1 Tuesday, 11 December 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.39 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. I was informed there
10 were a few preliminary matters and I do understand the Prosecution only
11 raises a selection of the preliminary matters which are urgent.
12 Mr. Shin.
13 MR. SHIN: Good morning, Your Honours, and good morning, counsel.
14 Indeed I just wanted to briefly touch on one issue. Following
15 Your Honour's guidance at the of yesterday's session, the Prosecution has
16 even further reviewed its proposed associated exhibits for this witness
17 and simply wishes to indicate briefly its intended approach. The
18 Prosecution anticipates that it will likely tender between seven and nine
19 documents as associated exhibits, withdrawing the remainder from
20 consideration as such and also excluding those that have already been
21 given P numbers. The exact number to be tendered will depend on how the
22 evidence proceeds. In that regard, the Prosecution would propose to
23 address tendering of associated exhibits at the conclusion of the
24 witness's examination.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Shin.
1 MR. SHIN: Thank you, Your Honours.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Anything from the Defence side?
3 MR. IVETIC: Yes, Your Honour, we have no objection to the
4 procedure as identified by Mr. Shin, and then we have one preliminary
5 matter with Your Honours' leave.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
7 MR. IVETIC: I have been asked by lead counsel to complete our
8 Defence position as to the situation relative to Witness David Fraser in
9 light of Ms. Bolton's records -- comments into the record yesterday. It
10 should be brief, only about four minutes.
11 The Defence would like to draw the attention of the Court to a
12 matter and ask for additional guidance. The Prosecution modified the
13 65 ter summary for Witness David Fraser, and we believe not entirely in
14 compliance with the Chamber's guidance of August 24 2012 where it was
15 clearly stated that for purposes of amending 65 ter witness summaries, it
16 is sufficient to provide the opposing party and the Chamber with adequate
17 notice of such amendments as soon as possible and, in any event,
18 sufficiently in advance of the witness's testimony.
19 The Defence notes for the record that it received the e-mail on
20 Sunday, December the 2nd, 2012, at 6.35 p.m., which included three new
21 topics for this witness's testimony and two 65 ter documents added for
22 this witness on the list. This was not more than a couple days before
23 Mr. Fraser's testimony that had been scheduled to take place for at least
24 two months, and in no way was sufficiently in advance of the witness's
25 testimony in the view of the Defence.
1 While it is true that the newly added topics were already covered
2 in the statements disclosed to the Defence and according to the decision
3 of 24 August can be considered as an indication that the Defence had
4 previous notice of the Prosecution's intention to lead the proposed
5 additional evidence, nonetheless, this only reiterates the fact that the
6 Prosecution knew for months the content and areas of this witness's
7 testimony. His amalgamated statement is signed the
8 20th of October, 2012, and is based on interviews conducted on the 23rd
9 and 24th of July, 2012. These topics did not come to light after the
10 witness proofing, and the Prosecution could easily have included these
11 crucial topics in a previous summary had it adopted a diligent position.
12 The Prosecution's reading of the guidelines set by this Chamber
13 seems to be a carte blanche concession to modify the 65 ter summary
14 almost immediately before the witness testifies as long as the topic was
15 previously included in the statement rendering the need to provide
16 adequate notice and almost useless mechanism. We are troubled by this
17 practice and ask the Chamber to clarify: First, how much time is
18 considered to be appropriate for as soon as possible or sufficiently in
19 advance of the witness testimony; and, two, if the Chamber is setting a
20 presumption regarding the automatic inclusion of the whole context of all
21 previous statements in the 65 ter summary insofar as the Prosecution does
22 not identify the precise written statement until just a few weeks before
23 the witness's testimony.
24 Additionally, we note that for this witness, the night before he
25 was scheduled to testify, we for the first time received corrections to
1 the written statement providing for the first time the correct ERN
2 numbers for eight associated documents in the statement. All of this
3 hampers the ability of the Defence to adequately and reasonably prepare
4 for cross-examination.
5 When considered with the fact that the list that came seven days
6 before this witness added 22 newly identified potential exhibits to be
7 used in direct which had not been noticed for this particular witness
8 previously, all the foregoing makes it difficult for the Defence to keep
9 up with the pace of trial especially as more complex witnesses are
10 scheduled back to back or in close succession to one another.
11 The Defence calls on the Chamber and the OTP to keep this in mind
12 as to the scheduling of future witnesses. Had this witness,
13 David Fraser, been advanced forward one day or two as had been proposed
14 last week, the Defence would not have been prepared and would not have
15 been able to overcome these hardships occasioned upon us by these
16 circumstances. Both counsels and I and the staff of the Defence want to
17 put on the record that we cannot endure like this any longer. The
18 Defence is at the end of its string, and if facts continue in this
19 matter, we will not be able to meet our obligations.
20 Thank you, Your Honours, for the time.
21 JUDGE ORIE: One simple question before I give an opportunity to
22 Mr. Groome to respond. Mr. Ivetic, you said for this witness you
23 received the correct ERN numbers only the evening before the witness
24 testified, and you were referring to associated exhibits. Does that mean
25 that you had no idea what these associated exhibits were until one -- the
1 night before, or is it just an administrative matter which is -- I mean,
2 the --
3 MR. IVETIC: The statement that was given to us had wrong ERN
4 numbers so --
5 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not asking that.
6 MR. IVETIC: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I'm asking whether you were aware of what the
8 associated exhibits were even if you may have received the wrong ERN
10 MR. IVETIC: With some of them I was able to, not with all of
11 them, Your Honours. I can't remember the exact number. But as I
12 indicated it was not something that prevented me from doing the
13 cross-examination of that witness, and that is why we did not object to
14 the calling of that witness. But for future reference, we believe that
15 this all affects the ability of the Defence to be prepared and we call
16 upon the Prosecution to try and resolve these matters sooner --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, I didn't ask you to renew your argument.
18 MR. IVETIC: Sorry.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I just asked a question. So did you then -- so for
20 some of the associated exhibits you knew what they were although there
21 was administrative error in not receiving the right ERN numbers. The --
22 for those you were unable to identify them until the evening before. May
23 I take it that you immediately asked once you became aware that you
24 couldn't find them, the Prosecution, to say, Hey, look, this ERN number
25 seems to not be the correct ones. Could you tell me what the associated
1 exhibits are?
2 MR. IVETIC: Your Honour, the ERN --
3 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] three minutes I would say and
4 then get the response, I take it, within one [indiscernible].
5 MR. GROOME: Your Honour.
6 MR. IVETIC: The --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Groome.
8 MR. GROOME: Can I just briefly observe the Prosecution would
9 want to reply and does not mean to cut off Mr. Ivetic at this stage, but
10 we have a very tight schedule this week and it is the last week before
11 the winter recess. Could I ask that we take up this matter as soon as we
12 return after the new year so that we can be sure to get the witnesses who
13 are waiting outside as far as we can take them today.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, any objection against the suggestion
15 that we would prefer to finish?
16 MR. IVETIC: No objection. And the ERN numbers for the documents
17 were for different documents so I read different document. I had no
18 notice that they were the wrong documents until I got the e-mail and
19 showed up in court, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then the Chamber will follow the suggestion
21 made by Mr. Groome and it's now on the record what you -- what the
22 problems were and what your position is.
23 Then, having dealt with that, could the -- we first turn into
24 closed session.
25 [Closed session]
11 Page 6078 redacted. Closed session.
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
9 Could I again invite you to make the solemn declaration.
10 THE WITNESS: [Microphone not activated]
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Just a second. We need your -- [Interpretation]
13 Would you kindly put your microphone, on, please. We just can't hear you
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I shall
16 tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
17 WITNESS: RM163
18 [Witness answered through interpreter]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Witness RM163. Please be seated.
20 Witness, you'll be first examined by Mr. Shin. Mr. Shin is
21 counsel for the Prosecution.
22 Mr. Shin, you may proceed.
23 MR. SHIN: Thank you, Your Honours.
24 Examination by Mr. Shin:
25 Q. Good morning, Mr. Witness. As you have heard, the Trial Chamber
1 has granted certain protective measures pursuant to Rule 70, and the --
2 the Judges have indicated what those are, so please note that I will be
3 referring to you not by name but instead address you as Mr. Witness or as
4 Witness RM163.
5 MR. SHIN: Your Honours, if I could ask the court officer to show
6 the witness the pseudonym sheet. Just one moment, please. And that is
7 65 ter 28595. I'm sorry, the procedure now is that we just bring it up
8 on e-court.
9 Q. Witness, I would ask you, please, to take a look at this
10 pseudonym sheet and direct your attention to where it says "Witness name,
11 "Temoin nom et prenom." Is that your name and date of birth?
12 A. [Microphone not activated]
13 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, for the witness.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Could the microphone of the witness be activated.
15 The interpreters are -- could the usher assist, or is there anything ...
16 [Trial Chamber and usher confer]
17 THE INTERPRETER: The mike is on. Thank you.
18 JUDGE ORIE: There still seems to be a technical problem. Is
19 the -- it's not your mistake, Witness, but ...
20 Oh, I may have misheard the interpreter. The microphone seems to
21 be activated. So that's okay at this moment.
22 The last question which was put to you was whether your name was
23 accurate on this sheet as was your date of birth. I heard the witness
24 saying in French that it was accurate.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
1 MR. SHIN: Your Honours, I would tender 65 ter 28595 into
2 evidence under seal.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Document 28595 receives number P626,
5 Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: P626 is admitted under seal.
7 MR. SHIN:
8 Q. Mr. Witness, did you provide signed statements under oath in
9 2000, 2007, and 2009, setting out your observations and experiences
10 during the conflict in the former Yugoslavia?
11 A. Yes, I did, sir.
12 Q. In preparing to give evidence here today, did you have a chance
13 to review an amalgamated statement in a language you understand which
14 consolidated those previous sworn statements?
15 A. Yes, I did.
16 Q. Were you also able to identify certain corrections and
17 clarifications you wished to make to that document?
18 A. Yes, that was done.
19 MR. SHIN: Could I please have 65 ter 28607 brought up on
21 Q. Witness, could you please take a moment to review this chart
22 which comes in three pages that has been placed on the screen. If you
23 could please indicate when you've had a chance to complete each page, we
24 can then ask that the next page be brought up.
25 A. Next page, please.
1 JUDGE ORIE: We have not seen the -- yes. We further have to
2 scroll down first.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Next page, please. If you
4 could scroll down, please. Thank you. Next page, please. Scroll down,
5 please. Thank you. Next page, please.
6 MR. SHIN:
7 Q. I believe that completes the three pages. Witness, does this
8 three-page document accurately capture the corrections and clarifications
9 you wished to make in both the French and English versions of your
11 A. Yes, perfectly so.
12 MR. SHIN: Your Honours, the Prosecution tenders 65 ter 28596 --
13 I'm sorry. 28607 into evidence pursuant to Rule 92 ter and requests that
14 it be admitted under seal.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
16 Madam Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Document 28607 becomes Exhibit P627 under seal,
18 Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please.
20 MR. IVETIC: Your Honour, one technical issue. I think it should
21 be MFI'd as there is no B/C/S translation of the same, to my knowledge,
22 and so my client now does not know what is in the statement with the
23 correction so as I have just received the note from my client.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Shin.
25 MR. SHIN: Yes, Your Honours. We have requested the translation.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but do you agree it should be MFI'd.
2 MR. SHIN: Yes, yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, P627 is MFI'd under seal. Now I am a bit
4 confused because I read from the transcript it is P627. Yes. P627 is
5 marked for identification under seal.
6 MR. SHIN:
7 Q. Witness, apart from those clarifications and corrections set out
8 in that chart, if you were asked the same questions as set out in your
9 amalgamated statement -- I'm sorry. If I could just -- if I could just
10 start again.
11 JUDGE ORIE: It has not been shown to the witness the amalgamated
13 MR. SHIN: Yes. I'm sorry, could I have 65 ter 28596 brought up
14 in e-court, please.
15 Q. Mr. Witness, do you recognise this document as your amalgamated
17 A. Yes, I recognise the -- the start, the first page.
18 Q. Apart from those clarifications and corrections which were set
19 out in that three-page chart, if you were asked the same questions as
20 those set out in this amalgamated statement which you have had a chance
21 to review -- I'm sorry, could you just clarify whether you've had a
22 chance to review this document, please?
23 A. Yes. Yes, I did review it, and I did re-read it.
24 Q. Okay. With that clarification, if you were asked the same
25 questions as those raised in this statement, would you have provided the
1 same answer in substance?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And having taken the solemn declaration, do you affirm the
4 truthfulness and accuracy of the information provided in that statement?
5 A. I do confirm it.
6 MR. SHIN: Your Honours, the Prosecution tenders 65 ter 28596
7 into evidence pursuant to Rule 92 ter and requests that it be admitted
8 under seal.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ivetic, you're on your feet.
10 MR. IVETIC: The Defence would maintain its objections to the
11 form of the document as being inappropriate under Rule 92 ter per our
12 filing of 29 November 2012, and therefore we would ask it be MFI'd until
13 the Court reaches a decision on our motion -- on our response.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, could you assign the number. The
15 document will be MFI'd.
16 THE REGISTRAR: Document 28596 receives number P628,
17 Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: P628 is marked for identification and under seal.
19 Mr. Shin.
20 MR. SHIN: Yes. Your Honours, will I have an opportunity to
21 respond to those arguments later on perhaps?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Parts of the arguments are better assessed
23 once we've heard the evidence of the witness.
24 MR. SHIN: Thank you, Your Honours. Your Honours, I would
25 propose at this time to, with your permission, read a brief summary of
1 the witness's evidence.
2 JUDGE ORIE: You have explained to the witness the purpose of
3 this exercise?
4 MR. SHIN: Yes. The witness understand that there is a brief
5 summary that will be read for the public's understanding.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
7 MR. SHIN: And I would just clarify, therefore, that the summary
8 is of a form which would not indicate the witness's identity.
9 Witness RM163 served with UNPROFOR in Sector Sarajevo during the
10 war in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1993 and 1994. During this time, he
11 observed the Bosnian Serb Army engage in a campaign of shelling and
12 sniping against the civilian population of Sarajevo. This campaign was
13 centrally controlled at the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps command level and
15 RM163 had contact and communication with members of the
16 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps. He observed that the Bosnian Serb Army had a
17 strict hierarchical structure and was disciplined. RM163 was under the
18 impression that the corps commanders were under the strict command of
19 General Ratko Mladic and that they had very little room for initiative.
20 Based on his observations, experiences and information that he
21 received, RM163 concluded that the siege of Sarajevo was important to the
22 Bosnian Serb forces because it was a means of exerting pressure on the
23 Bosnian Muslim leaders in order to accept a division of the city.
24 Moreover, the witness observed that reprisals for Bosnia and Herzegovina
25 attacks in other parts of the territory would be carried out in Sarajevo.
1 Following the shelling incident in Markale in February 1994,
2 which is scheduled incident G8, RM163 discusses negotiations which led to
3 a cease-fire agreement between the warring factions, the creation of
4 heavy weapons collection points, and the 20 kilometre total exclusion
5 zone around Sarajevo. He also discusses the negotiations during 1994
6 leading to the anti-sniping agreement of August 1994.
7 Your Honours, this concludes the summary of the witness's
9 JUDGE ORIE: If you have any further questions for the witness,
10 you may proceed.
11 MR. SHIN: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Q. Witness, could you please describe for the Trial Chamber the
13 types of information and the sources of information available to you
14 during your time in Sarajevo, and perhaps for the answer we should go
15 into private session.
16 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
17 [Private session]
11 Pages 6087-6090 redacted. Private session.
17 [Open session]
18 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
20 MR. SHIN: Thank you.
8 [Private session]
11 Pages 6093-6123 redacted. Private session.
20 [Open session]
21 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
23 Witness, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Ivetic. Mr. Ivetic
24 is a member of the Defence team of Mr. Mladic.
25 You may proceed, Mr. Ivetic.
1 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
2 Cross-examination by Mr. Ivetic:
3 Q. Good day, Mr. Witness. I would like to begin by asking you some
4 questions relating to the time period leading up to your deployment to
5 the former Yugoslavia. I do, however, want to remind you, since we are
6 in open session, that if at any time you consider that to fully answer
7 one of my questions we have to go into private session to protect your
8 identity, please do not hesitate to say so. Is that understood?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. First of all, sir, can you tell us if you as part of your formal
11 education or professional training ever had any courses of instruction or
12 areas of study focusing on the specific constitutional framework of the
13 Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or the Socialist Republic of
15 A. I didn't have any training, but I read up on the matter in order
16 to have an understanding of the constitutional system in the federation
17 of the former Yugoslavia.
18 Q. When you say you read up on the matter, would that be in your
19 personal or private capacity?
20 A. Exactly.
21 Q. Do you -- do you recall any names of any books or publications
22 which you read?
23 A. Yes. The book written by Mr. Garde.
24 Q. Can we at least have the full name of the author or the title of
25 the book?
1 A. As I have said, Mr. Garde is the author. He's a French writer
2 who is a specialist on the federation of the former Yugoslavia. I will
3 leave it to you to look up the references for this well-known book.
4 Q. Thank you, sir. Did you as part of your formal education or
5 professional training ever have any courses of instruction or areas of
6 study focusing on the structure and doctrine of the Yugoslav
7 People's Army, the JNA?
8 A. I studied the structure and the functioning of the Army of the
9 Federation of Yugoslavia.
10 Q. Could you clarify for us, sir, when you say that you studied.
11 Would that be in a personal, private capacity or otherwise?
12 A. It was in a private capacity.
13 Q. Did you -- well, strike that. Which -- which publications or
14 sources did you consult to study in a private capacity the structure and
15 functioning of the Army of Yugoslavia, the JNA?
16 A. As I have said, I studied certain extracts, certain articles from
17 newspapers that dealt with the functioning of the army or the
18 institutions of the federation.
19 Q. Did you locate these articles or extracts yourselves or were they
20 provided for you by somebody or someone?
21 A. I did this myself. It was on my own initiative.
22 Q. Did you as part of your formal education or professional training
23 ever have any courses or instruction or areas of study focusing on the
24 structure and doctrine of the All People's Defence system in the country
25 of Yugoslavia?
1 A. In the course of my training, this system which was an original
2 one was referred to. We studied in detail the functioning of the NATO
3 pact armies, but the federation wasn't part of this pact, so the
4 structure in the federation of Yugoslavia was a structure that was well
6 JUDGE ORIE: Revisit one of your previous questions. You asked
7 whether the witness remembered the book he read. He said it was by the
8 author Garde. Now, I -- he said, well, you can find out for yourself,
9 but, Witness, a brief look at the internet reveals that Mr. Garde most
10 likely has written several books. If I give you a few titles, just
11 quoting from and I'll tell you my source, Wikipedia, one of the titles is
12 "Vie et Mort de la Yougoslavie." Would that be the book you have read?
13 Another one would be "Les Balkans." Another one would be -- I don't know
14 whether these are all books, "Fin de siecles dan les Balkans," and "Le
15 discours balkanique. Des mots et des hommes."
16 Could you tell us whether one of these titles rings a bell so
17 that Mr. Ivetic doesn't have to speculate?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's the first one.
19 JUDGE ORIE: [No interpretation] "Vie et Mort de la Yougoslavie."
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The first one, "The life and Death
21 of Yugoslavia. It's the first one, "The Life and Death of Yugoslavia,"
22 or the suicide of a nation, but it's "The life and death of Yugoslavia"
23 written by Paul Garde.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Wikipedia tells me that it published in 2000 by
25 Fayard, Mr. Ivetic. We always try to assist the parties to the best of
1 our abilities, which we have done by now.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Ivetic.
3 MR. IVETIC: I must confess that now I am confused. My question
4 was dealing with the time period before you were deployed to Yugoslavia,
5 and now we're talking about a book that was published in the year 2000.
6 Could you please clarify when it was, sir, that you reviewed this
7 publication by Mr. Garde?
8 JUDGE ORIE: I can't guarantee that it's not a re-edition,
9 Mr. Ivetic. I'll have a look at it, but please proceed.
10 MR. IVETIC:
11 Q. Could the witness indeed confirm whether or not this was read
12 prior to his deployment or sometime thereafter.
13 A. It was before my tour of duty, and I can confirm that a new print
14 was run of the book.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I referred to what appears on the internet to be the
16 last edition of 2000, but I also see that there is an edition of
17 March 1992. Again, I'm not giving evidence. I'm just trying to assist,
18 doing nothing else.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. IVETIC: Thank you, Your Honour, for the assistance.
21 Q. If I can now focus on the time period when you were chosen to be
22 sent to Bosnia-Herzegovina. At that time, did you have any kind of
23 special training or briefing from the organisation that you were joining
24 as to the constitutional framework of the Socialist Federal Republic of
25 Yugoslavia or the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
1 A. As I have said, I consulted certain documents in order to learn
2 about the constitutional framework in force in relation to the federation
3 of Yugoslavia, and I was interested in the concept of defence that was
4 applied in the country.
5 Q. My question, sir, specifically relates to the organisation that
6 you were joining, UNPROFOR. Did you receive any training or briefing
7 from them specific to the constitutional framework of the former
8 Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia?
9 A. I did not receive any specific kind of training, but I had 30 --
10 experience of work in the military, and as a result when one finds
11 oneself in an operational situation one is in a position to rapidly
12 understand the issues at stake in a given situation. This is part of our
13 work. And when I arrived there, I had 30 years of experience within the
14 military and 30 years of experience of crisis situations.
15 Q. Did you receive any case-specific briefing or instruction from
16 UNPROFOR as to the functioning or doctrine of the
17 Army of Republika Srpska?
18 A. I received a lot of information from UNPROFOR about the situation
19 that prevailed in the area, about the operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina,
20 about the situation that prevailed in the area, but I wasn't provided
21 with information on the doctrine of the army of the former Yugoslavia,
22 but I personally was interested in the matter, and I became interested in
23 that field before I was actually deployed to the theatre of war.
24 Q. And how about the Armija BiH? Did you have any briefing or
25 instructions from UNPROFOR upon your deployment as to the structure,
1 functioning, or doctrine of this armed force?
2 A. I received information on the general situation in the area of
3 the former Yugoslavia, in the theatre of war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and
4 information on the environment as a whole that might have an influence on
5 my work in Sector Sarajevo, and I received such information on a daily
7 Q. I thank you for your answer. Can I infer from your answer, sir,
8 that you did not receive any briefing or instruction from UNPROFOR upon
9 your deployment as to the structure, functioning, and doctrine of the
10 so-called Armija BiH?
11 A. As I have just said, I said the contrary, in effect. I received
12 on a daily basis information on the general situation in the theatre of
13 war. This concerned the former Yugoslavia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and I
14 received information from my sector, of course, and as far as the
15 doctrine is concerned, as I have said, and I'll repeat what I said, I
16 learned about this doctrine myself because I am a professional soldier
17 and I was interested -- or I am interested in military doctrine in
18 general. (redacted).
19 I'd like to remind you of the fact. I also received information on the
20 institutions of the federation.
21 Q. At the time that you were deployed to Bosnia-Herzegovina, were
22 you able to speak the Serbo-Croat language?
23 A. No, but I had excellent interpreters who assisted me,
24 interpreters who were from the country itself.
25 Q. When you first arrived, did UNPROFOR have detailed information
1 about the locations and strengths of Bosnian Muslim military units
2 deployed in and around Sarajevo?
3 A. I received information on the deployment of military forces
4 around Sarajevo whether the forces were the forces of Bosnian Muslims or
5 the forces of Bosnian Serbs.
6 Q. Thank you. And how about in relation to Army of BiH military
7 warehouses or depots throughout the territory of Sarajevo municipality?
8 Did UNPROFOR provide detailed information about the locations of the same
9 and the contents?
10 A. We knew that there were some sites where ammunition was kept or
11 sites where equipment was kept for the forces. That's all the
12 information we had, but we did not necessarily have all relevant
13 information on this equipment.
14 Q. Did the information that you did have include information about
15 military production factories both within Sarajevo and in the surrounding
16 area of Sarajevo that were under the control of the Bosnian Muslim
18 A. Yes. We had information on plants, factories where before the
19 war weapons and ammunition were produced. There were such plants within
20 the limits of Sarajevo Sector whether it was in areas under the control
21 of the ABiH or in areas under the control of Bosnian Serbs.
22 JUDGE ORIE: You're on your feet. If you would like to draw the
23 attention of the Chamber to -- let me try to -- well, even without
24 referring to any page, but a redaction was made a second ago.
25 MR. SHIN: Yes. Thank you very much, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
2 MR. IVETIC: And, Your Honours, we are coming up to a part in
3 private session, so I think for the sake of being careful, we can go into
4 private session for the next several questions.
5 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
6 [Private session]
11 Pages 6133-6151 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open session]
5 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
7 Witness, we're close to the point where we'll adjourn for the
8 day. I would like to instruct you that you should not speak or
9 communicate in any other way to whomever about your testimony, that is
10 about testimony already given or testimony still to be given, and in
11 order to allow you to leave the courtroom, we have to return into closed
12 session again.
13 [Closed session]
18 [Open session]
19 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
21 Mr. Groome, you wanted to discuss further scheduling for this
23 MR. GROOME: Thank you, Your Honour. As it -- this is the last
24 week before the winter recess, these two witnesses, they are somewhat
25 time consuming, and it seems at this stage now that if the estimates hold
1 true, that if we maintain the sitting schedule as is, we would not be
2 able to finish them and so the Prosecution is simply ask the Chamber
3 whether it would consider the possibility of sitting an extra hour or
4 possibly two hours in order to ensure that the witnesses are finished
5 before the break.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I made the calculations, because I had that on
7 the back of my mind as well. As far as I can see that we had
8 approximately one and a quarter hours for cross-examination today. If we
9 would stick to the original estimate of eight hours --
10 MR. IVETIC: Six, Your Honours. I advised counsel earlier today
11 that it would be six hours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That changes already quite a bit, because
13 that would be a gain of two hours. Even then, if you would stick with
14 the next witness for six hours, because then we would still -- I think we
15 would be still two hours short, which might then be remedied by -- by two
16 additional hours.
17 MR. GROOME: That agrees with my calculation, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Which would mean that we would then have to
19 add one hour to the Thursday session. Since we are sitting in the
20 afternoon, we should start one hour earlier. Even a little bit more
21 because we have an additional break. So in order to gain one hour we
22 need to start one hour and 20 minutes earlier. Then we would have to do
23 the same on Friday.
24 Now, unfortunately, the only ...
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE ORIE: I'm also looking at my colleagues whether an early
2 start on Friday, that is at 8.00 rather than at 9.00, would give us that
3 extra hour, because at the end of Friday's session, we may have some
5 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I'm not seeking to have it resolved at
6 this moment. I just want to raise it, and I appreciate the Chamber
7 considering it, and if between now and tomorrow if it's possible the
8 Prosecution would certainly appreciate it. If it's not, then it's not.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And of course we would need a firm commitment by the
10 parties to strictly adhere to the scheduled time, because it was today
11 that the Prosecution took 15 minutes more than -- than the estimate was.
12 So therefore, if the parties could agree on a strict schedule, and that
13 of course includes if we are two minutes late or if a microphone has to
14 be adjusted. I mean, that would all be part of the agreement. If the
15 parties could agree on that, mainly being starting earlier on Thursday
16 and also starting earlier on Friday, the Chamber will seriously consider
17 such a solution.
18 MR. GROOME: Thank you, Your Honour. And just one brief matter.
19 Today would be the day that a reply is due for a -- based on a response
20 in relation to RM079. The Prosecution will refrain from filing such a
21 reply but we would appreciate an opportunity to address one particular
22 issue that was raised in the response and it has to do with the addition
23 of three exhibits that the Defence claims are not -- they're not on the
24 65 ter list, but the Defence claims -- or asserts that we should not be
25 permitted to -- to use them. We would appreciate an opportunity at the
1 time of the witness in the new year to address the Chamber on that
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I take it, Mr. Lukic, that there's no
4 objection to postponing this part of the debate between the parties?
5 MR. LUKIC: No, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. That's hereby on the record.
7 Then we adjourn for the day, and we will resume tomorrow morning,
8 Wednesday, the 12th of December, at 9.30 in the morning in this same
9 Courtroom II.
10 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.15 p.m.,
11 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 12th day
12 of December, 2012, at 9.30 a.m.