Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 4550

1 Friday, 26 May 2006

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: On the 23rd, the Chamber had read out an order on

6 exhibits, book evidence exhibits, and after some discussion expunged the

7 order for further consideration of the submissions that were made by

8 counsel. The order has now been redrafted, and it reads as follows.

9 1. Each party shall indicate which pages of the three books it

10 wishes to keep on the record by Friday, the 2nd of June, 2006.

11 2. Each party shall properly scan only the B/C/S portions and

12 corresponding English portions which it wishes to keep on the record and

13 resubmit them to the registrar by Friday, the 2nd of June, 2006.

14 3. The registrar shall correct the trial record accordingly and

15 assign any new exhibit numbers necessary out of court.

16 Thank you very much. Mr. Whiting.

17 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. We'll certainly comply with

18 that order, as with all orders. Ms. Valabhji will be handling the next

19 witness, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Ms. Valabhji.

21 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour. The Prosecution calls it's

22 next witness, John McElligott.


24 MS. VALABHJI: McElligott.

25 [The witness entered court]

Page 4551

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the witness please make -- take the

2 declaration.

3 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the

4 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. You may take your seat.

6 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

8 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.


10 Examination by Ms. Valabhji:

11 Q. Sir, can you hear me clearly?

12 A. Yes, I do.

13 Q. Please stationary for the court.

14 A. My name is John McElligott, Your Honour.

15 Q. Since we'll both be speaking English, please leave a short pause

16 after my questions, so as to facilitate the work of the interpreters.

17 Mr. McElligott, are you of Irish nationality and were you born in

18 1945?

19 A. Yes, Your Honour.

20 Q. After completing your secondary education, did you join the Irish

21 police force?

22 A. Yes, I did.

23 Q. What positions did you hold in the Irish police force?

24 A. I joined originally as a -- what would be regarded as the rank of

25 constable. I was promoted to an inspector sergeant, to an inspector, and

Page 4552

1 to a detective superintendent.

2 Q. When did you retire from the police force?

3 A. I retired in April of the year 2001.

4 Q. Did you at certain points in your career perform duties with the

5 United Nations?

6 A. Yes, Your Honour.

7 Q. Please tell us about these duties in chronological order.

8 A. My first term with the United Nations was in Namibia, and that

9 was during the years 1988 and 1989. I worked there for a period of 13

10 months.

11 Q. With what organisation were you affiliated in Namibia.

12 A. The mission was known as UNTAG, that is the United Nations

13 Transition Assistance Group.

14 Q. And what position did you told with UNTAG?

15 A. I was attached to the UNPROFOR -- UNCIVPOL headquarters and I held

16 the position as head of communications.

17 Q. Did you at some point thereafter work for UNPROFOR?

18 A. Yes, I did, yes.

19 Q. Now, what does UNPROFOR stand for.

20 A. The United Nations Transition Assistance Group in the Former

21 Yugoslavia.

22 Q. Where were you based when you were with UNPROFOR?

23 A. I was based at the CIVPOL headquarters in Zagreb.

24 Q. What did CIVPOL stand for?

25 A. It is the civilian police component of the UN commission.

Page 4553

1 Q. I'd like to ask you in more detail about UNPROFOR and UNCIVPOL.

2 First, why was UNPROFOR established?

3 A. UNPROFOR was established under the Vance Plan, and its concept was

4 that the United Nations troops and police force would enter certain areas

5 of Croatia, known as United Nations protected areas. These were generally

6 referred to UNPAs, UNPAs. The area was to be demilitarised. Military

7 forces were to withdraw or disband, and the UNPROFOR military forces were

8 to ensure the safety of the area and that it would remain demilitarised.

9 The civilian police component was to monitor the activities of the local

10 police. It was also envisaged that the parties would engage in

11 discussions and agree to co-exist within the area of Croatia.

12 Q. When was UNPROFOR established in the former Yugoslavia?

13 A. It was due to commence in February of 19 -- or 19 -- I forget my

14 years. My apologies. 1988, sorry. I was there in -- let me just my

15 bearings on time.

16 Q. Take your time, sir.

17 A. Apologies. I served between 2000 -- I've forgotten my years.

18 [Prosecution counsel confer]

19 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, 1998, yes. My apologies.


21 Q. Was it --

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, did you say 1990 or 1998 when you corrected

23 yourself?

24 THE WITNESS: Could you refer -- I mentioned my period of service

25 in -- with UNPROFOR, so if you could refer me back to that. I just

Page 4554

1 have ...


3 Q. Sure. Did you work with UNPROFOR between October 1992 and October

4 1993?

5 A. Yeah. The mission was to commence in February of 1992 - my

6 apologies - and I understand it did not take fill effect in Sector East

7 and May and Sector West in June and Sectors North and South in July of

8 1992.

9 Q. We'll return to the topic of the sectors later. Now, I just want

10 to clarify something. Earlier when you talked about your work with UNTAG

11 in Namibia, you mentioned that the acronym UNTAG stands for UN

12 Transitional Assistance Group. Now, the acronym UNPROFOR, is that the

13 same thing or is that something else?

14 A. It's the United Nations Protection Force within the former

15 Yugoslavia.

16 Q. Okay. Thank you for that clarification.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: While we are on the question of defining terms,

18 what is the Vance Plan and what does it entail?

19 THE WITNESS: The Vance Plan -- the concept was that the United

20 Nations troops and police components would enter an area of Croatia known

21 as United Nations protected areas, and the boundaries of that were set out

22 in accordance with the Vance Plan. And the area was to be demilitarised.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: So the Vance Plan was the plan that provided for

24 entry of United Nations forces into Croatia?

25 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.

Page 4555

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

2 You may proceed, Ms. Valabhji.

3 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

4 Q. I'd now like to go through some documents pertaining to UNCIVPOL

5 functions and structure.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Could the document with ERN 03630803 please be

7 exhibited.

8 THE WITNESS: This is a page from the standard operating

9 procedures that we had, UNCIVPOL.

10 MS. VALABHJI: Could the page be enlarged a bit.

11 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters cannot hear the witness.

12 THE WITNESS: This is a page from the UNCIVPOL operating

13 procedures.

14 MS. VALABHJI: Let's scroll down to the bottom of the page.

15 Q. Sir, do you recognise the signature in the bottom right-hand

16 corner?

17 A. I do, it's mine, and the date.

18 MS. VALABHJI: Let's scroll to the middle of the page. That's

19 fine.

20 Q. What was the mandate of UNCIVPOL, according to this document?

21 A. "To monitor the local police, to ensure that they carry out their

22 tasks without discrimination on any grounds of ethnic origin, culture,

23 religion, sex, or nationality, and with full respect for the human rights

24 of all residents of the mission area."

25 And secondly: "To provide appropriate assistance to the United

Page 4556

1 Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International

2 committee of Red Cross (ICRC) or other UNPROFOR-recognised humanitarian

3 agencies, in support of their work to facilitate the return, in conditions

4 of safety and security, of citizens -- or civilians who have been

5 displaced by the conflict."

6 Q. And just to be clear on terminology, were the UN monitors referred

7 to as UN civilian police monitors?

8 A. Yes, Your Honour.

9 MS. VALABHJI: Let's scroll further down the page.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is UN civil police monitors, are they the same

11 thing as UNCIVPOL?

12 THE WITNESS: Correct.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

14 And let's turn to the next page. Could we -- thank you.

15 Q. Sir, could you summarise for us the monitoring functions of


17 A. Our function was to monitor them, the police, and that entailed

18 observing them conducting their investigations, how they dealt with

19 prisoners in the course of their detention, people who were arrested,

20 houses being searched. We accompanied them to the scenes of crime. We

21 accompanied them on patrols to see how they carry out their duties. We

22 also conducted our own patrols to monitor their visibility, or the lack of

23 it, and to establish what was happening in communities. We assisted in

24 humanitarian issues with the various agencies of the United Nations,

25 including the Red Cross and the commissioner for refugees. We also made

Page 4557

1 reports on incidents, as they came to our notice, and on occasions we

2 would have carried out our own inquiries to establish the credibility of

3 some issues. We also made reports on other matter coming to our notice.

4 Our monitors act as, I suppose, facilitators in conflict, particularly

5 within the communities, and they engaged in many humanitarian issues.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

7 into evidence and assigned an exhibit number?

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

9 please be given an exhibit number.

10 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 721, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

12 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Q. We've just talked about the mandate and monitoring functions of

15 UNCIVPOL. Who had the primary responsibility for maintaining law and

16 order in the mission area?

17 A. That was the responsibility of the local police.

18 Q. Now, did the UN civilian police have executive powers or

19 responsibility for maintaining public order?

20 A. No, Your Honour.

21 Q. Were the UN civilian police monitors armed?

22 A. No, Your Honour.

23 MS. VALABHJI: Could document 03630807 please be shown.

24 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters note, could the second microphone

25 of the witness be switched on, please.

Page 4558


2 Q. Witness -- thank you, that's great.

3 Sir, do you recognise this document?

4 A. Yes, Your Honour.

5 Q. What is it?

6 A. It is the organisation chart for the CIVPOL organisation.

7 Q. Could you briefly describe the UNCIVPOL's structure using this

8 document?

9 A. The structure was one where the commissioner had overall authority

10 of the civilian police component. And at headquarters he had two

11 assistants -- if you can enlarge --

12 Q. I think we have the B/C/S on the screen at the moment.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Could we return to the English, please. Thank you.

14 THE WITNESS: One was Chief of Staff who had primary

15 responsibility for the personnel and logistical matters relating to the

16 force. And the second was a deputy commissioner who had responsibility

17 for operational matters. The commissioner or the UNPROFOR police force

18 was divided into what are known as sectors, and they are shown there as

19 Sectors North, South, East, West, and you have Sarajevo and sector -- I'm

20 not sure of the area it actually covers. It doesn't come to me. But each

21 of those sector commanders were responsible to the commissioner. In other

22 words, the line of command was from the commissioner to the sector chiefs

23 in these areas.

24 Q. Do you recognise the signature at the bottom right-hand corner of

25 the document?

Page 4559

1 A. Yes, Your Honour, it is mine.

2 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

3 into evidence.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

5 please be given an exhibit number.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this is document 722.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

8 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.


10 Q. Sir, what position did you hold?

11 A. I was chief of operations and I then transferred over to Chief of

12 Staff for a period and then back to deputy commission at the latter end of

13 the mission.

14 Q. And could you briefly tell us what -- pardon me. I withdraw that

15 question.

16 Now, the document we just looked at mentions Sectors North, South,

17 East, and West. With this in mind, let's take a look at 03630808.

18 There seems to be some difficulty in retrieving the document.

19 This document should be in e-court.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Ms. Valabhji, do you, by any chance, have hard

21 copies of the document? Enough to go around, if you do?

22 MS. VALABHJI: I think we have a few copies -- oh, I see. I think

23 we just have one clean copy, unfortunately, Your Honour.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. That's fine. We just have to find it in

25 e-court then.

Page 4560

1 MS. VALABHJI: Okay. Thank you.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are certain it does exist in e-court?

3 MS. VALABHJI: It is -- it is in e-court, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is in e-court?


6 JUDGE MOLOTO: I take your word for it.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you. Okay. I think it's on its way. There

8 we go.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

10 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

11 Q. Sir, what is this document?

12 A. This document sets out the CIVPOL stations at the various sectors.

13 It's showing the sector headquarters at the top line, and underneath for

14 the stations in respect of each sector.

15 Q. Where was Sector South based?

16 A. Sector South headquarters was based at Knin.

17 Q. And what about Sector North, where was --

18 A. Sector North was based at Topusko.

19 Q. Do you recognise the signature at the bottom of the page?

20 A. Yes, it's mine.

21 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

22 into evidence and assigned a number?

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I just ask a question before we assign a number

24 to it? That's fine. I don't have to -- I don't have a question to ask.

25 The document is admitted into evidence. May it please be given an exhibit

Page 4561

1 number.

2 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit Number 723, Your Honours.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

4 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

5 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

6 Could the document bearing ERN 0600 3593 please be shown. It is

7 in e-court.

8 Q. Sir, did you provide this map or sketch to the OTP earlier this

9 week?

10 A. Yes, Your Honour.

11 Q. What does this map or sketch portray?

12 A. The coloured area sets out the United Nations protected areas, and

13 they are displayed in red.

14 Q. Is it accurate, in your view?

15 A. I understand it to be, yes.

16 Q. Okay. Now, could you point out the various sectors?

17 A. Yes. Sector East --

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before you get to that point, did you draw

19 this map yourself?

20 THE WITNESS: No, I did not, Your Honour. It was one provided

21 sometime during the mission period, so I --

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Who provided it?

23 THE WITNESS: It would have come from somewhere within the mission

24 staffing level.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed, Ms. Valabhji.

Page 4562

1 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

2 Q. I think there's a pen marker that can be utilised.

3 A. If I could refer the court just to a note on the top right-hand

4 corner, it does give some reference to it and I suppose --

5 MS. VALABHJI: Could we zoom in on that note.

6 THE WITNESS: It says here it is not an official sketch produced

7 by the UNMOs, they are the military observers at the headquarters. So it

8 would be drafted by the military component of the military observers. So

9 that is the source of it.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is that the military component of the UN?

11 THE WITNESS: Correct.

12 MS. VALABHJI: Could we now return to the full -- that is, to zoom

13 out.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Say that again, Ms. Valabhji.

15 MS. VALABHJI: I was -- didn't express myself clearly. What I

16 meant was for the full picture to be displayed again and for the

17 zooming-in function to be negated.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.


20 Q. Using this pen, could you point out the various sectors.

21 A. Sector East is the area I am now circling.

22 Q. And the remaining sectors.

23 A. Sector West is the next one here. And Sector North and south are

24 joined, but the dividing boundary is somewhere here. I'm not exactly sure

25 on it, but I recognise that one station is in Sector South, Korenica, and

Page 4563

1 the next one is in Sector North. So the boundary lies somewhere there.

2 Q. Thank you.

3 MS. VALABHJI: Now, let's scroll down to the bottom left-hand

4 corner, please. Thank you for informing me about that. Could the picture

5 please be saved.

6 [Prosecution counsel confer]

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is it at all possible to get the document occupying

8 the entire screen and make it a little bigger, zoom in or out or whatever

9 you said.

10 MS. VALABHJI: Could we zoom in on the document to make it a bit

11 bigger?

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: If it is possible.

13 Ms. Valabhji wanted the bottom, left corner, so if you can perhaps

14 show that. Thank you.

15 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: You're welcome.


18 Q. Sir, what is the date on this document?

19 A. It is dated the 17th of April, 1993, that's 1993.

20 Q. I wonder if the --

21 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I'm sorry, but on my monitor I am not getting

22 the map, I am getting OTP counsel.

23 MS. VALABHJI: Could the marked-up exhibit please be admitted into

24 evidence and assigned an exhibit number. It's no longer on the screen at

25 the moment.

Page 4564

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated].

2 MS. VALABHJI: The map I have right now is the unmarked one. I

3 think the one the witness marked has been saved.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Right. May the document on which the witness made

5 markings, the saved map, please be admitted into -- be given an exhibit

6 number, and it is hereby admitted into evidence.

7 THE REGISTRAR: The map will be Exhibit Number 724, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

9 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

10 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

11 Q. And the last in this particular series of documents, not the last

12 document today but the last in the series, 03630809. Could this document

13 please be exhibited.

14 Sir, what is this document?

15 A. It is a profile of the staff and the station commanders at the

16 various sectors.

17 Q. Do you recognise the signature on the right-hand side of the page?

18 A. Yes, it is mine.

19 MS. VALABHJI: Let's turn to page 3 of the document. Could we zoom

20 in, and could we scroll down, please.

21 That suffices, thank you.

22 Q. Now, how many monitors were there in Sector North?

23 A. Sector North had 187, that's 187 -- or 167 -- it's not exactly

24 clear here.

25 MS. VALABHJI: Could we zoom in a bit more.

Page 4565


2 MS. VALABHJI: Just to verify that we looked at Sector North,

3 could we scroll back up to the top of the page, please. Okay. Thank you.

4 Could we now turn to the next page.

5 Q. What sector does this page pertain to?

6 A. This sets out the profile for Sector South.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Could we scroll down to the bottom of the page.



10 Q. How many monitors were there?

11 A. 127.

12 Q. Thank you.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour could this document please be admitted

14 into evidence and assigned an exhibit number.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence, may it

16 please be given an exhibit number.

17 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 725, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

19 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

20 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

21 Q. Earlier we discussed the monitoring functions of UNCIVPOL. Was

22 there a reporting procedure within UNCIVPOL?

23 A. Yes, Your Honour.

24 Q. What was the reporting procedure?

25 A. The reporting procedure was that a daily situation was prepared

Page 4566

1 every 24 hours, each evening. And the procedure was that police monitors

2 at the end of their day submitted their report to their respective station

3 commanders. At station level a situation report was prepared, setting out

4 all incidents coming to notice in that station throughout the day. That

5 report was then sent to the sector chiefs' headquarters. So each station

6 submitted a report to its sector chief, and at sector headquarters a

7 member staff there prepared an overall situation report, reflecting the

8 activities of the entire sector. That was then sent by each sector chief

9 to the headquarters at Zagreb. A member of staff at my office then,

10 during the course of the night, prepared an overall report setting out the

11 overall position in the entire mission for the previous 24 hours. That

12 report was then available to the commissioner and his key staff for their

13 meeting in the morning. It was also circulated to the head of civil

14 affairs or the director of civil affairs and to the force commander. And

15 the various sector chiefs' reports would be available to the head of civil

16 affairs at the sector headquarters as well.

17 Q. You mentioned the CIVPOL commissioner. To whom did he report?

18 A. He reported to the force commander through the director of civil

19 affairs.

20 Q. And what were the functions of the director of civil affairs?

21 A. Civil affairs director, I suppose, was to manage or direct all the

22 political and civil affairs of the mission.

23 Q. Finally, were there meetings with sector chiefs at CIVPOL

24 headquarters?

25 A. Yes. There were regular meetings with the sector chiefs. These

Page 4567

1 were, I believe, held once a month.

2 Q. And what would these have been about -- what were they about?

3 A. They mainly focussed on our operations on the ground, and we

4 reviewed our performance and the operational activities on the ground and,

5 I suppose, warfare [sic] strategies and how to deal with them and work

6 towards enhancing the performance of our staff on the ground. So they

7 were focussed very much on the operational and performance of our

8 monitors.

9 Q. I just want to be clear on something. Did you say -- the

10 transcript says: "And, I suppose, warfare strategies"?

11 A. No, operational strategies, or -- I'm sorry. The CIVPOL

12 operational strategies.

13 Q. Okay. At this stage we'll be examining a number of CIVPOL

14 documents.

15 MS. VALABHJI: Could 65 ter 327 please be shown. Could we zoom in

16 a bit?

17 Q. Now, sir, what is this document about?

18 A. It is a memo from myself to Cedric Thornberry, the director of

19 civil affairs. It is dated the 27th of July, 1993, and the subject title

20 is: Crimes committed against Croats in Sector South.

21 Q. What period of time does it cover?

22 A. Types and numbers of crimes committed against Croats living in

23 Sector South during the period August 1992 to the 31st of May, 1993.

24 Q. And on the same page, what does it say about the suspects of

25 crimes committed?

Page 4568

1 A. It says: "Men in military or police uniforms are suspects for 120

2 of the 497 crimes committed."

3 Q. Let's turn to page 2 of the document.

4 Now, sir, according to this paragraph, what is the report --

5 sorry. What is the information contained in this report based on?

6 A. Could you enlarge it a little more? Is that possible?

7 MS. VALABHJI: Could it please be enlarged.

8 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

9 Now, "The attached is a computation of the types and number of

10 crimes reported committed against ethnic Croatians covering the period

11 mid/late August 1992 until the end of May 1993, a period of nine months.

12 This research is based on data which has been taken from UNCIVPOL incident

13 reports. For the purpose of this report, there has been an attempt to

14 categorise this data by type of crime; however, there may be some

15 inaccuracies as there were no standard crime categories used throughout

16 the sectors by all stations. In addition, this data indicates each

17 individual report made, not the number of victims and not necessarily the

18 number of crimes committed. Also, multiple crimes reported on one

19 incident are recorded as one report and categorised under the most serious

20 crime. In updating this data, we have been unable to give a true picture

21 of the situation in the stations that were evacuated after the January the

22 22nd hostilities. The reason for this is as follows, our monitors have

23 been unable to patrol these areas because of the war situation. Attached

24 is a breakdown of crimes reported by station and backup data."

25 MS. VALABHJI: Could we scroll further down on this page.

Page 4569

1 Q. Do you recognise the names on this page?

2 A. I do, Your Honour, yes, one is Roberts Noonan and J. Jancewicz,

3 they were both operational officers in Sector South.

4 MS. VALABHJI: Let's turn to page 4 of this document, please.

5 Q. A reference is made here to pink zone. What was this? What were

6 these?

7 A. The pink zones, Your Honour, were the areas lying between the

8 United Nations protected areas and the confrontation lines. These were

9 areas where, I suppose, the Serbian population would have been the larger

10 proportion of -- or grouping living in the area.

11 Q. Let's look now at page 5, the next page, please. If we could

12 enlarge it just a little more. Okay.

13 What does this table represent?

14 A. It sets -- it gives a breakdown of the crime incidents or the

15 crime categories, I suppose, would be the correct reference to it, and the

16 reference across the top indicates the station, as referenced on the

17 previous page.

18 Q. How many incidents of murder are reported in total, according to

19 this table?

20 A. Murder, in total, 29.

21 Q. What about arson?

22 A. Arson, 48.

23 Q. Assault?

24 A. Assault, 9.

25 Q. Destruction?

Page 4570

1 A. Destruction, 24.

2 Q. Intimidation?

3 A. Intimidation, 39.

4 MS. VALABHJI: Let's turn now to the next page.

5 Q. How is destruction defined?

6 A. "Destruction is blowing up of buildings with explosives."

7 Q. And what about intimidation?

8 A. "Intimidation: Threats through action (firing shots, by throwing

9 stones or other extreme gestures)."

10 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

11 into evidence and assigned an exhibit number.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence, may it

13 please be assigned an exhibit number.

14 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 726, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

16 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

17 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

18 Let's go back in time a bit. Could 65 ter 330 please be

19 exhibited? Let's zoom in just a little bit. I don't want to lose the

20 entire text on the page, but if we could zoom in a bit more, and let's

21 scroll down.

22 Q. Sir, what is this document about?

23 A. It is a report from Victor Andreev. He was the head of affairs in

24 Sector South, and it is addressed to Cedric Thornberry, the director of

25 civil affairs. I think it is -- if I could look at the left.

Page 4571

1 Q. If you can scroll up, please?

2 A. It is to Cedric Thornberry, director of civil affairs.

3 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please speak into the

4 microphone.


6 Q. Now -- please continue.

7 A. The report is from Victor Andreev, he is the director of civil

8 affairs at Sector South -- or the head of civil affairs Sector South and

9 it is directed to Cedric Thornberry, the director for civil affairs of


11 Q. Could you tell us what the subject matter is about.

12 A. It is -- he is stating that: "I am afraid we have to confirm the

13 facts mentioned in Mr." -- Is it -- I'm not clear of the name there,

14 Your Honour, "letter to me of the 25th of August on situation in Kijevo.

15 I enclose my reply to the Nogolica which gives an account of what we have

16 done to remedy the situation as well as my written report to Martic whom I

17 also intend to see on the matter.

18 "Best regards."

19 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Isn't it written "protest"?

20 THE WITNESS: My attempt to see --

21 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Instead of "written report."

22 THE WITNESS: My apologies, it is "written protest."


24 Q. Now --

25 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Before you proceed, what is the date? I'm not

Page 4572

1 able to see it clearly at the top. I know the 25th of August is mentioned

2 and which year. Is it possible to zoom in or for the witness to give the

3 date?

4 THE WITNESS: It is further -- it is dated the 31st of -- 13th of

5 August, 1992.

6 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: [Microphone not activated]

7 Could the witness indicate.

8 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

9 THE WITNESS: [Indicates]


11 Q. Sir --

12 MS. VALABHJI: May I proceed, Your Honour?

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed.

14 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

15 Q. Now, let's look again at the date, if we could zoom in to that. I

16 see we have zoomed in very --

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: At what, at the date?

18 MS. VALABHJI: Yes, Your Honour.

19 Have we lost the -- there we are.

20 Q. Sir, is that the 13th of August, 1992, or the 31st of August,

21 1992?

22 A. The 13 immediately in front of the word "August," but there is

23 also a date on the top which would seem to be a sending date for the

24 message, and that is the 1st of September, 1992. So the probability is

25 that the 31st could be the date of the -- of the document. It's just a --

Page 4573

1 the structure in dating the document perhaps have the date first, the time

2 then, and the month, but I know at the top you certainly have the date,

3 the 1st of September, 1992, as the date of faxing.

4 Q. Okay.

5 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Sorry, as a matter of practice, can you say

6 anything about the two respective dates, what they would normally refer

7 to? The prior one at the top and then the one that is contained within

8 the box further down. Thank you.

9 THE WITNESS: The one entered date and time would seem to be the

10 time and the date the document was actually prepared.

11 MS. VALABHJI: Could we turn --

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: I still don't understand. The date that has the

13 date of the 13th of August has just before the number "13" 1815, which is

14 time I suspect. But then also before that 1815 there's "31." I don't

15 know what that means. And the date at the top that refers to the 1st of

16 September, 1992, has 5.16, which could also be time. So when you say the

17 one entered date and time would seem to be the time and the date the

18 document was actually prepared, which one are you referring to?

19 THE WITNESS: The one with the time and date -- I know that some

20 monitors used the time -- the date process, where they put the date first,

21 the time next, the month, and the year, and that would seem to be the case

22 there in this date -- time column.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which one?

24 THE WITNESS: The one immediately over the box "from V. Andreev,"

25 you have 31st, 1815.

Page 4574

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: But wouldn't you say 5.16 after 1st September 1992

2 is also a time?

3 THE WITNESS: Yes, I would and I would read that as the time the

4 message was sent by fax to some location.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: So the earlier date of August would be the date of

6 preparation of the document?

7 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: And do you know who it was sent -- or it was

9 probably sent to this address, the addressee?

10 THE WITNESS: Yes, to Mr. Thornberry.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sure. A document of the 13th is only dispatched on

12 the 1st of September.

13 THE WITNESS: Well, I suspect that the date is the 31st because I

14 know some people did use that process for dating, that they put the date

15 first, the time, and then the month and year.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, what is this -- what would then be the

17 significance of this "13" before "August"?

18 THE WITNESS: I have no idea.

19 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you able to assist us, Ms. Valabhji?

21 MS. VALABHJI: Yes, I'll certainly try. Actually, the -- what

22 appears to be a "13" in front of the August is probably actually a "B" --

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which would mean?

24 MS. VALABHJI: I'm not sure what the letter "B" would refer to --

25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.

Page 4575


2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I have appear objection. I

3 don't think the Prosecution can testify about the document. I believe

4 that the witness should be asked about the document and explain as far as

5 he can.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, perhaps I can ask the witness another

7 question which would take care of the matter, perhaps. May I proceed?

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed, Ms. Valabhji.


10 Q. Sir, the document refers in its body, the content --

11 MS. VALABHJI: And if we could please scroll down. This is the

12 text in handwriting.

13 Q. In that text the date of 25th of August is referred to. Does that

14 suggest that the document was prepared on 31st of August rather than the

15 13th of August?

16 A. Yes.

17 MS. VALABHJI: May I proceed, Your Honour?

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are on -- you may proceed.

19 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

20 Could we turn to page 3 of this document. And let's scroll down a

21 bit.

22 Q. Sir, do you recognise the name at the bottom of the page?

23 A. Yes, I do.

24 Q. Whose name is it?

25 A. It is Victor Andreev.

Page 4576

1 Q. And once again, he was Victor Andreev?

2 A. He was the civil affairs head at Sector South.

3 Q. And now sir --

4 MS. VALABHJI: Let's scroll back up.

5 Q. -- What is this page about?

6 A. It is a letter addressed to Mr. Milan Martic, Knin.

7 Q. When is it dated?

8 MS. VALABHJI: And let's scroll back up, please.

9 THE WITNESS: It is dated the 31st of August, 1992.


11 Q. What is the first paragraph of this letter about?

12 A. It says that: "According to our information, there are

13 approximately 50 old Croatian people, mostly women, living under constant

14 fear in Kijevo. They reported that they are constantly harassed and their

15 property stolen by people from the neighbouring village of Polaca. A

16 month ago, two people were murdered and their bodies were found floating

17 in a well. Recently, a drinking water well of one old lady was

18 maliciously contaminated by detergent. These people are terribly afraid

19 and would like to be reassured that their lives and property are

20 protected."

21 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

22 MS. VALABHJI: Pardon me. Thank you.

23 Q. Could you also read the first three sentences of the second

24 paragraph, the first three sentences will suffice.

25 A. "We have actually noticed that the number of cases of harassment,

Page 4577

1 looting, and theft have been increasing recently. In addition to this

2 specific case in Kijevo, we have received disturbing reports from other

3 villages. On Saturday, the 29th of August, in Poljane people dressed in

4 TDF uniforms harassed the villagers and stole their food and money."

5 Q. What does "TDF" stand for?

6 A. They were the Territorial Defence forces.

7 Q. For the Court's information Poljane can be found on page 30 of the

8 precise atlas in grid 2C.

9 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, can this document be admitted into

10 evidence.

11 A. The document is admitted into evidence. May it please be given an

12 exhibit number.

13 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit Number 727, Your Honour.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

15 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

16 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed, Ms. Valabhji.

17 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

18 Could we please take a look at 65 ter 337.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before we look at that one, the other document --

20 is this the same document with the date discrepancy? No. There was

21 another one before this one. What do you want to do with that one, the

22 one that has 1st September and 31st --

23 MS. VALABHJI: It's part of the -- actually, it's the first page

24 of that exhibit and the -- this is the third page that we just spoke of.

25 So it's all part and parcel of Exhibit 65 ter 330.

Page 4578

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: I thought this was a letter generated by that

2 previous one. Anyway, you know best. Fine. This one has been admitted?

3 MS. VALABHJI: It has been, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

5 Sorry, you may proceed.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

7 Could we zoom in a bit, please. And let's scroll down. Thank

8 you.

9 Q. Sir, what is this document about?

10 A. This, again, is a memo from Victor Andreev, the civil affairs

11 director himself to Mr. Cedric Thornberry. It is, again, dated -- and I

12 think this may clarify the previous one in the sense that where we were

13 looking at 13. It was probably B and this says the letter A. So it would

14 be dated the 27th of October, 1992. So I think that may clarify the

15 previous one.

16 Q. Thank you, Witness. Did you see reports such as these when you

17 worked with UNCIVPOL?

18 A. Yes, Your Honour.

19 Q. Now, please describe to us or explain, rather, how these reports

20 were generated.

21 A. These reports -- the director of civil affairs would make

22 assessment reports and send them to Mr. Thornberry on -- from time to

23 time. And they would, in general, be circulated to us at the civilian

24 police.

25 Q. And just to be entirely clear, the term in the subject line:

Page 4579


2 A. Situation report.

3 Q. Thank you. Now, let's turn to page 4 of this document. Please

4 scroll down just a little bit. Thank you.

5 Sir, could you read the first paragraph under the heading "human

6 rights."

7 A. "Several areas have remained at the forefront of our

8 preoccupations: Vrljika, Drnis, Korbat, in particular where looting and

9 seizure of Croat properties and food, often with the blessing of the local

10 militia commanders, have increased significantly thereby fanning the of

11 their owners, presently displaced, and their desire to return. We wrote a

12 strong letter of protest to Martic. Our complaints have remained

13 unanswered."

14 Q. And the next paragraph, there is no need to read it out, just

15 explain what it's about.

16 A. Again, indicating that there has been an escalation of crimes over

17 the previous two months. Croatian population have been subjected to

18 violence and intimidation, and again refers to October when five Croats

19 were brutally murdered and homes vacated by Croats have been burned down

20 in a -- probably attempt by Serbs to intimidate the remaining Croats into

21 leaving the Krajina and not allow them to return to -- not to allow the

22 return of displaced persons. "DPs" are referred to as displaced persons.

23 Q. Thank you, Witness.

24 MS. VALABHJI: For the Court's information Vrljika can be found on

25 page 31 of the concise atlas in grid C2 and Drnis is on page 30 in grid

Page 4580

1 C2.

2 Q. Sir, in which sector was Korbat located?

3 A. Well, I'm not absolutely sure, but if it's being referred to by

4 Mr. Andreev, I would relate it to being in Sector South.

5 Q. And now it's return to the first page of this document. Back to

6 the date and time box, please.

7 What is the date of this document?

8 A. It is the 27th of October, 1992.

9 Q. Thank you?

10 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

11 into evidence?

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: That document is admitted into evidence. May it

13 please be given an exhibit number.

14 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 728, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

16 I just note -- actually, my attention has been drawn to it by

17 Judge Hoepfel, that there is now an A what earlier you suggested would be

18 a B.


20 JUDGE HOEPFEL: That would clarify the question in exhibit 727.

21 What would that mean, after the hour, to have an E or maybe a B is?

22 THE WITNESS: I don't know, Your Honour.

23 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Would that be a.m. and p.m. In abbreviated form?

24 THE WITNESS: I don't know.

25 JUDGE HOEPFEL: But this is clear that this is an A after the

Page 4581

1 hour.

2 Yes, you may proceed.

3 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

4 Could we now look at 65 ter 347. Could we zoom in, and let's

5 scroll down a bit. Thank you.

6 Q. Sir, what is this document about?

7 A. It is a report from the information of the UNCIVPOL liaison

8 officer Belgrade sector -- again, from Sector South. It's a daily

9 situation report. It is dated the 22nd of February, 1993, and it is

10 addressed to the UNCIVPOL headquarters at Zagreb.

11 Q. Let's --

12 A. And it's -- it's from the UNCIVPOL headquarters in Sector South.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Let's scroll down on this page, please. And let's

14 look at the last few sentences on page 1 of this report.

15 Q. Sir, could you read aloud the part which commences: "It has also

16 been reported"?

17 A. "It has also been reported earlier that about 100 Croats have left

18 their homes in the Medvidja area and are living in the caves, fields, and

19 forests for fear of being murdered or robbed by the local turned bandits

20 soldiers. The CIVPOL monitors also received confirmed information from

21 the Benkovac milicija chief Slobodan Vujko, that for the past week between

22 11 and 17 Croats have been murdered and one woman raped."

23 MS. VALABHJI: For the Court's information, Medvidja is located on

24 page 25 in grid D2 of the concise atlas. Your Honour, could this document

25 please be admitted into evidence.

Page 4582

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

2 please be given an exhibit number.

3 THE REGISTRAR: That is Exhibit Number 729, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

5 Ms. Valabhji, you may proceed.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

7 Q. The word "milicija" is referred to this document and we will see

8 it later as well. What does this term refer to?

9 A. It refers to the police in -- it would refer to the RSK police

10 within the mission area.

11 Q. And while we're on this topic, let's take a look at 65 ter 343.

12 Sir, what is this document about?

13 A. It is an organisational chart showing the -- I suppose the

14 structure future man-power level of the milicija, and I understand it is

15 from the -- refers to Sector North, milicija in Sector North, and it is

16 dated the 29th of December, 1992.

17 Q. And what does MIL info sect refer to?

18 A. I think it refers to the military information section, it's

19 talking about Sector North, so it would be addressed to the military

20 element or component of UNPROFOR.

21 MS. VALABHJI: And let's scroll further down this document.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before we scroll down, is my memory failing

23 me? I thought when you explained the various sectors of UNPROFOR, Knin

24 was Sector South.

25 THE WITNESS: It is, yes.

Page 4583

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: And this is Sector North and I see Knin is written

2 here.

3 THE WITNESS: If my memory is correct, there is a footnote at the

4 end to indicate it refers to -- the information may have come to light in

5 a meeting with Sector North.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.


8 Q. Sir, according it this document how were the milicija to be

9 organised?

10 A. This document shows that "7.000 regular milicija responsible for

11 normal law and order and other milicija-performed functions. This

12 milicija is to be dressed in regular milicija uniforms and armed with

13 side-arms and batons. And then there were 16.000 special milicija or

14 purpose milicija organised in eight BDEs," I'm not sure what that

15 means, "each consisting of about 2.000 men.

16 "The special purpose milicija is divided into special milicija and

17 border milicija of which the latter is by far the largest contributor

18 concerning number of men.

19 "This milicija would be responsible for policing the borders and

20 protect population from threat of terrorist attacks.

21 "This milicija to be armed with long rifles."

22 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

23 into evidence?

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

25 please be given an exhibit number.

Page 4584

1 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 730, Your Honour.


3 Q. Now, this document that we just looked at refers to the

4 special-purpose milicija. How was the special-purpose milicija regarded

5 by UN monitors?

6 A. The -- it seems at a very early stage that there were two types of

7 police on the mission. One was what we regarded as a professional -- as

8 professional police officers. It was apparent that they were that, and I

9 suspect that they were part of the original police force in existence

10 prior to the break-up. And then there was another group, to be quite

11 frank, they did not possess any principles of policing. They were

12 certainly regarded as the problem on the mission.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which of these two would you --

14 THE WITNESS: The 2.000 group I would -- or the 7.000 group,

15 within that, we regarded them as professional police officers. Certainly

16 a lot of people came to prominence there that we considered professional

17 police officers.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: And the 16.000.

19 THE WITNESS: I would regard them and indeed they were held in

20 general regard by all the monitors by not conforming to any of the

21 principles of policing.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.


24 Q. And how did you know this?

25 A. It came to our notice through a variety of sources, I suppose,

Page 4585

1 firstly, our own monitors on the ground dealing with them. The local

2 community made numerous reports of incidents where they were involved, and

3 indeed they were absolutely terrorised of them. Professional police

4 officers within their own grouping, that would be the 7.000 grouping, had

5 indicated to us that there were people operating in a manner that they do

6 not condone. They also expressed views and concerns, and indeed that is

7 documented, that they had particular difficulties in dealing with certain

8 situations when these people were involved. In other words, these people

9 seemed to be -- unaccountability.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: While you are thinking, would that be a convenient

11 time?

12 MS. VALABHJI: Yes, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Would it?

14 MS. VALABHJI: It would.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

16 We will take the break. We will come back at quarter to 11.00.

17 Thank you. Court adjourned.

18 --- Recess taken at 10.15 a.m.

19 --- On resuming at 10.46 a.m.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

21 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

22 Q. Sir, before the break we were talking about the special-purpose

23 milicija or police. Did you know who was in command of the

24 special-purpose police?

25 A. Yes, Your Honour, it is -- yes.

Page 4586

1 Q. Who was that?

2 A. Mr. Martic.

3 Q. And how did you know this?

4 A. I knew it from contacts with the police in the various sectors

5 and, indeed, particularly Sector South, and it was common knowledge within

6 our headquarters as well, to civil affairs, the military element. It was

7 common knowledge that he was in charge.

8 Q. While we're on the same topic, that is the term "milicija," let's

9 take a look at 65 ter 333. Let's zoom in. That's perfect.

10 Sir, what is this document?

11 A. It is a status report dated the 7th of September, 1992, and Sector

12 South is referred to. And it's on the Serbo-Croatian conflict and

13 UNPROFOR mission.

14 Q. Were you given an opportunity to review it earlier this week?

15 A. Yes, Your Honour, I was.

16 MS. VALABHJI: Let's scroll down this page. And let's turn to

17 the next page, which is page 2 of the document. Please scroll down.

18 Q. Sir, are you familiar with the contents of this document?

19 A. I do not recall it -- once I saw it initially, I did not recall it

20 there and then, but I can say that everything that came through our office

21 I did read. And again, the assessment would have been reasonably familiar

22 to me, but when I saw it at the time I cannot say there and then yes I

23 remember that. But looking at the contents it would be familiar to me.

24 Q. When you say "looking at the contents it would be familiar," what

25 do you mean, can you elaborate?

Page 4587

1 A. In other words the assessment is something I would have become

2 aware of and, I suppose, would have knowledge of as well.

3 Q. What was that -- what is that assessment?

4 A. It is referred to here. Do you wish me to read?

5 Q. Yes. Please read the first paragraph under this heading "power

6 struggle in 'RSK'"?

7 A. "Martic is in charge, but he is not a gang chief -- he is a gang

8 chief, not a political leader. He appears as an executor of plans

9 commenced out of Knin -- conceived out of Knin."

10 Perhaps you can enlarge a little bit, my sight is variable. Is

11 that possible? Okay. I just wish to stay in front of the mike as well.

12 Q. Sure.

13 A. "Reshaping of power structure ongoing consists of Martic's band

14 (Ducic) getting rid of the moderates, through terror. Four ... Moderates

15 have been fired recently, four and -- so-called moderates, yeah, have been

16 fired recently.

17 "Spanovic is compelled to get close to him under threat. He looks

18 increasingly hard-liner. They need one another. No decision-makers and

19 not even valid interlocutors for us in Knin.

20 "Although the new balance of power is not clear yet and though

21 internal dispute is predominant, Militia is in power throughout

22 the 'Krajina,' more than civil authorities. Milicijas are not in private

23 army but the translation on the ground of the 'new shaped Krajina state in

24 progress.' They show devotion to him, imposing his kind of new 'militia

25 order' and rules through force. His group is expanding ethnic cleansing

Page 4588

1 systematically. Also in Krajina.

2 "Martic never gave to us indications to adhere to the Vance Plan.

3 On the contrary, he has repeatedly stated in public that he will -- that

4 there will be no restoration of Croatian authority and that the cease-fire

5 line is the border of the 'RSK' state."

6 Q. In the previous paragraph the word "his" is used, "his group,"

7 "his private army." Who's being referred to here?

8 A. The militia.

9 Q. Actually, maybe I should clarify. The word "his," which person

10 might be referred to in this paragraph by that possessive pronoun?

11 A. It's -- Mr. Martic is the person referred to.

12 Q. Let's turn now to page 5 of this document.

13 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, I'd be grateful at this stage for the

14 purpose of the last question on this document if I could distribute hard

15 copies, as I'll be asking the witness to compare the fifth and sixth pages

16 of the document to the first two pages, and hard copies may facilitate

17 this exercise.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, you may do so. Proceed.

19 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.

22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Martic is not -- does not

23 have the translation on his screen.

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can somebody help Mr. Martic to get the translation

25 on his screen?

Page 4589

1 MS. VALABHJI: Could I have the assistance of the usher in

2 distributing a hard copy of the B/C/S translation to the accused, Your

3 Honour.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

5 MS. VALABHJI: [Microphone not activated]

6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.


8 Q. Sir, could you take a look at page 5 of the document and compare

9 it to the first page. Are there differences? Are they the same? Could

10 you explain.

11 A. Yes, I was shown both documents, and I suppose I have -- I cannot

12 explain entirely why the second one is there, but on reading it I did

13 notice some -- different words along the way, and the view I came to was

14 that the -- what is referred to in the second document, that is 426074,

15 could be a draft. Some words were refined, and it's on that basis I would

16 go towards suggesting it is a draft.

17 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

18 into evidence?

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.

20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence has an

21 objection to the tendering of the documents because all the past documents

22 which had to be with UNCIVPOL, there was a cover page or at least a

23 reference to the effect that this was a document produced by the

24 organisation, date, author of the document, who it was addressed to, who

25 received it, when it was sent. There was even a reference to the effect

Page 4590

1 as to whether this took place in the morning or in the afternoon, whether

2 it was sent as a telegram. And none of the references I mentioned are

3 contained here, and the witness merely read parts of it out. And I don't

4 think that this document can, in fact, be admitted as an UNCIVPOL

5 document.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, first of all I would direct my learned

8 colleague to the Trial Chamber's guidelines issued on the admissibility of

9 documents, and these guidelines explicitly state that the practice will be

10 in favour of admissibility. Moreover, it states that the fact that a

11 document isn't signed or isn't stamped it does not render it a priori void

12 of authenticity. On this basis alone the document is admissible. In

13 addition, it is not the case that the witness merely read out paragraphs

14 from that document. If I could refer to the transcript, the witness also

15 mentioned that, in other words, the assessment in the document is

16 something that he would have become aware of and that he supposed he would

17 have knowledge of as well. This is at lines 8 and 9. I think the

18 document is admissible.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Any reply, Mr. Milovancevic?

20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the instruction my

21 learned friend referred to, the guidelines have in mind a document which

22 may be a copy of the original not bearing any signatures because it was

23 produced in several copies; however, here we have nothing, no heading.

24 The fact that the document is in the context of the witness's testimony

25 does not automatically mean that this is an UNCIVPOL document -- besides

Page 4591

1 the formulations used in the document are far from diplomatic. And the

2 question is, who signed the document or, perhaps, refused to sign it. The

3 witness has also explained not remembering having read the document.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Could you direct the Chamber, Mr. Milovancevic, to

5 the portion of the guidelines which contemplates a copy and not an

6 original.

7 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it was not my

8 intention to refer you to the guidelines. I was commenting on the

9 interpretation of the guidelines put forth by my learned friend. I said

10 that in addition to the guidelines, which are quite clear, reasonable, and

11 have to be adhered to, we, at any rate, can assess whether something is a

12 document or not. Our position as Defence is that one cannot make out who

13 the author of this particular text is.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, shall I quote what you said and

15 then you can tell me what you meant. Page 42, line 5, 10:59:38, you

16 say: "The guidelines have in mine a document which may be a copy of the

17 original not bearing any signatures because it was produced in several

18 copies ..."

19 Now I'm asking you to direct the Chamber in the guidelines to that

20 portion which says that the document must be a copy for it to be admitted

21 without a signature.

22 [Defence counsel confer].

23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when I said this -

24 and you have accurately repeated it - it was not my intention to quote the

25 guidelines. I was responding to my learned friend's submissions and

Page 4592

1 interpreting the guidelines, and I was providing you with my

2 interpretation of them. I was trying to apply the guidelines to this

3 specific instance. This was, therefore, not quoting the guidelines, but

4 merely giving you my interpretation of them where I wanted to say that the

5 document is practically impossible to identify.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Would you then please direct the Chamber to that

7 portion of the guideline which gives you the basis for the interpretation

8 that you have just given.

9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Bear with me for a moment, Your

10 Honour.

11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Will do.

12 [Trial Chamber confers]

13 [Defence counsel confer]

14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.

16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I had in mind paragraphs 5 and

17 6 of the guidelines governing these matters, where paragraph 5 deals with

18 a document which is not signed and does not bear any stamps and with the

19 status that may be accorded to such a document, whereas paragraph 6 goes

20 on to deal with the admissibility and non-admissibility of documents and

21 how the parties are to proceed on these matters. Paragraph 6 even

22 provides for the possibility for the party referring to the document to

23 check the authenticity of documents presented to the Court.

24 [Defence counsel confer]

25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it was not my wish

Page 4593

1 to claim that the absence of a signature or a stamp automatically shows

2 inadmissibility of a document; I wanted to say that we could not identify

3 this document as an UNCIVPOL document. The fact -- or rather, had the

4 witness recognised the document as the document produced by himself or the

5 team he worked with, then we would not call this matter into question at

6 all.

7 JUDGE MOLOTO: But, Mr. Milovancevic, two things I would have

8 liked you to do for me. I would have liked you to have quoted me

9 paragraphs 5 and 6, but starting with the very last point you are making,

10 my understanding of the witness is that he did not immediately recognise

11 but that when he looked at it was a document that would have been

12 generated in his office. And he thus said that in fact the page 5 is a

13 draft of page 1. That's how he explains it. That's how he recognised it.

14 I don't know whether you are suggesting that the witness should be able to

15 recognise each and every document that was generated by his office at

16 first glance. Is that what you are suggesting?

17 THE WITNESS: May I clarify something, please, Your Honour?

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just hold it.


20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Of course I'm not suggesting

21 that, Your Honour. What you have said is beyond doubt that the witness

22 has recognised the topic the document deals with, and it is a fact that

23 the witness stated that this is likely to be a document that was generated

24 in his office. However, there are no other elements for any further

25 inferences on this.

Page 4594

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: In your initial objection one of the elements that

2 you said was lacking from this document was the date, and it does have a

3 date. And I can remember this Chamber admitting documents which were not

4 even generated by the witness or by the witness's office. You will

5 remember that there was a witness who came here and referred to newspaper

6 cuttings and had to confirm that the -- what was mentioned in the

7 newspaper cuttings was what he had seen. Now, that newspaper cutting was

8 not generated by him. That's one point.

9 The next point, you say that -- in your objection, for the

10 document to be admitted, it must show who it was addressed to. Now, not

11 all documents are addressed to anybody, they may be records. And who

12 received it and when it was sent. Now, all those points you are raising

13 are not, to my knowledge, points that go to admissibility of the document.

14 Now, I'm reading here at page 5 [sic], lines 2 to 12, which is your

15 initial objection. If you have -- do you still have anything to say, Mr.

16 Milovancevic?

17 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, all the arguments

18 that you have put forward are absolutely in keeping with what has been

19 done so far. In other words, these are the elements that have always

20 governed the Trial Chamber to admit a document or not. In this particular

21 document, our concern is the fact that this document is absolutely

22 different from any other that has been presented so far. Even on its page

23 2, in its left upper corner, it says this was compiled by the sector or

24 the staff or something to that effect and it is being sent to whoever, and

25 it also bears a number, whereas this document does not have any of that on

Page 4595

1 any of the pages. I'm absolutely clear that one page may be missing some

2 of the elements that might identify either the author or the document

3 itself. And our concern is that those elements are missing from all the

4 pages. The fact that this document is different from the first one may be

5 interpreted by the fact that it is a draft, but this is the witness's

6 conclusion. He concludes that this might be a draft, although the

7 document itself doesn't show anything to point to the fact that it might

8 be a draft.

9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you done?

10 The Chamber is going to give its ruling. The document is going to

11 be admitted into evidence. Obviously the weight that is going to be

12 attached to the document is something that will be dealt with at the time

13 of assessing the evidence.

14 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

15 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: May it please be given an exhibit number.

18 THE REGISTRAR: That will be the Exhibit Number 731, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

20 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

21 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

22 Q. Sir, we've just looked at several reports from Sector South in

23 1992 and 1993 and discussed various aspects of them. What do these

24 aspects of the reports show, in your view?

25 A. The overall reports, to me, indicated that the Croatian population

Page 4596

1 was the subject of extreme violence, harassment, and the level of that

2 violence is absolutely extreme. In some of the documents there is

3 reference to entire families being wiped out, killed. It was clear as

4 well that the militia played an active part in a lot of the incidents.

5 There were men in uniform mentioned on many occasions. On specific

6 occasions militia were mentioned. Also, specific militia men were

7 mentioned. And I think they also indicated that the militia failed to

8 take any positive action to deal with the issues. I think that the

9 objective was to terrorise the people and, effectively, have them leave

10 the territory.

11 Q. The next set of documents are, for the most part, reports and they

12 will be discussed in chronological order. Let's take a look at 65 ter

13 324.

14 A. That is a report dated the 29th of May, 1992, from the CIVPOL

15 sector chief in Sector South. And it is addressed to the force commander,

16 General Sameer. Again, this is a situation report for Sector South.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just a second, Mr. McElligott, Mr. Milovancevic is

18 on his feet.

19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise for

20 the interruption. Mr. Martic is not receiving -- has not received the

21 B/C/S versions of these documents.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Once again, could we help Mr. Martic, please.

23 MS. VALABHJI: May I have the assistance of the usher, please?

24 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may.

25 MS. VALABHJI: Okay. Let's turn to page 2 of this document.

Page 4597

1 Could we scroll down to the bottom of the page, please. Further down.

2 Q. Sir, do you recognise the signature on this page?

3 A. Yes, I do, and the name, Sameer, Bino, yes, I know him well.

4 Q. And who was Sameer, Bino.

5 A. He was the sector chief in Sector South for a period, and he was

6 subsequently attached to headquarters.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Let's scroll further up this page. Further up,

8 please.

9 Q. What does the heading under "expulsion of Croats" mean?

10 A. It says: "Every effort has been made by CIVPOL to ensure their

11 safety within the UNPA Sector South. All reports to CIVPOL offices are

12 investigated to a satisfactory conclusion allowing order to be restored

13 and confidence in UNPROFOR. Despite these efforts by CIVPOL to ensure

14 their safety the local milicija are continuing to undermine and intimidate

15 these people. The local community are frightened to disclose information

16 to UNPROFOR because the likelihood of retaliation from the local

17 milicija."

18 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into

19 evidence.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. Could it

21 please be given an exhibit number.

22 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 732, Your Honour.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

24 Ms. Valabhji.

25 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour. Could we look at 65 ter

Page 4598

1 number 328, please.

2 Q. Sir, what is this document about?

3 A. This is a report from superintendent McGowan to Mr. Thornberry.

4 It's dated the 20th of August, 1992, and the subject is robbery and

5 larceny from elderly Croatian people in Vrljika area of pink zone.

6 Q. Do you recognise the signature at the top?

7 A. Yes, I do.

8 Q. Whose signature is that?

9 A. It is that of P. J. McGowan.

10 Q. And who was P. J. McGowan?

11 A. He was head of operations at the CIVPOL headquarters.

12 Q. Let's turn to page three of this document. Could we scroll --

13 rather, zoom in to the -- well, first to the top bit. Yeah. Thank you.

14 Briefly, what is this page about?

15 A. It refers to criminal acts, and specifically refers to Wednesday,

16 the 12th of August, 1992, made contact with citizen in the area of Maovice

17 near Vrljika. I accompanied by PC and CIVPOL interpreter.

18 "The citizen's name is Ive Rezic - elderly man.

19 "He complained about a robbery committed by uniformed milicija

20 men.

21 "He informed CIVPOL that on Sunday, the 9th of August, 1992,

22 10.00 two uniformed policemen arrived at his home. He described one of

23 the men as follows:

24 "Man, about 32-years-old, height 1.80 kilometres, dark skin.

25 "He was wearing uniform with Serbian Krajina on the

Page 4599

1 sleeve. He named him at Jurca Graovac from Stinovo.

2 Q. Let's scroll further down the page.

3 A. "No description of the other man.

4 "They were driving in a red car.

5 "Reg. number not known.

6 "Using violence, the two men threatened the old man to give them

7 all his food.

8 "They stole: 50 kilogrammes of sugar and 2 kilogrammes of bacon.

9 "The two men hit the old man, they knocked him to the ground and

10 bumped his head against the floor. We did not see any visible signs of

11 violence in the old man's face, but he seemed to be very frightened."

12 Q. You can complete what you were saying?

13 A. "He was reluctant first to report the matter to the local police."

14 Q. Thank you.

15 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into

16 evidence.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence, could it

18 please be given an exhibit number.

19 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 733, Your Honour.

20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

21 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

22 JUDGE HOEPFEL: I have a question concerning these handwritten

23 markings on the first they; they have appeared also on other documents.

24 Can you, Mr. McElligott, maybe explain to us what this note means on the

25 left top corner of the first page?

Page 4600

1 Can we go to the first page again?

2 And here it says: "File" -- it 403521.

3 THE WITNESS: It has no significant meaning to me, Your Honour,

4 neither have the other ones.

5 JUDGE HOEPFEL: The other thing is on the right-hand top corner it

6 says: "1.2.4." Does that have any meaning?

7 THE WITNESS: It does not. No, I don't recall it having any

8 specific meaning.

9 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Similar markings appeared also on this which we

10 discussed earlier, Exhibit 731. Thank you. You may continue.

11 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

12 Q. Now, keeping in mind the document we've just viewed, could 65 ter

13 329 please be shown. Now, let's turn to page 2 of this document.

14 Q. Sir, from whom is this document?

15 A. It is Mr. Cedric Thornberry, director of civil affairs at UNPROFOR

16 headquarters in Zagreb.

17 MS. VALABHJI: And let's return to the first page, please.

18 Q. To whom is it addressed?

19 A. It is addressed to Mr. Prjec. I understand him to be the head of

20 the militia or commissioner of militia in Knin.

21 Q. When is this document dated?

22 A. It is dated the 24th of August, 1992.

23 Q. And what's it's about?

24 A. It is a letter of complaint to Mr. Prjec in relation to two

25 incidents, and it is a demand, as supposed to rectify some standards in

Page 4601

1 relation to his policing.

2 Q. Let's return to page 2?

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before we return to page 2. Can I just ask --

4 you've told us what UNPROFOR stands for, or what is -- oh, I beg your

5 pardon, it's okay. Sorry. You can go to page 2.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

7 If we could just look briefly again at page 2.

8 Q. Could you read the line on this page.

9 A. "I ask that you use your good influence to examine these cases and

10 see that justice is not only done but seen to be done."

11 Q. Thank you?

12 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

13 into evidence?

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

15 please be given an exhibit number.

16 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit Number 734, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

18 Ms. Valabhji.

19 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

20 Could we look at 65 ter number 336.

21 Q. Circumstances what is this document about?

22 A. It is a document addressed to the UNCIVPOL headquarters in Zagreb

23 from the HG UNCIVPOL at Sector South. And it is signed by the Sector

24 chief K. G. Andersson, yes, addressed to the chief of operations, which is

25 probably myself. It is dated the 2nd of October, 1994, and it's -- the

Page 4602

1 subject is: "The destruction of a church."

2 MS. VALABHJI: I wonder, could that be 1992?

3 A. It is 1992, my apologies.

4 Q. Let's look further down the document. What is it about?

5 A. It's re: Your message of the 2nd of October, 1992.

6 "St. Ann's church is or was located in Zvjerinac, which is a part

7 of the village Kosovo, south of Knin. (Mentioned in SITREP 1/10/92.)

8 "By mistake the CIVPOL has written the wrong grid reference on the

9 initial report, and the correct grid should be 978-689.

10 "Please find attached requested report."

11 Q. And where was the church located?

12 A. The church is -- St. Ann's church is located in -- I'll spell it.

13 It is Z-v-j-e-r-i-n-a-c, which is a part of the village Kosovo,

14 K-o-s-o-v-o, south of Knin.

15 Q. Any idea what religious denomination the church belonged to?

16 A. St. Ann's, I would regard it as a Catholic church.

17 Q. Let's turn to page 2 of the document. Let's scroll down.

18 When did this incident occur?

19 A. At 7.30 a.m. On the 1st of October, CIVPOL station Knin received a

20 telephone call from unknown name, from Kosovo. These persons said that

21 St. Ana church was destroyed. We informed the milicija at 8.00 and we

22 went to Bvac hamlet of Kosovo where is situated the church. At 9.00 a.m.

23 When we arrived we saw Santa Anna church fully destroyed."

24 Q. Thank you, Witness?

25 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into

Page 4603

1 evidence and assigned a number.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. Could it

3 please be given an exhibit number.

4 THE REGISTRAR: It will be Exhibit Number 735, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

6 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

7 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

8 Could exhibit number 65 ter 338 please be shown.

9 Q. Sir, what is this document?

10 A. It is a briefing monthly report, dated the 2nd of November, 1992,

11 UNPROFOR civilian police Sector South, and it is a briefing about UNCIVPOL

12 Sector South on the visit of the 4th Commander, the director of civil

13 affairs and the deputy force commander -- Colonel Campose.

14 Q. Is the format of the document familiar to you?

15 A. Yes, indeed it is, yeah.

16 MS. VALABHJI: Let's turn to page 2 of this document. And please

17 scroll down the page. Let's enlarge the text in zone -- pertaining to

18 zone B. That's great.

19 Q. Sir, what does it say in the paragraph pertaining to Knin?

20 A. "Knin: Many incidents of theft has been reported from the village

21 of Kijevo. On the 1st of October, the church Santa Ana in Kosovo was

22 destroyed. During the month of October some incidents have been reported

23 from Kninskopolje, K-n-i-n-s-k-o-p-o-l-j-e, where Croatian people have

24 been threatened and someone shot on their houses. Some people now want to

25 leave for the Croatian side.

Page 4604

1 "A lot of thefts from UNCIVPOL have been reported in Knin."

2 That's about it.

3 Q. Please look at the very last paragraph on page 2. What does it

4 say about the milicija?

5 A. Whereabouts -- oh, yes, at the very end.

6 "However, UNCIVPOL have good cooperation with the Milicija in

7 Vrljika."

8 Q. Could you comment on this, please.

9 A. On occasions there was good levels of cooperation. It tended to

10 be switched on and switched off on certain occasions. We did have

11 situations where there was a constant flow of good contact. And I suppose

12 if I wanted to single out a particular area I would look at Korenica, and

13 I think that there was a steady, consistent, positive approach, I would

14 describe, in that area of keeping things pretty good. I think if we

15 looked at the report this morning where we had a reference to each station

16 and the crimes committed in it, it may also reflect that trend so that,

17 you know -- there was an absolute frustrating level of blocking done

18 put -- there were points along the way where good things did happen and

19 very often those good things were done to individuals.

20 Q. Thank you, Witness, for that clarification?

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: When you say on occasions there was good levels of

22 cooperation and it tends to be switched on and switched off on certain

23 occasions, cooperation from who between the two milicijas, the 7.000 or

24 the 16.000?

25 THE WITNESS: The 7.000 were the corner-stone to making progress.

Page 4605

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: And here at Vrljika, which one are you referring

2 to, which -- which milicija are you referring to, the 7.000 or the

3 16.000?

4 THE WITNESS: Again, I would suspect that it boils down to

5 individual contacts. Perhaps there was an individual or a couple of

6 individuals in that area at a given time, and --


8 THE WITNESS: -- there was a relationship built up between them and

9 our monitors and progress was made.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: But when you say: On occasions there was good

11 levels of cooperation, that was the comment you were making on the Vrljika

12 police station --

13 THE WITNESS: Yes --

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- Milicija. My question is: Which of these two

15 milicija are you referring to vis-a-vis Vrljika when you say there was

16 good cooperation? Was it the 7.000 or the 16.000?

17 THE WITNESS: The cooperation came from the 7.000 group.

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

19 You may proceed.

20 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

21 Q. Let's look at page 3 of this document, in prisoner of war under

22 the heading "Benkovac." Please scroll down.

23 Now, what information is provided in the first and fourth

24 paragraphs under Benkovac?

25 A. "Benkovac: Two persons were killed on the 2nd of the 10th in the

Page 4606

1 village of Dobro Polje, D-o-b-r-o P-o-l-j-e. The living conditions for

2 people in many villages in Benkovac are very bad, i.e., Bijeljina, where

3 about 25 Croatians have to stay out in the fields during the night,

4 because they are afraid to be killed."

5 Q. And the fourth paragraph?

6 A. The fourth paragraph: "And many of the Croatian citizens have

7 applied to leave the UNPAs, and during one month UNCIVPOL received 155

8 such applications."

9 Q. Thank you, Witness?

10 MS. VALABHJI: Could this document please be admitted into

11 evidence, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

13 please be given an exhibit number.

14 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 736, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

16 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

17 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

18 Could we look at 65 ter 339. Could we make it a little bit

19 bigger. Thank you.

20 Q. Sir, what is this document about?

21 A. It is a daily situation report prepared at UNCIVPOL headquarters,

22 and it is --

23 Q. Now -- please continue.

24 A. It is dated the 8th of November, 1992.

25 MS. VALABHJI: Let's turn to page 2 of the document, and let's

Page 4607

1 enlarge it a little bit.

2 Q. What is the date on this document -- on this page, rather?

3 A. The date is the 8th of November, 1992.

4 MS. VALABHJI: Let's now turn to page 4, and please scroll to the

5 second half of the page.

6 Q. What information is provided in the first paragraph under Roman

7 numeral V?

8 A. V: "Kostajnica CIVPOL received the complaint from Croats living

9 in the village of Timarci where they are threatened every night by Serbs

10 wearing masks. They also stated that their church was blown up on the

11 22nd of -- or at 2230 hours last night. They were afraid of complaining

12 to the local police that CIVPOL informed and will monitor about this case.

13 "CIVPOL also noted two destroyed houses in Kukuruzari,

14 K-u-k-u-r-u-z-a-r-i. They were not occupied since the owner named Juric

15 left the area before the war."

16 MS. VALABHJI: And let's scroll up, further up the page, to the

17 top.

18 Q. Which sector is being referred to?

19 A. Again, Sector North.

20 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

21 into evidence.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

23 please be given an exhibit number.

24 THE REGISTRAR: That will be 737.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

Page 4608

1 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

2 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

3 Could we look at 65 ter 340, please.

4 Q. What is this document about?

5 A. It's -- perhaps you could enlarge --

6 MS. VALABHJI: Could it be enlarged, please.

7 THE WITNESS: Thank you. I -- it's a daily situation report, and

8 the general -- yeah -- dated the 10th of November, 1992 -- or it has a

9 reference date on the 11th of November, 1992, as well.


11 Q. Could you summarise what the first paragraph on this page

12 indicates. It's the paragraph starting: "The operational situation ..."

13 A. It refers to the operational situation in Sector South. And it

14 says: "The operational situation in Sector South is in a very difficult

15 situation due to the increasing number of incidents and the low percentage

16 of incidents which is cleared up by the local police. Monitors are

17 getting a -- very little response from the local police and the situation

18 is tense in the whole sector. Many people of Croatian origin wish to

19 leave the UNPA because they are not feeling safe. Monitors are feeling

20 that they cannot help this person -- persons but will although try to do

21 their best."

22 Q. Thank you, Witness?

23 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

24 into evidence.

25 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

Page 4609

1 please be given an exhibit number.

2 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit Number 738, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

4 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

5 MS. VALABHJI: I only have a few more documents.

6 Let's take a look at 65 ter 342, please, and let's enlarge it,

7 please.

8 Q. Sir, are you able to see it?

9 A. Perhaps you could go further.

10 Q. Okay.

11 A. Thank you. Yes.

12 Q. Sir, what is this document about?

13 A. It is a document dated the 25th of December, 1992. It's from

14 UNCIVPOL headquarters Sector South to the HG at Zagreb. And again, it is

15 a daily situation report.

16 Q. Let's turn to page 2 of the document. And could we enlarge the

17 top part.

18 Sir, could you read aloud the part which commences: "They also

19 discussed ..."

20 It's about halfway down the top text at the top.

21 A. "They also discussed a new 'so-called customs' rules now being

22 enforced by the milicija at crossing points, where food items, electronic

23 items, and even cash is being confiscated. It was discussed to the

24 failure of the milicija to report serious crimes immediately to CIVPOL

25 stations, without delay. Current investigations by Knin station."

Page 4610

1 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, may this document be admitted into

2 evidence.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

4 please be given an exhibit number.

5 THE REGISTRAR: The document is Exhibit Number 739.

6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

7 Ms. Valabhji.

8 MS. VALABHJI: Could we now please look at 65 ter 344, please.

9 Q. Sir, what is this document about?

10 A. It is a document from the UNCIVPOL HQ at Sector South from K. G.

11 Andersson, the sector chief, addressed to the CIVPOL headquarters at

12 Zagreb. It is dated the 31st of April -- or of February 1993, and it's --

13 its subject: Your message of the 2nd of the 2nd, 1993, murder reports,

14 and it is actually addressed to me, for my attention.

15 Q. Let's just --

16 A. Sorry.

17 Q. Okay?

18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Would you like some water?

19 THE WITNESS: No, I'm okay. Thank you.

20 MS. VALABHJI: Could we zoom in on the date and time?

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Zoom in on the?

22 MS. VALABHJI: Date and time.

23 THE WITNESS: Yes, the 31st of February, 1993, are the 3rd --

24 sorry, the 3rd of February, 1993, at 1700 hours.


Page 4611

1 Q. Thank you. Now --

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Say that again. It's not the 31st, it's the 3rd,

3 the 3rd of February, at 1700 hours?

4 THE WITNESS: Correct, yeah.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you.

7 Now, let's turn to page 3, and let's look at the last paragraph on

8 this page.



11 Q. In brief, what is this paragraph about?

12 A. It has reference to a dead Croatian women at Kijevo with grid

13 reference provided.

14 "The body of this woman was found in a field near this village,

15 near the roadside. The skin on the head had almost completely been

16 removed. The skull had a large hole in it on the left side indicating a

17 blunt object like a stone may have been used. These observations were

18 made by a CIVPOL monitor. Milicija was contacted and attended but refused

19 to investigate or look after the body. CIVPOL took the body to Knin

20 hospital where they refused to do an autopsy and demanded UNPROFOR take

21 the body away and look after the burial. CIVPOL left the body there,

22 insisting that it was the" --

23 MS. VALABHJI: Let's turn to the next page.

24 THE WITNESS: "It was the responsibility of the local authorities.

25 There has been a total lack of cooperation with CIVPOL in this case."

Page 4612


2 Q. And the next paragraph, could you tell us what that indicates.

3 A. "This area, which is in the Vrljika CIVPOL station area is

4 inhabited by only older Croatian people, mostly old women. Over the past

5 months they have been systematically robbed, beaten, harassed, terrorised,

6 and now murdered, almost on a daily basis. Local authorities have not

7 been able to stop it. The suspects as reported by CIVPOL Vrljika were

8 actual members of the milicija or border milicija. Some suspects in these

9 crimes were actually under investigation by milicija and the investigative

10 court over the past months; however, the cases were never completed."

11 Q. Thank you, Witness?

12 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, could this document please be admitted

13 into evidence.

14 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. Membership

15 be given an exhibit number.

16 THE REGISTRAR: It will be Exhibit 740, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

18 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

19 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

20 And the last document for today, 65 ter 348, please.

21 Q. Now, what is this document about, sir?

22 A. It is a document dated the 20th of April, 1993, from Cedric

23 Thornberry to Jim Baldie, who was the CS -- the director of the, I

24 suppose -- he was the director of administrative affairs in the mission.

25 And again the subject is: "Protection of minorities in Sector North.

Page 4613

1 "Attached is self-explanatory correspondence. It would be very

2 much appreciated if the logistical equipment necessary to carry out this

3 most urgent and vital humanitarian task could be provided as soon as

4 possible."

5 And that is signed by Cedric Thornberry.

6 Q. I was just about to recognise you, do you recognise the signature?

7 A. I do indeed, yeah.

8 Q. Thank you, sir.

9 MS. VALABHJI: Let's turn to page 2 of the document. Could we

10 enlarge it slightly.

11 THE WITNESS: This, again, is a note from the CIVPOL commissioner

12 Michael O'Rielly and again the subject is: "Intimidation and board of

13 human" -- which I suppose board of human rights in villages near Glina,

14 Sector North.

15 "A report from the chief Sector North shows that crimes against

16 minorities (Croats) have increased to such an unacceptable level that the

17 residents of the villages (all elderly people) are living out in the woods

18 at night. The sector chief has forwarded a comprehensive proposal with

19 new initiatives -- initiative to tackle this problem and add to the

20 quality of life of those affected. Speedy logistical support is essential

21 to ensure immediate action. Support from your office is requested."

22 Q. Thank you, sir. I think it says invitations.

23 A. Invitations, correct.

24 MS. VALABHJI: Could this document please be admitted into

25 evidence.

Page 4614

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it

2 please be given an exhibit number.

3 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit Number 741, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

5 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

6 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

7 Q. Sir, I want to ask you now about visits to sectors in the course

8 of your work with UNCIVPOL. Did you visit sectors when you worked with


10 A. Yes, Your Honour. After taking up my initial appointment, I just

11 familiarised myself at HQ for some days, and then I travelled -- spent a

12 two-week period travelling to every station in the mission area, where I

13 went out and viewed every situation first-hand. Subsequent to that, I

14 would have made a number of visits to the sectors, specifically to meet up

15 with monitors to assess how they were managing their affairs and giving

16 them any support and encouragement we could. We also had meetings with

17 the administrative staff at the district headquarters where we met staff

18 to evaluate and support them in the work right down to ground level. I

19 visited again on numerous occasions to follow-up on specific events and on

20 each occasion would go to station level, travel with monitors on patrols,

21 and see first-hand what was actually happening on the ground.

22 Q. Did you meet with Croat civilians from the sectors?

23 A. I did, yes, I met with a number of them. I met them at places

24 where they resided out in the countryside, even in the CIVPOL stations

25 when -- where they called, and I availed them of opportunity to speak with

Page 4615

1 them on their circumstances. And I suppose the one strong memory I have

2 is that they were absolutely terrorised, they were totally insecure, they

3 were -- some of them recounted sleeping out in the forest. I remember one

4 lady describing sleeping in the forest with her young daughter at night in

5 the middle of winter, and I suppose it was a horrific thing to listen to.

6 It was hard to credit that people could be treated with such

7 insensitivity. They just did not-- not know -- they didn't know what to

8 do with themselves. They didn't know whether to stay and put up with the

9 horror they were doing or to leave and go into an unknown world. So it

10 was an incredible scenario.

11 Q. Do you recall which sectors these visits pertained to?

12 A. Generally Sectors South and North were the areas where those

13 situations really arose.

14 Q. Earlier in your testimony you mentioned that you worked with

15 UNPROFOR, based in Zagreb, from October 1992 until November 1993 -- pardon

16 me. Let's clarify that, actually. Could you tell us again from when to

17 when did you work with UNPROFOR.

18 A. From the 2nd of October, 1992, to the 1st of November, 1993.

19 Q. Thank you, sir. During the course of your work, how many

20 situation reports did you review, approximately?

21 A. I would have reviewed every situation report prepared in the

22 mission during my stay there, and certainly a substantial amount of them

23 prepared in advance of my arrival to read my way into the situation. So I

24 would say I have read every situation report prepared up to the date I

25 left.

Page 4616

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: About how many, would you say?

2 THE WITNESS: Well, I was there 13 months, so one was prepared

3 every day of the week, so we're talking about perhaps I would have

4 reviewed overall perhaps 400 or more.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

6 Yes, Ms. Valabhji.


8 Q. What did these reports indicate to you? What general impressions

9 did you form?

10 A. They gave a profile of the mission on a daily basis, and I suppose

11 they set out what was happening on the ground. They -- what I suppose

12 they marked out was that the minority population of Croatians were

13 subjected to extremely -- extreme violence. They were murdered, they were

14 intimidated, their communities were attacked in the sense of houses were

15 burnt in groups, churches were destroyed, which effectively deprived them

16 of a place -- to gather and pray, and indeed, I suppose to gather as a

17 community. So it was literally breaking down the community. The

18 perpetrators, I suppose, there are clear indications that the police

19 component within the mission was responsible for a lot of these things.

20 They certainly did little to prevent any of them, and there was no

21 accountability. Now, having said that, we did meet some fine police

22 officers, too, and I want to reflect that as well. There were policemen

23 we met on the mission who were on the Serbian side, and they were

24 honourable, professional police officers. They declared that publicly to

25 us, and indeed I had conversations with some them myself. And they did

Page 4617

1 indicate to me privately that they did not condone what was happening. So

2 I think it's important to mark that, too. But there was a group who do

3 not do credit to anybody. I suppose it was hard to believe that anybody

4 could treat elderly people with such disrespect. Most of the victims who

5 have been profiled in the reports show that they are very old people.

6 Many of the dates of births go back to 1920 to 1940, so effectively we had

7 people terrorising their grandparents.

8 Q. Are there any particular incidents of crimes that you became aware

9 of that are particularly etched in your memory?

10 A. Yes, indeed. I suppose when you profile what has happened, it

11 would be hard to say something stands beyond them all, but there were two.

12 And one was an incident where somebody was killed and they were scalped,

13 and another incident a very old lady was found nailed to the floor of her

14 home. So I think when you reflect on those it describes it all.

15 Q. What were the nationality of the victims in these two cases?

16 A. They were Croats, Croatians.

17 Q. And in what sectors were these incidentals?

18 A. Sectors North and south.

19 Q. Thank you, Witness, for coming to testify?

20 MS. VALABHJI: I have nothing further, Your Honours.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Ms. Valabhji.

22 Mr. -- I don't know, Mr. Milovancevic, whether you want to start.

23 We are two or three minutes to adjournment.

24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence has a

25 request to make of the Trial Chamber. Mr. Martic -- or rather, his

Page 4618

1 Defence team has yesterday, today, and several days ago received

2 translations of the documents which are all in English. Mr. Martic is

3 kindly requesting for some time to become acquainted with the material.

4 The documents were really received by him at the last moment, at the 11th

5 hour, and he did not have time to familiarise himself with the documents

6 and we kindly ask to start our cross-examination on Monday rather than

7 today. And we would like to make use of the time with a view to being

8 fully prepared for our cross-examination on Monday. At any rate, this

9 would not be time lost.

10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Ms. Valabhji, would have anything to say to that?

11 [Prosecution counsel confer]

12 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, may I have a moment to confer?

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may.

14 MS. VALABHJI: Thank you, Your Honour.

15 [Prosecution counsel confer]

16 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, I don't think that additional time is

17 required for the following reasons. Certainly not until -- delay until

18 Monday. First of all, the substance of the testimony of this witness was

19 disclosed months ago, earlier this year; and second, the substance or,

20 rather, the information contained in these exhibits could have been

21 explained by counsel, who I understand speak English, to their client.

22 And second -- and third, finally, I don't believe that the Rules provide

23 for or, rather, require the translation into B/C/S of English documents.

24 I don't think there is this requirement in the Rules. This is done as a

25 courtesy, and this is our position, Your Honour.

Page 4619

1 Your Honour, may I just add one more thing. I haven't been able

2 to verify exactly when all the translations were disclosed this week. I

3 think counsel mentioned yesterday, today, and several days ago -- pardon

4 me, I misunderstood. I think that's fine. I withdraw this comment.

5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

6 I'm trying to find, either in the Statute or in the Rules -- I

7 seem to recollect that there is a requirement that the accused shall be

8 tried in a language he understands -- or put it this way. If he doesn't

9 understand there shall be interpretation for him and documents shall be

10 given to him in the language that he understands. Can somebody help me?

11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.


13 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] There's the Appeals Chamber

14 decision listing precisely the documents to be translated. We can find

15 this over the break and present to the Trial Chamber.

16 At any rate, both the provisions of the Statute and the Rules in

17 their substance, and in addition to that the practice in this case has

18 been such that the accused has to have documents against him in his own

19 language to be able to respond. The fact that several thousand documents

20 were, in fact, delivered and disclosed several years ago does not give the

21 entitlement to the Prosecution not to deliver the accused the documents

22 that are precisely related to his case because these documents go to

23 Mr. Martic's activities and the activities of his police. Without having

24 the appropriate translations, we were unable to prepare ourselves fully

25 for the proceedings, because in this case the OTP has departed from the

Page 4620

1 practice and the obligations that both sides have had to meet in this case

2 so far. This is the decision in the case in Ljubicic dated November 2002,

3 2nd November --

4 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter isn't sure.

5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] The decision lists the

6 documents that have to be delivered to the accused in a language he

7 understands.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: I understand what you say, Mr. Milovancevic, but I

9 was also trying to find support from either the Rules or the Statute,

10 quite apart from the fact, Ms. Valabhji, that the practice since we

11 started this trial has been to try and provide -- to provide translations

12 whenever -- whenever the Defence has given documents, we have asked them

13 to give us translations as well.

14 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, perhaps I should confer since I'm

15 not -- I would like to confer with co-counsel on this matter some more.

16 [Prosecution counsel confer]

17 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I suggest that now that we're virtually in the

18 break time, we adjourn for the break and you confer during the break.

19 Court adjourned, come back at half past.

20 --- Recess taken at 12.07 p.m.

21 --- On resuming at 12.32 p.m.

22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Ms. Valabhji.

23 MS. VALABHJI: Your Honour, we find it difficult to believe that

24 the Defence is not in a position to commence its cross-examination today

25 for the following reasons. First of all, I've obtained the information

Page 4621

1 that the first of these translations that amounts to three translations

2 the first is disclosed on the 17th of May, 2006, and today, I believe, is

3 the 26th. That was nine days ago. Surely the Defence is in a position to

4 cross-examine if they have questions to ask about these today.

5 Second, as mentioned earlier, the substance of the testimony of

6 this witness was discussed a long time ago, earlier this year, and the

7 B/C/S translation of his statement was also disclosed earlier this year.

8 JUDGE MOLOTO: The B/C/S translation of the witness's statement?

9 MS. VALABHJI: Of the witness's statement informing of the areas

10 that the witness would testify about.

11 Finally, again what I mentioned earlier is that the substance of

12 the information contained in these exhibits can be explained to Mr.

13 Martic, the accused, by his counsel. So there is no -- it's not the case

14 that the accused is completely deprived of the opportunity to find out

15 what's in these documents. In fact, a list informing the Defence of the

16 documents to be used with this witness was sent several days ago. This

17 was last Friday. And a follow-up e-mail indicated the final list earlier

18 this week.

19 Now, the other point I'd like to mention is that in this case we

20 have had exhibits admitted that are in English. These were exhibits 204

21 and 205, and they were admitted on the 17th of February, 2006. Finally,

22 Your Honours, I have the Trial Chamber decision in the Ljubicic case of

23 the 20th of November, 2002. The Defence quoted -- or rather, referred to

24 an Appeals Chamber decision, but that is actually not the case. It's a

25 decision at the first instance of 20th November 2002. And the decision on

Page 4622

1 page 3, and I have hard copies, should that assist.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: It certainly will assist.

3 MS. VALABHJI: May I direct Your Honours to page 3 of the

4 decision. In the middle of the page in a noting paragraph, it says

5 that: "During the trial stage the incumbent Chamber may direct the

6 Prosecutor to tender exhibits or the relevant parts of such exhibits

7 either in hard copy or in audio format in a language understood by the

8 accused."

9 The operative word is "may direct the Prosecutor," and on this

10 basis, Your Honour, I think that some of the submissions made earlier in

11 relation to this decision may not be entirely in line with the text of the

12 decision. Thank you.

13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before you sit down, Ms. Valabhji, you said that a

14 list of the documents -- of the exhibits that was going to be used -- that

15 were going to be used in this case or by this witness was submitted to the

16 Defence when? Last week, on the 17th?

17 MS. VALABHJI: It was on Friday last week, that's right,

18 Your Honour.

19 JUDGE MOLOTO: My question to you is: Were the exhibits

20 themselves not delivered to the Defence? You said a list of them.

21 MS. VALABHJI: These exhibits have been previously disclosed to

22 the Defence, Your Honour. Now, I have to verify this, the exact date of

23 their disclosure, but by and large these were 65 ter exhibits, that is

24 exhibits filed with the Prosecution's exhibit list, and that exhibit list

25 was filed on the 7th of May, 2004. So therefore these documents - and

Page 4623

1 it's easy to verify this - but I'm pretty sure that these documents were

2 all disclosed in 2004 in May.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

4 Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.

5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I am surprised, Your Honours,

6 that my learned friend says that the accused has not been completely

7 deprived from familiarising himself with the material that he has been --

8 completely been deprived. He has the right to completely familiarise

9 himself with the material. Here we are departing from the practice that

10 has been present in the case so far. I'm wondering how come so much money

11 has been spent by this Tribunal for the translation of the materials so

12 far, and this is not being done in this case. Mr. Martic could simply not

13 study the documents that were delivered. It would be very professional if

14 my learned friend said: This is an omission on my part, and we apologise.

15 I wonder what this means. Why is my learned friend insisting on this?

16 This is not about me or Mr. Perovic, my co-counsel, being able to

17 cross-examine; it is about the right of the accused to know what we are

18 cross-examining about, and the witness has travelled from afar to be

19 examined and cross-examined. And the accused has the right to know what

20 the cross-examination is about.

21 I think we're wasting time here. This discussion is futile.

22 The -- in simple terms, the essential right of the accused has been

23 impaired here. I'm not saying that this has been done deliberately, and

24 I'm sure that it is a result of a string of circumstances, but if we are

25 going to start talking about the rights of the accused, then the right of

Page 4624

1 the accused to understand and to follow things that concern him should not

2 be jeopardised in any way and should never come into question.

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: I see you're standing up.

4 MS. VALABHJI: Yes, Your Honour. First of all, if there is some

5 kind of comment on professionalism, I take objection to that. What I have

6 said, and it's reflected in the transcript, is that we are surprised that

7 they are not in a position to start today, and then I set out the reasons

8 why that was, including the delivery of translations of at least three

9 documents on the 17th of May, 2006, which is about nine days ago. In

10 addition to that, I mentioned the ability of counsel to explain the

11 substance of what's in the exhibits to their client, and --

12 JUDGE MOLOTO: You don't have to rehash your argument. I

13 understand your objection.

14 What I did want to ask you, Mr. Milovancevic, is whether -- or

15 even before I ask you, Mr. Milovancevic, let me ask you, Ms. Valabhji.

16 You're talking of three documents that were delivered on the 17th. I

17 think we have tendered more than three documents through this witness.

18 What about the other documents?

19 MS. VALABHJI: That's correct, Your Honour. The other documents,

20 I'm informed that the disclosures took place on the 22nd, the 23rd, the

21 24th of May, 2006. So therefore, the last disclosures took place on the

22 24th.

23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Ms. Valabhji.

24 MS. VALABHJI: Sorry, this is the B/C/S translations of the

25 English documents. Now, the original English, of course, were disclosed a

Page 4625

1 long time ago.

2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.

3 I think the Chamber is going to take a robust approach to this

4 problem, and it's going to be based on just the fairness to the accused.

5 If B/C/S translations have been delivered to the Defence as recently as

6 the 24th and 22nd of May this year, I think it's in all fairness that the

7 accused be given an opportunity to look at those documents and give his

8 counsel proper instructions. I understand that this may be -- this may

9 not necessarily be in terms of the Rules, but you have referred me to the

10 Ljubicic judgement where you said the court "may." In this case the

11 Defence is not asking that they be given B/C/S translations; they are just

12 asking for time to study the material and be able to take instructions

13 from their client. I think that's a reasonable request. Their request

14 is, therefore, granted.

15 That being the case, you will be in a position to start with your

16 cross-examination on Monday, Mr. Milovancevic?

17 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Later this

18 afternoon I'm going to visit Mr. Martic in the Detention Unit, and I'm

19 sure we will be able to proceed on Monday. We will be prepared to

20 cross-examine. Thank you, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.

22 I do not also think that there was any hope that we could finish

23 with this witness this -- today, so you are not terribly inconvenienced.

24 You are still going to be here next Monday anyway.

25 THE WITNESS: Correct.

Page 4626

1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.

2 [Trial Chamber confers]

3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Then the matter then stands adjourned to

4 next Monday at quarter past 2.00 in the afternoon, in this same courtroom.

5 Court adjourned.

6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.44 p.m.,

7 to be reconvened on Monday, the 29th day of

8 May, 2006, at 2.15 p.m.