1 Tuesday, 11 April 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
6 WITNESS: IVAN GRUJIC [Resumed]
7 [Witness answered through interpreter]
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before we start with the hearing, there's just one
9 little housekeeping matter. There is a request, I think, from the
10 interpreters that we read the following message to all participants in
11 court. The message reads: "Since the instalment of the new audio
12 equipment in the courtrooms, interpreters have been experiencing problems
13 with the quality of the sound which is in turn affecting the quality of
14 interpretation. Speakers who stand are less audible than before, and even
15 the slightest incidental noise is picked up. Court reporters, too, are
16 experiencing similar problems with the new equipment. Until a solution is
17 found to remedy the situation, all participants in the proceedings are
18 kindly requested to do the following: One, make sure they speak directly
19 into the microphone; keep the lectern and/or papers away from the
20 microphone; switch off the microphone as soon as they stop speaking; to
21 the extent possible, keep all typing to a minimum; avoid shuffling papers,
22 clicking pens, et cetera. Technicians are kindly requested to switch off
23 any microphones inadvertently left open." And you have been thanked for
24 your understanding.
25 Could we kindly observe the request from the interpreters to make
1 their job a little more bearable.
2 Mr. Grujic. Am I right? May I remind you that you are still
3 bound by the declaration you made yesterday to tell the truth, the whole
4 truth, and nothing else but the truth.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
7 Mr. Milovancevic.
8 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Cross-examination by Mr. Milovancevic: [Continued]
10 Q. Good morning, Mr. Grujic. We will now continue your
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm going to ask you to try to speak directly to
13 your mike, Mr. Milovancevic, and try to speak a little louder.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. From May 1993, Mr. Grujic, when you were appointed president of
16 the Commission for Imprisoned and Missing Persons of the Republic of
17 Croatia to date, is it the case that you are dealing with imprisoned and
18 missing persons?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Can it be said that at that period you were heading all the bodies
21 of the Republic of Croatia, whatever their name, that dealt with issues of
22 imprisoned and missing persons?
23 A. Correct.
24 Q. Today you are heading the Commission for Imprisoned and Missing
25 Persons in the Ministry for Family and Intergenerational Solidarity?
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. In point 4 of your report, the scope of this administration is
3 specified under 2f. That's an addendum.
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. That scope is defined as technical matters related to search for
6 detainees and missing persons, exhumation, and identification of mortal
7 remains from individual and mass graves of persons killed in armed
9 A. Among other things, yes.
10 Q. Was the definition of the activities of the Commission for
11 Imprisoned and Missing Persons which you headed before defined in a
12 similar way?
13 A. Yes, in principle.
14 Q. In the decree about the internal -- decree on the internal
15 structure that we mentioned before, it is said that the job of the
16 administration is to gather, process, and keep records of persons kept in
17 detention during the Homeland War.
18 A. Yes. That's one of the purposes.
19 Q. Can you tell us what you understand under the term "Homeland War"
20 and what is understood under the term "enemy camps"?
21 A. Homeland War is defined in the Republic of Croatia as the
22 period -- I cannot give you exact dates, but between 1991 and 1995. And
23 as for enemy camps and prisons, that term means the places of illegal
24 detention where people were rounded up and taken away from the Republic of
25 Croatia, and they were located in the former Republic of Yugoslavia,
1 certain areas of Croatia and Bosnia, and formed a unified system of camps.
2 Q. Let us go back in time a little. In chapter 6 of your report, you
3 say that in end 1993, it was decided to renew requests to trace detainees
4 and missing persons. Was that so?
5 A. Yes. It was decided to conduct in 1994 a renewal of requests for
6 search for missing persons in order to arrive at an exact number of such
7 persons at that moment.
8 Q. Thank you. As we learned from your report in paragraph 7, new
9 questionnaires were developed and it was organised that they be filled in
10 again in "Areas of the Republic of Croatia which at that time were not
11 occupied." Can you explain what areas are that?
12 A. That is the part of Croatia that was not occupied at the time. I
13 don't think it's necessary to explain to you now which areas of Croatia
14 were occupied and which were not. Suffice it to say that one-third of the
15 territory of Croatia was occupied.
16 Q. Do you mean those parts of the territory of Croatia that were not
17 covered by UNPAs, United Nations Protected Areas as defined by the Vance
19 A. I mean those parts of Croatia over which the Republic of Croatia
20 had no authority.
21 Q. You said that on the occasion when these requests were renewed new
22 questionnaires were developed. We have an example, a sample of this
23 questionnaire as addendum 6a to your report.
24 In paragraph 18 -- rather, in item 18 of the questionnaire, it is
25 required to specify whether the person was a member of active or reserve
1 forces of the armed forces of the Republic of Croatia, a member of the
2 ZNG, an active or reserve policeman, a Home Corps Guard, or a member of
3 civilian defence at the time of arrest.
4 A. Yes. I think you have mentioned all the possibilities.
5 Q. Can you tell us, what is this term "domobran," which is one of the
6 options, "home guard"?
7 A. There are two categories that are possible. People who were part
8 of labour units, something close to civilian defence.
9 Q. Did I understand you correctly that there were two categories of
10 Home Guards?
11 A. No, I didn't say that there were two categories. It's the name of
12 a specific military unit that was given that name at that time.
13 Q. Can I infer then that when you say Home Guard you mean members of
14 certain military units that are different from civilian defence?
15 A. They were certainly not civilian defence. Civilian defence is one
16 category, and Home Guards are another category.
17 Q. Can you explain what you understand under "Member of civilian
18 defence," because that is one of the group of -- groups of persons
19 indicated in this question in the questionnaire.
20 A. You will allow that I am not a specialist on the establishment of
21 various forces in Croatia. That is the way they were designated and
22 enumerated at the time when these units and formations were established in
23 Croatia and that's how we named them in the questionnaire. I cannot tell
24 you what they were and how they were distinct from others. We just put
25 them in the questionnaire as they were called.
1 Q. In this same questionnaire, in part II, which is entitled "Data on
2 the forced removal, disappearance, or capture" of the person, you mention
3 in item 8, "Question: Who forcibly removed or arrested the person." You
4 give these possibilities. "A: Members of the units of JA; B: Members of
5 the Territorial Defence of JA; C: Members of paramilitary units, police,
6 from temporarily occupied areas of the Republic of Croatia; D: Members of
7 other paramilitary units; E: Members of secret services; F: Civilians; G:
8 Others. Is that correct yes.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. When you mention members of units of JA and members of Territorial
11 Defence of JA, what do you mean and what does JA mean?
12 A. JA means the then Yugoslav army and members of Territorial
13 Defence. That is clear. That means Territorial Defence units that were
14 under the authority of the then Yugoslav army but with the establishment
15 of the Territorial Defence.
16 Q. In the first part of this questionnaire, which is
17 entitled "General details of the person sought," the following is listed,
18 name, surname, maiden name, nickname, father's name, mother's name, date
19 of birth, place of birth, municipality, town, parish or county, state,
20 citizenship, ethnicity, and religion; is that correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And finally in part V, at the very end of the questionnaire under
23 V we have general information about the requesting person, the person who
24 is looking for the missing person and who signs the request has to give
25 their Yugoslav identity number, name, surname, father's name, residence,
1 street, town, municipality, UNPA area, citizenship, ethnicity, religion,
2 and kinship with the person sought. Those are the details that the
3 requesting person had to indicate.
4 A. Yes. Or, rather, let me specify. It was not required that the
5 requesting person give all these details. They could if they wanted to.
6 Q. You say in your report that on that occasion in connection with
7 these renewed requests in the period from the 14th of February to the 5th
8 of March, 1994, requests were renewed for a total of 35 -- 3.052 persons.
9 Is that correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. So at that time, was it the number of persons whose fate was
12 unknown who had earlier been imprisoned or missing?
13 A. Yes. At the end of that particular operation of ours, that was
14 the final number.
15 Q. Is it the case that for each of these persons a special dossier
16 was established that contained all the other documentation in addition to
17 the questionnaire concerning the said person?
18 A. That questionnaire was complete, and it contained the sum of all
19 information about the missing person. If any other information about the
20 missing person was available, a medical file or a document from the public
21 domain, it was included in the dossier, but the questionnaire was the
22 basis of the dossier.
23 Q. Did I understand you correctly as saying that based on this
24 renewed requested for the search for a missing person that was done in
25 1994, requests were renewed for a total of 3.052 persons which means that
1 questionnaires were filled for each and every one of them and dossiers
2 were formed for each and one of them, that is there are 3.052 dossiers in
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. We will now move on to information about exhumed persons. That
6 would be paragraph 31 of the report you provided.
7 The collection and processing of information about exhumed persons
8 was the responsibility of the administration that you headed. Is that so?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. In paragraph 31 on the report, and we have a chart enclosed as
11 well, it says that a total of 3.568 bodies were exhumed.
12 A. Correct.
13 Q. Can you tell me to which territory does this number pertain?
14 A. The territory that used to be occupied.
15 Q. Would I be right in saying that those are the territories that
16 used to be UNPAs?
17 A. I'll put it this way. Those are the territories where the
18 Republic of Croatia had no control.
19 Q. Is it the case that one of the details that the requesting person
20 had to indicate in the questionnaire was the specification of the
21 particular UNPA where the person went missing?
22 A. That's one of the possible questions, and they were included in
23 the questionnaire because the process of release and exchange of
24 prisoners, as well as relations with commanders of certain zones were
25 separated. So we covered different areas separately. It doesn't mean
1 that the entire territory was under UNPAs.
2 Q. Would I be right in noting that in item 5 of the questionnaire,
3 under the title "Personal details of the requesting persons," one of the
4 questions was "UNPA zone, sector"?
5 A. Yes. If -- if applicable. If that person was in such an area.
6 Q. Since the territory of the then SAO Krajina was included in the
7 UNPAs, do you have information that pertains to the SAO Krajina or the
8 municipalities that comprised it as regards the exhumed persons?
9 A. Not in that way, no. No.
10 Q. From the survey of the number of exhumed bodies according to
11 counties, it is evident that most of the bodies, that is to say 1.969 out
12 of a total of 3.568, were exhumed in the Vukovar-Srem district or county;
13 is that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Can you tell me where this county is?
16 A. That county is on the east of the Republic of Croatia, and I think
17 that it is very clearly depicted on the map.
18 Q. Am I right if I say that Eastern Slavonia is outside the borders
19 of the SAO Krajina that was included in the UNPAs?
20 A. I don't think that would be right. The current administrative
21 border, the present-day administrative border -- well, we can talk about
22 administrative borders nowadays that are in inside the Republic of Croatia
23 and as such these borders exist. This survey shows that in the territory
24 of that count ill the largest number of mortal remains was found.
25 Territorially speaking, most of that county was occupied but not entirely.
1 For example, the town of Vinkovci was not occupied but it belongs to that
2 county. So the counties were administratively set up, and they still
3 exist to this day, and that's the only thing that we can talk about.
4 It is clear that in that county, although it was not fully
5 occupied, most of the mortal remains had been found this their but in the
6 territory that had been occupied, which can be proven.
7 Q. When UNPAs were established, through Security Council Resolutions
8 of the United Nations, these zones were divided according to
9 municipalities which then in 1991 existed in the territory of Croatia; is
10 that right?
11 A. I could not talk about that. I do not have such information.
12 Q. You gave a survey of exhumed persons here in a way that includes a
13 new territorial division of the Republic of Croatia which is different
14 from that territorial division according to municipalities that existed in
15 1991; is that correct?
16 A. That's correct. In 1991, the territorial division was different.
17 This is a division which is in force now and that was in force at the
18 moment when we started the process of exhumations. We cannot go back now.
19 And if we start the process in 1996, we cannot go back to the division of
20 the state that existed in 1991. That would be absurd.
21 Q. I would like to indicate something else to you, that these
22 proceedings are taking place in relation to a particular territory, and
23 the description of the area where something is going on pertains to the
24 municipal divisions that existed in 1991 in the territory of Croatia.
25 What you said to us just now, does that indicate that you cannot
1 give an answer concerning the number of exhumed persons in the territories
2 or municipalities that existed in Croatia in 1991?
3 A. At this moment, I cannot give know that and I cannot say that, but
4 we know about the actual sites, the actual places where the exhumations
5 were carried out, and we're talking about the exhumations that have to do
6 with this indictment. We talk about individual sites. And I cannot talk
7 about other sites. I cannot talk about other place. I cannot talk about
8 other territorial divisions if the process of exhumations started in 1996.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Milovancevic please slow down.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, the interpreter asks you to
11 please slow down.
12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I'll
13 bear that in mind.
14 Q. In your report that pertains to exhumations, you say that 2.982
15 exhumed bodies were identified. Is that correct?
16 A. 2.982.
17 Q. Thank you. As far as I can see, 72 per cent of the identified
18 persons are men. Is that correct?
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. Also, almost 60 per cent of the identified persons are between the
21 ages of 18 and 60. Is that correct?
22 A. 39 per cent is over 60 -- are over 60, and 50 per cent are between
23 the ages of 18 and 60.
24 Q. Thank you. On the graph that pertains to these exhumations, it
25 says that 111 persons are of an unknown age; is that right?
1 A. That's right.
2 Q. Can you explain this to us? How can a person be identified
3 without knowing his or her age?
4 A. It is possible, especially in the case of the elderly, because
5 documents in their places of residence were destroyed. They were in the
6 occupied territories. And according to the statements of their relatives,
7 there would be a difference. One relative would say the person was born
8 in 1907. Another person would give another year. Or perhaps they can
9 agree on the year but not the actual date. So this is a small number of
10 persons whose exact date of birth cannot be established, and that is why
11 it says "Age unknown." That is precisely why we operated this way. We
12 wanted to stand firmly by every name that we gave, and when we cannot do
13 that we say "Unknown."
14 Q. Would it be more accurate to say in the case of such cases at
15 least what their year of birth was even if you don't know the actual date?
16 A. Well, yes, but then you would ask me, "Why did you not give a
17 date?" Our position was that in those cases where we cannot give firm,
18 accurate information about a particular person, that person was in the
19 category of unknown.
20 Q. Thank you. Among these 3.052 exhumed persons that were
21 identified, there is also 142 Serbs; is that correct?
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. Thank you. Now we are going to deal with a chapter of your report
24 that relates to information about persons who were killed. That is 34 in
25 your statement. So I would like to ask you the following: In 34b which
1 was displayed on graph 7 or chart 7, it says that 12.078 persons were
2 killed. Is that correct?
3 A. As I said in my statement, it is the least possible number,
4 because that is the number of persons who were killed that we have
5 identified until now.
6 Q. Mr. Grujic, you head the agency for detained and missing persons.
7 A. That's right.
8 Q. Does that mean that information about killed persons does not come
9 from your office?
10 A. That's wrong. In the year 2000, the government of the Republic of
11 Croatia passed a decree authorising my office and myself to compile a
12 single list of killed persons for the needs of The Hague Tribunal, for the
13 trials that were taking place then and that are still ongoing. I compiled
14 such a list, and in my introductory remarks I said that I used certain
15 sources. I said what sources I used, what lists I used in order to make a
16 single list, that is to say a list of the Ministry of Defence, lists of
17 the Ministry of Health, then the Crisis Staff. All these lists were
18 brought into one. They were all compiled in order to establish this
19 single list of persons killed, and that is at least 12.000, et cetera.
20 Q. In your report that pertains to these persons who were killed, you
21 said that the source of that information about killed persons is the
22 Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Family and Other Matters, and
23 Veterans, and the statistics office; is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Do you know anything about the methods that these organs used when
1 compiling information about killed persons?
2 A. Of course I know. The Ministry of Health received information
3 from hospitals and from the ground, and this information was set up in a
4 systematic manner, and that is how they compiled their records. Of course
5 the Ministry of Defence, too, had information about all members of the
6 armed forces. When a person would get killed, his unit would send this
7 information on. So all this information would be centralised and a list
8 would be compiled.
9 Since we had these two lists in the Ministry of Defence -- but
10 lest there be any confusion, you mentioned the ministry of defenders, but
11 some information was sent there too. So it's the same information but
12 because of this new set-up of Ministries the ministry of defenders
13 included this information, veterans, but it's the same information
14 basically. But I, in my office, have all the lists brought under a single
15 umbrella. This is clear information. This is a clear-cut list. And in
16 all those lists where we did not have enough elements, where we could not
17 be sure that there weren't any mistakes, those things were simply deleted
18 if we did not have enough particulars to be included in a list for The
19 Hague Tribunal.
20 Q. You said that you got lists of persons from these different
21 institutions. I'm interested in the following: Did you have before you
22 or did you have insight into materials under which this information is
24 A. Of course we had that. This wasn't done in the course of one day.
25 It was a long process that involved teams consisting of people from these
1 institutions and from my institution. So every piece of information was
2 checked and double checked.
3 Q. Can you tell us which territory and which time period is relevant
4 for this list of killed persons, of 12.078 persons?
5 A. Up to 1995.
6 Q. You said up to 1995. From when up to 1995?
7 A. What do you mean from when?
8 Q. What is the beginning of this period concerning these killed
9 persons? That's what I'm referring to.
10 A. I don't know the exact date, but it's from 1991, the beginning of
12 Q. Do I understand you correctly, and can I say on the basis of what
13 you said that this number of killed persons of 12.078 persons involves a
14 list of killed persons who were killed from the beginning of 1991 until
16 A. That's right. So it does not include the military operations of
17 Flash and Storm.
18 Q. Witness, that's not what I asked you. I did not ask you about
19 that operation. My next question is: Does this report mean that we do
20 not have the number of persons killed in 1995, for all of 1995? That is
21 to say from the 1st of January, 1995, onwards? We don't have that
22 information; is that correct?
23 A. Just a moment. Just a moment. Let us put things properly. This
24 number includes all persons who were killed and who were possible to
25 identify until the end of the military police operation Storm. So it
1 covers the entire area of the Homeland War over which my office is
3 Q. When you were first answering my question to which period this
4 figure 12.078 killed persons relates, you said until 1995.
5 A. I didn't say which month in 1995.
6 Q. To my subsequent question, you said -- can you tell us now until
7 which month is the report valid?
8 A. We can say that it's until June 1995.
9 Q. Does this answer mean that this list of 12.078 killed persons
10 includes every person killed until May 1995?
11 A. It's not so cut and dried. We have to explain this in broader
12 terms. The way in which you are formulating your questions cannot produce
13 the correct answer to the question.
14 These 12.078 persons were killed in connection with the aggression
15 on the Republic of Croatia. In addition to that, but your questions
16 didn't cover this area, we have persons killed during military operations
17 Flash and Storm, most of whom have not been identified and properly buried
18 yet. So we could not include them in lists because they are not connected
19 to identities yet. So this list is subject to updating, constant
20 updating. Exhumations are going on. We have people killed in the
21 Republic of Croatia and people killed during military operations Flash and
22 Storm, and all of them are being added to appropriate lists.
23 Up to this moment, we have this number on record, and of course
24 with every new identification of any category of death these lists will be
1 Q. I don't know whether it is me or the way I'm formulating my
2 questions, as you suggest, or the subject of your numbers. You said it
3 was a list of persons killed until 1995. When I asked you again, you said
4 it was a list of persons killed excluding those killed in Flash and Storm
5 operations. You also said that persons killed in operations Flash and
6 Storm did die, but they were not identified. Is that so?
7 A. No. No. I'll try again. All persons who were killed from the
8 beginning until the end of all armed conflicts in the Republic of Croatia,
9 whether they were killed in 1991 or 1995 and maybe even beginning 1996,
10 are on those lists. However, we have one category of persons who were
11 killed in military police actions Flash and Storm and who were not
12 identified. We know where they are buried. The process of their
13 exhumation and the process of revealing new mass graves is ongoing. So we
14 don't know when we start an exhumation whether the person was killed in
15 1991, 1992, or 1995, until identification is completed.
16 Therefore, your question whether persons were recorded relative to
17 a certain period is impossible. Why? Because I don't know whether this
18 year I will find a new grave site containing bodies of people killed in, I
19 don't know, 1991, 1992, or 1995. It can be anybody. The next person we
20 identify can be somebody killed in October 1995. At this moment, I don't
21 know the last date of the last death. You understand?
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: The Chamber doesn't. Is it possible from what
23 you're telling us that in the number 12.078 are included people who were
24 killed during Operations Flash and Storm?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If they were identified, yes.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now do you determine after exhuming a body that
2 this person died during Operation Storm and not during the previous war?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, all persons or almost
4 all persons who were killed during military police operations Flash and
5 Storm were buried according to Geneva Conventions in known sites, and in
6 the process of exhuming these graves and for the purpose of identifying
7 these persons and giving them a proper burial this is an ongoing process.
8 So we know when these persons were killed and forensic experts can confirm
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: And you also know where they are buried?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is correct, Your Honour. We
12 know where they were buried. Those lists were published and made
13 available to the international community. I personally produced them to
14 the representatives of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the course of
15 discussions on humanitarian issues. Dossiers complete with pictures were
16 also made available to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the
17 international community, but also the ICTY either at the request of the
18 ICTY or otherwise. The ICTY acts as a monitor in the process of these
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Therefore, you are able to distinguish between
21 bodies exhumed who were killed during Operation Storm and those who were
22 killed in the other war, the previous war?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you tell us of the 12.078 who were killed
25 during Operation Storm and Flash, on the one hand, and the number that was
1 killed in the previous war?
2 I'm sorry, Mr. Milovancevic. I just want to get clarity.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will now give you the
4 information. 332 persons.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: 332.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 332 were identified in the course of
7 such exhumations that were conducted upon request of the ICTY or together
8 with representatives of the ICTY, or the ICTY was a monitor in such
9 exhumations. So 332 persons from that period were identified, and they
10 are on that list.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: I still don't understand you. My question to you
12 is: Who or what number out of 12.078 were exhumed from graves resulting
13 from Operations Flash and Storm, and what number were exhumed from the
14 previous war, not ICTY. Just tell me which ones come from Operation Storm
15 and which once come from the previous war.
16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC? [Interpretation] I'm sorry to interrupt you. It
17 seems that we are in closed session or in private session. Are we?
18 Because it should be public session.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: According to my monitor we are not.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you very
21 much. I'm sorry. I thought for a moment we were in private session.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's okay, Mr. Milovancevic.
23 Did you understand my question, Mr. Grujic?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have understood, Your Honour. 332
25 persons were exhumed or identified from Operations Flash and Storm, 332.
1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] May I continue, Your Honour?
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: So the remainder from 12.078 were assumed died in
3 the previous war? This is by logical deduction.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. You may proceed, Mr. Milovancevic.
6 Once again, I'm sorry to interrupt your cross-examination.
7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that is completely
8 in accordance with the rules. I thank you.
9 Q. When you were responding to the Honourable Judge's question a
10 moment ago, you said 332 persons were identified as persons killed during
11 Operations Flash and Storm; is that correct?
12 A. When I asked you the first time a question regarding these 12.078
13 persons killed, and the question was to which period this number relates,
14 you said that those were persons killed until 1995. After that, you
15 broadened your answer, saying it was until June 1995. Operation Storm was
16 in August 1995, wasn't it?
17 A. Yes, but Flash was earlier.
18 Q. When you were explaining about the period of time when these
19 persons were killed, you said the report covers persons who were killed
20 during the aggression against the republic of Croatia, and that is why
21 persons killed during Flash and Storm were not included. Now responding
22 to the Honourable Judge's question you said those persons were included
23 after all. Which of the two is correct?
24 A. I have to -- I have to repeat. Records are kept in the following
25 way: At the moment when we managed to identify any citizen of the
1 Republic of Croatia regarding of -- regardless of their ethnicity, as soon
2 as we get hold of an identifying document, at that moment that person is
3 placed on the list of persons killed. Exhumations and identification of
4 victims of Flash and Storm started relatively late, maybe a year ago or a
5 year and a half ago, and in the course of regular updating they are
6 progressively being included in the lists of persons killed. I cannot
7 tell you exactly when any of them were identified and included in the
8 lists. All I can tell you is 332 is the number currently for people
9 killed during Flash and Storm in Croatia.
10 Q. When you were answering Judge Moloto's question about the number
11 of persons identified as having been killed in Flash and Storm operations,
12 you said there were 332. Can you give me any information about their
14 A. Just a moment. When we talk about persons killed, the number
15 12.078 includes 88.4 per cent Croats and 3.82 per cent Serbs, or in
16 numbers - we are talking about cases where ethnicity is known - 7.012
17 persons of Croat ethnicity, 302 persons of Serb ethnicity, 195 who had
18 declared themselves as Yugoslavs, and 402 other ethnicities. So we're
19 talking only about those whose ethnicity's known. 7.400 or 500. I could
20 add them up if you want me to. Whereas the ethnicity of the rest is not
22 Q. When you stated the percentage of persons killed who were Croats,
23 you gave us a number different from the one shown in diagram number 6,
24 where it says that 89 per cent of those killed were Croats?
25 A. You must forgive me. That was based on an old figure, 11.834. I
1 will give you the latest number in a second. 12.078 is the total, and the
2 percentage is 88.4 -- or, rather, 80.76.
3 Q. I'm not sure you understood me. What I mean is this addendum 6 in
4 the chapter related to persons killed, the big pie chart, it has 89 per
5 cent and a total of 7.012 persons of Croat ethnicity killed?
6 A. Could you say again which number?
7 Q. That is the chart that is marked as "ethnicity of killed persons,
8 persons," II. And then underneath it says "Analysis of those who are
9 known, 7.911." So 89 per cent of those who are known were Croats. Is
10 that what you're saying?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you. You gave an explanation to the effect that the number
13 of killed persons in Flash and Storm was included in the list of kid
14 persons who were identified; is that right?
15 A. That's right.
16 Q. You said that this number is 332 and that out of them 302 persons
17 were of Serb ethnicity; is that right?
18 A. That's right.
19 Q. In the diagram that you attached to this chapter about the number
20 of killed persons, that is a chart entitled "Ethnicity of killed persons
21 (III)," and the part that says "Others," that's 899 persons. You gave a
22 diagram of all these others, including Bosniaks, Albanians, et cetera, not
23 to go into all of that. There's certainly 20 ethnic groups or so. It
24 says there were 302 Serbs. So I'm asking you whether this chart pertains
25 to the ethnicity of killed persons that has to do with your entire report
1 that is to say from 1991 to 1995, or is this just a chart that pertains to
2 operations Flash and Storm?
3 A. This pertains to all of it. It was stated that 302 persons were
4 of Serb ethnicity, that 195 persons were Yugoslavs. So it can be said
5 that most were Serbs, but let's leave that aside. 302 persons stated that
6 they were Serbs, which is not to say that all the persons who were found
7 and identified in Operation Flash and Storm had declared themselves as
8 ethnic Serbs. Perhaps they had not declared themselves at all. That is
9 no one's obligation. No one is duty-bound to state his or her ethnicity.
10 I could have provided ethnic background only for persons who actually said
11 what their ethnicity was.
12 Q. Mr. Grujic, what you said just now, does that mean that from the
13 beginning of 1991 until Operations Flash and Storm in the territory of
14 Croat that not a single Serb got killed, that only 302 were killed in
15 operations Flash and Storm is that what you're trying to tell us? Until
16 then there were no casualties? Is that what you're saying?
17 A. No, that's not what I said, and that's not the way we can put it.
18 I said that out of the shown persons that were identified, all of these
19 persons who declared their ethnic background, we have the structure that I
20 provided. That does not mean that among the rest, almost 5.000, there
21 aren't any ethnic Serbs. On the contrary. I think there are ethnic Serbs
22 there. So I can only talk about the information provided by the family
23 during identification. If they did not want to state what their ethnicity
24 was, but I mean 5.000 people did not. They did not say what their ethnic
25 background was.
1 Q. Thank you. You said that you carried out exhumations of persons
2 who were killed in Flash and Storm and that identifications are under way
3 now. Can you tell me how many persons were exhumed in the territory of
4 Croatia in relation to these two operations?
5 A. In relation to these two operations, so far 499 persons were
6 exhumed in Knin, Gracac, Korenica, and Zvanusa.
7 Q. Does that mean that in other places other victims were not found
8 from these operations?
9 A. No. That is not what it means. I said already that there are
10 burial sites that are known pertaining to Operations Flash and Storm, and
11 that the international community was informed about these grave sites but
12 also the representatives of Serbia and Montenegro, exclusively for
13 humanitarian reasons.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just to get clarity, when you say Mr. Grujic in
15 relation to these two operations, so far 499 persons were exhumed in Knin,
16 Gracac, Korenica, and Zvanusa, by "two operations" do you refer to Flash
17 and Storm, or do you refer to Flash and Storm on the one hand and the
18 previous war on the other?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all, I would like to say
20 that it is 499 persons, not 4.000. It is 499 persons. And could you
21 please repeat this question to me? I did not quite understand it.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: My question is: What do you mean by the two
23 operations in which 499 persons have been exhumed? What are these two
24 operations you're referring to?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Flash and Storm. Those are the two
1 operations, Flash and Storm.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Grujic.
3 Thank you, Mr. Milovancevic.
4 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. Before the break, Mr. Grujic, I have one more question. You said
6 that as for the information about persons killed in these operations - we
7 are going to round up this chapter now - you submitted this information to
8 international factors and to the government of Yugoslavia. Can you tell
9 us how many persons are still considered as missing or killed in respect
10 of these two operations?
11 A. Could I just say a few words about this? Could I just say
12 something in order to clarify matters? Missing persons from Flash and
13 Storm were recorded in different ways, and their number was totally
14 unknown. In the year 2000, I personally took an initiative at the meeting
15 with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia aimed at clarifying the matter,
16 namely that they give jurisdiction over these persons to the Republic of
17 Croatia and that all abuse of these figures be stopped. We received an
18 agreement on this basis and it is being implemented now.
19 On the basis of these questionnaires presented here, the Federal
20 Republic of Yugoslavia said that they acknowledge this as a relevant
21 questionnaire, and together with the International Red Cross, and this was
22 preceded by education in Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, the
23 information-gathering process began in Operations Flash and Storm with
24 regard to persons who were killed in Operations Flash and Storm. The
25 process is still an ongoing one. So far, 915 dossiers were compiled. Two
1 weeks ago, the Croatian parliament was informed about this. So for the
2 time being we have these 915 persons that can be considered missing.
3 In addition to that, it is very important to say at this point in
4 time in order to understand the complexity of this subject matter, that at
5 a meeting with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - I beg your pardon,
6 Serbia and Montenegro. I do beg your pardon - an agreement was reached
7 or, rather, a document was signed defining the question of missing
8 persons, including persons missing from Operations Flash and Storm.
9 It says there that in territorial terms in the Republic of Croatia
10 about 2.400 persons went missing, out of which 915 persons have currently
11 been identified as from the Operations Flash and Storm. So approximately
12 about two weeks ago, these persons were placed absolutely under the
13 jurisdiction of the Republic of Croatia in terms of the request for these
14 persons. And in addition to that, Serbia and Montenegro are looking for
15 about 500 persons in the territory of Croatia.
16 So in relation to the armed conflicts in the territory of the
17 Republic of Croatia, another 1.140 persons are missing as recorded by the
18 office for missing persons.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Grujic.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I think that this would be the
21 right time to take the break.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.
23 We'll take the break and come back at quarter to eleven. Court
25 --- Recess taken at 10.19 a.m.
1 --- On resuming at 10.47 a.m.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.
3 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. Mr. Grujic, when you responded to a question from Judge Moloto as
5 to how many people were exhumed in relation to Operations Flash and Storm,
6 you gave us the number of 332, out of which 300 or so Serbs.
7 A. No. I said --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry. I know you said this before break,
9 Mr. Milovancevic. The witness actually didn't say that the 302 are part
10 of the 322. He said they are part of the 12.078.
11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That's correct, Your Honour.
12 My apologies to the Trial Chamber. It's my mistake. I wrote down the two
13 numbers next to each other.
14 Q. Mr. Grujic, if in putting my question I misstate something, please
15 correct me. It is not my intention to deliberately mislead you.
16 Did I understand correctly that among the exhumed bodies there
17 were 302 bodies of Serbs? That's the number you gave.
18 A. I gave a number saying the total number of ethnic Serbs relative
19 to the total number of exhumed persons, which doesn't mean there aren't
20 more of them, because as I said, we were able to analyse only part of the
21 data, namely those cases when family members indicated ethnicity. So you
22 have that table that I provided that gives the number of 12.078 persons.
23 Out of 12.078, 7.012 were those that declared themselves as Croats, 302
24 declared themselves as Serbs, 195 had declared themselves as Yugoslavs,
25 and 402 had declared themselves as members of other national minorities,
1 which means that we were able to analyse the data only of those who had
2 specified their ethnicity, which means that 5.000 didn't, and necessarily
3 those 5.000 include some Serbs, but I cannot tell you how many. I can
4 only tell you about the facts that I have at my disposal.
5 Q. I understand you correctly, Mr. Grujic? Since these figures about
6 Flash and Storm operations were not directly mentioned in your expert
7 report, we are hearing them for the first time. Is it correct that your
8 office registered 499 persons related to these operations? Did I
9 understand that correctly?
10 A. Yes -- or, rather, no, no. Not registered. We have to be
11 precise. We didn't register, we exhumed.
12 Q. That's what I meant, the number of exhumed persons that were
13 recorded as a number of 499.
14 Out of those 499 exhumed persons, have some been identified? And
15 how many?
16 A. Yes, 332 have been identified.
17 Q. Out of those 332, how many are Serbs and how many are other
19 A. I don't have that information because that was not supposed to be
20 the subject of my testimony. Those are the numbers that I have in my head
21 and that are not related to my testimony. The information you have been
22 asking me recently is something that is not connected to my planned
24 Q. Related to the number of victims, you told us recently that
25 according to the information available to your office the number of
1 missing persons for the period May, August until the end of the year
2 related to these operations is 915 missing in those operations. Is that
4 A. Yes. At this moment, that is the number we have. And I have to
5 note, to emphasise, that this number is not only available to the office
6 that I head, but the International Red Cross has the same number and it's
8 Q. This number of 915 persons, does it include the number of 499
9 exhumed persons?
10 A. No, and it cannot, because one category is identified -- or,
11 rather, possibly. Those who are not identified and have been exhumed,
12 some of them may be regarded as missing. So one part of this number 499
13 may be part of the missing persons, but we'll know that at some point in
14 the future.
15 Q. Did I understand you correctly by saying that the process of
16 exhumation started after 1995 in areas of the former Republic of Serbian
17 Krajina which were UNPAs?
18 A. That process began on the territory of the Republic of Croatia. I
19 would not like to get involved in a discussion about territories in this
20 way. That is the territory of the Republic of Croatia, and at the moment
21 when it was possible for the authorities of Croatia to get there
22 exhumations began, and that was in 1996. Exhumations began in 1996 in
23 areas where the Republic of Croatia did not have access before.
24 Q. We are in 2006. Is the process of exhumations finished in that
1 A. Certainly not. It is not finished either with regard to people
2 who were killed in the period from 1991 to 1995, that is before Flash and
3 Storm operations or with regard to people who were killed during Flash and
4 Storm operations. All this is part of the government's programme that is
5 being implemented continuously, with the proviso that people who were
6 killed during Flash and Storm operations were buried. Their graves are
7 mostly known. They have been recorded, and the lists of those grave sites
8 have been made available to the international community and to Serbia and
9 Montenegro for humanitarian reasons. And we are continuing to explore and
10 search for new grave sites containing bodies of people who were killed
11 between 1991 and 1995, that is before the beginning of Operations Flash
12 and Storm.
13 Q. In response to one of the questions today, you explained that out
14 of the 2.400 persons covered by the agreement between -- that 2.400
15 persons are covered by an agreement between Croatia on the one hand and
16 Serbia and Montenegro on the other.
17 A. I didn't understand your question. What about them?
18 Q. You said there was an agreement between Croatia and Serbia and
19 Montenegro that covers about 2.400 persons. Who are those persons?
20 A. I have said this before, and I'll repeat. In this year, at the
21 last meeting we had with representatives of Serbia and Montenegro an
22 agreement was reached and documented, and it stipulates that on the
23 territory of the Republic of Croatia, it can be considered that there are
24 2.400 missing persons. 500 of them are being sought by Serbia and
25 Montenegro as citizens of Serbia and Montenegro. It was the first time
1 that it was documented, officially recorded, that citizens of Serbia and
2 Montenegro have gone missing in Operations Flash and Storm, and 915 of
3 them are the responsibility of the Republic of Croatia, who will continue
4 to look for them. And there is a remaining number of persons who about
5 registered as imprisoned and missing. That is our approach currently.
6 So there is a large number of persons concerning whom we are
7 looking for answers from Serbia and Montenegro, but that is a different
9 Q. Would I be right in saying that this information you are giving us
10 now, these numbers, would feature in some possible agreement between the
11 two states in a situation when the process of exhumation has not been
12 completed yet? The victims have not been exhumed or identified?
13 A. Speaking about this, and you have now put the question more
14 broadly and profoundly and I'll try answer as briefly as I can. When we
15 talk about processes of exhumation, bearing in mind the fact that on the
16 territory of the Republic of Croatia it is possible to find some of those
17 who are being sought by Serbia and Montenegro, some members of the
18 Yugoslav army who were killed there and who can be found and who can be
19 exhumed, bearing in mind the fact that there are some ethnic Serbs,
20 citizens of Croatia where there is a vested interest of Serbia and
21 Montenegro, and bearing in mind that Serbia and Montenegro should be
22 represented in some exhumations, agreements have been reached and --
23 featuring the protocol between two states, that in exhumations in Croatia
24 but also in Serbia and Montenegro, monitors should be present from both
25 states together with monitors of the international community. I think
1 that's what you asked me. Which means that in all exhumations carried out
2 in Croatia where Serbia and Montenegro has a vested interest, we provided
3 them with access, and we have signed an agreement accordingly.
4 Q. All this that you have just told us, does this mean that the
5 actual number of victims and persons who are really missing has not been
6 established yet?
7 A. I will repeat. At this moment, and this operation is nearing its
8 end and there can be no dramatic changes any more, we can take it that the
9 number of citizens gone missing in Operations Flash and Storm, not all of
10 them being Serbs although most of them are, although it has been shown
11 that there are some Croats and others, the number of people gone missing
12 in Flash and Storm is at this moment 915. This whole operation has not
13 been completed. This number will be modified, revised upwards or
14 downwards, through the process of identification. But it doesn't mean
15 that all these people are dead. Those people are in the category of
16 missing persons.
17 As for your question about those who were killed, I said that we
18 have submitted this information both to the international community and to
19 the representatives of Serbia and Montenegro. But not only the
20 information but the dossiers complete with photographs with the aim of
21 preliminary identification. And according to our estimates - we can now
22 even talk about estimates based on those documents - there remain about
23 500 persons from the period of Flash and Storm operations to be exhumed
24 from known grave sites, and they have to be identified. And then we'll
25 know to what extent they will share in this number of 915.
1 As for persons who were killed in the period 1991 to 1995, that is
2 before Flash and Storm operations, we cannot know how large that number
3 is. We know that 1.140 people are regarded as missing in that period. We
4 can assume most of them are dead. We cannot know or, rather, we don't
5 know where their graves are, be it individual or mass graves, and we are
6 conducting intensive exploration in this area and cooperating with Serbia
7 and Montenegro in order to find these graves.
8 I have to say that so far in this process we have found 140 grave
9 sites containing this category of persons, and we have found 1.200
10 individual graves. However, 1.140 remain in the category of missing, and
11 it is an open question where and when we will find them.
12 Q. You said that the number of missing persons in Flash and Storm is
13 915, and that so far 499 were exhumed.
14 A. That's right.
15 Q. And in terms of the marked burial sites, you expect the exhumation
16 of another 500 people.
17 A. That's right. So now when you put this together, the number of
18 exhumed persons, that is 499, and number 500, which is our estimate, then
19 the figure we have is about 1.000 persons who were fatalities in that
20 period. That is what was officially made public after these operations.
21 That's the figure that appeared in the media and that was presented to the
22 international community.
23 Q. If it is so, then how come it is possible that 915 is the
24 registered number of missing persons whereas you say there is a thousand
25 people involved?
1 A. Well, you see, you have to distinguish between a missing person
2 and a killed person. Missing persons we can find in different places.
3 Some of them we can find alive. For example, as we did find some people
4 the last couple of days.
5 We have to bear in mind yet another aspect, and that is that some
6 of these people did not necessarily have to get killed in the territory of
7 the Republic of Croatia. That is to say that at this point this time or,
8 rather, I at this point in time speak only about facts that I have
9 available. These facts are always easily verifiable, especially because
10 the work I do is absolutely transparent and in every step I insist on
11 that, that the representatives of Serbia and Montenegro be involved as
12 monitors but also representatives of the international community. These
13 two institutions stand by everything I have said.
14 Q. Mr. Grujic, I put this question precisely because it is clear to
15 me that among the missing persons there can be persons who are still
16 alive. All missing persons need not be fatalities certainly?
17 A. Absolutely.
18 Q. However, you told us that 915 is the number of missing persons and
19 the number of dead should be a thousand. So the number of fatalities is
20 larger than the number of missing persons. I'm asking you how come that
21 is possible.
22 A. Well, we have to look at international humanitarian law on one
23 hand and on the other hand we have to look at procedure related to missing
24 persons, and the criteria were laid by the International Red Cross. These
25 procedures state very clearly that a missing person a person about whom
1 his or her family has no information whatsoever. After being registered a
2 certain period of time has to go by, and it is only then that a person is
3 confirmed as registered.
4 In the case of fatalities, the situation is quite clear. If a
5 family has information to the effect that a person got killed, then that
6 person cannot be part of the category of missing persons, because it is
7 well known that that person got killed, and one of the possibilities left
8 to the family is to initiate proceedings for seeking mortal remains.
9 Therefore, we have to distinguish between those two categories that were
10 defined very clearly in this particular subject matter.
11 Perhaps this will mean something to you as well: Out of 3.000 --
12 I'm speaking in general terms now. Out of about 3.000 identified persons
13 we had in the period 1991 up to 1995, only 1.200 persons were persons who
14 were registered as missing. What does that mean? That means that not all
15 missing persons were registered as such for different reasons, because the
16 family was disunited, because entire families were killed and there was no
17 one to initiate proceedings or, on the other hand, for some reason the
18 family simply did not initiate proceedings. So when talking about missing
19 persons the criteria are very clear and very definite. And precisely at
20 the last meeting we had with Serbia and Montenegro I insisted on this
21 criteria and they accept as well and they are now single uniform criteria
22 in that subject matter. That's how we managed to get this figure of 2.500
23 persons who went missing in the territory of Republic of Croatia, and that
24 is the territorial principle.
25 Q. These 2.500 missing persons in the territory of the Republic of
1 Croatia, what period of time does this figure refer to?
2 A. From 1991 to 1996 or, rather, the end of the armed conflict after
3 Operations Flash and Storm.
4 Q. Since you received information about 2.500 persons who went
5 missing and you have this information in this intergovernmental
6 cooperation, do you know the ethnic background of these missing people?
7 A. Up to now, no, because it is only now that it is being adopted as
8 such. I have in my office the ethnic backgrounds of missing persons.
9 Again, we can talk about estimates. We can say very clearly that out of
10 the remaining 915 missing persons they are Serbs, ethnic Serbs, for the
11 most part but not exclusively.
12 Q. If from 1995 until now it has been 11 years, are these persons
13 alive or not based on the experience you've had?
14 A. You see, I never go into such forecasts. For me, a missing person
15 either recorded or not, and my job is to find the missing person.
16 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not hear the end of the
17 answer because Mr. Milovancevic spoke.
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Thank you. Now, let us go back to your report that speaks about
20 12.078 persons that were killed. In the report it says that 87 per cent
21 of the persons killed out of these 12.078 are males; is that right?
22 A. That's right.
23 Q. Thank you. In the report it also says that 82.8 per cent of the
24 killed persons are aged 18 to 60; is that right?
25 A. That's right.
1 Q. Out of 12.078 persons who were killed, it is stated that for 983
2 the age is unknown.
3 A. That's right.
4 Q. The explanation you provided pointed out the identification
5 problem involved. Is it possible that if you have all details about a
6 particular victim you do not include the year of birth if you have that at
8 A. Well, possibly, but please, I have come to present information
9 before a court of law, and I have to stand by every piece of information
10 and every detail provided. For all these people for who I do not have
11 complete information, they have been included in the category of unknown
12 persons. And I have told you what the reasons are. I can stand by every
13 name and surname that was recorded by a certain number. And where it is
14 unknown, I do not have complete information, and I did not want to go into
15 providing that kind of information.
16 Q. Thank you, Mr. Grujic. I have understood what you're saying.
17 As for ethnicity, the ethnicity of the killed persons, out of this
18 12.078, it is stated that 34.5 per cent of them or, rather, in numbers
19 this is 4.176, are persons are unknown ethnic background. Is that right?
20 A. Precisely. 4.176 persons did not declare themselves in ethnic
21 terms. They did not provide this information. I pointed out at the
22 beginning of my remarks that we as a state institution cannot and should
23 not seek such information, because there is a law in the Republic of
24 Croatia on confidentiality of information and such information is one's
25 personal affair. So it is up to the person involved to say whether they
1 want to provide that information or not.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I just ask a question? Is this figure 4.176 or
3 is it 4.167?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The figure, Your Honour, is 4.167.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Perhaps I just misspoke. Perhaps there was a permutation of figures, so
8 perhaps I just misread this.
9 Q. So you confirmed that for 4.167 persons you done not have
10 information about their ethnic background. Can you tell us out of these
11 4.167 persons who got killed how many 18-year-olds were there?
12 A. No, I cannot put it that way.
13 Q. Do you have information about these 4.167, how many people there
14 were between the ages of 18 and 60 and how many were above 60?
15 A. You see, that is not customary. That is not regular practice to
16 go into such categorisations. Information about ethnicity, gender, age,
17 et cetera are provided, those that are known. Any further analysis is
18 possible, but that kind of request has to be put forth. And then in such
19 cases such analyses can be made, but regular practice is to publicize
20 categories that were presented here.
21 Now, going into further analysis of every category is possible,
22 but not in this way and here.
23 Q. Since this is a large number of killed persons, 4.167, for this
24 number of persons can you tell us who were civilians and who were members
25 of armed forces? Do you have information of that kind at least?
1 A. No. I already gave you the information that I have available,
2 that my office has available, and that information is clearly presented.
3 I said that it is possible to make any kind of analysis at a special
4 request, but such analyses were never made, the kind that you are asking
5 about now.
6 Q. Did you make an analysis for these 4.167 persons in respect of
7 their place of residence? That's information that you should have. So
8 can you say what municipality these killed persons belonged to and which
9 villages or towns? Do you have information of that kind?
10 A. You see, I'm repeating yet again that the analyses that we made
11 and that are relevant were presented here. At this moment, I do not have
12 any other analyses. Therefore, I cannot present them.
13 I have to point out yet again that I never, ever heard of anyone
14 asking for an analysis on that basis. An analysis can be made on the
15 basis of all parameters, but I have never heard of anyone making analyses
16 on the basis of these. If you needed such analyses, you could have asked
17 for them like all others from our office, and you would have received
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: I think, Mr. Milovancevic, from the answer of the
20 witness you can accept that outside the analysis that has been presented
21 in court, this witness has prepared no other analysis.
22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I understand, Your Honour.
23 Thank you.
24 Q. Only the basis of the questionnaire for missing persons, you
25 explain that a dossier file was compiled for every person. So for these
1 4.167 persons, do you have complete files including all details?
2 A. What was the number you said? I'm sorry.
3 Q. I asked whether for these 4.167 persons whose ethnicity is unknown
4 you have information or concrete dossiers for all of these persons.
5 A. I think that I have to repeat yet again what I've already spoken
6 about. We have to distinguish between a missing person and a killed
7 person. For all missing persons there are dossiers. For all killed
8 persons there aren't dossiers, because some people got killed in 1991, and
9 immediately after their death they were identified and registered.
10 Therefore, there are no dossiers. There are records on establishing cause
11 of death or another document establishing death. So I repeat, there are
12 dossiers, files, for missing persons, for all missing persons.
13 Q. Am I right if I quote part of your statement that among these
14 12.078 persons, 76, persons, I'm sorry, I don't want to make any mistakes,
15 12.078 among them, there were 6.780 defenders which is 60 per cent of the
16 total number of persons killed.
17 A. Precisely.
18 Q. You mentioned the category of defender. Who are the persons
19 included in this category?
20 A. All members of the armed forces of the Republic of Croatia. I did
21 not want to go into a precise categorisation of various units or branches.
22 That's not my job. But all of them are all members of the armed forces of
23 the Republic of Croatia.
24 Q. Thank you. According to a previous list of killed persons, it's
25 Exhibit 413, the number of defenders was 7.861 who were killed. Do you
1 remember that number?
2 A. Wait a minute. That's the number -- what is the total number of
3 those killed, if you have that document? Can you help me?
4 Q. There is an earlier list of persons killed, and the number of
5 defenders was shown as 7.861. In the meantime, the number went down to
6 6.788, and the total number of those killed increased by 244. Can you
7 tell me how this change occurred?
8 A. Yes, I can. Under the law on Croatian defenders, members of
9 civilian defence no longer enjoy the status of defenders; that is, cannot
10 exercise rights to benefits and other rights as that category, so they
11 were removed from the list.
12 Q. You stated that in the job you occupied dealing with the matters
13 that were within your purview you applied Geneva Conventions. Geneva
14 Conventions used term "members of armed forces," and you use the
15 term "defender." Are these terms identical?
16 A. Yes, member of armed forces or defender. I did not introduce the
17 term. That category was introduced under the law on Croatian defenders
18 that was adopted in Croatia.
19 Q. You just said that the number of those defenders was diminished by
20 a certain number because members of civilian defence were taken off the
21 list of armed forces.
22 A. Yes, I said that. I don't see what the problem is. If a certain
23 category under the law, the current law in the Republic of Croatia, does
24 not belong with the armed forces, is not considered to belong to armed
25 forces, and people from that category do not enjoy the same rights as
1 members of armed forces, that category is deleted.
2 Q. In view of the subject of this trial and the allegations in the
3 indictment that relate to about one-third of the Republic of Croatia, can
4 you give us any information about the number of killed persons in that
5 part of Croatia that is covered by the indictment?
6 A. That is almost impossible. Why? You will know -- you will allow
7 that Zagreb was never occupied. I hope we can agree on that. But in
8 Zagreb, we have victims, killed persons, who are included in the list of
9 killed persons. You will also allow that in Osijek that was never
10 occupied, we have a thousand victims, fatalities, who were killed during
11 the shelling. They are included in the list of killed persons, but that
12 territory had never been occupied. We also have Sisak and many other
13 examples that I could give you now. That is why we cannot do our analyses
14 in such a way.
15 Q. Is it the case that all towns in the former Republic of Serbian
16 Krajina and all former UNPAs we have the number of people killed? Can you
17 give us those numbers?
18 A. I have no such data, nor did we have occasion to obtain such data.
19 All we were able to do is to make certain analyses. We also receive
20 certain documentation all the time, and only when that process is
21 completed these people will be placed on record.
22 For instance, in the area of Vukovar, as far as I know, that's
23 what I heard, about 400 members of the Territorial Defence and the army of
24 Yugoslavia were killed, and their bodies were shipped away and buried in
25 the territory of Serbia and Montenegro. Some of them were citizens of
1 Croatia. We don't have such data, and that is precisely why we are
2 talking to Serbia and Montenegro in order to be able to receive that data
3 and to integrate it with our numbers. But for now we have only estimates.
4 However, I do not wish to discuss estimates. I'm only prepared to talk
5 about the facts we have at this moment.
6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Grujic. I have one question that is linked to
7 sheet number 5 in this chapter about killed persons. That's a diagram
8 showing the ethnicity of those killed. In the column number that is next
9 to the column "Ethnicity," we have numbers. The total number is 12.078,
10 as mentioned in your report. Are they exhumed and identified, these
11 people who are categorised as killed?
12 A. Let us just try to be clear. I'm not sure I understood your
14 Q. I'll try to reformulate. On this sheet 5, in the table dealing
15 with the number of those killed there is indication of ethnicity. All I
16 want to know is are these people recorded as victims, 12.078? Are all
17 those people exhumed and identified and thus recorded as killed?
18 A. No. We have to be clear. I told you that the process of
19 exhumation began in 1996. Through that process, to date 3.568 people were
20 exhumed, out of which 2.000 and something were identified.
21 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't hear the exact number.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So in the total 12.078, all
23 identified persons who were exhumed are included. They are part of the
24 list. And that is why the list is growing. As the number of identified
25 bodies grows, the list of persons killed is also growing but also the
1 number of missing persons.
2 Q. Now we will move to paragraph 34, page 14 of your report about
3 missing persons, and in this paragraph 34f, you say that 1.140 people are
4 still being sought; is that correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Would I be right in saying that those 1.140 persons are those who
7 are registered as missing?
8 A. Yes. To be precise, those are people whose families submitted an
9 official request to search for a missing person to my office, the office
10 force missing persons.
11 Q. That is the request that we mentioned at the beginning of the
12 cross-examination together with the questionnaire.
13 A. A family member has filled in a questionnaire for each of these
14 1.140, and that is the basis for the search. And if you allow me, I'll
15 try to make it clearer.
16 It was a widely publicised action to gather this information, and
17 it was conducted in Croatia but also outside in all embassies of Croatia
18 and consular offices. So every family had the opportunity to make such a
20 Q. Can we say that your office is the source of this information?
21 A. Yes, the source of the information that I'm presenting.
22 Q. 80 per cent of missing persons are males according to the
23 information that you provided; is that correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. You also stated that 71 per cent of those missing are between 18
1 and 60 years old; is that correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us to what territory does this
4 information about missing persons apply?
5 A. I can. The majority of missing persons is related to earlier
6 occupied territories, formerly occupied territories.
7 Q. Can you tell us to what extent is this number, 1.140 missing
8 persons, updated? When was the last time you revised this figure?
9 A. I can tell you that it is very recent. The current figure is
10 1.138. So the figure I gave you is very precise.
11 Q. Today you told us that in Flash and Storm 915 persons are
12 registered as missing. Are these persons included in this number of 1.140
13 or not?
14 A. No. I've already said that this action was still under way and
15 that we now have this mandate, and that during last month, towards the end
16 of last month, I informed the Croatian parliament about this and that's
17 where the number was recorded. And information about these people is
18 compiled on same questionnaires in Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina,
19 and third countries, just like in the Republic of Croatia. So the action
20 is not completed yesterday, and the number of 915 is a provisional number.
21 There is one more thing I have to add, that in the report that
22 went to the parliament of the Republic of Croatia, it was stated
23 unequivocally that in the Republic of Croatia 1.140 persons are registered
24 as missing in Croatia, and in addition to that, another 915 missing
25 persons in Operations Flash and Storm and that this activity of
1 information-gathering is not finished yet.
2 Q. This information that you provided to us, does it mean that your
3 report is simply inaccurate?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Allow me to finish my question. That in this report you just
6 mentioned 1.140 missing persons without involving or including the 915
7 persons who went missing in Flash and Storm, and that was not mentioned in
8 your written report at all.
9 A. Well, it could not have been mentioned in that way anyway in view
10 of the situation as it is and the period when I handed in my report. In
11 addition to that, this information related to Flash and Storm does not
12 pertain to persons registered in our office. Therefore, I gave
13 information, and I pointed that out several times, that those persons who
14 handed in requests for looking for missing persons were registered as
15 such. As for this activity concerning 915 persons, that is something
16 completely different. This is our activity aimed at establishing the
17 actual state of affairs. And once it is established, then the two will be
18 brought together and this will become official.
19 Q. As for these 915 persons, apart from the list of 1.140. So these
20 915 persons, do you consider them to be missing persons, and do you rector
21 them as missing persons?
22 A. We consider them to be missing persons, but there is a clear
23 differentiation precisely so that this number would not be abused. That
24 is to say the cumulative figure abused in different ways. That is to say
25 that there is a clear differentiation among missing persons in terms of
1 the periods of time involved. So it is called the first conflict and the
2 second conflict. And indeed some other rules are applied as well.
3 There is another important thing. It is important that we started
4 the initiative to have our questionnaires applied, that these persons were
5 recorded and that these records contributed to the identification of
6 missing persons, and that is a very clear position that the lists will be
7 brought together once this action is completed.
8 There is one more thing I have to add which is very important,
9 that in every one of these requests families were asked for their consent
10 in order to have this information provided to our office. It's a very
11 complex matter therefore, because it is the family that submits this
12 request. We as an institution cannot force anyone to do that.
13 Q. On page 14 in 34f, you wrote that in view of the year when they
14 went missing, 943 persons went missing in 1991. 13 persons went missing
15 in 1992. 15 persons went missing in 1993,3 persons went missing in 1994,
16 and 22 persons went missing in 1995. As for 44 persons, the time when
17 they went missing is unknown, and the total is 1.140. Is that what your
18 report says?
19 A. That's right. That's what my report says, and all of these
20 persons were recorded in that way. They filled out a form and they were
21 registered as missing persons by our office.
22 Q. However, this figure that you provided here of 1.140 is not
23 correct. At this moment the figure is 2.055, including the 915. Is that
24 what you're saying?
25 A. Please, please. I'm trying to say something for the umpteenth
1 time, something that is very important, that persons are recorded on the
2 basis of the family reporting the matter. In my office, 1.140 persons are
3 recorded, and every one of these requests is signed by the party that is
4 filing the request, and then there is an appropriate number that is filed
5 as well.
6 I repeat once again that knowing that a certain number of citizens
7 of the Republic of Croatia, primarily of Serb ethnicity, went missing in
8 Operations Flash and Storm, and seeing that there are no requests for such
9 tracing procedures, we as an institution and I personally started a
10 certain activity with the representatives of Serbia and Montenegro and
11 with international representatives including the ICRC in order to find out
12 what this figure is so that we could gather this information in a uniform
13 manner. This action has not been completed yet.
14 I repeat once again, as an institution we had to ask each and
15 every family for their consent to have this information provided to our
16 office, but the information is gathered in other states. Since this
17 action has not been completed yesterday and it is not that our office
18 initiated the procedure, I can only talk about this number and say that we
19 are gathering documentation, and once this documentation is complete then
20 all of those who gave their consent to have their information taken will
21 be included in the joint list. We have a joint list, but these people did
22 not file requests. I do not have official requests filed, and I can only
23 talk about those for whom an official request was filed, and that figure
24 is 1.140, and that is the basis for all of these analyses.
25 Q. Can you tell us from what moment you knew of this number of
1 persons, 915, apart from the 1.140?
2 A. The action started in the year 2000, and the action is still under
4 Q. That will do. Thank you. Please, in the report that you sent to
5 the Court, you said that 22 persons went missing in 1995. Let me just
6 finish this. Let me finish my question. Can you explain to us why you
7 did not write this what you are telling us now in order to present such
9 MS. VALABHJI: Objection, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, your opposite number, Mr. Milovancevic.
11 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.
12 MS. VALABHJI: I think my opposite member is going around and
13 around in circles on the same issue which has been asked and answered
14 multiple times.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you have any answer to that, Mr. Milovancevic?
16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I just wanted to
17 get answer from the witness about the moment from which he knew of these
18 915 missing persons, and the answer I got was from the year 2000. I don't
19 need anything else.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Allow me. I did not give that
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, do you have any response to make
23 to the objection?
24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, since today is the
25 first time that we received a series of information from the witness, 332
1 bodies, 915 missing people, and so on, various things that are not
2 contained in the report, I'm just trying to correlate this to the
3 information provided in the written report.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I interrupt you, Mr. Milovancevic.
5 Mr. Milovancevic, do you accept that you are going round and round in
6 circles, or do you not accept? And if you do not accept, why do you not
8 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm no longer
9 going to insist on these matters. I withdraw my last question in order to
10 move on to another subject.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.
12 I will uphold the objection.
13 You may proceed, Mr. Milovancevic.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Grujic, let us move on to expelled persons. That is page 11,
16 34a. These figures pertain to displaced persons, if I understand this
17 correctly, and they do not come from your office but from the office for
18 displaced persons for -- of another ministry, for trade, tourism, maritime
19 affairs, et cetera.
20 A. Yes, the Administration for Displaced Persons.
21 Q. Don't you find this strange that the Ministry for Sea and Tourism
22 through its administration deals with displaced persons?
23 A. It's not for me to say what I think about the establishment of the
24 state that was set up in that way.
25 Q. Well, I agree with you, Mr. Grujic. My next question has to do
1 with the figure of 220.338 persons that you refer to as displaced, and as
2 you say, "in the aggression against the Republic of Croatia." Can you
3 tell us what period and what territory this information refers to, this
4 information about displaced persons?
5 A. This is the total number of recorded displaced persons recorded in
6 the administration for displaced persons. And every displaced person has
7 a file of his own, and I think they have been provided in the attachment.
8 So that is the total number of displaced persons.
9 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us about this total number of refugees,
10 whether it includes persons of Serb ethnicity who were displaced, expelled
11 to the territory of Serbia also after Operation Flash and Storm?
12 A. Just a moment, please. We have to put things right in that
13 respect too. Yes.
14 Now, what is this about? First and foremost, it is a question of
15 terminology. We have to distinguish between displaced persons and
16 refugees and expellees. Your question yesterday was precisely aim at
17 that. I now avail myself of this opportunity, because I did not say it
18 yesterday, that there should and proper distinction in terms of this
19 terminology. In keeping with this terminology that is used in this field,
20 I gave information about displaced persons because that's the information
21 that I was asked to provide. According to this information, it was stated
22 very clearly that 20 -- 220.338 people were recorded as displaced persons,
23 an ethnic composition of them was provided, saying 205.215 were ethnic
24 Croats, 4.987 of Serb ethnicity, 3.104 Hungarians, whereas there are
25 others as well. So when talking about displaced persons, that is the
1 category I spoke of arranges I gave the exact number too.
2 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Excuse me, I think the numbers now got confused.
3 Maybe it's a problem of translation, but could you repeat that out of the
4 205.215 were ethnic Croats, Serbs, and so on? It seems to be wrong.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. This is the
6 information: 220.338 persons were registered in the category of displaced
7 persons. As for their ethnic affiliation, there are 205.215 persons of
8 Croat ethnicity, then there is 4.987 persons of Serb ethnicity, 3.104
9 persons that are Hungarians, and 7.032 persons that are of other
11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I proceed?
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let's find out.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE HOEPFEL: 34b -- no, 34a, this table speaks of Hungarians
15 4.987, and Serbs 3.104.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did you hear that, Mr. Grujic?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes. I'm trying to check.
18 I'm sorry. I inversed the numbers. I inversed the figures for Serbs and
19 Hungarians inadvertently.
20 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: What does that mean? Does it mean the Hungarians
22 are 4.987, and the Serbs are 3.104? That's the correct -- okay.
23 You may proceed, Mr. Milovancevic.
24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. I don't remember getting an answer to my earlier question, so I'll
1 repeat it. Can you tell us to what period this number applies, 220.328
2 expelled persons, and to what territory?
3 A. Well --
4 MS. VALABHJI: I think the question was put using the term
5 expelled persons, and the witness has already mentioned, not just today
6 but in the report, that this analysis pertains to displaced persons and
7 that there are distinctions between these terms.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you hear that, Mr. Milovancevic? There's a
9 distinction between "displaced" and "expelled" terms in the terminology of
10 the witness. Maybe if you put your question again in the correct
12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I heard what my
13 colleague from the Prosecution said. I quoted from the B/C/S, page 11,
14 34a of the expert report, and it says just before the table that in the
15 aggression against the republic of Croatia, 220.338 people were expelled.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you have an answer to that, Mr. Grujic?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will repeat, Your Honour. We have
18 to distinguish between expelled persons, displaced persons, and refugees.
19 Those are the three terms used for this population.
20 According to the information available to me, and I have stated
21 it, it's 220.338 people expelled for the entire period.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Expelled.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Expelled, the driven out.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
25 Mr. Milovancevic, would that be a convenient time?
1 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Right, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: The Court is adjourned and will come back at half
3 past twelve.
4 --- Recess taken at 12.04 p.m.
5 --- On resuming at 12.33 p.m.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before you continue, Mr. Milovancevic, I just want
7 to get clarity from Mr. Grujic on a few things here.
8 Mr. Grujic, what do you say for "displaced person"? I'm going ...
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did you get my question?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I did. So in Croatia, the
12 term "displaced person" is used specifically for Croatia where people left
13 their homes for different reasons and moved to another locality within the
14 state, which means that we had situations where people were displaced from
15 one area to another area within Croatia. So that is when we use the
16 term "displaced person."
17 Then there is the term "refugee." Those, in our terminology, are
18 people who left their homes and went to other states, where they received
19 the status of refugees, which involves certain benefits and assistance.
20 Expellees are persons who are forcibly driven out from their homes
21 and have the status of expellees in the Republic of Croatia. So we have
22 those three categories. And I provided my data related to expellees as I
23 was asked to.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, am I right to say that the distinction
25 between "displaced" and "expelled" is that an expelled person is expelled
1 through human action, whereas displaced may not necessarily be through
2 human action? For instance, people could be displaced by floods. Is that
3 the distinction between the two?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For the most part, Your Honour, yes.
5 Displaced persons can be displaced for a variety of reasons, to avoid
6 conscription, for instance, or to find better quality of life, or out of
7 fear from possible war or any other pressure. So reasons for displacement
8 can vary. And we have about 35.000 people on record, official record, as
9 displaced. But I did not cover them in my report. I covered in my report
10 exclusively expelled persons, people who left their homes because they
11 were forced to under pressure, coercion.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: What I would like you to comment on is the pressure
13 that is put on expellees is pressure put on by human action. Is that so?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is so. Exclusively human
15 pressure. Fear for one's own life or because one simply has to leave
16 under threat of force.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Grujic.
18 Mr. Milovancevic, those are the distinctions that the witness
19 gives between those words, and I hope that any confusion that we may have
20 had will be eliminated now. You may proceed.
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. Mr. Grujic, these details found in 34a of your report, page 11 of
23 B/C/S, where we see that in the aggression against the Republic of
24 Croatia, 220.338 persons were expelled, that relates to which period? I
25 mean years.
1 A. Let me correct you. You didn't give the correct number. It's
2 220.338. And if you look at table number 7, you will see the various
3 periods, precise periods, with exact indication with the number of
4 expellees recorded for each period.
5 Q. My question was very specific, Mr. Grujic. Does this number you
6 mention relate to the period 1991/1995 or not? You name the period.
7 A. As indicated in the table, from 1991 until -- it says the last
8 category was recorded from the 6th of August, 1995, onwards. That's the
9 last category on record. So it starts with -- it starts with 1991, where
10 186.903 were recorded until the 2nd of May --
11 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter apologises. We cannot go on
12 with these figures so fast. We have to see the document on the ELMO or
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Can you just hold on,
15 Mr. Grujic. The interpreters say they cannot go on with these figures
16 unless they see them somewhere written. Can we put them on the monitor
17 for the interpreters, please?
18 My immediate question to you, Mr. Grujic, is that you've just told
19 us that -- or, rather, the question put to you is expelled people,
20 220.338. This table doesn't talk of expelled people, it talks of
21 displaced people.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's probably a mistranslation. So
23 this table is about expelled persons.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you for that clarification.
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Mr. Grujic, you have told us that you viewed data until the 6th of
2 August, 1995, if I understood you correctly. When does that period start
3 in 1991, because we can't see it from the table.
4 A. That's correct. You can't see it from the table because the
5 statistics kept by that office was done by these periods, but it is clear
6 and well known that the first deportations started in August 1991.
7 Q. Can we then note your answer as being that this figure about
8 expelled persons applies to the period from August 1991 until the 6th of
9 August, 1995?
10 A. I can repeat. What is explicitly written here, and I stated it in
11 my testimony, the statistics is presented in this table by periods
12 relevant to the office that keeps these records. From 1991 until 1992, we
13 have the figure of 186.903 expelled persons. That's 1991 to 1992. I
14 don't have the exact initial date.
15 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Before you go on, Mr. Milovancevic, I'd like to
16 ask the witness about what is on the last line of this graph where there's
17 the asterisk beginning "Information," and ending with the digit 9. There
18 is obviously digit missing. What should that digit be?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, I don't have that in my
20 report, and the translation -- would somebody be able to assist me maybe?
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. Let's try and assist you. There is an
22 asterisk at the bottom of that table which explains the table, and it
23 says, "Information from August 6, 1995 concerns displaced persons who have
24 returned from other countries but have been treated as displaced persons
25 since 19," and then there is "9," and we want to know 1990 what. That's
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 199. That is what is written.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's what is written. It's obviously a mistake.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 199. Maybe I can try to explain.
5 The thing is that the list includes 199 persons who are outside the
6 Republic of Croatia and later returned. So they had been expelled to
7 somewhere outside Croatia and then returned. Let me try to be specific.
8 There were cases where people were expelled from their homes and
9 couldn't find quarter in the Republic of Croatia, and some countries
10 received them as refugees, and after a short while they returned to their
11 country and continued in their status of expelled persons within this
12 category. I don't know if my explanation is clear.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is not clear. I'll tell you why it is not
14 clear. That figure 199 is preceded by the word "since," so 199 must refer
15 to time, not to a number of people. It relates to time. These people
16 have been displaced since some year, 1990 something. There must be a
17 digit after the last 9.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It's probably 1991, but I
19 really cannot say with any certainty because on my copy I don't have this
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
22 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Wouldn't your records help you in any way to
23 determine the precise year?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'll try, although I'm not quite
25 sure if I'll succeed. But it seems unbelievable that we could have two
1 different figures.
2 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, may I in the interim point something
3 out? I have the B/C/S version here of page 7, and I see that the -- the
4 top row where dates are is not in the English. Perhaps those dates are on
5 page 8 of the English, but as it currently stands, page 7 of the English
6 doesn't contain the top row, which is on page 7 of the B/C/S. And the
7 last line on the English version is not in the B/C/S version.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Then can we either get the top row of the English
9 version so that we can see the period? Yes, can we get that either on
10 page 8 or page 6? If it is on the top row, it should be at page 6 and not
11 at page 8. This is page 7.
12 MS. VALABHJI: I think that in the chart on page 7, the dates have
13 been left out in the English version. So --
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are the dates available in the B/C/S version.
15 MS. VALABHJI: Yes. Yes, they are.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: And can that version be given to the witness so
17 that he can read those dates and they can be interpreted for us and we can
18 get them on the transcript?
19 MS. VALABHJI: Absolutely.
20 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Ms. Valabhji, I wanted to find out, does it mean
21 then that where the asterisk starts from "Information" to "199," that
22 should be removed from this graph? You said it don't exist in the B/C/S
23 version, if I understood you properly. It does not relate to this in any
25 MS. VALABHJI: That's right, Your Honour. On the English version,
1 that line "Information from," and so on, is not in the B/C/S.
2 My senior counsel has noticed that the asterisk is there in the
3 B/C/S version. The asterisk corresponds to the 6th of August, 1995, but
4 there is no corresponding explanation next to the asterisk.
5 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Do we know how that information got there then?
6 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, these charts were -- perhaps the
7 witness could explain about the asterisk. These charts were actually
8 provided to us by the witness, so --
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Maybe he should answer. But are we able to put on
10 the monitor the first row that shows dates?
11 Now, Mr. Grujic, for purposes of the transcript, we are going to
12 ask you to read that first row of that chart that is in B/C/S so that we
13 know from when it starts. It looks like it starts from the 1st of May,
14 1992, going up to the 6th of August, 1995, but it's for you to read it and
15 tell us.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This table was developed on the
17 basis of available data, and it depicts the number of persons expelled by
18 periods -- by periods that were specified by the office for expelled
19 persons. That is in the way that they found it possible to process
20 statistically. And at the same time, it deals with each county, each
21 territorial unit from which these people were expelled.
22 So the breakdown is by county and by period. The first period
23 is --
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I interrupt you. We just want the dates. We
25 are aware of all that breakdown. Just give us the dates from when this
1 operation started and when it ended.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So the first date mentioned is until
3 the 1st of May, 1992, which means the first five months of 1992 and 1991.
4 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Excuse me. Could you translate for us the heading
5 above all these lines, "Razdoblje Progonstva," and then it's --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Period of expulsion." That's the
7 first line. Below that we have the second line that starts with "County,"
8 that's the territorial unit. Below that we have a list of counties from
9 which people were expelled. Horizontally -- and the next line is the
10 period for which these expelled people were recorded, and the first column
11 is until the 1st of May, 1992. So they did not state the initial date.
12 But it is clear it covers 1991 and the first five months of 1992.
13 From then onwards we have all dates specified, from the 2nd of
14 May, 1992, until the 31st of December, 1992. Then from the 1st of
15 January, 1993, until the 31st of December, 1993. And on, from the 1st of
16 January, 1994, until the 31st of December, 1994. The following column is
17 from the 1st of January, 1995, until the 8th of August, 1995. And the
18 last column is from the 6th of August, 1995 onwards. So it's open-ended.
19 It was done in this way because the statistical information is as
20 it is, and those were the possibilities they had for presenting this data.
21 Of course it would have been much better to quote the date when the first
22 case was recorded but that's how these records are kept.
23 JUDGE HOEPFEL: There seems to be a mistake concerning this line,
24 1st of January, 1995 to 8th of August. Doesn't it have to be until 5th of
25 August? Otherwise, these -- this and the next one would overlap. And
1 then the last line we didn't get in translation.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Please do not take into account the
3 last line, because obviously there was a computer mistake when the CDs
4 were being recorded. So that's why it's not there.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: What does the last line say?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really cannot read it. I cannot
7 read what it says.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: "Broj --"
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's not shown now. What we see on
10 the monitors is not -- does not include that. But the English version
11 does show it. The table that we're looking at now is all right though.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Grujic, what we would like to understand is the
13 last column next to the column dated the 6th of August, 1995. To the
14 right of that, what is that heading, the one which ends -- I'm sorry -- if
15 you can bring it more to the left. No, no, no, it's -- more to the left.
16 More. That last column, that column. That column. And that has "Broj
17 Rodjenih u Progonstvu."
18 A. Yes. Evidently we have a mistake here, a typo. It is a purely
19 technical error. It says from the 8th of August, 1995, and then it should
20 say the 8th of 8th, 1995. So instead of the 6th of August, 1995, it
21 should say the 8th of August, 1995 onwards. It's obviously a technical
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Fine. The next column, Mr. Grujic, after that
24 column that you've been talking about, what does it talk about, the one
25 whose total at the bottom is --
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the next column refers
2 to the number of children born in exile, which means that their parents
3 were expelled and that these children were born in exile.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. That's all I want to know.
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, sorry about that.
7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Mr. Grujic, can you tell us how many expellees refer to what you
9 call the occupied territory of the Republic of Croatia and what I call the
10 Republic of the Serb Krajina? So how many expellees come from the
11 territory that was the UNPAs, the UN protected areas?
12 A. Just a moment, please. We have to clarify some of these matters.
13 All these people come from that area. All these people lived in that
14 area, and they were expelled from that area.
15 Q. Are you telling us that this number of 220.338 persons is the
16 number of people who were expelled from the territory of one-third of
17 Republic of Croatia that this indictment refers to?
18 A. If I understood your question correctly, Mr. Milovancevic, as you
19 can see, according to the information depicted here, all these people, if
20 we're talking about expellees as we are, were expelled precisely from the
21 territories that were occupied, one-third of the territory that was
23 Q. Are you aware of statistical figures from the census pertaining to
24 1991 about the number of Croats in the territory of the SAO Krajina and
25 later the Republic of Serb Krajina or, as you say, the occupied
2 A. Yes, I'm aware of the ethnic composition. I can talk about the
3 ethnic composition on the basis of the census made in 1991, and that's the
4 information I have.
5 Q. Can you tell us how many inhabitants of Croat ethnicity lived in
6 that one-third of the territory that is being discussed here?
7 A. I'm just going to ask you for a bit of time because it's not
8 related directly to my testimony, but I'll try to give an answer.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please be asked to speak into
10 the microphone and speak up a bit, please. Thank you very much.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Grujic, when you speak please speak into the
13 And, Mr. Milovancevic, what year does your question relate to?
14 Your question is, "Can you tell us how many inhabitants of Croat ethnicity
15 lived in that one-third of the territory that is being discussed here."
16 In what year, sir?
17 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, at the beginning
18 of my question, which was in the previous question, I mentioned 1991 and
19 the census that defined this number, which should be an undisputed figure
20 between the Defence and the Prosecution, as far as this is concerned, that
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Please finish your question anyway. The witness is
23 answering the question that you put, not the previous one.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you please give me a moment to
25 try to find something?
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: You have all the time, Mr. Grujic. Take your time.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. Thank you.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Ms. Valabhji.
4 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, regarding the question concerning the
5 census, it would be helpful if the Defence were to point out which areas
6 are being referred to, because in 1991 there were a lot of changes in the
7 area, and it's not clear exactly what geographic area is being referred to
8 by the 1991 census cited by my opponent.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: My reading of the question certainly refers to the
10 entire area that was occupied. Now, I don't know whether there is a
11 census for all that entire area.
12 MS. VALABHJI: I think this area there are fluctuations in terms
13 of this area in the picture in 1991. I don't think that it's -- the
14 boundaries or the lines are set, and it remained the same way throughout
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let the witness tell us what he finds.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can now give some tentative
18 information for starters if this will be satisfactory for the Defence
20 The Defence counsel asked me about what territory this pertained
21 to. I can say that at the beginning of 1992, 1.074 settlements were
22 occupied. Permanently populated ones, that is. From 1.074 occupied
23 settlements, Croats constituted a majority in 364 of these settlements.
24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Distinguished Mr. Grujic, I did not ask you what you said just
1 now. The Prosecutor in the indictment refers to a certain number of
2 expelled persons. That number is linked up to statistics concerning
3 ethnic Croats who as citizens of Croatia lived in the territory of the
4 Republic of the Serb Krajina up to 1991 and in 1991. I am asking you
5 whether you know how many inhabitants of Croat ethnicity lived there at
6 the time. And if you don't know that, you can tell us now that you don't
8 A. It is very hard to answer your question. Why? Because the set-up
9 was different territorially, administratively in 1991 compared to the
10 present-day situation when we have the establishment according to
11 counties. We would now have to look at each and every municipality
12 individually and to see which one was in the temporarily occupied areas,
13 and, of course, I cannot tell you that right now. So your question is
14 such that it is basically impossible to answer it, because now we have an
15 administrative set-up that is different, and I cannot tell you exactly the
16 borders and what the exact composition of the population was at the time.
17 Q. Lest there be any misunderstanding as to what the occupied areas
18 is or whether it is occupied or not, in the Vance Plan according to which
19 UN troops were deployed in Croatian territory, territory of the Republic
20 of Croatia at that time, the exact municipalities were listed, those that
21 existed at that time in 1991 and the beginning of 1992 that are part of
22 the UNPAs, the UN protected areas. Those are the areas I'm referring to.
23 However, since you cannot give me any information in respect of these
24 municipalities, my next question is as follows: On map 6 -- or, rather,
25 on page 6 of your report, which pertains to expelled persons according to
1 counties, that's what it says in B/C/S, you mentioned counties as a form
2 of a territorial organisation, the present-day territorial organisation as
3 the Republic of Croatia as it stands today. Is that right?
4 A. Yes, that's right. Here there is a territorial distribution and
5 information related to that, and that is what was provided in the previous
7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to ask the usher
8 to display on the monitor this map of displaced persons according to
9 counties so the gist of my question would be understood.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I beg your pardon. I didn't turn on
11 my microphone.
12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation].
13 Q. Mr. Grujic, on this map of Croatia we see the counties that you
14 later refer to in this vertical table; is that right?
15 A. Yes, that's right.
16 Q. On this map you can see that an entire series of counties has
17 access to the Adriatic Sea all along, Splitsko-Dalmatinska,
18 Sibenska-Zadarska, Licko-Senjska are the ones. Let's just restrict
19 ourselves to that.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. It is obvious that the territory of the counties for which you
22 developed these figures is much bigger than what the territory of the
23 Republika Srpska Krajina was. Do you agree with that assertion?
24 A. No, I would not agree with your assertion, because we can go from
25 one county to another, and in every county there were activities that were
1 aimed at expelling people, starting from Dobrovacko, Nejokansko [phoen],
2 Splitsko, Dalmatinska, and so on and so forth. We can move from one town
3 to another, from one village to another.
4 Q. That was into the my question, Mr. Grujic. Please follow my
5 question very carefully. My question was about the number of expelled
6 persons from the territory of the Republic of Srpska Krajina, not from the
7 territory of the present-day counties which are a new form of territorial
8 organisation. Can you give us this information that we are interested in,
9 the number of expellees from the territory of the Republic of Srpska
10 Krajina or the UN protected areas?
11 A. Well, I cannot, because things are being put differently now. You
12 have now put it completely differently. We have a valid territorial
13 principle which was presented as such.
14 Q. I beg your pardon, Mr. Grujic. Let's not dwell on this any
15 longer, not to keep the Trial Chamber.
16 You came here to testify as an expert and also to give answers
17 pertaining to the territory that is mentioned in the indictment, a
18 territory that is different from the territory that you depict on this
19 map. It differs by one-third, and now you're telling me you don't have
20 information about this territory; is that right?
21 A. No, that is not right. Could your questions please be formulated
23 I assert here and I state explicitly we have a territorial
24 principle that is in force now, and I repeat that each and every one of
25 these mentioned counties had activities on its territory that led to the
1 expulsion of people.
2 Now, you are going to different dates, not 1991, not 1995, not
3 2000, but you're talking about when some plan was elaborated. I claim as
4 an expert that these people were expelled - expelled - from their houses,
5 from their homes by way of activities that were gathered towards their
6 expulsion and that all these counties, therefore, were linked to
7 activities pertaining to armed conflict in the territory of the Republic
8 of Croatia.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, can I just ask -- can I just
10 understand your question? How does this area differ with the area that
11 was, as you call it, the SAO Krajina? Is it from the names?
12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the territory of
13 SAO Krajina, or the so-called Republic of Serbian Krajina, the Prosecution
14 uses this term "so-called," represents only one-third of this territory
15 that you see on the map, and I'm asking this expert now whether he's able
16 to tell us. From that territories which was allegedly or really under the
17 control of Serbian Krajina, he knows how many were expelled, not from the
18 entire territory of the Republic of Croatia.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... in this area
20 is represented by the SAO Krajina? Just tell us that.
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That is precisely why I asked
22 the witness this question, because in the meantime the administrative
23 organisation has been changed and the expert is speaking to the latest
24 administrative division regardless of the fact that it is quite different
25 in the maps and atlases we have been using as exhibits. So I'm asking him
1 now about the number of expelled from UNPAs, for instance, and he answers
2 me that he was looking also at other areas.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: He's telling you that he's dealing with this --
4 these areas that are shown on the map, which are listed on this table.
5 You say that this area occupies more than a third of -- no. You're saying
6 that the area that you call SAO Krajina is only a third of what is shown
7 here, and I'm saying which is that third, because obviously he doesn't
8 seem to understand what you're talking about. What is that third which
9 constitutes the SAO Krajina here?
10 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't think it's
11 my job to explain this. That's what I'm trying to elicit from the
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Explain your question to the witness so that the
14 witness understands what you're asking. You are saying to him, "You can't
15 give me this whole map because the SAO Krajina only constitutes a third of
16 this map." Now, he doesn't know which is that third that you're talking
17 about. And put the third to him, let him dispute it or confirm it. Put
18 that third that you say constitutes the SAO Krajina to him. If you don't
19 put it to him, how is he to answer your question.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I understand your point,
21 Your Honour.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Witness, on this map that we see on the monitor, do we see the map
25 of the area of Croatia where UN troops called UNPROFOR arrived?
1 A. No. This map does not show the borders of that area.
2 Q. Thank you. Thank you. That's all I wanted. Let us move on.
3 The towns that we see on this map, Split, Sibenik, Zadar, were
4 they in the territory of the Serbian Krajina ever?
5 A. What we see here are not towns but counties. And let me try to
6 clarify this, with your leave.
7 Q. Witness, let me just go through my questions. All these counties
8 that we see on the monitor now, were they an integral part of the then
9 Republic of Serbian Krajina?
10 A. Parts of those counties were occupied, and that's what I said
11 before. And precisely from the occupied parts those people we have seen
12 in tables were expelled, from the occupied parts of these counties.
13 Q. Thank you, Witness. Let me ask you one thing. Can you tell us so
14 that we can more easily visualise it, which part of what we see on the
15 monitor was under UNPAs?
16 A. I can show roughly, but people were expelled even before UNPAs
17 were established. In Osijek Baranja county, this upper part was occupied.
18 It's called Baranja. And part of the Osijek county also stretches towards
19 the Vukovar-Srem county. From that area, 36.660 people were expelled.
20 The Vukovar-Srem county was partly occupied, this area I'm showing
21 now. That is, more than half of the county was occupied. From that area,
22 from the Vukovar-Srem county, 55.644 persons were expelled.
23 Part of the Virovitica-Srem, and Bilogora county, as well as the
24 Pozega-Srem county belonged to sector west, and this area, let me draw a
25 line here, this area approximately was occupied in those three counties,
1 and you can see the numbers of expelled persons on the table.
2 The Sisak-Moslavina county was occupied in this part, towards
3 Bosnia all the way up to Sisak, and 32.865 persons were expelled.
4 The Karlovac county was occupied from Slunj almost from Karlovac
5 towards the Lika-Senj county. So this here was occupied.
6 The Zadar county, including the towns of Benkovac and others, this
7 part that I'm showing was under occupation.
8 The Sibenik-Knin county, again this part leaning on Zadar was
9 occupied, and partly the area of Split-Dalmatia county.
10 The Dubrovnik county was also subject to shelling and other means
11 of coercion, so it was occupied partly, and 6.270 people were expelled
12 from there.
13 Q. Does that means all these figures related to expelled persons,
14 these 220.338, relates to those areas that were the so-called Republic of
15 Serbian Krajina under the control of the accused here according to the
16 allegations of the Prosecution?
17 A. I'm not sure about the Dubrovnik-Neretva county. I'm not sure
18 whether it was under their control or not, but the rest certainly.
19 Q. This figure you stated, does it mean that in other parts of those
20 counties no single person was expelled from other parts of Croatia?
21 A. I'll repeat this again. That's the number of persons who were
22 recorded as expelled persons by the office for expelled persons, and they
23 were recorded as such by the UNHCR.
24 Q. And can you tell us -- thank you, usher. I will not need your
25 help any more.
1 In view of the moment when your office was established and the
2 moment from which you have been doing this work, who determined the status
3 of these persons, whether they were displaced, refugees, or expelled in
4 1991 and partly 1992?
5 A. It wasn't the job of my office ever. I have this information
6 because I need it for my negotiations with Serbia and Montenegro, because
7 they have their own commission for humanitarian affairs and missing
8 persons, and because of that I have to have these figures in my office.
9 But I get from other institutions in order to be able to do my work.
10 Q. So these figures reflecting the number of expelled persons was
11 given to you by other services, other institutions. You just processed
13 A. That's correct. I processed them. But this is an official number
14 that was published in official publications.
15 Q. In your statement or, rather, in the background material that the
16 Prosecution submitted to us on the 15th of March this year regarding you
17 as a witness, it is written that as a witness you mentioned in your
18 interview with the Prosecution the following numbers are estimates
19 regarding displaced persons from 1991 to 1995, that around 300.000
20 persons, mainly Serbs, left their homes in Croatia and that outside of
21 that those who remained in Croatia are estimated at 50.000 or so. Did you
22 give these numbers to the Prosecution?
23 A. I think so. We have now come precisely to the point we've been
24 discussing today and yesterday, the various categories of people who left
25 their homes.
1 Here when you spoke about estimates, those estimates come from a
2 variety of sources, and they vary from 200 to 300.000 persons who were
3 refugeed in 1995 after Operations Flash and Storm. So they are refugees,
4 not expellees, and they have the status of refugees in other states.
5 35.000 persons were displaced. That means that from some areas in
6 Croatia such as Western Slavonia, they moved to, let's say, the
7 Vukovar-Srem county where they resettled and were recorded. So it's a
8 fluctuation of population caused by a variety of reasons.
9 Q. Thank you, Mr. Grujic.
10 A. Allow me to finish. When we talk about refugees, and if we said
11 we have an estimate of around 300.000 people refugeed after Operations
12 Flash and Storm, then we have to mention in the same breath that dealing
13 with the category of refugees that we haven't been doing so far, we have
14 to say that in the Republic of Croatia, apart from those expelled persons
15 we discussed, 402.768 persons were recorded as refugees from Bosnia, as
16 well as 10.407 persons recorded as refugees from Serbia and Montenegro.
17 When we talk about estimates, we have an estimate of around
18 300.000. I don't want to discuss estimates. I can only talk about facts.
19 So at this point we can assert that 120.323 persons left Croatia as
20 refugees and later returned, and new -- newly returned persons are another
21 10.000 or so. I can say that 120.323 persons returned to Croatia after
22 being refugeed. There can be more, but then I would have to go into the
23 area of estimates, and I don't want to do that.
24 Q. According to this material disclosed to us by the Prosecution, you
25 said that around 300.000 persons, mainly Serbs, left their homes during
1 Operations Flash and Storm. You called them refugees, and you said that
2 outside that number it is estimated that another 50.000 remained in the
3 Republic of Croatia. 50.000 of whom?
4 A. It is estimated that 50.000 people left, let's say Western
5 Slavonia or Lika, and resettled --
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Ms. Valabhji.
7 MS. VALABHJI: My opponent has said that according to the material
8 disclosed to us by the Prosecution, around 300.000 persons, mainly Serbs,
9 left their homes during Flash and Storm. I think that misstates the
10 material disclosed, and according to my information, the material says
11 that the witness mentioned the following figures which are estimates in
12 relation to displaced persons, 1991, to 1995, about 300.000 persons,
13 mostly of Serbian ethnicity left their homes in Croatia. Out of these, an
14 estimated 50.000 stayed on the territory of Croatia and about 120.000
15 returned to their homes. I don't see a mention of Flash and Storm in
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, there is no mention of Flash and
18 Storm according to Ms. Valabhji, and how do you bring in Flash and Storm?
19 And while you are on your feet, is Flash and Storm the case we are dealing
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I put this number
22 to the witness from the material given us by the Prosecution, and it was
23 all precisely as stated by my learned friend just now. Since the witness
24 has already replied that this estimate of around 300.000 people who left
25 Croatia is related to Operations Flash and Storm, I just continued the
1 same line of questioning trying to get to the gist. If I was going about
2 it clumsily.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are going about it clumsily, I'm afraid, Mr.
4 Milovancevic. If in the material supplied by your opponent there is no
5 reference to Flash and Storm, then you have no right to include a
6 reference to Flash and Storm unless you say, My learned friend you are
7 wrong. You should have included Flash and Storm and I'm going to include
8 it for the following reasons.
9 When you just drop Flash and Storm with those figures of 300.000
10 and 50.000, you are bringing in, one, a completely different era, and two
11 a complete little different event from what has been put to you by the
12 Prosecution. But if that is your case, make it clear that that is your
13 case. Don't attribute that to the Prosecution or to the witness.
14 Say, "It is my case as the Defence that these figures have got to do with
15 Flash and Storm." Don't impute them to other people when they are not
16 either their testimony or their allegations.
17 You may proceed.
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Mr. Grujic, a moment ago I put to you this report from the
20 Prosecution that mentions 300.000 persons, mainly Serbs, who left their
21 homes in Croatia, and outside of that number another 50.000 that remained
22 in the territory of Croatia. Those numbers are contained in the report of
23 the Prosecution sent to the Defence on the 15th of March, 2006. When I
24 mentioned this, you answered, and it is on record, I hope, that these
25 numbers given us by the Prosecution do relate to Operations Flash and
1 Storm. Did I understand you correctly?
2 A. Yes. This move of the population that was named refugees occurred
3 after Operations Flash and Storm.
4 Q. Thank you. My colleague from the Prosecution in her objection
5 used the term "displaced persons," unlike the term that you are using.
6 She spoke about 300.000 persons, approximately, of displaced persons. So
7 what are they exactly? Are they refugees or displaced persons?
8 A. Maybe it's a misinterpretation or mistranslation, but I said
9 expressly that those people are refugees. They are on record as refugees.
10 They have refugee IDs which allow them to reside in the territories of
11 states where they are refugees. But this is, I have to repeat again, an
12 estimate. We don't have a solid figure. The solid figure is 120.000
13 people who returned. It is also certain that around 50.000 people
14 remained in Croatia but are displaced, because from one place in one state
15 they moved to another place in the same state. That's what we call
16 displaced. 35.000 of them are to be found in the Vukovar-Srem county.
17 Q. Speaking of this figure, around 300.000 people that you call
18 displaced, do you know where they went after the Operations Flash and
20 A. As I said, those are estimates, and I know that part of these
21 people are currently as refugees in Serbia and Montenegro, or at least
22 were. Part of them are in Bosnia. Also, they went to third countries.
23 So that is what I know. However, I do not have any official data as to
24 how many such persons are where.
25 Q. You said that out of these about 300.000 part of them went to
1 Serbia and Montenegro and some to Bosnia and others abroad. Does that
2 mean that none of these 300.000 people remained in Croatia after that
3 operation? I mean, these 300.000.
4 A. There are different estimates involved, stating about 300.000
5 persons who left their homes. The most realistic estimate is that in
6 this -- these 300.000 there are also the persons who are called displaced
7 persons, that they are also included in that figure. However, you see
8 these are forecasts, and I don't want to stand by that. And they come
9 from different sources, and they are all more or less the same. All
10 sources say between 250.000 and 300.000. But I can talk about 120.323
11 persons who had fled and who returned now. They are recorded as such, and
12 that is the figure that we can talk about.
13 Q. Thank you for telling us.
14 A. Well, we can also give the structure too.
15 Q. Just a brief question before we finish the cross-examination for
17 A. You said that the estimate was that after all of this, in the
18 territory of the Republic of Croatia there was about 50.000 people. Are
19 you trying to say that after Operations Flash and Storm in the territory
20 of Croatia there was a total of about 50.000 persons of Serb ethnicity.
21 A. No, not at all. Again, I have to be very accurate, very precise.
22 I really do not understand this kind of question.
23 Please take a look at the current census and you will see how many
24 Serbs still live in the Republic of Croatia. These are 300.000. This is
25 a prognosis stating that 300.000 left their homes and got the status of
1 refugees, and these people include those 50.000 who just changed their
2 place of residence within the Republic of Croatia, which is not to say
3 that in those areas where these 300.000 had fled from there is not a large
4 number of people left there of Serb ethnicity and other refugees, because
5 these areas had been populated, were populated and remain populated.
6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe that we
7 have overstepped our time for about two or three minutes already, so I
8 suggest that we conclude for the day.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milovancevic.
10 That brings us to the end of the trial today. We will come back
11 tomorrow in Courtroom II at 9.00 in the morning.
12 Court adjourned.
13 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m.,
14 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 12th day
15 of April, 2006, at 9.00 a.m.