1 Thursday, 24 August 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning, everybody.
7 Once again, Mr. Witness, let me warn you that you are still bound
8 by the declaration you made on the first day of your testimony to tell the
9 truth, the whole truth and nothing else but the truth.
10 WITNESS: WITNESS MM-096 [Resumed]
11 [Witness answered through interpreter]
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before I ask you to stand up, Mr. Whiting, let me
13 again remind everybody, if you are not the person speaking at that time,
14 please switch off your microphone. Okay. Thank you very much.
15 Mr. Whiting.
16 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Cross-examination by Mr. Whiting: [Continued]
18 Q. Good morning, sir.
19 A. Good morning to you, sir.
20 Q. During your direct examination you were asked some questions about
21 Arkan whom you described as being, I believe, notorious and you testified
22 about his role in the RSK in 1993. Are you aware, sir, that at the end of
23 November 1990, he came from Belgrade and met with Milan Martic and others
24 in Golubic?
25 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I only know about this from the press.
1 Q. When did you hear that in the press?
2 A. Firstly I learned this while watching Croatian TV news covering
3 Arkan's arrest.
4 Q. And when was that?
5 A. I don't remember the date specifically. It might have been
6 sometime in 1991 that this information emerged.
7 Q. Well, do you recall that in fact not long after this meeting that
8 he had in Golubic with Milan Martic he was in fact arrested and held I
9 believe in Zagreb, and that was at the end of 1990 or the beginning of
10 1991? Do you recall that?
11 A. There was something along these lines indicating that Arkan was
12 there. I don't know who he met. I heard that he was in Knin and I heard
13 that he had been arrested further up into the hills near Banija and
15 Q. And when you heard that he was in Knin, did you hear that he was
16 in Knin at the end of 1990, in November of 1990?
17 A. I don't know the date or the time. I can't specify. It might
18 have been in 1990 or possibly 1991. I wasn't involved myself and there
19 was so much information circulating at the time that I can hardly be
21 Q. Did you hear in connection with this information about Arkan
22 meeting -- going to Knin and meeting with individuals that the topic of
23 the meeting or of the discussion was about how Belgrade could assist in
24 organising and arming the Serb rebels in Croatia? Did you hear that?
25 A. No. I heard nothing about that.
1 Q. Now, you also testified that in the fall of 1990, there were
2 explosives planted in Knin in kiosks owned by companies from Zagreb and
3 Split. Do you remember that testimony?
4 A. I do.
5 Q. And I take it that the -- these companies were -- or the kiosks
6 were targeted because the companies from Zagreb and Split were perceived
7 to be Croatian companies. Would you agree with me on that?
8 A. As I've mentioned before in my testimony, explosives were planted
9 in companies and kiosks along the Croatian coast but Serb-owned ones.
10 That sort of reaction in Knin was merely a reaction to what was going on
11 in the other parts of Croatia. What happened in Knin happened after
12 similar things had already taken place elsewhere, outside the Krajina, in
13 parts of Croatia that weren't Serb-controlled. It was only after that
14 that such things started happening in the Krajina itself.
15 Q. Sir, I submit to you that in that answer you have attempted to
16 justify what happened in Knin but you haven't answered the question. The
17 question I put to you is: You would agree with me, would you not, that
18 the explosives -- that the kiosks in Knin were targeted because the
19 companies from Zagreb or Split were perceived to be Croatian companies.
20 That's why they were targeted. You'd agree with that, wouldn't you, sir?
21 A. It is not my intention to justify any kind of crime, in Knin or
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Witness, please listen to the question. We
24 haven't got much time now. You've been here for far too long than you
25 should have been. Answer the question, please, directly. You're not
1 asked to justify. You're asked to agree or disagree with the proposition
2 put to you.
3 MR. WHITING:
4 Q. The question is: Those kiosks were targeted in Knin because they
5 were perceived to be owned by Croatian companies. Isn't that right, sir?
6 A. That was one possible interpretation.
7 Q. Is there any other possible interpretation, sir? That's the
8 reason, isn't it, sir?
9 A. Well, yes. I assume that it is, but only the perpetrator could
10 tell you for sure what the motives were.
11 Q. Well, sir, you had no problem in concluding that -- drawing
12 conclusions about Serb companies or Serb places that were targeted on the
13 coast. Are you having a difficulty drawing the obvious conclusions about
14 what was happening in Knin? Given everything that you knew and what was
15 happening, it was because they were Croatian companies that they were
16 targeted. Isn't that right, sir?
17 A. Probably.
18 Q. You also testified that there were obstacles or mines placed on
19 the train tracks around Knin, and you testified about an occasion when a
20 team from Zagreb came and went on the train and it was attacked. Do you
21 remember that testimony, sir?
22 A. I do.
23 Q. Are you aware -- do you have any information about the fact that
24 the Council for National Resistance was behind these provocations that
25 were occurring in the Krajina, in the Knin municipality?
1 A. I have no information to indicate that.
2 Q. And I take it you have no information to indicate that that was
3 not the case. You have no information either way, you just don't know
4 about that. You don't know whether they were behind the provocations or
5 not, that's something you don't know about. Is that right?
6 A. I know nothing about the perpetrators of those misdeeds.
7 Q. You testified about some efforts at negotiations in the fall of
8 1990 between Serb leaders and the Croatian side, and you mentioned that
9 the Croatian Minister of Interior was involved in those negotiations. Do
10 you remember that testimony?
11 A. I do.
12 Q. And do you know that Milan Babic was the principal representative
13 from the Serb side in those negotiations?
14 A. Yes. As far as I remember.
15 Q. Are you aware that the Council for National Resistance opposed
16 those negotiations?
17 A. I'm not aware who the members of that council were, and I don't
18 know what their positions were.
19 Q. I'm going to move to another topic and that is the topic of
20 salaries for the police in the Serb -- Serb police in the Krajina. And
21 before I do that I want to show you a clip from an interview that Milan
22 Martic gave in August of 1990. It's in evidence as Exhibit 4 and 5; the
23 video is one and the transcript is the other. And we will have to switch
24 to Sanction again for this.
25 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: I noticed that my screen tends to be a bit dark
1 whenever these clips come on. I wonder if there is any way that quality
2 could be improved.
3 [Videotape played]
4 MR. WHITING:
5 Q. Sir, do you remember hearing Milan Martic making statements such
6 as this in the media in August of 1990?
7 A. Yes, I do remember this particular statement.
8 Q. And nonetheless, you testified that from July of 1990 until the
9 end of -- until January of 1991, the Knin police continued to receive
10 salaries from the Croatian government. Is that still your position?
11 A. Yes. I still believe that this was the case.
12 Q. And you testified that it was in January of 1991, only after the
13 Knin SUP was formed, that the salaries from the Croatian government
14 ceased. Is that your testimony?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Are you aware that in fact long before or quite a bit before
17 January 1991, sometime before the beginning of December 1990, that the
18 Croatian government cut off funding for the municipalities of Gracac,
19 Donji Lapac, Benkovac, Knin, Obrovac, Dvor Na Uni, Korenica? Do you
20 remember that?
21 A. Sir, Mr. Prosecutor, I believe I did not understand your question
22 fully. Can you please repeat it for me?
23 Q. Certainly. Are you aware that sometime before the beginning of
24 December 1990, the Croatian government stopped funding, stopped sending
25 funds to the municipalities of Gracac, Donji Lapac, Benkovac, Knin,
1 Obrovac, Dvor, Korenica? Are you aware of that?
2 A. The answer should now be a little more extensive. Up until
3 November, we had been receiving our salaries from Zagreb on a regular
4 basis through the Sibenik SUP. I'm telling you about the Knin station
6 As for December we were told that the state coffers were running
7 out of money and that we would be paid in two instalments. That was what
8 Sibenik told us at the time. Just after, we received half our regular
9 salaries for December. The other half was never sent. And that is the
10 entire truth of this matter. The last half salary from Zagreb was in
11 December 1990. I received it as did the entire Knin station. I don't
12 know about the remaining stations such as Benkovac and Obrovac. They
13 weren't under my jurisdiction, nor was there really much communication
14 between us about this particular aspect. This information should be easy
15 enough to check in Zagreb.
16 Q. Well, let's look at 65 ter Exhibit 36, please. It's a little
17 small. Can you -- are you able to read it? Or maybe it could be blown up
18 a little bit for the witness.
19 Can you just take a moment to read this document, please?
20 This is a document which references a meeting held on the 10th of
21 December, 1990 and it references an earlier decision by the Croatian
22 government to block funds for the various municipalities that I listed.
23 Having seen this document, does this refresh your recollection
24 that in fact before the beginning of December 1990, Croatia blocked funds
25 for these municipalities?
1 A. This doesn't jog my memory at all. I know there was talk of
2 salaries being paid and then not being paid anymore but this was about
3 municipal assemblies as institutions, whereas my police station got its
4 funding from the republican level, from Zagreb, and not from the
5 municipality, this being the reason that I'm not familiar with the detail
6 of this situation.
7 Q. Sir, isn't it the case that not long after the so-called log
8 revolution began in August of 1990 that Croatia stopped paying the police
9 in Knin and the Krajina? Isn't that when that occurred?
10 A. I don't know what the question is about. All I know are facts.
11 Q. The question is about the -- is about your memory of the timing of
12 this event. You have said that it occurred in January of 1991 and I'm
13 putting to you that it occurred shortly after August of 1990. Would you
14 agree with me that that's the case or that that is at least possible?
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.
16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think the
17 Prosecutor is now applying pressure on the witness and this is going
18 outside the bounds of cross-examination. The witness answered the
19 question. He was shown a document and again he said it changed nothing
20 about his position, that he knew about the police funds, and I think
21 pressing this issue any further is a pure waste of time.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting? Your basis of the objection is that
23 it's a waste of time? Mr. Milovancevic?
24 Yes, Mr. Whiting, do you have any response?
25 MR. WHITING: Well, that's an extraordinary objection coming from
1 the Defence, if I may say so, Your Honour.
2 I think that I have not exhausted this issue and I don't think I
3 have -- I'm pressuring the witness at all. I think I'm pressing for
4 clarity on this topic and for what his memory is. So I think it's
5 perfectly legitimate and a potentially fruitful line of cross-examination.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Objection overruled.
7 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Let me put the question to you again, sir. You said that the
9 cutting off of funding for the police occurred in January of 1991. I'm
10 putting to you that it occurred shortly after August of 1990. Would you
11 agree with me that -- either that that's the case or that that's possible
12 and that you are possibly misremembering the timing of this event?
13 A. Our salaries were regular up until December 1990. It is based on
14 this that I can't agree with you. My conclusion is there had been
15 sufficient funds up to that point and the cash flow was regular between
16 the municipalities and the SUPs and the police stations. I don't know
17 about the rest. I don't know about the -- all the different companies and
18 enterprises in the area and how their funding worked.
19 I'm telling you what I know. Everything else would be mere
20 speculation, and I'm not here to make any speculations about that. I'm
21 saying the truth. I'm saying nothing but the truth. And I'm merely
22 trying to tell you what I know.
23 Q. So are you telling the Trial Chamber that you're certain that your
24 salaries were regular up until December of 1990?
25 A. I am absolutely certain about that decision.
1 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, could the document 65 ter Exhibit 36
2 which is on the screen, could that be admitted into evidence, please?
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document on the screen is admitted into
4 evidence. May it please be given an exhibit number.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number 896.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
7 Yes, Mr. Whiting, you may proceed.
8 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Q. You testified also that when the -- when the Croatian government
10 stopped paying the police, that salaries started being paid by donations
11 by citizens. Do you recall that testimony?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Sir, isn't it in fact the case or maybe this is something again
14 you don't know about, that funds from Belgrade, from Serbia, started to
15 arrive to pay the salaries of the police once the Croatian government
16 stopped paying the salaries? Isn't that in fact the case?
17 A. Not that I know about.
18 Q. Is -- is this something else that could have happened without you
19 knowing about, though? After all, in January of 1991, you were no longer
20 in the position, I won't make reference to it, but your position had
21 changed. Is it possible that this occurred without you knowing about it?
22 A. It's possible.
23 Q. I want to ask you -- move to a new topic which is the situation of
24 the Croat population in Knin. And still focusing on the second half of
25 1990, you testified that: "You could not even imagine that you would find
1 yourself in a situation where people were freely interrupting the flow of
2 traffic, they were carrying weapons, there were violations of law and
3 order without any punishment." That appears at 6826.
4 Now just to be clear, you're talking there about the Serb
5 population in the area of Knin, right?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Now, let me ask you some questions about the Croat population.
8 And you would agree with me, would you not, that in Knin municipality -
9 and I believe you may have even testified about this yourself - that
10 Croats made up about 10 per cent of the population in the Knin
11 municipality; is that right?
12 A. Roughly speaking. I don't know exactly but I guess one could put
13 it that way.
14 Q. But that's approximately correct, whether it's 11 per cent,
15 9 per cent, that's approximately correct, isn't it?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now, you testified with regard to the Croat population in Knin
18 that from July of 1990 to January of 1991, that: "The security situation
19 was worsening and fear was encroaching upon the people living there, both
20 Croats and Serbs, Croats in particular because they constituted the
21 minority. They didn't know what would become of them the next day."
22 That's at 6822.
23 You recall that testimony?
24 A. Yes. And that's true.
25 Q. In fact, sir, isn't it true that the Croat population didn't just
1 experience fear, they experienced harassment and mistreatment, didn't
3 A. Well, one could put it that way, that this was the case. But if
4 there is an explosion near residential areas in a town, everybody is
5 scared alike, regardless of their ethnicity. Everybody is terrorised.
6 Everybody was in fear, afraid for their lives and their property. One
7 could say, though, that the Croats had a slightly more difficult time than
8 everybody else at the time in Knin at least. They felt greater fear.
9 Q. My question, though, is not about fear, sir. It's that -- my
10 question is: Isn't it true that the Croat population experienced
11 harassment and mistreatment?
12 A. There was both harassment and mistreatment of the entire
13 population. Certainly victims were Croats rather than others, or to a
14 greater extent than others.
15 Q. Well, are you having some difficulty just saying that the Croat
16 population in Knin experienced mistreatment and harassment?
17 A. No. I'm not having difficulty. It's the truth, and I'm not
18 trying to hide from it, but one needs to understand the overall situation
19 and I would like you to have a true picture of the overall situation at
20 that time.
21 Q. Sir, again, with respect, your job as a witness is simply to
22 answer the questions, not to try to advocate a certain position or to try
23 to give what you think is the correct position of the situation. Please
24 just try to answer the questions.
25 So as I understand it, you now agree with me, and you say it is
1 true that the Croat population in Knin, from July of 1990 until January of
2 1991, experienced mistreatment and harassment. That's true, yes or no?
3 A. Yes.
4 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: Mr. Whiting, I don't know if you're aware of
5 page 12, line 11 to 13. He actually said that the harassment was greater
6 than others. Or am I misreading?
7 MR. WHITING: Yes. I take that point. I think that's correct,
8 Your Honour.
9 Q. Now, you testified also that the difficult position of the Croat
10 population was not the result of actions taken by the public security
11 station in Knin. In fact, it was the result of actions taken by the
12 Council for National Resistance and the organisers of the barricades,
13 wasn't it?
14 A. No. I did not say that it was the result of the Council for
15 National Resistance or barricades. It's a consequence of the overall
16 situation, whereas barricades contributed to increasing their fear,
17 because whenever they attempted to go somewhere and use the roads, they
18 must have felt worse than Serbs passing through those barricades, worse
19 than Serbs, for instance, when they attempted to go to Sibenik or anywhere
21 Q. You also testified that the media on both sides of the conflict,
22 the Croatian media and the Serb media, was extremist, and just to quote
23 what you said yourself. You said: "The media" -- there is at 6828 --
24 "the media, regardless of whether they were from Zagreb, from Belgrade,
25 from Split, always featured reports where their own people would be
1 presented as victims and it was not said that both were victims."
2 You recall that testimony?
3 A. I remember.
4 Q. The media was at that time state-owned, wasn't it?
5 A. Most of them, not all, but most of them.
6 Q. Focusing on the most of them, the media that was state-owned, did
7 the description that you gave that I just quoted apply to that media, to
8 the state-owned media? Is that a fair description of the state-owned
10 A. I think -- I don't think I really understood the interpretation
11 that I received.
12 Q. My question wasn't particularly well phrased.
13 The description that you gave of the media, which I'll say is --
14 describing the media as being extremist, would you describe the
15 state-owned media that way, as being -- in those terms?
16 A. I would describe them the same way nowadays.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: We are not talking about nowadays. We are talking
18 about then. Would you describe them as extremist at that time? The ones
19 that you were describing in your evidence that was quoted to you, you are
20 not talking about nowadays. When were you talking about? What period
21 were you talking about?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I understood the
23 question to relate to the period starting with 1990, 1991, and that's the
24 period I'm talking about. I'm talking about that time, not today.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Why do you then say "nowadays"? You said here,
1 unless you are misinterpreted: "I would describe them the same way
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, then and now, with
4 hindsight, I would say the same thing. I meant to say I didn't change my
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. That's much clearer.
7 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Now, I want to ask you some questions about your leaving your
9 position and let's not refer to what that position was but -- or say
10 explicitly what it was. But you recounted a story in your testimony by
11 which in December of 1990 a policeman was murdered and another was wounded
12 in the area around Obrovac, and you told us that you were ordered to
13 arrest a Serb who had been suspected of having committed the murder. And
14 you said that there was this incident and many other incidents and as a
15 result you resigned from your post. Do you recall that testimony?
16 A. I recall that statement and the whole thing. Maybe it was not
17 interpreted quite precisely. It's not that we had to apprehend the
18 suspect, the murder, but the person who we thought was connected with
19 that, he was in fact just a passerby who was standing, who was at that
20 time quite some way from the scene, and the police later found him.
21 Q. Well, let me try to approach this a different way. Is it fair to
22 say that because of the ethnic tensions in your area by December of 1990,
23 that you found your job impossible to do and decided that you wanted to
24 leave your position? Is that a fair statement?
25 A. Yes, it's a fair statement. And also because I felt responsible
1 for a certain territory, while not being able to restore order, I felt it
2 was my duty to offer my resignation and to say that I'm no longer capable
3 of performing my duties under those circumstances. And I said all that at
4 a meeting in MUP at the office of Minister Boljkovac and his deputy,
6 Q. And in your direct examination you stated that -- you testified
7 about being relieved, and you said -- you said that you would not
8 be "morally responsible anymore." And that you "assumed where this could
9 lead later."
10 Now, just focusing for a moment on the Serb side of the conflict,
11 is it fair to say that already by that time, in December of 1990, you
12 could see that extremist forces were taking over?
13 A. I don't know what you mean when you say that they were taking
14 over. I don't know what you mean specifically by "taking over." But I
15 can say that I was no longer capable, and I didn't feel capable any
16 longer. Nobody came to threaten me in the police station and nobody
17 threatened my men and I still had the support from Zagreb. That all is
18 true. But I didn't want to go on in that way because I thought that if
19 even more blood is shed, there would be never any reconciliation and I
20 didn't want to be a party to that. I did not want to become somebody who
21 would be criminally or morally liable.
22 Q. And when you said in your direct examination that you assumed
23 where this could lead later, isn't it the case that you assumed that more
24 blood would be shed?
25 A. What I assumed was my personal assumption. I thought that all
1 these things that were going on for five months by that time were not
2 being resolved, and I thought that the goodwill is lacking to deal with
3 them. And that is what became the last straw, in my mind, and that's what
4 drove me to offer my resignation.
5 Q. In January of 1991, Milan Martic became the secretary of the SUP
6 in Knin; correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And that was because he was selected for that position, wasn't he,
9 because from August of 1990 until that time, he had emerged as the leader
10 of the Serb rebellion in the Krajina? Isn't that true?
11 A. Not true. I cannot make such judgements about somebody -- whether
12 somebody is a leader of the rebellion or not. History will make that
14 Q. Well, sir, you told us in -- about a speech that Milan Martic made
15 in August of 1990 in which he said that the chequerboard will not fly in
16 Knin or will not come in Knin "as long as I'm chief of the police." But
17 you didn't tell us about anything else that he did from August of 1990
18 until January of 1991.
19 Now, it's not your position, is it, that simply because he made
20 that statement in the media in August of 1990 that suddenly he was
21 selected of all the possible candidates to be the chief of the SUP in
22 Knin, is it?
23 A. Mr. Prosecutor, when I said that he had stated that the
24 chequerboard flag would not be hoisted anywhere in Knin while he was an
25 official of the police, was reflected in that footage that we saw taken
1 outside the police station. That film propelled Milan Martic into media
2 attention and he became popular among the people. And as for the decision
3 to appoint him secretary of the Knin SUP, that was a political decision
4 made by the leadership of the SDS, of municipalities in SAO Krajina. I
5 never attended such meetings or any such gatherings, so I do not know for
6 what reasons they appointed him and not somebody else. Equally, 10 days
7 before I arrived at Knin, nobody dreamed that I would be the person.
8 Everybody thought it would be somebody else. And in the same way, I don't
9 know how it was decided that he would become secretary of the SUP. Maybe
10 there's a written decision we can refer to, but I cannot be the judge of
12 Q. Well, sir, I want to ask you several questions now based on what
13 you've just told us.
14 First of all, in your direct examination, you said that Milan
15 Martic said in August, and I'm quoting now what you said: "As long as he
16 was in charge of the police, the chequerboard would never get in Knin."
17 It's at 6802.
18 And now when you've said it again you've changed it. You
19 said: "While he was an official of the police."
20 Are you now changing your testimony on that?
21 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I am not changing my testimony in the least. I
22 just want to make it clear that all that happened 16 years ago, and there
23 were many events involved and I have to keep the time-line clear in my
24 head. And when I said what I said about that film, I thought he said,
25 among other things, the words you quoted. I meant to say that it was
1 precisely that film that propelled him into media attention and it gave
2 him popularity on the Serb side and odium on the Croat side.
3 Q. You've made a reference to the fact that it's -- that it's 16
4 years ago. Are you having some difficulty because it's so long ago
5 remembering the time-line, remembering the exact sequence of events?
6 A. I am not having any particular difficulty, but without taking into
7 account some major events, that statement in itself is less memorable than
8 some other things.
9 At that time, statements were much less important to me than
10 killings, injuries and some other things. I still believe that things
11 that people said were much less important than the killing of people.
12 Milan Martic was at that time an official of the police of Knin, and after
13 that he was suspended from his job, and that statement was quoted in the
14 decision to suspend him as one of the reasons.
15 Q. So as you -- just to be clear, as you sit here today, it is still
16 your recollection that Milan Martic said that as long as -- and this is
17 again what you said in your direct examination, as long as he was in
18 charge of the police the chequerboard would never get into Knin. That's
19 still your recollection of what he said, right?
20 A. It's not true that it was said as long as he was at the head of
21 the police. He said as long as he was on the police force. So he was
22 speaking of himself as one among equals.
23 Q. So, in fact, now you are changing your -- you now recall it
24 differently than a few days ago? Because a few days ago you testified
25 that he said as long as he was in charge of the police. So is your
1 recollection now today different from what it was a few days ago?
2 A. Mr. Prosecutor, my recollection should not be different from my
3 recollection of a few days ago, but I -- although I may have said that his
4 words were "in charge of," it's not true, and that would have been wrong
5 even if he had said it. It would have identified him inaccurately. He
6 could have made such statements from the very start, and he probably did.
7 There must exist a recording of that statement where he said as
8 long as he's on the police force of Knin and as long as the police of Knin
9 itself exists. I'm pretty sure it's as long as he was on the police
10 force, not in charge.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Witness, if he would have made that statement
12 simply by being a member of the police and not in charge, how could that
13 statement affect whether or not the chequerboard flag would fly in Knin?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that would have made no
15 difference; those two wordings had the same weight. I just can't accept
16 it that the Prosecutor should put into my mouth such statements, although
17 in practical terms it would have been no different if he had said, "As
18 long as I'm in charge."
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: After that statement was made, did the chequerboard
20 flag fly in Knin?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. In 1995.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not talking about 1995. I'm talking about
23 immediately after he made that statement, for the months following the
24 statement. I see you shake your head. I'm not quite sure what you're
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the new flag of the
2 Republic of Croatia did not fly at that time in Knin. It was not hoisted
3 on top of buildings, of institutions, or masts or whatever.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Specifically not at the police station?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No where, no where, not that I saw.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Whiting.
7 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Aside from this statement that you have now testified about and
9 given several -- now at least two versions of, in August of 1990 can you
10 tell the Trial Chamber any other act that Milan Martic did or any other
11 thing that he did that led to him being selected as the chief of the SUP
12 in Knin in 1991?
13 A. I cannot recall anything that he had done to be selected.
14 MR. WHITING: Could we go into private session, please?
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the Chamber please move into private session.
16 [Private session]
11 [Open session]
12 THE REGISTRAR: We are back in open session, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
14 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Q. Now, you testified that in January of 1991 Milan Martic urged the
16 Serbs in the Krajina to return their weapons and, in fact, we looked at a
17 document which is in evidence, it has two different numbers, 891 and 515.
18 Do you remember this testimony?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Were you aware that in fact Milan Martic did not support returning
21 all of the weapons that were possessed by the Serbs? Did you know that?
22 A. I didn't.
23 MR. WHITING: Could we look, please, at Exhibit 496? This is
24 again --
25 Q. I'm going to show you again a portion of the interview with Milan
1 Martic from October of 1994. And if we could go to page 7 in the English
2 and page 8 in the B/C/S, and in English the ERN is 5510.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you ...
4 MR. WHITING: I'm sorry, I'm waiting. Now we have 5510 up on the
5 English. I was waiting for them both to be up.
6 In the English I would draw the attention to the last answer, and
7 it's on the screen for the B/C/S. It's the -- the answer -- and I'll just
8 read it out: "I remember that day well. It was in January 1991 when
9 Vasiljevic came to Knin. We talked in this very building. He tried to
10 convince me to return back the ..." - if we could go to the next page in
11 English - "... weapons taken from the police station that we distributed
12 to the population."
13 Now, sir, you'll have to tell me when, Mr. Witness, when you can't
14 see it anymore on the B/C/S because I'm just reading the English. I think
15 we are still -- yeah, if we could scroll down a little bit more, a little
16 bit more, right there.
17 "He also wanted me to give back the weapons that the people bought
18 after selling cattle or something else from their houses. I agreed to
19 return all the weapons we took from the police station in order to give
20 the JNA another chance to disarm the paramilitary army."
21 And then I want to skip down in the English to the next answer
22 that reads "General Vasiljevic," and you'll have to scroll down a little
23 bit on the B/C/S. Just the beginning of it appears now. Yeah.
24 "General Vasiljevic tried very hard to persuade me that the JNA
25 was going to do everything to protect the Serbs. I didn't trust him,
1 though, seeing what the JNA had done so far to protect us. Fortunately I
2 didn't allow all the weapons to be returned, neither the weapons the
3 people bought by themselves, nor all the weapons we took from the police
4 station. We bought some weapons from Serbs working abroad, got some from
5 JNA Serb patriot officers secretly from the storages. We got some from
6 people we didn't like, like Slovenia and even Croatia."
7 Now, did you, sir, know anything about the fact that Milan Martic
8 did not in fact all the weapons to be returned, now that you've seen that?
9 Does that refresh your recollection about any information that you had
10 about that?
11 A. Esteemed Prosecutor, this does not jog my memory at all about what
12 happened at the time. All I see is new information, information that I'm
13 entirely unfamiliar with. For example, this is the first I hear of this
14 particular event, Vasiljevic's arrival. This is probably General
15 Vasiljevic. It was a well known name across the former Yugoslavia at the
16 time. But I've never seen this interview before and I've never heard of
17 this before.
18 Q. Thank you. I'll move on, then, to another topic since you don't
19 know anything about this. And the topic is cooperation with the Croatian
20 Ministry of the Interior. You testified that after Milan Martic became
21 the secretary of the SUP, that cooperation with the Croatian Ministry of
22 the Interior continued. But it's true, isn't it, that the Krajina
23 Secretariat of the Interior declared that the Croatian MUP no longer had
24 any authority in the SAO Krajina? Isn't that true? In January of 1991?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. At some point in your testimony you testified about Golubic, about
2 a training centre in Golubic, and in your testimony it was in reference to
3 the years 1993, I believe. You're aware, are you not, that the training
4 camp in Golubic was set up in March or April of 1991, right? You knew
6 A. I didn't know that specifically. In terms of the time-line, I
7 know that the training camp in Golubic was set up. I'm not sure if it was
8 in March, April, or May. It's not something that I can remember
9 specifically, but it was around that time that the camp in Golubic was set
10 up. It was by May 1991, at least based on what I knew about what was
11 going on.
12 Q. You knew that this camp was financed by the Ministry of the
13 Interior of Serbia, didn't you?
14 A. No. I didn't. Nor did I ever say anything about that. That
15 can't be gleaned from any of my various statements, the simple reason
16 being I did not know.
17 Q. Did you ever go to Golubic in 1991?
18 A. The first time I went to Golubic was before the war. There was a
19 youth complex there and I was in the camp back in 1991 on the day --
20 Q. Okay. I was just going to ask you to please focus on my question.
21 My question was did you ever go to Golubic in 1991. So I'm sure you're
22 anxious to get home. If you could just answer that question and then
23 we'll move on.
24 A. Mr. Prosecutor, you are very, very right when you say I can hardly
25 wait to leave. You couldn't possibly be more right. I'm in a hurry to
1 get home, and I could make things easier on myself by saying yes, yes, but
2 I wish to offer further elucidations just in order to put us all in the
4 Q. Sir, believe me I want you to give truthful and complete and
5 accurate answers. I do. However, it's not necessary most of the time to
6 give further elucidations. You just really need to answer the questions
7 and then you'll get your wish to get home more quickly.
8 So let's go back to this question: Did you ever go to Golubic in
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. When in 1991?
12 A. In May 1991, when we were tasked with disarming the population in
13 Potkonje and Vrpolje.
14 Q. So you went there simply as a kind of staging before you went to
15 Potkonje and Vrpolje? Is that your testimony?
16 A. Yes, that's right.
17 Q. Did you go to Golubic on any other occasions aside from that one
18 in 1991?
19 A. I don't remember. I don't remember.
20 Q. I'll ask you some more questions about Golubic after the break.
21 MR. WHITING: But I think we've reached the time for the break,
22 Your Honours.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Lest I forget, I'm not quite sure I understand what
24 is meant by "staging," in context.
25 MR. WHITING: I'll try to clarify that after the break.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. We will take the break and come back at
2 quarter to 11.00.
3 Court adjourned.
4 --- Recess taken at 10.15 a.m.
5 --- On resuming at 10.47 a.m.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting.
7 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Witness, before the break we were talking about Golubic and I used
9 the word "staging." Let me see if I can clarify that. Is it your
10 testimony that before the action on Potkonje and Vrpolje that you gathered
11 and met in Golubic before proceeding to Vrpolje and Potkonje?
12 A. I think that was the case, yes.
13 Q. And so was it just -- were you in Golubic on that occasion just
14 for a matter of hours or was it even less time than that or was it more
15 time than that?
16 A. Even less time than that. There was the preparation, there was
17 the meeting, and then after the operation, there was a dinner.
18 Q. A dinner? Was that dinner at Golubic?
19 A. Yes, a dinner just after the operation. We stopped to eat at
21 Q. So you also testified that you don't recall being there on any --
22 in Golubic on any other occasion in 1991. So I take it that you did not
23 go through training in Golubic yourself, did you?
24 A. No.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I just get clarity on one point? You said yes,
1 dinner, just after the operation. Is it therefore your testimony that you
2 went to Golubic before you went to these two villages, and when you came
3 back from the operation you went back to Golubic again?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
6 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. You are aware, are you not, that special units, members of special
8 units, were trained at Golubic and these special units were then attached
9 to various public security stations in the SAO Krajina? Is that accurate?
10 A. At the time I was working at the station in Knin. In the station
11 itself, there was no room and nearby were stationed members of some
12 special units. I remember that some police officers from Knin went to
13 Golubic to be trained. I don't know where they were sent later, or
14 whether police officers from other stations were being sent to Golubic for
15 training. This wasn't something that I was involved in. I didn't even go
16 to Golubic myself to see what was going on and I certainly took no
17 decisions in connection with that.
18 Q. Are you aware that these so-called special units participated in
19 fighting during the war in 1991?
20 A. It's very difficult for me to provide a specific answer to that.
21 At that time, back in 1991, I only knew about the Knin station. Some of
22 its members had been involved in the fighting at Plitvica, some other
23 operations and the disarming of Potkonje. I don't know about any other
24 operations. I don't know where they were carried out or who was involved.
25 Q. Well, you testified in respect of Bosko Drazic, and this is
1 jumping ahead a little bit in time, that he "was busy with the special
2 units. There is a strong military aspect to that sort of work."
3 So later in 1992, when you went to Benkovac, did you -- did you
4 learn then that the special units were in fact involved in military
6 A. Later, when I arrived in Benkovac, I heard that some of the
7 smaller units had taken part in military operations, but all of those were
8 stories I heard upon my arrival in Benkovac and the stories were in
9 relation to a previous period back in 1991 and partly in 1992.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: What do you mean by "smaller units"?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when I say "smaller
12 units," I mean groups of police officers comprising between 10 and 30
13 officers. Those comprising 10 were called squads and those comprising 30
14 were called platoons but by no means brigades or any other major units.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: The question was not about smaller units. The
16 question was about special units. The question was: Later -- so later
17 in -- "So later in 1992, when you went to Benkovac, did you learn then
18 that the special units were in fact involved in military actions?"
19 That's the question.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I did learn, and I heard, but
21 that wasn't before later on in 1992.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: So please do answer the question directly. Then we
23 wouldn't have wasted that time.
24 Mr. Whiting, proceed, please.
25 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Q. I want to turn now to what happened in Potkonje. You would agree
2 with me, would you not, that the population of Potkonje in 1991 was
3 95 per cent Croat and about 5 per cent Serb?
4 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I'm not familiar with the exact information. One
5 thing that is certain is that Potkonje was a predominantly Croat village.
6 I'm not sure about the exact percentages but there were a good deal more
7 Croats. That much is certain.
8 Q. I understand you may not know the exact percentage but that
9 percentage, when you say "predominantly Croat," would you agree that it's
10 almost completely Croat, that is over 90 per cent Croat?
11 A. I would tend to agree, yes.
12 Q. Now, you testified that you never received an order "that involved
13 making a difference between citizens based on their ethnic, political,
14 religious or any other affiliation."
15 Do you remember that testimony?
16 A. I do. And I still believe that my behaviour conformed with that.
17 Q. But then just a few minutes after you said that, and actually it
18 appears on the next page in the transcript, at 6847, you testified that
19 you received an order to disarm the Croats in Potkonje who had armed
20 themselves. Wasn't that an order directed at an ethnic group, the Croats?
21 A. If you look at that particular operation, I suppose you could say
22 that this was the case.
23 Q. And just to take this one step further, you testified that in the
24 fall of 1990, the Serb population in the Knin municipality had armed
25 itself but that the police were unwilling to disarm the Serb population
1 because it would pit them against the population, but the police took a
2 different approach when it came to the village of Potkonje. There, the
3 police was willing to act and to disarm the population. Would you agree
4 with me that those -- the approaches in those two cases were different?
5 A. Yes, the approaches were different, but the problems were
6 different too. In the first case, you had --
7 Q. I'm going to interrupt you. Isn't it -- in both cases, wasn't it
8 a case where the population had armed itself? In the Knin municipality in
9 1990 it was the Serb population, and in April of 1991 we are talking about
10 the Croat population? So isn't it the -- in fact the same problem that
11 both populations had armed themselves?
12 A. It was true in both cases, the population armed itself. In the
13 first case with hunting rifles, and in the second case with military
14 rifles, and much more dangerous weapons. That applied to the Croatian
15 population, and that was the difference.
16 Q. And you -- in your mind -- well, I'm not going to press that.
17 You would agree with me, would you not, that the attack on
18 Potkonje had a devastating psychological effect on the Croatian population
20 A. I would agree with that, yes.
21 Q. And is it true that -- that approximately 60 members of the
22 SAO Krajina police participated in the attack?
23 A. Well, roughly speaking. I don't remember specifically, but we
24 might leave it at that figure.
25 Q. It's true, isn't it, that during the attack on Potkonje, the
1 police fired their weapons in the air --
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, objection.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.
4 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I decided not to spring to my
5 feet. Twice in a row the Prosecutor is entitled to his own position
6 needless to say, but this is the third time in a row in relation to
7 Potkonje that the Prosecutor speaks about an attack. At no point during
8 the examination-in-chief did the witness define this as an attack. He
9 defined it as a police operation to seize illegal weapons. At no point
10 did he claim that this was an attack. So these are two very different
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting?.
13 MR. WHITING: Given the evidence I'm not sure I appreciate the
14 distinction, but I'm happy to use the word "police operation." That's
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: I think if -- I may be wrong here, but my
17 recollection of the witness's testimony in chief was that he called it a
19 MR. WHITING: I think that's correct. I'm happy to use the --
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
21 MR. WHITING:
22 Q. It's true, sir, isn't it, that during the police operation on
23 Potkonje, the police fired their weapons in the air? Isn't that true,
25 A. Yes, it's true.
1 Q. And it's true that houses were searched?
2 A. Yes, yes, they were searched.
3 Q. It's also true, isn't it, that several inhabitants were arrested
4 and taken to the prison in Knin?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. It's true, isn't it, that maybe not on that day or the next day
7 but as a result of this operation, a number of residents of Potkonje left,
8 decided to leave the area?
9 A. I'm not aware of that. I don't know about that.
10 Q. Well, you would agree with me, would you not, that in -- at that
11 time period in April or May of 1991, Croats were leaving the area of Knin;
13 A. They probably were, but I didn't know the people well, and I don't
14 know anyone in particular who left. Maybe a small number left. It's
15 probable that a small number left because Serbs were coming in from other
16 towns who were swapping property with Croats, and those people who left
17 were replaced by the incoming Serbs. I don't know anyone in particular
18 who left, to be able to draw that conclusion.
19 Q. Okay. I didn't ask you if you knew anybody in particular. And if
20 we could look at your statement again, and I don't know if it's -- if it's
21 available. Okay. The Trial Chamber has it. I don't know if the -- yes.
22 Thank you. If it could be provided to the witness.
23 And if we could look at page 4, please. It's page 4 in English
24 and page 4 in the B/C/S. And I draw your attention to the paragraph that
25 begins: "In April and May 1991, a search of weapons in two villages
1 predominantly inhabited by Croats took place."
2 Do you see that paragraph, sir?
3 A. I do.
4 Q. Now, I won't read through that paragraph but that paragraph
5 describes the police action in Potkonje; is that correct?
6 A. Yes, it does.
7 Q. Now, if you would look at the first sentence of the very next
8 paragraph, please. "Croats were moving out of the Knin area."
9 A. Yes. It's written.
10 Q. And that's true, isn't it?
11 A. I said even earlier that it's probably true, and I suppose it is
12 and it's probably right.
13 Q. Well, there is a difference between saying it's true and it's
14 probably true. In the statement it doesn't say it's probably true. It
15 says: "Croats were moving out of the Knin area." That's true, isn't it?
16 A. To be 100 per cent sure, I would have had to know somebody
17 personally and know that he or she had left. But some new people had
18 arrived and occupied some apartments in the town of Knin, and I assume
19 that they moved out in that way, with those people coming in to take their
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Witness, you are saying to be 100 per cent sure you
22 would have had to know somebody personally and know that he or she had
23 left. Is it -- were you not telling the truth when you gave the statement
24 and you said Croats were moving out of Knin area? Because you didn't know
25 anybody personally to be Croat. So you were not telling the truth when
1 you made the statement?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I always thought and I
3 always meant and I think I did speak the truth. When I gave that
4 statement, we didn't go into details, whether I meant somebody by name or
5 not. I was just saying --
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Witness, nobody has asked you for a name today.
7 The question to you is: Is it true that Croats left the Knin area? Your
8 answer to that question is either going to be a yes, it is true, no, it is
9 not true. Now, if you say today that because you knew nobody personally
10 you cannot therefore say that Croats left Knin then you must have been
11 telling an untruth when you said in this statement that Croats left the
12 Knin area. Isn't it logical?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's logical that at that time some
14 people were being moved out, probably Serbs. Surely, since Serbs were
15 coming in and Serbs were not going to go to some place in Croatia, that's
16 why I'm saying this Croats were leaving, and I stand by that statement
17 that Croats were moving out at that time, but I said that based on those
18 assumptions. Based on the assumption that new inhabitants were coming in.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: You're not being asked about your assumptions. You
20 confirm -- do you confirm now as you sit there that Croats at that time
21 left the Knin area?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I confirm they were leaving.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
24 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. Now, Witness, you have told us today that the attack on Potkonje
1 had a devastating psychological effect on the Croat population there. And
2 in your statement the description of what happened in Potkonje comes right
3 before your statement that Croats were moving out of the Knin area. Isn't
4 it fair to say that there is a connection between those events, that
5 the -- and I apologise, I again said the attack on Potkonje. The police
6 operation on Potkonje and the effect that it had, that that caused people
7 to leave? Isn't that true?
8 A. Mr. Prosecutor, it was the decision of the person who took down
9 that statement that he put one paragraph before and another after. People
10 were leaving even before the events in Potkonje and Vrpolje but it is
11 certain that those events and the seizure of weapons in Potkonje and
12 Vrpolje had an impact in terms of intensified resettlements of Croats away
13 from that area.
14 Q. Now, are you aware that during that police operation on Potkonje
15 an individual by the name -- a villager from Potkonje named Zarko Batic
16 [phoen] was wounded in the head with a firearm? Do you know that?
17 A. I know -- I know that somebody was wounded and I think this could
18 be the man.
19 Q. Do you know that he was wounded in the head with a firearm?
20 A. I think so.
21 Q. In fact, sir, you were charged criminally by the Croatian
22 government for your participation in the police operation on Potkonje;
23 isn't that true?
24 A. I don't know about that.
25 Q. This is the first time you're hearing that you were charged
1 criminally by the Croatian government for your participation in this
2 attack -- police operation?
3 A. You mean I personally was charged?
4 Q. Yes. You personally. Is this the first time you're hearing that?
5 A. This is the first time I'm hearing of this, from you.
6 Q. Let's move on to your -- the next event, and I'm just trying to --
7 I'm pausing for a moment to see if we need to move into private session
8 but I don't think we do.
9 You testified that you were relieved from your post in May of
10 1991. So that would have been just after the events in Potkonje; is that
12 A. Well, whether it was in late May or early June, I would include it
13 in the major events of that period.
14 Q. And you were then given a lower-ranking position of being an
15 inspector; is that correct?
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. You then describe going back to your village, and let's not name
18 your name, and that armed patrols were instituted in your village for
19 reasons of protection; correct?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. And I presume that you thought then and think today that it was a
22 normal thing to do to have a kind of village guard in your village to
23 protect the village; correct?
24 A. I'm sorry, I didn't quite understand which period you mean.
25 Q. I'm talking about when you went back to your village in June/July
1 of 1991 and you testified that a village guard was instituted. I think
2 your testimony was that it had already begun being instituted when you got
3 there and it continued to be instituted. I take it that you thought then
4 and think today that that was a justified thing to do under the
5 circumstances, to protect your village with a kind of village guard,
7 A. I believe that at that time it was justified.
8 Q. You then -- you describe a clash that occurred. And from what I
9 could judge, from the sequence of your evidence, it seems to have occurred
10 in August of 1991, a clash in your village with Croat forces; is that
12 A. Don't know which clash you mean, but if you mean the first clash
13 in that area, when a vehicle of the Croat -- Croatian police was
14 attacked --
15 Q. No, I'm referring to the clash that the JNA then intervened to
16 establish a buffer. Do you recall that clash that you testified about?
17 A. Yes. I remember that. I recall that.
18 Q. And am I right, was that in August of 1991?
19 A. You're right.
20 Q. You testified that the JNA -- that JNA planes launched rockets at
21 certain targets in Croat-held areas but that these areas were in fact
22 empty and that the JNA planes were just trying to scare the enemy. Now,
23 the enemy that you're referring to there is the Croat forces, the Croat
24 police forces; isn't that right?
25 A. Yes. That relates to Croat forces.
1 Q. And you would agree with me, would you not, that from the Croatian
2 side, if rockets are being launched to scare them, that it would look like
3 the JNA was not simply trying to intervene to create a buffer but that it
4 was, in fact, acting on behalf of the Serb side? Would you agree that
5 from the Croatian side that that's how things would look?
6 A. I would not agree as far as that area is concerned, because I and
7 the locals were not on the offensive in that area. On the contrary, we
8 were on the defensive. We were withdrawing into one part of the village
9 from which, if we were in danger, we were able to flee more easily and
10 save our skins, whereas the forces of the ZNG, the Croatian home guard,
11 were actively attacking. And as far as I know, there were no casualties
12 when those planes did what they did.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I just understand the situation here? Were you
14 part of the planes? Were you in the planes yourself or were you on the
15 ground with the -- with the territorial authority of the -- of that area,
16 of the Serbs?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, at the time of that
18 attack, I was on the ground with my --
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Thank you. Now you're being asked
20 about the attack by the planes. Why do you answer about -- answer to what
21 you on the ground were doing? The question doesn't relate to what you
22 were doing on the ground. The question relates to what you think the
23 Croats would have thought of what the planes did, not what you on the
24 ground were doing. Can you answer that question, please? If you have
25 forgotten, Mr. Whiting will repeat it for you. Have you forgotten?
1 MR. WHITING: He nodded. I believe it would perhaps be helpful if
2 I repeated it.
3 Q. Would you -- wouldn't you agree with me that from the Croatian
4 side, from their perspective, if rockets are being launched into their
5 area by the JNA, by JNA planes, that from their perspective it would look
6 like the JNA was not simply trying to intervene to stop the fighting and
7 create a buffer but that it was in fact acting on behalf of the Serb side?
8 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, objection.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic? We are waiting.
10 THE INTERPRETER: He's just waiting for the interpretation, Your
12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] The witness did not say that
13 the aviation fired targeting Croat territory. The Prosecutor is asking
14 his question and building into that question things that the witness had
15 never mentioned.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: What did the witness say, Mr. Milovancevic,
17 according to you?
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] He said very clearly that they
19 were in one part of the village where they had withdrawn, that they were
20 under attack from the MUP and the home guard corps, whereas the JNA
21 intervened and fired on a clearing, on empty ground, in order to stop this
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Maybe we should go to the text and quote that,
24 Mr. Whiting.
25 MR. WHITING: Yes, I'll quote the text. It's transcript 6866, and
1 this is during direct examination on the 21st of August. And the witness
2 said: "And one thing I can say is that in the afternoon, JNA fighter
3 planes in two pairs, two by two, flew over the area and rocketed certain
4 targets in the Croat-held area."
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: I hope you're listening, Mr. Milovancevic.
6 MR. WHITING: "We realised that the planes were firing missiles
7 into empty areas. There were no soldiers there or anything. I thought
8 all they were trying to do it was to scare the enemy to keep the conflict
9 from spreading."
10 And I believe in my question I accurately quoted that.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: The objection is overruled.
12 I'm being informed that what you just read out now was in private
13 session, Mr. Whiting.
14 MR. WHITING: That may be so, but I don't think that there is
15 anything in there that would identify the witness.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: I don't think so either.
17 MR. WHITING:
18 Q. Now, sir, I'll -- out of fairness to you, because we've had an
19 interruption, I'll put the question to you again so you have in it mind.
20 Wouldn't you agree with me that from the Croatian side, from their
21 perspective, if rockets are being launched into their area by the JNA by
22 JNA planes, that from their perspective it would look like the JNA was not
23 simply trying to intervene to stop the fighting and create a buffer but
24 that it was in fact acting on behalf of the Serb side? Would you agree
25 with me?
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this is a
3 question for a Croatian witness, somebody who was involved in that
4 operation. How could the witness who was just defending himself know what
5 Croats felt?
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: The objection is overruled.
7 You may proceed.
8 MR. WHITING:
9 Q. I'm not inclined to repeat the question again, unless you want me
10 to, Mr. Witness. Are you able to respond to the question? Would you
11 agree with me in what I said?
12 A. I would not agree.
13 Q. So in your view, acting to create a buffer and to stop the
14 conflict includes attacking one side or the area of one side in order to
15 scare that side?
16 A. In my opinion, the Yugoslav People's Army was at that time
17 attacking the party that was attacking; whereas my side, the side I was
18 on, did not need to be militarily engaged by the JNA because we wanted the
19 attack to stop. We wanted peace. When two men are fighting, you don't
20 need to hit the one who is lying on the ground without offering any
21 resistance. That's how I see the situation.
22 Q. We'll move on.
23 You returned to the Knin police station in October or November of
24 1991; is that correct?
25 A. Correct.
1 MR. WHITING: Could we move into private session, please?
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the Chamber please move into private session?
3 [Private session]
11 Pages 7081-7084 redacted. Private session.
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
9 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Q. I want to ask you now about Bruska and what you learned about
11 Bruska, what had happened in Bruska. You testified that when you went to
12 Benkovac in April of 1992, you went through files to familiarise yourself
13 with the overall situation in the Benkovac municipality. Do you remember
14 that testimony?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And then you were asked by the Trial Chamber, by His Honour Judge
17 Hoepfel, about the investigation of the massacre in Bruska which had
18 occurred in December of 1991, and you responded: "There was information
19 to indicate that the massacre at Bruska had been committed by mistake by a
20 Croatian sabotage force that had been infiltrated into the area."
21 Now, sir, you know perfectly well, don't you, that the surviving
22 victims of the massacre identified the perpetrators as being members of
23 the SAO Krajina Police? Don't you know that?
24 A. First I hear of it.
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the question is
1 capricious. None of the damaged partners who were survivors of the
2 incident gave the names of the perpetrators, and to infer that the victims
3 identified the perpetrators is entirely inaccurate. They only spoke about
4 what sort of clothes the perpetrators were wearing and how they had
5 introduced themselves; that is, as belonging to the police or not
6 belonging to the police. But not a single perpetrator was ever
8 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I didn't say anything about a
9 perpetrator being identified. I said exactly that, that they were
10 identified as being members of the SAO Krajina Police.
11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Well, in other languages, this word "identified"
12 maybe means specific identification. I would also understand that in
13 German, for example.
14 MR. WHITING: I understand. I didn't appreciate that. I
15 certainly did not mean to say that the specific perpetrators had been
16 identified, only that they had been described as members of the
17 SAO Krajina Police.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic, you were on your feet?
19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my learned friend
20 failed in fact to say that they were identified as Krajina police
21 officers. He just told the witness that the perpetrators had been
22 identified by the victims. This is a very specific claim and that was the
23 claim that I was responding to.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, let us look at the transcript,
25 Mr. Milovancevic, because I don't think ...
1 MR. WHITING: Your Honour there may have been an interpretation
2 issue, and I can try to rephrase. To expedite the matter, I can just
3 rephrase it.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Rephrase, please.
5 MR. WHITING:
6 Q. Let's begin again. You are -- you're aware, aren't you, sir, that
7 the surviving victims of the massacre described the perpetrators as being
8 members of the SAO Krajina Police; correct?
9 A. I'm not aware of it.
10 Q. This is really the first time you're hearing of that?
11 A. Truly, this is the very first time.
12 Q. Let's look, please, at Exhibit 134 in evidence. This document is
13 a little difficult to read, if we could just blow it up a little bit.
14 Now, this is a -- this is an official record from the Benkovac
15 Public Security Service from the 25th of December, 1991. And it's a --
16 records a -- information given by one of the survivors of the massacre,
17 and if we could just scroll down -- my question is going to be --
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Your learned friend is on his feet.
19 MR. WHITING: I was not aware.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: So Mr. Milovancevic.
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, based on this
22 document and the witness's answer, it is quite obvious that the witness
23 was not physically present at the Benkovac public security station at the
24 time this event occurred and that was what the witness said. He said: "I
25 know nothing more about this event." He said he knew about certain
1 aspects about what happened but by no means the event in its entirety.
2 I'm not sure what the foundation is for the Prosecutor to be
3 showing the witness this particular document, especially given the fact
4 that the Defence did not delve into these particular aspects during our
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
7 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I have to say these frequent objections
8 disrupting the cross-examination, I would really object to. This
9 objection is baseless. The foundation for the question is that the
10 witness testified that he reviewed the files in Benkovac when he came, and
11 he in his direct examination gave us information, his knowledge, what he
12 had learned about who the alleged perpetrators were. And so that is --
13 I'm going to ask him to --
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: The alleged perpetrators that are dealt with in
15 this document.
16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the President, please.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: The alleged perpetrators of -- that are mentioned
18 also in this document, isn't it?
19 MR. WHITING: Well, no. He identified different alleged
20 perpetrators. And so my question is going to be: Did he see this
21 document, was he made aware of it, did he have information about it?
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, do you have any response to
24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, again, I just
25 don't see the foundation. I don't see the foundation to pursue this
1 matter since the witness wasn't working there, since he wasn't in charge
2 of the investigation, since he knows nothing about it. Today, in
3 cross-examination again we find him saying, "I know nothing about that" in
4 addition to having such and such information, which is, after all,
5 information that he has already shared with us.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may not see the foundation. The Chamber does
7 see the foundation. The witness said he read the files, and the objection
8 is overruled.
9 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Q. Now, Witness, have you had an opportunity to read over this
11 document, and do you see in particular that the victim describes somebody
12 knocking at the door and an unfamiliar male voice responded: "The police,
13 the police," and then again responded, that same voice responded: "The
14 Krajina Police"?
15 Do you see that in the document, sir?
16 A. I see that.
17 Q. In your review of the files in Benkovac in April of 1992 and
18 thereafter to familiarise yourself with cases that were going on, did you
19 see this document?
20 A. Your Honour, Mr. Prosecutor, I don't remember ever saying in my
21 statement that I had gone through the files. I was in fact just
22 familiarising myself with all the different cases, and these are, after
23 all, two very different things. I would not have been physically able to
24 go through such an enormous amount of different cases. I was no miracle
25 worker. I couldn't just have looked at a file and known immediately who
1 the perpetrator had been. I couldn't have issued orders to that effect as
2 a result. My associates were with me at the time. They were in charge of
3 certain investigations, and they were the persons familiarising me, giving
4 me a low-down on what exactly what is going on.
5 When I said I was familiar with that, that was precisely what I
6 had in mind. By no means was I implying that I had gone through every
7 single file. Those were literally mountains of files and there was no way
8 I would have been able to go through all of it. What I shared with you I
9 shared in the best possible faith and to the best of my knowledge and
10 ability. And that applies in relation to this and a whole series of
11 other --
12 Q. Sir, I'm going to interrupt you, if I may. I'm going to read to
13 you what you said on direct examination, which is why I asked this
14 question, and you confirmed it in fact just a few minutes ago in your
15 cross-examination. You said --
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before you proceed, there was a little bit of a
17 concern from Judge Hoepfel that shouldn't we go into private session? I
18 didn't see the need but ...
19 JUDGE HOEPFEL: I would like to go more into details.
20 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I don't believe that these questions in
21 the direct examination were in private session, his knowledge. I think as
22 long as -- basically we stayed away from his position. But if the Trial
23 Chamber or the Defence believes that we should move into private session,
24 I'm happy to ask that.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Maybe let's do just so that at least we will still
1 know what is taking --
2 May the Chamber please move into private session?
3 [Private session]
11 Pages 7092-7104 redacted. Private session.
15 [Open session]
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
18 Yes, Mr. Whiting.
19 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honours.
20 Q. I want to ask you some questions about the UN civilian police or
21 UNCIVPOL. You were asked if UNCIVPOL had powers to conduct their own
22 investigations on the ground, and your response was: "I don't know what
23 powers they had. They never told us."
24 But didn't you know that the role of UNCIVPOL was a strictly
25 monitoring role? They did not -- their job was not to investigate crimes?
1 Isn't that right?
2 A. As regards the civilian police of the United Nations, I know what
3 they told me, and I know about the work we did together. What they did
4 independently of me and my men, I don't know.
5 Q. No. But my question is they had a strict -- their function was
6 only to monitor what was happening and what the police were doing. They
7 did not have a function of investigating crimes. Is that correct?
8 A. I would agree with you.
9 Q. Now, I want to ask you some questions about events that occurred
10 around Benkovac after April of 1992, because that's where you were, and
11 presumably that's the area that you have information about; is that
13 A. Yes, that's the way it should be.
14 Q. Could we look, please, at Exhibit 729? And this won't be
15 broadcast, so there is no -- we just won't -- there is no danger about
16 compromising your identity, and we can remain in open session.
17 I'm just going to ask you, please, if you would, to look -- you
18 see there is one, two, three, and three says, operations -- "operational."
19 And then there is a big Roman numeral one underneath that. Sir, if you
20 could just -- yeah, that will make it easier for you to read it. Yeah,
21 keep going down, down, down. All the way down. There.
22 If you could just read that -- what's written under "operational"
23 and tell me when you get to the end of the page, and I'm going to ask you
24 when you're done with it if it's accurate.
25 MR. WHITING: And if we could also blow up the English version for
1 the benefit of the Trial Chamber.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "The monitors of the civilian police
3 from Kistanje accompanied by the local police visited" --
4 MR. WHITING:
5 Q. Sir, I'm going to interrupt you. I'm sorry, I should have been
6 more clear. You can just read it to yourself; you don't need to read it
7 aloud. Just read that section to yourself.
8 And could we blow up the English to have the bottom of the page --
9 to make it more legible? I guess we have control over the English.
10 A. I've finished reading.
11 Q. Okay. Could we turn to the next page on the B/C/S? And if you
12 could just finish reading that last sentence there.
13 Is what is written there accurate?
14 And just so the record is clear, again we are looking at Roman
15 numeral I of part 3 of the report.
16 Sir, did you finish reading that, just that first section,
17 section I of this report?
18 A. I've finished.
19 Q. And is it accurate?
20 A. Sir, it's difficult to say whether it's accurate or not. A lot of
21 time has elapsed. When I look at this report, I can't see which period of
22 time it's in relation to, especially in reference to between 11 and 17
23 dead, as stated by myself, allegedly. But I can't remember informing the
24 civilian police about any rapes in the area. Believe me, throughout my
25 time in Benkovac I never heard anything about any rape. I can't for the
1 life of me remember anything about any rapes except --
2 Q. I'm going to -- except what?
3 A. Except for one particular case of rape that was falsely reported
4 by a Serb lady, an interpreter who was working with the UNPROFOR CIVPOL.
5 She reported a member of the Kenya Battalion as having raped her but that
6 was a false report. I can't remember any rapes being committed regardless
7 of who the victims might have been, in terms of ethnicity, Croat or Serb.
8 I simply can't remember. Nor do I remember myself reporting anything like
10 Q. If we could turn to the first page of the B/C/S translation, and
11 perhaps I should have told you that this report has a date of the 22nd of
12 February, 1993. Now, now that you know the date of the report, does that
13 help you recollect anything in this report, or are you still unable to
15 A. Sir, I'm looking at the date, and I know that this was a month
16 after the attack on the villages in Benkovac municipality, after
17 Maslenica 93 operation. I know that there were murders of Croat
18 civilians. At the time, as I described earlier, there were many refugees
19 roaming about town in search of accommodation. The Benkovac Crisis Staff
20 helped with having some Croats from the area resettled else where.
21 Q. I'm just going to interrupt you because you've provided this
22 information in your direct examination. And my question really is now
23 that you know the date, can you tell us whether what's written there in
24 that first section that you read is accurate? About the report of 11 and
25 17 Croats have been murdered and one woman raped.
1 A. I can't remember the exact number of those killed. There were
2 Croats who were killed at the time. I've already explained about this
3 alleged case of rape. I'm not sure which period of time this report is in
4 reference to. The date is there but I'm not sure which period it covers
5 and how long the period is supposed to be.
6 Q. Well, let's look at the last sentence. Well, could we scroll
7 down, please, on the B/C/S?
8 The -- do you see the sentence there where it says that a certain
9 person confirmed information that for the past week, referring presumably
10 to the week before the 22nd of February, 1993, between 11 and 14 -- 11 and
11 17 Croats have been murdered and one woman raped? So now that you see
12 that it's the week prior to the report, does that refresh your
13 recollection that this, in fact, occurred and was reported as described in
14 the report?
15 A. This clarifies the situation to some extent. But it leads me to
16 believe that whoever wrote this did not draw a clear distinction between
17 the area covered by my station and the area that other stations were in
18 charge of, especially Obrovac and Kistanje. Try as hard as I might I
19 simply can't remember that over such a brief period of time, even in
20 February 1993, within a single week, between 11 and 17 Croats were killed.
21 This figure itself, 11 to 17, it's quite a range, isn't it? 11 is
22 a lot. But if I had told the civilian police anything about this, I would
23 have tried first of all to ascertain a more accurate figure. 11 to 17 is
24 quite vague, and if one deals with a crime, one necessarily tries to be
25 more specific than that as a police officer, and I certainly would have.
1 It seems quite a random figure.
2 There were killings when all of these things were happening, but I
3 can't remember a single case of rape for as long as I was in the area.
4 There were killings, there were murders at the time, but I can't say
5 exactly how many such incidents occurred because I simply don't have the
7 Q. And is it fair to say that with respect to that sentence of the 11
8 to 17 being reported, you've given some information about the range and so
9 forth, but is it fair to say that you don't recollect that being reported?
10 A. I don't. I really don't remember.
11 Q. Now, could we turn to the next page? And I'm going to ask if you
12 can read to yourself the next section, section II of the report. If you
13 could just read that paragraph, section II, and then I'll ask you the same
14 question, if you can tell us whether that's accurate or not and whether
15 you recall it.
16 A. I do recall this case.
17 Q. And is it accurately described in this paragraph, section II of
18 the report?
19 A. I believe so. I would lend credence to this information. There
20 is no reason why it shouldn't be accurate.
21 MR. WHITING: Can we go into private session, please?
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the Chamber please move into private session?
23 [Private session]
11 Pages 7111-7114 redacted. Private session.
24 [Open session]
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
2 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. Now, just in relation to a previous answer, you said that the army
4 of the Republic of Serbian Krajina was the only existing -- one of the
5 only existing legal armed units in the Krajina. But you're aware, are you
6 not, that the -- under the Vance Plan, the Krajina was supposed to be
7 demilitarised, meaning no armed forces. Correct?
8 A. It is correct that under the Vance Plan no army was allowed in the
9 area. I do believe, however, that the army of the Republic of Serbian
10 Krajina was established sometime after the aggression on Ravni Kotari and
11 Maslenica. I'm not sure about the dates but, yes, it must have been later
12 on. Because up until the attack the only thing that there had been was
13 the Ministry of the Interior. There were two different kinds of
14 formation: Units that were in charge of policing, police work, and
15 special purpose units, whose task was to watch the borders, to a lower
16 extent, and also to cooperate with the civilian element of UNPROFOR.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: With the military
18 element of UNPROFOR.
19 MR. WHITING:
20 Q. Well, now I have to say I'm a little confused, because the attack
21 on Maslenica was in January of 1993; isn't that correct?
22 A. Correct. Correct, sir.
23 Q. And the -- in fact, the army was declared by -- established by
24 Milan Martic, I believe, in May of 1993; isn't that correct? As you say,
25 after the attack on Maslenica.
1 A. I think it was after the attack on Maslenica that the army was
3 Q. Well, May 1993 is after the attack on Maslenica. Well, I'll come
4 back to this question, these questions, later.
5 Now, you testified that in 1993, Serb refugees -- this is: "Serb
6 refugees would come to their homes," and their homes in context refers to
7 Croat homes, "and take their homes by force, move in by force."
8 Do you recall that testimony?
9 A. I do.
10 Q. And you testified also that in Benkovac and Knin there were very
11 few officers to deal with these problems. You remember that testimony?
12 It was at 6915.
13 A. I think there is a problem with the interpretation. You probably
14 meant -- what you probably meant to say is that there were very few
15 soldiers, members of the army, to deal with these problems, not officers.
16 Q. Okay. Well, I'm just reading from the transcript, and it's at
17 6915 on the 22nd of August. "I later heard that this was the case in
18 Knin, and other villages around Knin such as Vrpolje were experiencing
19 some degree of difficulty because Serb refugees would come to their homes
20 and take their homes by force, move in by force, in order to have
21 somewhere to stay, a roof over their heads. In both Benkovac and Knin,
22 there were very few police officers remaining in the area to uphold law
23 and order and to deal with the sort of problems that the police usually
24 have to deal with, that is, that constitute usual police work."
25 So is it not your testimony that there were very few police
1 officers to deal with these episodes of Serb refugees taking homes
2 belonging to Croats by force?
3 A. Sir, I now understand your question. The first time around, the
4 interpretation quoted the word "officers" not policemen. When one speaks
5 about this period, that is after the 22nd of January, 1993, most regular
6 policemen, both in Knin and in Benkovac as well as in Obrovac and
7 throughout the area, including Vrlika, because by this time the front line
8 at Peruca had become active near Sinj. They were all busy with the
9 ongoing combat operations, and we had all received orders to join the fray
10 in numbers as great as possible, because we were few, and at the time the
11 priority was to check the advance of the Croatian army. In practice, this
12 left very few policemen in the towns and villages.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm going to cut you short. The Chamber has a few
14 housekeeping issues to talk about before we knock off. Just stick to the
15 question please, very short and very concise and very succinct. Thank
16 you very much.
17 MR. WHITING:
18 Q. Sir, I just will ask one follow-on from that last answer, and that
19 is: When you received these orders to join the fray, that is the
20 fighting, who did you receive the orders from?
24 MR. WHITING: We'll obviously need a redaction of that answer.
25 Q. And did you understand that secretary -- the Secretary Prijic
1 received his orders from Milan Martic?
2 A. That's how it was supposed to be.
3 Q. Now just to go back to what we were talking about, you said just a
4 moment ago that in practice this left very few policemen. So just to be
5 clear about your testimony, it's your testimony that there were very few
6 policemen who were available to deal with this problem of Serb refugees
7 taking the homes of Croats by force. Is that your testimony?
8 A. Yes. That is my testimony, that there were few policemen, too few
9 to prevent --
10 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I just have one more question and then
11 if the Court --
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Go ahead. I was just stopping him from --
13 MR. WHITING: Oh, I see.
14 Q. But yet you've also testified that there were officers, there
15 were -- there were policemen available to escort Croats out of the RSK as
16 far as the Zemunik airport. And that's at 6916. Isn't it really the case
17 that there were officers available to help Croats leave but not to help
18 them stay?
19 A. Your Honours, I really have to clarify this.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just answer the question. We haven't got much
22 MR. WHITING:
23 Q. If you could just answer the question: There were officers, there
24 were policemen who were -- there were policemen available to escort the
25 Croats out of the RSK but there were not policemen available to help them
1 stay in their homes?
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, on everything
3 that the witness has said to the Prosecutor in the past few minutes, he
4 cannot be expected to say yes or no to the question phrased this way. It
5 is a complete misrepresentation of everything that this witness has said
6 so far.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... answer the
8 question. I said just answer the question. I didn't say say yes or no.
9 [Microphone not activated].
10 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor said yes or no.
11 MR. WHITING: I don't think I did, and I also don't think that
12 there has been any misrepresentation of what the witness has testified
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: The objection is overruled.
15 Proceed, Mr. Whiting.
16 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Q. If you could just answer the question, please. There were
18 officers -- there were policemen available at that time to escort Croat
19 civilians out of the RSK but there were not policemen available to help
20 them stay in their homes. Isn't that true, sir?
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: And you can answer yes or no.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, that's not correct.
23 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I'm mindful that the Court wants a
24 little time. I can tell the witness I'm very close to finishing my
25 cross-examination. But I can't finish it today. I'll need to finish it
1 tomorrow. But I think this would be a convenient time, if the Court wants
2 some time to do housekeeping matters.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Microphone not activated] Thank you very much.
4 Mr. Milovancevic. Mr. Milovancevic? There were filings to be
5 made by yesterday. I just want to find out what the status is of those
7 MR. WHITING: I'm sorry, just because the witness has been here a
8 long time, can we excuse him?
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. Can the witness please be excused.
10 [The witness stands down]
11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That's correct, Your Honour.
12 You asked me whether the deadline passed yesterday. That's correct. And
13 we complied with the order of the Court. We supplied the list of
14 documents referred to by the Defence in our opening statement. We
15 supplied notification of witnesses whom we would not be calling. And
16 that's how we complied with the order.
17 I was waiting for this issue to be raised in order to provide some
18 additional information concerning Mr. Martic.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. Mr. Milovancevic, there were a number of
20 things to be done. You have told me about two things. You were going
21 to -- yeah, one of them is Mr. Martic, his 65 ter summary. You have now
22 told us about -- let's take them one by one. What is the position about
23 Mr. Martic's testimony 65 ter summary? Is it filed or not filed? And
24 once again, you can answer me yes or no.
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Any reason?
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. We have a reason.
3 Following the course of the examination of witnesses who testify about a
4 relatively limited period of time, like the witness who was just left the
5 courtroom, the Defence team has realised that the questioning, the
6 examination of Mr. Martic, would be extremely lengthy and that is the
7 reason why we took the position, after consulting Mr. Martic, that he
8 should not appear as a witness in his own case. The issues that
9 Mr. Martic was to testify about --
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's the answer. The reason you don't -- you
11 didn't have the 65 ter is that he's not going to testify. Just say that,
12 Mr. Milovancevic. We've got a very short time. Now you're placing it on
13 record officially that Mr. Martic is not going to testify, so we are now
14 back to 53 witnesses and not 54. Okay.
15 Now, what is the position about -- you said the seven who have no
16 65 ter summaries. You may have mentioned them a little earlier, but can
17 you just recap me very briefly?
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't have the
19 submission that we have sent in front of me, but out of --
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just tell me --
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] -- that list, the Defence will
22 not be calling four witnesses.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. I have seen -- I have seen that filing
24 where you say four witnesses are not being called. I just want to find
25 out about the three. Okay.
1 Your 92 bis lists?
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Out of the witnesses mentioned,
3 seven or six, we would not be calling four. Two witnesses from abroad
4 should go in through 92 bis.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm sorry, Mr. Milovancevic, we have dealt with
6 the 7. I'm talking about your 92 bis list of your entire witnesses. We
7 are done with the seven witnesses. What is the story -- have you filed
8 your 92 bis lists for your entire witness list?
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence
10 believes that there are no witnesses who do not testify about the
11 activities of the accused. If they do testify to the activities of the
12 accused, they cannot go in through 92 bis. They have to go in live. Some
13 of them will take more time, some will take less time.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, it is my view that the witness
15 before this witness, Mr. Licina, said virtually nothing about Mr. Martic,
16 virtually. Certainly not during evidence-in-chief. Maybe Mr. Martic was
17 mentioned once in cross-examination. That's an example of a witness who
18 could have come in through 92 bis.
19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence begs
20 to differ. We are required to prove that something that the Prosecutor
21 doesn't wish to prove does not exist. In keeping with the practice of the
22 Tribunal, it is not up to the Defence to prove that there was no joint
23 criminal enterprise, and that's precisely what Mr. Martic is charged with.
24 All the things that Mr. Licina testified about relate to the existence or
25 non-existence of the joint criminal enterprise. That is the core of the
1 issue in the view of the Defence, not the rest. The rest will be
2 established very easily. The question is what about the plan of the joint
3 criminal enterprise? The witness can tell us about which victim was
4 killed in which village in order to come to the conclusion that there was
5 a joint criminal enterprise.
6 We are trying to prove a completely different theory through our
7 witnesses, and we believe that witnesses should appear live, especially on
8 the issue of the joint criminal enterprise. The Prosecutor did not offer
9 a single piece of evidence about the joint criminal enterprise in the five
10 and a half months of his case. And that is precisely the reason why
11 Mr. Martic is in detention now.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Obviously, if the Prosecutor has not offered a
13 single piece of evidence, what are you disproving? All you have to say --
14 okay. Anyway, that's how you conduct your trial.
15 Is it your position, therefore, that you're not filing any 92 bis
17 Mr. Martic -- I beg your pardon. I'm sorry, Mr. Martic. I want
18 to say Mr. Milovancevic.
19 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] At this moment, we believe that
20 two witnesses can testify to that issue in that way, and those are
21 witnesses from France.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Translations of exhibits in the list.
23 You were supposed to say which ones are dropped and which ones are not
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think all that
1 has been done. According to the information available to me now, things
2 stand precisely as I presented them to you.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: And the expert reports that were supposed to have
4 been provided on the 14th of August, what about them?
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] That's the issue we discussed
6 at the session when you gave us the deadline of the 23rd. And we informed
7 you then, and I understood the Trial Chamber accepted it, and the
8 Prosecution agreed, that the military expert's report, which is being
9 translated and should be ready in early September, will then be submitted
10 immediately to the Prosecutor.
11 As for the other expert, the political expert, we still have not
12 received a decision from the Registry to appoint that person. Everything
13 has been prepared pending that decision by the Registry. It's a technical
14 issue. It is not overly concerning me only because the report is ready.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, it overly concerns the Prosecution and the
16 Chamber. Bear that in mind.
17 If I can go back to the 92 bis list, when can the two that are
18 going to testify in terms of 92 bis be expected to be filed? Or have they
19 been filed? The people from France.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, at this moment, it
21 is our agreement in -- within the Defence team to have that done by
22 yesterday. And I think that it was done. I'm sorry, I don't have this
23 material in front of me now. I don't want to be mistaken, but the
24 information I have is that it has been done.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's the answer. That's the whole paragraph is
1 no answer. I don't want to know what is the agreement within the Defence
2 force. I just want to know whether it's done or not done. That's all.
3 I know we are delaying Judge Nosworthy and we have got to move
4 very fast.
5 Protective measures is the last issue. I think there had been an
6 indication that you are going to make, I don't know, a composite motion.
7 Are you going to be dealing with them one by one as you go along? I'm not
8 sure what the issue is about the protective measures. Can somebody remind
9 me? I've got it on the list.
10 MR. WHITING: My memory is that issue has been addressed. I don't
11 have a memory of that being an outstanding issue.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: One last thing. I raise it, I'm not discussing it
13 because of time constraints, I'll probably talk about it tomorrow before
14 we start, is the time that's been taken on witnesses as against the
15 estimated time. And that also as against the time stipulated in terms of
16 73 bis. We will talk about that tomorrow.
17 Court adjourned. Reconvene tomorrow at quarter past 2.00.
18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.52 p.m.,
19 to be reconvened on Friday, the 25th day of August,
20 2006, at 2.15 p.m.