1 Wednesday, 9 May 2001
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 9.23 a.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good morning, please be seated.
6 Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning to the technical
7 booth, the interpreters, registry staff, the counsel for the Prosecution
8 and for the Defence.
9 We shall be continuing the testimony, I think, of Mr. Ljubisa, so
10 will the usher please have the witness brought in.
11 [The witness entered court]
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Ljubisa. Can
13 you hear me now?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You may remain seated. I just
16 wish to remind you that you are continuing to testify under oath. Have
17 you had a good rest, did you have a good night's sleep?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Fine. So Mr. Jovan Simic, I
20 hope you slept well too so we can continue our work.
21 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 WITNESS: LJUBISA PRCAC [Resumed]
23 [Witness answered through interpreter]
24 Examined by Mr. J. Simic: [Continued]
25 Q. Mr. Prcac, let me briefly remind you that we completed yesterday
1 this part of the testimony. I presented the various tokens of tribute
2 your father received and kept among his documents. Could you tell us,
3 please, when your father arrived from the Omarska Investigation Centre or,
4 rather, when he stopped working there?
5 A. I think it was on the 6th of August 1992. I know this because
6 father came that evening in a much better mood than he had been over the
7 previous period and said that a large group of people had left Omarska and
8 gone to Manjaca. Talking to people after my father's arrest, I remembered
9 the date because of that particular event.
10 Q. Did your father continue working and where did he continue working
11 after he left the Omarska Investigation Centre?
12 A. Upon leaving Omarska, he returned to the police station department
13 and I learned, talking to his colleagues, that he continued to do the work
14 he used to have done before he left for the investigation centre.
15 Q. When was your father demobilised?
16 A. That was in 1995, after the signing of Dayton.
17 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could I ask the usher to be kind
18 enough to distribute Exhibit D29/5A and B and Exhibit D30/5A and B.
19 Q. Mr. Prcac, I should like to ask you whether these two documents
20 marked D29/5 and D30/5 were also found together with all the other
21 documents that your father kept in a suitcase?
22 A. Yes. Yes. They were all together, and they were grouped into
23 files the way he had sorted them out.
24 Q. You also handed these documents to your father's Defence counsel?
25 A. Yes, I did.
1 Q. Would you be kind enough to look at Exhibit D29/5. What is it,
3 A. It is the decision on discharge from the reserve police force.
4 Q. What date does it bear?
5 A. The decision comes into force on the 1st of November 1996.
6 Q. Now, please look at document D30/5.
7 A. Yes. It is a certificate proving that during the imminent threat
8 of war and a state of war, he was a member of the MUP of Republika Srpska
9 in the period from the 29th of April 1992 until the 31st of December 1995.
10 Q. Thank you. What did your father do after he was demobilised?
11 A. After his demobilisation, he again engaged in agricultural work
12 and he rejoined the family and spent most of his time with us.
13 Q. Does that mean that your financial status did not improve much?
14 A. No. And it couldn't, because though we spent almost everything we
15 had on the treatment of my brother, on the 21st of August, 1993, I too was
16 wounded, and for the subsequent two years, I also underwent treatment, so
17 that this was an additional problem.
18 Q. Mr. Prcac, you started school early, didn't you, as far as I see
19 from your biography.
20 A. Yes. I started school when I was 6 and a half years old, whereas
21 the generation mostly consisted of children who had started school at
22 seven or seven and a half.
23 Q. Could you tell us, please, how old you were when you graduated
24 from secondary school?
25 A. When I graduated, I was 18.
1 Q. Can you tell us how much time later were you mobilised? I think
2 you went to Banja Luka?
3 A. It was only six days after my graduation.
4 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could I ask the usher to distribute
5 Exhibit D31/5.
6 Q. Mr. Prcac, I assume, to your misfortune, that you are very
7 familiar with these documents?
8 A. Indeed, I am.
9 Q. Could you explain to Their Honours how the injury occurred, what
10 are the consequences, how the treatment was carried out and so on.
11 A. This is my discharge paper from the medical centre in Banja Luka,
12 which shows that I was admitted on the 21st of August, 1993, and released
13 on the 3rd of September, 1993. The diagnosis shows that it was an injury
14 of the femoris -- femur, and the surgery was carried out on the day I was
15 born, on the same day, on my birthday, actually, and immobilisation was
16 placed on my leg.
17 Q. Will you please explain first how the injury occurred.
18 A. On that day, myself, together with another soldier, stepped on an
19 anti-infantry mine in Svilaja near Odzak and Modrica.
20 Q. When you were injured near Modrica, you were transferred to Banja
22 A. No, first I was taken to Odzak, then Modrica, and two or three
23 hours later to Banja Luka.
24 Q. You underwent surgery in Banja Luka, as shown by these documents?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. How were you treated after that and how long did it all take?
2 A. Shortly after my release from the Banja Luka hospital, because of
3 certain complications, it proved necessary for me to be treated at the
4 military medical clinic in Belgrade, where new problems arose because
5 there was no transportation for me and we had to arrange that ourselves.
6 The price of petrol in those days was too high, in view of the financial
7 situation of our family. And then thanks to the goodwill of kind people,
8 the funds were collected and I was transported to the military medical
9 academy in Belgrade. In Belgrade, they established that my leg was two
10 and a half centimetres shorter, one was shorter than the other. And then
11 after that, I was sent to a spa for rehabilitation three times, and I went
12 for regular checkups to Banja Luka. All this entailed extra expenses.
13 Q. Mr. Prcac, your father and your family financed -- how did they
14 finance all this?
15 A. All my trips, all my visits and stay in spas were financed in
16 those days by the army. But everything else, the checkups for which I had
17 to go to Banja Luka and my trip to the military medical academy in
18 Belgrade, was financed with the assistance of my family and relatives from
19 whom my father borrowed money and did his best to repay them afterwards.
20 That is why his prime concern was to keep on working, to get out of those
22 Q. You have often mentioned Omarska and your house in Omarska. Could
23 you explain to Their Honours what the house looks like and what it
24 actually is.
25 A. It's a small, ground floor house, an old building, and the ceiling
1 is not higher than one metre 90. In the middle is a small kitchen, and to
2 the left and to the right of the kitchen a small room. There is no
3 bathroom in the house. And in fact, I don't consider it suitable for
4 living in.
5 Q. Was it ever renovated, that you can recall?
6 A. No. We never had the funds that would be required. But from time
7 to time, my father would patch up the cracks that appeared in the walls,
8 again as far as his means allowed.
9 Q. In 1980, you were given an apartment by the police.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. How did your parents equip the apartment; in what way?
12 A. The apartment was furnished on the basis of a loan that they
13 obtained from the bank. I think that, in those days, they went to the
14 bank and obtained six different loans or maybe even more, I don't know.
15 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could I ask the usher to distribute
16 Exhibit D34/5A and B.
17 Q. Mr. Prcac, were these documents also together with the other
18 documents that you found?
19 A. Yes, in a folder marked with the words "apartment documents."
20 Q. You looked through those documents.
21 A. Yes, I did.
22 Q. They relate to the purchase of furniture for your apartment in
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. These are documents with different dates, but was all the
1 furniture that was in your apartment purchased through these loans?
2 A. Yes. All the furniture was purchased in that way, and that is the
3 same furniture we have to this day.
4 Q. You said that you never changed the furnishings in your apartment?
5 A. Never.
6 Q. You know Zlata Cikota?
7 A. Yes, I mentioned her yesterday.
8 Q. Did Zlata Cikota or her husband Sead leave some furniture for you
9 when they left Prijedor?
10 A. No, they didn't leave any furniture. As far as I know, they sold
11 most of their furniture to have the money they needed for the trip.
12 Q. Did the Cikota family leave you anything else, if not furniture?
13 A. Yes, they did. When they left the investigation centre, we
14 maintained regular contact with them and on January 1st, 1993, they were
15 the first people that I called to wish them a Happy New Year and they
16 reciprocated. After that, they told us that they were leaving Prijedor.
17 I'm not quite sure, but I think they left on the 19th of January. I saw
18 them off.
19 But the main problem for them was to collect the necessary
20 documents and they needed 500 German marks to leave the town. They didn't
21 have that money, and upon my suggestion, my mother gave them 500 marks
22 which she took from the sum that her brother, my uncle, was sending for
23 the care of my grandfather, her father, thereby risking a conflict with
24 her own brother in order to assist them.
25 Afterwards, Zlata said that she wasn't sure when they would be
1 coming back nor when she would be able to return that money to my mother,
2 and for those reasons, she left her video recorder and TV set at our
4 Q. Excuse me for a moment, let me clarify a point. At that time, did
5 you have a TV set of your own and a video recorder?
6 A. Yes, we did, both. But Zlata simply wanted to make up the value
7 of the money she had borrowed from us. But this was symbolic, really,
8 because in those days, the TV and the video recorder would not get more
9 than 100 or 150 marks. So if I had wanted to buy that equipment, I could
10 have bought it from anyone for that amount. My purpose was to assist
11 these people who were in difficulties.
12 Q. Did the Cikota family leave you anything else?
13 A. Zlata actually gave me a pearl necklace which she told me to give
14 to my future wife as her present. And also a contract was drawn up and
15 she insisted on making a gift to my father of her garage, holiday home,
16 and car. My father insisted that a contract be drawn up on the
17 safekeeping of these assets so that the property, all this property should
18 be returned to them should they return.
19 They left the car because in those days in Republika Srpska, there
20 was a law pursuant to which they could not have left with the car.
21 Several days prior to their departure, the law was annulled and they could
22 have left the car -- the country in a car, so my father went and returned
23 the keys to them.
24 As for the weekend home, it was burned down and looted while they
25 were still there. And as for the garage, some of their old things are
1 still in it, which they kept there, and currently no one is using it.
2 That's all.
3 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could I ask the usher, please, to
4 distribute Exhibit D35/5, D36/5 and D37/5.
5 Q. Mr. Prcac, first let me ask you, were these documents also in the
6 suitcase where your father kept his documents?
7 A. Yes, in a separate folder that was headed "Cikota documents."
8 Q. Are those the contracts that you have just been referring to
9 whereby the garage, weekend home and car are being entrusted for
10 safekeeping to your father?
11 A. Yes. I think that the contracts speak for themselves. They show
12 that it is a question of entrusting this property for safekeeping and that
13 my father was under the obligation to restore that property to the other
14 party at their request.
15 Q. You were on good terms with the son of Zlata and Sead Cikota?
16 A. Yes, I was.
17 Q. Could you explain your relationship and tell us whether you are
18 still in touch and what kind of relationship you have now.
19 A. We were on very good terms. The only way I can describe it is
20 that it was more than friendship. We trusted one another, we lived
21 together, from the very first grade of primary school until he left
22 Prijedor. I think it was the 19th of January. I'm not quite sure about
23 the date. I'm not in touch with him any more now, but during the first
24 year after they left, we were in touch regularly. After that, I asked for
25 his number so that I would call him up. He said he couldn't give it to me
1 because his mother was extremely nervous and he told me about an incident
2 that he had experienced in Zagreb, which I assume was the reason that we
3 are not in touch any more.
4 Q. What kind of incident? Could you tell us what happened?
5 A. After they left Prijedor, the first night they were turned back
6 from the Croatian border. They spent the night in Gradiska, and the next
7 day, they continued with the whole Red Cross convoy towards Zagreb. When
8 they were put up in Zagreb, a team of reporters approached them and asked
9 them for interviews. One of the people in the convoy, I don't know who,
10 started mentioning my father. I don't know in what context. Anyway, the
11 Sead Junior, my friend, reacted and said he was lying. The interview was
12 interrupted. I must point out that this was the story that I got from
13 Sead Junior. After that, with another friend of his - I'm not sure
14 whether his name is Mesic or Mesanovic - he was walking around in Zagreb,
15 and he was intercepted by a group of several men who started beating them,
16 both of them. He says that this seemed to last an eternity.
17 Q. And since then, you haven't heard from him?
18 A. We did hear one another when he arrived in [redacted] two or three
19 times, maybe more. I don't know. But when I asked him for the telephone
20 number where I could reach him, he said he couldn't give it to me on
21 account of his mother, and it was then that he told me about this incident
22 that I have just now relayed to you.
23 Q. Thank you. During your testimony, you said that you talked to
24 your father's colleagues from work. Could you tell us who you talked to?
25 A. After his arrest, my only aim was to hear from his work colleagues
1 what had actually happened there, because everything that is contained in
2 the indictment led to the desire on my part to see what kind of man my
3 father really was. So I first went to see his colleagues, colleagues whom
4 I knew had worked with him in the prewar period, and I asked them whether
5 they had worked together with my father during the existence of the
6 Omarska Investigation Centre. They sent me to people -- told me who the
7 people were who were connected to the investigation centre of Omarska and
8 I asked around. I talked to Sikman Nevenka. I also talked to Ljuban
9 Grahovac, with Rade Andzic, with Milorad Pusac, Ilija Prpus, and many
10 others who happened to be there at that time. I was interested in
11 learning what my father did down there. And the typist, Nevenka Sikman,
12 told me that, for the most part, he spent his time in the room on the
13 upper storey, that he did what the inspectors and Meakic -- ran errands
14 for the inspectors and Meakic and that he helped her personally. She was
15 a typist and he had helped her personally a lot. And that was all she
16 told me, nothing more.
17 Q. You also filmed a videotape. How did that come about? And what
18 did you want to accomplish by taking the video? Who did you take the
19 video with? Actually, what I want to know is could you explain the
20 circumstances under which you took the video.
21 A. The first thing I wanted to do when I made the acquaintance of the
22 people from my father's defence team was for them to go to Omarska with
23 me, to the investigation centre, to the scene of the centre itself, and to
24 take a look for ourselves in order to provide a better defence for my
25 father. After that -- so we went there together. We went to the actual
1 scene, the locality, and after that, during our discussions and talks, on
2 the basis of the facts brought up in the testimonies of the Prosecution
3 witnesses and their description of the circumstances, and having become
4 acquainted with the building and locality itself, I myself came to the
5 conclusion that certain things were just not possible in the way that they
6 had been described.
7 They were impossible. And so I suggested that we film the
8 premises. I borrowed a camera from a friend, and together with
9 Mr. Zivanovic and Mr. Simic, I went and filmed the premises. That's all.
10 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I should like to ask that Exhibit
11 D38/5, which is the videotape, be played. It is a brief videotape, Your
12 Honours, lasting about six minutes, and by playing it to you, we should
13 like to show you what the locality actually looks like. May we have the
14 lights dimmed, please, so that we have a better vision.
15 Q. Mr. Prcac, as we are going to see the video, while we're looking
16 at it, if possible, can you describe what we're seeing? If that is too
17 fast, if the video is too fast, you'll explain to us later on but perhaps
18 you could do this as we go along, as we're watching.
19 [Videotape played]
20 A. This is the angle taken from the entrance to the mine, this is the
21 main entrance. To the right is the Separacija building, and down at the
22 bottom is the guard hut.
23 So that's the gate. This is somewhat further off from the gate.
24 I can't tell you exactly how far away, but this is the road leading up to
25 the investigation centre itself. The main entrance has been left behind
2 We're coming up to the investigation centre now. This is the
3 administration building. Over there, the hangars used for repairs for the
4 vehicles and machinery used by the mine. This is the main building viewed
5 from the garage side. This is a view of the upper WC.
6 Could you hold the picture there, please, and go back a bit,
7 please. Hold it there and back a bit. Back up a bit, a little bit more,
8 and stop there, please. Thank you.
9 One of the illogical points in the stories that were told is
10 precisely the window that we're looking at up on the upper storey of the
11 building. I heard that one witness said that from that window he was able
12 to see what was happening down below.
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Ms. Susan Somers.
14 MS. SOMERS: What this witness is to give is his version of what
15 he saw and not to comment on conclusions drawn by other witnesses. We'd
16 ask to strike the testimony, please.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Jovan Simic.
18 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I agree completely, Your Honour.
19 The witness can just explain what he has filmed without any comments.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. He can explain, but not
21 contradict other witnesses.
22 You are here, Witness, to give us information and not to comment
23 on what other people, and draw conclusions on what other witnesses have
25 A. I apologise to Your Honours and to the Prosecution.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well.
2 A. This, then, is the window to the upper WC in the administration
4 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Just one moment, please.
5 Q. Could you indicate on the ELMO which window you are referring to.
6 A. It is the window on the storey.
7 Q. On the first floor, we have three windows, then we have two
8 smaller windows, then you have a series of five large windows.
9 A. Yes, that's right.
10 Q. Now, the first three smaller windows, do you know where they were
11 located, what they were windows to? Is that what you mean, are those the
12 windows of the WC?
13 A. You mean the first two next to the three? Yes, all that was the
14 sanitary part.
15 Q. Can these windows open outwards towards the concrete slab
16 underneath or can they only be opened as is seen on this inner window?
17 A. No. They can only be opened towards the inside, like the
18 central. Yes, they can only be opened towards the inside.
19 Q. So that means that the windows can only be opened towards the sign
21 A. Yes, that's right, but only a fraction. Just a little bit.
22 Q. How much can they be opened, how far can they be opened; right the
24 A. No, just up to the partition walls. The partition walls dividing
25 that area.
1 Q. Thank you. May we look at the video again further on.
2 A. Here we see an entrance to the building. The window is seen once
3 again and you can see how it opens and how far it can open. Now, this is
4 a direct picture of those premises, the sanitary area.
5 Q. This is the WC on the first floor, is it?
6 A. Yes, that's right, on the first floor, the WC. That's the window
7 we saw a moment ago. That is the handle by which to open the window.
8 That is the view from the window. This is the window in the middle.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] May we stop the video for a
10 moment, please. I apologise, Mr. Jovan Simic, but you mentioned --
11 Mr. Ljubisa, you mentioned the window in the middle. If I observed
12 correctly, there are five windows; is that right?
13 A. Yes.
14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So we are at the third, are we?
15 A. I apologise, Your Honour. When you're looking up from the bottom,
16 you have three windows. The window looking -- when you look up from the
17 bottom is the window, the open window in the middle, and the film shows
18 how far that window can actually be opened.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. But from the exterior we
20 saw five.
21 A. Yes, five. But I'm talking about the three on the left-hand side.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. So we are in the
23 middle of the first three left-hand windows; is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] How many of those five windows
1 opened towards the interior -- inside? Opened towards the inside? All of
2 them? Or some of them? Or were there some of them that couldn't be
4 A. I didn't check that 100 per cent but I think that the two of them
5 open. As to the other three, I'm not sure. I didn't check that because I
6 focused my attention on that particular window because that was the window
7 that was interesting to me.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you. I
9 apologise for interrupting. Mr. Jovan Simic, please proceed.
10 [Videotape played]
11 A. This is the second entrance now to these washrooms. These are the
12 two end windows that we saw when we looked from the bottom, from the
13 exterior. This is a window that is -- can be opened. So it opens the
14 same way, like the one in the middle in the other area, next door.
15 This is a picture of the room opposite the WC and bathroom. And
16 this is the view from that room. And you can see the restaurant down at
17 the bottom. So these are the different angles of vision from that room.
18 Q. Can you see the "white house" from this room?
19 A. I can't see it.
20 This is the view from the other room, looking down towards the
21 restaurant, and you can see the portion in front of the hangars, the side
22 wall of the hangars. This, I think, is the main entrance at the gate.
23 From this window, you can't see the "white house."
24 This is the entrance to the restaurant.
25 This is another door, and you can come in from the outside through
1 that door.
2 Q. What we can see at the bottom of the -- what we are looking at
3 now, what is that?
4 A. The door in front, you mean?
5 Q. Yes, where does the door lead to?
6 A. The door leads to the outside.
7 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] That is the end of the video.
8 There is no more. May I ask the usher to present Prosecution Exhibit
9 3/72B -- 3/77B, if I'm right, 3/77B, and place it on the ELMO, please.
10 Q. To make the video quite clear, could the witness explain the shots
11 that you took were from the WC and from two rooms, so could you show us
12 those premises? This is the layout of the first floor, and show us the
13 rooms where the film was made from. You have numbers here, so please use
14 the numbers when telling us, for the record, because that is the only way
15 to identify it.
16 A. B7, B6.
17 Q. Those are what?
18 A. The two washrooms and toilets, yes. And B11 and B10, those are
19 the two rooms.
20 Q. Thank you. We don't need the diagram any more.
21 Mr. Prcac, finally I should like to ask you about something that
22 we mentioned quite often here and we didn't go into the details. Could
23 you tell us the injury your brother was born with, what it looked like and
24 how he's managing.
25 A. He was born on the 3rd of March, 1982, and upon delivery, the
1 nerve of his right arm was stretched. I think the medical term is paresis
2 or paralysis, and this led to extreme complications in the lives of my
3 mother and father, because the child was born as an invalid. And there
4 were very small chances of recovery. However, my parents spared no
5 efforts and they dedicated their entire lives to the treatment of my
6 brother, to my treatment, to our education, because my father would often
7 say that he had nothing to give us but that he could help us to complete
8 our education and to find employment.
9 My brother still has problems with his arm. When our father is
10 not with us, I do my best to help him and we are trying to find a solution
11 for him because I know that would mean a great deal to my father who is
12 currently here.
13 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Could I ask the usher now to
14 distribute two more exhibits, D32/5 and D33/5.
15 Q. Mr. Prcac, you have received the documents. Could you tell us
16 very briefly what they relate to, D35/5 [as interpreted]?
17 A. It is a discharge document from the medical institution called
18 Dr. Mladen Stojanovic, the clinical hospital where he was treated from the
19 6th of September. I think this says the 6th of December 1983. This is
20 just one of many such letters of discharge. Sometimes he would be kept in
21 hospital for even longer periods than three months, as in this case.
22 Q. So this is part of the medical documentation related to your
23 brother Radisa Prcac?
24 A. Yes. This is one of the letters of discharge from one of his
25 hospitalisations that lasted three months.
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
1 Q. What about D33/5, this is the other document that you have in
2 front of you. It's a part of the medical documents of your mother related
3 to what?
4 A. To her discharge from hospital from the delivery ward.
5 Q. It is the document relating to her delivery of Radisa; is that
7 A. Yes.
8 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 Your Honours, the Defence has no more questions for this witness
10 at this stage.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Jovan Simic.
12 Perhaps we could have the break now before beginning the cross-examination
13 by the Prosecutor.
14 Do you have a cross-examination for this witness, Ms. Susan
15 Somers, or maybe Mr. Waidyaratne?
16 MS. SOMERS: I have, Your Honour. Thank you.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, then. We shall now
18 have -- yes, Mr. Jovan Simic.
19 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Your Honours. In the
20 transcript, the numbers of the exhibits are wrong. Instead of 32, we have
21 35. Do we need to correct that through the re-examination or could Madam
22 Registrar take care of it, please?
23 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No, I think we all have the
24 documents in front of us, it is indeed document 32/5 and 33/5. So it's
25 been corrected now. It has been registered correctly in the transcript.
1 We are now going to have a half-hour break.
2 --- Recess taken at 10.40 a.m.
3 --- On resuming at 11.15 a.m.
4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] [no interpretation]
5 Cross-examined by Ms. Somers:
6 MS. SOMERS: [no sound]
7 A. My brother, my mother and myself were living in Prijedor.
8 MS. SOMERS: Excuse me, Your Honour, there appears to have been no
9 English interpretation, or so it says. I'm not sure if there is a
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Just for a moment. I think the
12 court reporters were unable to follow our comments. Perhaps you could
13 repeat your question, Ms. Susan Somers. That would be simpler.
14 MS. SOMERS: Thank you.
15 Q. My question is: Between the beginning of April and the end of
16 August 1992, where were you living? And if you changed locations, would
17 you itemise or give the period and the location, please.
18 A. My mother, my brother and myself were living in Prijedor. My
19 father in Omarska, as I have already said, because his mother died. And
20 from that day on, he was constantly in Omarska. A few days later, a few
21 days after he was transferred to the investigation centre, when the
22 incident occurred with the people from Brdo, my brother, myself and my
23 mother moved to Omarska. We were there until school began. That would
24 mean until the 1st of September. But I would occasionally go to Prijedor.
25 Q. So if I understood you correctly, since you did comply with my
1 request, you itemised, much of the time you were in Omarska, not too far
2 from the centre, not too far from the investigation centre; is that right?
3 A. I don't know what "not far" means for you. My house is five or
4 six kilometres away from the investigation centre. I don't know exactly.
5 Q. On the 30th of April, 1992, when Prijedor was taken over by Serb
6 forces, where were you? Were you in the Prijedor apartment?
7 A. I was in the apartment in Prijedor, and I didn't know about the
8 takeover. I heard that on the media. And the day I started school, that
9 is when I left for school on the 30th of April, instruction was
10 interrupted and we were sent back home so I returned to the apartment in
12 Q. Did you have a television set in your apartment in Prijedor on the
13 30th of April? You mentioned in your testimony that it was no problem for
14 you to have a TV, that you had a TV and a VCR. Was that in your apartment
15 in Prijedor?
16 A. Yes, yes.
17 Q. And did you hear over the television or learn from the television
18 about the takeover of Prijedor?
19 A. I heard it on the radio.
20 Q. Was there a television set in the Omarska dwelling where your
21 family partially dwelt?
22 A. No, never. We didn't have any room for it. The house was too
24 Q. And where was your father, if you recall, at the time of the
1 A. He was in Omarska, and as I said, he was farming the land and took
2 care of my grandmother. Actually, after her death, he went on working the
3 land, as I have already said.
4 Q. Was there a radio in the house in Omarska?
5 A. There was one, but I don't think it ever worked. It's a radio
6 that was some 30 years old. I don't know that it worked at all.
7 Q. Your father indicated in his statement to the Office of the
8 Prosecutor, which is in evidence as Exhibit 3/167, that he learned -- on
9 page 27 in the English, but I won't bother you with having to -- I'll just
10 ask you if you are able to comment on this, but it is on page 27 in the
11 English, he was asked, "What did you learn had taken place?" And his
12 answer was, "I didn't know immediately what had happened. I learned, they
13 announced it on the Radio Prijedor. I was working at Omarska. I heard it
14 on the radio. I did not have a TV set when Prijedor was taken over by the
15 police and military."
16 Did you communicate to your father after you heard about the
17 takeover, that there had been a takeover? How did you react?
18 A. I don't understand what you mean, how I reacted. To what?
19 Q. Your father was in one place, you were in another. Something, I
20 presume, dramatic was happening. How did you communicate with your father
21 about the reaction to the events when it was occurring? What did you do?
22 A. At first, I don't know how to describe the feeling when this
23 happened. I know that I was at home and kept listening to the news and
24 news again. What I cared about most was to hear when school would resume
25 because, at that period of my life, that was the most important thing.
1 As for the contact with my father, we would be in touch when I
2 would go there to help him with the farming or when he would come and
3 visit us. If I have understood your question properly, I don't know.
4 Q. So the day of the takeover, you had no direct contact with your
5 father; would that be correct?
6 A. No, I think I didn't. No, I didn't. No direct contact.
7 Q. Perhaps you could help clarify something, it was an exhibit that
8 Mr. Simic put to you and it was a general mobilisation order. If I can
9 find it quickly, I'll ask you about it. I believe it was your Exhibit
10 D21/5, and I'll just read the relevant parts so I needn't trouble you.
11 But what it says, according to the translation, was that, "All men aged
12 between 18 and 45 who are not serving in either the army or the police
13 were to report immediately to the Public Security Station in Prijedor for
14 service and the reserve police force on security duties."
15 Is this document that was shown to you what you would consider a
16 true mobilisation order?
17 A. As I have said, I was 17 years old at the time.
18 Q. I'm not asking you about you. I'm asking you is this a
19 mobilisation order? Does it accurately describe the class of men who are
20 subject to mobilisation, 18 to 45; is that correct?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Between 18 and 45 --
23 A. Because according to the official gazette, that is what it says
24 here. But there's also the official gazette where this age group is
1 Q. [Microphone not activated]... assuming it has value, how old was
2 your father the day of the takeover of Prijedor?
3 A. In 1992, he was 54 years old.
4 Q. He was outside the age of mobilisation; is that correct? Yes or
6 A. Yes. But may I --
7 Q. [Microphone not activated]... your father had presented some
8 evidence of an award and I wonder -- it's not familiar to us and I wonder
9 if you might help us learn about the silver wreath award, that was your
10 Exhibit D26/5, and it was presented to him the 21st of July 1980. What is
11 the order of labour with the silver wreath; what does that kind of
12 commendation mean about its recipient?
13 A. It means a kind of praise or commendation for his work in the
14 bodies of the former Yugoslavia in those days, that he worked well and was
15 a conscientious person, and that he carried out all his obligations.
16 Q. In fact, your father was considered a very sharp, conscientious
17 police person, was he not? That was his -- that was the perception of
19 A. No. This order was not awarded only to the intelligent and
20 special people, a miner could get this order, a railway worker, so anyone
21 who contributed to the progress of the country through their work. That
22 is why it is called an order of labour.
23 Q. Your father went back to learn about policing and to become a
24 police officer somewhat beyond the typical age. He went as an adult; is
25 that correct, 30, perhaps 30-something years old?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. He did well, am I right; he did very well?
3 A. [No audible response].
4 Q. I'm sorry, you nodded your head, but the court reporter only takes
5 down a yes or no. Did he do very well?
6 A. What do you mean, "Did he do well?"
7 Q. His exams, did he score well? Was he considered a promising
8 police officer, as far as you were able to know?
9 A. I don't know that. All I can say is knowing him, and how
10 meticulous he is in all the areas of life that he was interested in, I
11 personally believe that he was equally conscientious at work.
12 Q. Meticulous, the type of work that he retrained to do, criminal
13 technical work, forensics is a science, is it not?
14 A. [No audible response].
15 Q. Could you speak into the microphone and not nod. Is it a
17 A. I don't consider it a science. It's a job like any other. When
18 you're doing it, you -- it becomes routine. And when I said "meticulous,"
19 I meant that he was systematic in his job, as required by his service.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Jovan Simic?
21 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm not objecting with
22 regard to my learned friend, but in the transcript, we see the word
23 "forensic." Forensics, according to the former Yugoslav legislation, and
24 the training required, significantly differed from a crime technician. A
25 forensic expert has a university degree. He's a highly-specialized
1 person. It's quite a different thing.
2 MS. SOMERS: Your Honour --
3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Have you finished, Mr. Jovan
4 Simic? No. Allow Mr. Jovan Simic to finish his comment, please,
5 Ms. Susan Somers. Please go ahead.
6 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] A crime technician is somebody with
7 a secondary education. Here in the transcript, the word "forensic" keeps
8 cropping up. It is something quite different in English.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay. Ms. Susan Somers.
10 MS. SOMERS: Thank you, Your Honour. I take that as testimony by
11 Mr. Simic that, if there is a discrepancy in function, should be the
12 subject of re-examination. I think that is what is being asserted here,
13 not necessarily a correction on language. And I would ask if the Chamber
14 is minded just to have it wait until we --
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. I think that we always
16 have interruptions of this kind that could be asked in redirect, so I
17 think that we should leave each party to do its work and then, Mr. Simic,
18 you can clarify that question when you come to your re-examination, but
19 thank you for drawing our attention to that. We are following the
20 discussion, of course, and we are following the responses by the witness.
21 I see that you wish to add something, do you?
22 I beg your pardon. Mr. Deretic, I heard -- you can remain
23 seated. We have to know one thing, be aware of one thing. When counsel
24 -- a counsel takes the floor here and is talking, the witness can always
25 hear. We can't. So it is a question of fairness, fair play, equitability
1 so that we can all understand. If you wish to make a comment or any other
2 Defence counsel wish to make a comment, do so so that we can share your
3 comment. If you don't do that, we don't know what you're talking about,
4 because you can understand everything that I say. You can follow my
5 reasoning, but I am not able to know what the comment you made means. So
6 please enlighten me. I heard it but I don't know what it means. So I am
7 making that observation. Perhaps there was no intention, and I'm sure
8 there was no intention, of anything untoward, but let us apply the rules
9 of fair play for all parties in the courtroom, for the Judges, for the
10 Prosecution, and the Defence, and allow us to follow your comments because
11 we are in a situation where the witness understands your language. We do
12 not understanding your language. I am sure you had no ill intentions, but
13 I'm just drawing your attention to that, Mr. Deretic.
14 Thank you for waiting, Mr. Simic.
15 Mr. Deretic, you have the floor first.
16 MR. DERETIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, you are absolutely
17 right, of course. I stand corrected. I turned to my colleague, Mr. Fila,
18 and said that very few people in our country know what a forensics man
19 is. So it was in the best of intentions, and I'm certain that this
20 witness, in view of his qualifications, does not know what a forensic
21 person implies.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Very well. I knew that
23 there was no ill intention on your part. But just to be able to
24 understand each other and to do our work properly.
25 Mr. Simic, did you wish to add something with respect to the other
2 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I wanted to apologise,
3 because my objection was directed to the translation service and not the
4 witness. So if somebody misunderstood me, I apologise for that.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, I understood that, but I
6 think that clarifications of that kind could always be made when you come
7 to your re-examination. So please try to keep the interventions to a
8 minimum because then we can respect the information that the witness is
9 giving us. And even what I said to Mr. Deretic was good,
10 well-intentioned, to ensure that justice prevails and fairness prevails,
11 and it is the role of the President and the Chamber to draw our attention
12 to that, and I do that as a good paterfamilias, so it wasn't a censorship
13 of any kind. I just wished to take note of the problem in hand. Thank
14 you, Mr. Simic.
15 Anyway, Ms. Susan Somers, please proceed.
16 MS. SOMERS: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Q. Mr. Prcac, a couple more questions about some of yesterday's
18 exhibits. D24/5 which was a commendation issued to your father on the
19 13th of May, 1983, from the secretary of the Secretariat of Internal
20 Affairs Prijedor, was for exceptional contribution to fulfilling the
21 programme tasks of the public security service. Was there a ceremony that
22 accompanied the receipt of this particular award? This was a police
23 commendation of some kind. Was there something special that accompanied
25 A. I don't know. I was eight years old at the time. I can't
1 remember any ceremony taking place.
2 Q. When this was shown to you, it had no meaning to you at all? This
3 exhibit was meaningless to you?
4 A. I found the document, together with all the other documents and
5 belongings of my father, and to present a picture of him to you about his
6 work in the former Yugoslavia, I handed it over to the -- my father's
8 Q. You also showed -- or it was shown to you, excuse me, although
9 there was no date on it, D28/5, which concerned the Kozara National Park.
10 There is no date. I don't know if you have any recollection of a donation
11 that was apparently given by your family of 200 dinars. Can you explain
12 what that would be, what's the significance of it, and what perhaps in
13 Deutschmarks today 200 dinars would amount to?
14 A. May I explain?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. Actually, I can't explain the relationship to the Deutschmark
17 after all the inflation that went on in our country, especially as there
18 is no date on the document. I think that this was the least possible
19 amount that could have been contributed, and although my father did not
20 have any money, he wanted to make some kind of contribution to the Kozara
21 National Park, even a negligible sum, so as not to be the only person that
22 didn't donate anything to the cause.
23 Q. Thank you. I noticed on a couple of exhibits -- and I'll just ask
24 you about the name at the bottom. Perhaps you don't know. You may have
25 been only eight years old. But D9/5 and D10/5 bear a signature of Rajko
1 Zigic as the secretary of the Secretariat of the Prijedor Municipal
2 Department of Internal Affairs. Did you know -- did your family know this
3 individual, Mr. Zigic?
4 A. I didn't know him, no.
5 Q. Do you know whether or not -- have you ever heard of him?
6 A. Only from this document.
7 Q. So you have no knowledge --
8 A. Otherwise, I told you yesterday that my father didn't like to
9 speak about his work. If he spoke to his colleagues from work, those whom
10 I spoke to as well, then they were people from his own department, from
11 the crime technology department. As for this particular individual who
12 signed the document, I don't know him.
13 Q. So you don't know if this is the Rajko Zigic who is related to the
14 accused Zigic in this instance? You do not know that?
15 A. No, I don't know that. I've just told you. I don't know.
16 Q. You did mention yesterday and today that your father did not like
17 to talk about his work. You also, however, have shown, over several hours
18 of testimony, that you know quite a bit about his work. Can you perhaps
19 tell us how you were able to acquire the detail that you have given today
20 if it did not come from your father? With whom did you speak before
21 coming to court yesterday?
22 A. With respect to which details, which details do you mean?
23 Q. You mentioned, for example, an incident concerning two young men
24 who had been brought in and on whose behalf allegedly your father
25 brandished a pistol because he was allegedly outraged at the treatment
1 they were allegedly receiving. How did you find out about this?
2 A. I have said -- I said he was afraid for the personal security of
3 the family.
4 Q. How do you know? How do you know this even happened? Where did
5 you learn it from? He didn't talk to you about his work.
6 A. That evening, I think I said that yesterday --
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Jovan Simic?
8 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, in the
9 examination-in-chief, I asked the question -- the witness direct questions
10 how he came to learn of that. So this is repetition. My learned
11 colleague could either tell him exactly what his answer was yesterday or
12 go on further, but there is no reason for us to repeat the same questions
13 that have already been asked and answered in the examination-in-chief.
14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, your
16 MS. SOMERS: Yes, Your Honour, I respectfully disagree. The fact
17 of the incident may have been given, but the detail was quite great and
18 I'd like to know, if, in fact, that much detail was presented by his
19 father to him in hearing the incident. It was quite detailed.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Jovan Simic.
21 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm not going to
22 repeat what the witness said, but the witness did say that his father came
23 and told the story, so that is his testimony. Now my learned colleague
24 could go on to ask about that conversation, but not to start out from the
25 assumption whether his father had told him what had happened and told him
1 the whole story. Thank you.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Ms. Susan Somers, we have
3 already received the information from the witness that his father told him
4 what had happened. So don't insist on those sorts of details. Thank
6 MS. SOMERS:
7 Q. Did you ask anyone else that your father worked with about the
9 A. I tried to talk to others about that incident too.
10 Q. Specifically with whom did you try to talk?
11 A. They were people who were down there in -- providing security.
12 Q. Names, please.
15 Q. What did they tell you, if anything, about the incident?
16 A. Well, most of what I know about the incident I got from my
18 Q. Your father's alleged concern was based on knowing the family,
19 from what you said yesterday. Did you also know the family members
20 involved, do you know what their name was?
21 A. No, no.
22 Q. So your father knew the family members but you, as a family member
23 of your father's, didn't know them?
24 A. We didn't. Let me just tell you that he told us that they were
25 the children of his friend from Tukovi. He didn't mention their names or
1 anybody else who was down there. So he didn't tell me those details. He
2 considered that the incident could perhaps have adverse effects on him and
3 therefore it was quite normal that when he was afraid for his life to tell
4 me as the eldest child and to explain what exactly had happened and what I
5 should do with the family if something were to happen to him.
6 Q. You indicated nothing did happen to him. Since 1992, you have had
7 conversations with your father, have you not?
8 A. Of course.
9 Q. Since the first time he may have mentioned this to you, did you
10 pursue it to try to find, perhaps, the individuals involved to get the
11 names? It seemed to be an important incident to your father, that he
12 broke his code of silence to tell you about it.
13 A. I already told you that he would tell me if something was directly
14 linked to his family. Now, the incident that could have had consequences
15 on us, the family members personally, and he just tried to take care of us
16 that way and not to talk directly about the incident with all the details,
17 just the reasons why we should move to Omarska and to be there together.
18 Q. You cited as the principle reason for your father's only going
19 through the fifth grade or the fifth primary class as poverty, I believe
20 was your quoted reason. You also indicated that you -- your family
21 suffered or lived in not terribly affluent circumstances. You, however,
22 did manage to go through school, did you not? You completed more than the
23 grade. Could you tell us about your education, please.
24 A. I graduated from the secondary school of electrical engineering,
25 and the fact that my father only has five grades of primary school was
1 that he did everything to ensure that we got a better education.
2 Q. Despite the fact that money was not plentiful, you managed to get
3 an education; is that correct?
4 A. Well, school was free of charge. By law, school was compulsory
5 and you didn't pay for schooling.
6 Q. Were either you or your younger brother ever denied medical
7 treatment on financial grounds?
8 A. I was denied them only in Belgrade at the medical military
9 academy, but when my parents didn't have the money to send my brother to
10 where he was sent for treatment, he didn't go. But the same therapy was
11 applied by my mother. My mother worked with him as she was advised and
12 told the kind of therapy to give him and what exercises to help him do.
13 Q. I believe your father told the investigator that almost
14 immediately following the birth of your younger brother, he was already in
15 x-ray. He was being taken care of immediately in the hospital. Was there
16 ever a time when an emergency arose where your brother was not able to
17 have some medical treatment because of money?
18 A. No. But medical treatment was covered by his health insurance,
19 that is to say, it was in the name of my mother --
20 Q. Thank you.
21 A. -- and my father.
22 Q. Your father mentioned on page 8, again, it will be a lot of paper,
23 but on page -- he mentioned on page 8 about your own, in his interview,
24 about your own background. I'm sorry, perhaps I have the wrong page, page
25 7, and he mentioned that you had served your military obligation both in
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
1 Banja Luka and at Manjaca.
2 A. At Manjaca, yes, I went to Banja Luka first and from Banja Luka,
3 we were sent to Manjaca, to Zaluzane, depending on the assignment.
4 Q. [Microphone not activated].
5 A. The 18th of June 1993 until the 10th of August. I'm not quite
6 sure. I think it was the 10th of August.
7 Q. Were you guarding military prisoners during that period of time;
8 was that your function?
9 A. No. At Manjaca, I underwent training, military training, and
10 after that, I was sent to the battle zone and I was never guard for
11 prisoners, soldiers.
12 Q. When you were fighting at Modrica, is that where the front was
13 where you were injured; Modrica?
14 A. It was Svilaja near Modrica. We weren't fighting against
15 anybody. We were just providing security for the border, the frontier,
16 and should there be any incursions from Croatia, we were there to stop
18 Q. When your father was taken back into the reserve police forces as
19 a result of the takeover in Prijedor by the Serb forces, did he speak to
20 you about his attitude toward going back in? Did he tell you how he felt
21 about going back into this type of work?
22 A. Well, as I have already said, the main problem was when he was
23 called to Prijedor. His main problem was that he would be outside -- away
24 from Omarska. He wouldn't be able to cultivate the land. So that was the
25 problem he had, leaving the land.
1 Q. When did your grandmother die?
2 A. In March. March 1994.
3 Q. Did your father mention to you that he claims to have persuaded
4 Simo Drljaca to let him have his, meaning your father's, first choice in
5 placement? Did he talk to you about that, as he mentioned to the
6 investigator on page 8 of his record of interview in English, but did he
7 mention that to you?
8 A. I say to you once again, like with the incident, he never
9 mentioned names. He just gave us the procedure, that is to say, he said
10 that he would like to be in Omarska, at the police department in Omarska.
11 And that's what we talked about, just matters that concerned us as a
12 family personally. And I can't say. I don't know. I didn't go with him
13 so I don't know who received him, who told him that. He knows that
15 Q. Your grandmother's age or health was not a consideration, as far
16 as your father told you, for his request to be placed in Omarska police
17 station as opposed to elsewhere? It was just tilling the land.
18 A. Yes. The care of his mother, that was important. She was aging.
19 She was an old woman. She was 80 years old. So that's a very advanced
20 age and he was very close to his mother.
21 Q. What is your understanding of when your father began his duties in
22 the Omarska police station? What do you see as the starting date?
23 A. At all events, it was the beginning of May sometime. He was to
24 take up his job in Omarska at that time.
25 Q. What did he tell you he was going to be doing in the Omarska
1 police station? What were his duties, as far as you knew?
2 A. Let me tell you once again, he didn't -- he never used to talk
3 about his duties, his actual work. And what kind of duties he performed
4 later on, after his arrest, I learned from his colleagues the kind of
5 duties they had. As far as I could see, he simply went to work.
6 Q. I'm speaking now -- let's make sure we understand each other. I'm
7 speaking about the police station. I'm not talking about the
8 investigation centre or the camp. I'm talking about the station. Do you
9 know, did your dad ever tell you that he worked as a criminal technician
10 or however the best translation is of his skilled area of endeavour? Was
11 that what he was sent there to do?
12 A. He didn't tell me. I could only assume that. I could only assume
13 what his work was at that time.
14 Q. Did he tell you why he collected in a suitcase, in a very
15 systematic manner, apparently, all these documents which have been given
16 to the Defence counsel for presentation? Why did he save these?
17 A. Because that's the kind of man he was. He would always collect
18 all the documents and save them and he kept them should the need arise.
19 Q. What need would that be?
20 A. Well, let me try to explain, simply. I keep all my electricity
21 bills myself in my own -- in my flat, and my telephone bills. I've kept
22 them all since the day we took up residence in the flat and onwards. I've
23 always kept all my bills. So that was the kind of man he was. We always
24 kept all our bills, electricity, telephone, and he was a man who kept
25 every piece of paper. Why he did that, probably that somebody wouldn't
1 come and say that he had taken anything or stolen anything or anything
2 like that.
3 Q. You mentioned a person named Zlata Cikota several times during
4 your testimony, and she also spoke with the Office of the Prosecutor on
5 one occasion, perhaps more than one but on one occasion, and her
6 assessment of your father was that, "He was clever enough to ask nicely
7 that my husband and I give him a paper stating how nice he was to us in
8 the camp. It was not officially stamped and of course all the things we
9 said in the paper were not true. We agreed to sign the paper because we
10 felt the lives of our two children were at stake."
11 Do you think she perhaps has a different understanding of why your
12 father collects paper?
13 A. Of course she did.
14 Q. Do you know an individual named Petar Josic?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Do you know an individual named Mario Josic?
17 A. Just know he's his son.
18 Q. Do you know that Petar Josic was interned in Omarska camp while
19 your father was there?
20 A. I do. But I didn't learn it from my father. I learned it from a
21 man -- actually from my sister, I'm sorry, who was a subtenant in the
22 apartment of Petar Josic. This is before the war, before all of this
23 happened. And she told me that he was down there.
24 Q. It's come to the attention of the Office of the Prosecutor that
25 while your father was speaking with Petar Josic, while your father was
1 working in Omarska camp and Josic was detained, that your father expressed
2 concerns about what was taking place, but then made a gesture to Josic
3 like this, which is my arms crossed as in prisoner status, indicating, and
4 said something to the effect about he would get a sentence for what
5 happened. Paraphrase, but did your father mention --
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Jovan Simic?
7 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I think that it would
8 be fair if we are referring to a statement, to show that statement to the
9 witness rather than paraphrasing somebody's statement, and still less to
10 ask whether the witness thinks that he did something over there. Why
11 can't my learned friend give the statement to the witness? I know which
12 statement is being referred to. And she's leaving out a part of the
13 statement which may be very important.
14 MS. SOMERS: Your Honour, I'm not prepared to show a statement.
15 I'm asking about something that came from the statement, and if counsel
16 wishes again to re-examine on it, I'm interested in knowing whether the
17 incident was mentioned to the witness, and what his understanding might be
18 of the emotion conveyed or the thought conveyed there.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic?
20 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, as only my learned
21 friend and myself are familiar with that statement in this courtroom, she
22 is misinterpreting it. She is extracting it out of context. It is an
23 introduction to a story which has an ending which is being, I think,
24 misinterpreted. I think it would be fairer if the statement be shown.
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, is it possible
1 to put a clear, concrete and concise question regarding this incident, and
2 then Mr. Jovan Simic will have a chance, if the Prosecutor is making a
3 misinterpretation, you can take up the statement again and say that, "My
4 learned friend said so and so, and the witness says so and so."
5 Otherwise, we can never finish this. So please, Ms. Susan Somers, put
6 your clear, concise and concrete question to the witness. Otherwise, the
7 witness and the rest of us are not able to follow. We have a limited
8 capacity of memorising. Your questions are very long. Or cut them up
9 into parts, into several questions. Then Mr. Jovan Simic will later put
10 the questions he needs to put to the witness. So please continue, Ms.
11 Susan Somers.
12 MS. SOMERS:
13 Q. Did your father ever express to you a concern he may have
14 expressed to Mr. Josic about the consequences of his role at Omarska
16 A. I don't know what you mean. What gesture? What you are
17 specifically referring to? If you want me to explain the behaviour or
18 conduct of my father, you must at least explain the event to me. I don't
19 know anything about that event. So how can I comment on it?
20 Q. Your father did not surrender to the Tribunal after having been
21 indicted, did he? He had to be arrested; is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. When was he indicted, do you know?
24 A. I can't tell you exactly.
25 Q. Did he continue from the time of his indictment, whenever it
1 became known to you, to walk around as a free man up until the time he was
2 arrested? Did anyone attempt, that you know of, to arrest him locally?
3 A. As far as I know, he stayed all the time at my grandmother's
4 house, as we called it, and continued to cultivate the fields, and to take
5 care of us. Most recently, my mother helped him a lot too. And I too was
6 in Omarska for a while, assisting them on the land, as I didn't have a
8 Q. Did you find yourself in any way limited by the virtue of the fact
9 that your father was a publicly-indicted individual?
10 A. I don't know what you mean by "limited."
11 Q. Could you travel? Could you enjoy life regularly? Did it have a
12 restrictive impact on your comings or goings or your plans?
13 A. No, it didn't limit my plans. It was my financial situation that
14 was more of a limiting factor.
15 Q. Did you yourself ever visit your father at the Omarska camp while
16 he was working there?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Did you come to learn what took place at that camp while he was
19 working there?
20 A. No. From him directly, no.
21 Q. From whom, then?
22 A. Well, you see, what was happening, most of those things about
23 events in Omarska I could learn talking to people.
24 Q. Which people would tell you these things?
25 A. I told you a moment ago, neighbours, my father's colleagues. I
1 spoke to people about my father, not actually about what was happening
2 there, but --
3 Q. Are you telling us, excuse me, that your neighbours knew what was
4 happening there but you did not know? Is that what you're trying to
5 explain to us?
6 A. No, no, no, absolutely not. What I'm trying to say is that I
7 learnt about those events mostly after his arrest because I personally was
8 interested in learning certain things because it's my father who is at
10 Q. Were you not interested in learning about these things after he
11 was indicted or did you feel it only necessary to learn after he was
13 A. I sincerely hoped that he would never be arrested. And I kept
14 persuading myself that that wouldn't happen. I couldn't reduce my life to
15 the question of whether he would be arrested or not. And I was able to
16 persuade myself that I would spend the rest of my life with my father.
17 Q. How were you able to get access to Omarska mining area in order to
18 make the videos that you made? What was -- what were the steps followed
19 to get access to that private property?
20 A. No special steps. The mining -- the mine is not working. I don't
21 think anyone is taking care of it. So you simply go through the gate.
22 You go to the investigation centre and you see it for yourself.
23 Q. The date on the video was March of 2001. Was that an accurate
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. So you are telling this Chamber that you and perhaps a team of
2 lawyers just drove in to Omarska camp, entered buildings, videoed and
3 left, with no special permission? It was no big deal?
4 A. It may appear unbelievable to you but it's not. It's an abandoned
5 mine that is not functioning and nobody is caring for it.
6 Q. Were there people working in the buildings that you entered? How
7 did you get access to the buildings? You have inside video. Who gave you
9 A. Simply through the door.
10 Q. You are suggesting that you walked into what was the
11 administration building, climbed up the stairs and videoed with no one
12 asking who you were, no one stopping you or no one opening the door;
13 that's how easy it is?
14 A. You see, a man was present there who may be a watchman, whom I
15 asked to let me in.
16 Q. Was it locked? Did you have to be let in by having a door opened
17 by this man?
18 A. Yes, yes, but I haven't finished. He went to the house that is
19 known as the "white house" and brought a key from there and gave the key
20 to me. And when we had made the video, I returned the key to the man.
21 But I didn't have to give him any particular explanation.
22 Q. Who was with you when you made this video? Every person there,
24 A. Mr. Zivanovic.
25 Q. Who else?
1 A. Mr. Simic, myself, and a friend of mine who lent me the camera.
2 Q. Who actually did the video recording? Who handled the video
4 A. I did the recording but as he is more skilled than me with the
5 camera, when zooming was required and other things that I don't know how
6 to do, then he would take over.
7 Q. You said, "He would take over." Who would take over?
8 A. My friend.
9 Q. What is your friend's name?
10 A. I don't know whether I should give you his name here.
11 Q. We can go into a private session later on a few matters so there
12 is no problem.
13 The items which you videoed, who directed you to video certain
14 items? Was someone saying, "Look here, copy there, go here"? How did you
15 know what to look for?
16 A. Simply I told you that I went with my father's lawyer, Defence
17 counsel, and I suppose they know what they need to produce here for you
18 because if I had done the filming myself alone, then it might have taken
19 an hour, and maybe it wouldn't show you what is most important for you.
20 Q. Who suggested where to focus the camera, what to include in the
21 view, how did you know how far to aim? Tell us, please.
22 A. It was my suggestion, and I told you I would say to him, "Zoom
23 onto the window, please," and he would do it; then, "Zoom on the view from
24 that window," and he would do that.
25 Q. So was this according to a script that you may have learned of to
1 know that certain things needed to be shown or not shown? How did you
2 know exactly what to do?
3 A. Primarily on the basis of the conversations we had. I knew more
4 or less what needed to be filmed.
5 Q. How did you know what to leave in and what to leave out of your
7 A. I filmed or told my friend to film what I thought was necessary.
8 I didn't know anything.
9 MS. SOMERS: We have a series of photographs, Your Honour. The
10 originals which would be identified for the Chamber are in colour.
11 Because of the quickness of the response, the copies to be distributed
12 sadly are not, but we will substitute them at a later time for colour. We
13 have been able to get the studio to reproduce them. I just wanted to
14 explain that, and I apologise for the lack of colour for everyone.
15 I would like to take a moment or two and show you the photographs
16 that you may be able to comment on.
17 For the usher, this may be the preferred ELMO shot and then the
18 others, again, are in black and white. Mr. Usher, there are some copies
19 that we can give you as well, please. This would be Prosecution's 3/277.
20 Q. This is the administration -- I'm sorry, do you have it in front
21 of you now?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. This is going up the steps to the first floor of the
24 administration building and I'll -- again, it's a bit dark on the ELMO,
25 but looking straight ahead on your right-hand side, the first two doors
1 would represent the toilet and a shower area that you had taken in a
2 close-up mode.
3 MS. SOMERS: Mr. Usher, rather than disappear, I might as well
4 give you the next round.
5 Q. You were inside this building, is that right, when you made your
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. This is -- would you agree that this is the same building from
9 which you did your filming?
10 A. [No audible response].
11 Q. I'm sorry, don't nod your head; either yes or no.
12 A. Yes.
13 MS. SOMERS: The next photo -- Mr. Usher, may I just take a quick
14 look -- is a corridor shot as well. It's perhaps a broader view, and
15 perhaps a better broader view and it would be Prosecution's 3/278, and
16 then the colour for the ELMO and then the copies would be distributed,
18 Q. Are you able to see it okay, Mr. Prcac?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Again, the same corridor, perhaps with a bit of a wider angle and
21 those first two doors, would you agree, represent the rooms which you
22 videoed in some detail? Is that accurate?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Okay, thank you.
25 MS. SOMERS: Mr. Usher, when you have made your rounds.
1 Q. The next colour for the ELMO is 3/279. Are you able to see it
2 okay, Mr. Prcac?
3 A. Yes. That is the window.
4 Q. If you could just wait a second --
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, maybe -- it's
6 surely my fault, but what is the objective of repeating with photographs
7 the pictures that we saw on the video?
8 MS. SOMERS: Selective photography, Your Honour, selective
9 videoing, Your Honour, accuracy of process. I'm testing the evidence,
10 Your Honour.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Continue. I
13 MS. SOMERS:
14 Q. Mr. Prcac, these doors were the ones we were looking at as you
15 were coming up the stairs to the right. The first door is --
16 A. Would you explain whether this is the toilet on the right or on
17 the left?
18 Q. Okay. These represent the same rooms which you videoed then, and
19 this is looking straight in in daylight. It's accurate then?
20 A. Yes. I don't know how -- I do know how I videoed and in what
21 order and I am not sure what your photographs are.
22 Q. They are stills. They are not from videos. They're stills.
23 MS. SOMERS: The next photo -- sorry to make you get up, but I
24 want to make sure everyone has them -- was Prosecutor's 3/280.
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, do you have
1 more photographs? Perhaps it would be better to give them at the same
2 time to avoid all this movement and wasting of time. We are losing a lot
3 of time.
4 MS. SOMERS: I think before the Chamber was concerned about having
5 too much unsystematically placed documents, and so we wanted to make sure
6 that you have them one at a time and then, at your convenience, they'll at
7 least be evident what they are. If we give them in a heap, I am afraid
8 they will be a little bit confusing. So we only have a few more, but I
9 wanted to make sure they're given to for your consideration
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] But if you distribute a set that
12 have already been marked, they follow in sequence so there is no problem.
13 Mr. Fila.
14 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] I'm sorry for interfering, but this
15 affects all of us. If you look at the transcript, when the photograph is
16 being shown where you see the white tiles between the two doors, these are
17 not the same doors as the doors with the red bricks in between. So there
18 is a point that needs to be clarified.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] What exhibit are you referring
20 to, Mr. Fila? What number? What exhibit number?
21 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] 3/279, showing one door or, rather, two
22 doors with a wall covered with white tiles in between. And on the
23 previous two photographs, we see red bricks. So I'd like to know which
24 doors these are.
25 MS. SOMERS: If we may be permitted to continue, it may become
2 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] In the transcript it says that, from
3 the staircase, you come to the door with the tiles. And that simply is
4 not true. It's not correct.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
6 Ms. Susan Somers, you see, when the photograph reaches us here,
7 Ms. Susan Somers, I don't know how to put it, I'm not trying to judge now,
8 but the presentation of your information should be done in an autistic [as
9 interpreted] way. You're talking between yourselves, you are, you and the
10 witness. When you finish the description of the photograph, the
11 photograph reaches our table, then you go on to another so we simply can't
12 follow you in that way.
13 Please do your work in such a way that we have the photograph in
14 our hands when you are talking about it because, after all, we may need to
15 take notes on the photograph, and then go ahead. Otherwise, we are
16 outside the proceedings and ...
17 MS. SOMERS: I apologise, Your Honour. And if it would make it
18 easier, there are a couple left and because the number is reduced, we will
19 just give them to the usher so you have them stacked.
20 The next one would be 3/281 and then 282, 283, 284, and 285. The
21 marking of the copies may be somewhat held back and we'll give you the ERN
22 number, that will help identify it. For now, that should be sufficient.
23 Thank you.
24 Does everyone have in front of him or her 3/281? Okay. We'll
1 Q. If everyone has in front of him 3/281, Mr. Prcac, I'd like to ask
2 a question of you. This is one of the two rooms that you videoed. Do you
3 recognise this room, one of the two rooms with a window that you videoed
4 and commented on later; is that correct? Do you remember this room? This
5 would have been a sewage line on a series of blocks. It's on the
6 projector next to you. Is it visible to you on your screen, on your
8 MS. SOMERS: 281, Mr. Usher.
9 Q. If you look on the screen, Mr. Prcac, you will get a better view.
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic?
11 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise, I was
12 there too and I'm not sure that that is the right photograph. Could the
13 colleague tell us?
14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] But you're not the witness,
15 Mr. Simic. What is your objection?
16 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Authenticity.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So you're telling us that you're
18 objecting because this photograph is not authentic. On what grounds? Why
19 are you suspicious?
20 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I don't know whether it is that
21 room or some other. I don't know which room it is. I think we first need
22 to be told which room it is so that we as the Defence also could find our
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay. Ms. Susan Somers.
25 MS. SOMERS:
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
1 Q. Mr. Prcac, if I can try to help a little bit with the description
2 of what is purported to be shown here --
3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, you must ask
4 the witness whether he recognises this or not. If he says yes, okay; if
5 no, you have to go on, move on. Otherwise you too are testifying by
6 telling us, "This is the room where you were, there was a sewage outlet, a
7 window," et cetera. So you're testifying, too. Ask: "Do you recognise
8 this photograph or not?" And then move on.
9 MS. SOMERS:
10 Q. Mr. Prcac, while filming, did you recognise a room like this one
11 depicted in this photograph? While filming at Omarska on the first floor,
12 the toilets, the shower area? Could you answer yes or no and not nod your
13 head, please.
14 A. I don't know for certain which room this is a photograph of. I
15 told you a moment ago, there are two entrance doors within the washrooms,
16 there is a separating wall, so that there are five separate rooms. How
17 can I know which one this is of? They are all similar.
18 Q. Do you know a room that looks like this? Did you see a room that
19 looks like this one?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Then I will move on. The next one, please? If you'd look,
22 please, at 282, do you recognize a room that looks like this room as one
23 of the ones which you videoed from that floor?
24 A. They are all similar to me. If you could explain in greater
25 detail what this is. I don't know what I'm looking at. I know which
1 premises I entered and in which order we did the filming. If you could
2 explain in greater detail which room you're referring to, then I could
4 Q. If you were to come up the stairs and enter the first room, the
5 first door on your right at the top of the stairs, would you find a series
6 of stalls? Do you recollect a series of tiled stalls that would have
7 either been for shower or toilet facilities?
8 A. They existed but I'm not sure now. I didn't pay attention to the
9 details that you're showing me now. What was important for me was to go
10 inside and film the things that I wanted to film.
11 Q. And not necessarily catch the detail of the room to represent the
12 whole room, is that right? Just certain things you were looking for? Is
13 that what you're explaining?
14 A. Well, you see, such a narrow room could be on the ground floor. I
15 can't with certainty claim that that is the same room. It could be the
16 same in appearance as the one on the ground floor. How can I know that
17 this is the one upstairs? They are all similar to me.
18 Q. When you took your video camera and made your shots, did you
19 bother to note the height from the floor? Did you measure the height from
20 the floor of every window that you videoed?
21 A. I did my best to show how the window could be opened.
22 Q. Did you measure the height from the floor of every window? That
23 was my question. Yes or no.
24 A. No, no. I stood there.
25 Q. Did you look out the window for a full view of what may be
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And where were you standing when you did that?
4 A. One can even stand here, on this photograph, 3/281, if it is the
5 photograph of the same washrooms, and you can look out of the window.
6 MS. SOMERS: Would you kindly put on 3/283 on the ELMO, please.
7 Q. Are you able to see this particular photo, Mr. Prcac? Is it
8 visible to you?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. There is glare, for which we apologise, but do you recall, in your
11 videoing, looking out a room that may have looked like this one and having
12 a view - now, of course, this is black and white, and colour may be
13 better - of the expanses, the space that is visible on this photo? Does
14 this view look familiar to you from any of the rooms which you videoed?
15 A. Yes, if we are looking at it straight, then we see the open pit
16 mine, open cast, and if this is the open cast bit, and I can't see that
17 from here, then that's it. But looking at this photograph, I really can't
18 say what is in the background, it could be anything.
19 Q. Yes. And we apologise, we have not been able to refine it.
20 You've not got the best quality there. But looking at it straight, did
21 you, in your videoing, look at it straight?
22 A. Yes. You looked at it like that, too.
23 Q. 284, please. Again the quality of it has not -- the quality of it
24 leaves something to be desired, and our apologies, but if you were looking
25 out the window or a window similar to the one you described, did you
1 yourself get the same view that you see in this photograph? Was that view
2 visible to you from any of the windows which you videoed from?
3 A. I do apologise, but I really can't see the background of this. It
4 looks like an airport, a runway from here.
5 Q. It appears to have some type of hard surface. And are you able to
6 see what appears to be a vehicle in the left-hand corner on a hard
7 surface? Is that visible to you? If it's too difficult, I'll move on.
8 It is not a good-quality photo, so if it's too difficult --
9 A. Please.
10 Q. Okay. No problem. 285, again we unfortunately cannot boast of
11 the quality, but I think you can discern. Do you see -- first of all, do
12 you see the photo? Is it visible to you sufficiently to talk about it?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Okay. Thank you. If you can focus ahead on some -- it looks like
15 barrels. Are you able to see something that looks like barrels in the
16 background? There is a UN vehicle. Can you see that?
17 A. No. I see something, but they don't look like barrels to me.
18 Q. Something rounded? Do you see some rounded objects?
19 A. This is too poor a photograph. All I can see is the UN sign on
20 the vehicle. The rest of it isn't clear.
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, I don't think
22 we can insist as to what can be seen here. I can see an airport, yes.
23 Ms. Susan Somers, please.
24 MS. SOMERS: Your Honour, airports and --
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] One can imagine. This is
1 typically -- I apologise to have to say this to you, Ms. Susan Somers, but
2 what shall I say, these are diffuse photographs where anybody can read
3 into them what they like, depending on the observer. So may we have a
4 better photograph, please, at least?
5 MS. SOMERS: I will try ultimately, Your Honour, to get better
6 quality. I apologise to the Chamber and Defence counsel and the witness
7 for the quality of it. If the usher would be kind enough --
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Simic?
9 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I should like to ask
10 my learned colleague Ms. Somers if she can explain something. Are these
11 photographs taken by someone or photographs taken from -- or are they
12 stills from a video clip? Because we see a UN vehicle there. Now, is
13 that taken from a video? Is it a still of a video? Or was it a
14 photograph actually taken as a photograph? Just for purposes of
15 clarification, please, thank you.
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] And what is the date of the
18 MS. SOMERS: It is roughly October 2000, Your Honour, October
19 2000, roughly. And my understanding is these are stills. They are not
20 made from videos. They are not made from videos. I think the glare is,
21 unfortunately, a result of that.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So they are photographs taken
23 before the date of the video; is that right?
24 MS. SOMERS: Yes, yes, they are, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay. Please proceed, Ms.
2 MS. SOMERS: If the usher could distribute the next two exhibits,
3 which would be 3/286 and then 287. The copies have not been numbered but
4 this is 286 first and then 287. Thank you.
5 Q. Mr. Prcac, do you recognize from this photograph the
6 administration of the Omarska mine?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Are you able with the pointer -- this is 286, 3/286. Are you able
9 with the silver pointer that we have there to indicate which rooms it was
10 you were videoing when you went to Omarska, please? I'm sorry, for the
11 record, could you do it again, please? As accurately as you can. Looking
12 at -- looking straight on at the photograph, it would be -- it would
13 appear to be right in front of the white vehicle on the upper floor.
14 There are -- how many windows would have been involved in your videoing
15 from this photograph, can you tell us, how many windows?
16 A. Five.
17 Q. All five from the left, the first one, the second from the left,
18 the third from the left, the fourth from the left, and the fifth from the
19 left; is that correct, Mr. Prcac? Thank you. And then looking at
20 3/287 --
21 A. [Witness nods].
22 Q. Sorry, the last response to my question was a nod in the
23 affirmative. Okay. Looking at 287, which is a bit closer, are these the
24 same five vehicles -- I'm sorry, windows, I beg your pardon, windows that
25 you referred to a moment ago?
1 A. Let me see. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
2 Q. Recording the witness with a pointer from the left upper floor,
3 going 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
4 Now, the white UN vehicle which is visible, is that on a pavement
5 area or what is the material that the vehicle is standing on, please?
6 A. I assume it is asphalt.
7 Q. And when you videoed, was there also asphalt there?
8 A. Yes, yes.
9 Q. Would you know, from the right-hand corner of both 286 and 287,
10 there appears to be an object, a curved object. Do you recall whether or
11 not, when you videoed, you saw similar curved objects? Perhaps a barrel,
12 perhaps some other type of object?
13 A. If you mean this part here --
14 Q. The right corner. Did you take note of that?
15 A. I can't tell what it is at all. I just see a corner of
17 Q. So you don't recall if there was any such object or anything on
18 the asphalt?
19 A. I remember that there were conveyor belts which were used for the
20 conveyance of the ore, but I don't see -- I see a portion of something
21 here but I don't know what it is a portion of.
22 Q. Did you bring with you, when you videoed, any instruments of
23 measurement whatsoever, a tape measure, a ruler, anything that would
24 record heights, width, anything?
25 A. All I wanted was that when I went there to stand in the position
1 that I had heard of and to see what can be seen. I wanted to convince
2 myself personally to see what could be seen from that vantage point rather
3 than taking any measurements.
4 Q. So the answer to my question is no, you did not have any
5 instruments of measure at all when you went to video; is that right?
6 A. If you can take my height and consider my height as an instrument
7 of measurement, then we did have, yes, because you have my own height to
8 go by, but not any special tape measures or things of that kind. And my
9 height is a metre 80, so when I stand up onto a window, I know what can be
11 Q. Did you, in fact, stand up on any ledges or any tile,
12 promontories, anything that jutted out, anything while you were in those
13 stalls? Did you have the benefit of standing on anything?
14 A. In one case, yes. In one case I did, in the other I didn't. So I
15 followed my own logic, so to speak, so as to be able to see as truthfully
16 as possible what can actually be seen.
17 Q. In which room did you stand on something and in which room did you
18 not stand on something?
19 A. Well, that's a little more difficult now, probably because I paid
20 more attention to filming, to the actual filming and to convince myself
21 personally what can be seen from that angle. I haven't got a photographic
22 memory to be able to tell you exactly when I did what.
23 Q. So at all times when you were in these stalls, these tiled areas
24 where there were windows, you at all times had your video recorder with
25 you and you were at all times doing something with a recorder; is that
2 A. No. I've told you already. My friend had the camera and he
3 focused on some points which the -- the kind of things that I was able to
4 see myself. I would go and stand and see what can be seen, then he would
5 come behind me and film that, film my vision with the camera.
6 Q. Correct me if I am wrong, but I did not notice your friend
7 videoing you at a metre 80 in front of any windows. Was that by design?
8 A. You have not understood me again.
9 Q. Help me understand you.
10 A. They are small rooms. For him to be able to film them, to film
11 what I had told him to film, I would come up to a window, for example, I
12 would step up, look through the window. After that, I would come away
13 from the window and he would go up to the window with his camera and film.
14 Q. But you did not ask him to film you at the window with your height
15 to see what you could see, is that right? You have no video of yourself
16 or any person ...
17 A. If I stand in front of him, then I blur his vision, he can't see
18 from me, he can't take a film and I don't think you would be interested in
19 seeing my back.
20 Q. You did not have a controlled video to show this is the height
21 with your control as the height, and then this is the window without a
22 person in front of it. You did not have a truly controlled video that
23 would be an experimental with the height and then without a person there;
24 is that right? You just didn't do it, did you?
25 A. The man was holding the camera at his own level up here and was
1 filming what I had seen and what I told him to film. I am an amateur as
2 far as those things are concerned so I can't tell you professionally about
3 all this.
4 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Perhaps, Ms. Susan Somers, this
5 would be a good time to make a break.
6 MS. SOMERS: Fine, thank you.
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] But before we adjourn,
8 Mr. Ljubisa, the entire film that you filmed or your friend filmed, was it
9 shown here or was there a selection and certain cuts in order to make the
10 video or did we see the whole video or was it edited?
11 A. No, it was how he filmed it. He could see what he was filming, of
12 course, and that's how we handed it over.
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] The question is this: He placed
14 a cassette, a videotape to be taped and then he started taping, and he
15 finished taping and that is the whole thing that we have here in the
16 courtroom or was there some editing done?
17 A. No, nothing was a montage or edited. It is the film that he took
18 there together with me.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So the entire film, everything
20 he filmed on the locality was shown here; is that right?
21 A. Yes, that's right.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you. I'm
23 going to ask the usher to accompany the witness out of the courtroom
24 before we adjourn.
25 [Witness leaves the courtroom]
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Let us take a 50-minute
3 --- Recess taken at 12.53 p.m.
4 --- On resuming at 1.45 p.m.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Please be seated. You may be
6 seated. Ms. Susan Somers, please proceed.
7 MS. SOMERS:
8 Q. Mr. Prcac, you had indicated that you had a friend with you when
9 you did your video recording, and I wonder if you might be able to
10 indicate, to the best of your knowledge, the height of your friend who was
11 also sharing the video process with you?
12 A. About the same as me, but he's much more heavily built.
13 Q. So that was approximately a metre 80?
14 A. Between a metre 75 and a metre 80. It's difficult for me to
15 assess his actual height because, as I say, he is far more heavily built
16 than I am.
17 Q. Did either you or he, during the course of making this video,
18 stand on the ledge, the tile ledges of the shower? Do you remember doing
20 A. Yes. If that was necessary, we did.
21 Q. What led you to make this video? What was it -- what were you
22 trying to show us?
23 A. I tried to say that yesterday. When I talked to the Defence
24 lawyers, some of the witness statements seemed to me to be illogical, that
25 is to say as to what they could have seen and what they in fact did see.
1 Q. Were you read to -- or was a witness statement or more than one
2 witness statement read to you by the Defence lawyers that you got this
3 knowledge of what was said?
4 A. I've already said we talked about it.
5 Q. Well, did they read to you something? Or was it just off the top
6 of their heads? What was the scenario from which this question arose?
7 A. Let me say again, we were talking.
8 Q. Let me ask again: Did they read from any documents to you, for
9 example, witness transcripts?
10 A. No, they didn't.
11 Q. Was there testimony -- was it discussed with you that there may or
12 may not have been certain witnesses who discussed the windows that you
13 talked about, that you videoed?
14 A. When they talked to me and told me that something could be seen
15 out of the window, that that's what certain people claimed, we quite
16 simply wanted to convince -- ascertain whether you could or couldn't see.
17 Q. Was it mentioned to you -- was the discussion held in connection
18 with your father or was it a general quest about windows?
19 A. I think it was all in connection with my father, what happened
21 Q. Did you take it upon yourself to visit any other places where
22 there may or may not have been references to your father and possible acts
23 that may or may not have been committed by him or were alleged to be
24 committed by him, or did you just limit it to the shower area?
25 A. Well, I've already said that I went to talk to his work colleagues
1 who still worked at the present day in -- who were in the service up until
2 the present day. So we visited some of the other places.
3 Q. Did you ask any of those persons to accompany you on your video
5 A. No, I didn't ask them.
6 Q. Did you take it upon yourself to go into the "white house" and not
7 video the structure called the "white house"?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Were there any other areas that you may have edited from that
10 video of other parts of the Omarska complex that you took a look at?
11 A. No.
12 Q. In whose --
13 A. I apologise. How do you mean "edited"?
14 Q. In whose possession was that video from the moment the video was
15 made until the time it was shown?
16 A. My friend, and he handed it over to the Defence on the spot.
17 Q. The incident about two boys that you made reference to, that your
18 father, as you say, broke the code of silence on and discussed his work
19 with you, yesterday you made a comment in your testimony, it was -- on
20 LiveNote, it would be on page 79, you said, and you were describing what I
21 assume was told to you, "Nobody heeded his words so he took out his pistol
22 and said he would shoot and the beatings stopped. He came to Prijedor and
23 said to me, my mother, and brother -- actually, he told us we had to go to
24 Omarska. When I asked him why, he told me about this incident which had
25 happened, and actually he feared that Zeljko Meakic, who was present,
1 would report him to Simo Drljaca."
2 Your father, in his record of interview, in the English page 66,
3 which is our Exhibit 3/167, but I will read it, English page 66. The
4 Serbo-Croat appears on -- it's page 22A because of the rather strange
5 numbering due to the ERNs, but 22A, your father talks about an incident
6 where, "I didn't tell them where they should be taken to," but then he
7 moves on, "They will report this to Chief Simo, and given Simo's
8 temperament, he could have killed me." 22A on the B/C/S edition, English
9 66. "Fortunately, none of this happened and this was the end of it. And
10 this got people in Omarska more upset because the guards told about this
11 incident. This was terrible for me and I felt very exposed to risks, but
12 I couldn't watch such sights because I was never such a person."
13 My question to you is: As you told us yesterday, your father told
14 you to go from Prijedor to Omarska but the danger that he relayed to the
15 investigators suggested that the danger lay in Omarska. Can you explain
16 this seeming inconsistency? Where were you told to go? Where was it
17 really safe for you if this was true?
18 A. As we were in Prijedor and we were closer to the Public Security
19 Centre and perhaps more subject to the influence of those people, he
20 thought that it would be safer for us to be with him in Omarska and not to
21 be separated because we always rallied together when we had difficult
22 situations in our lives.
23 Q. Perhaps you didn't understand my question. If the concern were
24 for your security, your father indicated to the investigator that the
25 security issues, the problems, lay in Omarska. Did you go to Omarska, did
1 you find that there were problems?
2 A. You don't understand me. When I came to Omarska, one or two days
3 after that, I heard rumours. Can you understand me? Had I stayed in
4 Prijedor, I might have heard things of that kind there too. So it wasn't
5 important where I was at the time. If somebody did not want to tolerate
6 the incident and his behaviour, he could find me at both places, at either
7 place. My father's basic aim was to have the family all together in one
8 place and not separated.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MS. SOMERS: I need to ask the Chamber for a few minutes of
11 private session, if I may, please.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, let us move into private
14 [Private session]
13 Pages 11441-11445 redacted private session.
7 [Open session]
8 MS. SOMERS:
9 Q. Yesterday --
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We are in open session now.
11 MS. SOMERS:
12 Q. Yesterday, during your direct examination, you were asked about
13 several documents, and I wanted to just perhaps gets some clarification.
14 One document, which was D16/5, Defence document 16/5, which is a letter
15 directed on the 24th of March, 2000, to attorney Dusan Masic, written
16 "Matic" but Masic, from the SDS, the Party of the Republika Srpska.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Jovan Simic?
18 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I think it would be
19 appropriate to show the document to the witness, for him to see what it
20 is. Here it is. Everything is fine. I apologise.
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think that is just being
22 done. So please continue, Ms. Susan Somers.
23 MS. SOMERS:
24 Q. The document which was introduced through you, a letter apparently
25 directed for this litigation, from a person, the President of the SDS in
1 -- it says Republika Srpska, the Prijedor Municipal Board, dated 24
2 March, 2000, Dusan Beric, comments that your father Dragoljub Prcac was
3 never a member of this party. Was it your understanding that a person
4 needed to be a member of the party to subscribe or support the position of
5 the party? Is that your comprehension?
6 A. No. I just see this document as one that I obtained for the needs
7 of the defence. Why our attorneys need it, let them explain to you. That
8 is, the attorneys of my father, I apologise.
9 Q. You served in the Army of the Republika Srpska, did you not?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Do you consider yourself loyal to the Republika Srpska?
12 A. Now or then?
13 Q. Both.
14 A. Both then and now, I consider myself -- I considered myself loyal
15 to the law, which means the constitution.
16 Q. Of the Republika Srpska?
17 A. No. If the constitution in effect now is the constitution of
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina for the whole state, then I respect the provisions of
19 that state. If it is Republika Srpska, then those provisions of that
20 constitution. If I live in the Netherlands, I will respect your
22 Q. You said, "Both then and now," line 22, page 70. "Then" means
23 1992, and let's say specifically April, beginning of April, to the end of
24 August 1992. The law that required the things that transpired that are
25 the subject of these proceedings, I believe your term was you were loyal
1 to the law. Did you support what was happening under the laws of the
2 Republika Srpska?
3 A. No. I responded to the call-up to join the army to avoid any
4 legal sanctions envisaged by that constitution and that state.
5 Q. Were you ever a member of the SDS or any other political party?
6 A. No, I was never a member of a political party nor am I now a
7 member of any political party.
8 Q. You also provided, which is document 17/5, a certificate from an
9 administrative affairs group concerning vehicle registrations or the
10 absence of vehicle registrations for your father.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Does your father have a driver's licence?
13 A. He did.
14 Q. Has he at all times since 1992 had a driver's licence, including
15 January 1st of 1992?
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Jovan Simic.
17 MR. J. SIMIC: [No interpretation].
18 MS. SOMERS: I will repeat the question.
19 Q. Has he at all times had a driver's licence since January 1st,
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. You mentioned yesterday that there had a been a crash in which he
23 was involved of a borrowed car, and I believe your testimony was that he
24 never had another borrowed car again. Whether or not he owns a vehicle
25 does not reflect on whether he can drive or could own a vehicle, does it?
1 I mean, he just doesn't own a vehicle. Is that unusual?
2 A. I don't understand the question.
3 Q. You yesterday indicated that he never again after the crash wanted
4 to have a -- borrow a vehicle. Is there any particular --
5 A. As far as I know.
6 Q. Have you seen your father drive since the crash?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Does the fact that he does not have a vehicle reflect a personal
9 choice, he doesn't want to have a vehicle?
10 A. No. He can't afford owning a vehicle. Do you understand that?
11 Q. I'm asking you, is that the reason? In other words, the fact that
12 he doesn't have a vehicle registered is a reflection of his financial
13 situation or his personal preference not to have a vehicle. Maybe you can
14 help us understand. It was not clear.
15 A. His financial situation.
16 MS. SOMERS: There is another document, D22/5A, it's an
17 authorisation dated 11 July 1992.
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Excuse me for interrupting.
19 Perhaps, Ms. Susan Somers, you can give us the number of the document and
20 Madam Registrar and the usher will give the documents to the witness once
21 in one go.
22 MS. SOMERS: This is the last document, Judge, so I just wanted to
23 clarify a point. The document --
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We have to pay attention to the
25 time, as you know, Ms. Susan Somers, and we have to save on time as much
1 as we possibly can.
2 MS. SOMERS:
3 Q. The document from 11 July 1992 which purports to be an
4 authorisation, although it is not evidently signed, it's hard to tell the
5 signature, in your own language authorises your father, Dragoljub Prcac,
6 to ask citizens for identity papers, bring them into the authorised organ,
7 enter apartments or other facilities, go through them and conduct a search
8 without a warrant from the appropriate organ, bear a weapon and use it
9 under circumstances provided for by law, and use another's vehicle or
10 means of communication in cases envisaged by law. It also indicated that
11 the bearer of these papers has the right to bear arms.
12 Are these powers which your father had when he was an active-duty
13 police officer as well?
14 A. I don't know that. You must ask him.
15 MS. SOMERS: Thank you very much. No further questions, thank
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Ms. Susan
18 Somers. I think you've made a present to us of 20 minutes today, and
19 thank you very much.
20 Mr. Jovan Simic, any re-examination?
21 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, very briefly.
22 Re-examined by Mr. J. Simic:
23 Q. Mr. Prcac, when you were filming or when we were filming, from the
24 WC window, any of those windows, could the "white house" be seen?
25 A. No.
1 Q. From the -- any of the toilet windows, is it possible to see the
2 pista, that is, the area between the administration building and the
3 hangar or, rather, the garage?
4 A. No.
5 Q. From the windows of the two rooms that you indicated, can the
6 pista be seen?
7 A. Only a small part of it.
8 Q. From those same rooms, can the "white house" be seen?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Let me just ask you one more question related to documents.
11 First, it is document 21B. This is the public announcement. I don't know
12 whether you remember it. If necessary, the usher can give you a copy.
13 The document D21/5 states that, "All men aged between 18 and 45
14 who are not serving either in the army or the police and who have not
15 received war assignments should report immediately to the Public Security
16 Station," et cetera.
17 The document is dated the 2nd of June 1992. That is correct,
18 isn't it?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. How did it come about that your father was mobilised though, when
21 this public announcement was released, he was much older than the limit
22 age mentioned in the document?
23 A. I can only express a personal opinion. As he had been employed as
24 a crime technician and, at that time, the war operations were starting,
25 the plundering of property, I believe that because of the job he had in
1 peacetime, he was needed because of a shortage of such personnel so as to
2 investigate robberies as successfully as possible.
3 MS. SOMERS: Your Honour, I would have to object. This is
4 speculative, and I would ask that the testimony be stricken. He has
5 admitted he does not know, it's his opinion, and this is not the subject
6 matter of opinion.
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I didn't have a translation, but
8 I see. You asked a whole series of questions and the witness, again,
9 answered with his opinions. The witness said according to what he knew
10 even though the witness said that this was his own opinion, he gave you an
11 answer to the best of his knowledge.
12 In any event, for things to be quite clear, Witness, let me ask
13 you: How did you come to reach the conclusion that you have just conveyed
14 to us?
15 A. On the basis of my personal reflection because that was the
16 situation -- that was what the situation was like.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] And you formed that personal
18 opinion on the basis of what?
19 A. On the basis of my own opinion and on the basis of my
20 conversations with his colleagues.
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So Ms. Susan Somers.
22 MS. SOMERS: I still think it's an inappropriate response, it
23 should be stricken in as much as he just indicated that he knew nothing
24 about what police work his father would have done when he was --
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No, Ms. Susan Somers, I'm
1 sorry. The Chamber knows how to distinguish between opinions and
2 information. We have a lot of work to do in that area in this case. In
3 any event, the response will be recorded as given.
4 Mr. Jovan Simic, you may continue, please.
5 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have no more
7 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
8 Judge Fouad Riad, please.
9 Questioned by the Court:
10 JUDGE RIAD: Mr. Prcac, good afternoon. Can you hear me?
11 A. Good afternoon; extremely well.
12 JUDGE RIAD: May I just ask for a few clarifications concerning
13 two or three points you mentioned yesterday and today. I remember
14 yesterday, while examined by Mr. Simic, you mentioned that there was some
15 kind of rumour that your father protected Muslims. Did this -- was this
16 met by any concrete reaction either from the authorities or any kind of
17 response publicly from the society, from the Serb community?
18 A. Yes, this came from them directly. I told you yesterday this was
19 just gossip.
20 JUDGE RIAD: Yes. But what was the reaction? Was there any --
21 was he transferred? Did anybody come and throw stones at your house?
22 Anything happened?
23 A. No. But it was sufficient for one to be walking in the street and
24 for somebody to say something behind your back, and it made you feel
25 uncomfortable. Those were very difficult times for me.
1 JUDGE RIAD: And professionally, he did not -- there was no
3 A. I think not.
7 A. No, no, no. I said that I asked them and they said they knew
8 nothing about the incident.
9 JUDGE RIAD: So who told you about the incident?
10 A. I said that I heard nothing more from anyone else regarding that
11 incident. I tried to find out more from these people. So it was my
12 father who told me that evening when he came to fetch us.
13 JUDGE RIAD: Only your father, no other source of information?
14 A. That's right.
15 JUDGE RIAD: Did you hear about other incidents where he protected
16 the detainees, or was it the only incident he related to you?
17 A. It was an incident that frightened him with respect to the safety
18 of his family, and the only incident due to which his family was directly
19 at risk, and he believed that he needed to take steps to protect us.
20 JUDGE RIAD: Yes. But throughout his stay in the camp, did these
21 protection endeavours, were they repeated? Did he tell you that he did it
22 on other times or other manifestations of protection to the detainees?
23 A. No.
24 JUDGE RIAD: I think today you -- and also you spoke about Zlata
25 Cikota's letter. I think you were answering the Prosecutor. What was the
1 need for this letter which she wrote?
2 A. Simply we sent her food. We were sending her food, and she sent a
3 letter to my mother to thank her.
4 JUDGE RIAD: A courtesy letter?
5 A. And in the letter, she asked that we continue to assist her as far
6 as we were able. It's not her only letter. But it's the only one that I
7 have kept.
8 JUDGE RIAD: You also mentioned, I think, that she offered you a
9 necklace, a pearl necklace. Did I understand rightly?
10 A. Yes.
11 JUDGE RIAD: Was it a gift or was it because she could not carry
12 her jewels with her, like sometimes people who are driven out of a
13 country, they can't take their belongings?
14 A. She did carry her jewellery with her. The necklace was a token of
15 gratitude to me because I assisted her children as well while she was in
16 the investigation centre. I was very close to her son. I would go and
17 visit them.
18 JUDGE RIAD: Were they well-off when they left? Did they have
19 enough money, enough things, so that she could afford to offer precious
21 A. An average family.
22 JUDGE RIAD: At the moment they left, were they still in
23 possession of enough -- enough wealth or sufficient money to allow them to
24 give gifts?
25 A. The gift was a small token of gratitude to me personally. That is
1 why I got the necklace. And she felt that we had done a lot to help her.
2 It was a token of gratitude to me, and the necklace was not intended for
3 me but to my future bride, which she doesn't know, and I don't, anyway,
4 for that matter.
5 JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much. Thank you.
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Judge Fouad
8 Madam Judge Wald, please.
9 JUDGE WALD: You told us that your father very rarely, if ever,
10 with the one exception we talked about, would talk about his job or what
11 it consisted of, at home. But you also told us that after his arrest, you
12 became very intensely interested in details about the charges that were
13 made against him and you began to talk to some of his work associates, and
14 you mentioned specifically that you talked to one of the typists, I think,
15 at Omarska who told you that he did errands for Meakic and he did some
16 radio or communications, and some other administrative -- whatever. You
17 can clarify that in your answer. But my question to you would be, as you
18 began to find out after his arrest, as you talked to people and asked them
19 questions about what his job at Omarska consisted of, did you ever have
20 conversations at that point with your father and ask him at that point
21 what his job had been at Omarska, in light of what you were hearing, the
22 answers you were hearing from other people you were talking to?
23 A. I said that I started inquiring about these things only after he
24 was arrested.
25 JUDGE WALD: I understand. But even I'm saying -- my question to
1 you is, at that time after he was arrested, did you ever have any
2 subsequent conversations with your father after you talked to these other
3 people, about what his job had been at Omarska?
4 A. No. I would just convey greetings to him.
5 JUDGE WALD: Okay. In the suitcase which had so many of the
6 historical records that you've given to the Defence and have been provided
7 to us, were there any letters of thanks or commendations or any documents
8 at all in that group that pertained to the period of time he spent in
9 Omarska? For instance, other witnesses, not your father, but other
10 witnesses, other accused, sometimes there have been records of where they
11 were given some kind of commendation or award for the time and the jobs
12 that they performed in the camp. Were there any such documents in his
13 suitcase that pertained to the period he was in Omarska camp?
14 A. No.
15 JUDGE WALD: None at all?
16 A. No.
17 JUDGE WALD: Okay. You told us that you were motivated to make
18 this film or to assist in making this film in the hopes of that it would
19 be of assistance to your father's defence in that you thought or you were
20 -- you believed that some of the testimony was not logical about what
21 people could see or that sort of thing. I just want to get this
22 straight. I know that you didn't -- or you told us you didn't personally
23 read any of the witnesses' testimony; is that right? But did you think --
24 when you were making the video, was it your impression that you were
25 filming the views from particular windows in order to show that witnesses
1 who may have said they saw your father here or there or doing something in
2 other places in the camp could not have seen it from that vantage point?
3 Or was it to show that your father, who worked in that same building,
4 might not have been able to see what was going on in the rest of the
6 A. This was all based on my conversations with Defence counsel.
7 JUDGE WALD: I understand. But I'm just wondering what was your
8 impression of how this was --
9 A. We didn't talk about the facts that the testimony of witnesses
10 related to, or to whom -- to any person in particular, but some things
11 were not -- simply not logical. I don't even know whether that witness is
12 testifying about my father.
13 JUDGE WALD: I see. But when you say, then - let's just say what
14 you said - that some things were not logical, what was your impression was
15 not logical? Just your own belief at the time? What wasn't logical that
16 these films might help to show was not logical?
17 A. For instance, that the window could be opened wide and when you
18 peeped out that you could see a part of the pista. I'm referring to the
19 windows in the bathrooms.
20 JUDGE WALD: And your belief that that might be of assistance to
21 your father's case, if I understand you, came exclusively from your
22 conversations with Defence counsel rather than any research on your own;
23 is that right?
24 A. Yes, yes.
25 JUDGE WALD: Was it your inspiration or your idea or Defence
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
1 counsel's that this film be made? Who had the first idea?
2 A. It sort of emerged as our joint idea, as a result of the
3 conversations. I proposed that I film it and they accepted it.
4 JUDGE WALD: And as I understand again your testimony, it was from
5 -- as a result of these conversations that it would be decided which room
6 to go in and which windows to focus on; is that right?
7 A. Yes.
8 JUDGE WALD: Thank you.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Judge
11 Following these questions, should I take it that your conclusion
12 about something being not logical was reached before the video, before
13 going to Omarska; is that right?
14 A. I had been to Omarska once before.
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So before you made that
16 conclusion, you had already been to Omarska once?
17 A. Yes.
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] For what purpose did you visit
19 Omarska before the filming of the video?
20 A. Simply to go to the location where all this happened, to try and
21 accept the story about my father. Simply to satisfy my own curiosity.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] That first time that you went to
23 Omarska, did you also go to the toilets inside?
24 A. I toured the whole building, yes.
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] That first time, was there a
1 specific motive, a specific reason for going to the toilets?
2 A. Quite simply to see what it all looked like and to try to conjure
3 up the image of some of the events that I had heard about. So for my own
4 personal gratification because I want to learn the truth about my father.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. Perhaps there is going to
6 be some repetition in the question I'm going to ask you but I'm going to
7 ask it nonetheless. Can you tell us openly and in a general manner, in
8 what circumstances did you arrive at the conclusion that something was not
9 logical, that what was seen out of the window, what was said could be seen
10 out of the window was not logical? What circumstances allowed you to come
11 by that conclusion with someone; why, who? What were the circumstances?
12 A. [No interpretation].
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Who? You say, "While we were
14 talking," who were you talking to?
15 A. I was talking with my father's Defence counsel.
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] That is to say the three
17 lawyers; is that right?
18 A. Yes, that's right.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Please proceed.
20 A. I heard what had happened because I was interested in my father's
21 trial in the course of the actual proceedings. I don't know who it was
22 exactly who came to that detail concerning the window but it cropped up at
23 some point in time, and in order to check that out, we went to Omarska
24 again. When we saw that some things didn't correspond, we filmed it. So
25 what we thought did not correspond to what was said, that's what we
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] And to wind up this issue, the
3 illogicalness, the lack of logic, was that the reason for making the video
4 or was it a conclusion of your visit?
5 A. Well, I would rather say that it was a summary of all the events,
6 a rounding off of all the events, a total image of what had happened and
7 all the events that had taken place.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, we have no more
9 questions for you, Mr. Prcac. We thank you very much for having come and
10 contributed in this way. We wish you a safe journey back to your place of
11 residence, and I'm now going to ask the usher to escort you out of the
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much too, Your
15 [The witness withdrew]
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Jovan Simic, I think that we
17 can have the next witness brought in because we shall go on for an extra
18 15 minutes at least. So we'll try to make up for some of the time, but I
19 think that we can end within the -- our deadline. Are you optimistic that
20 we shall be able to do that?
21 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] I'm always an optimist, Your
22 Honour. But we would have to deal with the exhibits first, I think, and
23 we'll need some time for that. And if we start the next witness for just
24 10 or 15 minutes, a witness who is in a country that is foreign to him and
25 should be isolated, I will -- that is to say, my colleague, Mr. Masic,
1 will conduct the examination but it would be a good time -- a good way --
2 a good thing if the witness could have a rest and then start the testimony
3 tomorrow morning, perhaps.
4 I do promise that we'll make up for that time in the course of
5 tomorrow, during the day tomorrow, and we'll get through the three
6 witnesses we had planned to get through, but perhaps we can have the next
7 witness tomorrow morning.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. We won't have the
9 witness shown in now. I do share your optimistic outlook but I also have
10 to be a realist myself so I have to look at the other side of the question
11 as well. But yes, you're quite right, let us discuss the exhibits.
12 That's a good proposal.
13 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence of
14 Mr. Prcac would like to tender into evidence the following exhibits from
15 D8/5A and B down to and inclusive with D38/5A and B inclusive.
16 I apologise but I should just like to mention that exhibit -- the
17 exhibit which is D19/5A and B was already introduced by the Prosecution,
18 and I apologise for that omission. It is already -- it is Prosecution
19 Exhibit 2/2.9. So perhaps Madam Registrar could assist us and then have
20 our, perhaps, exhibit quoted with a bis so that we know that it is the
21 Defence exhibit as well, D19/5 bis.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Madam Registrar, any comments?
23 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. I would like to say that I don't think it's
24 appropriate to have the bis number after it. All we can do is note that
25 OTP Exhibit 2/2.9 is the same as D19/5 and in the future, we will take
1 care not to double number. Okay?
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers.
3 MS. SOMERS: I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I believe
4 there's another exhibit that was an OTP exhibit that has also been
5 renumbered by the Defence and that is Defences D21/5. It is the public
6 announcement about military age and it was Prosecution's 2/4.23. That was
7 Prosecution 2/4.23.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] So the transcript is correct, is
9 it, with respect to the numbering of the exhibits?
10 MS. SOMERS: Yes, 2/4.23 is the Defence D21/5.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Okay. Yes. It is now. Very
12 well. Thank you.
13 MS. SOMERS: Did you wish -- may we lodge or not lodge
15 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes.
16 MS. SOMERS: Thank you. As to the documentary part of the
17 presentation of Defence evidence, meaning the paper part, we have no
18 objection. However, on the video, we believe that the methodology is
19 sufficiently flawed that its value is null and it should not be admitted.
20 We think it is -- does not represent accurately -- first of all, it's not
21 clear what it's supposed to represent, but it does not accurately
22 represent any type of view, and I think that it was an inappropriate way
23 to gather, and I think that the relevance, had it been done correctly, may
24 have been shown, but the way it was done has negated the relevance. And
25 the methods under Rule 95 -- I think the methodology casts such doubt on
1 its reliability that I think it would be inappropriate to admit it.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] One moment, please. The judges
3 will confer.
4 JUDGE WALD: Let me ask one question before we go into
5 conference. Could you sum up, Ms. Somers? I know the exhibits that you
6 used had already been introduced, right, the photos? The bunch of photos
7 that you used in your cross-examination.
8 MS. SOMERS: Those are new exhibits actually, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE WALD: They have not yet been introduced?
10 MS. SOMERS: They have not.
11 JUDGE WALD: Are you planning to introduce them?
12 MS. SOMERS: I would like to. I've labelled them. I must review
13 the transcript to see what the witness recognised and didn't because those
14 I would have to --
15 JUDGE WALD: I was going to say perhaps it would be of assistance
16 to us to know, before we rule on the other side, what you see as the
17 significant difference between those photos and the photos -- the video
18 that the Defence sought to introduce. To us, quite frankly, they all look
19 like pictures of bathrooms with pictures of toilet stalls with pictures of
20 windows above it, and it's not immediately clear why theirs is so flawed
21 but we should take -- we should embrace yours. I think it might make the
22 objection a little clearer if we knew what you see as the significant
23 difference between the two groups.
24 MS. SOMERS: I'm hampered by the fact that some are so unclear
25 and --
1 JUDGE WALD: Some of yours are unclear, yes, they are.
2 MS. SOMERS: Are so unclear, and they are just hot off the
3 development process, and so I've not had an opportunity to see if there
4 can be some perhaps enhancement or correction. But if the court would
5 just indulge me, the point of it was that the actual view of what could be
6 seen was not captured at all by the video. There was no indication as to
7 where -- as to height, in other words, if the --
8 JUDGE WALD: There wasn't for yours either. You didn't have
9 anybody talk standing in front of the window either.
10 MS. SOMERS: I could not testify, obviously, I was asking -- and
11 I'm in a position only to ask if they substantially reflect, and I do not
12 think at this time I can tender them in, but I will perhaps, because
13 issues have been raised, have an opportunity to do so in the last part of
14 our case, with the issues having been framed now. So at best I can just
15 ask to have them marked. There were some that were recognised by the
16 witness, and if the Chamber might let us just go through -- it's not
17 completely evident from just looking at the transcript which he
18 acknowledged as recognizing and which he didn't. If I can inform the
19 Chamber first thing tomorrow morning what we have, I think it will save
20 some steps. Otherwise, if the Chamber will just allow me to leave them as
21 marked, I will --
22 JUDGE WALD: That's a different question, but your primary
23 objection to their video is that it was flawed in methodology, but their
24 witnesses - I mean the witness, the same witness - clearly said, "I was in
25 there with these other people and this is what we filmed." So he
1 identified the areas that were being filmed too. We may all have
2 questioned him about what exactly he thought he was -- what was the
3 purpose of filming, but I don't know that I see right away any big
4 difference between his saying, "I went in and took these pictures in
5 Omarska and here they are, make of them what you will," and yours, which
6 goes in and says, "We went in and filmed these in the stalls and here is
7 what we got."
8 MS. SOMERS: Your Honour, I think the photos that the Prosecution
9 presented show the entire bathroom. They do not cut areas off. They are
10 from vantage points that give an entire picture, and if a window is shown,
11 it is shown directly looking out from a vantage point of a person standing
12 in front of it.
13 JUDGE WALD: But he at some point -- just to pursue this, because
14 we took up so much time, we might as well take up another minute. One of
15 the points they said they were trying to show was that the bathroom
16 windows opened inward instead of outward and whatever relevance -- we can
17 debate the relevance and what that relates to and a lot of other things,
18 but if that was a purpose, then they would obviously be filming the window
19 with a different purpose in mind than to show the straight view.
20 MS. SOMERS: If that is the sole purpose, I would have to ask the
21 Chamber then to consider only for that purpose, because I think that the
22 actual filming leaves out the necessary parts of the particular rooms that
23 might indicate the ledges where a person could stand, what a person could
24 see if so standing. And again, I'm constrained because today I do not
25 have a witness who can clarify mine, and there was non-recognition of a
1 number of mine. So I can only ask the Chamber to, if admitted, consider
2 only for a very limited purpose.
3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, I don't want
4 to enter into a discussion of this kind but I do have to make a comment.
5 All of us here are aware of the fact that the mechanism of perception is a
6 succession of images. Memory, memory is an association of images. And I
7 think that here we are talking about different things. The video shows us
8 a sequence of images. In photographs, we do not get a sequence of
9 images. And I think you noticed nonetheless that the witness talked about
10 the integral quality of the elements, and I think that for the Chamber,
11 things are clear. Madam Judge Wald brought up the question of relevance.
12 I don't know whether you were here already but there were witnesses who
13 did discuss this question at length, whether the window opened inwards or
14 outwards. And we now have the possibility of observing and judging. And
15 therefore, as Judge Wald said, the reasons for which you are objecting are
16 the same reasons that the Defence can use in objecting to your
17 photographs. So I'm going to discuss this point with my colleagues, to
18 confer with my colleagues, but perhaps later on, but are you going to ask
19 that the photographs be tendered into evidence or not?
20 MS. SOMERS: May I just respond to your comment, Your Honour?
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 MS. SOMERS: An additional point was raised in redirect about what
23 could be viewed, so there is an additional issue that was trying -- that
24 was attempted to be proven through these photos, what could be viewed from
25 the pista, and the issue is sufficiently tendentious that it is our view
1 that anything other than perhaps the hinges that -- yes, the hinges and
2 the direction in which they may have opened filmed at close range would
3 not have any probative value from their video. I understand the -- I
4 understand your position completely. I think that the only way for us to
5 try -- I'm sorry, what could be viewed from the window was raised in
6 redirect. And I believe that it is a very, very controversial point in
7 this trial. I am not clear how the Chamber would want to resolve it but I
8 think that if it does admit, and I sense that it is minded to do so --
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Excuse me for interrupting, Ms.
10 Susan Somers. The view from the window? Which window; the toilet window
11 or the office window? What view are you talking about?
12 MS. SOMERS: The toilet windows, Your Honour, the windows which
13 were the subject of videoing, and a number of issues are certainly very
14 much unresolved. The Prosecution, I think, is in a position where it will
15 have to address this in a later part of its case before trial is over.
16 Your other question to me, Your Honour, about do we want to
17 tender? Photographs which were acknowledged as representing what they
18 purport to represent by the witness I would ask to have moved in, and the
19 ones which were recognised were 3/277, 3/278, 3/279, 3/286, and 3/287. In
20 good faith, the others were not -- were not sufficiently clear for any
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Ms. Susan Somers. If the
23 witness recognised or not, it is up to the Chamber to conclude that. That
24 is your conclusion, but it is up to us to make the conclusion. Have you
1 MS. SOMERS: Thank you very much. I have.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you. Mr. Jovan Simic?
3 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just briefly, as far
4 as the videotape is concerned, the Defence presented an exhibit, a piece
5 of evidence, the Prosecution has the opportunity in rebuttal to counteract
6 that. Now, I'm sure the Trial Chamber will know what weight to give to
7 the exhibit, so I don't see why it shouldn't be admitted.
8 As regards these three photographs, the Defence is opposed. We
9 are worried about the position of the UN vehicle and nobody has
10 ascertained at what distance that is, how large it is, whether it can be
11 seen from the window or not, and in fact, by this photograph, they are
12 trying to show us that something can perhaps be seen from that window
13 which was not the subject of our exhibit. That is not what we wanted.
14 All we wanted to show was that the windows did not open in the way in
15 which it was presented here.
16 I am just afraid -- the Defence is just afraid that this
17 photograph should not later on be used as something which is evidence that
18 something can be seen from the window. We don't know the position of the
19 car. We don't know the distance of the car. I don't want to repeat what
20 I have already said. Thank you.
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Fila.
22 MR. FILA: [Interpretation] Very briefly, Mr. President: Yesterday
23 morning, during the cross-examination of Mr. Radic, Prosecutor Saxon
24 showed photographs which he himself had taken which were purported to show
25 what could be seen from Mr. Radic's position. I didn't ask us to measure
1 the height of Mr. Saxon or his breadth, but they showed a photograph which
2 the Prosecutor himself took, I don't know why, for us to see, and I did
3 not object because I believe what I am told.
4 How is it that the Prosecutor can take photographs and the Defence
5 cannot? We are all interested in finding out what could be seen from that
6 window. Furthermore, let Mr. Saxon go there with his camera and take
7 another video, and then we'll all be able to see it.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, I think that that is why we
9 do have a Trial Chamber and judges. I think that the people here in front
10 of you are able to observe, to compare, to watch, to see, and even to put
11 questions and interpret things. I should like to remind you that we do
12 indeed have to bear in mind, and I keep repeating it because I think it is
13 important, and it is something that we forget when we are talking about
14 small details, one can forget that perception is a sequence. Memory is
15 association. And therefore, for the judges who are here present, the
16 judges are able to make the distinction. We are fully aware of that.
17 I can tell you that even the photographs of the Prosecutor which
18 show the UN vehicle, the photos taken by Mr. Saxon with another vehicle
19 there which happened to be there, I thought to myself, Mr. Saxon couldn't
20 have removed the vehicle. If we start picking on things here and there,
21 we will not get through it.
22 For me, my own experience tells me that the people parked here
23 because it was more suitable. It was closer to the entrance. I don't
24 know whether that's a good interpretation. It was less comfortable to
25 leave the car outside the gates so that is a simple reason why they parked
1 here. That is my normal experience that tells me that. If there is
2 another reason, one must try to find it.
3 Also, with respect to the height of some -- whether there were
4 tape measures or not, we can see clearly that the windows on the toilets
5 are shorter than the others. And that is quite normal, I think, that all
6 architects usually plan, for reasons of privacy and intimacy, for the
7 windows to be smaller. There is things one doesn't show to the public, et
8 cetera. This is normal experience that tells us these things. Why are
9 you making an issue out of it?
10 So my question is still pending. Ms. Susan Somers, are you going
11 to ask for the admission of the photographs or not? You use this material
12 as it was for your cross-examination. The replies of the witness have a
13 meaning only in connection with those stimuli of his perceptions and those
14 were his responses to those stimuli.
15 MS. SOMERS: Thank you, Judge, just the enumerated ones. Those
16 are the only ones I'm seeking admission of.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Just a moment. The Judges will
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We have to ask Mr. Jovan Simic
21 whether you have any objections in relation to the admission of these
23 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You have already said that you
25 object in relation to 3/286 and 287, I think. Am I right?
1 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we object to all
2 these three photographs, 3/285 -- in fact, we are concerned by 3/285, but
3 after what you said, I have no doubts that Your Honours will be able to
4 judge the value.
5 The other Defence counsel tell me that 3/285 have not been
6 tendered. In that case, I have no objection to the other two, 286 and
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] In that case, we are going to
9 admit into evidence Defence Exhibits D8/5 through to 38/5, bearing in mind
10 that D19/5 already corresponds to Prosecution Exhibit 2/2.9 and that
11 Defence Exhibit 21/5 corresponds also to OTP Exhibit 2/4.23. And also
12 order the admission of Exhibits of the Prosecution, I think there are
13 three -- no I am lost, I am afraid. Could you remind me?
14 So Exhibits 3/277, 278, 279, 286 and 287. Is that right,
15 Ms. Susan Somers?
16 MS. SOMERS: Yes, Your Honour, exactly.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. So I think
18 that's all as regards the Defence, Mr. Jovan Simic, as well, yes?
19 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well, then. So now we can
21 adjourn until tomorrow, and tomorrow we shall try to make up for lost
22 time. I wish to tell the parties that the Chamber tried to work until
23 5.20 but with Jovan Simic, we have arranged that we can finish by
24 Wednesday next week and we have to finish because the Chamber has other
25 obligations, that is, Madam Judge Wald has obligations in the Appeals
1 Chamber and we cannot go beyond that. So please be as economical, time
2 efficient. Otherwise, we may have to prolong the hearings to be able to
3 complete Mr. Prcac's Defence case.
4 Mr. Jovan Simic, are you still optimistic?
5 MR. J. SIMIC: [Interpretation] Always, Your Honour. We will
6 complete our case by Wednesday at the latest. I hope that on Tuesday, we
7 will finish by the end of business because the next witnesses are briefer
8 and referring to very concrete facts.
9 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I too am optimistic today
10 because Ms. Susan Somers made a present of 20 minutes to us today.
11 MS. SOMERS: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 We received yesterday a motion or an objection by accused Kos's
13 trial team to the videolink, and I wanted to bring this to the Chamber's
14 attention so it could consider it, as it were, because preparations, I
15 believe, are underway.
16 The Chamber, to my knowledge, has ruled already on this matter
17 from 6th of October 2000, I have transcript page -- in Emir Zjakic, it was
18 a witness whose physical condition did not permit his travel. During case
19 in chief, it is transcript page 6449 and I just want to bring it to the
20 Chamber's attention so that we could seek a resolution of this because
21 time is of the essence with preparation. And if there's any -- if
22 tomorrow the Chamber wishes any further argument, but I just wanted to, as
23 it were, give a heads up about the motion if it had not yet crossed your
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Ms. Susan Somers, yes. This
13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
14 and the English transcripts.
1 witness -- maybe my memory has not been refreshed so I need additional
2 information. This witness was to have been called during the Prosecution
3 case, was that right?
4 MS. SOMERS: Correct, Your Honour. Exactly.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] This -- was this witness
6 replaced by another witness?
7 MS. SOMERS: No, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You need this witness very much.
9 MS. SOMERS: Yes, Your Honour. It goes to an issue at least --
10 more than one issue but a very contested issue from the Kvocka case
11 actually, and -- the Kvocka Defence. And as I indicated, the Chamber had
12 indicated to Ms. Hollis, my predecessor, that we -- initially it was an
13 indication about deposition, but since we've not used deposition,
14 videolink has been the means. "We can conclude that the witness who was
15 the object of the motion," this is Your Honour, Judge Rodrigues speaking,
16 "... of the motion in the deposition, is going to come in the rebuttal
17 and that is the best way to accelerate matters. So Madam Hollis, you have
18 the ruling and the decision and let us now proceed to the testimony."
19 Page 6449, 6 October 2000.
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well. Now I remember. You
21 see how my process of association functions. So we adjourn until tomorrow
22 at 9.20.
23 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
24 3.15 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday the 10th day
25 of May, 2001, at 9.20 a.m.