10 1991 in connection with the letter you ultimately sent about the
11 illegal -- allegedly illegal action of the Bosnian government?
12 A. Yes. That's what I said. I said I didn't have any contacts with
13 the leadership of the SDS.
14 Q. Turn to the intercept itself now, and if I can direct your
15 attention to page 3 of the transcript. And I believe that's both in
16 the -- in the B/C/S version and the English.
17 After a discussion, introductory discussion, between you and
18 Dr. Karadzic, you were explaining a little bit about the implementation of
19 the ministry's function and so on. Dr. Karadzic says: "So I'm asking you
20 to write an official record, that is, a report right now in your capacity
21 as in inspector to the prime minister, to write a report, et cetera,
22 et cetera."
23 You point out that you can only address the government, that your
24 competence only covers the government.
25 And he says: "Look, please write this and send copies to the
1 corps commander and the commander of the TO."
2 And you say: "Well, I thought we should ask for an urgent meeting
3 with the minister this morning and then he could put forward the concept
4 and we would be informed of what he's doing."
5 And Dr. Karadzic says: "You know very well what he's doing and
6 the whole ministry knows -- or every ministry knows what he is doing."
7 Mr. Kapetina, wasn't it the case that it was Dr. Karadzic who
8 raised and insisted on the issuance by you of a formal protest or letter
9 or record and that your idea at the time was just simply to call for a
11 A. No, that's not correct that the initiative was for me to write the
12 warning -- that the initiative came from Mr. Karadzic. That's not
14 If you will allow me to say this. I proposed -- well, I didn't
15 put the proposal to Mr. Karadzic, but I proposed that a meeting be held of
16 the staff of the ministry, because -- so that all of us could present our
17 views to the defence minister.
18 Q. And Dr. Karadzic goes on in the course of that intercept, and if
19 you look now at the bottom of page -- toward the bottom of page 3, he
20 addresses your concerns about the extent of your competence and says to
21 act instead according to your conscience urgently regardless of how far
22 your competence reaches and tells you that you have the right to send a
23 copy of your report to the government, et cetera, to the president of the
24 council for national defence, the corps commander, the commander of the
25 TO, as we see on page 4.
1 And you say: "All right."
2 And then he continues by saying: "Otherwise you'll be
3 responsible," insisting that you carry out your function.
4 And you say: "Agreed."
5 That was the substance of that conversation, was it not,
6 Mr. Kapetina, at least as it was recorded on July 1st, 1991?
7 A. First of all, Mr. Karadzic asks of me to write an official memo or
8 report, which I didn't do. I didn't write an official note. I issued a
9 written caution to the Presidency of the government on the fact that the
10 constitution and law was not being adhered to, and that's quite different
11 from an official note. An official note would have been to say that I
12 wasn't doing my job and what the situation was like in the ministry. I
13 did not write that.
14 Secondly, I didn't accept the suggestion made by Mr. Karadzic that
15 I send a copy to the commander of the Main Staff and the other people
16 mentioned there, because I saw that Mr. Karadzic doesn't understand my
17 position in the Ministry of Defence, and that is why I asked for a meeting
18 with Simovic, who knew full well what my competence and authority was,
19 what position I held and whom I could address.
20 Q. And after talking with Mr. Simovic, you did send a letter to all
21 the parties mentioned by -- at least you sent a letter that went to
22 Mr. Izetbegovic and you copied it to all the parties mentioned by
23 Dr. Karadzic?
24 A. I only sent a caution to the government and the Presidency of
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina, no one else. I didn't send it to anybody else.
1 Q. Are you sure about that, Mr. Kapetina, or is it possible that you
2 did send copies to the other parties? Because that's what you indicated
3 in your interview. You weren't sure; it may have happened.
4 A. I did not -- I wasn't asked that question during the interview.
5 The question I was asked, whether other sides had it. I don't know. I
6 said yesterday that everybody was a member of the council for national
7 defence, and the Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina received my letter along
8 with an invitation to attend a meeting. And they received it from the
9 secretary of the council, along with an invitation to attend the meeting
10 with the meeting's agenda. And I categorically state that I did not send
11 my letter of warning to anybody else but the institutions. I didn't send
12 it to the media either.
13 Q. Well, I'm not going to dwell on this point, but I would note that
14 at page 14 of the interview conducted on July 13th, 2004, you were asked
15 specifically: "Did you send an identical report to the prime minister,
16 the corps commander, and the TO commander?"
17 And your answer was: "I don't think so. And if I did send them,
18 if I did send something to them, then it was just an information because I
19 didn't really cooperate with them. They were not under me."
20 Is that a fair answer? Sorry, that's not a good question.
21 Is that what you said and does that more accurately reflect your
22 recollection of what was sent?
23 A. I'm not sure that that's the way I put it, but you can see from
24 that that I did not send anything to the institutions that you are
25 insisting on.
1 Q. Well --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, may I take it that there's an
3 audio-recording of this interview if -- if the parties would feel that
4 it's of such importance to verify the words of the witness?
5 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour, there is.
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- during the interview.
7 Mr. Kapetina, there is an audio-recording of that interview. So
8 if you -- I don't know, the Chamber might not take any action
9 proprio motu, but at least there is a possibility to verify this. And if
10 you feel uncomfortable with the matter, or if one of the parties would
11 feel uncomfortable with the matter being not verified, there's an
12 opportunity to do so. I just inform you about this so that you know that
13 there is a technical possibility.
14 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
15 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Q. At tab 2 of the Prosecution's exhibits, there's a conversation of
17 a -- a conversation that took place between Mr. Simovic and Mr. Karadzic.
18 It may not be necessary to direct your attention to particular portions
19 of that, Mr. Kapetina. Mr. Simovic indicates in that conversation to Dr.
20 Karadzic that a meeting was scheduled with the Council for All People's
21 Defence because of certain initiatives regarding recruits, particularly
22 the public warning by you, which he describes as "quite a good job."
23 Does that conform with your own recollection that your written
24 warning triggered a meeting of the Council for All People's Defence?
25 A. No. The meeting was not organised or scheduled because of my
1 warning. My warning was just one item on the agenda. The meeting had a
2 much broader significance and there was several items on the agenda.
3 Q. So in any event, your public warning was at least part of the
4 agenda for that meeting and part of the impetus for that meeting?
5 A. It was part of the agenda, but it was not the reason that the
6 meeting was held. It could also have happened for it not to be on the
7 agenda at all.
8 Q. Let's move on, if we can, quickly to the circumstances that were
9 extant at the time of these conversations, July and August of 1991.
10 Now -- and before I address that, let me turn quickly back to your
11 conversation --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, number 2 of the exhibits has not been
13 assigned an exhibit number.
14 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, that would be --
16 THE REGISTRAR: Tab 2 would be P1036, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. TIEGER:
20 Q. Now, if I understood your testimony correctly yesterday, you
21 indicated or testified that Minister Doko told you that he wanted to or
22 hoped to effectively destroy the JNA in Bosnia by preventing or
23 forestalling your inspections. Is that right?
24 A. I didn't say that Doko told me that the JNA would be destroyed if
25 the inspections were not held. I said that there was a certain task and a
1 plan. My personal feeling was that within that plan there was a way to do
2 it, but not through inspections.
3 Q. So the issue of your inspections and whether or not they were
4 conducted had no impact on this plan you're alluding to. Is that right?
5 A. Of course it did. I said what I found later out about Minister
6 Doko's plan. I could have prevented that plan from being implemented, had
7 I gone and toured about 20 different facilities, if I had 20 inspectors to
8 take with me. In this way many other plans could be thwarted as well.
9 Q. Let's be as clear on this as we can. You were not responsible for
10 inspecting the combat-readiness or preparation of the JNA, were you?
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. And you were not responsible for inspecting the combat-readiness
13 or preparation of the Territorial Defence?
14 A. That's correct.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, have you -- done with Exhibit 2?
16 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Looking at tab 2, which is P1036, Mr. Kapetina,
18 Mr. Tieger confronted you with a portion of that telephone conversation,
19 but I'd like to invite you to also comment to another portion of that
20 conversation. I think it's third box from the bottom in B/C/S of page 1,
21 and in English it is page 1, the seventh box from the bottom. Where when
22 Mr. Simovic had informed Mr. Karadzic about the meeting of the Council for
23 All People's Defence, Mr. Simovic says: "This inspector, Kapetina, I told
24 him to do something," which, at least from the language, suggests that he
25 instructed you to do something. Could you help us out whether you have
1 any recollection of any instruction received from Mr. Simovic, and if so,
2 what that instruction was about?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I suggested to Simovic -- or
4 actually, I informed him of what I was intending to do, and all I wanted
5 from him was his opinion, whether he agreed with this, in the sense of:
6 Would I have protection but not whether I would do that. However, the
7 vice-president told me: Mr. Kapetina, whatever you do, you will be held
8 responsible for it. There's nobody in this state who could protect you.
9 The government cannot protect you, the ministers from the government
10 cannot protect you. Whatever you do, you will be the one who will bear
11 the responsibility for it.
12 So I just informed them about what I wanted to do, and I was told:
13 This is something that you're doing at your own initiative because you
14 will not have the protection of the ministers, the Serbian ministers, in
15 the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
16 JUDGE ORIE: So this portion of the intercept -- and in this
17 portion of the intercept, Mr. Simovic does not adequately inform
18 Mr. Karadzic on your conversation. Is that a correct understanding?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He did not convey the conversation
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
22 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
23 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour. Sorry, Your Honour, just one
25 Q. Mr. Kapetina, I told you I wanted to turn to the question of the
1 circumstances that existed at the time and that were part of the decisions
2 being made about mobilisation and recruitment at that time.
3 First of all, this was all taking place in the context of both the
4 discussions of independence concerning Croatia and Slovenia and the
5 concern about imminent conflict in both of those republics. Is that
7 A. I know that changes to the military service law were carried out
8 in 1990. I did not deal with political with issues.
9 Q. Okay. Well, I'm going to tell you then that at this time many
10 people were aware of the fact that Croatia and Slovenia were threatening
11 to leave former Yugoslavia and that there was great concern about conflict
12 between the JNA and those republics, among many of the people in Bosnia
13 and Herzegovina. Did that escape your attention?
14 A. I was also concerned.
15 Q. There were also concerns among many people in Bosnia and
16 Herzegovina and in other republics about new recruits, that is young
17 recruits, not reservists, being sent outside of their republics to fight
18 in either Slovenia or Croatia. Isn't that also correct?
19 A. I don't know if that is so. I was not conducting the policy of
20 the Yugoslav People's Army, nor did I monitor activities in the JNA or the
22 Q. Well, it's odd that you say you don't know about that, because I
23 could have sworn that yesterday I heard you mention a conversation with
24 Minister Doko where he spoke about demonstrations and protests to you. I
25 didn't realise as you were giving your testimony that you had no idea what
1 Minister Doko was talking about.
2 A. I told you what he talked about. He mentioned the protests of
3 mothers who did not want to have recruits sent to serve their military
4 term, and he asked me -- I already said that. I don't want to repeat it.
5 If you wish, I can explain who these mothers were who were
6 protesting in front of the building. This is information from the Bosnia
7 and Herzegovina state security. None of them had a son in the army or
8 even had a male child to send to the JNA; they were paid. They were doing
9 this for money, which was also offered to me.
10 Q. Mr. Kapetina, is that your perception of what was happening in
11 July and August of 1991, that not one parent whose mobilisation or
12 recruitment-eligible child was at risk of being sent to fight in another
13 republic in a clash they disagreed with protested or demonstrated against
14 it? That everybody who participated in the demonstration was a fraud who
15 was paid? Is that essentially your perception of what was going on at the
17 A. That's not how I see things. Many parents were concerned; quite
18 rightly so. All I said was that information about the mothers who were
19 protesting publicly in front of the National Assembly of Bosnia and
20 Herzegovina -- actually, that information that I mentioned just now is not
21 something that comes from me, but it's the information that comes from the
22 Bosnia and Herzegovina state security service.
23 Q. Let's not quibble about that, Mr. Kapetina. The fact is that part
24 of the context is that many people were concerned that protests were
25 happening. Correct?
1 A. At the time there were no mass protests.
2 Q. Now, in addition there had been a conference at Brioni in which --
3 and at least an agreement in principle was reached concerning the
4 threatened conflicts. And that was another factor that was cited by the
5 Bosnian government in its decisions about whether or not mobilisation and
6 recruitment should be implemented on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
7 Isn't that right?
8 A. To be quite clear, at that time there was no mobilisation being
9 carried out on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, because serving
10 one's military term of duty does not mean being mobilised.
11 Right now I don't know what kind of meeting was held at Brioni or
12 the outcome or the agreements stemming from that meeting. Probably at the
13 time I did know, but right now I really cannot remember.
14 Q. Mr. Kapetina, you are also aware that the Bosnian government
15 asserted that the mobilisation was unlawful for a number of reasons,
16 including the fact that it was not legitimately directed at determining
17 combat-readiness and including the fact that it had not been ordered by
18 the SFRY Presidency. You knew that at the time, didn't you? That was
19 part of this ongoing discussion and dispute.
20 A. I was not implementing policy at the defence of ministry -- the
21 defence ministry; I was implementing laws. If something was agreed on the
22 political side, then they should have informed the government and all the
23 relevant departments, as you say, to selectively apply the law, what
24 should have been done and what should not have been done. But this kind
25 of information was not something that we had access to.
1 Q. Mr. Kapetina, the whole public had access to it because this was
2 being written about in the media. It's of great interest to the people of
3 Bosnia and Herzegovina and newspapers were writing about it. Isn't that
5 A. I don't know that the whole media wrote about it. I was not
6 obliged to listen to the media or the public in my job; I was obliged to
7 implement laws.
8 Q. Mr. Kapetina, I'm not suggesting to you that the whole media was
9 writing about it; that's a characterisation I think you put on it. What I
10 am suggesting to you is that enough of the media was writing about it so
11 that you were very much aware of it at the time. And those are all
12 factors you chose to ignore in painting a very misleading picture to the
13 Court about what was happening at that time.
14 Now, let me address just a couple more issues.
15 First of all, did you know at the time who the prime minister of
16 the federal government was?
17 A. Of course I knew.
18 Q. And did you know that the Federal Executive Council in early
19 August took the position that TO units were being engaged in certain parts
20 of Bosnia and Herzegovina arbitrarily and outside the authorities of the
21 republic and the federation?
22 A. I was not duty-bound to implement decisions of the Federal
23 Executive Council. That's what the inspections at the federal ministry of
24 defence at the Yugoslav level was supposed to do. So that's why we did
25 not do that. You said just now that that was a question of Territorial
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kapetina, no one asked you whether you were
3 duty-bound to implement the decisions of the Federal Executive Council.
4 The question was whether you were aware of the position explained by
5 Mr. Tieger taken by that council. So please concentrate on the questions.
6 Let me give you another example where you really tend to, at least
7 confuse me. A little bit earlier you were asked about whether many people
8 in Bosnia were concerned about young recruits, et cetera, and then you
9 said you don't know if that's -- and some 20 lines later you say: Parents
10 were concerned, and rightly so.
11 So do you understand that it's -- could confuse me if you on the
12 one hand say: Well, I don't know; and the other hand, 20 lines later say:
13 Yes, parents were rightly concerned about this situation? And here again
14 you're responding to a question which is not put to you. You don't have
15 to defend yourself here from knowing what -- you're just asked to tell us
16 what you know. It may be that you knew about it, that you felt no
17 responsibility, or that you even strongly disagreed with the position, and
18 perhaps rightly so. I don't know. But please concentrate on what is
19 asked and answer those questions.
20 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
21 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. Can we turn to tab 37 of the Prosecution binder, and can that be
23 given a number, please.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Tab 37, Your Honours, will be P1037.
1 MR. TIEGER:
2 Q. Now, Mr. Kapetina, I want to direct your attention to two portions
3 of tab 37 which contains an article by -- an article of -- an issue,
4 excuse me, of Oslobodjenje in July 1991. And first I want to turn your
5 attention to the reproduction of the letter of the BH Presidency to the
6 Federal Executive Board on the mobilisation in Bosnian Krajina listing
7 eight reasons against, I think is part of the heading.
8 Do you see that portion of the issue?
9 Now, in it a number of reasons are listed by the BH Presidency for
10 ending the mobilisation effort, and those include the following: That the
11 mobilisation was not ordered by the SFRY Presidency; that the mobilisation
12 obviously does not aim to check combat-readiness; is that the BH
13 authorities were not informed of it happening in a timely fashion; that it
14 has harmful political consequences and contributes to the deterioration of
15 inter-ethnic relations; creates or deepens mistrust for the JNA; it's in
16 contradiction of the provisions of the OEBS; it's in contradiction with
17 the declaration adopted during talks with the representatives in Brioni;
18 and it causes great financial expense and is not in compliance with the
19 present financial situation.
20 Did those reasons, whether you agree with them or not, given by
21 the -- publicised by the Bosnian government escape your attention in 1991?
22 A. I wasn't informed about this letter that was sent probably to the
23 SFRY Presidency, but from this attachment here I cannot really read
24 anything here in this title, eight reasons. It's so small, the print is
25 so small, that I really cannot -- but very well. You've told me all the
2 MR. JOSSE: I'm going to intercede. If he can't read them, then
3 my learned friend should put them to him one by one because he can't be
4 expected to remember all eight.
5 MR. TIEGER: I just listed those --
6 JUDGE ORIE: The issue is not whether he remembers all of these
8 The clear issue is the following: Mr. Tieger asked you whether it
9 escaped your attention that it was published that the Federal - what was
10 it? - Executive Council, I think, took strong position, whether it's 8 or
11 7 or 6, were you aware of such a position taken by this body, or were you
12 aware of a publication in which this is referred to?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've said before that it wasn't my
14 job to cover the Yugoslav People's Army and the Territorial Defence. This
15 information --
16 JUDGE ORIE: I did not ask you whether it was your job. I didn't
17 ask you whether you were informed about it. Did you, at that time, learn
18 about it, yes or no?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was following all the events, and
20 I cannot tell you anything specific about whether I knew something at the
21 time or not. But I was following all of the political and social events.
22 It's hard after 15 years to say now whether I knew that at the time or
23 not. I don't remember.
24 JUDGE ORIE: At the same time, it was an issue which, in view of
25 your letter, the legality of this activity was one of the subjects that
1 was of interest to you, wasn't it? I mean, that's how I understood your
2 concerns about illegal activity, that this was something you were very
3 much interested in.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've just said that. I really
5 cannot talk about individual meetings, conclusions, or decisions of the
6 federal organs. I probably did follow all of those things, but I cannot
7 give you a certain answer about that particular piece of information and
8 the eight conditions. The Presidency probably gave other conditions and
9 sought other agreements which were not respected. I didn't point to them
10 because I didn't think that they were relevant.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, this is at least an answer to the
12 question which was put in different ways several times to you.
13 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
14 MR. TIEGER:
15 Q. Two matters before we break.
16 The same issue of Oslobodjenje indicates -- reports something from
17 the Tanjug, I believe, from July 12th, that is that: "At today's meeting
18 the Federal Executive Council discussed the situation in the country and
19 the measures to halt armed conflicts, which is in the country's essential
20 interest, the Federal Executive Council also estimates that TO units are
21 being engaged in certain parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina arbitrarily and
22 outside the areas of the republic and the federation."
23 The Federal Executive Council, Mr. Kapetina, was headed by Ante
24 Markovic. Is that correct?
25 A. That's correct.
1 Q. Let me also quickly ask you to turn to tab 26.
2 MR. TIEGER: And I would ask that that be given a number as well,
3 Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Registrar, 26 would be --
5 THE REGISTRAR: P1038, Your Honours.
6 MR. TIEGER:
7 Q. P1038, tab 26, contains the recording, the transcript recording,
8 of a news conference held by Stipe Mesic, who at that time was the
9 president of the SFRY and Presidency. Is that right, sir?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And in the first paragraph in which he speaks, Mr. Mesic
12 says: "As far as the mobilisation is concerned, you know that the
13 Presidency was not constituted, in other words, the supreme command was
14 not functioning, and that what was done was done outside the supreme
16 So were you also aware at the time of the events we've been
17 discussing that the president of the Presidency, Stipe Mesic, also
18 asserted that the -- as did the Bosnian government, that the mobilisation
19 was outside the -- was done outside the proper channels?
20 A. I don't know about that. What's given to me here is just a
21 statement by one of the members of the Presidency, Mr. Mesic. Does that
22 necessarily mean that it's true?
23 JUDGE ORIE: You were asked whether you know about it. The answer
24 is no, yes?
25 Please proceed.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't know.
2 MR. TIEGER:
3 Q. Were you aware or unaware that there was at least a debate or
4 dispute or conflict about the legality and propriety and potential
5 consequences of the mobilisation and recruitment efforts during that
6 period of time and at the time you wrote your warning letter? Whether
7 you're aware of these specifics, all the specifics we just discussed, were
8 you aware of the dispute and debate generally?
9 A. I was not aware that there was a general debate. If you are using
10 newspaper articles for that, I must say that Oslobodjenje at the time was
11 quite partial as well as other media. There was a general propaganda
12 campaign so that the writing of the media in this case doesn't mean much.
13 I can remind you of another statement of Mr. Mesic when he
14 completed his term of office when he said: I have completed my task.
15 Yugoslavia is no more.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I'm going to stop you again. If you say:
17 Oslobodjenje at that time was quite partial, did you read these reports,
18 whether true or not, in Oslobodjenje?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course I read it.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So do I understand your testimony to be that
21 you were aware that for good reasons or perfectly wrong reasons, that the
22 issue was raised in the media, the issue of the legality of this
23 recruitment and the matters we are talking about?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those issues should be discussed in
25 the institutions of the system and not in the public or in the media.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't ask you what should have been done. I asked
2 you whether I understood your testimony well, that for good or bad reasons
3 that the issue was raised in the media. Even if you consider that to be a
4 totally wrong thing to do, were you aware of the matter being raised in
5 the media?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All the topical matters were also
7 covered by the media, so that question was probably covered, too.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Probably? Was it covered, yes or no?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That question did figure, to an
10 extent, in the media.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
12 Mr. Tieger, I think it's time for a break. We're late already.
13 We'll have a break of 20 minutes until quarter past 6.00.
14 And, Mr. Kapetina, may I really urge you again to answer to the
15 questions. This is not a place to -- I'm not saying that what you want to
16 tell us is not important and is not true, but it's very often not an
17 answer to the question. And I urge you again, because I think you came
18 here to testify, you were requested to testify by the Defence in this
19 case, and if you do not answer the questions that might -- might, to some
20 extent, invalidate your own testimony because the Chamber does not hear
21 what you know about the matters you were asked about, if you again and
22 again turn away from the questions.
23 We stand adjourned until quarter past 6.00.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise.
25 --- Recess taken at 5.56 p.m.
1 --- On resuming at 6.25 p.m.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, you may proceed.
3 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. May I ask the Witness and the Court to turn to tab 4, and may that
5 item be given a number, please.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Tab 4, Your Honours, will be P1039.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
9 MR. TIEGER:
10 Q. Mr. Kapetina, I see you have been looking over P1039 while the
11 logistical procedure has been implemented. That's a conversation between
12 Dr. Karadzic and Mr. Simovic on August 27th, 1991. And as you may already
13 have seen on the first page Mr. Simovic advises Dr. Karadzic that he wants
14 to inform him briefly about a letter by our chief inspector warning about
15 unlawful acts.
16 As we continue on to page 2 after a brief discussion about a
17 second issue, Dr. Karadzic says: "This thing with the inspector is
18 certain. Everybody should do his own job, and we'll see who in the end
19 will be responsible."
20 Mr. Simovic -- and Dr. Karadzic continues. "But I want to move
21 through this quickly."
22 Mr. Simovic says: "That's the best. We have officially addressed
23 the president of the Presidency, president of the government, president of
24 the Assembly, and the press, at the government session, 15 minutes in
1 Dr. Karadzic asks: "Who is the inspector?"
2 Mr. Simovic says: "Our guy, Kapetina."
3 Dr. Karadzic says: "I see."
4 And Mr. Simovic says: "We have activated him. He does his part
5 of work fully. Doko is almost seeking his life. However, we shall
6 protect him. He is doing what he is supposed to do in accordance with
8 And Dr. Karadzic says: "Yes, yes, good, good."
9 I had asked you earlier, Mr. Kapetina, about whether or not you
10 had been activated by the SDS, whether or not you had been doing your part
11 of work for the SDS, and let me ask you again if Mr. Simovic's remarks to
12 Dr. Karadzic reflect the fact that at that point and thereafter, you were
13 pursuing tasks for the SDS of various sorts.
14 A. That's not correct. I wasn't activated by the SDS.
15 Q. Well, we're -- again, I noticed before we had some smallish
16 debates, if you will, about the nuances of questions. So let me -- let's
17 not get hung up on the meaning of "activate" or "not activate." Let me
18 simply ask you if at this point and thereafter you were given tasks by the
19 SDS and performed those tasks?
20 A. No, I wasn't assigned tasks, not then, not to the end of 1991 or
21 the end of 1992 -- or rather, while I worked in the ministry I received
22 not one single task from the SDS.
23 Q. Let me turn next to --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, I don't think it really assists the
25 Chamber very much to hear whether the witness received a task from the
1 SDS, not having identified what you consider to be the SDS. Would that be
2 SDS officials? Would that be SDS party organs?
3 But perhaps I put it to you, Mr. Kapetina. You were just asked
4 about whether you received tasks from the SDS. You said: "No, I never
5 did receive tasks, I never performed tasks."
6 Would that include -- well, let's say, SDS members with important
7 positions or SDS organs because it's --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That's --
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It would refer to both
11 individuals and SDS organs. I didn't receive tasks from anybody, and by
12 the same token, I didn't carry any tasks out.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Then I have one other question for you. It seems on
14 the basis of this intercept that Mr. Simovic has a rather different
15 perception of the interactions you had. You said: "I consulted him once
16 on that letter I intended to write," whereas Mr. Simovic seems to have a
17 totally different impression.
18 Do you have any explanation for the difference of perception of
19 what happened at that time between you and Mr. Simovic?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I don't know what you're
21 referring to when you said that Simovic seems to have different views.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it's -- it seems that Mr. Simovic, at least if
23 we read the intercept, "I will want to inform you briefly. I will send
24 you a letter by our chief inspector warning about unlawful acts."
25 And Mr. Simovic calls you "our guy." Mr. Simovic says: "We have
1 activated him. He does his part of work fully."
2 Would you agree with me that that's at least a different
3 perception from the interaction you had with him, if we compare it to your
4 perception, just having consulted him once to seek protection? You say:
5 "He couldn't tell me that he would protect me." Mr. Simovic saying: "We
6 shall protect him."
7 I mean, it's a totally different story, the story you tell us and
8 the story Mr. Simovic seems to present in this telephone conversation to
9 Mr. Karadzic. So therefore my question is: Do you have any explanation
10 for that? Could you know -- do you know any reason for such a difference
11 in perception?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't wish to enter into the
13 opinion presented by Mr. Simovic in his conversation with Mr. Karadzic,
14 but Miodrag Simovic told me that the government can relieve me of my
15 duties and that they could not protect me because they would be outvoted
16 at the government meeting. That's the point. Now, how else could he
17 protect me? I don't know, and I didn't ask him to do so either.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So I do understand that you have no
19 explanation, apart from drawing our attention to the illogic statement
20 that he could protect you.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I be allowed to add something,
23 please, Your Honour?
24 Miodrag Simovic was the vice-premier of the government, and to all
25 intents and purposes he refers to all the cadres in the government
1 as "ours" because he's speaking on behalf of the government. So that's
2 the jargon. He says "ours," "our guy," because everybody in the
3 government is his -- an employee of his, a worker of his, and that's the
4 jargon he uses in his conversation. But I don't belong to anybody nor can
5 anybody appropriate me.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Tieger.
7 MR. TIEGER:
8 Q. Let's turn to tab 6, please, and I'd like that given a number.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: That will be P1040, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, for practical reasons if a number is asked, if I
12 do not object against it, then you may immediately give a number,
13 Mr. Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honours.
15 MR. TIEGER:
16 Q. Mr. Kapetina, P1040 are notes from the meeting of officials and
17 top-ranking personnel of republican state organs, members of the SDS,
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina dated September 12th, 1991, notes from that meeting.
19 And if we turn to page 4 of the English, item number 11, the notes
20 indicate the following:
21 "Propose the establishment of a system of duty shifts to monitor
22 the activities and execution of tasks in the operations of state organs.
23 Resolution of existing problems in the various fields and maintaining
24 contacts with the SDS. Ljubisav Terzic and Dragan Kapetina are entrusted
25 with this and a development of means of communication between SDS and SDS
1 personnel in republican state organs with the municipalities."
2 Mr. Kapetina, isn't this one of the reflections of Mr. Simovic's
3 indications to Dr. Karadzic, that you would be -- that you were working
4 well for SDS, that you had been activated and would be performing tasks?
5 Isn't this one of the tasks that you were given and undertook?
6 A. No. Do you wish further explanation? At the meeting I most
7 probably was not present myself. Perhaps the first man there, Ljubisav
8 Terzic, might have attended that meeting who was appointed by the Serbian
9 Democratic Party as vice-secretary in the ministry.
10 Now, the fact that somebody had put me in there, perhaps they did
11 because they knew that I could -- that I was capable of doing that kind of
12 work, that kind of job.
13 Q. So what does that mean --
14 A. I don't know about being entrusted with anything like this.
15 Q. You have no recollection of ever being entrusted with this
16 assignment or any similar kind of assignment, one that relied upon your
17 expertise and that was given to you by SDS officials or SDS members or
18 important people who were affiliated with SDS in pursuit of basic Bosnian
19 Serb and SDS objectives? Any recollection of anything like that, type of
20 thing that Mr. Simovic had been referring to?
21 A. Well, you see, I don't know anything about who followed SDS
22 objectives. I can't recognise somebody as being a person following SDS
24 And another thing, at that point in time the SDS, for me, was a
25 political party just like any other political party in Bosnia and
1 Herzegovina. Let me inform you that the vice-premier at each meeting held
2 talks with Muslim cadres in the Assembly, Mr. Cengic that is, from the
3 very first day, and I had nothing against that.
4 Q. You know very well that is not the issue here, Mr. Kapetina. The
5 issue is whether or not you were somebody who was working --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, the witness has answered the question.
7 He has said that he did not know about it, that he was never tasked with
8 this. If we look at the language, then we see that the following
9 conclusions were drawn and then quite some activities are mentioned,
10 facilitate, prepare, facilitate, and a couple of times we find the
11 word "propose." And sometimes who is proposed to do this -- proposed that
12 the SDS or proposed to the SDS, and here it just says "proposed." The
13 witness has answered the question by saying that it never reached him.
14 Let's please proceed.
15 MR. TIEGER: Let's turn next then to an item already in evidence,
16 and that's the stenographic record of the third session of the Assembly of
17 the Serbian People in Bosnia and Herzegovina held on December 11th, 1991.
18 I don't know if that's been distributed or not.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Is that under ...
20 Mr. Tieger, could you further provide the witness where to start?
21 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour.
22 Q. First at this third session of the Bosnian Serb Assembly we see at
23 pages 29 to 30 of the English and pages 47 through 48, I believe, of the
24 B/C/S, Mr. Krajisnik calls for the reports of the presidents of the
25 commissions and other working bodies on the discharge of duties and tasks.
1 And he indicates at page 31 of the English the order in which the relevant
2 speakers will address the Assembly, beginning with Mr. Miskin, and then
3 followed by Mr. Skoko, and ending with Mr. Mikic, and then yourself,
4 Dragan Kapetina.
5 Just moving through that very quickly, we see at page 32 of the
6 English, which is approximately page 56 of the B/C/S -- excuse me,
7 approximately page 54 of the B/C/S, Mr. Miskin discusses regionalisation,
8 that is if Bosnia and Herzegovina were to be divided into regions and if
9 it were to cease to exist as a single republic, the autonomous regions
10 would comprise the territories. And he calls on page 34 of the English
11 for an election of the council of ministers as soon as possible to carry
12 out the activities.
13 On pages 48 through 49 of the English -- and excuse me, let me
14 also note page 45 of the English by Mr. Miskin, which is page 57 of the
15 B/C/S, he notes: "Given the conditions of war in the country and the very
16 precarious situation in BiH" --
17 JUDGE ORIE: In the B/C/S you said "page 57," seems not to be
18 reproduced. There is more general terms, Mr. Tieger, only portions are
19 reproduced in B/C/S, whereas the whole seems to be tendered in English.
20 MR. TIEGER: Well, if I may, Your Honour, let me quickly complete
21 that citation. It's, I believe, the comments by the witness are
22 duplicated in full. These are -- provide the appropriate context, I
23 think, for the Court. If it turns out, in fact, that the witness has --
24 was present at the meeting, has any particular concerns about the portion
25 cited of other speakers, we can certainly find them.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Tieger, whenever you want to confront the
2 witness with certain portions of this document, he should at least have an
3 opportunity to read the relevant portion of it. And I noticed that 57 is
4 not among the B/C/S portions, unless you very slowly read the whole of the
5 passage that you would like to confront him with, and even then it's not
6 how it should be done.
7 MR. TIEGER: No. You're -- I agree, Your Honour, and I had
8 intended for that passage to be duplicated in B/C/S, and I apologise both
9 to the Court and the witness for that oversight.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.
11 MR. TIEGER: But I, as indicated, I think we can manage in the
12 fashion the Court just described.
13 Q. And just to complete that comment by Mr. Miskin, it was: "Given
14 the conditions of war in the country and the very precarious situation in
15 BiH" --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Could you assist me. Where are we exactly now in the
17 English version?
18 MR. TIEGER: Page 35, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: 35, yes.
20 MR. TIEGER: "We believe that in all the regions and in the entire
21 BH, detailed contingency plans should be elaborated in the event" --
22 JUDGE ORIE: I have not found it yet. Could you guide us to the
23 relevant paragraph or the relevant ...
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 MR. TIEGER: I'm not surprised that the Court couldn't find it,
1 and again I'm obliged to apologise to the Court. That is on page 36 in
2 approximately the very middle. That would be about --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I've found it. "Given the conditions ..."
4 MR. TIEGER: Yes. "Given the conditions of war in the country and
5 the very precarious situation in BH, we believe that in all the regions
6 and in the entire BH, detailed contingency plans" --
7 MR. JOSSE: We've got the normal problem, Your Honour. The
8 witness is looking for the passage. He's therefore not concentrating on
9 what's being put to him. What's being put to him he cannot find because
10 it's not there --
11 MR. TIEGER:
12 Q. Mr. Kapetina, can I have your attention for just a moment. I
13 thought the Court's explanation would have been understood, but if I could
14 just explain it quickly again. The passage I'm citing now is a comment by
15 Mr. Miskin before you spoke at the session. It has not been duplicated in
16 the B/C/S, and so it's no wonder you're unable to find it. My apologies
17 for that.
18 I'm going to try to read it slowly so that you can hear it. If
19 there's any particular reason why you would want to see it in the writing
20 in the B/C/S, you're more than free to let us know and we can do so.
21 Thereafter, I'll be turning my attention --
22 A. There's no need.
23 Q. So although I started it a number of times, I'll attempt to read
24 it through now.
25 "Given the conditions of war in the country and the very
1 precarious situation in BH, we believe that in all the regions and in the
2 entire BH, detailed contingency plans should be elaborated in the event
3 the Serbian people has to defend itself against various enemies."
4 Let me move directly now, Mr. Kapetina, to your own remarks which
5 are found at pages 57 through 60 of the English.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. TIEGER: And 98 to 102 of the B/C/S, which you should have in
8 front of you, Mr. Kapetina.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We see Mr. Kapetina starts speaking on page 58.
10 So someone may have worked from a different copy. I think we will find
11 our way.
12 Please proceed, Mr. --
13 MR. TIEGER: Okay.
14 Q. Now, Mr. Kapetina is -- you begin by noting that the -- you
15 have -- you and the ministry of national defence have drafted a paper
16 entitled "organisational and functional principles of the system of
17 defence in BH. Naturally, from the aspect of the interests of the Serbian
18 people and tasks in terms of decentralisation of relations in this field."
19 And in the interest of time, let me attempt to focus your
20 attention on two particular aspects of this without necessarily quoting
21 them directly, since you have them in front of you. You propose two
22 solutions, it seems, in your comments. After explaining how in your view
23 the Muslims are planning for a sovereign state with all the attributes of
24 statehood and sovereignty. For that you say: "We have proposed two
25 solutions. The first in the event that a sovereign BH is indeed created,"
1 and in that case you explain autonomous regions would be formed to protect
2 the interests of the Serbian people, and for that variant you've devised
3 the establishment of an ectogenous, what I understand indigenous system of
4 defence at the level of the autonomous regions. That's at page 58 of the
5 English. I'll let the excerpt speak for itself.
6 And the second model proposed by you is in the event that Bosnia
7 and Herzegovina remains within a federal state, and in that case you
8 note: "We insist on an even stronger centralisation of the system of
9 defence and don't want dual armed forces."
10 Now, Mr. Kapetina, although we went through a lot of discussion
11 about tasks that -- the question of whether or not you were assigned tasks
12 and performed tasks, isn't this an example of precisely that, that it
13 doesn't leave any doubt about whether or not you received that assignment
14 and whether or not you performed it?
15 A. No, I did not receive tasks and I didn't carry tasks out. This is
16 a task of the vice-premier, and it wasn't only I myself who worked on this
17 concept but a group in the Ministry of Defence.
18 So the vice-premier, Miodrag Simovic, I don't know whether already
19 at that time he was president of the ministerial council, I'm not sure
20 whether he was or not, but we received a task from the vice-premier, so
21 these were just possible variations. Of course my views on the ministry
22 and the problems in the system of defence and so on.
23 Q. Conducted, as I believe you indicated in the first sentence of
24 your remarks: "naturally from the aspects of the interests of the Serbian
25 people" --
1 A. Of course. That's the kind of task we were issued from the
2 vice-premier. Do you mean to say that the Serbian people did not exist in
3 Bosnia and Herzegovina and that it wasn't a constituent peoples? Did I
4 perhaps say that I wasn't a Serb, that I denied being a Serb here?
5 Q. Let's move on, Mr. Kapetina.
6 I'd like you to turn next to tab 9, which is a previously marked
7 exhibit as P64, P65; Treanor, tab 78. That's the minutes of the first
8 meeting of the ministerial council of the Serbian people. You may recall
9 Mr. Miskin's call at the third session of the Bosnian Serb Assembly for
10 the establishment of a council of ministers to implement the tasks
11 outlined by the groups that were reporting at that session of the Bosnian
12 Serb Assembly. And in particular, in his concern, to implement
14 This is the first meeting of the ministerial council, and if I can
15 ask you to turn your attention to the conclusions found at page 3 of the
16 English, and specifically to conclusion number 3 which states: "The
17 issues regarding cooperation with JNA organs and commands should be
18 treated in the rules of procedure of the ministerial council. Ljubisav
19 Terzic, Dragan Mirkovic, and Dragan Kapetina are entrusted with this
21 Mr. Kapetina, isn't this yet another example of you being tasked
22 with responsibilities in connection with pursuing the SDS programme or by
23 SDS high-ranking officials and, in this case in particular, in connection
24 with coordination and cooperation with the JNA?
25 A. No. As far as I'm concerned, this isn't an SDS organ. The
1 ministerial council is a group of ministers from the government of Bosnia
2 and Herzegovina, and we -- Terzic, myself, and Dragan Mirkovic were tasked
3 and we were assistants in the Ministry of Defence. So as far as I'm
4 concerned, this is a state task.
5 Q. Mr. Kapetina, we're almost out of time, so let me ask you one or
6 two quick questions.
7 Are you suggesting that you are not aware now and were not aware
8 then that the ministerial council was composed of members of the
9 government who were SDS members or representatives or who were affiliated
10 with SDS in contrast to a multi-ethnic body?
11 A. Do you mean to say that I should not have recognised the
12 government of Bosnia and Herzegovina composed of cadres of the SDS, SDA,
13 and HDZ? Is that what you want me to do? I knew that it was composed of
14 those three parties and the representatives of those three ethnic groups;
15 of course I knew that. As far as I was concerned, it was the government
16 of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Just --
18 MR. TIEGER:
19 Q. It's quite the contrary, Mr. Kapetina. This meeting of the
20 ministerial council, this first meeting of the ministerial council on
21 July 11th [sic] is the ministerial council of the Assembly of the Serbian
22 People of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is not a multi-party, multi-ethnic
23 body, is it, or was it?
24 A. As far as I am concerned it is not a party body. As far as I am
25 concerned, the ministers in the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina are
1 part of the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
2 Q. Mr. Kapetina, we're out of time for the day, but I submit to you
3 that you knew precisely what the nature of these questions were. In fact,
4 His Honour Judge Orie clarified it for you, and that you have attempted
5 purposefully to evade your work on behalf of these Serbian bodies until
6 confronted with them, and when confronted them, attempt to recharacterise
7 the questions. Isn't that, in fact, what's happening here?
8 A. No, that's not true.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Tieger, I take it that you misspoke when
10 you said "the first meeting on the 11th of July," where it gives the 11th
11 of January as the date?
12 MR. TIEGER: That's correct, thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Before we finish, Mr. Kapetina, I specifically asked
14 you about ever receiving tasks of the SDS. I also spoke about individuals
15 who held -- SDS members who held high positions. And I do not know
16 whether there's any confusion in this respect, but you said: Should I not
17 have recognised the government in Bosnia and Herzegovina? The documents
18 you were confronted with, the minutes of this first meeting of ministerial
19 council, is not of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a whole. Is there any
20 misunderstanding about that? Or same for the 11th of December, third
21 session of the Assembly of the Serbian People in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
22 These were Serb organs or Serb institutions, and not anymore of the whole
23 of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Or do I not understand the meaning of these
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In my answers I stated quite
1 categorically that I had never received a task from the functionaries of
2 the Serbian Democratic Party, organs of the Serbian Democratic Party in
3 1991, and that's the truth. And I state that quite categorically, as far
4 as I'm concerned, the vice-premier of Bosnia and Herzegovina, or any
5 minister for that matter, not only functionaries of the Serbian Democratic
6 Party, but the government itself.
7 Now I'm asking the question: Are the rest of the members of the
8 government the legitimate members of the government of Bosnia and
9 Herzegovina? And why they would be legitimate. The constitution and the
10 law is being implemented now, but when I insisted it was not being
11 implemented. So that's that selective approach.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just re-read your answer.
13 So let's -- let me try to understand you. Is it your position
14 that you say since Mr. Simovic was the vice-premier of Bosnia and
15 Herzegovina, whatever --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Government --
17 JUDGE ORIE: -- whatever -- yes, vice-premier of the government of
18 Bosnia and Herzegovina, that whatever tasks I received, I received them
19 from a member of the legitimate government of Bosnia and Herzegovina. At
20 the same time - and that seems to be the issue Mr. Tieger is raising - is
21 that tasking you with these kind of matters is at least discussed in
22 organs that were at that time predominantly, if I may say so, Serb organs
23 and not organs created by the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina. So we now
24 see Mr. Simovic appearing in two different contexts, two different
25 environments; one being -- I would say constitutionally BiH, and the other
1 one, to say at least, not provided for in the constitution of Bosnia and
2 Herzegovina but predominantly Serb.
3 Do I understand your testimony well that you say: Well, whatever
4 task I got, I always got it from someone who held an official
5 constitutional position in BiH, and it's of no importance that these tasks
6 and the performance of these tasks were discussed in totally different
7 contexts, predominantly Serb contexts, as well? Is that ...
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely. I didn't know about the
9 conversations between Simovic and Karadzic, and I wasn't interested in
10 that or any other conversation. I received this task. I didn't receive
11 any particular tasks that year anyway, but I received that task from the
12 vice-premier, Miodrag Simovic. And I would just like to make one --
13 JUDGE ORIE: If I may ask one additional question before you add
14 something to that.
15 You were working in the Ministry of Defence, weren't you?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Isn't it true that civil servants in a Ministry
18 of Defence receive their tasks usually from their superiors in that same
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Now, could you explain how the vice-premier gave you
22 tasks? Directly, indirectly, through your minister? I do not know.
23 Could you please explain this for us, and then -- this is for the
24 interpreters, then I will stop.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that yesterday I said in
1 answer to questions by the Defence, that Minister Doko himself called
2 vice-premier Simovic and told him: Kapetina is available for you as of
3 today. He will not be receiving tasks from me. If I recall, I think that
4 that is what I said.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's what you said. So you said you received
6 these instructions by the vice-premier on the basis of Mr. Doko having
7 told him that you were available for him. Yes. Do you know --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course. Of course.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's then finish for the day, and that at
10 least clarifies a few matters.
11 We'd like to see you back tomorrow at a quarter past 2.00 in this
12 same courtroom, and we hope then to finish tomorrow in the afternoon. May
13 I again instruct you not to speak with anyone about your testimony and --
14 already given or testimony still to be given.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would just like to
16 make one remark. These comments are very detailed. I cannot follow such
17 complicated details or subjective assessments. It's difficult to tell
18 what the actual questions are. Perhaps the comments could be cut short,
19 if possible.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll try to do the same as what we expect you
21 to do, is to be as much focussing on what's the core of the question, and
22 then you focus on the core of the answer to that question.
23 We stand adjourned until tomorrow, quarter past 2.00, with, again,
24 the appreciation of the Chamber for the interpreters and technicians.
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.11 p.m.,
1 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 19th day of
2 January, 2006, at 2.15 p.m.