1 Tuesday, 16 July 2013
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.36 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Madam Registrar, would 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 Mr. Lukic, the Chamber was informed that there was a preliminary
11 matter you would like to raise.
12 MR. LUKIC: Yes. Good morning, Your Honours.
13 Mr. Mladic has to be at the UN Detention Unit after our
14 third session, so he will waive his right to be present here, agrees that
15 we continue with the trial, only he -- that the transportation should be
16 organised for him to be transported to the UNDU.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you have reported this to the Registry --
18 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- so that they can contact the transport services?
20 MR. LUKIC: Yes, I did.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then, in view of the fact that there's an
22 explicit waiver, we'll then continue after that.
23 Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
24 Meanwhile, I use the time to deal with the following matter, and
25 that is the testimony of Witness Haglund.
1 On the 24th of June, the Prosecution gave notice of its intention
2 to tender an additional report for expert witness Haglund. The Defence
3 objected to this on the 8th of July and requested that the witness's
4 testimony be delayed, as the current scheduling would not give the
5 Defence the 30 days to review the report as stipulated in the Rules. The
6 Chamber notes that Haglund is scheduled to testify on the 25th of July,
7 thus 31 days after the Prosecution's filing. Furthermore, the Chamber
8 has already ruled on the witness's expertise and indicated that the
9 witness should be brought for cross-examination. Under these
10 circumstances, the Chamber sees no reason to delay the witness's
11 testimony at this stage.
12 [The witness takes the stand]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Madam.
14 THE WITNESS: Good morning.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Maljaars, I would like to remind you that you're
16 still bound by the solemn declaration that you've given yesterday at the
17 beginning of your testimony, that you will speak the truth, the whole
18 truth, and nothing but the truth.
19 Mr. Lukic will now cross-examine you. Mr. Lukic is counsel for
20 Mr. Mladic. You'll find him to your left.
21 WITNESS: SUZANNA MALJAARS [Resumed]
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic:
23 Q. Good morning.
24 A. Good morning.
25 Q. I will pose my questions in B/C/S so you receive proper
1 translation and I will wait after that for a while for your answers to be
2 translated. It doesn't mean that I'm not satisfied because I'm pausing.
3 A. Thank you.
4 Q. [Interpretation] Yesterday we heard from you that you know
5 Mr. Dean Manning. Would you agree with me that Mr. Manning is a lay
6 person and that he's not an expert in your area of expertise?
7 A. Mr. Manning is not an expert in my area of expertise or at least
8 he was not at the time.
9 Q. Regarding the tests that you did in the course of your work, it's
10 true that Mr. Manning did not take part in these tests; right?
11 A. Mr. Manning did not take part in any of those tests that I
13 Q. He did not take part in any conclusions or opinions reached on
14 the basis of your tests; is that correct?
15 A. No, he did not take part in any of my conclusions or opinions.
16 Q. Mr. Manning drafted a number of written reports, quite lengthy
17 ones, and he made some observations and conclusions in reporting on the
18 work that you performed. Am I correct if I were to say that you did not
19 help him in the drafting of any of these reports?
20 A. I have never seen such reports, therefore I've never helped him.
21 Q. Yes, that was my following question. I'm going to ask you if
22 it's correct that Mr. Manning never asked you to look at and verify the
23 information contained in his report, at least not in the part that
24 concerned your area of expertise?
25 A. No, he never asked me to do that.
1 Q. In his testimony, Mr. Manning gave some of his opinions regarding
2 certain strips of fabric that were found in the garbage dump and that
3 were not close to any graves. On page 14269 of our transcript,
4 Mr. Manning said that these strips were not kept because his predecessor,
5 Mr. Jean Rene Ruez, decided to film them with a video camera. As an
6 expert in this field, would you agree that video recording or
7 photographing of fabric would not be the proper way to keep samples that
8 would make it possible for you to conduct tests on them?
9 A. Video recording is -- makes it impossible to run any further
10 tests because then you would have to have the textile material itself.
11 We kept from the textiles small pieces of fibre to examine them
12 microscopically, so if there was to be any more tests to be done, then
13 the NFI would still have the small amounts of fibres taken from the
14 textile materials.
15 Q. Were you ever consulted by Mr. Jean Rene Ruez if it was all right
16 to destroy certain samples of strips of fabric or pieces of clothing?
17 A. I was never consulted by any persons of the ICTY. Maybe --
18 shortly after I finished those examinations, I left the department. So
19 maybe other persons were consulted but I was not.
20 Q. Had you been asked about destroying strips of fabric or pieces of
21 fabric of clothing, would you have agreed with that, given your
23 A. I would have given my personal opinion what the implications
24 would be of destroying strips of fabric, and I would leave the decision
25 about destroying them with the ICTY.
1 Q. What would you have said when giving your personal opinion on
2 this matter?
3 A. I would have pointed out that when destroying the fabric no other
4 tests could be done or no second opinion would be possible.
5 Q. And would you agree with me that you did not examine any strips
6 of fabric other than those you identified and that you dealt with in your
7 written report?
8 A. I and my team only examined the strips of fabric that were
9 mentioned in the report, saying what items we received, so it's about
10 400 or so.
11 Q. Mr. Manning identified the anthropologists and archaeologists as
12 being the source of information about the origin or source of the
13 fabrics. Madam, in your work to determine the nature of the textiles and
14 the way you reach your conclusions on these samples, would that also
15 include archaeologists and anthropologists?
16 A. I made my results and I took the conclusion or I made the
17 conclusion based on the textile and fibre experience that I have and not
18 on any archaeological or anthropological way.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, could I seek clarification on one of the
20 previous answers?
21 MR. LUKIC: Of course.
22 JUDGE ORIE: You said you and your team "only examined the strips
23 of fabric that were mentioned in the report, saying what items we
24 received, so it's about 400 or so." I did understand from your testimony
25 in chief that you made a selection of what samples you would more
1 thoroughly examine and compare, but you received far more than those that
2 were -- that underwent a very thorough examination. Do I understand that
3 you still kept small pieces of the -- all of the samples you received
4 even those which you did not examine in such detail as the ones you had
6 THE WITNESS: You are right, we only took small pieces of fibre
7 from the ones that we thoroughly examined.
8 JUDGE ORIE: But the other ones, is there anything left from
9 that, you said 400?
10 THE WITNESS: As far as I know now, as I recall, we did not take
11 any fibre samples of those.
12 JUDGE ORIE: But you received the original material, you took
13 some samples to examine thoroughly. What happened with the remainder?
14 Is there anything left out of the other, well, if we could say some 390
15 or a little bit less, that you received?
16 THE WITNESS: From the about 400, we saw macroscopically matching
17 textiles and from those we took extra fibre samples and from the other we
18 did not take any fibre samples and we gave them back to the ICTY without
19 taking fibre samples, as far as I can recall.
20 JUDGE ORIE: So from the large majority of the material you
21 received, nothing is left with the NFI at -- to your knowledge?
22 THE WITNESS: Yes, nothing is left to my knowledge at the NFI.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
24 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
25 Q. [Interpretation] I would now like to move to your report.
1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we please look at P1771 on our
2 monitors, please.
3 Q. Mrs. Maljaars, first of all I wanted to ask you this: This
4 report or any other report that you authorised for the needs of this
5 case, was it subjected to any kind of review by your colleagues or, as
6 it's described in English, was it subject to peer review?
7 A. Yes, it was. It was peer reviewed for the information about the
8 textile material and it was peer reviewed for my use of the English
10 Q. When you say that it was subject to peer review, in terms of the
11 content, the material, and the text, could you please tell us who carried
12 out this review and what did it involve?
13 A. The peer review about the content was done by a co-worker at that
14 time and it involved everything, checking numbers, dates, conclusions,
15 anything that I wrote down concerning the investigations. The peer
16 review in English was carried out by a linguistic expert who had a
17 master's degree in English to see whether the terms and the sentences
18 that I used were good enough to work with.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you when you're talking about the peer
20 review by the co-worker, is that the same review as you told us about
22 THE WITNESS: It's part of the same review that I told yesterday.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Can we agree then that there was no peer review by anyone outside
1 of your lab?
2 A. Yes, that's correct. There was no peer review by someone outside
3 of the laboratory of the NFI.
4 Q. You said that one person conducted the review. Could you please
5 tell us when the review was completed?
6 A. The review of the investigations was completed just before I
7 submitted the report, so it must have been the beginning of
8 February 2000. And I would like to say it says on my screen "the review
9 of the investigations," that would be the investigations of the textiles
10 that's in the report.
11 Q. This person who conducted internal review, did they provide any
12 kind of written findings, critique, suggestions?
13 A. Yes, they did or she did. Sorry.
14 Q. And then is that part of this report or not?
15 A. No, those comments are not -- well, those -- we discussed the
16 comments that she made and I made some alterations in the report before
18 Q. How many other reports have you prepared during your career,
19 during your work in this laboratory?
20 A. I have to give an estimate. I don't know, maybe a thousand.
21 Q. Did you provide your findings ever for outside peer review,
22 outside of your institute?
23 A. No, I have not.
24 Q. Thank you. I saw here in your work - and we see the first page
25 of it on our monitor - that you divided the samples that you worked on
1 into five groups. In the first group you described three pieces of
2 textile material -- I apologise, two pieces of textile material; in the
3 second group, three pieces; in the third group, two pieces; in the fourth
4 group, three pieces; and in the fifth group, six pieces. Is that the
5 total number of pieces of textile material that you processed and
6 analysed in the course of the entire process?
7 A. The textiles that you mentioned are the ones that were examined
8 more thoroughly based on macroscopical similarities between them.
9 Q. Then we will agree that only these textiles were tested for this
11 A. No, all of the textiles were investigated and were described, and
12 only when a macroscopical similarity came up, those pieces of textiles
13 were examined on a microscopical way.
14 Q. When you say "investigated" and "described," [In English] "And
15 only when a macroscopical similarity came up, those pieces of textiles
16 were examined on a microscopical way."
17 [Interpretation] How did you establish microscopic similarity
18 unless you examined them under a microscope? Could you please clarify?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, is there any possible confusion --
20 MR. LUKIC: Might be --
21 JUDGE ORIE: -- where macroscopical is mixed up with
22 microscopical. I do understand that without using a microscope, just by
23 the bare eye, I take it that the --
24 MR. LUKIC: My mistake, obviously.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. A macroscopic examination, then, would be one that you did with
3 the bare eye and you did not examine those samples microscopically. Is
4 that correct?
5 A. Yes, there is one addition to be made. A macroscopical
6 examination also includes a magnification of about ten times.
7 Q. From whom specifically did you get the samples? Was it from
8 Mr. Dean Manning?
9 A. The first batch of textile materials we received from Mr. Ruez,
10 and I think the second one was received from Mr. Dean Manning, although
11 the -- there may have been more persons with them at that time. But we
12 received them from Mr. Ruez and Mr. Manning.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, I read from yesterday's transcript:
14 "We received them from Mr. Ruez, Mr. Kruszewski and Mr. Manning,"
15 so to put the same question to the witness where even I remember --
16 MR. LUKIC: I missed that one.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
18 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
19 Q. [Interpretation] Ms. Maljaars, how did you establish the
20 provenance of each sample where told they had been found by someone else?
21 A. The provenance of each sample, meaning the origin of the sample,
22 was written on papers with codes -- individual codes of the textile
23 material that were in -- well, the batch that we received.
24 Q. You did not check the accuracy of this information yourself, nor
25 were you in a position to do so; is that right?
1 A. When those textiles were entered in the laboratory, they were
2 checked by me to see if all the textiles were there and that they had a
3 proper identification code on them.
4 Q. I probably didn't phrase my question well. I wanted to ask you
5 whether you checked, whether you were able to check, if a piece of fabric
6 actually came from a given location; in other words, you did not go to
7 the sites, correct?
8 A. No, I did not go to the sites.
9 Q. I would like to move on to page 8 of your report. It should also
10 be page 8 in e-court. Near the bottom of the page, that is, the third
11 line from the bottom, we read:
12 "B076.5 - ligature/blindfold."
13 Who decided if something was a blindfold or a ligature? Was it
14 you or the investigators who gave you the material?
15 A. It was done by the investigators that gave me the material and
16 the description that they provided us with is in the list that's on this
18 Q. Just for the record let me ask you if this applies to all the
19 entries, wherever it says "ligature" or "blindfold"; is that correct?
20 A. Yes, that's correct.
21 Q. Let's go to page 11 of your report now. Here we see a
22 description of the procedure and you say there that a database was
23 formed. Was that database created in your institute?
24 A. Yes, it was and it was created by me.
25 Q. Who entered data in that database, you again?
1 A. Some of the data I entered and others were done by a co-worker.
2 Q. Can you tell me which data you entered?
3 A. No, I cannot.
4 Q. Don't you remember or is it -- is this classified information?
5 A. I don't remember. There were over 400 entries and I don't
6 know -- I don't recall which one I made or what was done by a co-worker.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you one question, is it visible in the
8 database who --
9 THE WITNESS: No.
10 JUDGE ORIE: -- made the entries.
11 THE WITNESS: No. I can tell you something more about creating
12 the database, if you like.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Well, I was just giving a follow-up question. If
14 Mr. Lukic is interested in it, he'll ask you.
15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 Q. Was there, or rather, did you use a special software or what was
17 the format of that database?
18 A. I used Microsoft Excel or Access, I can't remember which one of
19 them I made.
20 Q. Thank you. You told us how many items from each group were
21 examined microscopically. Who decided what would be examined and what
23 A. I decided what to be examined and what not to be examined.
24 Q. On the exhibit list next to your name we see the Prosecution
25 exhibit, namely P27979.
1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would like for it to be displayed.
2 I'll have some questions about it.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Most likely is that a wrong number. An exhibit
4 number with the number P27979 would bring us somewhere in 2018,
5 Mr. Lukic.
6 MR. JEREMY: Your Honours, I think it's P1739 in this case.
7 MR. LUKIC: Thanks for your help. Let's try that one. That's
8 it. Thank you.
9 Q. [Interpretation] Was this document shown to you during the
11 A. No.
12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we please get page 3.
13 Q. Do you remember ever having seen this list? I don't mean to say
14 that you should have seen it, but were you involved in the creation of
15 this document in any way?
16 A. No, I wasn't.
17 MR. LUKIC: I know this will be a surprise for everybody, but
18 this answer shortens my cross-examination drastically and this is all we
19 had for this witness.
20 Q. Thank you, Ms. Maljaars. This is all we had for you. Thank you
21 for answering my questions.
22 A. You're welcome. Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.
24 Mr. Jeremy, any need to put questions in re-examination?
25 MR. JEREMY: No, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Since the Chamber has also no further questions for
2 you, Madam, this concludes your testimony in this court. I would like to
3 thank you very much for coming -- usually I add to that "coming to
4 The Hague," but that might be not the right expression, and for having
5 answered all the questions that were put to you by the parties and by the
6 Bench. And even though it may not be a very long distance, I
7 nevertheless wish you a safe return.
8 THE WITNESS: Thank you. You're welcome.
9 JUDGE ORIE: You may follow the usher.
10 [The witness withdrew]
11 JUDGE ORIE: I would suggest to the parties that I deal with a
12 few procedural matters, we would then take the break, and then after the
13 break, would the Prosecution be ready to call its next witness?
14 Then a few procedural matters. The first, the Defence submitted
15 on the 9th of July two requests seeking extension of respectively 30, 45,
16 and 30 days to respond to the Prosecution's 28th, 29th, and
17 30th Rule 92 bis motions on the basis of the length of these respective
18 motions. The Prosecution has indicated that it does not object to
19 reasonable extensions. The Chamber hereby grants the Defence's request.
20 For the 28th and the 30th Rule 92 bis motions, the new response dead-line
21 is the 8th of August, 2013; and for the 29th Rule 92 bis motion, the new
22 response dead-line is the 23rd of August.
23 Then the Defence has submitted a request on the 9th of July of
24 this year, seeking an extension of 14 days to respond to the
25 Prosecution's bar table motion to admit UN Resolutions reports and code
1 cables. The Chamber notes that the Prosecution has indicated that it
2 does not object to reasonable requests for extensions, and the Chamber
3 hereby grants the Defence's request. The new dead-line for the response
4 is set at the 23rd of July.
5 Then I would like to move into private session.
6 MR. LUKIC: Before we move to private session.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. LUKIC: I think you omitted the 30th 92 bis --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Let me see. I think I said the 28th and the 30th --
10 MR. LUKIC: Oh, yes, sorry.
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- Rule 92 bis motions with the same dead-line.
12 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
14 [Private session]
11 Page 14508 redacted. Private session.
5 [Open session]
6 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
8 I would like to deal with the following matter. On the
9 19th of October, 2012, the Chamber admitted into evidence
10 Witness Mujanovic's statement on the condition that the necessary
11 declaration and attestation pursuant to Rule 92 bis be filed within
12 four weeks of the decision. The Prosecution only filed the requested
13 material on the 16th of January, 2013, long past the dead-line. And the
14 Chamber would like to know whether the Prosecution has any explanation
15 for this.
16 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, I don't right now. I don't know.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please inform the Chamber as soon as
19 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: The next item I would like to deal with is the
21 position of the Defence regarding the verification of transcription for
22 P1451. In court on the 14th of May, the Chamber inquired about the
23 possible transcription error in Exhibit P1451, an excerpt from the
24 testimony of Witness Zlatan Celanovic from the Popovic case. The
25 sentence in question occurs in the original text of the Popovic
1 transcript at page 6635 and in e-court on page 11, lines 24 to 25 of
2 P1451 and reads:
3 "I did thought mention the 28th Division and I didn't know there
4 was a 28th Division."
5 In court on the 16th of May, the Prosecution informed the Chamber
6 that after having checked the corresponding B/C/S audiotape of the
7 transcript, the sentence should correctly read:
8 "I did not mention the 28th Division and I didn't know there was
9 a 28th Division."
10 The Defence informed the Chamber that it would have to verify
11 this and was requested to come back to the Chamber within seven days. In
12 court on the 13th of June of this year, the Chamber inquired again about
13 the Defence's position, but the Defence did not come back to the Chamber.
14 Could the Defence submit its position regarding the transcription for
16 MR. LUKIC: Obviously very late, but if we can get one more day.
17 I don't know if somebody checked it, but I don't have the data with me.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I -- it's almost time for the break --
19 MR. LUKIC: Saved by the bell.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, saved by the bell, Mr. Lukic. The Chamber
21 happily grants your extra time.
22 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Which is better than at the point to lose a boxing
24 match, isn't it? But before we take that break I'd like to deal with
25 Exhibits P1674. On the 2nd of July, 2013, transcript page 13700, the
1 Chamber admitted Exhibit P1674 into evidence. This is an unofficial and
2 uncorrected transcript of Drazen Erdemovic's testimony in Prosecutor
3 versus Popovic et al. dated the 4th of May, 2007. The Chamber instructs
4 the Prosecution to upload an official, corrected version of P1674 into
5 e-court and to inform the Chamber when it has done so. The Chamber
6 requests the Registry to then replace the current version with the newly
7 uploaded one. I leave it to that for the time being.
8 We take the break and we'll resume at ten minutes to 11.00.
9 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.
10 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.
11 JUDGE ORIE: If the Prosecution is ready to call its next
12 witness, let me see, we need -- no protective measures requested. Could
13 the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
14 I take it that you want to call Mr. Obradovic?
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President, and we would be requesting a
16 caution for this witness.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 Meanwhile, as the parties may have noticed, the list of exhibit
19 numbers attached to the admitted evidence of Witness Rupert Smith has
20 been filed by the Registry.
21 [The witness entered court]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Obradovic. Before you give your
23 testimony, I would like to invite you to make a solemn declaration, of
24 which the text is now handed out to you.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
1 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
2 WITNESS: LJUBOMIR OBRADOVIC
3 [Witness answered through interpreter]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please sit down.
5 Mr. Obradovic, I'd like to inform you that you as a witness may
6 object to making any statement which might tend to incriminate yourself.
7 We, then, as a Chamber, we may compel you to nevertheless answer the
8 question, but testimony compelled in that way should not be used as
9 evidence in any subsequent proceedings against you, if there are any, for
10 whatever offence, apart from if you would be prosecuted for giving false
11 testimony. I think it's not the first time that you were informed about
12 this rule. Have you understood the important content of this rule?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Obradovic, you'll first be examined by
15 Mr. McCloskey. Mr. McCloskey is counsel for the Prosecution and you'll
16 find him to your right.
17 Mr. McCloskey, you may proceed.
18 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 Examination by Mr. McCloskey:
20 Q. And good morning, sir.
21 A. Good morning.
22 Q. And can you please state your name and current rank?
23 A. I'm Ljubomir Obradovic, born in 1950, in Visegrad. I'm retired
24 and I retired with the rank of major-general.
25 Q. And do you recall recently testifying in the Tolimir case here at
1 the ICTY?
2 A. Yes, I do.
3 Q. And was your testimony truthful and correct to the best of your
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And if you were asked the same questions today that you were
7 asked then, would your answers be substantially the same?
8 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could all extra
9 microphones be switched off, please.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My answers would be the same in
11 essence, yes.
12 MR. McCLOSKEY:
13 Q. All right.
14 MR. McCLOSKEY: I would then like to offer the testimony from the
15 Tolimir trial, 65 ter 29083.
16 MR. LUKIC: No objections.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Document 29083 receives number P1783,
19 Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: And if I could, I would deal with the associated
22 exhibits after the testimony, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you may.
24 MR. McCLOSKEY: And, Mr. President, if I could, I would like to
25 read a short summary of the witness's testimony; that is purely for the
2 In 1992 and 1993, the witness was Chief of Staff and acting
3 commander of a VRS brigade in the 1st Krajina Corps. On 1 September
4 1994, the witness was transferred to the Main Staff to the position of
5 chief of the operations department within the operations and training
6 administration of the Main Staff. In June 1995 he was promoted to
7 colonel. On 27 January 1995, the witness broke his leg and he returned
8 to duty at the Main Staff on the 17th of July, 1995. He was promoted to
9 general after the war.
10 At the Main Staff he was the deputy of, and directly subordinate
11 to, General Miletic, who was the chief of the operations and training
12 administration. The witness will testify about the structure and
13 functioning of the VRS Main Staff. He will identify the Main Staff's
14 different sectors, administrations and units, including the
15 67th Communications Regiment, the 10th Sabotage Detachment, the
16 65th Protection Regiment, and the department of civil affairs and others.
17 He will set out their various duties and responsibilities. He will
18 explain the co-ordination of these sectors, administrations, and units in
19 carrying out their duties. He will testify about the command
20 relationship of the Main Staff and its different components and
21 subordinate units.
22 The witness will testify about the tasks and competencies of the
23 operations and training administration and its role in the preparation,
24 execution, and monitoring of military operations conducted by VRS units.
25 With reference to VRS military documents and military operations,
1 the witness will explain the reporting channels between the Main Staff
2 and its subordinate units and between the Main Staff and the supreme
3 commander. He will comment on the reporting procedures as well as
4 aspects of the information contained in daily combat reports.
5 He will explain what directives are, their significance, and the
6 process involved in their drafting. He will also give evidence about the
7 knowledge and involvement of the VRS Main Staff officers, including
8 Mladic, Miletic, and Tolimir and others in dealings with UNPROFOR and
9 approval and passage of humanitarian and UNPROFOR convoys through
10 VRS-held territory.
11 The witness will additionally comment on a range of orders and
12 reports emanating both from the Main Staff and from subordinate units on
13 various topics.
14 Q. Now, General, as you know, you've testified in a fair amount of
15 detail in the Tolimir case and a good part of that testimony is now in
16 evidence in this case. So I won't be going over that again in detail,
17 though I do want to bring up a couple of things.
18 And is it true that you first testified at this Tribunal as a
19 Defence witness called in the Miletic Defence in the Popovic et al. case?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And then the Prosecution called you as a witness in the Tolimir
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And then not so long ago, the Prosecution called you as a witness
25 in the Karadzic case?
1 A. Yes, in February of last year.
2 Q. And welcome back for hopefully your last time.
3 And I first want to provide something to the Court, it is exhibit
4 65 ter 25940. It is a line-and-block chart that is referred to in the
5 testimony and so I will not be going over it in detail, but I do want to
6 confirm with you that this is something that you have recently had a
7 chance to review and that you stand by its accuracy.
8 MR. McCLOSKEY: And it may be easier to hand out the A3 size. I
9 did give one in Serbian to Mr. Lukic, but it's a good thing to have, I
10 think, for this witness, Mr. President. And Ms. Stewart has some copies.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If they could be distributed.
12 MR. McCLOSKEY: And if we could blow that up a little bit and on
13 the staff sector which is over to the left side which, as we can see,
14 does include the administration for operations and training. Could we
15 get the General a copy as well. Yes, they've seen it, they've got it.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Is there a copy for Mr. Mladic as well or has he
17 received one? I have my B/C/S version.
18 MR. McCLOSKEY: We do have an extra one for him. Mr. Lukic has
19 got his own.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I just want to make sure that there's one available
21 for the accused as well.
22 MR. McCLOSKEY:
23 Q. And, General, as you -- do you recall me showing this to you
24 yesterday at our offices?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And -- and I think you had recalled earlier the name of the
2 67th Communications Regiment person which is blank in this diagram. Can
3 you tell us who that is?
4 A. Yes. When I was asked by Ms. Edgerton in the Karadzic case about
5 the organisations, I remembered the name of the commanding officer of the
6 communications regiment, that was Colonel Gredo.
7 Q. All right. Thank you for that. And otherwise, does this
8 document look accurate as to your recollection of helping create or fill
9 out the boxes for the Tolimir case?
10 A. Yes, it's identical.
11 Q. All right. And these -- we see these solid lines coming out of
12 General Mladic's box at the top. One swings around the whole unit and
13 goes down to the corps commanders and to the 10th Sabotage Unit and the
14 air force and anti-defence and military schools. What's the significance
15 of a solid line connecting General Mladic to these people and units?
16 A. The line implies subordination and superiority by the commander
17 of the Main Staff in relation to sectors of the Main Staffs and the
18 administrations and the subordinate units.
19 Q. And is this a direct connection between the commander and the
20 various people and units?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Meaning there's nobody or institution in between?
23 A. No, except if a unit had a reduced number of connections which
24 would be burning the command process, the commander would give those
25 duties to one of the professional organs.
1 Q. Right.
2 MR. McCLOSKEY: I would offer this exhibit into evidence.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Document 25940 receives number P1784,
5 Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: P1784 is admitted.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY:
8 Q. And as I've said, you've talked about these people and units in
9 detail, so I won't get into that. But just one thing, we see your
10 administration over here for operations and training. We see it as
11 headed by General Miletic, of course, with you as the chief of
12 operations. Can you tell us, by design and by - how do you say it? - how
13 many people really were supposed to be in an operations administration as
14 opposed to how many you actually had back in July of 1995?
15 A. By establishment on the basis of which this organisation was
16 established, the operations and training administration was supposed to
17 have 18 staff. And, in fact, the number of staff in the administration
18 was four: General Miletic, as the chief of the administration; myself,
19 as the chief of operations, and I was also General Miletic's deputy at
20 the same time; the chief of the training department, that was the late
21 Colonel Krsto Djeric; and there was also another lieutenant, Micanovic,
22 in my section who was a cartographer. So the staffing level was actually
23 approximately 20 per cent.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you please repeat the name of the head of
25 the section for training, it's not clear if we have the right name on the
1 transcript. Krsto and what is his family name?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Krsto Djeric.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
4 MR. McCLOSKEY:
5 Q. Was this understaffed problem that you had in your administration
6 a problem that was consistent within the entire Main Staff? Or was it
7 just your -- just operations?
8 A. This was a problem in all the sectors and administrations of the
9 Main Staff, and it featured also in the units because there was a
10 shortage of professional cadres. The staff sector that the
11 administration was a part of had the -- a staffing level of 36 per cent.
12 It was supposed to number 46 people, but actually the level of staffing
13 was 36 per cent.
14 Q. Okay. Thank you.
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: And I don't have any other questions on this,
16 if -- and we'll go on to another topic.
17 Q. General, you also spoke at length about reporting, reporting
18 procedures and such, and I would like just to go to a couple of examples
19 of some of the reports that came into and went out of the Main Staff.
20 MR. McCLOSKEY: So if we could start with exhibit 65 ter 04035.
21 Q. And as we just look at that first page in both languages, we can
22 see that this is a report from the Main Staff to the president of the
23 Republika Srpska and the various corps and other units - I won't read
24 them out. And I don't think we need to go to the end, but we'll -- I
25 think all will agree that it's under the name of Major-General
1 Radoje Miletic, standing in for the Chief of Staff, which is something
2 you explained at length in your testimony what that meant.
3 So I would like to go -- as we see and as you've explained, this
4 is a report that goes to the president that talks about the situation in
5 each of the corps. And let's go to the Drina Corps.
6 MR. McCLOSKEY: It should be on page 3 in the B/C/S and page 3 in
7 the English. There we go.
8 Q. And so we now see it entitled: "In the area of responsibility of
9 the Drina Corps ..."
10 It talks about the enemy. Can you remind us, just briefly, where
11 is the Main Staff getting this information from that it's sending on to
12 the president?
13 A. At the reporting organisation, subordinate units of the corps
14 supply their reports or submit their reports to the corps command by a
15 certain time of day. The corps command then collate all of those reports
16 into one report and then they send such a report from the corps to the
17 Main Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska. Based on the reports
18 received from the corps commands, the anti-aircraft defence section and
19 the training schools, the Main Staff would compile a main report which
20 would then be addressed to the president and those persons who were
21 members of the supreme commands, those would be the vice-president, the
22 president of the Assembly, the prime minister, the defence minister, and
23 the minister of the interior. In order to inform subordinate units about
24 events in the whole theatre, we would send the reports also to the corps
25 commands, so in order to inform the subordinate units about the overall
1 situation in the theatre.
2 Q. And remind us who assembles all these reports and then creates
3 this report that gets sent to the president?
4 A. By establishment, that was the job of the administration for
5 operations and training which had an operations centre within it. That
6 operations centre was in charge of these assignments and it had a chief,
7 two shift leaders, and one operator who entered all the data. We didn't
8 have anyone and this operations centre did not function, and that is why
9 we in the operations department and the training department and
10 frequently we also used superior officers from the branches organ for
11 those jobs as well.
12 Q. Okay. Let's go to the -- I'm sorry, were you not finished?
13 A. And we would compile the reports from the corps and from the
14 other subordinate units and send it to the address that I -- to the
15 addresses that I referred to, such as the address of the president and
16 the rest.
17 Q. All right.
18 MR. McCLOSKEY: Now I'd like to go to the next page in English,
19 it's section (b) in the B/C/S so that can stay where it is.
20 Q. And just to look at some of the examples of the kind of
21 information you would get and pass on. So we see here that it mentions
22 the Krivaja 95 task at the top of the page, it says:
23 "All the combat tasks are going ahead as planned. During the
24 day, they liberated Potocari, and they continued advancing in order to
25 liberate all the settlements in the Srebrenica enclave. On the ... axes,
1 part of our units and MUP units have organised ambushes in order to
2 destroy Muslim extremists who have not surrendered and who are trying to
3 break out from the enclave towards Tuzla."
4 Can you help us on this sentence beginning "on the ... axes."
5 That's an unknown word for the translators. So after it says "on
6 the ... axes," can you tell us what is being said there?
7 A. I'm not sure that I have the same report in front of me. With --
8 in my copy it says:
9 "In the Drina Corps from the Srebrenica enclave transport of the
10 population was organised towards Kladanj in the course of the day" --
11 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please speak up.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "During the day about
13 10.000 Muslims are estimated for transport. In all the areas of
14 responsibility of the corps, the situation on the territory is stable and
15 under control. During the day in most populated areas, recruits were
16 being sent off to the army. All the planned and approved convoys passed
17 safely through RS territory."
18 MR. McCLOSKEY:
19 Q. Okay. I was -- that's okay, General. I was going to ask you
20 about that, but you've just got that out. So -- but it's -- the one I
21 was asking about to help us with the word is the paragraph up above.
22 It's -- should be under (b) for you. It starts "Krivaja 95" and there
23 was just a word in about the third sentence that we couldn't make out.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It's not clear if we have the right part in
25 B/C/S. Under (b) the heading is different or it's the second part of
1 that paragraph.
2 JUDGE ORIE: It's the second part of (b).
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes, in the third line it starts with
4 "Krivaja 95."
5 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you. That's correct.
6 Q. So if you could just read slowly where after "Krivaja 95
7 task ..."
8 A. [No interpretation]
9 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please be asked to speak into
10 the microphone.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you please speak in the microphone or
12 could the microphone be adjusted in such a way that the interpreters can
13 hear you.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "During the day they liberated
15 Potocari and they continue advancing in order to liberate all of the
16 settlements in the Srebrenica enclave. On the estimated axes,"
17 "procenjenim," "part of our units and MUP units have organised ambushes
18 in order to destroy Muslim extremists who have not surrendered and who
19 are trying to break out from the enclave towards Tuzla" --
20 JUDGE ORIE: One second. There seems to be a practical problem.
21 The portion just read seems to be on the B/C/S version which is now
23 MR. McCLOSKEY:
24 Q. All right. And, General, is this the kind of information that
25 was normally sent off to the president?
1 A. The information was about the enemy, the situation in the field,
2 and the proposals from the corps for subsequent operations.
3 MR. McCLOSKEY: I would offer this into evidence.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Document 04035 receives number P1785,
6 Your Honours.
7 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
8 Could I ask one question in relation to this document. On page 3
9 in the B/C/S and 3 in the English, under 5, reference is made in B/C/S
10 which seems to be a corps referred to as HK, in the English as BK. Could
11 you tell us what corps that is?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, this is an
13 abbreviation for the Herzegovina Corps.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, which is not immediately clear from the English
15 translation. Yes, it's clear now. Please proceed.
16 MR. McCLOSKEY:
17 Q. And, General, I'd like to go to a Drina Corps report to the
18 Main Staff, one of the daily reports on the next day, the 13th.
19 MR. McCLOSKEY: If we could go to 65 ter 04123.
20 Q. And I just want to call your attention to some information on
21 here and then go to the Main Staff to the president report and ask you
22 just a couple of questions. But the information to please focus on is we
23 see here in the third paragraph under "the enemy" that:
24 "The enemy from the former Srebrenica enclave are in total
25 disarray and have been surrendering to the VRS in great numbers."
1 Then if we go down to the section "situation in the zone of
2 responsibility," we see:
3 "The Corps zone of responsibility is under full control. So far
4 the transport of 15.000 Muslims from Potocari to Kladanj has been
6 "In Konjevic Polje and also in Nova Kasaba reception of Muslim
7 civilians and soldiers who surrender is being carried out taken in an
8 organised fashion ..."
9 Okay. And is this one of the reports that you were talking about
10 from the corps to the Main Staff that gets assembled by your unit and
11 then finds its way into the report to the president in some form?
12 A. Yes.
13 MR. McCLOSKEY: I would offer this into evidence.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Document 04123 receives number P1786,
16 Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: P1786 is admitted.
18 MR. McCLOSKEY: Now if we could go to 65 ter 04038, which should
19 be that Main Staff report to the president on the 13th of July. And if
20 we can again go to the Drina Corps section, which should be page 3 in the
21 English. It's noted as paragraph 6. And page -- same page 3. And we
22 can see it.
23 Q. And if you could just read that to yourself to see if we can find
24 the information that was in the Drina Corps report, and I'll help us a
25 bit as you're reading that because you may remember from the Drina Corps
1 report there was a paragraph that said "the enemy from the former
2 Srebrenica enclave are in total disarray and had been surrendering to the
3 VRS in great numbers ..."
4 And if we look at that first paragraph, we eventually see a
5 sentence in the current document, and I quote:
6 "The enemy from the former enclave of Srebrenica is in a state of
7 total disarray, and the troops are surrendering in large numbers to the
8 VRS ..."
9 And as we continue to look down, we -- I'll remind us that from
10 the Drina Corps report it noted that the:
11 "Corps zone of responsibility is under full control. So far the
12 transport of 15.000 Muslims from Potocari to Kladanj has been
13 organised ..."
14 And then in the Drina Corps report it goes on to say:
15 "In Konjevic Polje and also in Nova Kasaba, reception of the
16 Muslim civilians and soldiers who surrendered is being carried out taken
17 in an organised fashion."
18 In this Main Staff report to the president, I don't see anywhere
19 any reference to the surrender of Muslim civilians. That information is
20 not being passed on to the president that was received from the
21 Drina Corps. Can you -- I know you weren't there at the time, but can
22 you think of any reason why this information was left out of the report
23 that came to them in the Drina Corps report?
24 A. I can only speculate. Could this be scrolled down? Perhaps I
25 can see the initials of the one who wrote this?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Could we move to the last page of the document.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The initials of the person who
3 compiled the report are NT. I believe that stands for Nikola Trkonja
4 [as interpreted]. In the report of the Drina Corps, after the mention of
5 200 or 300 fighters there was an addition about Muslims. I don't know
6 why it was left out. In the paragraph about the situation in the
7 territory, in this report we see a mention of Kladanj and so on.
8 MR. McCLOSKEY:
9 Q. We heard that you said I think Niko Trkulja. Is it Niko or
11 A. Actually, it's Nedeljko Trkulja. I correct myself.
12 Q. Thank you, General.
13 MR. McCLOSKEY: I would offer this document in evidence.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Document 04038 receives number P1787,
16 Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: P1787 is admitted.
18 MR. McCLOSKEY:
19 Q. Now, as a career JNA and VRS officer, were you familiar and are
20 you now familiar with what a directive is in the context of the VRS and
21 the RS?
22 A. A directive is a combat document about which I was taught and I
23 knew from the theory that prevailed in the former army. It's also the
24 same in the VRS. It's a combat document that emanates from high-ranking
25 commands. It regulates all essential matters in connection with the
1 planning and implementation of combat operations during a longer period
2 of time.
3 Q. And when you say upper echelons make these, who would that be in
4 the context of the VRS and RS?
5 A. In the VRS the Supreme Command is a high command and also the
6 command of the Main Staff. When I say "combat documents of high commands
7 and staffs," this is the meaning.
8 Q. And in some of the directives that are in this case, we have seen
9 General Mladic's signature, others such as Directive 7 the Court has seen
10 President Karadzic's signature. Do you know why that is?
11 A. Directive number 7 signed by President Karadzic was drafted after
12 an analysis was conducted of combat-readiness for the year 1994.
13 Q. General, I appreciate that and I -- this is a question I don't
14 know if you can answer, but do you know why some directives are signed by
15 Karadzic and others by Mladic? And we'll get a bit into Directive 7
16 after that.
17 A. This was only meant to be an introduction into the answer to your
18 question. The civilian leadership was involved in this analysis of
19 combat-readiness and the head of the civilian leadership was the supreme
20 commander. The first directive that ensued after that analysis was
21 signed by the supreme commander. Directive 7/1, although I wasn't
22 involved in drafting either, was signed by the commander of the
23 Main Staff because it was a directive concerning subsequent operations.
24 I believe that it was written in late March, on the 31st or so.
25 Q. And can you tell us what is the particular purpose for these
1 directives? And remind us, first of all, where the directive goes and
2 then what their purpose is.
3 A. A minute ago when I defined what a directive is, perhaps I should
4 explain. Directives include tasks and deal with matters that concern
5 corps. It's written for a longer period of time. It doesn't go much
6 into detail. Objectives are stated there. So that corps commands have a
7 kind of orientation about the tasks that are expected to follow through a
8 certain period and they can prepare in every way for what is stated in
9 the directive. Operations that are to be implemented at the level of the
10 army, including the involvement of the Main Staff, are mentioned there,
11 just as operations supposed to be implemented independently by corps
13 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, this would be a good time to
15 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll take the break now.
16 Could the witness be escorted out of the courtroom.
17 We'll take a break of 20 minutes, Mr. Obradovic.
18 [The witness stands down]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, are you on track as far as time is
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: I am, Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: That's good to hear.
23 We take a break and we'll resume at ten minutes past midday.
24 --- Recess taken at 11.50 a.m.
25 --- On resuming at 12.14 p.m.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
2 Meanwhile, I use the opportunity for the following. The Defence
3 has submitted a request on the -- yesterday, on the 15th of July, for a
4 30-day extension to file its response to the Prosecution's 31st
5 92 bis motion on the basis of the length of the motion. The Prosecution
6 has indicated recently that it does not object to reasonable extensions,
7 and for that reason the Chamber hereby grants the Defence request and
8 sets a new dead-line of the 14th of August for filing a response.
9 [The witness takes the stand]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey, you may proceed.
11 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Q. General, in the past you've described that there's two methods in
13 putting together a directive, a full and an abbreviated. Could you
14 briefly explain to us the two methods.
15 A. The full method involves all staff organs, that is, sectors and
16 administrations. The abbreviated method does not involve all, hence the
18 Q. Let's go to Directive 7, which is Exhibit P01469. And I know you
19 have talked about this before in I think all your testimonies. And can
20 you tell us, did you ever see this directive while you were at the
21 Main Staff?
22 A. I told you in the Miletic case that looking for some documents in
23 a cabinet when ordered to do so, I came across a document and took a
24 cursory look at it. It may have been in August 1995.
25 Q. And I think you said you were -- you found it in
1 General Miletic's strong-box or lock-box?
2 A. It was a metal cabinet and I took a cursory look because I had no
3 time to deal with it. My task was to fetch another document for Miletic.
4 Q. So whose lock-box or cabinet was this that you found the document
6 A. I'm not sure now. It may have been the Chief of Staff's cabinet
7 or the cabinet of the entire staff sector, because it contained documents
8 of the training administration.
9 Q. All right.
10 MR. McCLOSKEY: Let's -- let's go to the next page in the
11 document. This is the letter that you will recall, Your Honours, that
12 went with the document that has always been attached on the front of it.
13 All right.
14 Q. Is this the Directive 7 that you've talked about before?
15 A. Yes.
16 MR. McCLOSKEY: And can we go to the last page in both documents,
17 the signature page.
18 Q. And we can see that this was -- at the bottom it says:
19 "Drafted by: Colonel Radivoje Miletic.
20 "Typed by: Staff Sergeant Spasoja Zeljkovic."
21 We know who Miletic is. This Staff Sergeant Zeljkovic, what unit
22 was he assigned to at this time?
23 A. Staff Sergeant Spasoja Zeljkovic was in the establishment
24 structure of the logistics sector.
25 Q. And the logistics -- in the logistics sector, that was Djukic's
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. All right. Now, based on your knowledge of Directive 7, was it
4 put together in the full method by all the organs or the abbreviated
6 A. Based on its structure and layout, I think that the full method
7 was used.
8 Q. All right. And can you describe for us in brief, as you did in
9 Tolimir, the process of doing this? You may recall in Tolimir you said
10 that General Mladic started the proceedings and then heard from various
11 people. Is that correct?
12 A. This specific directive, having been written soon after the
13 analysis of combat-readiness for the previous year, all those involved in
14 that analysis, especially corps commanders, made proposals in the
15 conclusion about the tasks for the subsequent period. The leadership and
16 the Supreme Command, as well as the Main Staff, must have spoken about
17 it, must have discussed it, and defined the relevant tasks in accordance
18 with the situation in the theatre of war. Based on that, the individual
19 sectors continued to further elaborate their respective fields or parts
20 of the directive.
21 Q. And when you say "leadership" - let me interrupt for a
22 second - do you include General Mladic in that?
23 A. To my surprise, the commander of the Main Staff was not a member
24 of the Supreme Command, but it's a fact nonetheless. The Supreme Command
25 comprised the president of the republic, the vice-presidents, the prime
1 minister, the president of the Assembly, the minister of defence, and the
2 minister of the interior.
3 Q. Yes, General, we understand that. What was General Mladic's
4 involvement in the Directive 7, the process of creating the directive?
5 A. I don't know about Directive 7 because I wasn't present and I
6 don't know the methodology. If we're to speak about Directive 7/1 signed
7 by him, then it would have been -- would have had to be him who approved
8 the parts put together by the sectors.
9 Q. General, we can see that this document was drafted by Mladic's
10 chief of operations and training and the Court has seen this document and
11 has seen the various contributions that have gone into it. Based on your
12 knowledge of how the Main Staff worked, what would General Mladic's role
13 have been in the creation of this document?
14 A. I can only repeat that I don't know about this directive
15 number 7, but I can suppose what his role was with regard to
16 Directive 7/1 signed by him. I don't know who was involved in drafting
17 this directive here. In the heading we saw "Supreme Command" or "supreme
18 commander" and it was signed by the president.
19 Q. Was the Main Staff involved in this document in any way?
20 A. I assume so because the Supreme Command and the civilian
21 leadership did not have the professional staff to cover all of the
22 segments of the directive. So the participation of the organs or the
23 sectors and administrations of the Main Staff was inevitable. As for
24 specific people from which sector, which administration, that's something
25 that I don't know except for what I read at the bottom, Zeljkovic and
1 Miletic and the president who signed.
2 Q. Let's go to something you said in the -- I believe it was the
3 Popovic case, 65 ter 29092, e-court page 39. And I'll read the question.
4 I say:
5 "Thank you. General, I am just trying to get a -- what should be
6 the normal path of this directive," and that would be Directive 7,
7 "before it gets finally signed off by Karadzic. So if Milovanovic is
8 there, you say he's a stickler for detail, he wants to see it. Would
9 Mladic want to see it as well if he was there before it goes to the
10 president, or would he see it under the rules that you were living by?"
11 And your answer was:
12 "According to procedure, General Miletic should have shown the
13 proposal of the directive to the commander, if the Chief of Staff was not
14 there, before sending it off to Karadzic."
15 Then I ask:
16 "Okay. And if the Chief of Staff was there, and he showed it to
17 the Chief of Staff, will it still be seen by Mladic, in your view, under
18 the way the procedures -- and you know General Mladic better than we do."
19 Your answer was:
20 "According to procedure, the Chief of Staff would be duty-bound
21 to show it to General Mladic of course, yes."
22 Do you stand by that -- those answers?
23 A. Generally speaking, yes, when we're talking about the methodology
24 of the work I stand by that and the responsibilities of the superiors
25 towards the work of their subordinates. As for what really happened is
1 something that I can only speculate about, though, because I was not
3 Q. All right. Let's go on to another subject, brief subject. You
4 may remember Miletic's lawyer Nenad Petrusic asking you that when you
5 were at the Main Staff on the 17th of July, whether Miletic said anything
6 to you about a job for Trkulja, do you remember that and your response to
7 Mr. Petrusic?
8 A. I don't know if it was about Trkulja or about a group. He told
9 me that pursuant to the commander's order he sent some senior officers to
10 the Zvornik Brigade area of responsibility I think because of some
11 situation that was unclear.
12 Q. And to be clear, who told you this, the commander had sent senior
13 officers to the Zvornik area?
14 A. General Miletic told me that pursuant to a task set by the
15 commander he sent Trkulja. I asked about somebody and he said he went on
16 an assignment to the Zvornik Brigade area of responsibility.
17 Q. And was this on the 17th, your first day back?
18 A. It's possible. I don't know exactly.
19 MR. McCLOSKEY: Let's go to 65 ter 29091, e-court 65.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Is this still the same subject, Mr. McCloskey?
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: No. I've got off Directive 7, if --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Because you asked the witness whether he remembered
23 something he said in another case. And then to -- what's -- the question
24 was what the response was. And then the question is about whether it was
25 him or a group and that "pursuant to the commander's order he sent some
1 senior officers to the Zvornik Brigade ... of responsibility." To say
2 that it's quite clear to me at this moment, no, it's not.
3 MR. McCLOSKEY: And it's not -- it is not clear, that's why I'm
4 going to the record to try to clear it up.
5 JUDGE ORIE: So the record is about the same matter --
6 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes -- this is --
7 JUDGE ORIE: That's why I was --
8 MR. McCLOSKEY: I'm sorry, yes, this -- we are on the same
9 subject to try to clear this up.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's what I asked you.
11 MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
13 MR. McCLOSKEY:
14 Q. All right. And we would start at line 7 and Mr. Petrusic says --
15 sorry, let's start at line 4.
16 "Q. And what about General Milovanovic, was he there at the
17 General Staff at the time?"
18 And your answer is:
19 "On the 17th, no, he was not."
20 The next question is:
21 "Could you please answer the previous question and tell us what
22 General Miletic told you about Colonel Trkulja upon your arrival in the
23 Main Staff?"
24 And you were talking about on the 17th. And you say:
25 "He told me that he had sent him together with some other
1 officers of the Main Staff upon the order of the commander of the
2 Main Staff to the area of responsibility of the Zvornik Brigade."
3 So does this refresh your recollection?
4 A. Yes. I said that he told me because I was actually inquiring
5 about Trkulja, and he told me that pursuant to an order by the commander
6 he sent him to the Zvornik Brigade because of some unclear situation.
7 Q. And you inquired about Trkulja, the -- that first day you got
8 back; correct?
9 A. In the afternoon, when I arrived.
10 Q. On the 17th of July?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. All right. All right. One last short topic, I hope. I -- you
13 have spoken at length about the convoy requests as you received them from
14 UNPROFOR and others, General Mladic's role in that, and you were -- and
15 you've identified his initials on certain documents. I want to show you
16 one more of these.
17 MR. McCLOSKEY: It's exhibit 65 ter 19040. And here we see the
18 cover page of a document from the Main Staff dated 31 March 1995, and it
19 lists 14 separate convoy requests from UNPROFOR requesting the Main Staff
20 to approve them. And let's now go to -- it should be in the original
21 B/C/S, e-court 13, and 16 in the English.
22 Q. And like I've done many times before, can I direct your
23 attention ...
24 [Prosecution counsel confer]
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: And I think Ms. Stewart just spotted it. In the
1 English it goes from 7 to 9, that should be obviously an 8. But this
2 handwriting that we see in the document, the original document on the
3 left, could that be blown up a bit.
4 Q. And do you recognise that initial?
5 A. Yes, these are General Mladic's initials.
6 Q. And what's the circled word next to his initials?
7 A. It says "no," meaning not approved.
8 Q. All right. And you've explained this system and what this means
9 in the transcript, so I don't think - unless the Court has any
10 questions - I will go through that.
11 MR. McCLOSKEY: But I would offer that whole packet of materials
12 into evidence.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Document 19040 receives number P1788,
15 Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: P1788 is admitted into evidence.
17 MR. McCLOSKEY: And, Mr. President, I have no further questions.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. McCloskey.
19 Is the Defence ready to start its cross-examination?
20 MR. LUKIC: I just need one minute to organise myself.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 Mr. Obradovic, you will be cross-examined by Mr. Lukic.
23 Mr. Lukic is counsel for Mr. Mladic.
24 Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic:
25 Q. [Interpretation] General Obradovic, good day.
1 A. Good day.
2 Q. You have already heard this before. We spoke the same language,
3 so can I please ask you to pause between question and answer for the
4 interpretation. We need to cover a lot. I will try to make my questions
5 as concise as possible and I kindly ask you to make your answers the
7 I'm going to make a small introduction and ask you: How did it
8 come about that in the JNA, before the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, it
9 was mostly the Serbs that were in the army? In other words, did anybody
10 force the non-Serbs in the JNA to leave the army?
11 A. Nobody forced anyone to do anything. The political leaderships
12 of Slovenia and Croatia and then of the HDZ and the SDA in Bosnia and
13 Herzegovina in support of the idea of secession of the two northern
14 republics, Slovenia and Croatia, and pursuant to the concept of
15 Franjo Tudjman to create a Serbo-Communist or a Serbo-Chetnik army
16 influenced the population of their own ethnic groups not to respond to
17 the summonses to mobilisation and encourage the recruits not to go to the
18 units where they were supposed to report to, and that is why the ethnic
19 structure of the Yugoslav People's Army was disrupted, which always had a
20 certain number of percentages set according to the percentages of
21 specific ethnic groups within the federal state.
22 Q. Well, now I would like to move to the war years and I would like
23 to ask you that when you were in the Krajina, what was the situation
24 therein? In which sector of the Krajina front were you?
25 A. If you're thinking of 1994, I went pursuant to a request by the
1 Chief of Staff who left to go there about a month before that, or rather,
2 when the 5th Corps of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, from the Bihac
3 enclave and the Cazin Krajina made two deep incursions towards Krupa na
4 Uni and to the south towards Skender Vakuf. And that was the reason for
5 the commander of the Main Staff to order that a forward command post
6 should be organised, headed by his deputy, in order to stabilise the
7 situation in that sector of the front.
8 Q. At that time was Bihac a safe zone or a protected zone?
9 A. Yes, one of many.
10 Q. And did the Bosnia and Herzegovina army launch any actions from
11 that area, from the protected zones?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And can we conclude then that Bihac was not demilitarised? Our
14 legal questions might sometimes seem superfluous, but this is for the
15 sake of the transcript.
16 A. Well, no, it was not because the units from that sector, from
17 Bihac, made incursions and created attacks and incidents directed at
18 positions of the Army of Republika Srpska.
19 Q. At that time was there any fighting in the Bihac part of Bosnia
20 and Herzegovina between the opposing Muslim forces?
21 A. At that time this inter-Muslim conflict was going on between the
22 forces of the 5th Corps of the B&H Army and forces headed by well-known
23 politician Fikret Abdic, who organised the autonomous province centred on
24 his birthplace of Kladusa where there was also an industrial facility
25 that he managed.
1 Q. Thank you. We're now going to move to a different topic. I'm
2 going to ask you something about the situation when the commander of the
3 Main Staff is absent. In the event that the commander of the Main Staff
4 is not at the Main Staff, who would replace him? Who would stand in for
6 A. In the absence of the commander at the Main Staff, his deputy by
7 establishment would stand in for him if he is present, that is, the chief
8 of the sector for staff affairs, Lieutenant-General Manojlo Milovanovic.
9 Q. And if General Milovanovic is not there either, who would take up
10 these duties then? Who decides who would replace him?
11 A. If the chief of the staff sector was absent as well, then before
12 he would leave, the commander of the Main Staff would allocate one of his
13 assistants to do that job. That could be the chief of the morale, legal,
14 and religious affairs, chief of logistics, chief of the organisational,
15 mobilisation, and personnel affairs, or chief of the intelligence and
16 security sector; or if none of them were present, then it would be the
17 chief of the administration for anti-aircraft defence or of the other
18 independent administration, that would be the chief of the administration
19 for plans, development, and finances. So these are the chiefs of sectors
20 who at the same time are assistants to the commander, and then the
21 commander would allocate one of them to replace him. And if all of them
22 were not there, then that would be the duty of the Chief of Staff.
23 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we briefly look at 1D1132.
24 Q. This is your testimony from the Tolimir case.
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: And could we get a list when you can send it to
2 MR. LUKIC: You didn't receive a list?
3 [Interpretation] Page 11 in e-court, please.
4 Q. When the commander of the Main Staff leaves the RS, what is the
5 situation like? I'll read it out for us starting from line 15. The
6 Prosecutor asked you a question. I'll read it out your answer in
8 [In English] "And how was the term 'absent' defined? We -- for
9 example, we see General Mladic going to Serbia, going to Belgrade. Would
10 that be considered an absence or would he still be the commander in full
11 command and Milovanovic would still be Chief of Staff?
12 "A. He would temporarily stand in for the commander during the
13 commander's absence."
14 [Interpretation] I'll get back to the question itself, but first
15 tell me if it is true that nobody can be commander in a situation when
16 communication is not possible. In other words, is it a requirement that
17 any commander wishing to exercise command must have means of
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. McCloskey.
20 MR. McCLOSKEY: This subject context is crucially important.
21 Could the next two questions and answer also be read to the victim -- the
22 victim, the witness so that we can nail down this term "absent" a bit
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, perhaps we read the next questions as
1 MR. LUKIC: Yeah, I will.
2 "Q. Would going to Serbia be considered absent?
3 "A. It doesn't depend on the whereabouts of the commander but it
4 depends on the duration of absence."
5 Q. [Interpretation] I wanted to do this later, but now I've read it
6 and we have it on the record. So let me ask you if it's a requirement
7 that a person capable of exercising command must have means of
8 communication available?
9 A. Yes. Mobile communications centres are organised for commanders
10 to enable them to exercise command while moving.
11 Q. Without these means of communication, the commander cannot
12 exercise command and the same goes for command and control documents;
14 A. Yes. The abbreviation for that is TKT, classified command
16 Q. All right.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, since it has been read ...
18 Witness, you said:
19 "It doesn't depend on the whereabouts of the commander but it
20 depends on the duration of absence."
21 What duration would result in temporarily standing in by the
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, in previous trials I
24 explained the procedure. If anybody for reasons of physical absence or
25 illness would be uncapable of exercising command, then the superior
1 commander would issue an order about who stands in for that person. The
2 other person appointed in that order - and usually it's the superior
3 officer - assumes all rights and obligations that go with that position.
4 Also that --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- that person gets all the rights
7 that go with the status in the new position.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I asked you during what would be the period of
9 the duration of the absence which would trigger this formal being
10 replaced? Would it be half -- a day, two days, a week, one hour?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A week or more, to my mind, because
12 if somebody leaves for a day, standing in for the commander is reduced to
13 become present in the command of the staff because the one standing in,
14 because of his position in the establishment or pursuant to a decision by
15 the commander, that person is responsible for order and discipline and
16 the organisation of work inside the staff but has no right to take
17 decisions or issue orders. The deputy in establishment -- in the
18 establishment structure can but only following an approval of the
19 commander himself.
20 JUDGE ORIE: And that would then be by remote communication?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do not understand, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you said a deputy in the establishment
23 structure can, but only following an approval of the commander of
24 himself. Would that -- approval obtained from a distance or would it be
25 approved before the commander left, or both?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You misunderstood me. The deputy
2 in the establishment structure can issue an order that is in keeping with
3 the spirit of an earlier decision made by the commander but cannot make
4 new decisions.
5 JUDGE ORIE: So therefore the commander who was absent still is
6 in command although his deputy being present would follow-up on any
7 earlier decisions taken by the commander; is that how I have to
8 understand it?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. For a deputy to stand in for the commander, no written order or
13 notice is required; right? General Mladic could simply call
14 General Milovanovic and tell him, "I'm leaving for Belgrade. Now you
15 take over"?
16 A. Yes, but if the absence exceeds the duration that I stated, then
17 an order about standing in will be issued and then the deputy will have
18 all the -- the same authority as the commander.
19 Q. And if the absence is shorter than seven days, a written order is
20 not required?
21 A. No.
22 JUDGE ORIE: But if I understand you well, during such a shorter
23 absence, the deputy who takes over temporarily, short period of time,
24 could not - as you told us - decide but only could follow-up on decisions
25 earlier taken by the commander. Is that well understood?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, exactly.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Did you ever hear General Mladic -- did you hear from colleagues
5 upon your return to the Main Staff in July 1995 that the prisoners from
6 Srebrenica were being killed?
7 A. No, not until this day.
8 Q. During the war, the superior officer is duty-bound to control the
9 work of his subordinates; however, was it easy to replace persons at that
10 time if they were making mistakes as subordinates?
11 A. If I understood your question correctly, in both peace and war
12 the superior officer is duty-bound to monitor the work of his
13 subordinate. And when the Prosecutor asked me and I spoke about the
14 share in percentages, I had -- I replied that we had problems with
15 staffing at all levels. And if you were to punish someone by removing
16 him from his position, then you would have to bring in someone new and
17 you don't have anybody.
18 Q. Were there problems with reporting in writing during the war? I
19 mean the quality of the reports and I'll show you some documents.
20 A. In my previous testimonies, I also spoke about this when asked.
21 There were many inaccuracies in reporting. Sometimes that was a
22 consequence of the poor qualifications of the personnel at lower levels
23 and sometimes it would be the result of the intentions of a commander to
24 hide his responsibility for something.
25 Q. Do give us an example.
1 A. Here's an example for such intention. In 1994, when I joined the
2 Main Staff, it was in October, Lieutenant Boro Djurdjevic, who hails from
3 the area south of Teslic, came to the Main Staff and met me there. Since
4 I had come from that area on the 1st of September, I asked him what was
5 new back home. And he started listing that everything had been taken,
6 Vucja Glava, Banici, Djukici, and other villages. And I replied that it
7 wasn't right for him to spread misinformation because only the previous
8 evening I was writing a report for the Supreme Command and I never found
9 such information in the report received from the 1st Krajina Corps. He
10 pointed out that he was speaking in all seriousness.
11 I informed General Miletic of that. After a short while he
12 summoned me to the office of the Chief of Staff where he was. And he
13 demanded that I repeat the same in the presence of General Milovanovic.
14 When I did, General Milovanovic called General Tolimir and asked him if
15 he had any information along his own professional lines. The reply was
16 negative. He called the chief of security of the 1st Krajina Corps on
17 the phone. It was Colonel Stevo Bogojevic. He asked him if that
18 information was true. The other replied that it was. When
19 General Tolimir told him to write a report in our presence, he replied,
20 "I can't. But why? Because of the commander."
21 That's an example for the intention to hide something for fear of
22 being reprimanded. Every once in a while we sent out letters to
23 subordinate commands complaining of the poor quality of the reports we
24 were receiving from them.
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] 65 ter 25928 from the Prosecution
1 list, please.
2 Q. We see that this is a document of the Main Staff of the VRS from
3 June 1993, signed by Major-General Manojlo Milovanovic, Chief of Staff.
4 He orders:
5 "1. Send combat reports daily ... as regulated before.
6 "2. Before combat reports are sent, they must be checked and
7 signed by the Commander ..."
8 And then:
9 "3. Keep combat reports brief, clear, meaningful, in accordance
10 with the established standards of military terminology ..."
11 This was in 1993. Did that problem persist later, 1994/1995?
12 A. Yes.
13 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We would like to tender this
14 document. [In English] Your Honour, we would offer this document into
16 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Document 25928 receives number D331,
18 Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
20 Mr. Lukic, we are close to the point where we take a break --
21 well, we'll take a break and we -- I do understand Mr. Mladic wants to be
22 excused from the courtroom.
23 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Then could the witness already be escorted out of
25 the courtroom.
1 We'll take a break of 20 minutes, Mr. Obradovic.
2 Meanwhile, the Chamber was informed that P1674 has been uploaded
3 now in its official, corrected version.
4 [The witness stands down]
5 JUDGE ORIE: So that Madam Registrar can replace the previous
6 copy by this one.
7 Mr. --
8 MR. McCLOSKEY: I could help fix a problem you pointed out
9 yesterday about 65 ter number 09670 regarding General Smith's issues.
10 And I can inform you that in the amalgamated report now in evidence at
11 page 785 this document is referred to -- the Prosecution can tell you
12 that this -- this number is ERN 00902180-00902180, and it's -- this ERN
13 number is referenced in the first sentence of paragraph 130 on page 33 of
14 the English version of P785. So I hope that helps resolve your
15 difficulty in finding the reference. That's what I'm provided for by
16 Ms. Stewart, though I didn't say it very eloquently.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I would have to look it up first to see whether it
18 helps, Mr. McCloskey.
19 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Because it looks like an exchange of phone numbers
21 rather than -- but it's appreciated that you paid attention to it.
22 We take a break and we'll resume in the absence of Mr. Mladic at
23 25 minutes to 2.00.
24 And we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning, Mr. Mladic.
25 [The accused withdrew]
1 --- Recess taken at 1.14 p.m.
2 --- On resuming at 1.39 p.m.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
4 We'll continue. Mr. Mladic has waived explicitly his right to be present
5 for this last session this morning.
6 [The witness takes the stand]
7 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed, Mr. Lukic.
8 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 Could we look at 1010 in e-court, please.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: What is 1010, Mr. Lukic? Is that an ID number --
11 a 1D number or is it a 65 ter number?
12 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry, I'm reading the wrong number from Popovic
13 trial. We need 65 ter 25929.
14 Q. [Interpretation] As you yourself told us, this document from 1994
15 indicates that once again the poor utility of regular combat reports is
16 being pointed to and it also states here that it's a warning, where
17 Major-General Milovanovic, the Chief of Staff, warns -- actually, it's
18 not clear to me. I can see the 2nd Krajina Corps and then again the
19 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, the Eastern Bosnia Corps, the Herzegovina Corps,
20 the Drina Corps --
21 A. At the beginning there is item 1 -- actually, at the beginning it
22 says 1st and 2nd Krajina Corps, so the 1st and the 2nd Krajina Corps are
24 Q. That is precisely the clarification that I was seeking from you.
25 And based on the content of this document, is it true that the complaint
1 is still about the poor use of regular combat reports?
2 A. Yes, that was a constant complaint.
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this document,
4 Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Document 25929 receives number D332,
7 Your Honours.
8 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 Q. In connection with your stay in the Krajina, if you were to
11 receive an order from General Milovanovic and if he would not be there,
12 did you report back to Miletic instead of to Milovanovic, and did
13 General Milovanovic ask you to visit General Miletic and report directly
14 to him?
15 A. My status at the forward command post of the Main Staff was of a
16 temporary nature, lasting for as long as the forward command post was
17 there. So in that position I was directly subordinated to
18 General Milovanovic in terms of the execution of those assignments, but
19 by establishment and status-wise my immediate superior was still
20 General Miletic.
21 Q. For the transcript I just wanted to record a part of your
22 testimony from the Tolimir case and then I wanted to put a question to
24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] It's 1D1132. Could we look at
25 page 20, please, bottom of the page, line 24.
1 Q. I will be reading in English again and you will receive
2 translation. Actually, I will begin from line 20 so that we can also see
3 the question.
4 [In English] "Q. If you were given a task by, for example,
5 Milovanovic when Miletic was absent, would you be reporting back to
6 General Miletic, and would he be monitoring your work even though
7 Milovanovic had given you the order?
8 "A. In practice, when the second in command issues a task, I
9 proceed to carry the task out, but I have to report to my immediate
10 superior as to what kind of task I had been given by the second in
11 command or the second superior. There were lots of problems with writing
12 reports. For example, General Milovanovic wanted me to give him reports,
13 bypassing General Miletic. And the other officers were the same. They
14 were not subordinated to Miletic. In other words, General Milovanovic
15 would be the one to inspect such reports and sign them.
16 "Q. But did you go through Miletic as the -- what you've
17 identified as the proper order, proper chain of following those orders?
18 "A. However, if he was not present physically and if priority
19 and speed were required, then I would go directly to the person who had
20 issued the order in the first place."
21 [Interpretation] So other officers as well followed this
23 A. I think that things are a little bit mixed up here. I was at the
24 forward command post in a kind of resubordinated status to my
25 second-ranking superior, but it was an operational kind of task. So I
1 didn't have any need to keep calling on the telephone and ask to talk to
2 my first immediate superior and tell him I am sending a report from the
3 forward command post or I toured such and such a unit. But generally in
4 practice, according to the rules that we followed, if I receive an
5 assignment directly from the second superior in line, I have to report to
6 him but I have to report to my immediate superior what task I got that
7 did not come from him. But this is something that would not prevent me
8 from carrying out such an assignment.
9 And here specifically reports are mentioned. We wrote reports,
10 Krsto Djeric and I, we were directly subordinated to General Miletic.
11 But these chiefs of combat arms also wrote reports from the combat arms
12 administration but they were not subordinated to Miletic but they were
13 directly subordinated to General Milovanovic.
14 Q. I would now like to ask you something about the 65th Protection
16 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We need to look at 65 ter 25930 in
17 e-court, please.
18 Q. This is a document by the command of the 65th Motorised
19 Protection Regiment of the 23rd of December, 1993. The heading is:
20 "Writing of regular combat reports, order." It's signed by the commander
21 of the regiment. At that time that was Major Savcic; is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And the document states:
24 "Based on a verbal order by the chief of the Main Staff of the
25 Army of Republika Srpska," that's General Milovanovic; is that right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. "... on writing regular combat reports, in future, regular
3 reports will not be written but the regiment Chief of Staff will call
4 Colonel Miletic on the telephone. And every day at 0800 hours and at
5 1900 hours on extension 277 the report will be given verbally on issues
6 pertaining to the regular combat report."
7 Was the practice adopted then for the protection regiment not to
8 send in written combat reports anymore?
9 A. Well, this is probably a consequence of the fact that the
10 regiment command was directly at the location where the Main Staff was.
11 It was engaged for security. It was of different composition so that
12 writing and coding the report would create an even more difficult
13 situation for the encryption personnel. So the Chief of Staff probably
14 wanted to ease their duties a little bit so that the Chief of Staff of
15 the regiment was then supposed to call in and speak to General Miletic
16 every day on extension 277 for that reason.
17 As for the way a report should be written, well, this is an order
18 by Colonel Savcic for his men.
19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I seek to tender this document.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Document 25930 receives number D333,
22 Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
24 Mr. Lukic, when you earlier, transcript page 59, line 10,
25 referred to 1D1132, where you read part of it, for those following the
1 proceedings at a later stage that what you read is also found in P1783,
2 which is the 92 ter materials of this witness.
3 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour, but --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. LUKIC: -- I composed my questions before I had these
6 excerpts so I was not sure --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
8 MR. LUKIC: -- whether I would have it.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Where you didn't oppose admission of it, so
10 therefore it shouldn't have come as a surprise. But it's just to make
11 life easier for those who will read the transcript later.
12 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
14 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
15 Q. [Interpretation] General, you explained today that you didn't
16 have an operations centre at the Main Staff?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You explained who actually did that, and we agreed that finally
19 the reports coming from the corps ended up in General Milovanovic's
21 A. Yes, for him to sign.
22 Q. However, when General Milovanovic was in Krajina - in other
23 words, he was absent from the Main Staff - we often saw that next to the
24 signature there was the remark "for," that is, somebody else signed for
25 him. Do you know whether General Milovanovic ever corrected those
1 reports because he found some irregularities?
2 A. When I had just arrived, I noticed that the combat arms organ or
3 somebody else would submit reports that were returned because of
4 grammatical errors and so on. So I strove to write the reports as
5 accurately and well as possible so that after a while when he saw that my
6 reports were mostly all right, he didn't pay so much attention to these
7 things anymore. Apart from that, in the signature block there was also
8 the remark "standing in for." I explained that earlier and how it came
9 about because General Miletic never stood in for the Chief of Staff when
10 he was in a territory controlled by the VRS.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 MR. McCLOSKEY: Could I just -- to clarify -- I think your
13 question was based on "standing in," "zastupa," as opposed to "for."
14 Because his answer referred to "standing in" --
15 MR. LUKIC: Yes, but my question was "for."
16 Q. [Interpretation] In a situation when it was -- when
17 General Milovanovic's name was stated before "standing in for" and in
18 front of General Milovanovic's name there was the word "for," and in case
19 such a letter was sent out by fax or telefax or --
20 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. -- or by telex, you could only see the typed name of
23 General Milovanovic; right?
24 A. Yes, you're right. The remark "for" and the signature of the
25 person were for authenticating that document. But the communications
1 operator who typed that letter to be sent by telex, for example, would
2 only type the name without the signature itself.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Lukic, perhaps it's an interpretation
4 problem. Your last question, page 33, line 25, and the beginning of
5 page 64 -- oh, I said "page 33," that was wrong, page 63. It seems to be
6 that there is a mixture now of "standing in for" and "for." Can you
7 please clarify with the witness. In my view there is a difference
8 between the two.
9 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour, I will. Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: And apart from that, could you assist me, Mr. Lukic,
11 by giving the page number for where the standing in is explained because
12 I can't find it that quickly in this not-searchable copy. The witness
13 referred to it in his previous testimony.
14 MR. LUKIC: It was my question so I don't have it in front of me.
15 I was asking "for."
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I know that, but since the witness testified
17 about his previous testimony explaining "standing in," I would like to
18 have a possibility to look at it and I can't find it.
19 MR. LUKIC: I can give it to you tomorrow when we continue.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's okay.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Now, about the signature block, when it says "for," that also
23 applied in case of the signature of General Mladic, often a telefax would
24 feature General Mladic's name. Was anybody in the position to sign a
25 document in his stead --
1 MR. McCLOSKEY: Objection --
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I suppose --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
4 MR. McCLOSKEY: This continues to confuse the distinction between
5 "for" and "standing in," because that sounds like you're making a
6 reference to the "standing in" and calling it a "for." Each of these
7 documents is different, I think the meanings are different, and this is
8 just confusing it further.
9 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry if I am confusing anybody. It wasn't my
10 intention. I'm only dealing with the version "for." I'm not dealing
11 with "standing in."
12 JUDGE ORIE: That is at least a clear statement. Now see what
14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Is it true that General Mladic was often absent from the
16 Main Staff because he went to various locations on the front line?
17 A. In other words, the general --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- the document reads:
20 Colonel-General or Lieutenant-General Ratko Mladic and then there's the
21 handwritten remark "for" as well as the signature of the person
22 authorised to act in that manner during a certain period, whereas the
23 other party in the communication only receives a typed copy of the
24 document without the handwritten signature of General Mladic.
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Thank you. This clarifies this matter now. Now tell us whether
2 it's true whether -- that General Mladic often was absent from the
3 Main Staff to visit various locations on the front line?
4 A. Yes, he often wanted to see for himself what the situation was
5 like in some places. He chose those places himself.
6 Q. We only have a few minutes left. Let us speak about directives
7 now. Directive 7 and 7/1, you were asked about them by the Prosecutor
8 today. Is it true that a directive is both military and a political
10 A. It's true because the first item of the directive contains a
11 description of the military political situation.
12 Q. You were never involved in the drafting of any directive?
13 A. No.
14 Q. You mean -- what do you mean by "no"?
15 A. I was never involved in the drafting of any directive, not one of
16 a total of eight or nine that were drafted in the VRS.
17 Q. Is it true that parts of directive are implemented at a
18 subsequent time and other parts never?
19 A. In a directive, tasks and objectives are set very ambitiously.
20 It is normal that as a consequence a substantial part is never
21 implemented. And when a subsequent directive is drafted, then a part of
22 a previous directive can be taken over.
23 Q. Speaking about which, let me ask you that if a part of
24 Directive 4 has -- is not implemented but not included in Directive 5, is
25 it still valid?
1 A. Whenever a new directive is issued, the previous directive is no
2 longer in force.
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] P1469, please, that's Directive 7.
4 Could we have it on our screens.
5 Q. This is the cover letter, followed by the directive as you saw.
6 I would like to deal with page 17 in B/C/S and page 10 in English. The
7 difference is due to many blank pages in the original. We're always
8 interested in the parts where the Drina Corps is mentioned. Here at the
9 beginning it says:
10 "Enemy breakthroughs along selected operative tactical lines
11 should be prevented by extremely persistent and active defence in
12 co-operation with [indiscernible] the forces," et cetera.
13 Do you know that Krivaja 95 was an operation of the Drina Corps
14 and that there was no link-up with the forces of the Sarajevo-Romanija
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. In keeping with that, is it also true, since it was their
18 operation, that the command of the Drina Corps was able to decide to
19 implement that operation the way it thought best fit?
20 A. A directive only states which operation should be implemented,
21 whereas planning is in the remit of the corps command, and that includes
22 the ways of reaching an objective.
23 Q. Thank you, General. We're at the end of today's hearing. We'll
24 have to continue tomorrow.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Lukic. We will conclude for the day,
1 but before I invite you to follow the usher, Mr. Obradovic, I'd like to
2 instruct you that you should not speak or communicate in whatever way to
3 whomever about your testimony, whether that is testimony that you've
4 given today or whether that is testimony still to be given tomorrow. Is
5 that clear to you?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is clear.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning at
9 [The witness stands down]
10 JUDGE ORIE: We adjourn for the day and we will resume tomorrow,
11 Wednesday, the 17th of July, in this same courtroom, III, at 9.30 in the
13 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.16 p.m.,
14 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 17th day of
15 July, 2013, at 9.30 a.m.