1 Monday, 8 October 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.34 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone. Madam Registrar, would
6 you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
8 IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 If there are no preliminaries, then could temporarily could the
11 curtains be down so that the witness can enter the courtroom, and could
12 the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
13 [The witness takes the stand]
14 WITNESS: RM081 [Resumed]
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Witness RM081. I would like to remind
17 you that you are still bound by the solemn declaration you have -- is
18 there any problem with the sounds?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I hear this noise, something like
21 JUDGE ORIE: That's the curtains that are pulled up. We'll wait
22 for a second until its over.
23 Witness RM081, I would like to remind you that you are still
24 bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your
25 testimony that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
1 the truth, and Mr. Ivetic will now continue his cross-examination.
2 Mr. Ivetic.
3 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
4 Cross-examination by Mr. Ivetic: [Continued]
5 Q. Good morning, Mr. RM081.
6 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, I believe we'd ended off in private
7 session last week and I'd like to go back to private session to finish
8 off the questions that might reveal the personal nature of this witness.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we move into private session.
10 [Private session]
11 Pages 3719-3728 redacted. Private session.
12 [Open session]
13 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
15 Because it's important, Mr. Stojanovic, could you please again --
16 perhaps I summarise. You said when Mr. Mladic left the courtroom, he
17 insisted that time would be given to briefly consult with you and also
18 instructed you -- he insisted that you should not be in the courtroom if
19 he is not in the courtroom, and that you tried to explain to him your
20 duties and obligations, and that you had no further chance to talk to him
21 during the short break, and that is why you're asking to enable you to
22 have a very brief contact with Mr. Mladic.
23 Is there anything you'd like to add? I summarised and to some
24 extent repeated what you said.
25 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Precisely, Your Honour.
1 According to the rules, the security did not allow us to have any further
2 contact with Mr. Mladic, and we are now in a vice between the obligations
3 that we have and the demands of our client. That's why we're asking you
4 to give us a little time to clarify the situation we're in with
5 Mr. Mladic.
6 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please. I'll consult with my
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, the fact that you could not consult
10 with Mr. Mladic is entirely due to his behaviour. That is what caused
11 the problem.
12 We will take the usual break in ten minutes from now, which is --
13 meanwhile, consider what your duties are. If you would decide at this
14 moment to leave the courtroom, then we would continue, because we
15 consider it a waiver of Mr. Mladic.
16 Now, of course you have a few possibilities. One of them is that
17 one of you consult with Mr. Mladic and that meanwhile we'll continue in
18 court. I'm not suggesting what you're supposed to do. You know
19 entirely -- you can decide for yourself, but that is how we look at it.
20 Apart from that, you know that Mr. Mladic has an opportunity to
21 follow the proceedings on a screen at this very moment. Of course,
22 whether he uses that opportunity is a different matter, but he has an
23 opportunity to do that. So therefore, we'll continue until 10.30 and
24 then you'll have an opportunity to consult with him, or one of your
25 colleagues, of course, at this moment could already -- or I think ...
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, you know that for members of the
3 team to cross-examine witnesses, the presence of counsel is required, but
4 you are the three of you. So even if counsel is here and if Mr. Ivetic
5 further cross-examines the witness, then still Mr. Petrusic could consult
6 with Mr. Mladic if he wishes.
7 That's the situation. That's how we'll proceed.
8 Then, Mr. Ivetic, you may continue your cross-examination and
9 we'll take a break in eight minutes from now.
10 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Just one more thing, with your
11 leave, Your Honour. Could you allow Mr. Petrusic to leave and get into
12 contact with Mr. Mladic and the rest of us will be in the same position
13 in ten minutes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Petrusic can take any instructions as he
15 wishes and consult with Mr. Mladic. Please proceed.
16 MR. IVETIC: If we could return to private session, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We return into private session.
18 [Private session]
11 Pages 3732-3736 redacted. Private session.
23 [Open session]
24 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
1 The Defence is hereby informed that the removal of Mr. Mladic
2 from the courtroom lasts until the conclusion of the examination of the
3 present witness. Mr. Mladic is allowed to re-enter the courtroom for the
4 next witness.
5 We also understood that Mr. Mladic would prefer to return to
6 the -- to the UNDU. The Chamber would seek, if Mr. Mladic wants to
7 return, a clear expression of a waiver to attend the proceedings for the
8 beginning of the testimony of the next witness if Mr. Mladic would wish
9 to return. Now, whether or not he could return at this moment and what
10 it takes to bring him back earlier than scheduled is something the
11 Chamber is not competent. The only thing we could say is that if under
12 those circumstances and with a clear waiver that if he would be returned
13 to the UNDU earlier than scheduled, that the Chamber would not oppose
14 that, but whatever extra efforts it takes, the Chamber is not aware of
15 it, and the Chamber certainly not does -- does certainly not instruct
16 anyone to bring him any earlier to the UNDU.
17 Is that clear, Mr. Stojanovic?
18 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] That is completely clear, Your
19 Honour. And if you'll allow me to, I would like to present the view and
20 position of the Defence following our conversation with Mr. Mladic.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you would briefly explain.
22 Mr. Groome.
23 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I believe it's relevant to this matter.
24 Based upon my discussions with the Defence earlier today, it seems that
25 they will be concluding their cross-examination mid-session of this
1 session. At present we only have two questions. The next witness is
2 somewhat pressed for time and is available to begin immediately, so I
3 would ask that there be no delay occasioned by this going back and forth
4 to the prison if possible. Thank you.
5 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. No. Again, if Mr. Mladic would be returned
6 to the UNDU, then it would be on the basis of a clear waiver to not
7 attend the beginning of the testimony of the next witness. That should
8 be clear.
9 Mr. Stojanovic, very briefly, because we have spent already quite
10 some time on the matter. So if you could inform us in one or -- one or
11 two minutes.
12 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, over the break we
13 analysed the rules governing situations such as this one. We conveyed
14 the contents of these rules to our client, Mr. Mladic, who asked that we
15 represent his interests in the courtroom. He stood by his position and
16 insisted that we convey his sentiments to you that he was no longer
17 capable of restraining his emotions, be they tears or laughter, given the
18 condition he is in, and he made it clear to us that he did not wish us to
19 proceed with the examination of the witness outside of his presence. He
20 asked that should this be the course of action chosen, that we should
21 withdraw from the courtroom as well.
22 We presented to him the views of the Chamber on this, and he said
23 that we should let it be known that if this sort of situation will
24 continue, he will refrain from taking his medication and go on a hunger
25 strike, and he insisted that we should convey this to you.
1 Now, as for your order --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, sending this kind of message is --
3 is not, I think, something that is the appropriate time and the
4 appropriate moment to do, but we've heard it. It's there. Our order,
6 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Let me conclude by saying this,
7 Your Honours: In view of your decision whereby Mr. Mladic should be
8 absent from the rest of the examination of this witness, I can inform you
9 that we will conclude our examination at this moment. We have no further
10 questions for him.
11 Now, if the Prosecution have any additional questions, we could
12 conclude this witness and allow Mr. Mladic to return to the courtroom
13 again. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. One second, please.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, if Mr. Mladic is unable to control
17 his emotions that amounts to interference with witnesses, because a clear
18 laughter in the presence of the witness is interference, and the Chamber
19 will take the same position for the future. So therefore, Mr. Mladic is
20 urged to control his emotions to avoid consequences as we have seen
22 I do understand that you conclude your -- hereby conclude your
23 cross-examination. Then we'll have the witness escorted into the
25 Ms. D'Ascoli, would you have questions in re-examination?
1 MS. D'ASCOLI: I have a couple of questions, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could the curtains be put down and could the
3 witness be escorted into the courtroom.
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Witness RM081, we'll wait for a second for the
6 curtains to be pulled up again.
7 Meanwhile, Ms. D'Ascoli, could we remain in open session?
8 MS. D'ASCOLI: I would need us to go in private session, Your
10 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
11 [Private session]
11 Pages 3742-3746 redacted. Private session.
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
9 Ms. D'Ascoli, I think that part of what we dealt with in private
10 session perhaps would have been better dealt with in open session,
11 especially your questions about the questions that were put to the
12 witness in preparing for statements or earlier testimony, and whether
13 that was specific about Mr. Mladic. That's hereby put on the record in a
14 summarius format.
15 Then I gave an opportunity to the Defence to put further
16 questions to the witness triggered by the re-examination. The Defence
17 had no further questions.
18 Witness RM081, this ends your testimony. I would like to thank
19 you very much for coming to The Hague and for having answered the
20 questions that were put to you by the parties and by the Bench, and I
21 wish you a safe return home again.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Once the curtains are down, you may follow the
25 [The witness withdrew]
1 JUDGE ORIE: It may take a couple of minutes to remove the
2 screens and to prepare for the return of Mr. Mladic into the courtroom.
3 We take a break of two minutes, and the Chamber expects then Mr. Mladic
4 to be escorted back into the courtroom.
5 --- Break taken at 11.32 a.m.
6 --- On resuming at 11.38 a.m.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I established that Mr. Mladic has not returned to
8 the courtroom, although he will be given an opportunity to do so. The
9 Chamber interprets this as an explicit waiver to attend the proceedings.
10 If, Mr. Stojanovic, there is anything wrong in the interpretation of the
11 behaviour of Mr. Mladic, then you have half a second -- well, not half a
12 second, of course, but you have a brief opportunity to explain.
13 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have just
14 returned from the room where Mr. Mladic is. He is lying down. He feels
15 very unwell. He would like his pressure to be checked before his return
16 to the courtroom. He is lying down, and I'm conveying his wish to you
17 now that he have his blood pressure measured, and he certainly does not
18 look at all well.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, we did not hear from you whether
21 Mr. Mladic, apart from his condition at this moment, is willing to return
22 to the courtroom.
23 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I believe I
24 said so. He would like to come back, but I conveyed every word of his to
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, the Chamber rules as follows: We'll
3 continue with the proceedings. If it would turn out after the
4 measurement of the blood pressure of Mr. Mladic that there would be a
5 sound medical reason not to attend, the Chamber will consider whether or
6 not to restart the testimony of the witness who is next to be called by
7 the Prosecution. If there are no sound medical reasons, the Chamber even
8 exceptionally will allow Mr. Mladic to return to the courtroom during the
10 The Chamber takes as a rule that if Mr. Mladic for any specific
11 reason is absent from the courtroom due to his own will, that we would
12 allow him to return to the courtroom after a break and not to interrupt
13 the proceedings.
14 As matters stand now and also in view of a long history of
15 Mr. Mladic not feeling well where no sound medical reasons were found for
16 him not to be able to attend, we'll proceed at this moment, and if
17 matters are different today, we'll certainly -- upon an application, we
18 will consider whether or not to restart or to take appropriate remedy for
19 Mr. Mladic having missed part of the proceedings.
20 Is the Prosecution ready to call its next witness?
21 MR. VANDERPUYE: Yes, Mr. President. I understand that he is --
22 he's prepared.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could the witness be escorted into the
25 Mr. Vanderpuye, I -- the Chamber noted that the number of
1 associated exhibits is far beyond the guidance of the Chamber. I see
2 that the grey ones, which you usually would not use, the shaded items,
3 are in the minority and there is still a huge number of associated
4 exhibits, which certainly does not fit in the guidance.
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: Yes, Mr. President. Would you like me to
7 JUDGE ORIE: Not at this moment. The only thing is that you are
8 aware that the Chamber considers this not to be in accordance with the
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: I am aware of that.
11 JUDGE ORIE: And that you should take appropriate action to be
12 within the limits again.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 WITNESS: PYERS TUCKER
15 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Tucker, I take it. I apologise
16 for not paying proper attention to your entry into the courtroom.
17 Mr. Tucker, before you give evidence the Rules require you to make a
18 solemn declaration. The text is handed out to you. May I invite you to
19 make that solemn declaration.
20 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
21 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Please be seated, Mr. Tucker. Mr. Tucker, you'll
23 first be examined by Mr. Vanderpuye. Mr. Vanderpuye is counsel for the
24 Prosecution. You'll find him to your right.
25 You may proceed, Mr. Vanderpuye.
1 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you very much, Mr. President. Good
2 morning to you, Your Honours. Good morning to everyone.
3 Examination by Mr. Vanderpuye:
4 Q. And good morning to you, Mr. Tucker. Mr. Tucker, first would you
5 prefer to be addressed as Mr. Tucker or Colonel Tucker?
6 A. Mr. Tucker will be fine, thank you.
7 Q. Very well. As you know my name is Kweku Vanderpuye, and before
8 we get started I just wanted to remind to try to keep your voice up,
9 speak a little bit more slowly than you would otherwise so that it'll
10 give the interpreters a chance to keep up with us as we speak the same
12 For the sake of the record, would you please state your full
14 A. My name is Pyers William Tucker.
15 Q. I'd like to show you 65 ter 28446, and while that's coming up let
16 me ask you: Do you recall having provided the Office of the Prosecutor a
17 witness statement on 10 May 2010 -- or, rather, dated 10 May, 2010?
18 A. That is correct.
19 Q. Do you recognise the document that's in -- on the screen in front
20 of you now?
21 A. Yes, I do.
22 Q. And what do you recognise it to be?
23 A. It's the statement of which I compiled and then eventually signed
24 on the 10th of May, 2010.
25 Q. If we could go to the last page of this document, page 75. Do
1 you recognise the signature there? Is it yours?
2 A. That is my signature.
3 Q. Okay. And you undertook the acknowledgement that is indicated on
4 this page as to the truth of the statement in question; is that right?
5 A. That is correct.
6 Q. Do you recall providing certain corrections to that statement
7 during the course of your testimony in the trial of Radovan Karadzic on
8 17 January 2012?
9 A. I do.
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: Your Honours, for the record, that is at
11 transcript pages 23192 through 23194. I have a summary of those
12 corrections which we have marked as 65 ter 28452, which I would like to
13 tender in addition to the statement, but first let me finish the
14 qualifications for 92 ter purposes.
15 Q. Mr. Tucker, have you had an opportunity to review your testimony
16 in the Karadzic case and in particular the corrections of which I'm
17 discussing just now?
18 A. I have.
19 Q. And can you confirm that your statement, subject to the
20 corrections to which you testified in the Karadzic case, is accurate and
21 truthful to your recollection?
22 A. That is correct.
23 Q. And let me just ask, does your statement as corrected therefore
24 fairly and accurately reflect what you would say if you were to be
25 examined today on the same issues?
1 A. That is correct.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, at this time I would tender both
4 the statement as well as the corrections, and in view of the Court's
5 position concerning the associated exhibits, I expect we can deal with
6 that later.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. First, Mr. Ivetic.
8 MR. IVETIC: No objection to the statement and the corrections
9 that have been marked a separate 65 ter number.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: The statement document 28446 becomes
12 Exhibit P317, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ORIE: P317 is admitted into evidence.
14 THE REGISTRAR: And correction [indiscernible] 28452 becomes
15 Exhibit P318, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: P318 is admitted into evidence.
17 Mr. Vanderpuye, you may proceed.
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I have a brief
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. VANDERPUYE: From October 1992 until March 1993,
22 Colonel Pyers Tucker, a British Army officer, served with UNPROFOR as
23 military assistant to General Philippe Morillon, the commander of
24 UNPROFOR in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Colonel Tucker's evidence concerns
25 the siege of Sarajevo and the ethnic cleansing of Eastern Bosnia by the
1 Bosnian Serb Army during his tour. He witnessed shelling and sniping in
2 Sarajevo, which he describes as terroristic and intimidatory and
3 requiring co-ordinated military operations achievable only with the
4 approval of the VRS chain of command. His evidence also discusses the
5 extreme humanitarian toll borne by Sarajevo's civilian population.
6 In March 1993, Colonel Tucker travelled with General Morillon to
7 Eastern Bosnia, including Cerska, Konjevic Polje, and Srebrenica. VRS
8 operations against these Muslim-held areas were underway and forcing
9 civilians from their homes. Colonel Tucker witnessed the desperate
10 humanitarian situation of thousands of refugees as they fled their
11 villages and streamed into Srebrenica. He describes the VRS' shelling of
12 columns of Muslim refugees making their way to safety, their shelling of
13 UN forces as they distributed aid in Konjevic Polje, and their shelling
14 of a humanitarian air-lift during an evacuation of the wounded.
15 Colonel Tucker accompanied General Morillon to Srebrenica where Muslim
16 refugees blocked them from leaving, fearing that upon their departure the
17 VRS would shell them as they had recently done in Konjevic Polje.
18 Colonel Tucker personally accompanied General Morillon to
19 meetings with General Mladic, President Karadzic, and other senior
20 political and military leaders of the warring factions in Bosnia and
21 Herzegovina. He kept notes of these meetings and drafted reports for
22 General Morillon, for UNPROFOR headquarters, and others. His evidence
23 describes these meetings and the issues consistently raised by
24 General Morillon with Bosnian Serb leaders in relation to the siege of
25 Sarajevo, freedom of movement of UN forces, and the delivery of
1 humanitarian aid convoys and resources, which were repeatedly and
2 deliberately obstructed by Bosnian Serb forces.
3 That concludes my summary, Mr. President, and I do have a number
4 of questions for Mr. Tucker.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Vanderpuye.
6 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 Q. Mr. Tucker, in your statement you noted that the repair of
8 utilities in and around Sarajevo featured prominently on
9 General Morillon's agenda. You mentioned that in a number of different
10 areas in your statement, in particular paragraphs 26, 116, and 286.
11 What I'd like to know is how often were these issues raised with
12 the Bosnian Serb leadership to your recollection?
13 A. They were raised in virtually every meeting that will the Mixed
14 Military Working Group had with the Bosnian Serbs, and they were raised
15 in most meetings that General Morillon had with members of the Bosnian
16 Serb leadership. If you look at my testimony in this case and others,
17 you will see multiple references to that.
18 Q. What was your perception of the attitude shown by the Bosnian
19 Serb leadership with respect to the repair of utilities affecting
21 A. The attitude was one of controlling a tap and drip feeding
22 repairs so that they could not accused of blocking them completely, but
23 equally never fully addressing the situation of very limited utilities
24 being available to the population of the Sarajevo; that is, gas for
25 heating, electricity for heating and lighting and cooking, and water.
1 Q. Were these matters raised separately with the political and
2 military leadership, or were they raised simultaneously with both, and
3 did you observe any difference in the results on the ground as a result
4 of either?
5 A. These matters were raised with both political leadership in order
6 to get agreement in principle and with military leadership in order to
7 execute specific repairs at a time, place, location, and to arrange a
8 necessary cease-fire for the engineers to get access to whatever it was
9 that needed repair.
10 Q. And when it was raised as between one or the other, that is the
11 military leadership or the political leadership, did you observe any
12 difference in the results that were realised on the ground?
13 A. No. Very limited progress was made.
14 Q. You mentioned at paragraph 116 in your statement that the Bosnian
15 Serbs, that is the participants of the Mixed Military Working Group, in
16 meetings with Mladic, Gvero, and sometimes Tolimir, invariably wanted a
17 quid pro quo before allowing any repairs to utilities. I just wanted to
18 clarify what do you mean in the context of a quid pro quo?
19 A. What I meant was that in these negotiations, the Bosnian Serb
20 side would want agreement or acceptance of some other issue before they
21 were willing to approve or agree to a particular repair being made.
22 Q. And do you believe that in your dealings or General Morillon's
23 dealings with the Serb leadership that they undertook a genuine interest
24 in working to resolve the problems surrounding the repair or maintenance
25 of utility services to Sarajevo?
1 A. We believed that they, when it suited them, would address the
2 issues, but most of the time that despite saying that they were trying
3 their best, that they were firmly keeping the tap closed, to use my
4 previous analogy.
5 Q. I'd like to show you 65 ter 2353. And what we should see are the
6 minutes from the 16th National Assembly session, dated 12 May 1992. And
7 what I'd like to do is to go first to page 31 in the English. And I
8 think it should also be 31 in the B/C/S. And just for the record, before
9 we move on to the substance of what I'm getting at, we can see here at
10 the top of the page that General Mladic is present and is recorded
11 speaking. Do you see that, Mr. Tucker?
12 A. Yes, I do.
13 Q. Okay.
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. What I'd like to do now is to go to page 38 in the English and 36
16 in the B/C/S. It is rather small, but if we go to the bottom quarter of
17 the page in the English, we can see General Mladic saying the
18 following --
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could it be, please, enlarged.
20 JUDGE ORIE: You should seek confirmation with the witness
21 whether he's able to read it or not or whether it would be more
22 comfortable for him to have it enlarged.
23 MR. VANDERPUYE: Yes. Thank you, Mr. President.
24 Q. Mr. Tucker, I'm going to refer you to about ten lines up from the
25 bottom of the page where it says, "We should not say," and there's a
1 semicolon, and it says, "We should not say we will destroy Sarajevo."
2 A. Yes, I can see it now.
3 Q. Okay. It reads that:
4 "We should not say we will destroy Sarajevo. We need Sarajevo.
5 We're not going to say that we're going to destroy the power supply
6 pylons or turn off the water supply. No, because that would get America
7 out of its seat. But, gentlemen, please find, well, one day there is no
8 water at all in Sarajevo. What is it? We do not know. Damage? We
9 should fix it. No, we will fix it slowly. And the same with the
10 electrical power, Zadar, Sibenik, and Split. They disconnected the
11 army's power supply. The army had none for six months, but I told them
12 while I am here you will not get it and they didn't, apart from when I
13 felt like letting them have some or when that president, the one for
14 political affairs, that Viktor Andreev. Therefore, we have to wisely
15 tell the world it was they who were shooting, hit the transmission line,
16 and the power went off. They were shooting at the water supply
17 facilities. There was a power cut" -- if we can go to the next page. In
18 both. In both languages, please. "There was a power cut at such and
19 such a place. We're doing our best --"
20 A. I'm sorry.
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. I'm no longer looking at the text that you're reading out.
23 Q. I'm sorry, we should be on the next page at the top of the page.
24 JUDGE ORIE: It takes a second to move to the next page.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: We have to go to the top of the page, please.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that we are on -- we should be --
2 MR. VANDERPUYE: Page 39 in English, please.
3 JUDGE ORIE: 39 e-court page in English, starting with "... cut
4 at such and such a place." There we are.
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Q. It reads:
7 "There was a power cut at such and such a place. We're doing our
8 best repairing this. That is what diplomacy is. And not like yesterday
9 when this smart man in Nevesinje, I do not want to offend him, when he
10 said, when I have exposed their goals, what's the point in exposing their
11 goals when it is the Vatican setting their goals for them."
12 In terms of what General Mladic says at this Assembly session
13 concerning the utilities, in particular asserting that the other side was
14 shooting at them, severed the transmission line and so on and so forth,
15 does that -- is that consistent with your experience in Sarajevo?
16 A. That is exactly what was happening in Sarajevo and is exactly
17 what I meant when I described controlling the tap and letting a little
18 bit out every now and then but never opening the tap.
19 Q. Did you believe at the time that you were in Sarajevo with
20 General Morillon -- or, rather, in Bosnia-Herzegovina with
21 General Morillon, that you were dealing fairly and honestly with the
22 Serb -- Bosnian Serb leadership?
23 A. We believed we were dealing with them in a very difficult
24 situation. What exactly their motives and how truthful they were being
25 to us was always something we were never entirely sure about.
1 Q. What do you make of that now that you see what General Mladic
2 said on the 12th of May, 1992?
3 A. It confirms the most negative assumptions that we considered at
4 the time in Bosnia.
5 Q. In your statement at paragraph 90 through 91, you refer to a few
6 different concepts with respect to the use of artillery in Sarajevo, in
7 particular, terrorism, random shelling, punitive shelling. And what I'd
8 like for you to do if you could is just explain what you mean by those
10 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, is counsel going to be tendering the
11 exhibit that we just discussed? Because I have a submission that I have
12 just been confirmed to make on that document on the evidence that was
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I was looking at the document, and I wondered,
15 but perhaps I've missed it, where exactly it says that Mr. Mladic is
16 speaking, because I see on other pages clearly indicated who is the
17 speaker, whereas here I'm trying to find on page 38 or the previous pages
18 where it is Mr. Mladic that is --
19 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, the -- it begins at page 31 in
20 English, 31 in B/C/S.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Let me have a look. Thirty-one, you are referring
22 to -- let me see. We have -- I have on page 30, that's the previous
23 page, Mr. Krajisnik speaking, then Mr. Mijatovic, then again
24 Mr. Krajisnik at the end of page 30. Now -- yes. I see it's slightly
25 different indicated compared to the others. Yes, it's clear to me.
1 Mr. Ivetic, do I understand you well that you wanted to object,
2 perhaps, to this document being tendered, but it has not been tendered
4 MR. IVETIC: I know, Your Honours, but it has not been identified
5 as a document for this document until -- well, yesterday, at 5.00, and
6 the e-mail that we sent -- received this morning at 8.45.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Van --
8 MR. IVETIC: I've raised this before with Your Honours. Seven
9 days is what your guidance is. I don't know what that guidance means
10 since it is not being followed by the Prosecution.
11 JUDGE ORIE: The guidance means guidance.
12 Mr. Vanderpuye --
13 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- do you want to tender this document and to tender
15 the document in its entirety, and when was that you indicated to the
16 Defence that you would use it, this document, which is far prior to the
17 arrival of the witness in the former Yugoslavia?
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: Okay. I told the Defence about the use of the
19 document yesterday as Mr. Ivetic has indicated --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. VANDERPUYE: -- following my proofing of the witness which
22 occurred yesterday afternoon.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. VANDERPUYE: That's number one. Number two is I don't need
25 to tender it through the witness. I notified the Defence that I intended
1 to use it with the witness. It is referred to in an expert report and
2 then there is other evidence that will come in with respect to it, so I
3 don't need to tender it through the witness although it is my intention
4 to use it with him.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, there is no intention to tender this
6 document only apparently to read small portions.
7 MR. IVETIC: Agreed, Your Honour. And I thought the guidance was
8 with documents that were going to be used with the witness. That was my
9 understanding of it. That's what we've been doing with all of our lists.
10 Any document that we want to use with the witness is on our list.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber wants to consider this objection against
13 the use of the document because that's, Mr. Ivetic, I understand what is
14 your objection, but to first take a break, and then we have 20 minutes to
15 discuss it, and you have 20 minutes to prepare for what -- for the
16 remainder of the morning.
17 We take a break, and we resume at 12.30.
18 [The witness stands down]
19 --- Recess taken at 12.11 a.m.
20 --- On resuming at 12.30 p.m.
21 [The accused entered court]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
23 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, if I -- if I may.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Vanderpuye.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: I do see that General Mladic is now in the
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I wanted to establish that. Mr. Mladic
3 returned to the courtroom. The Chamber was informed that Mr. Mladic's
4 blood pressure was measured by security and by the ICTY medical unit
5 nurse and that it was found to be acceptable according to the ICTY nurse
6 to follow the proceedings.
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: I wonder, Mr. President, whether or not the
8 Defence has an application or whether the Chamber --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, Mr. Vanderpuye --
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- if the Defence has an application we'll hear from
13 MR. VANDERPUYE: Very well.
14 JUDGE ORIE: And we leave it at the time being as it is.
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: One last thing, Mr. President, I was wondering
16 if the Chamber is prepared to dispose of the issue raised by Mr. Ivetic
17 at this time or whether or not --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber has considered it. The Chamber
19 has established that the document is -- may be have been put to the
20 witness during proofing, that's fine, but it's -- first of all, it's a
21 document dealing with what happened in May when the witness has not --
22 had not yet arrived. Second, the only thing you asked him, whether it
23 was consistent with what he experienced.
24 Now, what we read from the statement and whether that is
25 consistent what we find here, we don't even need the witness for that.
1 It's not a novelty coming up in proofing, because I take it that the
2 Prosecution has put this to the witness, and therefore the Prosecution
3 now creates the novelties by putting documents to the witness apparently,
4 and that is not how the guidance should be understood as any new thing
5 coming up during proofing.
6 Is that clear Mr. Vanderpuye?
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: Not exactly, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Well, what we have -- we'll later explain it to you
9 in detail.
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE ORIE: But you're supposed not to use it any further. I
12 don't know whether you had any further questions. And it is without
13 prejudice as to the tendering of this document under different
14 circumstances when using it under different circumstances, but you're
15 supposed not to use this document any further with the witness and the
16 ruling of the Chamber is also that you shouldn't have used it as a matter
17 of fact.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. With your permission,
20 I would like to address this matter following my examination of the
21 witness, because I think it goes to a very important point with respect
22 to the use of exhibits and the proofing process that we follow.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber certainly will consider whether to
24 hear any further submissions on the matter both from the Defence and the
25 Prosecution and in which format to do that and whether it should be done
1 orally or in writing is a matter we'll further consider.
2 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 MR. VANDERPUYE:
6 Q. Mr. Tucker, in your statement at paragraphs 90 through 91, you
7 refer to a few different concepts with respect to the use of artillery.
8 As concerns punitive shelling, can you tell the Chamber what you mean by
10 A. By punitive shelling, what I mean is the shelling of a suburb of
11 the town from which previously an attack had been made against Bosnian
12 Serb lines.
13 Q. And would that shelling be considered defensive in the
14 circumstances under which you observed it?
15 A. That shelling would not be considered defensive as it was not
16 necessary. It was shelling which was carried out after the attack and
17 after the military operations in order to defend against that attack.
18 Q. You also characterize some of the shelling that you observed as
19 terrorism or terroristic. Could you describe what is meant by that?
20 A. What I mean by that is single shells being fired somewhere into
21 the city of Sarajevo to no observable or obvious military intent. The
22 only observable consequence of the shells are to make the civilian
23 population very anxious and concerned about the possibility of high
24 explosives raining out of the sky at complete random. And the Bosnian
25 Serbs must have known that this was the case, and as I said, there was no
1 observable military intent with these individual, single shells coming
2 in, so therefore the inference was that it was done primarily to
3 terrorise and cow the population, the civilians living in Sarajevo.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.
5 MR. IVETIC: Your Honour, I waited to see if this was going to be
6 linked somehow to the witness's own personal observations of specific
7 incidents. It has not. I submit that this is improper expert testimony
8 that has not been qualified under Rule 94 bis nor tendered under Rule 94
9 bis and is now giving expert-type testimony of the type that we have
10 objected to in our response to the Rule 92 ter motion for this witness.
11 JUDGE ORIE: First of all, Mr. Vanderpuye, with a 73-page
12 statement, where is the terroristic? Could you guide me, because the
13 punitive shelling you indicated was paragraph 91. By the way, the
14 questions you have put to the witness in respect of the punitive
15 shelling, nothing arose which was not already very clear from the
16 statement itself, but where do we have the terrorist?
17 MR. VANDERPUYE: I believe we have it in paragraph 90 and 91.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Ninety and 91.
19 MR. VANDERPUYE: If you bear with me, I'll give you the reference
20 for it.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think it's in 90. Yes.
22 Then, Mr. Ivetic, in paragraph 90 it's directly linked to the use
23 of artillery in the battles for Otes, which seems to be not just a
24 general statement but -- but perhaps Mr. Vanderpuye could further explore
25 with the witness to what extent there is a basis in his personal
1 experience which led the witness and perhaps others to describe it in the
2 way they did.
3 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour. Then this paragraph was
4 objected to in our response in the Rule 92 ter as being expert type.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Vanderpuye.
6 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, I'm not exactly how -- sure how
7 to address Mr. Ivetic's objection. I don't see that it has any
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, first of all --
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: I am prepared, however, to proceed on your
11 guidance and to put it to the witness on what basis he drew the inference
12 that is indicated in his statement.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Well, at least to link the description and the
14 qualifications to his personal experience on specific incidents.
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: All right.
16 Q. Mr. Tucker, you've described now what you meant by the
17 terroristic use of artillery. First, can you tell us how it is that you
18 arrived at that specific conclusion with respect to what you observed on
19 the ground?
20 A. During my time in Sarajevo, there was continual shell-fire
21 artillery and mortars into Sarajevo from Bosnian Serb lines. On a few
22 occasions, it was concentrated artillery fire in a specific area, but
23 most of the time it was sporadic and individual shells.
24 As to personal evidence, you could hear this going on if you were
25 in Sarajevo. Secondly is that there was reports from the UNMOs every day
1 reporting the -- the amount of incoming and outgoing artillery fire. So
2 it is a matter of record that that shell-fire was going on. And the
3 deductions that I described a few minutes ago are the basis of
4 consideration of those facts that there were indisputably single sporadic
5 shells being fired continually throughout the five months that I was in
7 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, could you indicate where exactly you
10 objected against the admission of paragraph 90, which is the very basis
11 of -- in your response? Page and --
12 MR. IVETIC: I have to get the response. I do not have it in
13 front of me, Your Honours. I apologise, since I'm --
14 JUDGE ORIE: We cannot find it at this moment. Apart from that,
15 in paragraph 90 the witness describes the impression they gained at the
16 time. He has linked it now to certain events and reports that were given
17 to him. Under those circumstances, without having found paragraph 90 in
18 your response as objected to, Mr. Vanderpuye is allowed to proceed.
19 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I would just note,
20 and I'm sure Mr. Ivetic is well aware of this, that the witness has a
21 rather extensive background in matters concerning military artillery --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye, I said that you could proceed, and
23 we were not at this moment triggering submissions on experience and how
24 that worked out.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
2 MR. VANDERPUYE:
3 Q. In terms of your experience in Sarajevo, Mr. Tucker, what was the
4 purpose, as best as you could determine, of the type of shelling that you
5 saw, this punitive or random shelling that you saw occurring in Sarajevo?
6 JUDGE ORIE: Isn't that -- the purpose of the shelling was in
7 paragraph 90. Is there anything new or do you want the witness, who has
8 testified to the accuracy of his statement, to say it again?
9 MR. VANDERPUYE: I would like to know if the witness has anything
10 new to add to his statement, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.
12 MR. IVETIC: And, Your Honours, this is in paragraph 23 which we
13 did object to precisely for this military purpose. That's objection A,
14 paragraph 5(a) of our response.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I read in (a):
16 "Paragraph 23, the second type of fire was single shells landing
17 around the city to no military purpose, and they were not fired in
18 support of attacks or to defend."
19 Do you expect on the Chamber to search for the whole of your
20 response to see whether anything is linked to paragraph 23?
21 MR. IVETIC: No, Your Honour. I'm saying that the question that
22 was just asked goes paragraph 23 which we have objected to which I have
23 just put forth in front of Your Honours. It is my job to search. I have
24 done so.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Vanderpuye, and any reason to -- of
1 course, Mr. Tucker, as far as the purpose of this shelling is concerned,
2 the punitive or random shelling, would you like to add anything to your
3 statement or is what you say in your statement your -- what you wanted to
5 THE WITNESS: I have no -- nothing further to add, nothing new to
6 add to what I've already said.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Did you in your preparation for this testimony, did
8 you give any suggestion to the Prosecution that you would like to add
9 something as far as the purpose of this random or terrorist shelling is
11 THE WITNESS: No, sir.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye, you may proceed. And I take it that
13 you've carefully listened to both my questions and the answers given by
14 the witness. Please proceed.
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: I have, Mr. President. And I'm not sure if I
16 understand the Court's ruling. Is it that the Prosecution is not allowed
17 to elicit evidence from the witness that is outside the scope or outside
18 the specific words of the 92 ter statement, or is it that -- or is it
19 that the particular question that I'm putting to the witness in terms of
20 its substance is inappropriate?
21 JUDGE ORIE: No. It is because we expect you not to be
22 repetitious in your examination of the witness. What is in the statement
23 doesn't need to be asked again to hear the same answers.
24 MR. VANDERPUYE: Let me ask it this way then. Thank you,
25 Mr. President.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Well, ask something else I would say.
2 MR. VANDERPUYE:
3 Q. Did the shelling that you observed, Mr. Tucker, appear to follow
4 part of a broader plan in respect of the Bosnian Serb leadership's
5 objectives concerning Sarajevo, Srebrenica, Cerska, and Konjevic Polje?
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.
7 MR. IVETIC: He's asking for the witness to speculate and to give
8 expert testimony for which this witness has not been qualified before
9 this Tribunal.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye, this question is too broad. If you
12 want to explore these matters, then please do not ask the witness about
13 whether he has any knowledge of a broader plan and what it was -- what
14 this knowledge is based on and then compare it. But this question as
15 phrased now is too broad. Please proceed.
16 MR. VANDERPUYE:
17 Q. In respect of the shelling and sniping that you observed in
18 Sarajevo, Mr. Tucker, did what you observe appear to follow any plan on
19 the part of the Bosnian Serb leadership?
20 A. I cannot comment on what plans the Bosnian Serb leadership may or
21 may not have had. What I can comment is that it was consistent behaviour
22 across many parts of the conflict area and that similar use of artillery
23 was made in many places.
24 Q. What was the purpose of the use of that artillery in relation to
25 what you've commented on in your statement --
1 JUDGE ORIE: May I take it that you want to ask the witness what
2 he perceived to be the purpose of that artillery. What the purpose is
3 depends on the one who -- who fires the artillery. If the witness formed
4 any opinion about what he saw and heard, of course we can ask the
6 Did you -- did you form any opinion as to what may have been the
7 purpose of what you saw happening?
8 THE WITNESS: Our perception of what the reason for using
9 artillery in that way was that it was intended to frighten and terrorise
10 the population and to try and make them -- motivate them to leave the
11 area of where that shelling was taking place.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Vanderpuye, is this the -- the answer or
13 the information that you sought from the witness?
14 MR. VANDERPUYE: Indeed, Mr. President.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I can tell you that this is also in the
16 statement clearly expressed. So we don't want to hear the same evidence
17 as we found already in his statement, which was admitted. That's the
18 whole purpose of 92 ter. Please keep this in the back of your mind, and
19 you may now proceed.
20 MR. VANDERPUYE:
21 Q. You travelled to Eastern Bosnia, as you've indicated. Did you
22 see any evidence of a practice of burning down the houses of the fleeing
23 population by Bosnian Serb -- by the Bosnian Serb forces?
24 A. Yes, I saw some evidence in parts of the enclaves where I
1 Q. And in respect of those observations, were you able to draw any
2 conclusions as to what the purpose of those actions was?
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.
4 MR. IVETIC: Again, if he's asking for conclusions, I would say
5 this witness has not been properly tendered under Rule 94 bis to render
6 expert-type conclusions.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We could ask the witness whether he formed any
8 opinion about what the purpose of those actions was. That's a factual
9 question, whether the witness did form such an opinion.
10 Did you?
11 THE WITNESS: I saw facts on the ground. In other words, houses
12 whose roofs had been burnt, where the furniture had been destroyed, where
13 the ovens and the fridges had been thrown out into the -- into the
14 garden, and where cattle, sheep, pigs had been locked in the buildings in
15 order to defecate in the buildings. That I saw in a number of areas.
16 Now, what the purpose and reason for doing that was, we surmised
17 that the reason was to frighten people who were living in those houses
18 previously into leaving and not coming -- and make it difficult for them
19 to consider coming back.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did it ever come to your mind that it would
21 serve a military purpose?
22 THE WITNESS: Unless you consider the military purpose to be the
23 clearance of people out of an area that you wanted to control.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but no other -- you could not detect any other
25 military purpose when you formed your opinion --
1 THE WITNESS: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: -- about what you saw?
3 THE WITNESS: There were two types of damages that you could
4 observe to houses. You could see houses that had no roofs, because all
5 the roofs in Bosnia were wood, and which were in the condition I just
6 described to you. Those houses did not have damage, bullet holes, to the
7 side of houses. You then had other houses which were damaged with bullet
8 holes and shell holes in the side of the houses. Those were houses where
9 military fighting and military combat had taken place, and you could
10 always tell immediately, ah, that house has been ethnically cleansed,
11 whereas the other house with the holes in the side, that one is where
12 military combat and fighting had actually taken place.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Vanderpuye.
14 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to show the
15 witness 65 ter 3402.
16 MR. IVETIC: Your Honours, again this document was given to us
17 notice for this witness at 5.00 in the afternoon yesterday and was not
18 within the seven-day guidance of Your Honours.
19 MR. VANDERPUYE: Your Honour, I don't know what Mr. Ivetic is
20 talking about. There is very clear, very clear guidance on the record of
21 these proceedings. At transcript page 2160, the Court gave very specific
22 guidance which says as follows:
23 "The parties are encouraged to send lists of documents to be used
24 during examination-in-chief as early as possible."
25 In this case Mr. Ivetic received it in excess of 30 days before
1 this witness testified.
2 "The Chamber would expect that a first list of documents be sent
3 not later than seven days prior to the witness's testimony," which
4 Mr. Ivetic received.
5 "Such a list could then be complemented," and I quote,
6 "complemented at a later stage following any proofing of the witness,"
7 which is precisely the circumstances under which Mr. Ivetic received the
8 documents in this case.
9 Furthermore, in relation to the witness's testimony, the document
10 I propose to put to the witness relates specifically to his direct and
11 personal observations during his time in Bosnia. Moreover, as Mr. Ivetic
12 is fully aware, this witness has specific training and expertise, I might
13 add, in artillery matters which are the direct subject matter of his
14 testimony and which the Chamber has previously given guidance is an
15 appropriate basis upon which to put questions to the witness concerning
16 his opinions.
17 I don't know what Mr. Ivetic is objecting to, and I don't know on
18 what basis he's making these objections.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could I -- before I give an opportunity to
20 Mr. Ivetic to respond, would that mean that any document you would have
21 used in proofing where you would normally expect it to be considered for
22 the use with the witness well in advance that -- so there is an unlimited
23 realm of new documents in the complement -- the complementary part of the
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: No, Mr. President. You can see me shaking my
1 head. The number of documents that I sent to Mr. Ivetic are probably not
2 more than six. Number one.
3 Number two, with respect to the document that is the
4 16th Assembly minutes, 16th Session Assembly minutes concerning
5 General Mladic's speech, I sent them specifically the pages references
6 that I would use. It's an enormous document. I think it's 50 or 60
7 pages. I gave them the specific page references concerning that. And I
8 do understand the Court's concern about flooding the Defence at the last
9 minute, but this is a far cry from that. In fact, of the documents that
10 Mr. Ivetic has received, they probably don't total, with the exception
11 of -- there is one UN document that is just coming up on the screen, with
12 the exception of that document they probably don't total more than 20
13 pages all put together.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.
15 MR. IVETIC: Your Honour, my objection is very clear. It's based
16 on the guidance and the ruling that Your Honours have given on the prior
17 document. It is correct that six documents were disclosed to us for this
18 witness at 5.00 p.m. yesterday. I'm stating facts. I'm not stating
19 anything that's inaccurate. The witness list for this witness that Your
20 Honours identified as being rather lengthy has approximately 58 documents
21 on it, and in addition to those 58 documents we received 6 documents
22 yesterday at 5.00. I am objecting to it and I will abide by whatever
23 Your Honours' order is on this regard.
24 MR. VANDERPUYE: Just so the record --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, any response to Mr. Vanderpuye's
1 observation about to complement the list with documents which arose
2 during proofing?
3 MR. IVETIC: And Your Honour, that's why I said I don't know what
4 the guidance is. I'm asking Your Honours, if I'm wrong in understanding
5 your guidance, please tell me that I'm wrong and I will then tailor my
6 approach differently to this witness and other witnesses. I'm trying to
7 find out how we're supposed to be acting in this courtroom, what rules
8 we're supposed to be following, and I'm trying to adhere to them, and I
9 would also like to -- I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that since now
10 the Prosecution has indicated they are relying upon the expertise of this
11 witness, I would ask the testimony to be barred because Rule 94 bis has
12 not been adhered to for this witness to provide expert testimony.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, you're mixing up two different matters,
14 isn't it. Let me just consult with my colleagues.
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, I just wanted to add one thing
16 and just to clarify one thing: Mr. Ivetic --
17 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers].
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: And I apologise interrupting you. Mr. Ivetic
19 indicated these documents were disclosed to him yesterday. In fact,
20 these documents were disclosed --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Now, now there's no --
22 MR. VANDERPUYE: A long time ago --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. VANDERPUYE: They were indicated --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye, Mr. Vanderpuye, I think there's no
1 issue about when they were disclosed. There's an issue about when notice
2 was given that you would use them with this witness.
3 MR. VANDERPUYE: Correct. Correct.
4 JUDGE ORIE: That is the issue - that's -- that became clear.
5 Whatever language was used by Mr. Ivetic, I have not checked that. One
6 second, please.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye, the Chamber considers that what
9 comes new in proofing, that is documents of which the Prosecution --
10 Prosecution -- documents the Prosecution could not link to that witness
11 any earlier than during proofing.
12 Now, therefore, we wonder when we have a statement of the
13 witness, and let's return to the one we have ruled on already, that if
14 the witness statement is clear and if that other document contains, as
15 you suggest, information which is fully consistent with the witness's
16 statement, why is it that you could not link that information any earlier
17 to the witness than one day before his examination?
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: Your Honour, the most clear reason is that the
19 documents that I'm using with the witness, first of all, do not directly
20 implicate the witness. They bear upon matters that the witness observed
21 which are directly relevant, and they are directly relevant to those
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but the question was why could you not link it,
24 because you're now clearly explained what the link to the witness is, why
25 couldn't you have done that before proofing?
1 MR. VANDERPUYE: Your Honour, if I were to do that, the exhibit
2 list -- or the proposed exhibit list for any given witness could number
3 in the thousands, because if this witness testifies that he -- or,
4 rather, his statement bears upon ethnic cleansing in Eastern Bosnia, that
5 would put a million documents on Mr. Ivetic's exhibit list which could
6 potentially be used with this witness. What we're talking about is
7 something that's far more narrow and far more precise than that, and it
8 has to do with specific observations that he made which did not -- which
9 were not put to him in his prior testimony, which were not put to him at
10 any point prior to the -- prior to the statement that was -- his
11 amalgamated statement, and which were only put to him in proofing.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. VANDERPUYE: This on Sunday.
14 JUDGE ORIE: If you're able to make a selection of, as you said,
15 six documents, I found a few more but perhaps they had been on the
16 previous list, if you are able to select those for the proofing of the
17 witness, you should have been able to give notice of that a week ago --
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President --
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- to the Defence, and I take it that you never
20 intended to use a million documents. I take it a bit of an exaggeration.
21 MR. VANDERPUYE: It is.
22 JUDGE ORIE: But --
23 MR. VANDERPUYE: But it underscores the point which is that the
24 documents that I disclosed or indicated to Mr. Ivetic that I was going to
25 use are -- they're very limited in number and they're very limited in
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. VANDERPUYE: And that's to avoid precisely the situation
4 where the Defence would be unable, wholly unable, to prepare for the
5 cross-examination of a witness based upon those documents.
6 They are six, that's it.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you made that selection to deal with those
8 documents during proofing, and the question of the Chamber is why you
9 didn't make that selection a week ago, because I take it that you have
10 not put all million documents to the witness and then it suddenly emerged
11 that these six were relevant. You have made your own selection and I
12 think the message of the Chamber is that you should have done that before
13 yesterday in the afternoon. I take it that you have a limited number of
14 documents you want to put to the witness during proofing.
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: I have a limited number of documents I want to
16 put to the witness in proofing.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: I don't know what the witness is going to say
19 about those documents until I put them to him in proofing, and so it
20 would be irresponsible for me to put that on an exhibit list to indicated
21 to the Defence to prepare for 500 documents or a million documents or 20
22 documents or 30 documents without any knowledge whether -- whatsoever
23 whether or not the witness can actually speak to them.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye --
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: This is exactly the problem that arose --
1 JUDGE ORIE: -- one second.
2 MR. VANDERPUYE: -- with respect to the previous witness.
3 JUDGE ORIE: How many documents, not associated exhibits, did you
4 put anew to this witness during proofing?
5 MR. VANDERPUYE: I believe six.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Six.
7 MR. VANDERPUYE: And I believe I've -- actually, no, more than
8 six. I have them on my -- I have indicated that in a proofing note also
9 to Mr. Ivetic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: How many. I asked you. You said not six. How many
11 did you put to the witness, new documents.
12 MR. VANDERPUYE: If you give me a moment, I'll pull up my
13 proofing note and I can take a look and give you an accurate number.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: In all, Mr. President, I count nine.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, what the issue is, you said that it would
17 be irresponsible to put all those on the list. Now, you would have nine
18 instead of six. The Defence would have had a week to look at those nine
19 documents. It would not be irresponsible. You are talking about huge
20 amounts. In fact, you're telling us that there were nine that you used
21 with the witness during proofing. What you should have done is to give
22 notice of those nine you intended to deal with during proofing to the
23 Defence so that they could prepare for that.
24 MR. VANDERPUYE: I'm afraid that the Chamber has misunderstood
25 me. The nine documents I put to the witness were documents that I --
1 that I vetted before I proofed him. If I were to give the Defence notice
2 of the documents within the potential range of documents I would put to
3 him, it would be utterly ineffective for them.
4 JUDGE ORIE: But if you use nine documents during proofing, well,
5 let's say that at the last minute you have to make up your mind finally
6 whether there would have been 15 or, but that is reality. You use a very
7 limited number of documents with the witness during proofing. At that
8 moment you shouldn't wait until the day before the testimony starts, but
9 you should give notice to the Defence already at that early stage, and
10 that would not be irresponsible. I think that would be very responsible.
11 And I would like to leave it to that at this very moment.
12 Let's now then rule on the document. You wanted to put to the
13 witness which one again, Mr. Vanderpuye?
14 MR. VANDERPUYE: 340 -- I think it's 3402.
15 JUDGE ORIE: 3402. Yes. Yes. Any specific link with this
17 MR. VANDERPUYE: I think so.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from that the subject matter, of course.
19 Everything in the former Yugoslavia has to do with the -- let's --
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 MR. VANDERPUYE: Yes, there are some matters that are
22 specifically linked to this witness, Mr. President, and those -- if you'd
23 like, I can give you the paragraphs numbers I intend to show him.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I'm consulting with my colleagues, Mr. Vanderpuye.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: Sorry, Mr. President.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye, we allow the use of documents only
3 if specific facts are mentioned in that document to which the witness can
4 testify, not about practice of shelling or -- but specific facts. A fact
5 is something that happened on a certain day in a certain area and which
6 is described concretely. If that is the case with 3402, you may proceed.
7 If, however, it's just a report describing the situation in -- human
8 rights in the territory of the former Yugoslavia, that is too general a
9 subject to link it to this witness.
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. What I'd like to show
11 the witness in this document in particular is paragraph 105.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then let's -- could I invite the witness not
13 yet to look at paragraph 105 of this document. We'll have a look at it,
14 and then we'll see, Mr. -- do we have it on our screen already? I don't
15 think -- well -- yes, we have it. You said paragraph 105. We'll read
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye, I think the witness testified about
19 burning down of houses. If you think that he would have any specific
20 knowledge about what happened in the village of Bradina or -- this is
21 about, by the way, by Croat forces. I do not know whether you're
22 interested in that. It seems to be a bit outside the scope of -- but if
23 you have, again, any specific village, if the witness would have any
24 specific knowledge about that, ask the witness about it and put the
25 document to him.
1 However, the witness testified about what he saw as far as
2 burning houses are concerned, and at this moment the Chamber is unable to
3 identify any specific factual matter in paragraph 105 to which it
4 expects - but we have not proofed the witness, we have only read his
5 statement - we did not -- we're not able to identify any specific factual
6 matter where we would expect the witness to have any personal knowledge
7 or observation.
8 Unless you find something like that --
9 MR. VANDERPUYE: I do, Mr. President. I do. That's the reason
10 why I've asked the question.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Which one?
12 MR. VANDERPUYE: It's the first sentence in the paragraph.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that is not a specific factual matter, but
14 that is a general statement, and therefore if that's what you want to ask
15 questions about, then you are not allowed to use this document which you
16 have given notice of only yesterday to the Defence.
17 You may proceed.
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: Is it a question of relevance, Mr. President?
19 JUDGE ORIE: I said this is a ruling. You are not allowed. You
20 have given this document yesterday to the Defence, whereas you should
21 have done that a week ago, and you haven't done that, and that's the
22 reason why --
23 MR. VANDERPUYE: Very well, Mr. President. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- the Chamber ruled as it did.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE:
1 Q. Mr. Tucker, you testified a minute ago about having observed
2 evidence that houses were burnt during your period in Bosnia and
3 Herzegovina. Can you tell us what information you had, if any, about how
4 widespread that particular kind of conduct was in the areas that you
5 yourself visited or were aware of?
6 A. I personally saw the evidence after the action of houses having
7 been burnt in the way previously described in the area between Sarajevo
8 and Kiseljak. I saw it in the area around Srebrenica and a number of
9 villages in the Srebrenica pocket. I saw it later in the area of
10 Mrkonjic Grad in the Banja Luka area. That's what I personally saw
11 myself. I also saw it in the areas around the Lasva Valley. In addition
12 to that, there were media reports and television pictures which were
13 taken during the -- at the time when people were actually being evicted
14 from their houses. I also saw journalist reports from journalists who
15 had been present and seen these actions taking place.
16 All of those together built up into a consistent picture of what
17 had been happening in those areas which were ethnically cleansed.
18 Sorry, one more place that I actually saw the consequence myself
19 is in the area to the south-west of Banja Luka where there were
20 previously Muslim civilians who had been displaced.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Tucker. Did you receive any information
22 concerning the shelling or artillery fire directed against hospitals in
24 A. Yes, I did, and in particular around the two hospitals in
1 Q. Did you have any dealings -- in fact, let me rephrase that. You
2 did have dealings with Vinko Pandurevic as you've indicated in your
4 A. That is correct.
5 Q. And are you aware of whether or not Vinko Pandurevic engaged in
6 the practice of burning Muslim houses in the areas in which the VRS -- in
7 which the VRS entered?
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.
9 MR. IVETIC: As phrased I believe that the question asked for the
10 witness to speculate as to matters that are -- as to a third party.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the witness is asked about whether he has any
12 knowledge about Vinko Pandurevic engaged in certain practice. That is
13 not asking for speculation. That is exploring with the witness whether
14 he has any knowledge of it, and of course then the next question would be
15 on what base he gained that knowledge.
16 Do you have any knowledge about Vinko Pandurevic being engaged in
17 the practice of burning Muslim houses?
18 THE WITNESS: I do not know or have any specific knowledge
19 whether Vinko Pandurevic engaged in that. What I do know is that he was
20 the VRS commander in areas where that happened.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye, please proceed.
22 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to show the
23 witness 65 ter 9059.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: For the Chamber's benefit, I would direct -- it
1 is one such document, and I would --
2 JUDGE ORIE: It's one such document. So --
3 MR. VANDERPUYE: And I would direct the Chamber to the last line
4 of this document.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Last line. Yes. So what we'd like to know is
6 whether the witness has any specific knowledge about Konjevic Polje and
7 whether or not houses were burned there. Could we first ask whether the
8 witness has any knowledge about that. That can be done even without
9 using the document at this moment.
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 Q. Mr. Tucker, do you have any knowledge of houses being burnt in
12 the area of Konjevic Polje during the period of time that you were there,
13 obviously, or if you have any information concerning whether or not
14 houses were burned in that area?
15 A. I do not have specific knowledge of houses being burnt in
16 Konjevic Polje because I was there before the VRS seized that -- that
17 territory. Afterwards I went through that area, but there had been quite
18 heavy fighting and I could not determine because I didn't spend time
19 looking at the houses to see whether it was burnt or whether it was
20 combat damage.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This determines the fate of this document,
22 Mr. Vanderpuye, again without prejudice, but for using it with this
23 witness. Please proceed.
24 MR. VANDERPUYE:
25 Q. In terms of what you observed concerning the burning of houses,
1 given your extensive military experience, is that something that you
2 would expect to have occurred in the absence of a chain of command?
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.
4 MR. IVETIC: This is quintessential expert testimony. It has not
5 been tendered and subjected to Rule 94 bis and I would object.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Let me re-read the question.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: The answer to this question, Mr. Vanderpuye, the
9 Chamber considers not to assist it in whatever ways it go, whether he did
10 expect it or whether he did not expect it. It's not a question to which
11 the answer would assist us in making the determinations we have to.
12 Please proceed.
13 So the witness is not -- doesn't have to answer the question.
14 MR. VANDERPUYE:
15 Q. You were present in the area of Cerska, Konjevic Polje, and
16 Srebrenica around March of 1993, and in respect of your visit there, did
17 you see evidence of a campaign being carried out by the Bosnian Serb
18 military to remove the Muslim population from those areas?
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 Q. What did you see?
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic.
22 MR. IVETIC: It's a matter of a legal conclusion that I believe
23 is the purview of the Chamber to determine this. He can testify to what
24 he saw. I don't think he can draw conclusions of this nature.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you can -- whether it's conclusion or not -- a
1 witness can develop a personal opinion on the consistency of what he
2 sees, and that's not a legal conclusion. Now, perhaps the question would
3 have been better phrased slightly different to achieve that purpose.
4 But what Mr. Vanderpuye apparently wanted to ask you is whether
5 you, when observing what happened in the areas covered by the question in
6 March of 1993, whether you saw or whether you formed any opinion about it
7 being a pattern or, rather, loose incidents.
8 THE WITNESS: Sir, what I saw was reports from the UN military
9 observers who were with General Morillon and myself inside the Srebrenica
10 pocket who were sent out into the area around Srebrenica in order to
11 observe what was happening. Those military observers reported back to me
12 what they saw, and it is those observations that I'm reporting. What
13 those military observers reported seeing was continued sporadic
14 shell-fire of villages on the edge of the perimeter, and over a number of
15 days then a military attack on the ground would follow a number of days
16 of sporadic shell-fire, and then the Serb forces would seize that
17 particular village, and this would then proceed to the next village.
18 This behaviour, and this is observable fact that we saw on the
19 ground, the consequence of these actions by the Bosnian Serb Army was to
20 precondition the civilians living in these villages that as soon as they
21 started being shelled, one shell every 40 minutes, one shell every two
22 hours, then suddenly two shells, as soon as that started happening to
23 their village, they then knew that they were within a few days going to
24 be attacked by ground forces, and so those civilians then packed up
25 whatever they could carry and then fled away from the Bosnian Serb
1 forces, which meant basically towards the centre of the pocket, which
2 meant basically towards Srebrenica.
3 That was reported to us by the UN military observers in the
4 Srebrenica pocket, and it was described to us many times by refugees who
5 we talked with in Srebrenica itself.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And on the basis of this information, you considered
7 it to be events according to a pattern.
8 THE WITNESS: It appeared to us to be far too consistent for it
9 to be coincidence and that this had to be in some way, shape, or form a
10 deliberate plan of action which was being conducted by the
11 Bosnian Serb Army.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer. I'm looking at the
13 clock, Mr. Vanderpuye. We need another break. We'll take a break and
14 we'll resume at 13 minutes to 2.00.
15 Could the witness first leave the courtroom.
16 [The witness stands down]
17 --- Recess taken at 1.27 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 1.47 p.m.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
20 [The witness takes the stand]
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vanderpuye, you may proceed.
22 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
23 Q. Mr. Tucker, in light of what you said just before the break
24 concerning what appeared to you to be a pattern or not to be a
25 coincidence with respect to the -- to what you observed in Eastern
1 Bosnia, in your statement at paragraph 134 you talk about a
2 counter-offensive being carried out by the Bosnian Serb Army. I was
3 wondering how that figures in to your assessment of the pattern that you
4 just described concerning Eastern Bosnia, Cerska, Konjevic Polje,
5 Srebrenica, et cetera?
6 A. General Morillon had been told by Dr. Karadzic and other members
7 of the Bosnian Serb government and leaders that the Bosniak, that is the
8 Muslim forces in Eastern Bosnia, had conducted a series of attacks
9 against Bosnian Serb forces and civilians in Eastern Bosnia and had
10 killed a number of civilians, and I believe the number, from
11 recollection, was -- 1.260 was mentioned quite a few times. And that, as
12 a result, the Bosnian Serb forces were taking steps against the eastern
13 enclaves and that is -- was a declared intent by the -- by Dr. Karadzic
14 and other members of the Bosnian Serb leadership. That intent was
15 confirmed by reports that we were being given by the Bosnian Muslim
16 leadership about the situation and what was happening in the -- the
17 eastern -- eastern enclaves, and that is why General Morillon was asked
18 by Izetbegovic at the beginning of March to go personally himself to the
19 eastern enclaves in order to establish what was actually going on and in
20 order to ameliorate the terrible situation that he was telling us that
21 Muslim civilians were in and experiencing in these enclaves.
22 Q. Based on what you could observe and what you know or testified
23 about the apparent plan that you observed or lack of coincidence
24 concerning Bosnian Serb intentions towards Cerska, Konjevic Polje, and
25 Srebrenica, did you then or do you now find any credit with respect to
1 the so-called counter-offensive as a result of the events on 7 January
2 1993, as a basis for what you ultimately observed when you were in
3 Cerska, Konjevic Polje, and Srebrenica in 1993?
4 A. At the time, given what we knew at the time, we had heard the
5 Bosnian Serb leadership from the middle of December onwards declaring
6 that they wished peace, cease-fires, et cetera. That is what we had
7 heard at the time. We then heard the reports about attacks on the
8 eastern enclaves by the Bosnian Serbs, and we heard reports from the
9 Bosnian Serbs that people in the enclaves had carried out attacks out of
10 the enclaves.
11 Given what we knew at the time, we could see for a fact that a
12 campaign had been initiated by the Bosnian Serbs in order to seize the
13 eastern enclaves. What I know after the fact from documents from the VRS
14 army which have been shown to me by the Office of the Prosecution are
15 documents from the VRS army which show that the attack on the eastern
16 enclaves in order to seize these eastern enclaves had in fact been
17 planned and ordered in November of 1992 that had been -- that they had
18 ordered a tactical halt to the attacks in the middle of December in order
19 to not represent to the international community that they're being
20 aggressive, and that they were ordered to continue the attacks in January
21 and February. Those are documents which I was shown after the event. I
22 obviously did not have -- General Morillon obviously did not have that
23 information at the time.
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Tucker. In relation to your service in Bosnia, I
25 understand that you received a commendation, and I wondered if you might
1 tell the Trial Chamber just a little bit about that.
2 A. I was awarded the military cross for halting or preventing the
3 last Serb military attempt to capture Srebrenica around the 18th or 19th
4 of -- of March when General Morillon had left the enclave in order to go
5 to Zvornik in order to get the UNHCR convoy, humanitarian convoy, which
6 had been blocked in Zvornik for many weeks. He left me at the front
7 line, at the Yellow Bridge between Srebrenica and Bratunac, in order to
8 "keep the front line open." And by that he meant the warring factions,
9 all parties, repeatedly used the excuse oh, there is fighting going on,
10 as a reason for not allowing humanitarian aid convoys to pass, and
11 General Morillon wished me to stay there in order to observe what was
12 going on and be a presence on the ground to try and make sure that that
13 excuse would not be used again.
14 What actually happened in the six hours between General Morillon
15 leaving the Yellow Bridge and returning with the UNHCR convoy six hours
16 or so later was that as soon as General Morillon -- as the vehicle left,
17 about 15 minutes later a column of tanks and armoured vehicles came out
18 of woods and tried to cross the Yellow Bridge towards Srebrenica,
19 brackets, now that General Morillon was out of the way.
20 I had my armoured personnel carrier parked on the Yellow Bridge
21 which was half destroyed and been filled with rubble. So a track vehicle
22 could bump its way across. A tank could have squeezed around my armoured
23 vehicle, but it would have been risky, and I stood in the way of the
24 leading Serb tank and stood in front of it waving and gesticulating at
25 the commander and the driver not to pass, and I refused to get out of the
1 way. After a standoff for about 15 minutes, this was during a fire-fight
2 where Muslim soldiers behind me and Serb soldiers in the front lines in
3 front of me were firing at each other. The Serb tanks backed off and
4 went into reverse and back into -- back behind Serb lines. This happened
5 a second time a few hours later.
6 It was clear to me that the commander of the tank, the Serb tank
7 company, who was reservist, who spoke good English, actually, he was a
8 teacher, he was not keen at all on pressing forward the attack, which is
9 why me standing in front of his tank -- I mean, he could have just driven
10 over me, but the Serb colonel in the -- on the ground dugout behind the
11 Serb front lines screamed and shouted and ranted and raved at the -- the
12 Serb tank company commander about going into the attack, and there was a
13 lot of shooting going on back and forth and a lot of arguing and shouting
14 and -- but that's what happened.
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you very much, Mr. Tucker. I don't have
16 any further questions for you, and I apologise for some of the procedural
17 interruptions to your testimony.
18 Mr. President, that concludes my direct examination.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Vanderpuye.
20 Mr. Ivetic, it will be you who will cross-examine the witness.
21 MR. IVETIC: Yes, it is, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tucker, you'll now be cross examined by
23 Mr. Ivetic. Mr. Ivetic is a member of the Defence team of Mr. Mladic.
24 Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.
25 MR. IVETIC: Thank you.
1 Cross-examination by Mr. Ivetic:
2 Q. Colonel Tucker - I'll call you Colonel as I believe that is your
3 preference as I've garnered from prior proceedings - prior to your
4 deployment to Sarajevo in 1992, did you have occasion to receive any
5 instruction or training relative to the specific constitutional or
6 political framework of the SFRY or the Socialist Republic of
8 A. We had some training and briefings which were conducted in -- at
9 Monchengladbach with the headquarters before it deployed, where the
10 entire background to the negotiations and discussions which had started
11 back in -- back in March. Was I given a detailed briefing about the
12 intricacies of it? No, I was not. Was I given some briefing about the
13 matter materials? Yes, I was.
14 Q. Could you quantify, was it a few hours, a few days? Is there any
15 way to tell us how extensive this training was?
16 A. The overall briefing -- briefings were carried out in a number of
17 session, and I would guess -- I would estimate that they were probably
18 about a total of three to four days' worth of briefings conducted over a
19 period of about a week and a half, two weeks.
20 Q. Thank you. I apologise. I'm waiting for the transcript to catch
21 up with us. I should have mentioned since we both speak English we
22 should try to pause between question and answer to allow the translators
23 and transcribers to catch up with us.
24 Did this training that you had that you said took about several
25 sessions over a three to four day period, did it all involve the military
1 structure of the JNA, the Territorial Defence system, the Army of
2 Croatia, the Croat Defence Union, the VRS, or the army of BiH? That is
3 to say, did you receive any specific training or instruction as to their
4 structure, operative rules, and history before deploying to
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina in October 1992?
6 A. We received some briefings. The knowledge of the intelligence
7 organisation of the headquarters with which I deployed to Bosnia of the
8 specifics in the former Yugoslavia were, of course, limited and were
9 hastily pulled together.
10 Q. And just so we're clear, apart from this training that was
11 imparted to you in that three to four day period, you personally did not
12 have any prior formal education as part of your military or any civil
13 education with respect to the SFRY and the militaries that existed in the
15 A. No, not training, just listening to the media as it was obviously
16 one of the top events in the media that was being reported at that time.
17 Q. Thank you. I believe we already have P317 up on the screen. If
18 we could look at the fourth page in English, and it's also the fourth
19 page in the B/C/S, these are paragraphs 15 and 16 of your witness
20 statement that I would like to ask you about. And there we have it on
21 the screen now, sir.
22 In these paragraphs you identify issues that were raised with the
23 Bosnian Serbs, as you say, "after my arrival in the latter part of 1992,
24 we had a number of issues which we were constantly raising with the
25 Bosnian Serbs, and they had a number issues they were constantly raising
1 with us."
2 I want to ask you about that which should be in the same context
3 but which I could not find in your statement. What were the issues that
4 you, in the sense of the UNPROFOR BH command, raising with the Bosnian
5 Muslims during this time period?
6 A. The issues that we were raising with the Bosnian Muslims were
7 that they should also enable freedom of movement of UN forces as they
8 also at times were impeding those or making it difficult; that they
9 should distribute humanitarian aid which was delivered to them by the
10 international community in a free and fair manner; and that they should
11 not provoke incidents by creating attacks which looked as if they had
12 been caused by somebody else. Those were the main ones that we -- we
13 covered with them.
14 Q. Did you, and again I'm talking about the UNPROFOR BH command at
15 that time, raise any issues with the Croatian Army in this context?
16 A. In the mixed military working group around Sarajevo there were
17 three what I would call combatant parties - there were the Bosnian Serbs,
18 there were the Bosnian Muslims, and there were the Bosnian Croats - and
19 it is through that forum that we also had discussions with the Bosnian
20 Croats, and we had similar -- we raised similar issues with them as we
21 did with the Bosnian Muslims, which is to say freedom of movement for
22 humanitarian aid and for the UN. It was the free and fair distribution
23 of humanitarian aid, and it was the prevention of actions, breaking
24 cease-fires, and set up to look as if somebody else had fired upon the
1 Q. I asked about the Croatian Army and your answer talks about the
2 Bosnian Croats. Would you agree with me that we are talking about two
3 different entities?
4 A. There are two different entities, but the -- they were very
5 closely related. The two different entities are the Army of the Republic
6 of Croatia and the Bosnian Croat forces inside Bosnia-Herzegovina. There
7 were repeated accusations that Bosnian Croat army forces were from time
8 to time masquerading as if they were Bosnian Croat forces.
9 Q. I'm going to ask you to take a look at what you just said. I
10 think you've got your words mixed up, but ...
11 A. You are correct. What I meant is that there were accusations
12 that the -- that forces from the Republic of Croatia came into Bosnia and
13 masqueraded as if they were Bosnian Croat forces.
14 Q. And apart from there being just mere accusation, did the
15 UNPROFOR BH command have actual knowledge of the Army of the Republic of
16 Croatia in part having crossed over and being on the territory of
18 A. Yes, in two -- in two places. One is in the south of Bosnia, in
19 the area of Trebinje north of Dubrovnik; and secondly is in the area that
20 in the UN we called the Orasje pocket which is where forces from the
21 Republic of Croatia crossed the Sava River and came onto the southern
22 side of the Sava River.
23 Q. And so again I ask my original question: What issues, if any,
24 did the BH command of UNPROFOR raise with the Army of the Republic of
25 Croatia that was known to be on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
1 A. My understanding is that those issues were raised with the
2 Croatian republic through UNPROFOR in Zagreb.
3 Q. Okay. Now if we could focus on the items listed in paragraph 15
4 of your statement, you identify among the issues the demilitarisation of
5 Sarajevo. Did that in your parlance include the demilitarisation of the
6 Bosnian Muslim forces in Sarajevo itself?
7 A. I'm looking for the text.
8 Q. I apologise. It's paragraph 15, and it's the middle of paragraph
9 15 "... lifting the siege of Sarajevo (demilitarisation and safe
11 A. Demilitarisation of Sarajevo was discussed. The other issue
12 which was discussed was the centralisation of heavy weapons away from the
13 front line which at that time was mainly around Sarajevo.
14 Q. And again, sir, my question for you is when you use that word
15 demilitarisation, did that include in your parlance the demilitarisation
16 of the Bosnian Muslim forces in Sarajevo itself?
17 A. It was a proposal which Dr. Karadzic, and I believe
18 General Mladic as well on a couple of occasions, made to General Morillon
19 in November, December of 1992.
20 Q. Was it something that the UNPROFOR BH command considered to be
21 necessary for demilitarisation; that is to say, demilitarisation of the
22 Bosnian Muslim forces in and around Sarajevo?
23 A. It was a proposal which General Morillon passed on to the
24 leadership of the Bosnian Muslims in Sarajevo, and General Morillon
25 believed that the complete demilitarisation of the Bosnian Muslims in
1 Sarajevo would not be acceptable to them. General Morillon, nonetheless,
2 passed on the proposal.
3 Q. And if we look at the end of this paragraph, it would seem that
4 you are also saying the same issues applied to the eastern enclaves and
5 Bihac. And I wanted to ask you was there -- was the UNPROFOR position as
6 you understood it at that time to seek demilitarisation of the Bosnian
7 Muslim forces that were situated within the eastern enclaves and within
8 the municipality of Bihac?
9 A. It was certainly a proposal from the Bosnian Serb side to
10 demilitarise; in other words, remove all weapons from the Bosnian Muslims
11 in Bihac and in Eastern Bosnia. But again, General Morillon did not
12 believe that such would be acceptable to the Bosnian Muslims and -- but
13 he nonetheless passed on the proposal.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, I'm looking at the clock.
15 MR. IVETIC: If I can just ask one more question so we don't lose
16 sight of it.
17 JUDGE ORIE: One more question, please.
18 MR. IVETIC:
19 Q. Sir, did General Morillon believe that the Bosnian Serbs would
20 agree to give up their heavy weapons and demilitarise if the other side
21 in the same region did not demilitarise?
22 A. There is a difference in demilitarising which to my parlance
23 means handing in all weapons, in other words including small arms, and
24 the centralisation of heavy weapons which leaves small arms in place.
25 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honours. We can have the break now.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes we'll adjourn for the day. Mr. Tucker, before
2 we adjourn, I'd like to instruct you that you should not speak with
3 anyone or communicate in whatever other way with whomever about your
4 testimony, whether that is testimony you've given already today or
5 whether that is testimony still to be given tomorrow, if that's clear to
6 you. You may follow the usher. Yes. And we'd like to see you back
7 tomorrow morning at 9.30 in this same courtroom.
8 [The witness stands down]
9 JUDGE ORIE: We adjourn for the day, and we'll resume tomorrow
10 Tuesday, the 9th of October, at 9.30 in this same Courtroom I.
11 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.16 p.m.,
12 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 9th day
13 of October, 2012, at 9.30 a.m.