1 Monday, 11 September 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.14 p.m.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good afternoon, everybody. We have just a small
6 housekeeping matter.
7 May the Chamber please move into private session.
8 [Private session]
16 [Open session]
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. You may call the next
20 [The witness entered court]
21 WITNESS: BRANKO POPOVIC [Resumed]
22 [Witness answered through interpreter]
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may be seated, Mr. Popovic.
24 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just to remind you that you took -- made a
1 declaration at the beginning of your testimony to tell the truth, the
2 whole truth and nothing else but the truth. You are still bound by that
3 declaration to tell the truth.
4 THE WITNESS: I did.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. And you still are bound.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good. Thank you very much.
8 Mr. Milovancevic.
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Examination by Mr. Milovancevic: [Continued]
11 Q. Good afternoon, Witness.
12 A. Good afternoon.
13 Q. I will remind you of the request I made at the beginning of your
14 examination. Since we are speaking the same language, we must not
15 overlap, and we both have to take care to make a brief pause between
16 question and answer.
17 In one of your previous answers, you mentioned that near your
18 village there was a pit called Mratunska Jama [phoen]; do you remember
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Does the name Pribilovci mean something to you?
22 A. Yes. Pribilovci is a village in Herzegovina where in 1941
23 Ustashas virtually slaughtered all the residents of the village whom they
24 found there, and I believe that in the 1990s an exhumation was organised
25 from those pits, and the smallest bone extracted was 12 centimeters long,
1 which probably means it belonged to a human fetus. It is a well known
2 fact that Ustashas killed even pregnant expecting mothers. That was not
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please see a document
6 from the Prosecution's 65 ter list, number 298.
7 Could we please zoom in on the quadrant next to the right edge in
8 the middle. Can we zoom in along the right edge? That's the middle map,
9 the next one. The one next to it.
10 Further to the right. This is the middle map. I want the one on
11 the extreme right. This one. Thank you.
12 Q. In the top right corner of this map, it says map of the Ustasha
13 genocide against the Serb people on the territory of the NDH independent
14 state of Croatia 1941 to 1945. Can you see that, Mr. Popovic?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. According to the key we see next to the map, these points denote
17 places where killings took place. And along the right edge, we see a key
18 saying that the German envoy, that is Hitler's envoy to the independent
19 state of Croatia, General Edmund Gleise Von Horstenau, otherwise an
20 historian, wrote that Ustashas had killed 750.000 people. The places
21 where the killings took place are marked on this map.
22 Do you know, Witness, whether some representatives of the
23 international community were aware of these facts?
24 A. As you rightly said, German commanders noted in their reports the
25 monstrosity displayed by the Ustashas in their liquidation of Serbs, and I
1 know that the president of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt, asked
2 that patronage be designated over the Croatian people, because of the
3 crimes they committed in the Second World War.
4 Q. But that was never established, this supervision?
5 A. No. Not as far as I know.
6 Q. Can you tell me if you know for what reason President Tudjman as
7 president of the Croatian republic and president of the HDZ, the Croatian
8 Democratic Union, marked in his platform that one of the objectives of the
9 HDZ was to restore this independent state of Croatia for which the
10 American president Roosevelt asked international guardianship?
11 A. I believe that is because the attempt to commit genocide and
12 liquidate the Serb people in the Second World War did not succeed.
13 MR. WHITING: I have an objection to the question. It is actually
14 a two-part objection. The first is, I don't think this fact is in
15 evidence, that it's marked in the platform that one of the objectives of
16 the HDZ was to restore the independent state of Croatia.
17 Secondly, I don't know how the witness could possibly know the
18 reason President Tudjman did something, that he did or didn't do.
19 The third -- well, I will leave it at that. Two objections is
20 probably enough.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.
22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we did, through
23 the mediation of the OTP precisely, introduce this document -- these
24 documents into evidence. The statute of the HDZ party and the programme
25 objectives of the party that Mr. Tudjman discussed on the 24th of
1 February, 1994, and 1991. In many places in those documents it is noted
2 that the independent state of Croatia is not only a quisling creation and
3 an historical crime, but also an expression of the time honoured
4 aspirations of the Croatian people. And I am asking the witness as a
5 person who lived in Croatia from the Second World War when he was born
6 until 1991 if he's aware of the reasons for including these points in the
7 HDZ programme. I don't think it is baseless.
8 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, if I may. I think counsel's referring
9 to Exhibit 873 in evidence, which in fact contains the platform and
10 objectives of the HDZ.
11 There is a reference to this quotation which we've heard a lot
12 about from Tudjman, and that -- I'm not going to say anything about that.
13 But that quotation certainly does not support what counsel put to the
14 witness, which was that the -- that one of the objectives of the HDZ was
15 to restore this independent state of Croatia.
16 Whatever -- however objectionable that quotation from Tudjman may
17 have been about what he was saying about the past, that is one thing. But
18 it's something entirely different to say that the objective of the HDZ,
19 that the explicit objective of the HDZ was to restore the independent
20 state of Croatia. I don't think that is contained anywhere in
21 Exhibit 873.
22 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, it is true that
23 is not explicit in Exhibit 873, but I didn't say that, nor did I ask such
24 a question that Tudjman said it was one of the objectives to restore. I
25 didn't use the word "to restore." I only said -- in fact I asked the
1 witness how he explained the fact that Mr. Tudjman as one of the programme
2 objectives introduces such a creation.
3 It is not to restore, and I did not use the word "to restore."
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: I would like to re-read the question, because for
5 starters, I didn't understand it. The question says: "Can you tell me if
6 you know for what reason President Tudjman as president of the Croatian
7 republic and president of the HDZ, the Croatian Democratic Union ..."
8 Up to that I think everybody knows the answer. He was president
9 because he was elected president.
10 Then you say: "... marked in his platform that one of the
11 objectives" -- I must confess here I don't understand what is meant by the
12 platform here but I see the two of you seem to understand each other about
13 what is meant by that.
14 "Marked in his platform that one of the objectives of the HDZ was
15 to restore ..."
16 Now you say you didn't use that word. It may very well be wrong
17 interpretation. But that is what we see on the transcript. It says: "To
18 restore this independent state of Croatia for which the American president
19 Roosevelt asked international guardianship"; that is how it is stated.
20 If that is not what you said, correct it, Mr. Milovancevic.
21 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you for the
22 effort you invested. I really did not say that word and it would have
23 been a misrepresentation of the text, which is very precise.
24 I said it was one of the programme objectives. The question was
25 asked before, because both the Prosecutor and I, as Defence counsel,
1 insisted on what kind of programme and platform the HDZ had.
2 We have this speech of Mr. Tudjman of the 24th of February, 1990,
3 which was later transformed into their political programme, in which he
4 says that the independent state of Croatia is not only --
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: I think you have explained sufficiently to say that
6 what I read would have been a misrepresentation. Give us the correct
7 representation. Just tell us now how that question should have read,
8 instead of how it stands now.
9 In other words, put the question to the witness once again.
10 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Q. Witness, my question is: In your view, why did Mr. Tudjman,
12 speaking primarily as the leader of the HDZ party at their founding
13 convention, introduce one of -- as one of the programme objectives the
14 independent state of Croatia, that was the essence of my question.
15 All this is related to your previous testimony to the effect that
16 President Roosevelt had suggested what he had suggested during the Second
17 World War.
18 MR. WHITING: I'm sorry. I again object. The question is
19 essentially the same question without the word "restore" in it. But it is
20 essentially the same question that one of the programme objectives is the
21 independent state of Croatia, and if counsel wants to insist on that, I
22 would ask for a reference, what the basis is in Exhibits 873, what he's
23 relying on in that exhibit to put that question.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting, if this question is not contained in
25 that statement, can't the witness just answer and say, no, it is not there
1 or it's there. If he says it is there, then in cross-examination you can
2 take it up with him?
3 MR. WHITING: Well, I mean, that is one way to go, certainly. But
4 I think it's -- I think that counsel is misrepresenting what the evidence
5 is. We have in evidence, the Prosecution put it in evidence what the
6 programme objectives of the HDZ were. It's Exhibit 873. And I think
7 that --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: And it doesn't say one of them is the independent
9 state of Croatia?
10 MR. WHITING: No. It does not say that one of the programme
11 objectives is the independent state of Croatia. It does not say that.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, does it say so or doesn't it say
13 so? I would like to resolve this, otherwise I am just going to have to
14 rule on this point.
15 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that is not
16 written in the programme objectives, nor did I say that.
17 Our problem here is this: The Prosecutor seems to believe that
18 that is what I mean. However, he cannot know what I mean. I asked the
19 witness very specifically: Why, in a speech that later became the
20 programme platform of the party, was it necessary to mention the
21 independent state of Croatia, not only as a quisling creation and a
22 fascist crime, and it was both of these, but also an expression of the
23 historical aspirations of the Croatian people. So Mr. Tudjman says at
24 this Assembly the independent state of Croatia is an expression of the
25 historical aspirations of the Croatian people. And I'm asking the witness
1 why did Tudjman say that.
2 My learned friend is making an objection which is completely
3 inappropriate. It is a completely different matter that the question
4 doesn't suit him, I cannot do anything about that.
5 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, the Defence counsel has just put a
6 completely different question to the witness and one that I do not object
7 to. Though I'm not sure how the witness is going to be able to say why
8 Tudjman said something, but fine.
9 But the question now, as has been expressed is completely
10 different from formulation number 1 and formulation number 2. This is
11 formulation number 3, and it is quite different.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: I am mindful of the differences, but I think I am
13 going to rule now, because I think this is a matter that can be dealt with
14 by some other means.
15 Mr. Milovancevic, I will allow the question. I have allowed the
16 question. Just put the question to the witness.
17 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Q. Witness, you heard the question.
19 Your Honour, shall I repeat the question? Or what I have already
20 said suffice?
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: You have asked three versions of the same question.
22 I would like you to put your final version to him and we must all know
23 what it is you are asking.
24 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Q. I will formulate my question in such a way as to avoid --
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just one minute, Mr. Milovancevic.
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] -- any objection.
3 Q. Can you tell us your opinion on this, Witness. Why did
4 Mr. Tudjman, at the founding convention of his party, speaking about the
5 programmed objectives of the HDZ, say about the independent state of
6 Croatia that it was not only a quisling creation and a fascist crime but
7 also an expression of the historical aspirations of the Croatian people?
8 Do you have an opinion about this?
9 A. He said that because Croatian parties in the past, starting with
10 Starcevic onwards until Tudjman, all started to create an independent
11 Croatian state.
12 In the period between 1941 and 1945, the independent state of
13 Croatia was created as an expression of the aspirations of the Croatian
14 people, regardless of the crimes committed by Ustashas in World War II.
15 Tudjman believed that this struggle of the Croatian people should be
16 continued in some way in order to create an independent Croatian state.
17 With what means? We'll see that later if we compare what happened to
18 Serbs in 1941-1945 and in the 1990s. We will see that in the 1940s as
19 well Serbs were thrown out of the Croatian constitution as a constituent
20 people. Ethnic cleansing was committed in Western Slavonia in 1941 and in
21 the 1990s in Grubisno Polje, for instance.
22 Serbs were dismissed from their jobs en masse in the 1940s and in
23 the 1990s alike, and almost 400.000 Serbs were forced to leave Croatia in
24 1990 to 1993. Mainly Serbs from urban communities, whereas Serbs living
25 in villages managed to defend themselves, mainly by force of arms. The
1 same emblems were in play in the 1940s, and in the 1990s the same hymn,
2 the same coat of arms. Serbs are nowhere mentioned as a constituent
3 people, and kuna was reinstated by Tudjman as the currency that existed
4 back in the early 1940s. Tudjman introduced the kuna again.
5 Then we have the language split. In the Vienna agreement of 1850,
6 Croats had accepted the common Serbo-Croat language. Tudjman discontinued
7 this agreement about the common language and proceeded to cleanse the
8 Croat language of what they called borrowings from Serbian, or Serbisms.
9 The result was a new speak that was a little ridiculous even to
10 Croats themselves, but it was rather a successful attempt to cleanse the
11 Croat language of all common words, although it was essentially the same
12 language. And that is not to mention the terror that Serbs were exposed
13 to in the 1990s as they were in the 1940s. Because obviously nobody would
14 leave their home of their own will.
15 Q. Thank you. Do you know what happened to the Serbs who were
16 staying, who were residing in the areas under the protection of the
17 United Nations? In one sentence, please.
18 A. Mainly, for the most part, the United Nations were just observers,
19 so what was happening, because we saw that all attempts of Croatia and of
20 its newly formed army what were aimed at conquering territory under Serb
21 control ended in massacres, starting with that on the Miljevci plateau
22 where were killed --
23 Q. Sorry, excuse me, Mr. Witness. Let me ask you this question.
24 If it should be necessary, I will ask you specific questions about all
25 these events but I put to you a very short question.
1 How did all of this end?
2 A. It all ended in the wholesale destruction, the total destruction
3 of all these Serbs settlements and the expulsion of the Serbs from them
4 who were found refuge in Krajina from Ravni Kotari, et cetera, from Lika.
5 Q. Do you know what the name is of the operation which ended the
6 combat -- the war operations in that area?
7 A. Yes. This is the Croatian army's operation, the so-called Storm,
9 Q. Thank you. That will suffice.
10 Can you tell us, you mentioned that you were born in a Croatian
11 village. What did you possess of property there?
12 A. In my native village, I had several houses. Each one of my
13 brothers and I myself had a house, and as we had our families as well, we
14 would go there for our holidays, annual vacations, and we built each house
15 there, and our parents also had one. So that we had about five houses in
16 all. We had our vineyards there by the Krka river. It was an idyllic
17 place, very suited for one's vacation.
18 Apart from that, I also had property in Sibenik, and my wife also
19 had a house which she had inherited from her parents.
20 Q. What happened to that property?
21 A. My flat was seized as was Mr. Raskovic's immediately when we had
22 to flee, after the petition which was implemented against us. All our
23 effects, all our things, all the furnishings and furniture in the flats
24 were taken, and the houses in the village of Bogatic, after this operation
25 of the Croatian army, that is what completely destroyed, as were all of
1 the houses in the village. The entire village was obliterated. There is
2 not a single house that is habitable there, nor did a single inhabitant
4 Q. Excuse me, I will interrupt you. How was the -- this operation
5 called in your village?
6 A. My village was at the line of separation, the contiguous line with
7 UNPROFOR. This was the line where there was a zone where there were no
8 operations and there was no reason for the village to be destroyed. As a
9 matter of fact, we helped the Croats who had fled to our village and my
10 father actually put them up in the different vacant houses.
11 They spent there several months under, his, my father's protection
12 and actually they ate up all of our food stores. They shared everything
13 they had, simply speaking, with them, but the food was scant and after a
14 while they left.
15 THE INTERPRETER: Will counsel and witness please not overlap.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, the interpreter is asking that
17 you please do not overlap, you and the witness.
18 Will you please give each other a chance. And may you speak
19 slowly, please, Mr. Witness.
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. So you say that you hosted them, your neighbours or your -- these
22 refugees who had fled the JNA, which is what you said. When was this?
23 A. This was before this operation of the Croatian army directed at
24 the Miljevci plateau, below from where we were. So they were frightened
25 and they fled their houses, which were not destroyed afterwards. And they
1 could and did return to their houses which were habitable.
2 Q. Thank you, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Popovic. Was
3 any of your property restituted or compensated for? Can you go back
5 A. No. I have no place to go back to, because the flat, not only my
6 flat, about 30.000 flats in Croatian cities have been occupied -- haven't
7 been given to Croats for their use by the state of Croatia, to citizens
8 from both Croatia and from Bosnia who had gone there. And this was done,
9 in fact, in the perfidious manner invoking some law on housing relations
10 which used to be valid during the time of the Socialist Republic of
12 Q. Thank you. That will do. Whose flats were these? You were
13 referring to 30.000 flats.
14 A. These were flats given to Serbs for their use as tenants from
15 their work organisations, from where they worked by way of compensation
16 for what they were contributing to their work organisations. They would
17 be given flats or, rather, the right of occupancy to those flats as
18 tenants or would be given credits for building their family houses.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Popovic. That will do. How did those Serbs come
20 to remain without those flats? What happened did they sell them? Did
21 they give them away?
22 A. Simply speaking, because of the terror which was being -- out
23 against them, people just had to leave. So many people had left their
24 flats and their vacationing houses and cottages along the seaside. Nobody
25 cared about those. Everybody wanted to save their lives and their
1 families and children's lives, and for years nobody was able to return and
2 because of the force inflicted on them by Croatia. And still today people
3 cannot return because Serbs are being subjected to veritable orders as we
4 have witnessed in the vicinity of Zadar.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Popovic.
6 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the
7 examination-in-chief is completed.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Milovancevic.
9 Mr. Whiting.
10 Cross-examination by Mr. Whiting:
11 Q. Good afternoon, sir. My name is Alex Whiting.
12 A. Good afternoon to you.
13 Q. I'm one of the Prosecutors in this case, and I'm going to ask you
14 a few questions.
15 I want to start with the -- something that we ended or that you
16 ended on on Friday, and that is Exhibit 938. I don't believe it's in
17 e-court. I think copies were passed out. And if anybody hasn't brought
18 their copy along, I made more copies. It's this one. Yes. I have some
20 Sir, you remember testifying about this photograph on Friday?
21 A. Yes, Mr. Prosecutor, I do.
22 Q. And in fact, did I understand correctly that you -- you provided
23 this photograph to Defence counsel during your proofing. Is that correct?
24 A. Yes, it is. It's correct.
25 Q. And did you -- during your proofing with the Defence counsel, did
1 you tell Defence counsel, did you tell them the same thing that you told
2 the Trial Chamber here about this photograph on Friday?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, you testified that this came from the book, a book called
5 "The Spiritual Genocide," which was published in 1997. You testified
6 that the photograph, this photograph was a message intended for you. And
7 you even went so far to say that the message intended for you was "quite
9 Do you remember that testimony, sir?
10 A. I do. I do remember, Mr. Prosecutor.
11 Q. Now, when you say this photograph was a message intended for you,
12 are you -- I want to get clear on this -- are you saying that the person
13 who wrote the book included the photograph as a message to you? Or are
14 you saying that the people, whoever spray-painted this on the gate, was
15 trying to send a message to you?
16 A. The message was sent by those who also participated in our
17 expulsion from Sibenik. Because you can see the signature says "the
18 Ustashas from the bank," that is a message addressed to me. And here on
19 the left it says "here lies Jovo." That is a message to some others and
20 probably to his family, because he was already dead. He died in 1997.
21 Q. So, sir, just if you could please focus on my question, please.
22 So you're saying that the person or persons who spray-painted this
23 on the gate in 1997 was trying to send a message to you? Is that your
24 testimony, sir?
25 A. Yes, yes.
1 Q. And, sir, you conclude that because it says "Ustashas from the
2 bank." And from that you conclude that this spray-painted message is a
3 message for you? Is that your testimony?
4 A. Yes, because they are from the bank. The organisation for which
5 and in which I worked.
6 Q. Well, sir, it doesn't have -- let's be clear here. It doesn't
7 have the name of your bank on here, does it?
8 A. There is just one bank in Sibenik.
9 Q. Okay. Was there just one employee? Sir, were you the --
10 A. And the other --
11 Q. Were you the only employee of that bank? Or were there other
13 A. There were other employees.
14 Q. Of course.
15 A. But this is immediately associated with the name of Jovan
17 Q. But that's not your name, sir, is it?
18 A. No. But I am -- it is quite clear that this refers to me.
19 Q. Well, sir --
20 A. Because --
21 Q. Can I just ask you a question, please. Because you've told us
22 already that you think it is quite clear that it refers to you.
23 This spray-painted message does contain a name or at least part of
24 a name which you say refers to Jovan Raskovic, right? The Jovo there
25 is --
1 A. Yes, Jovo.
2 Q. Could you tell us, please, if the person or persons who are
3 spray-painting this message on the gate wanted to send a clear message to
4 you, why didn't they put your name on there?
5 A. Well, you know, this message was on the gate. The entrance to the
6 bishop's mansion of the Serbian bishop, and this is where Jovo Raskovic
7 used to park his car, in the yard there. So that particular place was
8 chosen because precisely of that fact and --
9 Q. Sir. Sir, I'm going to interrupt you, because I don't have a
10 sense that you're focussing on my question. I want you to please listen
11 carefully to my question.
12 If the person or persons who spray-painted this message on the
13 gate wanted to send you a clear message, why didn't they simply put your
14 name there, as they had with Jovan Raskovic? Can you think of any reason
15 why they didn't include your name?
16 A. No, I cannot. Probably there would be no space left for these two
17 Croat, Croatian coat of arms and the U, the letters U and the HDZ. But it
18 was quite clear to them that I would read that message right.
19 Q. But sir, you didn't live in Sibenik at that time, did you?
20 A. No. I didn't. But of course you can have messages sent via
21 intermediaries and probably this priest who came to the parish house --
22 Q. Sir -- sir --
23 A. -- he actually recorded it. He took a photograph of it, because
24 it was the parish house, the bishop's house.
25 Q. Sir, you hadn't lived -- this was in 1997, and you hadn't lived in
1 Sibenik for years; isn't that right?
2 A. Yes, that is right. Yes, but I sent out feelers. I'm always on
3 the look-out to know what is happening. Everything that -- to hear about
4 everything that refers to me, and I have very strong sense developed for
6 Q. So strong, in fact, that you still insist that this, this
7 photograph, this message refers to you?
8 A. Well, I'm 100 per cent sure that it did, that it does, because why
9 would they, precisely in my town --
10 Q. Sir --
11 A. And -- an in association with a bishop.
12 Q. You're 100 per cent sure. So you could not be more sure of this?
13 100 per cent is as sure as it gets. Is that right?
14 A. Well, you know, the petition also -- did not have my name on it in
15 all places either, but it was implemented, it was carried out in practice.
16 We were expelled and there were so many people who were
17 expelled who don't have any shred of evidence of this kind.
18 Q. Well, I'm --
19 A. Hundreds of thousands of people.
20 Q. We'll talk about that in a moment, sir. But all I'm asking is
21 that you say you're 100 per cent sure that this refers to you. That's
22 your testimony. You're 100 per cent sure that this refers to you.
23 A. Yes, I am sure.
24 Q. By the way, what is the message that they're trying to communicate
25 to you, in a sentence?
1 A. Well, I can see here "Long live the Ustasha, the NDH." They know
2 that I cannot accept to live in an Ustasha climate.
3 Q. But you were living in Belgrade at the time, weren't you, in 1997.
4 So what was the message that was being communicated to you, sir, by this?
5 A. The message was: Don't return. Don't ever entertain the idea of
6 returning, because I did submit some formal requests for my flat to be
7 restituted to me. However, that remained just dead letter on paper, and
8 probably in order to induce me to abandon the entire idea altogether and
9 not even think about it, that was the idea, because they knew that I was a
10 great champion of human rights.
11 Q. All of these things that you have now told us about this
12 photograph, you shared with Defence counsel before you came here and
13 testified; is that correct?
14 A. Yes. That is the way I read it.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 A. I have no other interpretation.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 A. You're welcome.
19 Q. Now, sir, you were trained as a lawyer and you worked as a lawyer;
20 isn't that true?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Is it --
23 A. Yes, and I actually represented at the bank, in court.
24 Q. And is it fair to say that as a lawyer, being trained as a lawyer
25 and working as a lawyer, that you understand the importance of being
1 precise, of being accurate when you speak?
2 A. Yes. Yes, I am, of course.
3 Q. And sir --
4 A. The bed of Procrusteans.
5 Q. Well, I'm not going to touch that one. But, sir, you also
6 understand that you're testifying under oath here, right? You realise
7 that, right?
8 A. Yes, I do. That is what I said, I believe, at the very beginning.
9 Q. And all the more reason, if you're testifying under oath, to be
10 particularly precise and careful and accurate in the way you testify;
12 A. I believe that I am the closest to this here piece of evidence,
13 that I am the one who is the most knowledgeable about it.
14 Q. Sir --
15 A. And that no one can know the truth about it better than I.
16 Q. Sir, sir --
17 A. But --
18 Q. I'm going to ask you, please, listen to my question. I didn't ask
19 if you were knowledgeable or what you knew. I asked if you understood
20 that being under oath it's particularly important to be precise and
21 careful and accurate in the way you testify. You understand that, right?
22 A. Yes, I do. And I do not shirk from it, because I know what is and
23 what is not the truth.
24 Q. Thank you. Now if we could look, please at Exhibit 880. You
25 looked at this during your direct examination.
1 Sir, you remember looking at this article during your direct
3 A. Yes, I do. I saw it.
4 Q. And this article recounts what Ratko Licina said. This article is
5 from August of 1990, and it recounts what Ratko Licina said at the time
6 about events that were occurring. Is that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And it accurately records what he was saying at the time, doesn't
10 A. Yes. That is correct.
11 Q. And this is a -- but Ratko Licina was a Serb politician in the
12 Krajina; correct?
13 A. Yes. He was a deputy of the Serbian Democratic Party to the
14 Croatian Sabor, the Croatian Assembly, and he represented Gracac
16 Q. And this is a Croatian newspaper, isn't it, sir?
17 A. Yes. Vjesnik has its seat in Zagreb. It is based in Zagreb.
18 Q. So this Croatian newspaper in August of 1990 is accurately
19 publishing long quotations from Mr. Licina; is that right?
20 A. Yes. This was actually the inaugural address of our deputies to
21 the Croatian Assembly which was proved by -- endorsed by the Main Board
22 and their constituency probably. It was not something extemporised, you
24 Now we may have to zoom in on what I believe is the third
25 paragraph of the text. And it starts --
1 MR. WHITING: You probably have to move to the left. No, the other
2 way. Keep going. And move down. Okay. Let's stop there. Sir, I
3 think -- sir, sir, I don't think you -- I think because he's leaning so
4 close to the earphones I mean to the mics it is causing a feedback.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Witness.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Oh, yes.
7 MR. WHITING:
8 Q. Sir, do you see --
9 A. I see the text, yes.
10 Q. Do you see a sentence, and I'm reading from the third paragraph on
11 the first page in English where it says: "This, Ratko Licina said, which
12 is still happening to the Serbian people in Sibenik, and in Primosten
13 where for two days already they have been gathering signatures for a
14 petition to expel the academy members, Jovan Raskovic, Branko Popovic and
15 Marko Dobrijevic is a fascist expulsion orchestrated by the democratic
16 Croatian leadership."
17 Do you see that sentence, sir?
18 A. No, no, I don't see that sentence. The third paragraph, you said?
19 Oh, yes, yes, I see "Ratko Licina." I see the text but not the --
20 your quotation in the third column. What I see is night refugee columns
21 reminiscent of war, Ratko Licina, is that what you mean?
22 MR. WHITING: This is completely my fault. Could we zoom out a
23 little bit? I have located the exact spot. Maybe Mr. Perovic will help
24 me out on this.
25 Could we go to the next page in the B/C/S. I'm getting assistance
1 from Mr. Black, who always comes through.
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] On page 2, the third paragraph
3 from the top to the bottom.
4 MR. WHITING: Oh, great. I'm very grateful.
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] So the third column, the second
6 paragraph from the top. It starts with the words "this is what Ratko
7 Licina said, what continues to be happening to the Serbian people,"
8 something to that effect. So the very top of the third column.
9 MR. WHITING: Yes, I see it now and I'm very grateful. Thank you.
10 Q. Sir, do you see it now?
11 A. Yes. "This, said Ratko Licina."
12 Q. Thank you. It's right in the middle. Okay.
13 A. I see it, sir.
14 Q. Is that an accurate description of the petition? A petition to
15 expel the academy members in a fascist expulsion. Is that accurate, what
16 Mr. Licina had said?
17 A. Yes. He did say that.
18 Q. No, the question is: Is it accurate? Is that an accurate
19 description of the petition?
20 A. Certainly, by all means. I was in Sibenik during those days and I
21 know. I crossed the central square where this ostracism was being
23 Q. Sir, please, you only need to answer the question, and you fully
24 answered the question when you said "certainly, by all means."
25 Now, in fact, in your direct examination you yourself said that
1 the petition said that you should be expelled from Sibenik. Right? Is
2 that what you say the petition said? That you should be expelled from
4 A. Yes, yes. And there is even the text of that petition available.
5 Q. So, sir --
6 A. -- in which the message is clearly sent by name to Professor
7 Raskovic as the president --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sir, I will ask you a second time. When one of the
9 lawyers is talking to you says "stop," please do stop, okay?
10 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Q. Sir, so are you saying, then, that the petition demanded or
12 demanded of the authorities that you be expelled from Sibenik? That the
13 authorities -- that the Croatian authorities or the authorities in Sibenik
14 expel you from Sibenik? Is that what the petition demanded?
15 A. The message was unequivocal that we were not welcome and that they
16 were very unhappy that we were among them. That's how it was formulated.
17 And they would be --
18 Q. Sir --
19 A. There would be no end to their happiness if we would simply
20 disappear from their community.
21 Q. Well, sir, in that answer, you didn't say the word "expulsion"
22 and I am focussed on the word "expulsion," that Mr. Licina described it as
23 an expulsion, and you described it in your evidence as an expulsion. So
24 did the petition ask for you to be expelled from Sibenik?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. And our names were written there explicitly.
3 Q. Okay. Let's look at the petition, because you're right, the text
4 of the petition is available. And if we could look, please, at
5 Exhibit 02664917.
6 MR. WHITING: You know, I apologise to Defence counsel because I
7 usually send a list of exhibits that I am going to use right as I start
8 the cross-examination and I forgot to do it. I've just done it now. My
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: You mean you've just sent them now?
11 MR. WHITING: Yes. I usually do it just at the beginning of the
12 cross-examination, and it slipped my mind, so I have just done it now.
13 Q. If we could focus in, please --
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry. Your opposite number is on his feet.
15 Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.
16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] No problem, Your Honour. Thank
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Why did you stand? Maybe you're tired of sitting.
19 MR. WHITING: I think he was just being polite and saying it is
20 fine, which I appreciate. Thank you.
21 And if we could focus in on the right, the article on the
22 right-hand corner, please. And -- yes, you have to move over to the --
23 move it all the way to the right, please. Yes. Perfect.
24 Q. Are you able to read that, sir, in the right-hand corner? Or --
25 we can make it a little bigger, I think.
1 A. No need, sir. I recognise this text.
2 Q. Now we've lost it. You have to move all the way to the right.
3 And then to the top, please. There we go. There it is. Thank you.
4 Now, this is an article from Politika and it's dated the 23rd of
5 August, 1990. Now Politika, you told us in your direct examination,
6 right, is a newspaper published in Belgrade which, in fact, you read at
7 the time, right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. So the text of the petition is reproduced here and it says: "You
10 have offended us and humiliated us deeply, Messrs. Jovan Raskovic, Branko
11 Popovic and Mark Dobrijevic. We shall never forgive you this. We are
12 very sad at these moments and unhappy that you are among us. What is
13 more, we would be happy if you disappeared forever from our environment.
14 Gentlemen, you have not done anything to deserve it."
15 Now, that's the text of the petition, right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And, sir, whatever the extreme nature of this language is, it does
18 not say anything about expulsion, does it?
19 A. Well, that was placed just a little above that teen sitting at
20 those tables where the citizens were coming to sign the book, that is
21 close to the centre of town. In fact, it is the centre of town, the
22 central square, near the theatre. I think it was quite clear to everybody
23 what they should do when they come there and over 20.000 signatures were
24 in fact collected.
25 Q. Sir, sir --
1 A. -- and now it makes no -- there is no point in trying to --
2 Q. Sir, please, sir?
3 A. -- relativise this.
4 Q. Sir, please listen to my question. I am trying to be precise and
5 accurate. This petition does not call for you to be -- does not call on
6 the authorities or on anybody to expel you, does it?
7 A. I think there can be no dilemma that this referred to us and that
8 we were unwelcome. And --
9 Q. Sir, sir, sir.
10 A. -- the results of this petition, all these books were --
11 Q. Is there a reference to expulsion in this petition, yes or no?
12 A. Well, in a way, yes.
13 Q. In what way?
14 A. As soon as we are designated as "unwelcome."
15 Q. Sir, do you understand the difference between unwelcome and
17 A. Well, just after that we were invited, in fact I was invited by my
19 Q. Please, please, I have put a question to you. Do you appreciate
20 the difference between a petition which says you are unwelcome here and a
21 petition which calls for your expulsion? Do you understand -- do you
22 appreciate the difference between those two things? Or do you think those
23 are the same?
24 A. Sir, you are trying to make me say whether it was some sort of
25 trial. No, it was not a trial where it would be said the decision has
1 been made to expel you, no.
2 Q. Sir, I'm not trying to get you to say anything. I'm just trying
3 to get you to answer my questions. Okay? Please focus on my questions.
4 The question is: Do you appreciate the difference between a
5 petition which says you are unwelcome here. We would be happy if you
6 weren't here," and a petition which calls for your expulsion?
7 Do you appreciate the difference between those two things, or no?
8 A. Well, I don't know of all kinds of petitions that may exist. I
9 know what plebescite is. I know what --
10 Q. Sir --
11 A. -- referendum is, but this is something unique.
12 Q. Sir, this is not a question about petitions. This is a question
13 about language. You told us a few minutes ago before I showed you this
14 petition, that the petition asked for you to be expelled from Sibenik. I
15 put that question to you and you said "yes."
16 Now my question is: Do you understand, do you appreciate the
17 difference between a petition which says "you're not welcome here. You're
18 not -- we would be happy if you weren't here" and one that calls for your
19 expulsion? Or do you think those are the same things? It's a simple
20 question, sir.
21 A. Well, I think from the linguistic point of view it's not the same
22 thing. There is a difference. But in my reality, in the reality for me,
23 the message is unequivocal, because the essence of it was that we were
24 proclaimed persona non grata by the political parties in Sibenik and just
25 after that we were prevented from going back to our work.
1 Q. Sir, we'll talk about that --
2 A. Raskovic was disallowed from getting into the hospital.
3 Q. We'll talk about that in a moment. But now that you have conceded
4 that there is a difference between expulsion and what is written in this
5 petition, would you agree with me, then, that you were not being precise
6 and accurate and careful in your testimony when you told me that the
7 petition called for your expulsion from Sibenik? Would you agree with me,
9 A. I do not really distinguish between -- all I know is how I felt
10 and what I was subjected to after that.
11 Q. Sir, we're talking about --
12 A. And whether there was --
13 Q. The question is: Would you concede that you were not precise and
14 accurate and careful when you testified earlier that the petition asked
15 for you to be expelled from Sibenik?
16 A. Well, you know, when an entire people are being expelled the fate
17 of one person means nothing. But if you are trying to question even my
18 expulsion, that is absolutely preposterous, it makes no sense. The
19 pressure was such --
20 Q. Sir, did you --
21 A. It was so great not only against me, but --
22 Q. Sir, did you understand the question that I put to you just now?
23 Were you able to understand the question that I put to you? Or no? Did
24 you not understand it?
25 A. I understand your question.
1 Q. Could you answer it, please. Sir, could you please answer it,
2 then, if you understood it.
3 The question is: Would you concede that you were not precise and
4 accurate and careful when you testified earlier and on Friday that the
5 petition asked for you to be expelled from Sibenik? That was not
6 accurate, was it, sir?
7 A. I still continue to believe and claim that that petition asked for
8 our expulsion. And I think that's the way I understood it. Maybe others
9 can read it differently. At least I understood it that way.
10 Q. Well, that's not what you testified to, sir. What you testified
11 to is that the petition called for your expulsion, that it said it in the
12 text. And it doesn't say it in the text, does it, sir? It does not call
13 for your expulsion.
14 A. Sir, what would have happened with that entire design if my name
15 had not been there? Then I would not be able to prove at all that that
16 had happened to me. But luckily my name does feature there.
17 If my name were not in this document, we could interpret it this
18 way and another, whether it was Branko Popovic, member of the Main Board
19 of the Serbian Democratic Party that was meant.
20 However, there is no dilemma. At any rate, I understood the
21 message the way I understood it, and I don't know how else I could
22 possibly interpret it.
23 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I think -- I think this is a convenient
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is, indeed. We shall take a break and come back
1 at 4.00.
2 Court adjourned.
3 --- Recess taken at 3.30 p.m.
4 --- On resuming at 3.58 p.m.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Whiting.
6 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Could this document be admitted into evidence, please, Your
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
10 please be given an exhibit number.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes exhibit number 939.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
13 May I just ask a question, Mr. Whiting? You picked up the last
14 two documents, I thought in support of the points you were making from
15 this Exhibit 938.
16 MR. WHITING: No, Your Honour. It was a completely different
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Was it? Oh, okay. Then I should have interrupted
19 you a little earlier. Can I just check something with the witness, here?
20 With respect to this document Exhibit 938, the picture on that
21 document, Witness, did I understand you correctly to be saying the message
22 refers to you because of the words "Ustasha from the bank"?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yes.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: What do they mean to you? What message are they
25 saying to you?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The message is, as I have said
2 before when answering one of the Prosecutor's questions, that I should not
3 even think of going back, because they always fear that what they've done
4 to us as innocent people will come back to haunt them.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let me ask my question slightly differently. To
6 whom do the words "Ustasha from the bank" refer, in your view?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's probably the employees of the
8 bank who participated in the creation of that petition, because the
9 pressure that started with the petition continued just a few days later in
10 the bank where I worked, and it was made clear to me that I would no
11 longer be allowed to enter the bank and the director was told to
12 communicate that to me. HDZ militants intended to stop me from going back
13 to my work, in the bank, and that's why my manager invited me to tell me
14 that I had better take some annual leave and leave until things settled
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. I just wanted to understand
17 who those words referred to.
18 Thank you very much, Mr. Whiting.
19 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. Now speaking now about the -- again, about the petition from
21 August of 1990, you testified also, did you not, that it had been
22 organised by the HDZ, right?
23 A. Yes. Possibly other parties took part in it, too, but the HDZ was
24 the leader. Prior to that, a similar petition targeted Raskovic in
25 particular, in Primosten.
1 Q. Sir, I'm just asking about the petition that we've now seen the
2 text of.
3 Could we look at another document, this is ERN 02664892. And this
4 is an article from another newspaper on the same date, the 23rd of August,
5 1990 and it's the -- this one is from the newspaper Oslobodjenje. You
6 know that newspaper to be a Bosnian newspaper; correct?
7 A. Yes, I know.
8 Q. Now, we have to focus --
9 MR. WHITING: Could you scroll down, please. Okay, that's not the
10 correct page in the e-court. Is that the only page that's in there? No,
11 that's not it either. That's it, okay? Well, I have a hard copy of it.
12 If we could put, with the assistance of the usher, if we could put
13 the hard copy on the ELMO, please, and let's see if the translation is ...
14 Is there an English version of this? Your Honours, on the English
15 screen, do you have a text which says "Sibenik does not want Raskovic"?
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, Mr. Whiting. We have the other newspaper which
17 you said was the wrong one. That's better.
18 MR. WHITING: I just need a moment to catch up here, Your Honour,
19 I'm sorry.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: What's the heading of the --
21 MR. WHITING: No. The number should be 02664892. Did I give the
22 wrong number?
23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I may be of
24 assistance. We can see it on the screen in B/C/S, the passage from the
25 text titled "Sibenik does not want Raskovic." However, I cannot be of
1 assistance as regards the English version.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you, we've got that Mr. Milovancevic.
3 We're trying to get the English version. Thank you so much.
4 MR. WHITING: That's the English. Can we scroll down on the
5 B/C/S? Or is that -- or actually, go to the second page of the B/C/S.
6 Okay. On B/C/S we have it on the ELMO; and on the English, it is on the
7 e-court. My apologies.
8 Q. Sir, this is another article about the petition and it says that
9 it was organised, the decision was brought at a joint party meeting
10 organised on the initiative of HSLS, which stands for the Croatian Social
11 Liberal Party. That's not the HDZ, is it, sir?
12 A. No, no.
13 Q. So would you accept that this was in fact organised at the
14 initiative of a different party, at the HSLS party?
15 A. I didn't see this. I don't know anything about it.
16 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, could this document be admitted into
17 evidence, please.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
19 please be given an exhibit number.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will become Exhibit number 940.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
22 MR. WHITING:
23 Q. Now, sir, you spoke about harassment that occurred after the
24 petition, but -- and, sir, I'm actually done with that document, so ...
25 If we could lower the ELMO.
1 But, sir, in fact after the petition of the 23rd of August, 1990,
2 you did continue to leave your apartment on occasion, and you went to your
3 work, didn't you?
4 A. Sir, after the petition appeared, the very next morning, as I came
5 to the bank, I noticed that all the employees, starting with the
6 receptionist, are avoiding all contact with me. The receptionist
7 disappeared as soon as I said good morning.
8 Q. Sir, sir, I'm going to interrupt you because you told us this on
9 direct examination. My question to you was to confirm that in fact you
10 did go back to your bank, after the petition was -- this petition
11 happened; correct?
12 A. That morning I came to the bank, and then the manager invited me
13 to his office to talk. And he told me that a group of employees had been
14 to see him, and that they wanted to prevent me from going into the bank.
15 I think those people who had come to see him were HDZ members. I knew
16 them as HDZ members. So he suggested that the best thing for me to do
17 would be to take a vacation, because I had 16 days of annual leave that I
18 could take, and then after that, we would see what we were going to do
19 when the situation settles down, and I knew the situation would not settle
20 down because the tensions continued --
21 Q. Sir, sir --
22 A. -- to increase. On the contrary.
23 Q. Let me ask you some questions. Did you take the vacation, yes or
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. After the --
2 A. I accepted his suggestion and I took the vacation, not of my own
4 Q. Sir, after the vacation was completed, did you return to the bank?
5 A. I called up. The last day, I called up the manager --
6 Q. Sir, sir --
7 A. -- on the 16th day of my leave to tell him I was coming back, and
8 he said: Where are you going to --
9 Q. Just please answer the question. Did you return to the bank, yes
10 or no?
11 A. Yes. I came back, contrary to what the manager wanted.
12 Q. In fact, sir, this petition occurred in August of 1990 and you
13 continued to be employed by the bank until March of 1991; isn't that true?
14 A. Yes, yes, I did, but I didn't do anything. They took everything
15 away from me.
16 Q. Right. I believe you testified on direct examination that you
17 listened to the music that was being played in boom boxes by other
18 employees. Is that correct?
19 A. Yes. They took away my archives, the law files that I had
20 maintained for 25 years as the bank's legal officer. They also divested
21 me of my license for representation in court. They appointed a different
22 person, a lady assistant of mine, to take over the archival records, and
23 they moved me to another legal office.
24 Q. Sir, sir, so you continued to go to the bank, but you did not --
25 you did not do any work there is what your testimony is; correct?
1 A. No. I was given a new -- actually appointment by decision as if I
2 were a beginner, and they gave me this small office like a little cafe,
3 which was devoid of any furnishing, no books, no nothing. And I sat there
4 for eight months idle, without being assigned any work to do. They were
5 just playing games with me.
6 Q. Okay. I understand --
7 A. Probably they were counting that I would actually become so
8 exasperated as to leave of my own.
9 Q. Okay. Please focus on my question and just answer my question, if
10 you would. So, sir, to be clear and precise and accurate, you were not,
11 during that time, put into home detention, were you?
12 A. Well, you could say that I was, because any going out of my house
13 was risky for me --
14 Q. Sir, sir --
15 A. -- so that I actually avoided to --
16 Q. But you just told us that you went to the bank for eight months.
17 So you were not in home detention, were you?
18 A. Well, yes. But later I hardly ever dared go out to town. And if
19 I did, it was something which was a blitz sort of exercise, because I
20 wanted to avoid being harassed in any way.
21 Q. Okay. But I just want to get clear on the answer to my question.
22 You were -- it's correct to say that you were not put in home detention?
23 That is correct, right?
24 A. Well, in a way, yes, there was no court injunction or order of
25 that kind, something of that kind.
1 Q. Sir, sir, please, if you could answer my question directly. You
2 were not put in home detention during that time, right? All of these
3 other things happened, but you were not put in home detention, were you?
4 A. Mr. Prosecutor, actually I'm not quite clear on what kind of home
5 detention you are talking about. Does that require some sort of a
6 document, or is it just my feeling of fear or what have you that will
7 suffice for that?
8 Q. Well, what I mean by "home detention," which I think is a common
9 understanding, is that you were detained in your home. You were not
10 detained in your home, were you?
11 A. Well, all sorts of things happened every day there. Either in the
12 case of the building where I lived there would be graffiti --
13 Q. Sir, sir, please.
14 A. -- written that would actually amount to persecution.
15 Q. Sir, please focus on my question and answer my question.
16 You were not detained in your home, were you? All of these other
17 things happened; you've described them. But you were not physically
18 detained in your home, were you?
19 A. Any attempt on my part to go out anywhere was associated with some
20 provocations or assaults or people crying out things at me. In our
21 building, they would write --
22 Q. Sir, sir.
23 A. -- this is Croatia. Go. You have two daughters. Beware. And
24 things of that kind.
25 Q. But, sir, you were able to leave your house. You did, in fact,
1 leave your apartment, so you were --
2 A. I was, sir. I was able to go out and I did go out. But I would
3 transact my business very quickly, and I would return very quickly home in
4 order to avoid --
5 Q. Sir, now --
6 A. -- being exposed to any such possibilities.
7 Q. Now please answer my question. You were not put in home
8 detention, were you?
9 A. Well, it could be understood as some sort of an isolation, because
10 I was not free. I was not free as a citizen to go out. I had problems,
11 wherever I appeared. They punctured our tyres. They harassed us by
12 telephone every half an hour. There was this leaflet --
13 MR. WHITING: Your Honour I have put this question now about eight
14 times to the witness. I would ask that the Court at this point order the
15 witness to answer the question, please.
16 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Milovancevic.
18 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I refrained from reacting by
19 raising an objection in the belief that all of these questions would be
20 clarified by the witness's answers.
21 My learned colleague, the Prosecutor, in my view, should have
22 explained to the witness what house detention is. The witness is a jurist
23 but this institution never existed in Yugoslavia. We have prison,
24 imprisonment, we have detention, we have service, serving of a sentence.
25 These are the three institutions which exist in our country, according to
1 the constitution, the law, and jurisprudence. We do not have this
2 institute of house detention. So for heavens sake, I don't understand
3 what kind of a house detention are we talking about? Who is the one that
4 takes a decision on detaining, a house detaining a person?
5 In Yugoslavia and Croatia, in no republic of Yugoslavia, did there
6 exist such an institution as a notion or in practice.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, I have warned you before not to
8 call in God's name in court, and I ask you again to refrain
9 from doing so.
10 I am trying to look for the transcript where the witness did ask
11 Mr. Whiting what home detention was, and Mr. Whiting said that as is
12 understood by everybody, is to be kept in the house.
13 Now, I don't think there has been any suggestion,
14 Mr. Milovancevic, that there was home detention in the legal structure of
15 Croatia or anywhere else.
16 The question is just: You were not kept in home detention? I
17 think it is a simple enough question to answer. You are either -- you
18 were either kept there or you were not kept there. And without asking
19 Mr. Whiting to respond I am going to rule that objection as out of order
20 and overruled.
21 May the witness please answer.
22 I have told you before, if I have ruled, Mr. Milovancevic, and you
23 are not happy with my ruling, it's open to you to take the ruling on
24 appeal. You don't argue with me about it.
25 Now, will you please answer the question and tell us -- to answer
1 the question whether you were kept in home detention or not.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I was not kept in that
3 by some persons. But --
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. That is the end of the
5 answer. I don't need any more answer.
6 Okay. You've got an answer.
7 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. I'm grateful.
8 Q. Sir, can you tell me the first time that you were interviewed by
9 the Defence in this case. And by that I mean either the Defence counsel,
10 or investigators representing the Defence.
11 A. That was, Mr. Prosecutor, I believe the second day after -- after
12 my arrival.
13 Q. You mean, when you say your arrival, you mean your arrival in
14 The Hague?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Before you arrived in The Hague, were you -- can you tell me when
17 you were interviewed or spoken to by a representative of the Defence for
18 Milan Martic?
19 A. When I was to make my statement which you have received, and that
20 was perhaps a month or so prior to my coming here. I'm talking about my
21 curriculum vitae and this statement of mine in connection with the
23 Q. Okay, sir, sir?
24 A. -- that is all.
25 Q. Just to be clear. I do not have a copy of that statement.
1 So the first time that you were interviewed by the Defence was
2 approximately one month ago? Is that your testimony?
3 A. Yes. And I gave that statement.
4 Q. Is the statement a written statement? Did it result in a written
6 A. Yes, it did.
7 Q. Did you sign that statement?
8 A. No, no. I did not. I just gave it.
9 Q. Did you review the statement, the written statement, after it was
10 written? Or did you write it? Did you write the statement? Or did
11 somebody else interview you and write the statement?
12 A. I wrote that statement myself.
13 Q. In that statement, did you write anywhere that you were put into
14 home detention? Is that contained in the statement?
15 A. I cannot recall at this point, because I wrote about it on a
16 number of occasions. And given the limitations of space, I'm not quite
17 sure whether I put it precisely in that way, but I believe that in the
18 book I talked about it the most as -- the most important document.
19 Perhaps I did not refer to it as house detention, or maybe I did refer to
20 it in a pejorative sense, but I am not quite certain at this point. I
21 considered the petition the most important of all.
22 Q. Well, sir --
23 A. And all the rest is --
24 Q. Sir, let me tell you why I am putting this question to you.
25 Because we did not receive your statement, we're not entitled to that
1 under the Rules, but we did receive a summary of your testimony from the
2 Defence, and contained in that summary it states that you would testify
3 that all three officials were put into home detention.
4 Now, is that something that you ever stated to the Defence
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: All three? Which officials?
7 MR. WHITING: This is a reference in context to Jovan Raskovic,
8 the witness, and the third person whose name escapes me at the moment.
9 Q. Is that something, sir, that you told the Defence counsel that you
10 and Mr. Raskovic and the other gentleman were put into home detention?
11 A. Yes, in the sense that we explained to Their Honours. Because you
12 insisted on "house detention" as such, and we were in it, all of us, in a
13 way, and all of us were in the same position.
14 Q. Sir, sir, the phrase "home detention" did not come from me. It
15 came from the Defence counsel in their summary of your testimony. So I am
16 asking if you, in fact, ever used that term when making your statement to
17 the Defence.
18 Did you in fact say that you and the other men were put into home
19 detention? Did you say that, or not, sir? That seems like an important
20 point that you could remember.
21 A. Well, I cannot recall right now whether I did put that in the
22 statement, because I have -- my description of those events is in the
23 books, the collection about Jovan Raskovic which gives these descriptions
24 in detail, but --
25 Q. Sir, sir, sir --
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Witness, sorry. Mr. Witness I am not quite
2 sure whether the books you keep referring to are part of the evidence
3 here. If they are, I'm sorry. But if they are not, I don't think that's
4 what is being asked. What is being asked is what you discussed in
5 preparation for coming to this case.
6 Let's distinguish between the books that you may have written and
7 the preparations for coming to this case. Do you think you can do that?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours --
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you think you can do that?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I think that I can.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Please do that.
12 Yes, Mr. Whiting.
13 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Q. Now that we're focused -- I am grateful, Your Honour.
15 Now that we're focused on your preparation for this case, and you
16 said that you wrote this statement just a month ago, can you tell us, did
17 you say, in that statement, did you write in that statement that you and
18 Mr. Raskovic and Mr. Dobrijevic were put into home detention, yes or no?
19 A. I believe that I limited that statement to just myself, that I did
20 not refer individually to each one of us.
21 Q. Sir, that is not really the import of the question. It is not who
22 is referred to. The import of the question is: Did you say that you and
23 the other men were put into home detention?
24 A. I believe that I did in that statement.
25 Q. And that was not accurate, was it, sir?
1 A. Well, I've told you that I'm not quite certain, but I think that I
2 put that there too.
3 Q. And, sir, then why is it that when I was asking you the question
4 earlier about home detention, you started saying you didn't know what that
5 meant and what did I mean by that, when in fact you're now telling us that
6 you used those very words in your statement one month ago? Why did that
8 A. You insisting at any cost on this house detention, I really see no
9 reason why should that be of the essence vis-a-vis this petition? Where I
10 was, what I did after that, that is, in my view, irrelevant, I believe,
11 because there were --
12 Q. Sir, sir --
13 A. -- other pressures that followed.
14 Q. Sir, with all due respect, it is the Trial Chamber I think that
15 will ultimately determine what evidence is relevant and what's not
17 But my question to you is: If you used those words yourself a
18 month ago in your statement that you were put into home detention or house
19 detention, why did you -- why did you say that you didn't understand what
20 I meant by that and had difficulty answering the question when I put it to
21 you earlier, if you had used those words yourself, as you now claim?
22 A. Because, sir, because I believe that this concept of house
23 detention within the constellation of all these facts, was not to me that
24 essential, because there were a multitude of other events which were more
25 dramatic where I was concerned, and I probably used it in the way that we
1 understand that notion; that I was at home, that I was unable to go out,
2 that I was unable to leave my flat as a free man, rather that someone had
3 adopted a decision to put me into house detention. That is why I do not
4 attach any significance, any major significance to that.
5 Q. I will move on. But before I do, sir, isn't it true that in fact
6 at that time Jovan Raskovic was given police protection by the Croat
8 A. Well, I don't know much about that. This was not spoken about.
9 Probably when he went on his trips to Zagreb he probably had such
10 protection, but in Sibenik itself he probably did not have protection
11 because he could not leave his flat, many times. And often he would call
12 me when he was unable to go out and buy some food-stuffs or the like, he
13 often called me to get him some and bring him food to his home because
14 allegedly some HDZ people --
15 Q. Sir, let's stay focused on my question, please.
16 So it is your testimony that at least at times he was given police
17 protection; correct? That's your testimony?
18 A. Maybe. Maybe he had, but I didn't see that.
19 Q. Well, I'm sorry, but you told us that probably when he went on his
20 trips to Zagreb he probably had such protection.
21 A. Well, I remember when once we returned very late, about midnight
22 from an Assembly meeting in Slavonia, we arrived in Zagreb, he was
23 supposed to go and have talks with Tudjman, and as soon as we parked the
24 car in front of an apartment where he usually stayed, some Croatian
25 policemen walked up to us and they saw who we were, and probably they were
1 securing that apartment.
2 Q. Okay.
3 A. And then they withdrew. That is the only time I saw something of
4 the kind.
5 Q. Now, speaking of Jovan Raskovic, you described him as being
6 a "eminent physician" and "an intellectual par excellence" and in the rank
7 of intellectuals like Habermas and John Paul Sartre. Do you remember that
8 testimony from Friday?
9 A. Yes, I do. I do remember, and I have --
10 Q. Sir, sir, sir.
11 A. -- something to add.
12 Q. You fully answered the question when you said, "Yes, I do."
13 You also said he was well respected and popular. Do you remember
14 that testimony?
15 A. Yes, yes, I do. I do remember.
16 Q. And finally you said that "hatred or intolerance" could not be
17 associated with him and that he was a soft-spoken person and a great
18 humanitarian. Do you remember that testimony, sir?
19 A. Yes, I do. I remember that also.
20 Q. I would like to play for you a little, a very short clip of a
21 speech he gave on the 17th of August, 1990, so in fact before the
22 petition. And it's Exhibit 875 in our case.
23 MR. WHITING: I think we have to switch to the Sanction for this.
24 I don't know how this works.
25 [Videotape played]
1 MR. WHITING: Okay. That's enough we can stop it there.
2 Q. Sir, is that the man that you just told us couldn't be associated
3 with hatred or intolerance and was soft-spoken and an intellectual? Is
4 that the same man?
5 A. Yes, Mr. Prosecutor, that is Jovan Raskovic.
6 Q. And when the crowd is saying, "We will kill Tudjman. We will kill
7 the Ustashas," do you remember what he said? Do you remember him saying:
8 "Hvala, hvala," meaning "thank you, thank you," before he addressed --
9 A. Yes, yes. His custom was to seek to calm down the masses and the
10 people, and he managed, always, to calm them down. But of course --
11 Q. Sir, sir --
12 A. -- this has been taken out of context.
13 Q. Well, did it look to you like he was calming the crowd?
14 A. Yes, yes. At any rate, wherever we were, wherever there had been
15 some incidents, he would manage to calm down the people and to actually
16 suppress the --
17 Q. Sir, he says, he says to the crowd that he cannot provide weapons
18 but "you will probably find somebody who will give it to you." And this
19 is a crowd that is chanting: "We will kill Tudjman, we will kill the
20 Ustashas." Is that, in your mind, calming the crowd?
21 A. I think that this has been taken out of its context, and his
22 statement in extenso actually is "I will not give you weapons. I will not
23 lead you into war. If you want war with the Croats, look for another
25 That was on the 31st of March in Knin, in 1991, when the people,
1 after the Croatian special units had attacked Plitvice, demanded arms.
2 Q. Sir, you're talking about -- you're talking about a different
3 speech. This speech is from the 17th of August, 1990. He says -- we can
4 play it again, if you like, but he says -- he says: "I don't have arms
5 but you will probably find somebody who will give it to you."
6 A. I don't know where this was. If you told me where it was, perhaps
7 I could remember.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, my objection is
10 the incorrect quote of the beginning of the sentence by my learned
11 colleague. In the film Mr. Raskovic clearly says: "Do not ask me for
12 weapons," and that is not the way it was represented by colleague
13 Prosecutor. I mean, this part of the statement was not presented thus to
14 the witness.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: How did he represent, Mr. Milovancevic? I thought
16 the witness saw it for himself on the clip? He didn't need it to be
17 represented to him. On the contrary, he gave an interpretation of that
18 statement which is completely different from what was on the clip.
19 What did Mr. Whiting represent to this witness, Mr. Milovancevic?
20 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, literally this is
21 what he says: "I have no weapons, but there will be someone there to give
22 them to you."
23 But Mr. Raskovic -- this is not what Mr. Raskovic said.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: What line are you reading?
25 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Page 51, line 16.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Page 51 line 16 is what you are telling us. What
2 are you reading, which is a representation by Mr. Whiting?
3 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm pointing to
4 the imprecision in the interpretation of the statement of Mr. Raskovic.
5 My learned colleague says that Mr. Raskovic said: "I have no weapons but
6 there will be someone who will give it to you."
7 Mr. Raskovic did not say: "I have no weapons." He said: "Do not
8 ask me. Do not demand weapons from me."
9 These are two completely different things.
10 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I think I can shorten this. I accept
11 that the -- I may have misquoted the first part of the statement. I'm not
12 sure I appreciate the importance of the distinction, but it is -- I think
13 Defence counsel has put it more correctly.
14 Perhaps we could just play the clip again so we see it.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Whiting. I do see now where,
16 without him showing us -- please, Mr. Milovancevic, when you refer, please
17 be able to refer us to the transcript. It is at line 50 -- I beg your
18 pardon. Page 50, line 22 to 23.
19 If you want to play the clip again, play it again.
20 [Videotape played]
21 MR. WHITING:
22 Q. Sir, having --
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Whiting, there is a request from Judge Hoepfel
25 that could you play a couple of minutes or some three minutes before the
1 "hvala, hvala."
2 MR. WHITING: I can try to -- I can try to do that at another time
3 but the clip is prepared this way. I mean, it has already been edited
4 this way, so I don't think we have the part that occurs -- oh, you mean
5 what was already seen? Play it again? Or ...
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, no, no, no, no.
7 MR. WHITING: Or --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: What he says before he says "thank you, thank you."
9 MR. WHITING: Yes. I don't have that available. I can certainly
10 see if we have that available in-house and make that available to the
11 Trial Chamber.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Do you think it would be possible to do so
13 while this witness is in the box? It doesn't have to be today.
14 MR. WHITING: We certainly can check by tomorrow. That's
15 certainly no problem.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
17 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
19 MR. WHITING:
20 Q. Now, sir, having seen the clip again, is it still your position
21 that Mr. Raskovic is calming the crowd here in this clip that you see?
22 A. I think that his wish was to calm them down. At any rate, at
23 every rally the situation was very tense and inflamed, and I don't know
24 why you zoomed in on this one. Maybe the way it appears here, taken out
25 of context, it may sound that way. But you can rest assured that he
1 certainly -- he was actually the only man who was able to calm things
2 down. Between us, I don't know if there was another person who was able
3 to cope with that crowd the way he was able to.
4 Q. In fact, Mr. Raskovic was one of the more moderate of the SDS,
5 wasn't he?
6 A. Yes, that's why he was nicknamed Serbian Ghandi. That's a
7 nickname we gave him. I was his closest associate, and we all thought we
8 needed to be radical. Why is he talking about peace and brotherhood with
9 Croats? We needed to strike back more fiercely. But he was always
10 against that. He was not against Croatian statehood. He was just asking
11 equal treatment for Serbs.
12 Now, that didn't happen, and the crowd reacted as it did, and we
13 should bear in mind that such reactions on the part of the crowd always
14 followed some dramatic event, a killing, wounding of some of our members.
15 Q. Well, sir --
16 A. Assaults and attacks on the people, et cetera.
17 Q. Well, this is on the 17th of August, 1990, and there's -- we have
18 a lot of evidence about things that happened on that date. But for our
19 purposes today, that's just six days before the petition. And would you
20 accept that Croatian citizens, that Croats, let's say Croats seeing this
21 clip, seeing this rally, that that might make them afraid?
22 A. Well, the Croats saw that from media reports, from the news, Radio
23 Television Zagreb broadcast our rallies for the most part, and it's
24 curious that the television also took part in the demonisation of our
25 movement and our party.
1 Q. Sir, sir --
2 A. At every rally where --
3 Q. Sir, we're going to talk about that in a moment. But this is not
4 an example of demonisation, is it? The entire crowd is chanting "we will
5 kill Tudjman, we will kill the Ustashas." That's not focusing in on one
6 Chetnik or one person in the crowd. That's the entire crowd chanting.
7 And wouldn't that make the Croats afraid and couldn't that provoke,
8 perhaps, the reaction that occurred in Sibenik against Raskovic?
9 A. Sir, one needs to know that at that time propaganda was being
10 conducted in Croatia by Croatian parties --
11 Q. Sir --
12 A. -- and by the ruling party.
13 Q. I'm going to interrupt you because you're not answering the
14 question. The question is about the effect that this would have on
15 Croats. Please focus on that. You would agree with me that this would
16 make Croats afraid? Wouldn't it?
17 A. Hardly. I don't think so. If they had been afraid, they would
18 not have gone ahead with what they did do eventually. That's the breaking
19 up of Yugoslavia and the drive to expel Serbs from Croatia. Because one
20 needs to know that at that time --
21 Q. Sir, now, sir --
22 A. -- there was a document in circulation, like instructions.
23 Q. Sir, sir --
24 A. -- on what needed to be done with us.
25 Q. Sir, you've answered the question. You've told us that in your
1 view they weren't afraid.
2 Now, you were shown excerpts in direct examination of Jovan
3 Raskovic's book "Crazy Land" which was published in 1990. Do you remember
4 that? Do you remember talking about that book, during your direct
5 examination on Friday?
6 A. Yes. I remember that.
7 Q. And you testified that the book was -- the book is about events in
8 World War II, but you testified that it's topical, it was topical in 1990,
9 because the policies of the HDZ and Tudjman harked back to 1941. Do you
10 remember that testimony in your direct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And, in fact, it's fair to say, isn't it, that that's why Jovan
13 Raskovic wrote the book in 1990, because he wanted to draw a parallel
14 between the Ustasha government of 1941 and the Croatian government of
15 1990, right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. He wanted people to believe that they were the same thing, right?
18 A. Probably, probably.
19 Q. And that certainly made Croats -- I'm sorry, made Serbs afraid,
20 didn't it?
21 A. Well, Serbs were already frightened enough in the face of the
22 moves the new Croatian authorities had made --
23 Q. Sir, sir, I'm want to focus --
24 A. -- towards the Serbs, so that Jovan Raskovic could not frighten
25 them any more than that.
1 Q. Sir, leaders -- the Serb leaders in the Krajina, and you've told
2 us that Jovan Raskovic is one the most moderate of the Serb leaders, is
3 telling the people that there is no difference between the Ustasha
4 government of 1941 and the Croatian government of 1990. That made the
5 Serb people afraid. Right?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 A. The Croatian authorities caused that fear.
9 Q. And the Serb leaders fanned that fear and they repeated it and
10 their speech made people afraid, didn't it?
11 A. Well, I think there was fear on both sides, probably, because
12 that's how the events developed. It seemed that conflict was inevitable.
13 However, I would like to stress here that Croatian politicians
14 always saw every display of Serbdom as something anti-Croatian, because
15 Serbs were always pro Yugoslav. In Croat eyes, Serbs were always
16 pro Yugoslavia and pro communist.
17 Q. Sir, I was talking specifically about the parallel that was
18 being drawn between Serb leaders between the Ustasha government and the
19 Croatian government of 1990.
20 Now, isn't it true that even Jovan Raskovic himself, shortly
21 before he died, some months before he died, that he -- he himself
22 acknowledged that these kinds of speeches ignited the fuse that -- and led
23 to war. Isn't that true?
24 A. No, I don't think so. I don't think that his speeches ignited
25 the fuse. As far as I know, he extinguished that fire, as far as he was
1 able to. As to what happened behind his back and beyond our control is
2 another question.
3 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Was this your question, Mr. Whiting? Or was your
4 question if Mr. Raskovic said that?
5 MR. WHITING: You are exactly correct, Your Honour, it's whether
6 Mr. Raskovic said that.
7 Q. Are you aware that Mr. Raskovic, in January of 1992, said that --
8 well, why don't I just show the statement. It would be easier.
9 MR. WHITING: If we could see Exhibit 879 in evidence, please.
10 If we could zoom in on the right hand side, the right-hand column
11 underneath the photograph of the woman. There. I don't know, there may
12 not be an English -- it's probably the part -- probably the part for OTP.
13 Q. Yes. Now, do you see, sir -- can we just move over all the way to
14 the right of the B/C/S version.
15 Do you see where Mr. Raskovic says: "I feel responsible for
16 laying the groundwork for this war, albeit not in the military sense or as
17 someone who believes that war is a solution. However, had the emotional
18 flame in the Serbian people not been fanned, it would not have come to
19 that. In fact, it was my party and I personally who kindled this sparkle
20 of Serbian patriotism and not only in Croatia. We ignited it all across
21 Bosnia and Herzegovina."
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I see that.
23 MR. WHITING:
24 Q. And that's true, isn't it, sir, that the kind of speech and
25 emotional flame was -- led to conflict and led to war, didn't it?
1 A. I don't think so. No, actually. Because, you see, Professor
2 Raskovic used to give interviews after those, among other things, because
3 he was an interesting person to interview, and lots of times journalists
4 and reporters asked me to secure an interview with him, just a brief
5 interview because that would increase the copy of their papers, and I
6 often did that favour for various reporters. And he gave those interviews
7 hastily after great rallies and big meetings, and it's possible that he
8 gave that statement in a brief interview. He gave several a day. He
9 didn't know any more --
10 Q. Sir --
11 A. -- all the people to whom he had given interviews, and I often
12 warned him of the possibility that various reporters might interpret his
13 words in various ways, but he always ...
14 Q. Sir, isn't it more likely that he said those words and gave that
15 interview because that's what he felt at that time, and that it was true?
16 A. Yes, possibly, maybe in moments of resignation, after seeing that
17 his work did not bring about any improvement, any political improvement
18 for the Serb people. And he said, in a tone of resignation: "Maybe I
19 should not have appeared at all. Maybe I should not have ignited that
20 fuse of Serbdom." Serbdom that had been buried for many years and was not
21 allowed to be asserted, either in science or culture or in health care, in
22 any area.
23 He also asked for the bones of those slaughtered Serbs to be
24 exhumed and placed in ossaries and then others --
25 Q. Sir, sir, I'm going to interrupt you because I think you have
1 answered the question and now your answer is going a bit astray.
2 Let's talk about the end of Raskovic's career.
3 You testified that tapes of conversations between Tudjman and
4 Raskovic were leaked. Do you remember that?
5 A. Yes, I do remember.
6 Q. And that occurred in the summer of 1990, didn't it?
7 A. Yes. In the end of -- in fact -- no. Yes. Summer.
8 Q. And these tapes were widely publicised by the Belgrade media, were
9 they not, when they came out?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And Raskovic lost his authority and was discredited because of
12 these tapes; correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And in fact it was because of this that he left and went to
15 Belgrade, isn't it?
16 A. No, not because of that, but from that point on the radical stream
17 in the SDS never forgave him that.
18 Q. And --
19 A. Although it was a conversation on a human level where not
20 everything should have been published, although it was. Especially not
21 parts where he spoke about his family, his daughter who was married to a
22 Croat, his grandchildren who were Croat. He intended all that to relieve
23 the tensions during the talks. However, those who published it placed the
24 stress on that, and Krajina people took the bait, if I can say so.
25 Q. When you say --
1 A. In later appearances we tried to explain it to the people.
2 Q. When you say the Krajina people, you're talking about the Serbs in
3 Krajina, right?
4 A. Yes, yes, Serbs.
5 Q. And --
6 A. And members of our movement.
7 Q. And the radical stream that you referred to took -- essentially
8 took control of the SDS and the Krajina, right, after that, after the
9 summer of 1990?
10 A. Well, yes. Raskovic kept losing ground. He always remained
11 popular among the people, but he was losing control over the situation.
12 He would go to Belgrade often. He would go every 15 days to the Knin
13 Hospital to have a meeting with the staff, with the doctors, and then he
14 would intervene --
15 Q. So --
16 A. -- to calm the situation --
17 Q. So in March of 1991, then, by the next year, it's not true, then,
18 that Raskovic and his wing of the SDS was "the only party representing the
19 Serbs in Croatia." That's not true, is it? Because the radical --
20 A. No, it was because Babic had established his own Serbian
21 Democratic Party, SDS of Krajina. And then the original Serb Democratic
22 Party of Jovan Raskovic, of which I was a member too, lost its influence
23 and authority. Institutionally we were no longer connected and we were in
25 Q. So the --
1 A. To the extent our abilities, we --
2 Q. So the SDS of Krajina that was established that was Babic's wing
3 of the party, let's say, that wing of the party represented the Serbs in
4 Croatia, correct, by 1991?
5 A. Yes. It was always touch and go. Not all areas supported Babic.
6 It was all very patchy. Things happened very fast. It was tit for tat.
7 As soon as Croatian authorities announced a new move --
8 Q. Sir, when you say that your wing was in exile in Belgrade,
9 what you mean by that is that your wing and Raskovic's wing of the SDS had
10 essentially lost authority in the Krajina, right?
11 A. Yes. Because all the key figures who were presidents of our
12 boards across various Croat cities lost their jobs. They were driven out
13 of their communities, and all of them found themselves in exile in
14 Belgrade. We all kept in touch with Raskovic, only in as much as we were
15 able to help out occasionally, but that assistance did not have much
16 effect on the situation on the ground. As I said, Raskovic went to the
17 Knin Hospital every fortnight to lecture --
18 Q. So, sir beings to be clear, to be clear --
19 A. -- and along the way, he would --
20 Q. Mr. Raskovic was not prevented from going to the Krajina, was he?
21 He went to the Knin Hospital.
22 A. I know he went to that hospital every 15 days. I know that very
23 well because the driver always came to pick him up.
24 Q. Sir, you were not prevented from going to the Krajina. You
25 yourself could have gone from Belgrade to the Krajina; correct? There is
1 nothing that prevented you from going to the Krajina?
2 A. Yes, yes. I could have travelled, too, if the corridor through
3 which one was able to travel to Bosnia was open, because there was
4 fighting there often. It was not safe.
5 I went only occasionally to visit my father in Knin who was ill
6 and suffering from angina pectoris. He is an 80-year-old man. And I
7 stayed for ten days or so. It was just before Operation Flash, and
8 Operation Storm came a month later.
9 Q. Now, sir, sir, I want to move to another topic, unless there is a
10 question from the Trial Chamber on this topic.
11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Witness, maybe you can explain once more was there
12 any special reason for Jovan Raskovic and you to go to Serbia, not to
13 Knin, when you moved away from Sibenik?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because in -- Knin is a small place.
15 There is not enough work, even for the residents, let alone for us,
16 newcomers. That is the main reason why during that period, when I was in
17 that funny situation in the Jadran bank I was trying to find another job
18 to find a way out of there, and as soon as a job appeared in Belgrade for
19 me, I left. Jovan Raskovic left just after the petition. He didn't have
20 a problem finding another workplace. He would just occasionally come back
21 to attend a meeting or something, but he had already planned to move to
22 Belgrade for his career, because he had found a job in the neurological
23 hospital called Sveti Sava, and he was going to lead that specialised
24 institute. It was good for his professional career, and he was happy that
25 they gave him that job.
1 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you. You may go on, please.
2 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour. I think it's a convenient
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. We will take a break and come
5 back at quarter to 6.00.
6 We're adjourned.
7 --- Recess taken at 5.15 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 5.44 p.m.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Whiting.
10 MR. WHITING: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Q. Sir, I want to ask you some -- just one question about the HDZ.
12 You accept, do you not, that the HDZ programme that was adopted on
13 the 24th and 25th of February, 1990, explicitly stated that it supported
14 the guarantee of rights and liberties of every citizen, regardless of
15 race, nationality, religious persuasion, political views, gender or
16 status? You know that, right?
17 A. Well, yes, that was the proclaimed stance of more or less all the
18 parties at the time.
19 Q. And you also accept, do you not, that the Croatian constitution of
20 1990, the so-called Christmas constitution or that was adopted in December
21 of 1990, explicitly guaranteed equality for anybody who was a citizen,
22 regardless of ethnicity, right?
23 A. Yes, formally.
24 Q. Now I want to ask you some questions about the SDS and the
25 founding of the SDS. You testified that on -- that you remember this
1 meeting on the 9th of November, 1989, that you had I believe with Bogoljub
2 Popovic about -- and the topic of the meeting was to discuss what name to
3 give the party that you had been planning. Do you remember testifying
4 about that meeting?
5 A. Yes, I do. I do remember.
6 Q. So if, on the 9th of November, 1989, you're talking about what
7 name to give the party, then I take it the planning for this party had
8 been going on for some time before that; correct?
9 A. Well, not exactly. Not for a very long time. Probably from June,
10 the time of the commemoration of the 600th anniversary of the battle of
11 Kosovo in Dalmatia, so that was in June. That is when the Serbian
12 Cultural Society, Zora, was established. At that time the initiative was
13 launched. Actually, we started thinking about it.
14 Q. And that's June of 1989?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You testified about the founding Assembly of the SDS, which I
17 believe was in February of 1990 and why it was -- and you testified about
18 why it was held in Knin rather than in Sibenik.
19 Now, isn't it true that in 1990, the municipality of Knin was
20 90 per cent Serb and about ten per cent Croat; whereas the municipality of
21 Sibenik, it was exactly the opposite, it was 90 per cent Croat and ten
22 per cent Serb. Isn't that approximately correct?
23 A. Yes, that is approximately correct.
24 Q. And that's why the founding Assembly of the SDS was held in Knin,
25 isn't it? Because that's where the majority, overwhelmingly majority Serb
1 population lived.
2 A. Yes. This was the dominant reason, but also for security
3 considerations it was impossible to have it in some towns, and we wanted,
4 especially Professor Raskovic, wanted us to present our programmes in some
5 cities, but it was impossible for instance in Zagreb, in Sibenik, and in
6 some other cities, like Split for instance, given the overall situation
7 that obtained.
8 Q. Now, you testified that the Croatian media would focus on and
9 emphasise the presence of so-called Chetniks at rallies of the SDS. Do
10 you remember testifying about that on Friday?
11 A. Yes. I do. I remember.
12 Q. Now, let me just ask you a few questions about so-called Chetniks.
13 At that time there were Serbs who described themselves at
14 Chetniks, right, who considered themselves Chetniks and described
15 themselves as Chetniks, right?
16 A. In Croatia this was a negligible number of people.
17 Q. But --
18 A. Because Croatia ...
19 Q. I'm not at this moment interested in the -- asking about the
20 number of people. I'm just saying there were people who openly described
21 themselves this way in Croatia, also in Serbia; correct?
22 A. Yes, there were people who described their selves in that way.
23 But these were more or less groups of individuals who might appear at our
24 Assembly meetings perhaps wearing such uniforms and caps in order to show
25 their appertaining to such movement. But Jovan Raskovic always insisted
1 that our guards take care of those people and --
2 Q. Sir, sir.
3 A. -- make them leave, because the Croatian television would always
4 make a point of showing them on television.
5 Q. I just have a few more questions about Chetniks. In fact, there
6 were -- Vojislav Seselj who had a group of volunteers who called
7 themselves Chetniks, right?
8 A. Well, I don't think that they were exactly his people. Everybody
9 had radicals within their ranks who presented themselves as such. This
10 was not associated with just one party.
11 Q. But --
12 A. Because there were radical people in all the parties. There were
13 radical men in all the parties.
14 Q. Okay. Now, you are aware, right, that in World War II there were
15 Chetnik groups that committed massacres of Croat and Muslim civilians,
17 A. Yes, in certain areas there were such people as well who
18 collaborated with the occupying forces in order to be given weapons by
19 them and in order to protect themselves in their enclaves in a way. That
20 way they collaborated with the Italians, later with the Germans in order
21 to strike some sort of a balance. It was mainly thanks to that that they
22 stood their ground in such areas, but after the war, of course, they had
23 to flee towards Slovenia, Austria and other places.
24 Q. But -- and these certain groups participated or committed
25 massacres of Croat and Muslim civilians, right, in World War II? That
1 happened, right?
2 A. Well, normally in a civil war, both parties did all sorts of
3 things, but what was done to us in Croatia can be called a genocide.
4 Q. Sir --
5 A. That is well known to all.
6 Q. Sir, I take it the -- your answer to my last question was yes. It
7 was yes, right?
8 A. In war everything is possible. Especially in civil war.
9 Q. And that happened in World War II, that certain Chetnik groups
10 participated or committed massacres of Croat and Muslim civilians, right?
11 That was one of the things that happened in World War II.
12 A. Yes. There were such situations also, but not on such a massive
13 scale as the suffering of the Serbian people.
14 Q. And you are aware, are you not, that Croats in 1990 viewed people
15 who adopted the Chetnik uniform or the Chetnik insignia and called
16 themselves Chetniks as threatening to them, and supportive of the notion
17 of a Greater Serbia, right, and that's why the Croatian television focused
18 on those people.
19 A. Well, that is possible, but that was actually vis-a-vis the state
20 regime which treated us in the way they did. These were just marginal
21 groups, individuals who could not threaten anybody, be a threat to
22 anybody. This was more in the way of folklore, you know. But here we're
23 talking about an entire state apparatus, participating in the demonisation
24 of --
25 Q. Sir, sir, please don't argue. Just answer my questions. So your
1 testimony is that the Croatian television would focus in on the Chetniks
2 at these rallies and those Chetniks were frightening for Croats, right?
3 A. Well, I wouldn't say -- I would call them. This is just a
4 pejorative designation, Chetniks, because they only had this cap which is
5 a traditional Serbian peasant's cap which is also worn by members of
6 folklore societies.
7 Q. Well, sir -- sir, I'm sorry --
8 A. But in Croatia they see everything Serbian including the trappings
9 of Serbian folklore as --
10 Q. Sir, I'm sorry, but we started off this topic with you telling us
11 that there were people who identified themselves as Chetniks. So for
12 those people the term was not pejorative, right?
13 A. They were not typical of our party. Perhaps of some other
14 parties. But in the Serbian Democratic Party, especially in relation to
15 Dr. Raskovic, people subscribed to the party and to his views who were not
16 extremists, but people would come to our meetings to sell some of the
17 accoutrements of that movement, the images of Draza Mihajlovic, T-shirts,
18 badges. Now a member, a participant would get drunk and wear that badge,
19 and Croatian television would focus on that particular participant, and
20 that would be ascribed to us in general, but actually that wasn't the
22 Q. Sir, didn't the exact same thing happen on the other side, that is
23 that the Serb media and Serb leaders, including yourself, would focus on
24 extremists individuals within the HDZ or within Croatia and would seek to
25 discredit the entire HDZ and the entire Croatian government based on that?
1 Didn't the exact same thing happen?
2 A. Well, that too happened. Everything would have been all right if
3 we personally had not been subjected to terror, lost work, were prevented
4 from earning a livelihood. We had to establish --
5 Q. Sir, sir --
6 A. -- that party in order to keep our jobs.
7 Q. You answered the question when you said "that too happened."
8 So the same thing happened on both sides. Both sides demonised
9 the other side; is that right?
10 A. Well, yes. Naturally that also happened, but it's different when
11 it is backed by the state regime.
12 Q. Sir, and not only did it happen, but you yourself participated in
13 it, didn't you? You participated in it then, and you've participated in
14 it in your testimony here in court, haven't you? You have sought to
15 demonise and to claim that all the HDZ and all the Croatian leaders were
16 Ustashas and fascists. Right?
17 A. No, no, I wouldn't say that. Specifically speaking as far as I
18 myself am concerned, always in my speeches I called for the preservation
19 of the joint state of Yugoslavia, and I was well known for that.
20 Actually, people actually resented my doing that. I don't remember my own
21 raising the temperature, as it were, with my speeches.
22 Q. Well, sir, in fact, you didn't think the danger was just the
23 Croatian authorities. You thought the danger came from the Croatian
24 people, didn't you?
25 A. Well, this aggression, this dispersive aggression which had found
1 its way into the people and was aimed against us was present in every walk
2 of life. And I remember this leaflet of the HDZ, which was an instruction
3 of how to harass the Serbs, the Croats were instructed how to ask -- how
4 to act, sorry, in a so-called peaceful way in order to harass the Serbs.
5 This was published in Novasti [phoen] I believe in 1991, this leaflet.
6 Q. Sir, so the -- in your view the aggression -- by 1990, in your
7 view the aggression had -- was not just contained in some leaders or some
8 individuals, but was contained in the Croatian public. That's what you're
9 saying, isn't it?
10 A. Yes. In any case the entire people was given instructions in
11 order -- as to how to act with respect to us in our residential houses, in
12 our workplaces --
13 Q. Sir --
14 A. -- and how to expel us in a peaceful way in order to avoid
15 incrimination, meaning --
16 Q. Sir --
17 A. -- harass us by telephone.
18 Q. In that case --
19 A. -- every half an hour. I apologise, sorry.
20 Q. So then in your view, by 1990, the Croatian public, if the
21 aggression in your view had spread to the Croatian public, then the
22 Croatian public is the enemy, isn't it, in your view?
23 A. Well, you see, harassing people in their flats, at their
24 workplaces --
25 Q. Sir, could you answer my question, please.
1 A. Yes. There was aggression -- there was aggression everywhere
2 against us, against Serbs.
3 Q. Sir, sir --
4 A. In their workplaces, in their houses, where they lived.
5 Q. Sir, the Croatian public was the enemy. You must have thought
6 that the Croatian public was the enemy, right?
7 A. Well, I can think or not think what I like, but they manifested
8 their attitude towards us --
9 Q. Sir, sir, my question --
10 A. -- in what I might even call a genocidal way.
11 Q. And that's the public manifested themselves in a genocidal way, in
12 your view.
13 A. Well, look here. For instance, harassment --
14 Q. Sir, sir --
15 A. -- of the people in their houses by telephone.
16 Q. Please, sir, answer my question. In your view the Croatian public
17 had a genocidal attitude towards the Serbs, right?
18 A. They participated in it. And seeing that they were given written
19 instructions of how to peacefully harass us, to make our lives such an
20 inferno that we had to leave of our own volition --
21 Q. Sir, sir, let me put my question to you one more time. So you
22 must have thought that the Croatian public had become the enemy. Right?
23 A. Well, they were mainly in the first echelons or at the end of this
24 chain. The chief promoter saw that aggression, but this so-called
25 peaceful --
1 Q. Were they the enemy, sir?
2 A. In my view, they were -- they were members of this extremist HDZ
3 regime, as well as of other parties.
4 Q. Sir, were --
5 A. To me personally they were some kind of an enemy.
6 Q. Thank you, sir. I have no further questions.
7 A. Because they wouldn't let me live --
8 Q. Sir, thank you. You have answered my questions. Thank you.
9 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I have no further questions.
10 I can report to the Court, that we do not -- with respect to that
11 video clip, that is the beginning of the clip that we have. We do not
12 have anything that precedes it.
13 Thank you, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Whiting. Do you have anything that
15 succeeds it?
16 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, in evidence is -- the tape continues
17 for another minute or so, and that is in evidence and we can play that
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's fine. If it's in evidence, that's fine.
20 Thank you very much.
21 Mr. Milovancevic.
22 Re-examination by Mr. Milovancevic.
23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
24 Q. In response to a question by my colleague, the Prosecutor, you
25 referred to a leaflet giving instructions on how to harass the Serbian
1 population without that being a criminal offence. Can you tell us what it
3 A. It was an instruction, instructions how to drive away Serbs in a
4 peaceful way without the alleged use of force. That meant constant
5 telephone harassment every half hour. It was specifically written at
6 night. Then put toothpicks in their locks so that they cannot enter their
7 flats. Also do the same to the locks of their cellars. Puncture their
8 tyres but do not slash them. Just puncture them. Or open the tyre
9 exhaust. Do not slash the tyres. Do not communicate with them. Do not
10 talk to them. Do not give them any assistance. Do not receive any
11 assistance from them. Tell your children not to associate with Serbian
12 children. Not to socialise with Serbian children. Assist them only if
13 their children are sick. Or --
14 Q. Thank you, Mr. Popovic.
15 A. So this leaflet was later published.
16 Q. Thank you. Thank you. That will do. It is enough.
17 From the stand-point of your experience and the experience of
18 other people whom you know, did the Croatian population actually follow
19 those instructions?
20 A. We felt it. We saw it. I later realised that a part of that
21 programme was incorporated in the petition also. Precisely the part which
22 speaks of us as undesirable, because allegedly, they said that they should
23 not take any acts which would constitute a criminal offence and could be
24 incriminated, so that vis-a-vis the international public that would be
25 seen as that, but that allegedly the consequence of all of these actions
1 would be our departure, if not, then they will be -- our families would be
2 exerting pressure on us to leave.
3 Q. You said it was in the leaflet: Do this. Do the enumerated
4 things in order for the Serbs to leave, or to have them -- the members of
5 their families buckle under the pressure.
6 A. Yes. They said, if they stand firm, the members of their families
7 will buckle and under pressure and exert pressure on them to leave.
8 Q. When was this?
9 A. This was in the latter half of 1990 and then continued also later
10 in respect of Serbs in towns, because if 300.000 Serbs left as a
11 consequence of such actions from 1990 to mid-1993, you can imagine 300.000
12 people predominantly from the cities, what that meant.
13 Q. Can you tell us who was behind that leaflet? Do you know that?
14 A. Well, I suppose it's the political party, the ruling political
15 party. And possibly instructors from the state authorities who knew the
16 kind of effect it would have.
17 Q. My learned friend from the Prosecution asked you a couple of
18 questions about the petition. Do you remember them?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. My learned friend from the Prosecution showed you the text of the
21 petition. You confirmed it was accurate. And it reads, among other
22 things: "We would be happy if you disappeared forever from our
23 environment or community."
24 Can you tell us what these words mean to you?
25 A. Well, I don't think there's any question about it. We simply have
1 to go. I don't find any other meaning.
2 Q. And when you said that at the central square in Sibenik under the
3 auspices of the HDZ the implementation of that petition was organised, you
4 said there existed also books that citizens signed. Do you recall that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Can you tell us what happened to those books? Were they sent
8 A. They were handed over to the vicar of Sibenik, Pasko Bubalo. The
9 governor in fact. Pasko Bubalo.
10 Q. What is a governor?
11 A. According to the new system of Croatian administration, parish
12 replaced the municipality. And he was the equivalent of president of
13 municipality under the previous system.
14 Q. These books were signed by 20.000 people, and the purpose of that
15 text which said that three from among their community, from their
16 communities should disappear forever, that was handed over to the
17 governor. To the mayor.
18 MR. WHITING: Your Honour, I'm sorry.
19 A. Yes, I learned later that the same sort of petition was signed in
21 MR. WHITING: I think counsel is now testifying.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.
23 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I just asked the witness if I
24 understood him correctly. I asked a question. Is that what you're
25 saying? And the witness confirmed what he said earlier.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, can I tell you what's
2 translated. "These books were signed by 20.000 people, and the purpose of
3 that text which said that three from among their community, from their
4 communities, should disappear forever, that was handed over to the
5 governor. To the mayor."
6 Is that what you said? And that is not a question. If that is
7 what you said, you are not asking him to confirm anything. You are
8 telling him.
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I will withdraw the question.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
11 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. The Prosecutor also put to you the text of the speech that the
13 member of parliament, Mr. Licina, pronounced in the parliament. Do you
14 remember that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Do you recall that some of his words were put to you, the part of
17 his speech where he says that "this action to expel three people." Was
18 equivalent to ostracism after 2.000 years?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. What did he mean by that, this ostracism?
21 A. He's talking about a certain method of expelling citizens from a
22 community that is not adapted to our times, but is more evocative of the
23 ancient times and the ancient way of making people leave, and that was a
24 custom wherein a crowd of people would gather in the central square to
25 vote, usually by throwing little plates against somebody's continued
1 presence in their community.
2 MR. WHITING: I'm sorry. I'm sorry, but maybe this is a
3 translation issue but the translation I have of the text that's being
4 referred to by counsel of Mr. Licina is that he says: "The matter at
5 issue is neither ostracism nor a recurrence." It he says it is not a
6 ostracism. He says: "After 2.000 years this is an act of genocide."
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, do you agree with that
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Completely agree, Your Honour.
10 I overlooked the details of the text, and I will correct myself.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
12 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] I thank my learned friend from
13 the Prosecution. I was not very precise. That's true.
14 Q. Mr. Licina even said that according -- in his view it was neither
15 ostracism nor a recurrence, but a genocidal act after 2.000 years. Can
16 you tell us briefly, do you stand by what you just said about ostracism,
17 and how do you view this action yourself?
18 A. It was completely uncivilized, inappropriate in relation to
19 citizens who had lived there for a long time and who were upstanding
20 citizens of that community and who had contributed a lot to it. There's
21 no way they deserved that kind of action.
22 Q. Let me ask you something. You, Mr. Raskovic, and Mr. Dobrijevic I
23 think was the third, did you hold any positions in the SDS at the time?
24 A. Yes. We were members of the Main Board of the Serbian Democratic
1 Q. What positions did you hold?
2 A. Raskovic was president, I was secretary-general, and Dobrijevic
3 was a member of the Main Board.
4 Q. Thank you. Did this action have any repercussions on the general
5 attitude towards your party and you personally?
6 A. Yes, it had grave repercussions. In Sibenik --
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm sorry. I'm not following you. Which actions
8 are you talking about?
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I omitted the
10 word "petition." But I meant the act of petition, the action of that
11 petition. I'm sorry if I phrased my question in a way that is not easily
13 Q. What I meant is did the petition have any repercussions on the
14 position of the party and the position of Serbs?
15 A. Yes. Yes. All the mass media in Croatia reported with relish on
16 this action of expelling the members of the Serbian Democratic Party. In
17 fact a delirium reigned in Sibenik at the time because Radio Sibenik
18 broadcast this signing of the petition in its various stages, calling upon
19 citizens to turn out and put their signatures on that. So it did not
20 finish in a day. It continued on and on, and people came in from other
21 towns and villages on buses.
22 Q. Thank you. You've told us about that already. You didn't tell us
23 how that affected the position of the Serbian Democratic Party and the
24 Serbian residents. Did it have any effect on them?
25 A. Of course it did. It affected everybody very seriously.
1 Everybody who had a job felt pressure in their workplaces, and people who
2 came to attend our rallies from various enterprises and companies would be
3 filmed at our rallies, and then stills were taken from those films and the
4 photographs of these people would be glued to -- posted on the doors of
5 their offices.
6 Q. That's how who was treated?
7 A. Serb employees.
8 Q. Thank you. That's enough. Now, in relation to this petition, the
9 issue of house detention was mentioned. You said you were at home without
10 being able to leave your apartment as a free man. That's how you
11 described your own situation at the time. Do you recall that?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. You mentioned some graffiti in the hallway or in the stairwell,
14 and you even mentioned some incendiary devices. What was that all about?
15 A. Some sort of cocktails were thrown on to my balcony, especially
16 towards the evening, and I kept the blinds down all the time so that they
17 wouldn't shatter my windows. Once the device fallen to my balcony and I
18 took it quickly wearing a glove in my hand and threw it out.
19 Q. Why was it dangerous, if an incendiary device came flying through
20 your window?
21 A. Well, of course, because it would cause a fire in my apartment.
22 Q. Thank you. You said that you bought mineral water for
23 Dr. Raskovic.
24 A. Yes. He drank only mineral water, and since he was unable to go
25 out himself, he called me on the phone asking me to bring it to him.
1 Q. When was that?
2 A. Even his wife didn't dare go out. That happened whenever he would
3 come to Sibenik.
4 Q. Sorry, Mr. Popovic. I really have to interrupt you. Was it
5 before the petition or after, that was the purport of my question.
6 A. Before and after, because after he was dismissed he dedicated all
7 his time to establishing ever new boards of the Serbian Democratic Party,
8 so he would occasionally come to Sibenik and he would spend time in his
9 own apartment. Since he was unable to leave and go outside, he called me,
10 asking me to --
11 Q. Just tell me once again: Why was not he able to leave his
13 A. Because those militants from the HDZ or from some other party,
14 it's difficult to establish that now, every time he would go out -- well,
15 first of all, he couldn't park his car anywhere near because they would
16 deflate his tyres and damage the car. And whenever he attempted to leave
17 his apartment, those young men would run into him, hitting him shoulder
18 into shoulder, and he was a very weak man. And he would totter as if to
20 Q. You said that Mr. Raskovic was dismissed and you were replaced
21 from your post as head of the legal department at the bank. When was
23 A. Just after the petition.
24 Q. To conclude, let me ask you a question about that gate with that
25 inscription spray-painted in 1997, the gate into the bishop's mansion.
1 You remember that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Where was that gate?
4 A. Just next to the building where Jovan Raskovic lived. My
5 apartment was further down the same street, about 200 metres away.
6 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us how did you find out about this
7 writing on the gate? Did somebody notify you? Or did you see it in a
9 A. I saw it in that book, and I recognised the gate immediately as
10 soon as the book was published. That book depicts all the damage done to
11 Serbian temples, monasteries, places of worship.
12 Q. Can you tell us when this photo was taken and who took it?
13 A. It was taken in 1997. In the words of author himself, the
14 director of the museum of the Serb Orthodox church, the late Mileusnic,
15 and he said that the photo was taken by a priest of the Serb Orthodox
16 church who visited Sibenik at the time, because only priests dared to go
17 there in that period, and this priest took the photo.
18 Q. Thank you. One of the last questions from the Prosecutor was
19 whether you, in your testimony here, I quote, "exaggerated things and made
20 unjustified accusations" in terms of what you and other Serb leaders did
21 and said presenting the situation in Croatia. Do you recall that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Did you really do that?
24 A. Never. In the entire time I was politically engaged.
25 Q. The Prosecutor was asking you whether you did that here, in your
2 A. No. I just described what happened to me and other members of my
3 people, and I didn't describe even the 100th part, not even a fraction of
4 what -- of all the things that really happened to us.
5 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I have
6 no further questions.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Milovancevic.
8 Questioned by the Court:
9 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Mr. Popovic, may I ask you, first, once more about
10 this so-called petition in Sibenik. My question is: What caused them to
11 make that petition? I would like to cite once more, as Prosecutor has
12 asked you, about your party having caused fears among the Croatians. But
13 I think -- I don't -- I still don't understand the sentence of the wording
14 of this petition.
15 So I repeat, it was said, you were told: You have, I am quoting
16 now: "You have offended and humiliated us deeply, Messrs. Raskovic,
17 Popovic and Dobrijevic. We shall never forgive you this." What action
18 were they referring to?
19 A. Since the three of us were the founders and officials of the
20 Serbian Democratic Party, the SDS, they probably believed it was too much,
21 it was over the top for three people from their town to be at the top of
22 the Serb Democratic Party. And since we were in the process only of
23 establishing and developing the Serbian Democratic Party, we had to be
24 prevented from engaging in that public, legitimate political life. But we
25 must not lose sight of the fact that the demonisation of Jovan Raskovic
1 started back in 1971, and that lots of lies had been had been made up to
2 smear him. And one of them was that his brother, Srdjan -- and we must
3 also not forget that Sibenik was also considered to be a town of Croatia's
4 thousand-year-old culture and statehood, a town in which one of their
5 princes Zvonimir --
6 JUDGE HOEPFEL: So would you mean that reading once more the
7 report in Oslobodjenje on the 23rd of August, 1990, or what we saw in
8 Politika on the same day was referring to the mere act of founding this
9 party against the Croatian tradition in Sibenik? Is this what has been
10 condemned, as it was said in this petition? The citizens petition
11 condemning the act of the leaders of the Serbian Democratic Party who live
12 and work in Sibenik, Dr. Raskovic, member of the academy, Branko Popovic,
13 B.A. in law, and Marko Dobrijevic, B.A. in law?
14 Was that simply the act of being there and being politically
15 active in a certain sense? No other special act which was condemned as it
16 was said? Just yes or no. You wouldn't ...
17 A. Yes. That was the principal reason. There was no other specific
18 act which was the reason for that, just the fact that we were living there
19 and that we were to be eliminated in that sense.
20 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you. Well, I appreciate your precision and
21 Dr. Raskovic's position cannot have been easy. On the one hand, hostile
22 attitude of Croatians, and on the other hand, in that clip we saw, more
23 radical elements in your party on the Serb side asking for more radical
24 action. And so this is what leads me back to this -- to these words in
25 the clip that Dr. Raskovic said: "From me you cannot get arms. You have
1 to ask somebody else." To insiders, to whom was he referring to? Asking
2 somebody else. Who was someone else? For example, who could that have
3 been in the party?
4 A. Not in the party. There were not such in the party. Because he
5 endeavoured, in fact he would not allow even any references to those
6 words, weapons, armament. I know for a fact that he kept drawing the
7 attention of those people to the fact that at his Assembly meetings they
8 should not mention any weapons. But you know how it is, always in such
9 encounters, speeches, you cannot prevent the public from sometimes voicing
10 such things.
11 But I do know for a fact that not only at that gathering, but also
12 later he always spoke against the war and he always said that it is much
13 better to negotiate for a thousand years than wage war for one day. And
14 he always told the people: If you want war, seek another leader.
15 So I don't see how this came to be torn out from -- actually, even
16 when giving interviews, he was always very wary lest he make -- made such
17 a mistake. I mean, specifically in that particular regard.
18 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you. And there is no name you can give me
19 for such an other leader, as you now said, who could then lead the party?
20 Didn't he refer to anybody, or he wasn't he in a conflict with any certain
21 other later leader in the party?
22 A. As of the late Milan Babic was in our party and he had set up a
23 separate Serbian Democratic Party of the Krajina, which separated from
24 this original Raskovic's party and started pursuing a policy of its own,
25 because Milan Babic and our councillors, who were -- who were elected in
1 the municipalities or the slate of the SDS, were actually conducting the
2 policy, and they called themselves the Serbian Democratic Party of the
3 Krajina, and they continued to pursue their own policy, of course.
4 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
5 A. They always sought to tie themselves to Raskovic. They always
6 used his name. Whenever they sought to win some popularity or score some
7 political points, they always subscribed to his programme, to his opus,
8 and they often asked for his support themselves.
9 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you. That's enough.
10 A. He kept going to the Krajina on occasion.
11 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you. Was this, this line, this political
12 development of the SDS of Krajina, as you explained now, the then dominant
13 political movement in the Krajina? And was there no possibility for
14 Raskovic and you to go there and to direct the party, the Croatian SDS in
15 a different way?
16 A. No, it was not possible.
17 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you.
18 A. Because --
19 JUDGE HOEPFEL: Thank you very much. I think, from my side, that
20 was all I wanted to ask you.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Judge.
23 JUDGE NOSWORTHY: No questions.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: No questions.
25 Mr. Milovancevic, any questions arising from the questions by the
2 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours. Thank you.
3 MR. WHITING: Just one or two, Your Honour.
4 Further cross-examination by Mr. Whiting:
5 Q. Sir, the SDS was founded in Knin on the 17th of February, 1990;
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And you were publicly associated with that event on that date,
9 weren't you? I mean, it was known that you were part of that.
10 A. I was in charge more or less of the founding Assembly. And as a
11 jurist I was actually in charge of the -- conducting of all assemblies
12 initially when these committees were being set up. I had the necessary
13 routine when these things were being established.
14 Q. And, in fact, the statute of the SDS was proclaimed under your --
15 with your name identifying you as the president of the Assembly; correct?
16 A. Yes. I was actually the presiding or chairman of that Assembly,
17 and I signed all the documents, the statutes and based on that served to
18 actually register the party by the Croatian authorities in Zagreb, which
19 still was then the capital of the Socialist Republic of Croatia at the
21 Q. And it's still your testimony that these events which occurred in
22 February of 1990 caused the petition in August of 1990? That that's what
23 caused the petition? That's your testimony?
24 A. Well, probably. Probably that was what influenced it. Actually,
25 I was associated with Raskovic for over 20 years as a personal friend, so
1 that everything which happened to him actually also was reflected on me.
2 We were an inseparable tandem really and we were personal friends.
3 MR. WHITING: Thank you. I have no further questions.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
5 Thank you very much for taking the time to come and testify here,
6 Mr. Popovic. We have now come to the end of your testimony. You are
7 excused and you may stand down. Thank you very much.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours, for having
9 given me this opportunity to present a portion of --
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- this truth about us. Thank you.
12 [The witness withdrew]
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic.
14 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we did not plan to
15 start a new witness today. We thought that this witness would last until
16 the end of working hours today, and we were not too much off.
17 However, there's another thing. We saw the decision of the Trial
18 Chamber regarding the schedule, and I wish to say that we reviewed this
19 matter, took into account all the forthcoming witnesses, and I wish to say
20 that we do not see how we can deviate a lot from the schedule, given
21 previously. All we can do is do our best to comply with the Trial
22 Chamber's order and the limitations imposed upon us.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Milovancevic, we're losing time. Last Friday
24 we had to break for well over 40 minutes waiting for a witness because you
25 hadn't sort of scheduled him to come earlier. It's happening again. You
1 may say it's 15 minutes. It's a lot of time. In 15 minutes you can lead
2 a lot of evidence.
3 May I implore you to make sure that you have your witnesses lined
4 up, that when one finishes the next one is ready to testify. I'm not
5 saying you may not deviate from that. It can happen sometimes, due to
6 some unexpected -- unforeseen circumstances, but it shouldn't be a
7 pattern. It is beginning to be a pattern. Let's have our lines, our
8 ducks in a row, ready to go to battle.
9 MR. MILOVANCEVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will abide by
10 your instructions.
11 I just have to say about this last witness, that this came
12 unexpectedly, even for me. I was not aware of the whole procedure and the
13 problems involved in bringing the witness up to the courtroom. I had
14 thought the witness would be waiting outside. It didn't turn out that
15 way. I do not wish to shift blame to another service. I'm just trying to
16 say that at that moment I was not expecting that kind of problem.
17 I was more aware of what happened today and that determined our
18 approach to this witness, but I will do my best to comply with your
19 orders, Your Honour, in the future.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Milovancevic. May I just ask you
21 once the Bench has said what it wants to say about an issue, going back to
22 it doesn't help. You're trying to reopen this discussion, and I'm not
23 particularly keen in going into this discussion because then I could take
24 you up on it, but I don't want to.
25 Thank you very much. The Court will adjourn. We will start
1 tomorrow at 9.00 the morning.
2 Court adjourned.
3 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.46 p.m.,
4 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 12th day of
5 September, 2006, at 9.00 a.m.