1 Thursday, 4 May 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.08 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in the courtroom, but also
6 just outside assisting us.
7 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number
9 IT-00-39-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much. Mr. Josse you are on your feet.
11 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, I'm going to deal with one intercept
12 immediately if I may.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I would first like to remind Mr. Krajisnik
14 as I do every morning that you're still bound, Mr. Krajisnik, by the
15 solemn declaration that you gave at the beginning of your testimony.
16 Mr. Josse you would like to start with the intercept, I do
17 understand. Please proceed.
18 MR. JOSSE: Thank you. I'm going to ask that this be played.
19 Could copies be handed to the Bench?
20 JUDGE ORIE: I think they are handed out already.
21 MR. JOSSE: Mr. Krajisnik needs a copy in B/C/S.
22 JUDGE ORIE: We even have a few copies. Which one would you --
23 no. There are two -- no, there is one. Yes, I've got an intercept, 3rd
24 of December 1991.
25 MR. JOSSE: That's right and could I say I'm very grateful to my
1 learned friends for the Prosecution who are going to play this because
2 we've been unable to do so on our equipment this morning.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 WITNESS: MOMCILO KRAJSINIK [Resumed]
5 [Witness answered through interpreter]
6 Examination by Mr. Josse: [Continued]
7 [Intercept played]
8 "Head of household because he is.
9 Real heads of households, not a single one of them is a scoundrel.
10 They must be Serbs since they are so nice.
11 Real Serbs, no other town is more Serbian than Niksic, there you
13 Oh, no there is none like it in the world.
14 None like it in the world.
15 I knew it, as soon as it was Niksic.
16 Are you all right?
17 How is it going? It's fine. How was it up there?
18 It was great, I was with Vance for an hour and 25 minutes. We
19 didn't make it public.
21 But it's -- it was fantastic.
23 Those Americans, they are different. These European shits are
24 unbearable compared to them.
25 Well, what do you think, what's going to happen? Well, all right.
1 I'll tell you. He wanted something regarding Bosnia and I refused, I told
2 him first, please, tell this to the others in the European Community, when
3 you come to Bosnia, if you don't see representatives of all three peoples
4 and all three parties, you've seen nothing.
6 If you only see me and Izetbegovic, then again you've seen
7 nothing. You must see the Croats as well. You must see all three sides.
8 Hey, that's good.
9 Otherwise you haven't seen you'll be misinformed. And second, no
10 to the blue helmets. They say that the situation in Bosnia is difficult,
11 well, it is difficult, but we are still maintaining the balance, there is
12 no shooting.
14 If you come, that will disturb the balance and you will be the
15 cause of unrest and clashes, and if you tell them that, it really bothers
16 them when you tell them that they will be the cause. What do you mean, we
17 will be the cause? All right. Since there is a lot of mistrust, the
18 Serbs will think that the Muslims will manipulate you. The Muslims will
19 think that the Serbs will manipulate you. Everyone will be tense and
20 there will be disorder. You won't be able to bring the disorder under
21 control because Bosnia is broad and there will be shooting and so on.
22 It's best that you leave it alone. All right. Can we send unarmed
23 observers? But would they be uniformed? Yes. Oh, well, I can't promise
24 that. I have to see. You would deploy them in the Neretva River valley.
25 I said, well, I can't decide about that on my own. I must ask my people.
1 We are a democratic party and so on. But I think it's out of the
2 question. Then he wanted the headquarters to be in Sarajevo. I said,
3 Sarajevo is out of the question.
4 Well, did he agree?
5 No, he agreed. I said not in Sarajevo but it can be in Livno. He
6 asked about Banja Luka, and I said, I'll let you know about Banja Luka
7 because I was thinking, you know, if it has to be in Bosnia I suggested
8 Ljubljana to him.
10 He said, there is no point because it would seem we were
11 supporting Slovenia's secession.
13 He's strongly against recognition.
15 Against recognition. I said, please we are not against
16 recognition, but we are against recognition of unilateral acts. So, why
17 don't we do it in the Federal Assembly, have Slovenia initiate the process
18 of its recognition, and have Yugoslavia be the first country to recognise
21 And after Yugoslavia it can be recognised by everyone. And then
22 use this experience for Croatia. He said we are afraid that the tension
23 would increase because Croatia wants to be recognised and Bosnia also
24 wants to; no, I said, Bosnia doesn't. And then I explained to him about
25 our constitution and so on. He said, I read something about that. Did we
1 send it to him? Did we?
3 Uh, those documents of ours.
4 Yes, we did.
5 He said he read about it.
6 Yes, we sent it, sent him a letter.
7 A letter.
8 And a reply came from him and he replied, did he?
9 Yes, he replied.
10 I'd like to see his reply.
11 Nikola has it, I gave it to Nikola because he put my name on it
12 and associates that with Nikola.
13 Uh-huh. It was great. It was great. I sorted out many things
14 with Slobo about his government and it's --
15 Listen, please.
16 I'm listening.
17 We have the constitutional committee session at 12.00 here, a
18 Serbian one for the first time.
20 It would be good if you could come.
22 And at 1600 hours we have that, you know, our.
24 Well, I thought we could have a short one for about half an hour.
25 To ask that Petko continue his work, you know, to continue work on our
1 constitutional committee.
2 Well, do I have to? Because I -- a foreign television crew is
3 coming at 1300 hours. Well, if you don't have to, then don't. But I
4 wanted to tell you I just thought it might be useful, it doesn't matter we
5 will explain what it's all about. Our people are informed. I hope that
6 the people from Krajina will come and the others who haven't.
7 Oh, please one more thing.
9 See if you can find, I need the Belgian political system and the
10 Dutch political system. We should ask some of our people --
11 I don't know. I think someone had it.
13 I don't know who, the Belgian one is that right? We'll see now.
14 The Belgian political system. Two communities living next to each
15 other from beginning to end. Schooling authorities and everything is
16 times two and then merges at the top of the state.
18 And there it merges on the basis of parity and with complete --
19 it's a very interesting situation.
20 It would be good if it's true. I heard it from them and I
21 received the Belgian ambassador here. He explained it to me, and there
22 are enclaves and everything, you know, so that --.
23 Well, there isn't.
24 All right.
25 In Holland, Protestant and Catholic children go to their own
1 schools from beginning to end.
2 All right. We have nothing against us living together. The only
3 problem is that someone can't impose on others.
4 The problem is manipulation and in position of will and if we can
5 ensure that, everyone will breathe more easily when they see there is no
6 imposition of someone's will.
7 See here Radovan, please, this is what we agreed on here. I think
8 it might be useful. We have the Main Board and the Deputies' Club
9 sessions. They will last for a while because we have to decide on the
10 economic -- then, you know, have the ministers submit and so on, we didn't
11 want to be profane in the assembly. It's a disgrace when it's disorderly.
12 It seems so common. It should all be prepared, decisions with invitations
13 and everything and that it's official because on the 12th we also have --
14 All right.
15 The Deputies Club here and in connection with the assembly, and
16 that it be made official then because we should never put the assembly in
17 a situation where it loses its dignity.
18 All right, I agree, I agree.
19 And there are no urgent decisions. It can all be done by the 12th
20 and then if necessary adopt some decision on the 12th and we can prepare a
21 bit, we have some material and so on. I think that the council sessions
22 are on the 12th and we should decide tomorrow. I believe it will be a bit
23 difficult for the one -- they will want to remove Begovic. We owe him a
24 very big favour.
25 Yes, yes.
1 The way he is acting, and we also have to attack Doko.
2 Yes, yes.
3 And tomorrow, I don't know what the people want but I -- perhaps
4 there should be a delegation now that we've begun, you know.
6 But it's no good to walk out of the assembly. We must stay until
7 the end and fight, you know.
8 All right. We'll discuss it today and we'll see.
9 But all right, then you'll come at 1600 hours and we'll have the
10 club and the Main Board.
12 You know, so that it's at the same time.
14 So that we finish it.
16 We'll release you for 12 hours.
17 All right, agreed.
18 And you'll speak about what's going on there.
19 All right.
20 It will be a closed session so we can have a little talk.
21 All right. Agreed. I'll inform the deputies and members of the
22 Main Board.
23 Agreed. All right."
24 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note there is just one correction
25 to make in the translation of the transcript. Would you like to hear
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes we would like to hear that.
3 THE INTERPRETER: After the word "Begovic," it should read, "we
4 owe him a debt of gratitude," not "we owe him a favour."
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for the correction. No number has yet been
7 MR. JOSSE: Please.
8 THE REGISTRAR: That will be D186, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: D186. Mr. Registrar, if you would give me the copy,
10 I'll -- I made the correction on the original so that it's -- and gave
11 my -- I -- how do you say that, I put my initials with it.
12 MR. JOSSE: Initialed it. Yes, we are grateful to Your Honour.
13 Can I mention one logistical matter in this regard which I've discussed
14 with the Registrar? And that's this. We would rather provide the audio
15 CD of all the transcripts that we play at the conclusion of
16 Mr. Krajisnik's evidence-in-chief.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I think there should be no problem. It should --
18 however, then perhaps you could, since you have to give a name to all of
19 the files, the audio files on it.
20 MR. JOSSE: Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: It should then reflect not only what you may have had
22 in mind but also the numbers assigned to the exhibits by the Registry so
23 that we -- for this one we find at least D186 as part of the title.
24 MR. JOSSE: I understand.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And I think that's technically not a major problem.
1 We can give them the names we want, isn't it?
2 MR. JOSSE: I'm sure that's right. If there is any problem with
3 it I'll revert to the Court.
4 JUDGE ORIE: You'll come back to us, yes.
5 MR. JOSSE:
6 Q. Mr. Krajisnik --
7 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter's note from the French booth.
8 The French interpretation of the transcript hasn't finished so could there
9 please be a pause? Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: We have finished now and even the French booth has
11 translated, the English booth pronounced that the French booth was not
12 ready yet.
13 MR. JOSSE:
14 Q. At the beginning of this transcript --
15 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, no.
16 Please proceed, Mr. Josse.
17 MR. JOSSE:
18 Q. At the beginning of this intercept, Mr. Krajisnik, Mr. Karadzic is
19 clearly talking about negotiations that he has had with Mr. Vance?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Where did the negotiations that he is referring to take place?
22 A. The media reported that this meeting was held in Belgrade, because
23 Mr. Vance visited Mr. Milosevic and then he met with Mr. Karadzic as well.
24 That's what this refers to, what Mr. Karadzic is saying here.
25 Q. It is apparent from the detailed report that Mr. Karadzic is
1 giving you, that you were not present at the meeting.
2 A. No, no. I was not present.
3 Q. Mr. Karadzic is clearly describing a negotiation that he had with
4 someone in particular. Who was that person, do you know?
5 A. I believe that this pertains to the late Mr. Milosevic, when he
6 was president. That's when the media reported that he met with Mr. Vance
7 and his associates.
8 Q. Why were you not present at this meeting?
9 A. I've already said, I was a representative of the state, and I
10 could not go to a meeting of this kind. How should I put it? Mr. Vance
11 wanted to see the parties involved, the parties involved in
12 Bosnia-Herzegovina were represented by the top people of the political
13 parties, from Bosnia-Herzegovina there was Mr. Karadzic, who attended the
14 meeting as the representative of the Serb party, the Serb side, and also
15 the president of the Serb Democratic Party. So there was no possibility
16 for me to attend in that capacity.
17 Q. On the first page in English, Mr. Karadzic talks about, I
18 quote, "There is no shooting." What is that a reference to, as far as you
19 are aware?
20 A. Well, also the late Mr. Vance came in order to reach an agreement
21 with Serbia or rather with President Milosevic, to exercise his influence
22 over the Serb Krajina, so that the UN forces could be brought in. Now,
23 Mr. Karadzic is saying, in Bosnia there is no shooting, there is no war.
24 Well, he didn't say like there is a war in Croatia, but it was necessary
25 for the UN forces to go there. That's what he meant. Perhaps this was
1 sporadic, but he said there is no shooting like in that other area, that
2 is to say Croatia, which is why you, and he's referring to Mr. Vance,
3 came, so that the blue helmets, the UN forces, would go there.
4 Q. What is the document that is being referred to a little later on
5 in the conversation that you say you gave to Nikola because he put my name
6 on it?
7 A. That's probably the letter that we sent or, rather, a letter, one
8 of the letters that we sent. I can't remember now. One of the letters
9 that we sent to the European Community, then, and to Mr. Vance. Since it
10 was sent to me, but for Mr. Koljevic, then I forwarded it to him. I
11 assume that that is the late Mr. Vance's response to what we had sent to
12 him, a letter. I assume that it's that letter. I could not remember
13 anything else.
14 Q. There is then a reference to the constitutional committee, a
15 Serbian one, for the first time. Tell the Chamber about that, if you
16 would, please.
17 A. When we established the Assembly of the Serb People in
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina, like any assembly, it was supposed to have its
19 commissions. Last time -- or, rather, I mean in Bosnia-Herzegovina the
20 president of the constitutional commission was always the president of the
21 assembly. Now, was this in accordance with some kind of document or was
22 it just based on inertia, but that's the way it was. If you remember, we
23 reached a decision to carry out preparations for adopting a declaration on
24 the Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Probably this commission had to
25 meet in order to carry out these preparations. There was always a number
1 of MPs involved and people from the outside. These were top legal experts
2 who were there to interpret matters so that everything would properly be
3 brought into a constitutional framework. So that's the constitutional
5 If you remember, Mr. Trbojevic came here, who was a member of the
6 commission, both in Bosnia-Herzegovina when I was president and -- of the
7 Serb republic, that is. And very often he kept taking my place. He had
8 to take my place because I could not attend meetings. Excuse me.
9 The president of the commission for constitutional affairs was
10 supposed to attend various meetings. He stood in for me many times. So
11 that's the constitutional commission of the Serb assembly in the Official
12 Gazette we can even find the names of the members of that commission. I
13 know that every MPs was a member of some commission and some MPs even
14 served on two commissions because there were several commissions where MPs
15 were supposed to be represented.
16 MR. JOSSE: Yes. The transcript uses -- says "Mr. Poplasen."
17 That's clearly a mistake. The witness said "MP" and no doubt it will be
18 changed in the correction process.
19 Q. There is then, Mr. Krajisnik, a reference to both the Belgian and
20 the Dutch political systems by Mr. Karadzic. Why was he interested in the
21 workings of those two countries?
22 A. I know that for the entire course of the talks, those two states,
23 two legal systems, were an example for us. The Belgian and the Swiss one.
24 Because they are all multi-ethnic states, entities and we wanted to apply
25 their systems on Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bosnia and Herzegovina has some
1 sort of roof authority, umbrella authority, and inside it there are
2 different entities, units, like the Wallonians and the Flemish in Belgium.
3 When we visited Belgium, we were told that there are Flemish and Wallonian
4 neighbourhoods, and we thought we could -- within the same town, and we
5 thought we could apply that to Sarajevo, organise it that way. I don't
6 know to what extent such arguments were convincing but I know that Bosnia
7 and Herzegovina were supposed to be transformed along those lines.
8 Q. A little later on, you say, "the Deputies Club here, and in
9 connection with the assembly, and that it be made official then because we
10 should never put the assembly in a situation where it loses its dignity."
11 What is that a reference to?
12 A. Well, if this is true, this is the 3rd December and the assembly
13 session was after the 11th of December, various agencies of the
14 government, especially of the SDS on the municipal level and the
15 republican level, wanted to attend the assembly session of the Serbian
16 people. It was supposed to be a large gathering. And that would have
17 virtually deprived the assembly of its autonomy. So I suggested to
18 Mr. Karadzic to separate the preparatory meeting and have it held
19 separately, the Deputies Club should meet separately, and have the
20 assembly session without them so that it shouldn't turn into a fair. I
21 was trying to keep the assembly more official, more ceremonial, because I
22 thought a large number of outsiders would overwhelm it. I didn't want the
23 MPs to be -- to be dominated over.
24 Q. Since the English transcript has been very helpfully corrected,
25 let me ask you why you said that you owed Begovic a debt of gratitude?
1 A. Mr. Begovic was, I believe, deputy minister for National Defence.
2 He was Mr. Doko's deputy, and he was a Muslim. But he was one of the
3 staff who had been taken over from before, and he was advocating
4 constitutionality in the domain of national defence in Bosnia-Herzegovina,
5 and he came into a conflict with the SDA because the SDA was favouring
6 Doko, a Croat, rather than Mr. Begovic, who used to be an active-duty
7 officer of the JNA, and I am saying, since the SDA wanted him replaced by
8 somebody from their own ranks, who would be more amenable to the
9 instructions of the party that appointed him, I said we owed him, meaning
10 we, the Serbian side, owed him, because Mr. Begovic, a Muslim, worked for
11 constitutionality and for giving the JNA the role that was due to it.
12 If you remember, Mr. Kapetina testified here, and he explained all
13 sorts of violations perpetrated vis-a-vis the JNA by the ministry. Mr.
14 Begovic was very unbiased and objective in his work. That was my opinion.
15 They later replaced him, but at this point in time, the situation was as I
16 just explained.
17 Q. Was Mr. Begovic a member of any political party?
18 A. I don't think so. Just like Mr. Kapetina stayed in his position
19 from the previous regime, Mr. Begovic stayed in the ministry and the SDA
20 supported him, although he wasn't a member of the SDA. But he was a
21 Muslim so he was automatically considered to be quote unquote, Muslim
23 Q. And presumably, the reason you go on to say that you have to
24 attack Doko is for the reasons you have just given?
25 A. Yes. For the reason I just named and for some other reasons I did
1 not indicate. Mr. Doko did exactly as witness Kapetina explained in his
2 testimony. He didn't recognise any laws, and he did a lot of things
3 completely neglecting, bypassing the law.
4 Q. Towards the end of the conversation, you say to Mr. Karadzic,
5 "It's no good to walk out of the assembly. We must stay until the end
6 and fight, you know."
7 Explain to the Chamber what you meant by that comment, if you
8 would, please?
9 A. I was thinking that members of the Serbian Democratic Party and
10 the Serbian renewal movement, that is Serbian MPs, had already walked out
11 of the parliament several times. When their constitution was being
12 violated and their national interests were offended, they would walk out
13 and leave me alone. I was saying that's not a good thing to do. We have
14 to fight. We did put up our veto but we shouldn't walk out in anger.
15 There were other walkouts by the HDZ and the SDB, and I would go and talk
16 to them, trying to persuade them to come back. My idea was that just like
17 we decided to participate in the work of the joint assembly and discuss
18 only our own interests in the Serbian assembly, we should stay and fight
19 for our rights in the joint assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, for what
20 we thought was right.
21 MR. JOSSE: I have no further questions on this intercept,
22 Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Josse. Just looking at one detail.
24 When you said that you didn't want to make the assembly a fair, where too
25 many outsiders would dominate, did you at that time have in mind the joint
1 assembly still or were you at that time talking about the Serb assembly?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was talking about the Serbian
3 assembly, and I used a picturesque expression because that sort of thing
4 did not happen in the joint assembly any way.
5 JUDGE ORIE: So therefore I do understand that at a certain moment
6 you're talking about the Serb assembly when you are discussing this, and
7 at a later stage you're talking about how to operate in the joint assembly
8 so as to defend yourself and not walk out?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. That we should not walk
10 out of the joint assembly. You're right, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Judge Hanoteau also has a question. From the
12 transcript it does not always clearly appear which assembly you're talking
13 about but it's now clear to me. Judge Hanoteau?
14 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Yes. In this Serbian assembly,
15 how could external people who would attend the assembly -- how could they
16 dominate the MPs? I don't really understand how that could be. What
17 exactly do you mean?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we had 63 MPs. If we
19 let in 50 members of the Main Board, seven or eight members of the
20 Executive Board, maybe some people from the Regional Board, plus some
21 other guests, then the MPs are outnumbered by non-members, and if I was
22 talking about numbers, anybody present has the right to participate in the
23 discussion, although MPs have priority. I was trying to say that this
24 gathering would be 63 versus 80 non-members. That sort of thing didn't
25 happen, but I wanted to prevent any such possibility. I didn't want the
1 MPs to be overwhelmed by such a large audience and there was a keen
2 interest on the outside in attending the session.
3 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Yes, but is it constitutional or
4 legal that guests to the assembly could actually take the floor and
5 discuss and debate? Is that in the text? Is it provided for in the text?
6 You know, to have people that are -- who are not MPs? That was in the
7 text, that people who were not MPs could take part in the discussion, I
8 guess they couldn't vote but they could debate? Is that what you're
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely, Your Honour. Precisely.
11 They were allowed to debate but they couldn't vote.
12 JUDGE HANOTEAU: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 MR. JOSSE: I have no other questions at this moment, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then I take it Mr. Stewart has some further
15 questions. Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
16 MR. STEWART: One or two, Your Honour, yes.
17 Examination by Mr. Stewart: [Continued]
18 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, good morning. Mr. Krajisnik, we come --
19 chronologically we are really coming to January 1992. Just so that you
20 can understand, Mr. Krajisnik, and feel comfortable about it but also to
21 indicate to Their Honours and the Prosecution, there were two Serb
22 assembly sessions held in January 1992, one was on the 9th of January,
23 when a step was taken, the proclamation of the declaration of the Serb
24 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and then there was another session on
25 the 26th of January 1992.
1 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, all that -- Your Honours, all that
2 material is available.
3 Q. But, Mr. Krajisnik, I'm not going to ask you questions about those
4 sessions. There may be method to my madness but just so you understand
5 they haven't been forgotten; it's a deliberate decision not to ask
6 questions at the moment about those sessions. The reason in a nutshell
7 being that the points essentially get picked up later in subsequent
8 sessions. So it isn't that January 1992 was a dead month, Mr. Krajisnik.
9 But I do then want to go straight to something which indisputably happened
10 at the end of January 1992 which is that you were in Belgrade, were you
11 not, at the very end of that month?
12 A. Yes, I was in Belgrade. But I was never sure whether it was end
13 December or the end of January, but I think you're right, it was the end
14 of January, if we both mean one large meeting held in Belgrade.
15 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, there is sufficient evidence that this event took
16 place at the end of January that -- let's put it this way, I am not
17 disputing it on your behalf in this Court. It's really clear that it was
18 the end of January. You're referring to one large meeting held in
19 Belgrade. Was Dr. Karadzic there as well?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And what were you there for in Belgrade?
22 A. Just a moment ago I mentioned the visit of late Mr. Vance. The
23 subject of our agreement was the bringing in of blue helmets to the
24 Republic of Serbian Krajina, to areas that later became UNPAs. The
25 leadership of Serbs from the Republic of Serbian Krajina, from this
1 Croatian side of the Krajina, was opposed to the plan that later became --
2 came to be known as the Vance plan. The Presidency of Yugoslavia, headed
3 by Mr. Kostic at the time, convened a large meeting, including
4 representatives of the Serbian Krajina, Bosnian Krajina, four or five of
5 us from Sarajevo, Mr. Koljevic, Mr. Karadzic, Mrs. Plavsic, and myself,
6 and there was also Mr. Mladic because he was at the time a commander of
7 the JNA in Knin, and the purpose of that meeting was to exert pressure on
8 the leadership of the Republic of Serbian Krajina, which was then called
9 SAO Krajina, to accept the Vance plan, and I believe we spent two or three
10 days discussing from dusk until dawn to get them to accept that plan, and
11 there were all sorts of representations made there.
12 Q. Now, we have -- Mr. Babic, of course, was a central figure in that
13 particular event, wasn't he?
14 A. Yes. Late Mr. Babic was against it and, as you put it, he was the
15 central figure, central figure to the opposition. He and his government
16 were opposed to the plan, so they were the focus of the debate.
17 Q. So what was the role of you, the Bosnian Serb group that you have
18 mentioned, at that meeting?
19 A. There was the president of Banja Luka municipality, people from
20 Banja Luka region. We were a mixed group. It was not just the
21 representatives of the Assembly of the Serbian People. Our role was to be
22 used in order to exert pressure to get them to accept the Vance plan.
23 When I say to be used, it's quote-unquote, of course, because we were
24 supposed to participate, to contribute, to persuading the people from the
25 Serbian autonomous district in Krajina who were closer to us and trusted
1 us more, to accept the plan.
2 Q. So you -- you said used quote-unquote. Was it your feeling that
3 you were being properly used or that you were being exploited?
4 A. When somebody brings you in, in order to exert pressure on a third
5 party in a matter that doesn't involve you directly, I cannot find a
6 proper word for it. I don't think it was something bad. We were brought
7 in to help exert that pressure. That's why I used that word, although it
8 might have been better if I had said that we had been brought in to
9 present our arguments and help persuade the SAO Krajina people. Until
10 then, we didn't have any say. Nobody asked us anything. It was all
11 between Serbia and the SAO Krajina. So I used the term conditionally.
12 Q. Were there any significant differences of view in relation to that
13 issue involving the Krajina and Mr. Babic, any significant differences of
14 view among you, Mr. Karadzic, Mr. Koljevic, Mrs. Plavsic?
15 JUDGE ORIE: It sounds a bit as if a cat is snoring or --
16 MR. STEWART: A rather large cat, I think, Your Honour, yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any source known for this? Are all
18 microphones apart from mine closed at this moment?
19 MR. STEWART: Well, I just closed mine.
20 JUDGE ORIE: That seemed to help, Mr. Stewart.
21 MR. STEWART: Maybe I was that cat.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Now --
23 MR. STEWART: It wasn't me, so ...
24 JUDGE ORIE: It could be that construction works outside of
25 this --
1 THE INTERPRETER: The French interpreter seems to think that it's
2 because the panel, be that the microphone is against the panel and that's
3 what's vibrating, from Mr. Stewart.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Your microphone might be --
5 MR. STEWART: I just moved it, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 MR. STEWART: It seems I was the source of the cat at the end.
8 But maybe that will solve the whole problem. Seems to have done. My
9 apologies. There it was.
10 Q. Yes, Mr. Krajisnik. Before that seismic interruption, I was
11 asking you whether there was any significant differences of view in
12 relation to the issue involving Krajina and Mr. Babic among you,
13 Mr. Karadzic, Mr. Koljevic, Mrs. Plavsic.
14 A. Yes, there were.
15 Q. And can you fairly briefly describe what those differences of view
17 A. Well, Mr. Karadzic, like Mr. Koljevic and I, were on the line that
18 the Vance plan should be accepted, and we trusted the negotiators when
19 they said that nothing -- no further improvements can be made, whereas
20 Mrs. Plavsic sentimentally supported the leadership of the Serbian
21 autonomous district of Krajina. She was saying that demands should be
22 made for higher equality between the Serbian and the Croat side, so she
23 differed in her opinion from us, the other side, including the Serbs from
24 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
25 Q. Did she keep those differences to herself in the more public
1 meetings involving others than the Bosnian Serbs?
2 A. As far as I can remember, she said that publicly at that meeting.
3 She was even applauded for that by the Serbs, by the leadership of the
4 Serb Autonomous Region of Krajina, as far as I can remember. Well it's
5 not as far as I can remember, I'm practically sure that she said that
6 publicly at this joint meeting.
7 Q. Were there, during your -- how long were you in Belgrade at that
9 A. I think that we worked all night, a day and a night, and that we
10 even continued the next day. Perhaps it's two days and the whole night.
11 We didn't even sleep. I don't know whether we went back home the next day
12 or the day after that. I don't remember. But I know it was a long
13 session, a day and a night and the following day. When the
14 representatives of the Serb autonomous region did not come or the late
15 Mr. Babic did not come to the meeting that was held the following day,
16 there was just a short break. But we didn't sleep at all that night.
17 Q. Did -- during the whole time you were in Belgrade on that visit,
18 did you, by which in this context I mean the Bosnian Serbs from Sarajevo,
19 not including Mr. Babic in that, did you, the Bosnian Serbs from Sarajevo,
20 have any discussions with anybody else about issues affecting Bosnia other
21 than this particular issue about the Krajina and Mr. Babic and his
23 A. I think the answer is no because we were so preoccupied with the
24 big problem. It would have been wrong for us to talk about Bosnia without
25 having resolved the central issue at that meeting. All of the people who
1 were from Belgrade left the meeting pretty soon, the following day, and
2 the rest of us, we all went our respective ways. I think that's the way
3 it was, as far as I can remember. If there was a meeting, these were
4 unofficial meetings, but it's not that we discussed Bosnia.
5 Q. Now, at that time, you were in the -- still in the middle of
6 negotiations under the auspices of the European Community, weren't you?
7 A. Yes. Yes, yes. Well, yes, yes, we were.
8 Q. And Portugal had taken over the Presidency as from the 1st of
9 January 1992, for six months. That's right, isn't it?
10 A. Well, I think the answer is yes. Oh, yes, you're right, because
11 Great Britain took over afterwards.
12 Q. Did you know at that time that you were going to be having an
13 imminent meeting with Mr. Cutileiro?
14 A. I think so, not at that meeting, though. I think that an
15 initiative followed, primarily because the Muslim-Croat coalition had
16 already passed a decision on the referendum and then the European
17 Community got a bit more actively involved. I think so. I can't get the
18 dates in the right order, it seems, but at any rate, around that time, the
19 talks started and ambassador Cutileiro was there with his delegation, and
20 he was a mediator, if I can put it that way, among the three sides.
21 Q. We'll come to that quite soon, then, Mr. Krajisnik. Before we get
22 there I want to ask you about a couple of other things. One is an exhibit
23 which is P64A, binder 11, tab 264. I don't know whether Mr. Krajisnik
24 gets that from another source. I have a copy for him.
25 MR. TIEGER: It may be premature. I was waiting for a copy for
1 the Prosecution side as well but I see the usher is still involved in
2 distributing. Thank you.
3 MR. STEWART:
4 Q. There seem to be two items on one little clip of paper,
5 Mr. Krajisnik.
6 MR. TIEGER: Excuse me, Your Honour. I'm sorry, Mr. Stewart. We
7 just have a copy of the B/C/S so we are unable to follow this. We don't
8 have all the binders with us, of course, and we did not --
9 MR. STEWART: I'm not surprised. My apologies. I'll see if we
10 can do something about that straight away.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from giving the exhibit number, could you tell
12 us what it is?
13 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. I was going to just pause while
14 Mr. Tieger gets the piece of paper. It's described 13th of February 1992
15 in the English. It's described as minutes of the meeting of the rather
16 critically 00 Municipal Board. That's what we see and that seems to
17 reflect the B/C/S as well from what I remember. But, Your Honour, it's
18 not that item I'm going to ask about. It's the next one if we go on in
19 the English two pages.
20 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, you'll find a reference to -- you'll find the date
21 the 17th of February 1992 and a heading, "Meeting of the Municipal Board
22 of the Prijedor SDS." Do you see that?
23 A. I see that it's from Prijedor but I can't see the date.
24 Q. It should be just above that. If you've got the meeting of the
25 Municipal Board of the Prijedor SDS, the meeting was convened ...
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Do you see? It should have a date the 17th of February, just
3 above that. Does it not, Mr. Krajisnik?
4 A. Yes, yes. I see it. The 17th of February 1992.
5 Q. All right. And then agenda, about two or three lines under the
6 heading, "Agenda. Report on the implementation of conclusions adopted at
7 the meetings of the Main Board and the Serbian Assembly of BH after
8 adopting the agenda. 28 members. Simo Miskovic, president of the" --
9 well, OO SDS we get again, "reported on the meeting held in Sarajevo."
10 The key speaker was Mr. Karadzic, president of the SDS BH, the issue
11 discussed was a BH act of secession carried out by the SDA. In view of
12 this we are forced into the creation of national communities in ethnically
13 defined areas. Then quotes, "The position of the European Community is
14 said to have been that it would not interfere in internal arrangements in
15 BH." Soon to follow is a debate on the constitution of a Serbian BH and
16 then its adoption. The goal of the republic is to strengthen local
17 authorities in the regions, economic and political, to the maximum. The
18 region of Bosnian Krajina is also working in that direction. After the
19 situation in the country has calmed down and proper conditions created,
20 all Serbian territories and communities will be united by the will of the
21 people. The international community has taken the view that it will not
22 recognise a sovereign BH as an independent state. The SDA is largely
23 engaged in sorting out the electoral rolls. Any participation by the
24 Serbs in any form of referendum organised by the SDA is out of the
25 question. In this context, it is necessary to put into motion the second
1 level of the standpoint the main board of the SDS, BH. Party activists
2 and commissioners must be sent to cover the entire territory and
3 population (Serbs). Everyone should provide security, protection in their
4 respective areas."
5 Now, Mr. Krajisnik, can you -- can you say what --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, before we continue, I have on my screen,
7 which should represent the exhibit as it was tendered, a different version
8 of what seems to be the same document, but it may -- yes. Yes. The
9 document that is in evidence has -- I wouldn't say a really different
10 translation but it's at least another translation. Could we work on the
11 basis of the documents that have been tendered? I'm now looking at P64
12 tab 264. It's not exactly the same, and I'm aware of the problem of
13 double translations being made, but let's try to focus on what is in
14 evidence in order to -- of course, if for one reason or another that
15 translation would not be the best, we always could try to have it replaced
16 for a better one but let's try not to work on the basis of so many
17 different versions of the same document.
18 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, can I simply say I accept that. We do
19 try. We will continue to try.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. STEWART: We will probably from time to time fail simply
22 because of the plethora of different versions of different documents but,
23 Your Honour, we will do our very best to avoid this problem.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I checked and P65 tab 89 seems to be also that
25 different translation, and not the one you're using at this moment. So we
1 find it in two sources.
2 MR. STEWART: Not sure whether it makes me feel better or worse,
3 Your Honour, that a different translation has been exhibited twice.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No. The only thing I'm trying to do is to make
5 it clear on the record where we find the different versions of the same
6 document, and neither of the two is the one you're using at this moment
7 but I don't think that the differences are such. I'll follow on the basis
8 of the other one and check whether there are such differences that it
9 should be clarified or whether it's just a matter of words used, slight
10 linguistic differences. Please proceed.
11 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I don't dissent one iota from what
12 Your Honour has said. The record also probably makes clear how difficult
13 it is to cope with material in this way but we will do our best.
14 Q. The -- the bit that I just read, Your Honour, is that -- may I
15 inquire, is that significantly different?
16 JUDGE ORIE: No it's approximately the same.
17 MR. STEWART: Yes, thank you, Your Honour.
18 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, the specific key phrase, I think that is clear,
19 was "it's necessary to put into motion the second level of the standpoint
20 the Main Board of the SDS, BH." Can you say what was being referred to
22 A. We saw that here several times. We heard that by way of
23 testimony. I really don't know what this is. This is being tied to
24 variants A and B but I cannot really bring that into connection with that
25 provision because it seems that this is a consequence of the meeting that
1 was discussed here through the bills from the Holiday Inn, as far as I can
2 remember. So there was this joint meeting, negotiations were discussed,
3 and it was already stated publicly that Serbia and Montenegro would be set
4 up as Yugoslavia, as a core so to speak, so that it would be easier for
5 Bosnia to be recognised and to go for ethnic units. That was the meaning.
6 The interpretation was komisars but the word in B/C/S was "poveranici."
7 Do you remember that in a way the positions of the president of
8 the party were being transmitted. I'm trying to portray the situation as
9 it is now but I cannot say with any degree of certainty what this second
10 level is supposed to be. Perhaps the other variant. I don't know.
11 Perhaps they thought along similar lines. Something like this. But I
12 don't see how I can link this up to variants A and B. I don't know what
13 they did. Prijedor did not do anything after that. You can see that
14 through the documentation. I mean, through the documentation of the
15 municipal board of Prijedor, you can see that before that and then and
16 after that they did not do anything in connection with variants A and B.
17 So I don't see what this would be.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, just for your information, there is a
19 slight difference to the extent that the one translation is -- and that's
20 the one -- let me just have a look. I think you used. No. The one you
21 used talks about that it's necessary to put into motion the second level
22 of the standpoint of the Main Board of the SDS, BH, party activists and
23 commissioners, whereas the other speaks about the other translation says
24 it absolutely necessary to cover the territory and the population (Serbs)
25 by activists and representatives. So commissioners and representatives
1 might not be exactly the same but that's the difference, the main
2 difference, I identified.
3 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, can I indicate how this happened?
4 Because it may be of some help to others to avoid them chasing down blind
5 alleys or something. I got the version I've got -- I'm not blaming
6 anybody on the Prosecution side for this, Your Honour, but I got it from
7 the footnote in the OTP pre-trial brief, which is, I suggest, not a
8 particularly unreasonable thing to do sometimes when you're working but,
9 of course, if the document which is footnoted in the OTP pre-trial brief
10 all those years ago is a different version from the version has appeared
11 in evidence, first of all it's not surprising this sort of thing happens
12 and secondly why it might be helpful is just for Your Honours and others
13 to realise that occasionally if one is working from that document, there
14 is going to be a discrepancy between the footnoted document and the actual
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber has quite some understanding for
17 the problems. At the same time, awareness of differences is I think most
18 important to avoid whatever misunderstandings and confusion.
19 MR. STEWART: Indeed, Your Honour. We are grateful to know that
20 the exhibited version is different. Thank you for that.
21 Q. And then a bit further down in this same document, well,
22 immediately afterwards there is a heading, "Links with Serbia." Well,
23 whether it's a heading or not, it says "links with Serbia." Do you see
24 that, Mr. Krajisnik?
25 A. Yes. I see that.
1 Q. And then several paragraphs and then a sentence, "We need to
2 establish control over our territories. This has been agreed at the
3 plenary session held before the queried joint session of the Serbian
4 Assembly of BH in which Srdic as a deputy of the Serbian illegible of the
5 Serbian people of Prijedor municipality took part."
6 The reference to a plenary session there, Mr. Krajisnik, held
7 before the assembly, what would you understand that to mean? It's a
8 session of what or whom?
9 A. Could you tell me where this is? I really can't find it. I saw
10 the links with Serbia but I can't find this other part so that I see what
11 it is.
12 Q. You see some figures, 150 --
13 A. Yes, yes.
14 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... 1.5 million and it's
15 immediately after that. It's the next line after the reference to 10 per
16 cent of Muslims. It says, "We need to establish control over our
17 territories. This has been agreed at the plenary session held before the
18 queried joint end -- query session"?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Here is a major difference in the translation, the
20 other translation says preliminary meeting. Could we perhaps first -- Mr.
21 Krajisnik, where a meeting is mentioned, is that a preliminary meeting in
22 your language or is it a plenary meeting -- did you see, yes, a plenary
23 meeting, Plenary Session.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It says pleminarni meeting here,
25 pleminarni. That's what it says here, and that means a preceding meeting,
1 a previous meeting. It says pleminarni here.
2 MR. STEWART: Excuse me, Your Honour, it can't say pleminarni in
4 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note, yes, that is exactly what
5 it says.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Could be --
7 THE INTERPRETER: It is not a Serbian word but that is exactly
8 what the original says. It's a mistake in Serbian.
9 JUDGE ORIE: So it's understood --
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is not right in Serbian.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then at least it's -- it doesn't seem to be
12 very much of a Plenary Session but rather a preceding or preliminary, but
13 the language is unclear.
14 MR. STEWART: Yes, sorry, my apologies to the interpreters. It
15 was a rather odd situation where a hybrid non-word in English was being
16 produced as a translation from the Serbian. That was what was puzzling
17 me, not surprisingly, perhaps. I'm still a little puzzled, to be frank.
18 Q. But, Mr. Krajisnik, whatever it's described as what sort of -- can
19 you say what sort of meeting that was, of whom, that was held before the
20 session of the Serbian assembly?
21 A. The meeting should be a broader meeting. Apart from the Club of
22 Deputies, there were other participants before the Serb Assembly. This
23 could be plenary meeting all throw that's not what is written here, so a
24 bigger meeting the way I understand it before the meeting of the Serb
25 assembly of B and H. That's what it says here. Where Srdic a Serb deputy
1 from Prijedor took part. A Serb deputy of the Serb assembly.
2 Q. The Serb assembly held immediately before this meeting here had
3 been on the 15th, Saturday, the 15th of February. Leaving aside the text,
4 do you actually remember whether there was such a meeting before the
5 assembly session?
6 A. The 15th of February. I do not remember. I just saw that there
7 was a bill here from the Holiday Inn. I think it's the 15th of February.
8 So that's how I think that there was a meeting, a broader meeting, before
9 the assembly meeting. But I cannot remember now. If somebody were to ask
10 me whether I remember, I don't remember, but I saw the bill and I believe
11 that such a meeting was held.
12 Q. Just -- it's about half a page on in the English, but do you see,
13 then, Mr. Srdic speaks and then there is a reference to Mr. Miskovic and
14 then a Dragan Sidjak speaks. Do you see that? Sidjak
15 A. Sidjak, Dragan Sidjak. The page is 534. If that is the text that
16 reads, "He believe that is a Serbian BH," et cetera; is that it?
17 Q. That's exactly it, Mr. Krajisnik. My translation says he
18 "believes that is a Serbian -- will only lead to war and does not think
19 that the idea will work. He is convinced that a more realistic option
20 would be a Krajina, particularly Sarajevo, as the centre. First of all,
21 do you -- did you -- did you know Mr. Sidjak?
22 A. I saw him once at a session but I did not talk to him. I know who
23 he is but I didn't talk to him. I cannot say that I know him.
24 Q. When he refers there to a -- a Krajina, is it clear to you what he
25 was -- what that Krajina would consist of?
1 A. I have talked to the Trial Chamber here about a historical
2 context, that there was an ongoing wish to unite the two Krajinas. This
3 is not uniting the Serb Krajina and the Bosnian Krajina but generally
4 speaking for the Autonomous Region of Krajina, well, I mean, that's what
5 it's about, that Krajina, and he says that its capital would be Sarajevo
6 and he says that that is a better option than having a Serb republic
7 within Bosnia-Herzegovina. That's what he's talking about, that it would
8 be better for this region, this autonomous region, that already exists,
9 that that should be some kind of separate entity and he did not mean
10 uniting with the Serb Krajina, although on several occasions due to fear
11 there was this idea which was prevented all the time and that is to unite
12 the two Krajinas. Even as far as the Vance Plan was concerned that would
13 have been a violation of the Vance Plan. We tried and we succeeded in
14 preventing that.
15 Q. And then Mr. Srdic --
16 A. Sorry, perhaps I did not hear the right interpretation. He says,
17 "in the Serb BH." But this is the recording clerk who is writing this,
18 and it's as if he is saying it. He sees only war in the Serbian BH. I
19 mean, he is not saying, I guarantee that there is going to be a war. His
20 assessment is that there is going to be a war soon. So it is the
21 recording clerk who was writing this down, so as if he said it. So he is
22 conveying an opinion of his which is a bit different from him saying, "I
23 think that" -- I mean it would be different if he called for war himself.
24 He simply thinks that the situation is such that there is going to be a
1 JUDGE ORIE: There also is a slight difference in translation.
2 Let me just check. The version you are using reads, "He believes that a
3 Serbian BH will only lead to war and does not think that the idea will
4 work." Whereas the other translation says, "He only sees war in the
5 Serbian BH." Which is not exactly the same. And thinks that it could not
6 function. Just to draw your attention to differences in translation.
7 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. Your Honour, I was going to
8 say I have one more question on this document so perhaps I can proceed
9 with it.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. STEWART:
12 Q. Mr. Srdic who speaks then shortly very shortly after, there's
13 Miskovic's response and Srdic, "we've seen that he is a deputy in the Serb
14 Assembly." He says, "An important argument in our transformation is the
15 plebiscite that we have held. The creation of states entails massive
16 emigration, relocation, and swapping of territories, and it is something
17 that cannot be avoided."
18 Was that view expressed by Mr. Srdic? By this time, mid-February,
19 was that a widespread view among deputies in the Serb assembly?
20 A. I'm afraid that this will be misunderstood. The previous
21 participant in the discussion said that the Krajina, the Krajina option,
22 the Krajina that was autonomous, should be a state, and Mr. Srdic is
23 saying or rather he is opposing that, and he says, "Our decision reached
24 by plebiscite is different." Although he didn't say this, but creating
25 states within Bosnia-Herzegovina would lead to relocation and so on and so
1 forth. If you remember once we read something to that effect here when
2 Mr. Karadzic said something like that and he's against that option. He
3 thinks that what Mr. Sidjak said was better. So the meaning of what
4 Mr. Srdic said was to oppose this discussion that we are now supposed to
5 create some kind of princely states. Rather, Bosnia should be transformed
6 into three national, constituent units.
7 If you saw this up here, perhaps it is hard to understand, this
8 other one talks about Sarajevo, and he says, Mr. Sidjak, that he is
9 particularly against having its seat in Sarajevo. All of these phrases
10 are just inserted, so they have a different interpretation when I read it,
11 I who understand the language, than when this is interpreted or
12 translated. The point of what he was saying was not to create states
13 within Bosnia-Herzegovina because that would lead to relocations and so on
14 and so forth.
15 You can analyse everything here and you will see that that's the
16 way it is.
17 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, would that be a convenient point for
18 Your Honours?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We will adjourn and resume at 11.00.
20 --- Recess taken at 10.34 a.m.
21 --- On resuming at 11.07 a.m.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, please proceed.
23 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. Your Honour, may I hand to
24 Mr. Krajisnik through the usual channels -- it's the 7th session,
25 transcript of the 7th session of the Serb Assembly, 15th February 2002,
1 and keeping my fingers crossed, Your Honour, it's P65, binder 8, tab 88.
2 Q. Could you go, please, Mr. Krajisnik, to page 15?
3 A. I found it.
4 Q. I've numbered that in the margin one, and you as the president
5 chairing this session, you introduced the session, and you're there and we
6 see this throughout this meeting at this point you're you the meeting are
7 discussing the draft constitution for Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the draft
8 in -- Professor Milanovic is talking and he says, do you see, third
9 paragraph of what he's saying, with respect to Article 3, and the
10 definition of the Bosnia-Herzegovina territory?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Page in English would be, Mr. --
12 MR. STEWART: It's 15, Your Honour. I'm sorry, Your Honour, did I
13 not say that? I beg your pardon.
14 Q. He says with respect to Article 3 and the definition of the BH
15 territory, "let me tell you what I have proposed at the meetings of our
16 constitutional commission, of which I am a member."
17 "Mr. Krajisnik, we had difficulty finding that draft that was
18 before the meeting. What we do have is the constitution as adopted."
19 MR. STEWART: Your Honours, that's P64 A, tab 551, binder 20.
20 Q. And Mr. Krajisnik, that shows, and perhaps you could say if it's
21 your recollection, that was the provision under discussion, a very simple
22 form of Article 3, just stating the republic is a part of the federal
23 state of Yugoslavia. Do you recall that was -- that was the very short,
24 simple statement in Article 3 as adopted, but Article 2 of the
25 constitution, as it was adopted, and we are jumping ahead here, said the
1 territory of the republic consists of Serb autonomous regions,
2 municipalities and other Serb ethnic entities, including the regions in
3 which genocide was committed against the Serb people in the Second World
4 War. We've come across that wording before, broadly in that form, but do
5 you recall that that was what was adopted as the definition of the
6 territory of the republic in the constitution?
7 A. My answer to both your questions is yes.
8 Q. If we go to -- you can go straight on to page 23. And the speaker
9 is Mr. Zekic, Mr. Goran Zekic. I put the note number 2 in the margin. He
10 says, "I have skipped a reference to the territory of the republic. This
11 Article 3 has been outlined so that it leaves open the possibility for
12 most Serbian territories and areas to become parts of Serbian
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina but this is a realistic version of a peaceful
14 resolution to the situation. Perhaps we should still include a reference
15 to a historical standard, a reference to territories that belonged to us
16 once historically. In case of conflict, for instance, the constitution
17 would provide for the possibility that the territories which used to be
18 ours but were lost not only as a result of genocide but because of
19 migrations, too, but which are necessary. For instance, this stretch
20 along the Drina, to connect Romanija with Serbia and others, we must take
21 them and make a breakthrough, we should not deprive ourselves in advance
22 of this possibility or giving up claiming such standards in case of a
23 different outcome in this situation."
24 So, Mr. Krajisnik, it appears, but say immediately if this is
25 wrong, beyond the definition which incorporates the regions in which
1 genocide was committed against the Serb people in the second world war,
2 Mr. Zekic is suggesting something in addition to that by reference to
3 historic territories which had been lost; is that correct?
4 A. Well, yes. There were various proposals. One of them was the one
5 you just mentioned. Historically, some areas were populated by one ethnic
6 community, then by another, then there were migrations. So it was not
7 very clear but he probably meant Srebrenica and the Drina valley where he
8 comes from. That's probably the reason why he spoke as he did.
9 Q. But his view was not accepted, and not therefore adopted in the
10 constitution, was it?
11 A. As far as I remember, it was not included because there were
12 reasons. We wanted to stretch our hand, to reach out to the other side
13 once again, wanting this constitution to be the constitution of all the
14 people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, although the decision on referendum had
15 already been taken. The constitution was only proclaimed on the 22nd of
16 March 1992. As for the draft, I have that copy with me. I can give it to
17 you if you're interested, although I don't think that's necessary. I have
18 one copy of the draft as it was in the first version.
19 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, if you're saying you actually have the draft with
20 you here today, well, yes, as a matter of fact, I would be interested,
21 with the Trial Chamber's permission.
22 A. No, not here. I have it in my room at the prison.
23 JUDGE ORIE: May I take it, Mr. Stewart, if you're interested that
24 you'll still be interested tomorrow if Mr. Krajisnik --
25 MR. STEWART: I will remain interested tomorrow, Your Honour,
1 you're absolutely right.
2 JUDGE ORIE: If you could bring it, Mr. Krajisnik, that would be
3 highly appreciated by Mr. Stewart.
4 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. Could we go on, then, to -- it's page 26 in the Serbian. It's top
6 of page 27 in the English. It's margin number 4, and it's Mr. Milojevic
7 speaking with regards to Article 3. Mr. Krajisnik, I think we are going
8 to find that Article 3 gets renumbered as Article 2 in the constitution as
9 it emerges, when you bring the draft tomorrow. You're nodding but we are
10 going to find that that there was a renumbering, I think. But with
11 regards to Article 3, "this morning I looked up the borders on the map.
12 Please let us give this Article serious examination once more. I am not
13 sure that I could mark borders on the map on the basis of the present
14 Article 3. We should first consider the concept of Serbian ethnic areas."
15 Mr. Krajisnik, on the basis of an article number 2 or 3, that
16 talked about regions in which genocide was committed against the Serb
17 people in the Second World War, would you have been confidently able to
18 mark definite borders of the territory of the Serb republic at that point
19 in time?
20 A. Well, the map as to where the genocide was committed is included
21 in the documentation of the OTP. It is documented. One of the maps is
22 attached. It wasn't the point here, nor was I able to draw the borders
23 then. The point was that this was being discussed during the talks with
24 Mr. Cutileiro, and you have pressure for Krajina to be formed, and there
25 were also actions aimed at stopping a process that we were reluctant to
1 support, the breaking up of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and we were proceeding in
2 gradual steps as long as it was possible to find a solution through talks
3 with Mr. Cutileiro. So this was a time when the talks were already far
4 advanced and it was already known what the criteria were, et cetera.
5 That's why people were talking about ethnic areas and other entities. So
6 this was a time when the talks on Bosnia and Herzegovina were already
7 under way under the aegis of the European Community talks on
9 Q. The position is this, Mr. Krajisnik, that the adoption of -- and
10 it was adopted, the adoption of a constitution containing a definition of
11 the territory of the Serb republic was done in circumstances where there
12 was at least considerable room for doubt as to where exactly one would
13 draw the boundaries of that territory?
14 A. You're quite right. It's a different matter that each of those
15 who contributed to the discussion saw that map differently but it was
16 impossible to discuss borders without an agreement between the three
17 sides. That was always a requirement. You couldn't simply say "these are
18 our territories," and that's it. It was impossible, at least from the
19 view point of the Serbian side. That was our official position, which is
20 different, of course, from the position of certain individuals. Everybody
21 by the way wanted their village to be in the Serbian part of the
22 territory. That's why this was worded in such a general way, to make it
23 amenable to stretching because it was a matter for negotiation. It was
24 not only up to us.
25 Q. If we go about -- it's about a dozen lines down in the English, I
1 hope it won't be too different in the Serbian, but there is a reference to
2 51 per cent, should be a figure, and a sentence that begins, "We should
3 say that we shall grant the right of absolute ethnic majority." Do you
4 see that sentence? There is a reference to the phrase, 'absolute ethnic
5 majority.' Then this follows that. Do you have that point, Mr.
6 Krajisnik? It's only about a dozen lines after where the number 4 has
7 been marked in the margin.
8 A. It's page 27 in Serbian, where you see 31 per cent and 51 per cent
9 on the same page, if that's the same thing.
10 Q. A few lines above that, then, it says, "We shall say that we shall
11 grant the right of absolute ethnic majority to others just as we claim the
12 absolute ethnic majority right for ourselves as the criterion for the
13 determination of the sovereignty of a people. I think that this may be
14 the sole criterion because only where it makes an absolute ethnic majority
15 can a people be considered a sovereign people or make sovereign decisions
16 without asking the others. I think that only through the inclusion of
17 this (I am just bringing this forth for discussion because I think it is
18 very important), the inclusion of the absolute ethnic majority criterion
19 as the criterion of delineation, the physical delineation between us and
20 them, we should accept one thing. We cannot transform our 31 per cent of
21 the people into 51 per cent (interjections from the Benches). They will
22 be a minority among us just as in some areas, we will be a minority among
24 Interjections on the benches? Did that signify some degree of
25 dissent or opposition to what Mr. Milojevic was saying there?
1 A. If I remember this correctly, they were opposed to this reference
2 of 31 per cent because the opinion prevailed that a large number of Serbs
3 had declared themselves as Yugoslavs in the census, 31.5 per cent were
4 nominally Serbs, 43 per cent of Muslims, and 17.5 per cent of Croats. But
5 there was a large number of Yugoslavs, and the ace of Mr. Milojevic was
6 that we couldn't rely on 31.5 per cent as being the true number of Serbs.
7 He was saying, we have 51 actually, because we had most of the land, 64
8 per cent. So he was opposed to the 31 per cent as being taken as the
9 figure. The Serbs were the most numerous people in Yugoslavia so many of
10 them declared themselves as Yugoslavs. Some Croats did as well but it is
11 true that it was mostly Serbs who put themselves into the category of
12 Yugoslavs and other people after those present did not approve his
13 argument. They didn't approve even what he said earlier about the
14 absolute majority. The relative majority was supposed to be the criterion
15 whereas somebody would have 40 per cent, 30 per cent; 43 per cent should
16 have been the decisive figure. Even what he said about, you know, they
17 were going to be a minority in our area and we were going to be a minority
18 in their area, it's certainly not right that we should make decisions
19 without asking the others. I think he went too far. He is a nice man, a
20 Professor, but I think he went too far in his philosophising, if I can put
21 it that way.
22 Q. Just to seek clarification, Mr. Krajisnik, of something you said.
23 It's at line 19 of the transcript. You said he, that's Mr. Milojevic was
24 saying we have 51 per cent actually because we had most of the land of the
25 just looking at the text here, he says, "we should accept one thing, we
1 cannot transform our 31 per cent of the people into 51 per cent, they will
2 be a minority among us, just as in some areas we will be a minority among
4 Mr. Krajisnik, it's not perhaps a hundred per cent clear. When
5 you say that Mr. Milojevic was saying we have 51 actually, and he was
6 opposed to 31 per cent being taken as the figure, the English reading
7 tends to suggest the opposite. That's why I'm -- unless you're going to
8 explain a misunderstanding there, Mr. Krajisnik.
9 A. When I just heard this interpreted to me, it's exactly the
10 opposite. The figure, 31 per cent, or 31.5, never mind, that's the
11 percentage according to the 1991 census, the percentage of Serbs in
12 Bosnia-Herzegovina. And now when I was talking about 31 and why that
13 caused a reaction, I explained that it was because of Yugoslavs. Let me
14 not repeat myself. But here, Mr. Milojevic says speaking of the
15 territories that probably the preceding speakers discussed, said, "We
16 cannot transform our 31 per cent and present it as if we made up 51 per
17 cent." That's the point he was making. And it's only later the
18 territories are discussed because we were not dividing population. What I
19 mean to say is that we were not talking about separating the population
20 but about delineating between territories and that's the difference
21 between those maps, if you remember, that I mentioned.
22 So your observation is completely correct. It was a
23 misunderstanding. He was saying we cannot say 51 per cent of the
24 population and we want more territory than we have. That's what caused a
25 reaction from outside.
1 JUDGE ORIE: One additional clarification, when you mentioned the
2 64 per cent, that was your own observation in this respect? Is that your
3 comment to it? Because I do not see anyone speaking about 64 per cent.
4 So I understand that that was your own observation in relation to this
5 matter discussed.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. That's --
7 that was my comment indeed. I don't know whether it features in his
8 contribution but we bandied about that figure quite often.
9 MR. STEWART:
10 Q. He then says, "This is a reality of life. We shall regulate our
11 interactions at the level of the republic on the basis of reciprocity and
12 we shall claim reciprocal rights. We must accept that there will be areas
13 where Serbs will be a minority. But Croats or Muslims will be a minority
14 in other areas. Excuse me, but in some of the purest Serbian areas, we
15 have only 60 per cent Serbs. Others make the remaining 40 per cent. This
16 is life, and this is the reality of life that we are witness to and must
17 have it reflected in the constitution, that we will be both a minority and
18 a majority, that they will also be both a minority and a majority, and
19 that on the basis of a physical demarcation of our separate sovereignties
20 and on the basis of reciprocal rights we will be able to arrange some kind
21 of interaction right from the beginning."
22 Mr. Krajisnik, that passage that I've just read, did that match
23 the intentions and approach of the negotiating team that were about to
24 resume talking to Mr. Cutileiro and others?
25 A. That was the official policy and the subject of our discussions
1 with Mr. Cutileiro, namely that certain ethnic communities will be in the
2 minority in some areas but that there should be reciprocity and so on and
3 so forth. So what Mr. Milojevic said stands, and he advocated it. Plus
4 we advanced that as a necessary condition in our talks with Mr. Cutileiro.
5 We knew that Serbs would be a minority in some Muslim areas, for instance,
6 and we had nothing against that as long as their ethnic rights were
7 protected as well as their human rights.
8 Q. Now, he continues, and it's at the very foot of page 27 of the
9 English, slightly different page in the Serbian but it's immediately
10 following that passage. "We cannot know what is coming 50 years from now."
11 Do you see that reference, Mr. Krajisnik?
12 A. Yes, I see it.
13 Q. "We can cannot know what is copping 50 years from now. Let us
14 leave that to the process of time. We do not know whether there will be
15 resettlements or cleansing of ethnic territory or if we are to reach such
16 a stage of civilisation where it is irrelevant whether we are in a
17 minority or a majority, but at this stage, we should opt for the criterion
18 of ethnic majority and an acceptance of the ethnic minority."
19 What did you understand Mr. Milojevic to be talking about when he
20 used the phrase there, "Cleansing of ethnic territory"?
21 A. I know exactly what kind of debate was going on then. Deputies
22 from the Bosnian Krajina, that means Krajina in Bosnia, were saying that
23 there were whole areas that were predominantly Serb. They mentioned
24 Cazin, Bihac, Prijedor, and so on, and they were saying that that people
25 was ethnically cleansed, meaning killed, in the Second World War. And
1 after the war, there were migrations also to Vojvodina and to Slavonia.
2 There were some immoderate qualifications uttered there. And
3 Mr. Milojevic made his point in the first sentence. "Let us -- wait and
4 see what happens in 50 years. Time will show. What we should deal now is
5 our current problem, the one that's on the table now. And we should
6 concentrate on the transformation of Bosnia and Herzegovina."
7 It's not as if he was advocating ethnic cleansing. He was
8 invoking the genocide that took place in World War II in his reply to
9 deputies from Bosnian Krajina. I'm just trying to explain what kind of a
10 debate it was, because they were saying that it was many years before the
11 first soldier from that area that was cleansed in World War II went to
12 join the army. That's the extent to which the men had been killed.
13 Q. And then at page 30, and it's apparently 30 of both the English
14 and the version in your language, Mr. Krajisnik, Dr. Karadzic speaks.
15 There should be a number 6 in the margin against where he begins. Do you
16 see that?
17 A. Yes, yes, I see it.
18 Q. And then the third paragraph of Dr. Karadzic's distribution there,
19 he says, "With regard to majorities, many areas in Bosnia and Herzegovina
20 would remain undefined in this respect because no group can claim absolute
21 majority in them. I think that where we have a majority we should not be
22 mentioning whether we have an absolute or relative majority but only refer
23 to areas where Serbs constitute a majority. There are areas and we
24 arranged with one of our partners that in the area where they represent a
25 relative majority we will vote so that the area is defined as theirs and
1 that they will do the same with their vote in those areas where we
2 constitute a relative majority. After all, the maps are surely going to
3 be the subject of negotiation and of some dispute. It would be so much
4 better if these are political rather than of some other kind, and I do
5 think that it is entirely possible."
6 Mr. Krajisnik, he says there, Dr. Karadzic, we arranged with one
7 of our partners that in the area where they represent a relative majority
8 we will vote so that the area is defined as theirs. He's talking there,
9 is he, about -- well, either Croats or Muslims?
10 A. I could say yes, perhaps, although I believe that Mr. Karadzic was
11 a bit closer to Croats there. There were more talks with the Croat side
12 than with the Muslim side. As for what Mr. Karadzic was saying, that was
13 the version before, not the final version. If there are 33 per cent
14 Serbs, 33 per cent Croats, and 33 per cent Muslims, where nobody has
15 either a relative or an absolute majority. So the three ethnic
16 communities should agree to which area one place belongs. For instance,
17 Muslims and Croats say, Together we form 66 per cent; this place should go
18 into this territorial unit. So Karadzic was referring to one of the other
19 two sides here and we were saying that some areas -- they were saying that
20 some areas should go to the Croat side and some areas to our side, in
21 order to round off the territories. That was the territorial principle
22 advocated in this way.
23 Q. If we go on to page 37 in the English. It's page 38 in your
24 version, Mr. Krajisnik, you should find the number 8 in the margin.
25 A. Yes, I found it.
1 Q. This is Professor Kosutic talking. I don't think we have come
2 across him before. Who was he, Mr. Krajisnik?
3 A. He was a professor of the University of Belgrade, a professor of
4 law. I mean, he's a trained lawyer. He was invited to help our lawyers,
5 and he attended this session and he gave a contribution with regard to the
6 constitution. Actually, he was asked to come in through private channels,
7 if I can put it that way. He was pretty close to Mr. Karadzic so he
8 invited him to come to be a sort of adviser to us so that we avoid
10 Q. And if we go against the margin number 8, where he is speaking at
11 the page 37, English, page 38, in your version, Mr. Krajisnik, he says the
12 first matter relates to the referendum question. Do you see that?
13 A. Yes, I see that.
14 Q. "The people has decided in favour of living in a common state with
15 those people who wish the same. This must be stated. The country
16 referred to is called Yugoslavia. Naturally, it is possible that the name
17 will change later, if the proper authorities so wish, but that is
18 irrelevant. In this moment, the country is Yugoslavia and that is the
19 name it was referred to as in the referendum question. Similarly you are
20 keeping to your own words that you are absolutely not against living in a
21 common Bosnia and Herzegovina under the provision that it be a state of
22 three equal peoples."
23 And Mr. Krajisnik, the constitution, as it was adopted at that
24 meeting, stated baldly in article 3, the republic is a part of the federal
25 state of Yugoslavia.
1 Had you got an indication from Belgrade -- and I don't mean with
2 respect to the academics in Belgrade, such as this Professor, but from the
3 political leaders in Belgrade, of their attitude towards that provision
4 being included in your Bosnian Serb constitution?
5 A. The decision was a definite one, as I've already said. I said
6 that a few days ago. To establish a new Yugoslavia and that we could not
7 be in it because of the position taken by the conference on Yugoslavia.
8 That Yugoslavia had not been established yet. I think it was only in
9 April. I can't remember exactly when it was promulgated.
10 I remember this very well. In the draft, this was yet another
11 argument in our talks with the other sides, although we were quite aware
12 of the fact that we could not be in Yugoslavia because quite simply
13 Yugoslavia would be established along different lines. Mr. Kosutic
14 probably mentioned that in his talks with Mr. Karadzic. I don't think
15 that it wasn't that he wasn't informed by him. He was saying, well, you
16 stay in Bosnia, then he explained that model, but they didn't want to
17 discourage people who kept saying, well, we had a plebiscite. Why are you
18 now in the constitution throwing us out of Yugoslavia? It's not a
19 problem. We can promulgate the constitution later. Let's find a solution
20 for Bosnia and Herzegovina. It's going to be easy for us to turn this
21 constitution of ours into something that would be incorporated into the
22 documents of the internationally recognised state of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
23 I think I can remember all of this pretty well. Maybe I can make a
24 mistake but I know what our wish was, to have these negotiations and to
25 have a solution. And indeed, what followed later were some steps forward
1 in that regard. Positive steps forward.
2 Q. And then there is a contribution from Dr. Kalinic, and this is
3 probably -- probably begins at page 57 or just possibly 56 in your
4 version, Mr. Krajisnik, but in the English it's at the top of page 54.
5 Dr. Kalinic begins to speak. Do you find where he starts, Mr. Krajisnik?
6 A. Yes. I see it. And I see the number 9 after that, where
7 Mr. Kalinic begins.
8 Q. Yes. You do see the number 9. I'm actually going to start
9 earlier, though, Mr. Krajisnik. I'm going to start near the beginning of
10 Dr. Kalinic's contribution. But summarising, he says, Mr. President,
11 ladies and gentlemen, I will give a few proposals. Then the essence of
12 the first long paragraph is got from somewhere in the middle where he
13 says, "I strongly believe we should really hurry up the work on the
14 constitution, aware that this constitution is not the first or the last
15 one," but I'm not going to dwell on that paragraph.
16 The next paragraph he says, "The other thing I wanted to suggest
17 seems much more important. We shall have a constitution but it remains
18 questionable whether our state will begin to function. Earlier today, in
19 a smaller group, I suggested a medical procedure. You know that our
20 ministers, our council of ministers, with Mr. Cizmovic and Mr. Simovic,
21 are to tour all our municipalities and establish the true situation during
22 the next seven days, which would help us determine whether we have an
23 infrastructure which may become operational once we proclaim our Serbian
24 Republic or not. We cannot be sovereign if we are not able to exercise
25 power over the territory that is ours."
1 First of all, Mr. Krajisnik, can you say in his reference to a
2 smaller group, was Dr. Kalinic referring to a group of which -- in which
3 you had been a participant?
4 A. No. I don't know who it was he was talking to. He could have
5 talked to his MPs from the reformist forces or somebody else. I mean, I
6 don't remember any such idea being voiced at any meeting that I attended.
7 And I believe that he talked to somebody else, some circle.
8 Q. And did you, at this point, before Dr. Kalinic spoke at this
9 assembly meeting, did you know of this plan or proposal for Mr. Cizmovic,
10 Mr. Simovic, and maybe others, to tour all our municipalities and
11 establish the true situation?
12 A. I'm convinced that I did not know about anything like that. I
13 know that they didn't go and visit later so it was just a proposal of his.
14 I believe this was just a contribution to the discussion, some proposal of
15 his by way of a contribution to this strengthening but that was not
16 adopted and it was not carried through, and I do not remember Mr. Cizmovic
17 and Mr. Simovic visiting those areas.
18 Q. Then I'll go to the next paragraph. He begins, "The third thing
19 that I'm really uneasy about." Do you find that, Mr. Krajisnik, that will
20 be at page 58?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Page 55 in the English. "The third thing that I'm really uneasy
23 about has bothered me since the last time and I can see that no progress
24 has been made, but perhaps the gentlemen from the inner circles of leaders
25 of the Serbian party may have more to say about it. I can see that the
1 constitution provides for the JNA to take on the defence. I wish to God
2 it was this simple or easy to achieve. I think that the next seven days
3 should be used for something else, something we said in our previous
4 conclusion, that our relationship with the Yugoslav People's Army should
5 be redefined in terms of determining the common ground in our political
6 and essential interests and that we have urgent talks with General Staff
7 and ask them whether the Yugoslav People's Army will be ready on the 23rd
8 or worse yet on the 29th or the 30th when Bosnia and Herzegovina will be
9 declared an independent country, something I have no doubt will happen
10 because all that has been arranged and stored in computers. We should ask
11 them whether they would defend the territories of the Serbian people, that
12 is the territories that belong to the common state of Yugoslavia."
13 So first of all, Mr. -- Dr. Kalinic is -- he's offering what from
14 the Bosnian Serb point of view is a relatively gloomy prediction, isn't
15 he, that independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina may well be declared later
16 that same month?
17 A. Well, Mr. Kalinic is panic-mongering here and unfortunately that
18 actually happened. He was speaking in a panic-stricken way, that Bosnia
19 and Herzegovina would be recognised, that there would be a war. It was
20 the 30th, I think, probably. It's February. So it couldn't have been the
21 30th of February. It had to be the 30th of March. So we had to see
22 whether the Yugoslav People's Army, whether they would protect us, as we
23 had planned, as our position was, and whether they will not do that. All
24 of this is panic-stricken thinking, and unfortunately in part he proved to
25 be right ultimately because we really did not believe that Bosnia and
1 Herzegovina would be recognised before the transformation is adopted, just
2 as Mr. Cutileiro told us exactly. We would carry out this transformation,
3 we would go for a referendum, after this transformation, and then that
4 would be the end. I have an article from that period of time. He said
5 first the referendum and then the independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina but a
6 referendum about this joint proposal of all three sides. So what he
7 proposed that we should establish some new variant, that is to say some
8 Territorial Defence or something like that. All of that is confusing and
9 a product of his concern, which regrettably was rather well founded too.
10 Q. Well, Mr. Krajisnik, as a matter of fact I hadn't overlooked the
11 technicality that February, as usual, didn't have a 30th, though it did
12 have a 29th that year, by the way. But whether he was thinking of a
13 particular month, he was -- is correct, is he, that you -- it's correct,
14 is it, you understood that Dr. Kalinic was saying it's going to happen
15 very soon, independence being declared?
16 A. Yes. Yes. There were some intimations, if I can put it that way,
17 some tangible and realistic ones, that Bosnia and Herzegovina would be
18 recognised. Mr. Kalinic is right on that, so this additional warning
19 addressed to the international community and making people aware of our
20 constitution was aimed at that. Let us agree on this transformation first
21 so that we would resolve the problem by peaceful means. We don't need the
22 situation to deteriorate any further. So you're right, yes, there were
23 quite a few indications that Bosnia and Herzegovina would be proclaimed an
24 independent state.
25 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, so far as you knew at the time of this assembly
1 session, had anybody among the Bosnian Serb leadership already had any
2 discussions with the General Staff of the JNA about what would happen or
3 would be done if and when Bosnia and Herzegovina was declared an
4 independent country?
5 A. We did not talk about that variant, but the Presidency of
6 Bosnia-Herzegovina, I don't know exactly in which period of time, talked
7 about this in Sarajevo and in Skopje about this, with the General Staff,
8 that is to say about the fate of the Yugoslav People's Army in the
9 territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina. As for us, the Serb side, whether we
10 talked to the JNA and to the General Staff, about this variant, what would
11 happen if Bosnia-Herzegovina were to be recognised, are you going to
12 defend us? I know, or rather I don't know about that kind of variant.
13 And I'm sure that nobody talked about this because this went without
15 They would carry out their constitutional role. That's what we
16 wanted. That's the way we wanted to. There should be no war and that
17 there should be a transformation of Bosnia-Herzegovina and up to that
18 moment the JNA should safeguard the peace and if there are attacks then
19 they should defend themselves. If you remember, at one point Karadzic
20 says we don't need an army, we have the Yugoslav People's Army, that
21 promised to defend those who are attacked, and since we are not going to
22 attack anyone, then they are going to defend the Serb people. It's in a
23 statement that he made. I think that it was presented here too. So it
24 should carry out its constitutional function. The Yugoslav People's Army
25 should carry out its constitutional function.
1 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, we appreciate you're not a lawyer, but your answer
2 said they would carry out their constitutional role.
3 From your point of view, as a politician and economist, not a
4 lawyer, in those circumstances, where Bosnia and Herzegovina declared
5 itself independent and let us hypothesise was recognised as independent
6 by -- sufficient of the international community, what did you perceive to
7 be the constitutional role of the JNA from that moment?
8 A. First of all, our understanding was that we did not accept that
9 recognition. For us it was unlawful recognition because it was done in an
10 unlawful way. It is well known the constitution says what the role of the
11 JNA is. Now, what were we thinking? We wanted part of that authority
12 that had to do with Bosnia-Herzegovina, should -- would mean that the JNA
13 would be there as the only remaining armed force, that they should protect
14 those who are protected, to preserve the peace. That is what we had in
15 mind. It is not for me to say. And it was not for anyone of us to say
16 that Yugoslavia should be protected and many others but as far as Bosnia
17 and Herzegovina is concerned, we expected them to protect the peace and if
18 anyone were to be attacked, to protect them, that they should be there
19 sort of as a buffer. That is the point of what I'm saying, that this is
20 constitutional subject matter, but certainly this does not exhaust it.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: It should read those
22 who are attacked.
23 MR. STEWART:
24 Q. Now, from your standpoint, and you made this very clear,
25 Mr. Krajisnik, a declaration of independence, recognised albeit by the
1 international community, from your standpoint was unlawful. I'm simply
2 noting what you have clearly said in that vein.
3 Was -- well, I haven't asked a question yet, Mr. Krajisnik.
4 That's -- have I misrepresented your position, first of all?
5 A. You presented my position quite rightly, although perhaps some
6 additions would be needed. Even today I think that Bosnia and Herzegovina
7 was recognised in an unconstitutional manner. It should have been done in
8 the assembly and then the constitution changed. Mr. Filipovic wrote a
9 book. I can slow it to you. I can show you what his comments are in
10 terms of how all of that was done then. It was not constitutional. Well,
11 but that's the past.
12 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, I'm certainly not trying to conduct a legal seminar
13 here so my questions are directed towards -- well, your position as a
14 politician. Perhaps make that clear.
15 Did you -- did you seek advice from lawyers at this point, this
16 assembly session, 15th of February, had you sought advice from lawyers as
17 to what the constitutional position of the JNA would be in those
19 A. I think that we did not discuss the JNA at any length because it
20 was there. There was a provision in our talks with Mr. Cutileiro that as
21 for the question of defence we would regulate it separately. Let me just
22 add something to what I've already said. When I said a few moments ago
23 that we did not recognise that way of recognising Bosnia-Herzegovina, at
24 that moment we said, "Let Bosnia be recognised but we want it to be
25 transformed now because that was promised to us. We want that process to
1 be carried through, internationally recognised, to complete the Cutileiro
2 plan." So after all, the UN recognised the country but we asked for it to
3 be transformed and to finally bring this process and this crisis to an
4 end. We were against a unitary Bosnia-Herzegovina, the kind that was
5 recognised, but we were not against a Bosnia-Herzegovina that would have
6 been transformed as had been proposed by the European Community. So that
7 was the meaning involved.
8 As for seeking advice from lawyers, since this is a question of
9 the constitution, eminent lawyers took part in the debate on the
10 constitution itself. As for the JNA, it went without saying that it would
11 remain there during some transition period so we did not debate that. I
12 don't even know whether we asked them but I don't think so. It wasn't
13 necessary in our view.
14 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, perhaps to avoid any possibility of cross-purposes,
15 when you talk about the constitutional role of the JNA, you say it was
16 well known the constitution says what the role of the JNA is. Were you
17 referring to the newly adopted constitution of the Serb republic or the
18 constitution of federal Yugoslavia, as it had already been existing?
19 A. At that time, that former Yugoslavia still existed, not the newly
20 established one. So according to that constitution, the Yugoslav People's
21 Army had its constitutional role. That's what I meant. Because we were
22 not authorised to envisage the role of the Yugoslav People's Army. It was
23 not under our command and we didn't have the right to do that. We are
24 taking the facts as they were.
25 Q. So is it the position that you were relying upon also in the sense
1 of leaving it to the JNA to implement or carry out their constitutional
2 role, without guidance, direction, request, from you?
3 A. First of all, we did not have the ability to influence them.
4 Perhaps there were some individuals who thought that they were the best
5 military leaders possible, but our position was that we seek information
6 as to how the Yugoslav People's Army would behave but we could not make
7 any suggestions and we could not order them, and that indeed was not done.
8 We became its natural ally because the other two sides turned against the
9 Yugoslav People's Army, sealed off their barracks, waged war on them and
10 so on. So we were closing to the Yugoslav People's Army then and we could
11 have some information. As for guidelines regarding its moves, its action,
12 we didn't do that and we couldn't have done any such thing.
13 Q. Now, is this correct, Mr. Krajisnik, that at this time, and I'm
14 still talking about 15th February, when you were holding this assembly
15 session, you were as we know about to have further meeting and talks with
16 Mr. Cutileiro and others, your evidence to the Trial Chamber has been that
17 you wished and in your case at least, Mr. Krajisnik, you told the Trial
18 Chamber you were really rather hopeful that some positive, peaceful
19 solution would emerge from that, that that's right so far, isn't it, as a
21 A. You are absolutely right, and there was a solution. In March a
22 solution had been found. If you remember the first version of the Lisbon
23 agreement and then the Sarajevo agreement. So that indeed followed.
24 Q. We'll come to those, Mr. Krajisnik. But at this point in time, in
25 February, with that being summarised as your position, there nevertheless
1 was, wasn't there, lurking there the distinct possibility that before that
2 process could come to a successful conclusion, it would be pre-empted by a
3 declaration of independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina recognised by the
4 international community? That -- Dr. Kalinic may have had that fear more
5 strongly than others but it was a distinct possibility lurking there in
6 your minds, wasn't it?
7 A. You're right. I've been saying Mr. Stewart is right so often that
8 I'm afraid I'll be hard put to say differently in the future.
9 Q. I'm reeling from the shock, Mr. Krajisnik, but I'll recover.
10 Mr. Krajisnik, if that did happen, what, in your mind, at that
11 time, in February, would be the need or the trigger for any action by any
12 military forces?
13 A. Well, that's what happened. I'm not going to say now what
14 happened in the beginning of April -- sorry, yeah, beginning of April,
15 although you will probably ask me, but if the proclamation of independence
16 of Bosnia-Herzegovina happened without the realisation of the European
17 promise that Bosnia and Herzegovina would be first transformed into three
18 entities, that would have meant that somebody else's solution was imposed
19 on us, and it was unpredictable what could happen. I don't think that
20 anybody on our side would have made any moves towards war, but just as war
21 began in April, in a spontaneous, or shall I say uncontrolled way, we were
22 afraid of exactly the same thing when we were at that assembly session.
23 There was a lot of armed people, there were armed forces, and weapons are
24 never silent. The JNA later withdrew, paramilitary units appeared. It
25 doesn't take much for the entire Bosnia to be set on fire.
1 Q. So what -- Mr. Krajisnik, I appreciate in the light of the fact
2 that all sorts of things did happen and sometimes it's not absolutely
3 straightforward to turn your mind back to the middle of February before
4 they happened, but as best you can do, I'm asking you at this time in the
5 middle of February, for the senior figures among the Bosnian Serbs, what
6 was your real fear as to what would happen if this declaration and
7 recognition of independence did pre-empt the peace discussions?
8 A. Publicly, when we debated, everybody was saying that that could
9 never happen, and even if it did we wouldn't recognise it. People did not
10 admit to fear easily. I'll tell you what I felt and what I thought, I
11 personally. As I said before, I thought we were going to find a solution,
12 and I was afraid of war. When I say I was afraid of war, I mean I was
13 afraid of the stories I'd been hearing about what war brings with it, and
14 I saw that everybody on the Serb leadership was concerned that such a
15 unilateral move could lead to uncontrolled moves that would be made by
16 people on the local level about which you cannot do anything. So you
17 conduct a two-pronged policy. You keep telling your collocutors that
18 something will be done, there will be no war, and then when something
19 happens, you have to hear them tell you, yesterday you were telling me one
20 thing, today you're telling me quite another, see what happened, et
21 cetera. All sorts of information was flowing in. So we were making this
22 move geared solely at negotiations. We were saying that we had drafted
23 this constitution but we will proclaim it only at a later stage, wanting
24 to find a solution in the meantime.
25 Q. Did -- was Dr. Kalinic's request or suggestion that there should
1 be urgent talks with the General Staff adopted?
2 A. I don't know whether it was adopted or not. I attended another
3 meeting when the leadership or rather the Presidency of Bosnia and
4 Herzegovina talked to representatives of the General Staff in Sarajevo. I
5 attended that one but not any other. Even if something like that had been
6 adopted, it wasn't carried out. I'm sure it wasn't carried out anywhere
7 outside Sarajevo, outside this meeting. There were contacts with
8 Mr. Kukanjac, who was there in Sarajevo. All the sides had contacts with
9 him but he is not the General Staff.
10 Q. Without my proposing to explore it immediately, Mr. Krajisnik, but
11 just so we can be clear, when you referred a moment ago to a meeting that
12 you did attend with representatives of the General Staff in Sarajevo, when
13 was that meeting?
14 A. I really can't remember the date but I know it was around that
15 time. There was Mr. Brovet, Mr. Adzic, and Mr. Kadijevic. I think that
16 was the composition of the delegation of the General Staff, and on the
17 other side, there were representatives of BH, the president of the
18 assembly, the Prime Minister, the president of the Presidency. I cannot
19 name any others, I'm afraid. I could make a mistake. But it's documented
20 somewhere and the media wrote about it.
21 Q. Before or after this assembly session? Are you able to say that?
22 A. I really have to be honest. Logically, it should have been after,
23 but I can't remember when it was held. Plus, this meeting did not discuss
24 the topic raised by Mr. Kalinic. It was not about are you going to defend
25 the Serb people? It was just a meeting with representatives of the
1 General Staff. I don't remember that we ever talked with the General
2 Staff about this proposal put forward by Mr. Kalinic. I don't remember
3 that we ever asked them, can you protect us? Will you defend us? If not,
4 we are going to establish our own army. I am certain I would have
5 remembered if the Serbian side had discussed it with the General Staff,
6 ever. It went without saying, as I already said, that they would defend
7 whatever party is attacked, and in the meantime, we were looking for a
8 political solution.
9 Q. At this time, in -- right in the middle of February 1992, did
10 Mr. Ratko Mladic have an active role in the politics of Bosnia and
12 A. No, no. I don't think so. At least not until the establishment
13 of the army of Republika Srpska. But before he became commander of the
14 Main Staff of the army of Republika Srpska, he did replace
15 General Kukanjac as commander of the 2nd military district and before that
16 he was co-commander in Knin which covered a larger area, including a bit
17 into Bosnia and Herzegovina. I met him for the first time at the
18 discussions concerning the Vance-Owen plan and after that I didn't see him
19 again for a long time but politically speaking, I had never heard that
20 name. I didn't know him. I wasn't aware of him, although I'd heard about
21 him, but he didn't play any role.
22 Q. So let's be clear. You had mentioned specifically earlier this
23 morning that he'd been in Belgrade for that meeting or those meetings
24 involving Mr. Babic. You said that, Mr. Krajisnik. I've just said a
25 moment ago that was the first time you met him. So you had not seen or
1 met him at all in the couple of weeks since the Belgrade meeting when we
2 get to this assembly on the 15th of February; is that right?
3 A. No, no. I didn't meet with him before. I met him only then. He
4 occupied some sort of position in Knin. I didn't talk to him. I didn't
5 know him, until he replaced Kukanjac. I don't know when that was exactly,
6 but after that I saw him twice, I think.
7 Q. Is -- was the next time that you ever saw Mr. Mladic after you
8 went -- moved to Pale in April of 1992?
9 A. I think that's that period, yes. I think after he replaced
10 Mr. Kukanjac, after that incident happened in Sarajevo when the command
11 was being withdrawn, he came to replace Kukanjac and he was probably
12 working on the withdrawal of other barracks, and I must have seen him
13 then. You're right. That's that time. I hadn't seen him before that,
14 because I know that he had met with Mr. Kukanjac before. He led me
15 through the barricades to my home in Zabrdje, so until the war began, I
16 didn't see Mr. Mladic. It's all coming back to me, especially some
18 Q. At the time of this assembly session on the 15th of February 1992,
19 had you personally, Mr. Krajisnik, been involved in any war planning for
20 the Bosnian Serbs?
21 A. No, absolutely not. I'm convinced that none of the Serbs from
22 Bosnia and Herzegovina worked on any plan. There was absolutely no
23 military plan except for the JNA. I can say that with 100 per cent
24 certainty, because I should have known if anybody had planned anything
25 militarily. I'm talking about the civilian side. The Yugoslav People's
1 Army is something different and we didn't have anything official to do
2 with them. There was some SDS support to the army in their move for
3 mobilisation but we did not plan anything with them.
4 Q. Let me clarify by broadening the question a bit, Mr. Krajisnik.
5 When I ask whether you had been involved in any war planning, I'm
6 extending the question to include any form of civil defence planning or
7 war preparations as well as purely armed forces planning. Do you -- is
8 the question clear to you, extended in that way?
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, may I just ask whether I understand the
10 question? Are you referring -- perhaps among other matters -- to
11 distribution of arms among Serbians? Would you like to include such an
12 event, for example?
13 MR. STEWART: I'm sure I would include that, Your Honour, in that
14 question, yes. I was trying to --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, many words.
16 MR. STEWART: Express it as neutrally as I could.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do understand, but that's the core of the
19 MR. STEWART: It's --
20 JUDGE ORIE: At least it's an important part.
21 MR. STEWART: One of the matters, Your Honour, yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, when you said that you should have
23 known if anybody had planned anything militarily, would you include, and
24 where you said I'm convinced that none of the Serbs from Bosnia and
25 Herzegovina worked on any plan, would that include any form of
1 distribution of arms among civilians or at least outside the JNA or the
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am -- I've been on guard all the
4 time, fearing any kind of imprecision, but I did allow an imprecision.
5 What I meant to say is that it would have been logical for me to have been
6 informed, but as to whether arms were distributed or not, I know how
7 people received arms. Krsman mentioned it. I'm talking about something
8 that was official, and when we talked, maybe in the council, at the club,
9 in assembly sessions, I never attended a meeting that would have discussed
10 military organising. Two things did happen at the session of the assembly
11 of Bosnia-Herzegovina. An issue was raised concerning an incident on two
12 occasions two trucks or rather several times trucks carrying weapons were
13 intercepted. Once the Serb side was blamed in Herzegovina and in
14 Sarajevo. I simply didn't get involved in that. That was up to the MUP
15 and the Prosecutor's office and others. I'm speaking from me personally.
16 We had a plan in Bosnia-Herzegovina, a contingency plan, in case the war
17 broke out. I had that plan, as the speaker of the parliament of
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was in my drawer. That's something that existed
19 for Bosnia-Herzegovina. As to whether the Serb side militarily organised
20 something, made any plans, I completely ignored all about it at that time.
21 Maybe somebody else was planning something at the time. I am receiving
22 all sorts of information now but I did not know anything about it then.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Could I then ask when you said I received all sorts
24 of information but you did not know anything about it, then are you
25 referring to later moments that you received all sorts of information or
1 were you talking about what happened at the time?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President --
3 MR. STEWART: Could I observe, Your Honour in my transcript it
4 does very specifically say "now."
5 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just see so.
6 MR. STEWART: In the transcript he said, "I'm receiving all sorts
7 of information now but I did not know anything about it then," which seems
8 clearly to deal with the point Your Honour just raised.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: If I've overlooked that, then -- let me just check.
11 Yes. I see that. My question was superfluous. I should not have put it
12 to you because you have been clear enough, Mr. Krajisnik. I apologise.
13 Please proceed Mr. Stewart.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Stewart is right again.
15 MR. STEWART: I worry about that, Your Honour. On that note,
16 Your Honour, I see the clock.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We will adjourn. We'll resume at ten minutes
18 to 1.00.
19 --- Recess taken at 12.32 p.m.
20 --- On resuming at 12.58 p.m.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, there was one matter of clarification
22 that I'd like to ask the witness about.
23 MR. STEWART: Of course, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, this morning you spent some time on
25 explaining to us that you would have an absolute majority situation or a
1 relative majority situation where one of the ethnic groups would be the
2 largest one but less than 50 per cent. Now, yesterday you explained to us
3 in relation to the document, the variations A and B document, that there
4 would be no need at all to take certain measures in Variant A majority
5 Serb municipalities because it was more or less the existing situation
6 that they had a majority so therefore they could exercise all these powers
7 or authority on the basis of the existing situation.
8 May I take it from that explanation that you interpreted the
9 Variant A and B document where it speaks about majority Serb, that that
10 would be an absolute majority Serb situation? Is that a correct
11 understanding of your testimony?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. You are quite right. Variant
13 B was for municipalities where Serbs had 51 per cent of deputies in the
14 municipal assembly. 51 per cent or more. That's about Variant A.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. A, not B, yes. So majority municipality would
16 mean absolute majority. Okay. Thank you very much for this.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there was talk about
18 the municipal assembly here, where you have 51 per cent of the power,
19 meaning deputies. That's where you have proportionate power. But the
20 consequence was what you just said, that Serbs voted for Serbs, Muslims
21 for Muslims, Croats for Croats. So the municipality where we had power
22 was where we had 51 per cent of the deputies, therefore majority power.
23 There was no talk about ethnic composition but the two were linked. They
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's clear to me.
1 Mr. Stewart, please proceed.
2 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, can we move on to the next point in this same
4 document, which is at page 61 of your version and it's at page 58 of the
5 English. I've marked it as point 10.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. It's Dr. Karadzic speaking, and he says, "Something tells me that
8 Mr. Krajisnik is going to conclude the proceedings soon. So I would make
9 two requests." Do you see that, Mr. Krajisnik?
10 A. Yes, I see it.
11 Q. "The first request is addressed to Krajina deputies. I am asking
12 them to work a lot with our people there, with party membership, to
13 explain our strategic goals and to explain our tactics on a daily basis.
14 Even if we have not changed our tactics that much, we went straight
15 through the mountain so that our people can clearly see what we are
17 Were there at that time, Mr. Krajisnik, identifiable, formulated
18 strategic goals of the Bosnian Serb leadership?
19 A. It is evident here that Mr. Karadzic is asking nicely the deputies
20 from Krajina, meaning Banja Luka Krajina, which was, as I said before, the
21 Bosnian part of Krajina, to explain what we had been talking about that
22 day, that we want a unified republic of the Serbian people in
23 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and that the version of Krajina that they often wanted
24 to put forward as their own version was not our strategic goal. When he
25 talks about strategic goals, he means that tactically speaking, we should
1 be saying something to be interpreted by something else, whereas we were
2 talking straightforwardly. We want Yugoslavia, we want a constituent unit
3 in Bosnia. So that was our strategic goal, to have one single unified
4 constituent unit within Bosnia-Herzegovina. At this moment, it was
5 proclaimed in the Republic of the Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
6 So Mr. Karadzic asked the deputies to explain our goal, our current goal,
7 to the Serbian people in Krajina. You remember the conclusions of the
8 Autonomous Region of Krajina within Yugoslavia. So this was an attempt to
9 explain what happened at this session. It's almost identical to what was
10 adopted on the 12th of May but we'll deal with that later. So our goal
11 was to explain to the people on the ground everything that was discussed
12 at that session that day.
13 Q. Yes, Mr. Krajisnik, we will certainly come to it in the course of
14 your evidence. It's not my intention to go two or three months on and
15 launch into an exploration of those 12th of May goals now but where you
16 say in that answer, "It's almost identical to what was adopted on the 12th
17 of May," what specifically at this point is almost identical to what was
18 adopted on the 12th of May?
19 A. Well, if we follow the sequence of events, we have a constitution
20 here which, for political reasons, refers to Yugoslavia, but what was
21 discussed was the constitution of the Serbian Republic of
22 Bosnia-Herzegovina. That was in the Cutileiro plan something that was
23 supposed to be called the Serbian constituent unit in Bosnia and
24 Herzegovina on a par with the Muslim and Croat constituent units in
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina. So Mr. Karadzic is saying, "Please explain that all
1 of us Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina will have one constituent unit. It will
2 not be your region that will form the constituent unit." Of course, that
3 needed explaining because people had already gotten used to their identity
4 as a region. And that was closely linked with our talks, negotiations
5 with Mr. Cutileiro. But politically speaking we were preparing the ground
6 rather than saying to the people abruptly, "We cannot be part of that
7 Yugoslavia that hasn't even been formed by that time." That's what I
8 think is rather similar.
9 Q. Yes. I'm leaving this document now, Mr. Krajisnik, and
10 Your Honours, so you can put that on one side, the assembly session.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps, Mr. Stewart, I had great difficulties in
12 following your numbering in the B/C/S version, never any of the pages you
13 mentioned I found. There seems to be perhaps a problem in the original as
14 well, as far as paging is concern. I don't know whether you would agree,
15 Mr. Krajisnik, of course, I had not the help of any numbers added to it
16 and I'm -- I could find it most of the time but never on the page you
17 indicated. So there might be a problem there as well. But perhaps you
18 pay some attention to it, and, of course, I used the electronic version
19 where the page numbering is at the top of the page and where the last page
20 of this document, let me just compare perhaps the ERN numbers, page 61
21 bears ERN number 00898123.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I explain to you?
23 Very often there is a double recording of assemblies. For example, I have
24 here SA 000. Then I have two footnotes. This other version. So you
25 probably have another version. I managed to find every page here in
1 Mr. Stewart's document.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, does the ERN number --
3 MR. STEWART: It doesn't coincide, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Again we are working. I was focusing now on the tab
5 88, which is -- let me just have a look. I think it's 64 A, tab 88 but it
6 could be P65 as well.
7 MR. STEWART: Well, the reference -- it's just a note,
8 Your Honour, was P65, binder 8, tab 88.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I used that one but the one that is it stored
10 by the Registrar and I noticed that there must be different versions of
11 that document in the original as well because sometimes I see some
12 differences in the headings, in the B/C/S version and the translation. So
13 there again, I'm very much concerned, although most of it is -- seems to
14 be exactly -- seems to be the same but we should be aware to avoid to at
15 all costs to work from different versions of the same documents, whether
16 different versions in B/C/S or different versions in the translation. I
17 just have drawn attention to it.
18 MR. STEWART: Absolutely in principle I completely agree,
19 Your Honour. The explanation as far as this item is concerned is that
20 they are not two different translations. One is a -- as I understand it,
21 one is a stenographic recording of the session and the other is a tape
22 recording. So they are actually -- they are two different Serbian
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes.
25 MR. STEWART: I think the Prosecution agree with that.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Well, when I asked your attention for the ERN numbers
2 and they are different, and it's clear already that there are two B/C/S
3 versions as well. So therefore -- but I don't think it's dramatic at this
4 moment but especially since you're going into quite some detail I'm a bit
5 concerned about it.
6 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, in this particular case as well, I
7 believe it's correct to say that if there is a value judgement to be made
8 the tape recorded version is actually better than the stenographic one,
9 but that may be a personal view.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Although it seems that the one which -- the
11 tape is better than the stenographic one?
12 MR. STEWART: It seems to be, without my being able to check
13 against the original Serbian, Your Honour, but it seems to be fuller in
14 some way which is perhaps not -- I don't want to offend any stenographer.
15 JUDGE ORIE: It's mainly that the parties should be aware to rely
16 as good as they can on the documents as stored by the Registry and they
17 can be found on the judicial database, almost all of them. If not I'm
18 certain that Mr. Registrar will help you, as he does now and then, if one
19 of the documents is not found he sends it to me by e-mail as an attachment
20 and I can open it immediately. So there are always ways of using the
21 documents as admitted, which I very much prefer.
22 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour. May I say this? First of all we
23 do very much appreciate that help which is continuing and considerable and
24 we do take full advantage of it, Your Honour. A point I would 100 per
25 cent acknowledge is that we owe it to Your Honours to alert you whenever
1 there are two different versions and Your Honours may be inconvenienced in
2 that way. But I will also add this, Your Honour, that 23 if the
3 Prosecution have chosen to exhibit, and the Trial Chamber, to exhibit a
4 particular version of a document, and we, the Defence, do for good reason
5 consider that a different version is preferable, then, well, Your Honour,
6 that is a request we would reserve the right to make.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. There is no way of -- that the Chamber would --
8 the Chamber is just concerned about the possible confusion, not about one
9 party suggesting that a better translation or a better original would be
10 used. I mean, the best is not even good enough for us, but I just
11 establish that both in translation and in the originals and for the
12 translation certainly the -- I have to look at the Prosecution, where it
13 seems that many documents have been translated more than once, that we
14 should avoid that to happen.
15 MR. STEWART: The Defence says yes to all that, Your Honour, with
17 MR. TIEGER: I was just on my feet for one small, practical
18 suggestion. I think we are bringing in anticipation of moving ahead to in
19 a chronological manner to other sessions, copies of those sessions we have
20 attempted it in so far as possible to match those to what we understand to
21 be actual exhibits. So if Mr. Stewart will simply identify the ERN of the
22 B/C/S version as well as the interpretation he has, we can check those
23 immediately against the copies we brought. Again, I can't ensure with 100
24 per cent accuracy that they do represent the actual documents in evidence
25 but we have attempted to do that.
1 MR. STEWART: Absolutely.
2 JUDGE ORIE: I'm trying to do that during the Court hearings but,
3 of course, it's better done prior to that. I'm also concerned not only
4 about the Chamber being confused by the witness and the accused, the
5 present witness and the accused, could be confused by this as well because
6 he answers questions on the basis of his B/C/S original usually and he
7 might not be aware that a question is phrased in accordance with either a
8 different original and its translation or one of the two versions of the
9 translation. So therefore, it's -- I'm just asking and insisting on
10 greatest precision by the parties. Let's not spend more time on it unless
11 there is really something very important. Let's try to clarify these
12 issues before court and not during the testimony, and please proceed.
13 MR. STEWART: Ten seconds' practical matter. Mr. Sladojevic can
14 answer all inquiries on these matters of ERN numbers and so on and I'm
15 sure would be happy to send an e-mail listing what we are coming to.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
17 MR. STEWART: Well, even if he's not happy I'm sort of saying he
19 JUDGE ORIE: That's a new style of management. If you're not
20 happy, you should. I'll keep that in mind for my staff, Mr. Stewart.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. STEWART: I didn't quite say that, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
24 MR. STEWART: All right.
25 Q. Yes, Mr. Krajisnik, there is an exhibit that I -- may not give
1 rise to specific questions but nevertheless --
2 MR. STEWART: Your Honours, a useful thing to have a look at.
3 It's P211. We did notify that this might be an exhibit we would refer to.
4 Your Honour, I mention it because -- well, first of all it's rather a long
5 time, that's not a good reason in itself but it's rather a long timing
6 since we looked at this map. It was produced during the evidence of
7 Mr. Okun, a long time ago, and among other things, it was before
8 Judge Hanoteau joined the case so he didn't have the pleasure of looking
9 at this map when it was originally produced. I wouldn't know among the
10 many, many exhibits in this case how much opportunity has been taken for
11 familiarisation with it but it's -- it is a -- it's based on the 1991
12 census and it appears from its date, Your Honour, it's -- it seems to be
13 produced around August 1991. And from the legend -- it's all in Serbian,
14 Your Honour, but from the legend on the left, the colouring it's not quite
15 the colouring that matches what Mr. Krajisnik said yesterday. It's blue
16 for Croats, green for Muslims and then a -- I don't know what you would
17 call it it's a sort of orangey colour for Serbs, and then yellow for
18 Yugoslavs. And the -- where it shows majority, it also ties in with the
19 observation Your Honour made a few moments ago about the question relating
20 to variants A and B, that if we take, for example, the Croat
21 municipalities in blue, where they got more than 66 per cent of the
22 population, it's a solid, dark blue, where they've got between 50 and 66
23 per cent it's a lighter blue, and then it's the white-hatched blue where
24 there is the relative majority that Your Honour was asking about in that
25 context a few minutes ago. And then very helpfully, the percentages of
1 the population of the other ethnic groups are given in the sort of mini
2 bar chart in the middle of the municipalities. So this is the 1991
4 It's a pretty good map, if I may say so, simply didn't produce it
5 myself, from the point of view of information because it also gives on the
6 right a picture of the position in 1971 and then it gives various other
7 information relating to 1981 to 1991 movements, and then in the bottom
8 right, because Sarajevo obviously can't be easily fitted into a map of
9 this scale, Sarajevo is taken out separately as a block. So the Sarajevo
10 municipalities are shown. But the reason I raise it at that this point,
11 Your Honour, is not because it gives rise to any questions but it does
12 appear to the Defence now to be revived as a useful map to have in mind
13 when we are considering such matters as Cutileiro and so on and when we
14 are looking at some of the remaining elements of the case. And it's
15 terribly easy for anybody involved in this case to forget about a map like
16 this two years later. It's lurking there among the exhibits.
17 JUDGE ORIE: It certainly will assist us.
18 MR. STEWART:
19 Q. And Mr. Krajisnik, have not actually -- you haven't actually got
20 it in front of you, I think, but if I perhaps if I just hand it to
21 Mr. Krajisnik and he can confirm --
22 A. Yes, yes, I can see it.
23 Q. Is it a map that you've seen it in the course -- oh, yes it's up
24 on the screen. You've seen it in the course of this case, Mr. Krajisnik,
25 but is it a map that you had available to you and did look at in the
1 course of late 1991, early 1992?
2 A. Yes. This map or a similar map we saw at the time. However, I
3 have to draw your attention to something else, that it was not the
4 subject, if I can put it that way, of our discussions with Mr. Cutileiro
5 because this is a map of municipalities. It is not a land registry map.
6 I have a map here of Bosnia-Herzegovina that is based on the land registry
7 and that was presented here and I can explain why it is not convenient for
8 the establishment of constituent units but I am familiar with this map. I
9 know this map.
10 Q. Well, before we come on to more specific questions about that,
11 the -- one of the features of the map that we are looking at right now,
12 P211, useful though it might be, is that it just deals with it
13 municipality by municipality, doesn't it, so that the smallest block for
14 which we see information on this map is a municipality. That's perhaps to
15 a considerable extent the point you were making a moment ago, is it,
16 Mr. Krajisnik?
17 A. Yes, yes. You're quite right. You can see here which
18 municipality has a majority and which could become part of the region,
19 those that don't have it could not, because they haven't got that
20 particular type of population or a majority in the municipality. It's
21 interesting for clarifying variants A and B who was a majority and who was
22 a minority. However, for Cutileiro plan you need a different map where in
23 the municipalities you can see which local communities are minority ones
24 and which are majority ones. We can now look at all of Bosnia-Herzegovina
25 as 43 per cent, so it all looks yellow or blue or -- you're quite right.
1 You should really look at municipalities in their entirety and what the
2 percentage of the population is.
3 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, just by way of groundwork again, you've made a
4 reference a moment ago to a map you have with you here. Again, by here,
5 you mean not in this courtroom with you today, but here with you in The
6 Hague, do you?
7 A. No, no. I mean here in my bag.
8 Q. Yes.
9 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, it might just because it can only help
10 to resolve any possible misunderstanding, it might be helpful if
11 Mr. Krajisnik could be permitted to produce that map and then we can make
12 sure overnight perhaps that it's -- it matches what we've got and isn't
13 going to cause any confusion in the morning.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I leave it to you, Mr. Stewart, whether you would
15 invite Mr. Krajisnik. I mean we have heard evidence several times that in
16 terms of lands ownership that quite a few municipalities would be majority
17 Serb where the population would not -- of course, the next question is
18 whether the -- whether decisions are taken by land owners or by citizens.
19 I mean, even if we would accept, and I think it's not contested until now,
20 Mr. Harmon, that the -- some municipalities would have over 50 per cent of
21 land owned by Serbs, whether that would be a legitimate ground for claims
22 or whether population percentages would be a legitimate ground for claims
23 is, of course, a matter still to be seen but there seems to be not that
24 much of a difference. At least I've never heard any cross-examination on
25 disputing that landownership might have been quite different and more
1 favourable to the Serbs than the composition of the population.
2 MR. TIEGER: That's not completely consistent with my
3 recollection, Your Honour. I do recall evidence during the course of the
4 Prosecution case that a great deal of land was state-owned and that the
5 claim of landownership, particularly the 64 per cent claim that was, as
6 Mr. Krajisnik indicated today, was bandied about considerably, was
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I now do remember that there was some dispute
9 about to what extent the claim of landownership was justified especially
10 in relation to land which was not privately owned. I apologise for not
11 having remembered that but --
12 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I leave it to you, Mr. --
14 MR. STEWART: That came up specifically in the evidence of
15 Mr. Okun; wherever it came up, it certainly came up in the course of his
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then I misstated it at this moment but sometimes
18 I have to -- I was not prepared for this issue at this moment.
19 MR. STEWART: Like the maps, Your Honour, some of the evidence was
20 a long time ago as well.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I leave it up to you whether you find it of
22 such importance.
23 MR. STEWART: I'd like the map, if I may, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Krajisnik.
25 MR. STEWART: It doesn't do any harm just to check that it's
1 something new --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Krajisnik, you're invited to provide the map you
3 have with you to Mr. Stewart.
4 MR. STEWART: I can tell Your Honour I have no enthusiasm for one
5 more map unless it is strictly relevant.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There is a map of Sarajevo here and
7 a map of Bosnia-Herzegovina. But there is not a Serb map. It is a map of
8 an official authority of Bosnia-Herzegovina, so these percentages are
9 completely different. This map was already exhibited here. This is
10 Sarajevo. This is Bosnia-Herzegovina.
11 MR. STEWART:
12 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour it was really just to confirm this.
13 I think I can see from here although they are quite detailed, that they
14 are maps already exhibited?
15 JUDGE ORIE: If they are exhibited, there is no need to -- then
16 most important us is to find out under what numbers.
17 Yes, I certainly remember this -- these ones. Perhaps they are
18 two that are the same. I certainly remember the blue and rose one.
19 MR. STEWART: Your Honour would the most helpful thing be perhaps
20 if Mr. Krajisnik can bear to part with them over night we will take them,
21 and double check that they are the same as what's been exhibited, and get
22 it all sorted out.
23 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, based upon our quick glance --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I see at this moment -- we have P68, in which
25 at least the blue and rose map appears.
1 MR. STEWART: That's an exhibit with a number of different tabs,
2 isn't it, Your Honour, from Mr. Treanor.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The one I'm referring to is tab 2. I could
4 just briefly check on whether ---
5 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, we believe it's also P293.
6 JUDGE ORIE: P293. Yes so that's already exhibited twice.
7 MR. STEWART: Too much to hope it's only once.
8 JUDGE ORIE: To restore the equality of arms you're entitled to
9 exhibit it twice as well, Mr. Stewart. I'm just looking at whether the
10 third map, the blue and green one, is already here in this bundle. I
11 think as a matter of fact it is not. I think it's not. If you would pay
12 specific attention to the blue and green overnight, the other two are
13 exhibited, Mr. Krajisnik, so they could be returned to that.
14 MR. STEWART: Yes. May we do that, then, Your Honour? We'll pass
15 them to our cartographical assistant, through Mr. Josse to our
16 cartographical assistant, Your Honours.
17 Q. Mr. Krajisnik, I would wish to you have at this point D5 and D6.
18 They go in reverse chronological order. D6 comes first. Now, does D6
19 appear to you to be what is commonly known as the Lisbon Agreement?
20 A. Yes, the Lisbon Agreement is both the Lisbon agreement and the
21 Sarajevo agreement. So it's two agreements. And two statements of
22 principles have been attached here. What I got here is the first variant
23 that was agreed in Lisbon.
24 Q. Yes. That's a statement of principles and it -- to identify it,
25 it begins as well as being marked D6. I hope that Bosnia and Herzegovina
1 would, after independence, be an independent state composed of three
2 constituent and then it's got in square brackets, unit, named ... and then
3 there is an asterisk indicating the word for these constituent units
4 requires further consideration.
5 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speaker slow down the interpreters did
6 not receive the text. Thank you.
7 MR. STEWART: Sorry, a bit fast. The constituent, in brackets,
8 units, and then there is a asterisk against that and at the bottom,
9 asterisk, the word for these constituent units requires further
11 Q. This document, the original of this document was not in your
12 language, was it, Mr. Krajisnik?
13 A. Not at that time, not when we talked. It was translated quickly
14 because it was short. Perhaps during the course of the same day or the
15 following day, I was aware of the subject matter.
16 Q. And the -- is it correct the -- the meetings at which this
17 document emerged was held in Lisbon just a few days after the assembly
18 session that we were considering a few minutes ago, the 15th of February
20 A. Yes. But as far as I can remember, the date on this document was
21 the 13th of March. But it can be checked in the original. So after the
22 25th of February, this meeting in Lisbon took place. I think it was the
23 13th of March. And the second one on the 18th of March, as far as I can
24 remember. It can be checked.
25 Q. Well any way there was a gap -- there was a gap between the two,
1 wasn't there, when the talks were adjourned or suspended -- no, not
2 suspended, the talks were adjourned and everybody returned home and then
3 you resumed, didn't you, after that gap? Correct?
4 A. Yes, yes. You're right.
5 Q. And if you can be given D5, if you don't already have it, and
6 that's -- but, of course, here you're disadvantaged here, Mr. Krajisnik,
7 by the fact that you are looking at the document that is in English but it
8 bears a date at the end, Sarajevo, 18th March 1992. And that's consistent
9 with, is it, with your recollection that it was at that time in March that
10 the second version emerged?
11 A. Yes. This is the version after the Sarajevo meeting. You're
12 right. This is the second version, the amended and final one, final as it
13 was at the time, that all three parties stated their views on.
14 Q. Is it correct, Mr. Krajisnik, that -- that -- there never did
15 purport to be final, confirmed agreement of either of these documents by
16 the parties to those discussions?
17 THE INTERPRETER: Could the Defence please move the microphone
18 away from the -- thank you.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you explain that a bit? I
20 don't quite understand final. This was sort of the final document that we
21 agreed on but it had not been elaborated. That is to say that what was
22 envisaged was that a complete plan should be made now and then perhaps
23 signed, if I understood this correctly.
24 MR. STEWART:
25 Q. What I was asking, I'll put it in neutral terms, was it -- was
1 it -- were either of these documents agreed as a binding agreement among
2 the parties?
3 A. These principles were agreed on as binding, but if I understand
4 your question, we called this the Lisbon Agreement but on the basis of
5 these principles, we did not make a complete plan like the
6 Owen-Stoltenberg plan or the Dayton plan ultimately that was signed as
7 such and that was binding. But all four parties, that is to say the
8 European Community and the three parties, accepted these principles. So
9 then it is a well known thing what the experts are supposed to do to make
10 maps and work on this and so on and so forth. So actually the only real
11 question that we were discussing all the time and where we had
12 disagreements, if I can put it that way, was the map. Everything else was
13 easier to agree upon.
14 Q. Now, there is a D7A and a D7B; Mr. Krajisnik, I don't think you
15 have those yet.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I see a D7 and a D7A. I take it that you're
17 referring to.
18 MR. STEWART: I --
19 JUDGE ORIE: D7 being one with some handwritten text at the
20 left-hand side.
21 MR. STEWART: Your Honour I had it marked as D7A but if that's D7,
22 may I ask Your Honour, are they technically what? 7 and 7A? Just so I
23 know for future reference.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. D7 is the I would say the more or less
25 handwritten, where the --
1 MR. STEWART: 02094.000?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the other one is D7 B which doesn't make that
3 much sense.
4 MR. STEWART: That's perfect, Your Honour. Could Mr. Krajisnik
5 have those?
6 Q. Do you see, there are two different maps. Mr. Krajisnik, do you
7 recognise either or both of those?
8 A. I recognise both.
9 Q. Well, the one --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger?
11 MR. TIEGER: We either need a copy of D7 A or need it put on the
13 MR. STEWART: We can put it on the ELMO. That's being done.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any way of copying the whole list of
15 exhibits? I can find it on my computer within a second approximately.
16 It's just a matter of copying the complete set of exhibits as we have it
17 on the computer so that you could just find it immediately, Mr. Tieger.
18 I'm not saying that you're not entitled to have a hard copy in your hands
19 but very often it's --
20 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we believe that's still at this point
21 in the case technically or practically not quite achievable or not
23 JUDGE ORIE: That would surprise me. It seems to be such an easy
24 thing to just to have the scanned exhibits which are --
25 MR. STEWART: Not everything has been scanned, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: A lot has been scanned by now, it's almost complete.
2 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm not quibbling about it. A lot has
3 been scanned but given the scale, a lot hasn't been scanned because the --
4 Mr. Treanor's stuff, for example, is thousands of pages. That's the
5 problem Your Honour. Your Honour is absolutely right. A great deal has
6 been scanned. A great deal hasn't.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I would say a great majority has been scanned by now.
8 It's not really complete but it's -- even the Treanor Exhibit 64 A, 65,
9 is -- it's almost complete and we'll find a way of accommodating you
10 because I'm very concerned about having to print out everything again and
11 again and it saves a lot of paper.
12 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, we acknowledge great progress has been
13 made recently.
14 JUDGE ORIE: We are where we are. And that's --
15 MR. STEWART: What I would say, Your Honour, is obviously it's
16 tremendously helpful if whatever anybody -- because this is neutral, after
17 all, whatever anybody has everybody else should have. But that can be
18 sorted out behind the scenes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I take it.
20 MR. STEWART: Yes. It's up there.
21 Q. Right. Mr. Krajisnik, what is this that you're seeing on the
23 A. What I see on the screen is the Cutileiro map as it was proposed
24 to us in Sarajevo at that last meeting.
25 Q. And the other map, then?
1 A. The other map -- well, these two maps were published in the
2 newspapers too. This other map is the proposal of the Muslim side and
3 that created confusion. Before the Cutileiro map, all three parties had
4 given their proposals to Mr. Cutileiro, so this was the proposal of the
5 Muslim side. All three maps were published here as well as the Cutileiro
6 map. I think that that has even been exhibited already.
7 Q. Well, probably, Mr. Krajisnik. So the position is very clear, is
8 it, that the -- the first of those maps we looked at, which is 7 B, I
9 think, the one with the -- the horizontal hatching across it, that was
10 actually part of the agreement, that was attached to the agreement. The
11 other one, the Muslim map you referred to, wasn't. That was one of a
12 number of maps which were put forward and had been under discussion? Is
13 that a correct summary?
14 A. Yes. You're right. Just a small correction: This map of
15 Cutileiro's was a working map. They said, well, this is the map we
16 propose along with this agreement, and on this map it says that we are
17 going to establish teams that are going to make some smaller territorial
18 corrections or whatever, and that we'll accommodate their views. You saw
19 in the principles of the 13th of March that it said according to the
20 census of 1971, 1981, and 1991 respectively. This was aimed at making a
21 map that would be as accurate as possible. The Croatian side asked for
22 the census of 1971, we asked for the census of 1981, and the Muslim side
23 asked for the census of 1991. So more work had to be done but the working
24 map that we had all agreed on in a preliminary way, I cannot say was a
25 final one because it still needed additional work to be done.
1 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, would it be convenient to pause there?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. It is, Mr. Stewart.
3 Mr. Krajisnik, even if I would not remind you that you should not
4 speak to anyone about your testimony already given or still to be given,
5 you would accept that anyhow, isn't it?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You have frightened me so much that
7 I don't dare say a thing.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the interpreters are frightened by the
9 Prosecution. Let's not discuss the matter.
10 So therefore, since you understand it, there is no need to remind
11 you of it.
12 We will adjourn for the day.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, certainly, thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: We will resume tomorrow morning, 9.00, in the same
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.48 p.m.,
17 to be reconvened on Friday, the 5th day of May,
18 2006, at 9.00 a.m.