1 Wednesday, 16 October 2013
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.33 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around this
6 courtroom after the break of one week we had.
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
9 IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 The Chamber was informed that there were a few preliminary
12 matters to be raised by the Prosecution. Mr. Traldi.
13 MR. TRALDI: Yes, Your Honour. Good morning.
14 First, two brief notes regarding exhibits not related to this
15 witness. P02198 was marked for identification on 17 September of this
16 year pending the B/C/S translation. The B/C/S translation has been
17 received and uploaded into e-court under doc ID R0013471 B/C/S T. We
18 request that the Court Officer be asked to attach the translation to the
19 English and that P2198 be admitted into evidence.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Has the Defence had an opportunity to look at it?
21 Then it was marked for identification ...
22 MR. TRALDI: Yeah, Your Honour, I just put on the record that we
23 provided this information to the Defence as well as to Chambers by e-mail
24 on the 2nd of October this year at 3.26 p.m.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, apparently you've had an opportunity for
1 14 days to look at it. If you would want half a day more, I would not
2 oppose because it doesn't make much sense to decide and then to revisit
3 the matter. But could you please --
4 MR. LUKIC: We will check by the end of the day. Thank you.
5 JUDGE ORIE: By the end of the day.
6 Then we will deal with your request, Mr. Traldi, once we've heard
7 from the Defence.
8 MR. TRALDI: The second similar matter, Your Honour,
9 Exhibit P01110 was marked for identification pending translation of the
10 entire document on 23 July of this year. A revised English translation
11 is now available. The Prosecution will request that the English
12 translation currently in e-court be replaced with the revised
13 translation. The doc ID for which is 03308987 ET REV.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, same response? Then same answer as far
15 as I'm concerned. We'd like to hear from you not later than tomorrow
16 morning and then we'll decide on the matter.
17 MR. TRALDI: Then, Your Honour, a couple of brief notes about
18 exhibits related to this witness. First, there are a number of exhibits
19 related to the witness's core expert report which set out his findings in
20 more detail. If it would suit the Chamber, I will ask to have the expert
21 report marked for identification, tender it after cross-examination, and
22 simply postpone dealing with the related exhibits until after
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, may I expect that there's no objection
25 against this way of proceeding?
1 MR. LUKIC: No objections against the proceeding.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then that's -- then we'll ask for a number for
3 the core expert report.
4 Madam Registrar.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Expert report which is number 30375 receives --
6 MR. TRALDI: I apologise, it's 28815 is the report, I believe.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Document then 28815 receives number P2503,
8 Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And is marked for identification.
10 MR. TRALDI: The second similar matter, Your Honour, is that
11 we'll be doing a slide show of a few illustrative examples. The photos
12 we are using for it are all in the formatted entries or database
13 65 ter 28816 and 28817. However, I submit that it would be clearest to
14 preserve the slide show as a separate exhibit as was done in other cases.
15 This will admittedly create a small amount of duplication, but I submit
16 that's outweighed by the benefit of a clear record. We're in the
17 Chamber's hands as to that of course.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, any position about it?
19 MR. LUKIC: I think that all our objections that go against the
20 report can be applied to these additions actually to the report.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, this is a matter of making the slide show
22 a separate exhibit rather than to be part of any -- that's rather
23 technical issue I would say. That notwithstanding other objections that
24 were raised, do you have any objections against this technical exercise?
25 MR. LUKIC: No, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Then you are -- then you may proceed as you suggest,
2 Mr. Traldi.
3 MR. TRALDI: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Third, the witness has identified submitted documents in his
5 report, paragraphs 98 to 112, consistent with the Chamber's guide-lines.
6 I may have a very brief bar table submission depending on what areas are
7 challenged on cross, which will include several of these. I anticipate
8 excluding several of the longer documents identified in that section from
9 the bar table submission.
10 And then on two most immediately relevant notes, Your Honours, I
11 wanted to put on the record that first the witness has requested to have
12 a copy of his report with him and has been provided with a clean copy and
13 I'd inquire if the Defence has any objections.
14 JUDGE ORIE: From the nodding by Mr. Lukic, I see that there are
15 no objections against the witness having a copy.
16 MR. TRALDI: And finally, Your Honour, as you'll see in the
17 corner of the room, we will be using a large visual. I've provided A3 --
18 well, we've provided A3 copies to the Defence, Chamber, and to the
19 Chamber's Senior Legal Officer. Depending on how we proceed, I may ask
20 to break a couple of minutes early to set it up.
21 JUDGE ORIE: That's okay. Now the hard copies are not of great
22 use for us because they are mainly illegible, so I take it that we could
23 also work on the -- on the digital versions of --
24 MR. TRALDI: It is also in e-court, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. TRALDI: It's 65 ter 13413 [Realtime transcript read in
2 error "14313"].
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that. Nothing else?
4 MR. TRALDI: No, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, nothing from the Defence at this moment.
6 Therefore, could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
7 MR. TRALDI: Just while that's happening, Your Honour, at page 5
8 line 1 I'm recorded to have said 65 ter 14313 and I believe I said 13413.
9 If I didn't, I should have said 13413.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that, Mr. Traldi
11 [The witness entered court]
12 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Riedlmayer, I presume?
13 THE WITNESS: Good morning, yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Riedlmayer, before you give evidence the Rules
15 require that you make a solemn declaration. I invite you to make that
16 solemn declaration.
17 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
18 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
19 WITNESS: ANDRAS RIEDLMAYER
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Riedlmayer. Please be seated.
21 Mr. Riedlmayer, you'll first be examined by Mr. Traldi. You find
22 him to your right.
23 Mr. Traldi, you may proceed.
24 MR. TRALDI: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Examination by Mr. Traldi:
1 Q. Good morning, sir. Could you please state your name and
2 occupation for the record.
3 A. My name is Andras Janos Riedlmayer I'm an art documentation
4 specialist employed by Harvard University.
5 Q. And how long have you worked as Harvard?
6 A. I'm about to complete 28 years of service next week.
7 MR. TRALDI: Could we please have 65 ter 28813.
8 Q. Mr. Riedlmayer, is this the curriculum vitae that you provided to
9 the Office of the Prosecutor?
10 A. It is.
11 Q. And does it correctly set out your experience and your current
13 A. Yes, it does.
14 MR. TRALDI: Your Honour, I -- the Prosecution tenders
15 65 ter 28813 into evidence.
16 MR. LUKIC: No objections.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Document 28813 receives P2504, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
20 MR. TRALDI:
21 Q. Sir, can you briefly describe the research work you've done into
22 cultural property during the period of war in the former Yugoslavia?
23 A. I started looking into damage to cultural property in the former
24 Yugoslavia while the war was still going on, collecting publicly
25 available documentation. I wrote about it and in the mid-1990s I also
1 helped organise cultural reconstruction initiatives. In 1999 after the
2 end of the Kosovo war, I conducted a field survey in Kosovo with a
3 colleague, an architect, with the results submitted to both UNMIK, the UN
4 administration in Kosovo and to the UN war crimes Tribunal. Subsequently
5 I was asked by the Office of the Prosecutor to also prepare reports on
6 Bosnia. These were based initially on a field survey conducted in the
7 summer of 2002 and then also on subsequent visits to Bosnia and on
8 documentation that I have collected over the past decade and more.
9 Q. And had you been familiar with the culture of the Balkan region
10 before you did the work you've just described?
11 A. Yes. I received my undergraduate degree in history from the
12 University of Chicago in 1969 and wrote my senior thesis on the subject
13 of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Congress of Berlin. I received a graduate
14 degree in Near Eastern studies basically in Ottoman history from
15 Princeton University and there too part of my research had to do with the
17 Q. And do you also speak what we refer to as B/C/S?
18 A. I speak it with an accent but I can read it quite fluently.
19 Q. When did you begin to acquire your familiarity with the language?
20 A. In the early 1990s I took a course at Harvard and I've been
21 working at it ever since.
22 Q. Can you briefly summarise for the Chamber what you view as
23 included within the ambit of cultural heritage in the former Yugoslavia?
24 A. Cultural heritage consists of all the cultural production,
25 obviously, of the peoples of the former Yugoslavia, but the cultural
1 heritage that I've documented for the Tribunal is limited to immovable
2 cultural heritage, meaning buildings, institutions, rather than works of
3 art or other things that are considered movable cultural heritage. These
4 typically consist of historic landmarks, buildings, monuments, as well as
5 houses of worship of the various religious communities and archives and
6 libraries as institutions.
7 Q. Based on your studies and your work, can you tell us about the
8 role of houses of worship in Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat cultures?
9 A. Okay. Houses of worship in neighbourhoods and villages were
10 often the centres of religious life and, to some extent, also of cultural
11 and social life and they symbolised the visible presence of a community
12 in a given place. So Mahala quarter of a city or a village would be
13 immediately recognisable as a place where Muslims or Croats lived by the
14 presence of a minaret or a church steeple. Many of these neighbourhoods
15 and villages had a mixed population, and in that case you would see each
16 groups' prominent religious monument visible in the landscape. In the
17 late 20th century especially in urban areas the majority of the
18 population was not particularly religiously observant. They might go to
19 a mosque or a church mainly for the big transition of life events such as
20 weddings or funerals. Nevertheless, the presence of these constituted
21 the sign that this community to which they belonged had history in that
22 place and belonged there.
23 Q. You also discuss just now as well as in paragraphs 60 to 64 of
24 your report some other cultural sites, religious archives, libraries, a
25 monastery. Can you explain the importance of those types of sites for
1 the Chamber?
2 A. Okay. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, as in much of south-eastern Europe,
3 the civil registration of births, deaths, and marriages came along
4 relatively late in history, basically around World War I, as a result of
5 which the parish archives and the archives of the Islamic religious
6 councils in each community held not only the records that pertained to
7 the operation of those religious communities, but also the history of
8 entire families and of entire groups of people. In other words, their
9 destruction is a loss not only to the operation of a parish but also to
10 the whole group whose past is captured in those documents.
11 Q. Now I'd like to turn briefly to your current employment. You
12 described yourself as an art documentation specialist. Can you be more
13 specific about the position that you hold?
14 A. I direct the documentation centre of the Aga Khan programme for
15 Islamic architecture at Harvard university. The Aga Khan programme is a
16 joint programme between the school of architecture at MIT and the art
17 history department and urban planning department at Harvard. The
18 documentation centre actively collects documentation on Islamic
19 architecture from around the world in all formats, including photographs,
20 digital images, textual documentation. We also create some of our own
21 documentation by conducting photography missions. We typically send out
22 groups of students on summer projects under supervision to bring back
23 documentation of specific sites.
24 Q. And as director of the documentation centre, do you -- are you
25 involved in deciding what documentation becomes part of the collection?
1 A. Yes. We -- for many years I have served on committees that
2 approve student projects for summer documentation and when they bring
3 back the documentation I oversee the selection of what gets kept and what
4 does not, what makes good documentation and what is not worth keeping.
5 Q. Did you make similar evaluations of what made for suitable
6 documentation in the course of preparing your report for this case?
7 A. Definitely. Let's consider, for example, a building.
8 Documentation would typically consist of a before and after picture. If
9 you have an after picture, it has to be one that provides sufficient
10 information about the building to tell what happened to it. In many
11 cases we also -- I mean, I also was able to obtain cadastral plans or
12 pre-war ground plans. This was very useful, especially in cases where
13 the building had been totally destroyed. It was then a task to compare
14 the site in its post-war condition with the pre-war plan and match things
15 up. So that is one aspect. Another aspect is textual documentation.
16 Both in advance of my field of war and afterwards I would collect every
17 possible published documentation on particular sites, including published
18 photos, descriptions, histories, and so forth. And I would evaluate
19 these sources as to their reliability and the utility for the purpose and
20 then match them up with the visual documentation in order to come to an
21 evaluation of what happened, both to specific sites and to a pattern of
22 sites at a larger scale.
23 Q. Both in your work at the documentation centre and in preparing
24 the report, do you visit habitually every cultural site you're
1 A. No, I do not. Typically in my work in the documentation centre,
2 I work with photographs, texts, and digital images, and only when I go
3 out on the very occasional field trip do I actually collect and create
4 the documentation. In my fieldwork for the Tribunal, I've been able on
5 average to visit about half the sites that I documented. I should also
6 like to add that of -- in the process of evaluating the information for
7 sites which I have not visited, I often compare what that particular
8 source has to say about the sites which I did visit, and thereby be able
9 to judge how reliable its descriptions or its evidence is for what I'm
10 trying to establish.
11 Q. And for sources that you used regularly, your observations about
12 those sources' reliability is -- are set out in appendix 1 to your
13 report; is that right?
14 A. That is correct.
15 MR. TRALDI: I would ask that the Court Officer call up
16 MFI P2503. And I believe what we have is 2504. It should be
17 65 ter 28815.
18 Q. Is this the first page of the expert report you drafted for this
20 A. Yes, it is.
21 Q. And can you describe any additional information to what you've
22 said already that the Chamber should have in understanding the approach
23 you took to preparing this report?
24 A. Could you clarify what you mean? Methodology or ... ?
25 Q. Just -- just briefly any additional steps you took beyond the
1 fieldwork and sources you looked at above, anything that's important for
2 a reader to understand the process of preparation.
3 A. Okay. Well, the process of preparation includes, first of all,
4 looking at published and unpublished allegations of destruction, also
5 researching what buildings and institutions existed prior to the war.
6 Then, in accordance with the terms of reference set by my mission which
7 specified which municipalities I should collect information on, then
8 assembling all possible documentation both from sites that I covered in
9 my various visits to Bosnia and sites for which I have documentation. If
10 there are sites for which there is insufficient documentation, I tried to
11 obtain additional documentation wherever possible; if that was not
12 possible, I had criteria by which I determined what the threshold was
13 below which I would simply not cover a site. As I set out in my
14 description of my methodology, that typically included sites for which
15 there was no photo documentation available. Photographs were required in
16 large part because damaged descriptions in the public -- published
17 documentation, such as that issued by the religious communities, was not
18 always very precise or reliable. If a site is described as completely
19 devastated, what does that mean? In the absence of either a site visit
20 or good photographs, I had no way of knowing what had really happened to
21 a site like that.
22 Q. I'd like to discuss two specific points within the report at this
23 juncture. First, in paragraphs 18 and 19 you describe which sites were
24 included. Were you able -- sorry, did you exclude from the ambit of the
25 report any sites which you were able to prove to the thresholds you'd
1 just described had existed before the war?
2 A. No. I included everything for which adequate documentation was
4 Q. Regardless of whether anything had happened to it during the
6 A. Exactly.
7 Q. And in paragraph 15 you describe your report as documenting cases
8 of "deliberate destruction." What steps did you take to identify
9 destruction as deliberate?
10 A. Okay. Well, first of all, one of my concerns was to ascertain
11 whether a building still stood on the eve of the war. There was at least
12 one site in the schedule D list, which I determined had been damaged
13 before the war. There was another site which apparently was essentially
14 a site that hadn't existed. It was a duplicate name for another mosque,
15 this is Kutina. So that was the first step. The second one is how do
16 you know it's deliberate? Okay. You look at a building, first of all,
17 if it is falling down simply due to neglect, then you know that is not
18 necessarily deliberate damage. Then you look at the context, is the
19 building more damaged or less damaged than surrounding buildings,
20 assuming they're -- it is in a context where there are surrounding
21 buildings. And I include some statistics, I believe, in footnotes 17 and
22 27, where I compiled this information and found, in fact, that in the
23 majority of cases where this information was available, the surrounding
24 buildings had been less damaged and that these particular buildings had,
25 indeed, been the focus of damage. So that I would call deliberate
2 MR. TRALDI: Could we have 65 ter 28816, page 69.
3 Q. As that comes up, sir, aside from the report, did you also
4 produce specific records called formatted entries for each of the sites?
5 A. Yes. My report consists of three parts. One is the database
6 which we'll talk about more later. That covers every site in these
7 municipalities for which I have sufficient information. The second one
8 is the text report which we have already discussed. And the third one is
9 the formatted entries. The formatted entries, so-called, cover each of
10 the schedule D indictment sites plus Srebrenica. Formatted entry is
11 simply an expanded version of the database entry. For technical reasons,
12 database entries can only accommodate a limited amount of information,
13 two vertical photos, two horizontal photos, and a limited amount of text.
14 For most of these sites I had more information than that available and so
15 I put them into essentially PDF document. So sites might have additional
16 photos, additional text and the formatted entry reflects that.
17 Q. And is this that we're seeing here an example of those formatted
19 A. Yes, this is one of the mosques in Rogatica, the town of
20 Rogatica, it is the Arnaudija mosque and it is a site that I'd visited
22 Q. Can we turn to the next page, please ...
23 THE INTERPRETER: Kindly slow down for the interpretation,
24 please, thank you very much.
25 MR. TRALDI: Can we turn to the next page, page 70, please.
1 Q. Can you describe for us the relationship between the three
2 photographs on this page?
3 A. Yes. The two photos at the bottom are pre-war photographs of the
4 mosque. The photo on top shows how it looked in the period after the
5 war. I visited the site in 2002. This photo is from 2005 from the
6 Centre for Islamic Architecture of the Islamic Community of
7 Bosnia-Herzegovina. I chose it rather than my photo because my photo was
8 a poor exposure. It was getting dark when I was there. As you can see,
9 the site of the mosque is empty. The building is simply gone. In the
10 background at right is a building which is an updated version of the
11 buildings you see in the two pre-war photos, a bus station. So it
12 confirms that we're looking at the same site. When I visited the site, I
13 could also see disturbances in the ground cover. I was there in the
14 summer. This photo is from the autumn, so the ground is covered with
16 Q. In cases where mosque sites had become empty, like the photograph
17 we see here, were there characteristic features which you looked for to
18 determine that a mosque had at one point stood there?
19 A. Yes. There were several things that one could do to determine
20 that a building had stood there. One I just alluded to is the
21 disturbance in the ground. This is most frequently reflected by the fact
22 that when you tear down a building, typically if the foundations are not
23 removed the growth of vegetation will be different on top of what used to
24 be stone and on top of undisturbed earth. And so very often you can
25 trace the outlines of a building even if the building has gone because
1 the grass and weeds will be very sparse or stunted where walls had stood
2 and much more lush where walls hadn't stood. So you can pace it. One
3 can match these up to pre-war plans. Also if one has pre-war photos it
4 is often possible to match up the context, either by adjacent buildings
5 or by topography. Sometimes there are outlines of hills that you can
6 match up, so the background tells you something. There are roads. And
7 finally, if one has plans, many of these mosques had very specific
8 dimensions and I would measure.
9 There are also other ways you can tell. The sites of destroyed
10 mosques often leave behind the Linden tree that is traditionally planted
11 next to the mosque when it's dedicated in Bosnia. Linden is going back
12 to pagan times, where a sacred tree of the Slavs -- and it was customary,
13 still is, in Bosnia that when a new mosque is erected that to the right
14 of the entrance a Linden tree is planted. The Bosnian term is Lipa. And
15 so often you would find a Linden tree and you would find a disturbed
16 ground and the other thing we would often we would find is a large
17 deposit of garbage marking where the mosque stood. Often these sites
18 seemed to be deliberately chosen for the deposit of garbage and which
19 seemed very strange because often this was in the middle of a settlement
20 so not exactly the place where you would expect smelly refuse to be
22 MR. TRALDI: Regarding this specific mosque, Arnaudija,
23 Your Honours, I would refer you to adjudicated fact 1137 and the evidence
24 of RM081.
25 Q. And, sir, now I'm going to turn to the database. The database is
1 not compatible with e-court so to assist in understanding its functioning
2 I would ask Ms. Stewart to pull up an example and if we could play it in
3 Sanction. The example we're looking at here is the Kukavica mosque in
4 Foca. Do you see it on your screen now?
5 A. Yes, I do.
6 Q. Is this a site you visited yourself?
7 A. It is.
8 Q. Can you describe what we're seeing in the pictures on this page?
9 A. Okay. So, first of all, you will note the structure of the
10 database entry, where there are different forms of the name of the
11 building in English and in B/C/S, its precise location including GPS, its
12 date of construction, whether or not it was a listed monument, meaning
13 under legal protection as a historical landmark, and then its function,
14 and finally the context, whether it was heavily damaged or lightly
15 damaged, and what the surrounding buildings look like.
16 The pictures you see include pictures I've taken of the exterior
17 of the mosque. One facade of the mosque has collapsed. On the picture
18 at bottom right you can see the place where the minaret stood before it
19 was destroyed. There's a pre-war photo that shows the context and
20 there's also a shot taken of the interior in June of 1996 right after the
21 war by a journalism student who -- whom I asked to take it. He did
22 charity work in Bosnia the summer after the war and you can see that the
23 interior is filled with rubbish and a pig skull.
24 Above the pictures is my technical description exactly of what
25 the damage is --
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I interrupt, please?
2 THE WITNESS: Yes.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is it possible to point to us which one is the
4 interior with the pig skull.
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, it's the second photo from the
6 top. It's the only one that doesn't show the exterior of the building
7 and the pig skull in the centre.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any way to zoom in on that or is that
10 MR. TRALDI: I'll defer to Ms. Stewart on that, Your Honour --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
12 MR. TRALDI: -- but if we get a second, we'll try.
13 THE WITNESS: If it is -- is this just an image or -- oh, here it
14 is. Okay.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Could you -- Mr. Riedlmayer, could you assist us
16 by -- you see that there's an -- there's an arrow at -- to guide it to
17 where we find the pig skull. I think at this moment we are --
18 THE WITNESS: It's at the very centre of the image. You can see
19 the eye hole --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, I see it. Could we just -- so that we are sure
21 you are looking at the same, could I ask the person who's handling the
22 arrow to go to the picture and then to -- I think that is where it is --
23 THE WITNESS: Yes. Yes, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think we all agree it's in the very centre,
25 you see a hole where the eye would have been --
1 THE WITNESS: And the mouth --
2 JUDGE ORIE: And the right side of the mouth. Yes, thank you.
3 MR. TRALDI:
4 Q. Sir, why did you choose to provide the database along with the
5 formatted records?
6 A. Okay. The database is a database that I designed using the
7 FileMaker software which allows one to search and sort on all fields. It
8 is very useful, I believe, for deriving statistical information. One can
9 search, for example, by municipality, by degree of destruction, by type
10 of building, by context, and so forth. So most of this statistical
11 information that you find in my report was generated by searches of the
12 database. And I thought it was -- would be useful for the Court to have
13 the database as a whole to be able to do searches of Their Honours'
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I put at this moment another additional
16 question. How did you establish that the skull was the skull of a pig?
17 THE WITNESS: It's a good question --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mladic, Mr. Mladic, could you please remain --
19 if you want to consult with counsel, you're -- you have to remain
20 seated -- Mr. Mladic, you have to remain seated and if you want to
21 consult briefly and --
22 THE WITNESS: I --
23 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please. One second, please.
24 Please proceed.
25 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour. Harvard has a museum of
1 comparative zoology. I took the photo over to the museum of comparative
2 zoology where they have a collection of animal skulls and I compared them
3 and I consulted the curator, and it was a positive identification that it
4 is a pig skull. It is also compatible with information on other sites,
5 though not this particular one, that talks about pig skulls being --
6 pigs' heads being deposited at sites of mosques because, as you're
7 probably aware, pigs are considered unclean by Muslims.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I have one other question of detail. The
9 description of the photograph says "skulls" and you talked about a skull.
10 THE WITNESS: Okay.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Is there a -- do we miss something or ... ?
12 THE WITNESS: No. That is a typographical error. There's one
13 skull. There are other bones that you can see amidst the rubbish. The
14 interior of the mosque was burned out and this is how it was given to me
15 by the student who took the photograph and he described it as skulls so I
16 just wrote it. But the one I could identify was the one right in the
17 middle of the photo.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 THE WITNESS: It's a largish building, so there may have been
20 other ones outside of the photo.
21 JUDGE ORIE: So whether it's a typo or not is unclear?
22 THE WITNESS: It's unclear in other words.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Okay.
24 THE WITNESS: But in any case, there is at least one identifiable
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
3 MR. TRALDI:
4 Q. And, Mr. Riedlmayer, I understand you have three brief
5 corrections regarding the database which I'm simply going to read to you
6 now. First, the cover page of the database does not mention Srebrenica.
7 Does the database also include Srebrenica sites?
8 A. It does.
9 Q. Second, regarding the Catholic church in Kozaric the database
10 entry lists it as damaged in June 1999. Should that date read June 1992?
11 A. That's correct, and that is a typo.
12 Q. And finally, the Catholic church in Cesina, Sanski Most, is it
13 correct that that church was destroyed in June of 1993 rather than in
15 A. That is my information, yes.
16 Q. And that correction should also apply, should it not, to
17 paragraph 59 of your expert report?
18 A. Yes.
19 MR. TRALDI: I'd ask the Court Officer to call up 65 ter 28814.
20 Q. And we see it already on the right. Can you tell the Chamber
21 what this document is?
22 A. Yes, it's an appendix that I devised called principal elements of
23 a Bosnian mosque. I put it together in order to aid the Court in
24 understanding my database in which I refer to these terms and it -- if
25 you had this guide, you would understand, first of all, what is said
1 without it needing to be explained. But also this explains the relative
2 position of elements of the mosque to each other. Every mosque in Bosnia
3 is oriented towards Mecca, which in Bosnia is generally a south-easterly
4 direction. And almost all mosques have the minaret to the right of the
5 entrance. The other elements are laid out there. There's a prayer hall.
6 There is a prayer niche called the mihrab marked with the letter D. That
7 indicates the direction of the prayer. To the right of the prayer niche
8 is a pulpit called a mimber from which sermons are delivered. The
9 minarets typically have an internal staircase and that is where the
10 muezzin, the man who gives the prayer call, goes up the minaret. If we
11 could have the next page.
12 MR. TRALDI: If we could turn to page 2, please.
13 THE WITNESS: Okay. So on this one -- should I wait for the
14 second one? Yes. On this one you can see the exterior of the same
15 mosque before the war. So you can see that three-quarters of the way up
16 the minaret is a balcony from which the prayer call is issued. The
17 balcony is called a "serefe" and it is important to note its presence
18 because in mosques that have been ruined you often have that as an
19 element among the damaged masonry. The front of most mosques has a
20 portico here marked with a letter B, it comes in various shapes, but it
21 is again a distinctive element of the building.
22 Q. And you use here the example of the Aladza mosque in Foca. Why
23 did you choose that example?
24 A. Basically because I had good documentation for it. It was a
25 particularly notable document and there are books about it, and so it was
1 easy to choose photos that were clear and understandable and I was able
2 to locate good floor plans.
3 Q. When you studied what happened to that mosque, what did you
5 A. The mosque was completely destroyed in 1992 and its ruins were
6 razed and it was one of those sites where all you could see was the
7 outlines of foundations after the end of the war.
8 MR. TRALDI: If we could have please 65 ter 28816, page 140.
9 Q. And what site do we see here on this page?
10 A. Okay. This is from the formatted entry for the Aladza mosque.
11 On the top photo which was taken in June of 1996 by the same student who
12 took the picture of the interior of the Kukavica mosque. You can see the
13 circular outline in the front is of the ablution fountain in front of the
14 mosque and then behind it you can see the outlines of the foundations and
15 some buildings in the background, including some that have suffered
16 damage. It's the Imam's house between the trees. The photo below is
17 this site as it looked some years later, with more of a growth of
18 vegetation, but you can still see, if you look carefully, the places
19 where there had been a foundation of a mosque.
20 MR. TRALDI: Could we have page 142 of the same document.
21 Q. And what site are we seeing here?
22 A. Okay. This is also in the town of Foca. This is next to the
23 iron bridge on the Drina River. In September of 2004, there was an
24 exhumation of a suspected mass grave site. As far as I know, no human
25 remains were found, but at the depth of 7 metres, identifiable fragments
1 of the Aladza mosque were found, column capitals, carved stone work,
2 pieces of the mihrab were recovered from beneath tonnes of refuse. This
3 was at some considerable distance from where the mosque had stood, so the
4 rubble had been moved.
5 MR. TRALDI: If we could have 65 ter 30376.
6 While that comes up, Your Honours, regarding the mosques in Foca
7 I would refer you also to adjudicated fact 721 and transcript page 17666.
8 This, I'm afraid, is just a surrogate sheet. Ms. Stewart will play what
9 I'm looking for in Sanction.
10 Q. Do you recognise this spreadsheet, sir?
11 A. Yes. This is a spreadsheet I put together at the request of the
12 Office of the Prosecutor. It covers all of the reports I did for the six
13 Bosnia-related cases at this Tribunal, and it's simply a compilation of
14 each of the sites that were surveyed. There are -- I don't remember the
15 exact figure, but it was something like 535 sites. I have -- yes. And
16 the red entries are Islamic religious sites, the blue entries are
17 Catholic religious sites, and there's a handful of black entries which
18 are heritage sites which are not connected to a particular community,
19 such as the oriental institute in Sarajevo, for example, which was a
20 state institution.
21 Q. In studying those more than --
22 A. Those are in black.
23 Q. In studying those more than 500 sites, can you tell the Chamber
24 what patterns, if any, you were able to discern in the relationship
25 between the location of a site and what happened to it?
1 A. Again, would you clarify what you mean by the question.
2 Q. Sure. Two of the pieces of information on this spreadsheet are
3 where in Bosnia a specific site is located and the level of damage
4 associated with that site.
5 A. Okay. Yes. What is indicated on these is, first of all, which
6 municipality they're in, and then for each there is a GPS location, the
7 degree of damage, and the date if it can be established. And the general
8 pattern was that sites which had been in territory which at various
9 points in the war was under the control Bosnian Serb forces tended to be
10 heavily damaged or destroyed. Sites that were near the confrontation
11 lines would have lesser degrees of damage, typically damage category 2.
12 And sites which were undamaged would be inside territory that was
13 controlled by the Bosnian government forces for the duration of the war.
14 Q. Were those patterns consistent across all the municipalities
15 you've studied?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And does this spreadsheet include every site in those
18 municipalities for which you determined you had sufficient documentation?
19 A. It does.
20 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I think it might be time for the
22 JUDGE ORIE: It is time for the break, but before we take the
23 break could we just have a bit of a closer look to the spreadsheet
24 because we see now columns A, B, C, D, and E, but what then follows and
25 what was apparently referred to is not visible. Could we just move to F,
1 G, and H so that we -- yes, so that we have an -- F is the condition of
2 damage, I take it --
3 THE WITNESS: And G is the reported date of destruction.
4 MR. TRALDI:
5 Q. Just to be totally clear, perhaps the number in column F, does
6 that correspond to the scale you set out in your report?
7 A. Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We've seen it.
9 We take a break.
10 Mr. Traldi, will you be able to set up everything during the
11 break or would we need another five minutes after that?
12 MR. TRALDI: I think the break should be sufficient, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Are you on track as far as time is concerned?
14 MR. TRALDI: Approximately, Your Honour, yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Now, I asked for the electronic version of
16 65 ter 13413, but having looked at it, if you zoom in then it turns out
17 that the -- how do you say it, the number of pixels, et cetera, is
18 insufficient to even read it when zoomed in. I don't know how you are
19 going to deal with that or whether you'd expect us to take home one of
20 these huge maps. We have to find a way that we cannot only look at it in
21 this courtroom but also later if we have to deliberate on these matters.
22 MR. TRALDI: Yes, Your Honour, we can explore the technological
23 side of things. The map itself is in custody of court management, and so
24 we'll try and work things out with them as best we can.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so we have a way to access that material and be
1 able to read what is written on it as well.
2 We take a break but not until after Mr. Riedlmayer has been
3 escorted out of the courtroom.
4 [The witness stands down]
5 JUDGE ORIE: And we resume at five minutes to 11.00.
6 --- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.
7 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.
8 JUDGE ORIE: The witness will be escorted into the courtroom.
9 [The witness takes the stand]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, you may proceed.
11 MR. TRALDI:
12 Q. Before we start with the map, sir, I know we'd arranged a pointer
13 with Registry. Have you been provided with it? I'll take that as a yes.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Then do you recognise the map that's just to your left?
16 A. Yes. This is a map compiled by Mr. Bekir Besic, who was a member
17 of the Council of Islamic Community of Banja Luka, and who now lives as a
18 refugee in a third country. He mapped the sites of destroyed mosques
19 based largely on the published report by Muharem Omerdic, which is cited
20 among the sources of my report.
21 Q. Is this also one of the sources you used in preparing your
23 A. It is not a -- the Omerdic or the map?
24 Q. [Microphone not activated] The map.
25 A. Okay. The map is provided largely as an illustration of the
1 pattern of destruction, but insofar as my report is based on specific
2 subsets of municipalities, obviously I was not dealing with the entirety
3 of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
4 Q. So can you tell us, to start working with it, just generally what
5 we're looking at.
6 A. Okay. So what we're looking at is a map of
7 Bosnia and Herzegovina. The large green circles reflect the larger
8 towns. At the centre is Sarajevo. In the south is Mostar. Here are
9 Travnik and Zenica at the centre, Banja Luka at the top, and Tuzla in the
10 east. This is -- in the far east is Gorazde in the Drina valley. The
11 various coloured dots on the map represent damaged, destroyed, and intact
12 mosques. I'm sorry that it's so far from the Bench, but maybe the camera
13 can zoom in. I also know from having handled the map that it does fold
14 and can be spread out on a table. So it should be possible to handle it
15 outside of a court setting.
16 Q. And can you just let us know what respectively the red, yellow,
17 and green dots represent.
18 A. Red dots marked the sites of destroyed or severely damaged
19 mosques, yellow dots mark mosques that are lightly damaged, and green
20 dots mark the sites of mosques that are undamaged. These are not in
21 complete match with my multi-point scale, but I think it's generally
23 Q. And geographically, how does the distribution of these sites
24 relate to the pattern that you described earlier?
25 A. I think it matches the phenomenon I described with reference to
1 the Excel spreadsheet that we discussed shortly before the break. You
2 can see, Your Honours, the pattern of red dots. If you start here in
3 Sarajevo --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
5 THE WITNESS: You can see red dots going down to Mostar and then
6 in the other direction up this way --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: It is difficult to
8 understand --
9 JUDGE ORIE: One second, one second, Mr. Riedlmayer.
10 THE WITNESS: I'm sure --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps you --
12 THE WITNESS: I hope you could hear --
13 JUDGE ORIE: I can --
14 THE WITNESS: So let me --
15 JUDGE ORIE: One second.
16 THE WITNESS: Yeah?
17 JUDGE ORIE: I can hear you. The interpreters cannot hear you if
18 you move away from your microphone, and therefore then there'll be no
19 translation in other languages. So if you could -- is there any way to
20 have an extended microphone fitted or is there -- that's not possible.
21 Then I have to ask that the map --
22 THE WITNESS: I could --
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- will be moved slightly and that you stay as close
24 to the microphone, and if you speak that the microphone is adjusted in
25 such a way that if you then would speak slowly --
1 THE WITNESS: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And could I ask transcriber and interpreters to
3 immediately yell at me, either directly or through my earphones, that
4 they cannot follow you. And could I really invite you to slow down --
5 THE WITNESS: Yes --
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- and that we -- I can intervene whenever there's a
7 need to do that --
8 MR. TRALDI:
9 Q. Sir --
10 A. I'll do my best.
11 Q. Sir, perhaps if you could, you were describing specific regions
12 where there are particular concentrations of red dots. Perhaps if you
13 could indicate for the Chamber, whilst sitting, there's this specific
14 region where there's a particular concentration and then point, that
15 would be easiest for the interpreters.
16 A. Yes. So what I was trying to point out is that the pattern which
17 I indicated with reference to the GPS spreadsheet is graphically
18 illustrated on this map. The red dots are concentrated pretty much in
19 territory that was under the control of Bosnian Serb forces at various
20 points during the war. This is the case for the following regions: In
21 Southern Herzegovina, in Eastern Bosnia, up the Drina valley, and then
22 across Northern Bosnia, and then down towards Kupres and Donji Vakuf.
23 Yellow dots tend to follow the confrontation lines during the war. The
24 only place where yellow dots appear elsewhere in some profusion is in
25 Central Bosnia, which was the site of the war within the war that pitted
1 Croat militias against the forces aligned with the Sarajevo government.
2 None of the municipalities in this case are located in Central Bosnia so
3 it's not of direct relevance I don't think. The green dots which
4 indicate the locations of intact mosques are concentrated in areas which
5 were under the control of the Sarajevo government throughout the war.
6 For example, up here in what was the Bihac pocket in the far
7 north-western corner of Bosnia and over here in the central zone near
8 Zenica and near Tuzla. And you will observe, Your Honours, no green dots
9 in any of the territories that were under the control of the VRS during
10 the war.
11 Q. Sir, are you able to approximate for the Chamber the number of
12 red dots on the map?
13 A. Yes. There is a statistic on the map. It adds up to 900-odd
14 red dots, in other words, severely damaged or destroyed mosques.
15 Q. Of those 900 or so red dots, about how many have you visited
16 yourself, how many of those sites over the years?
17 A. I think roughly half.
18 Q. And are you able to approximate what percentage of the total
19 mosques on the map are represented with those red dots?
20 A. Yes, roughly three-quarters of the mosques represented on the map
21 have been either damaged or destroyed.
22 MR. TRALDI: Your Honour, that concludes the questions I have
23 about the map. I put on the record earlier, I think, the 65 ter number
24 but just to be completely clear 13413.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's 13413.
1 I have one additional question. Could you again tell us where
2 the concentration of green dots are found because I --
3 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I will stand up and simply point.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then I have a look at the map which is
5 before us. Yes.
6 THE WITNESS: There is one group around Bihac in
7 north-western Bosnia-Herzegovina. There's another group in
8 Central Bosnia, east and north-east of Zenica.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I found it. That's --
10 THE WITNESS: And there's a third group that's in the
11 Tuzla region, north of Tuzla, and slightly east and south of Tuzla.
12 Everywhere else you either see yellow dots, such as along here, along the
13 front lines or -- or you see red dots which are pretty much everywhere.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Riedlmayer, for that.
15 Mr. Traldi, you have done with the map --
16 MR. TRALDI: I --
17 JUDGE ORIE: -- so we can -- the map perhaps can be moved away so
18 that the public gallery has a better view.
19 MR. TRALDI: It could, Your Honour.
20 Q. While it's being moved, sir, the larger green circles, what do
21 those represent?
22 A. I think I mentioned that they represent the larger population
24 MR. TRALDI: Then I'd ask that 65 ter 30375 be called to our
1 Q. Do you recognise this document, sir?
2 A. Yes, it's a document I prepared at the request of OTP, just at
3 the end of last month.
4 Q. What is -- what does it record?
5 A. It records information in -- that I received from informants
6 during the course of my fieldwork as to who is allegedly the party
7 responsible for the destruction of various buildings.
8 Q. And when you were preparing this chart, where did you locate the
10 A. I -- all the information is derived from my previous reports that
11 were submitted to the Tribunal.
12 MR. TRALDI: Could we next have Exhibit P178.
13 Q. Sir, I'm going to be very quick about this. Did you review the
14 maps for the following municipalities that are contained in this book:
15 Foca, Kljuc, Kotor Varos, Prijedor, Novi Grad, and Sokolac?
16 A. Yes, I did.
17 Q. Did you confirm that with one exception the mosques and churches
18 represented there were located correctly based on your research?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And is that exception that your research indicates that the
21 mosques at Pudin Han and Velagici were in fact the same mosque?
22 A. Yes, that's the exception.
23 MR. TRALDI: Could we next have 65 ter 03120.
24 Q. And, sir, are you familiar with this document?
25 A. I am familiar with it. I received a copy from the
1 Islamic Community, the Medzlis of the Islamic Community in Kljuc during
2 my fieldwork and a copy was also provided to me by OTP.
3 Q. The sites in this document that you were familiar with, were they
4 described correctly?
5 A. Yes, they were.
6 Q. And you mentioned earlier that sometimes the Islamic or Catholic
7 community wouldn't when they prepared a document like this use the most
8 scientific terminology in describing the consequences. Does that caveat
9 apply here as well?
10 A. Yes, and it's worth noting that the damage described is
11 encyclopedic; in other words, they include not only events of the
12 1992-1995 war, but they also catalogue destruction from World War II but
13 they make it clear which is which.
14 Q. The document assigns financial values to the consequences for
15 each site. Do you have any comment on the value of these sites for that
17 A. I think the -- I looked very closely at instance. I've worked on
18 a couple of reconstruction projects after the war. I have some sense of
19 what it really takes to reconstruct a historic building and the values
20 they assign here are very much the per square metre values that are used
21 for calculating costs of housing reconstruction. So, in financial terms,
22 this is a very low statement. The real value is what I was trying to
23 point out before the break, namely, the symbolic value for these
24 communities of what these mosques represented, both in terms of their
25 being sacred sites and what they embodied for the community, symbolically
1 and functionally.
2 Q. Relatedly, in paragraphs 43 to 45 of your report you discuss the
3 impact of the destruction of houses of worship on the communities which
4 prayed there. And you refer to quotes from a Serb leader from Sokolac
5 and a Muslim resident of Banja Luka. Why did you choose to include those
7 A. I think precisely with a view of assisting the Court in
8 determining what was the reason for the destruction of these mosques.
9 Q. And in terms of discussions that you're familiar with from people
10 in Bosnia, are those quotes an exhaustive list of statements you're
11 familiar on the topic or illustrative?
12 A. They're meant to be illustrative.
13 MR. TRALDI: And I'd refer Your Honours as well to transcript
14 page 17388. And at this point I'm going to ask Ms. Stewart to pull up in
15 Sanction the slide show that we've prepared and we'll go through this in
16 I would expect 15 minutes.
17 Q. Sir, can you tell us what we're looking at in this first picture?
18 A. It's one of the pictures from my formatted entry. It's the
19 mosque in Vrhpolje, a village in Sanski Most municipality. This is a
20 picture taken in December of 1995 at the very end of the war. You can
21 see to the left the burned-out houses of the village. In the centre is
22 the mosque, the mosque at that point was still under construction. There
23 is a stump of the minaret up front with a pile of rubble covered by snow,
24 and the mosque itself, as it has no windows and holes in the wall. I
25 would call it a lightly damaged mosque because it is not structurally
2 Q. And it was relatively rare the mosques you identified were
3 lightly damaged. Is it surprising to find this mosque lightly damaged?
4 A. Not as such. The -- if Your Honours refer to my report, you will
5 see that mosques that were lightly damaged, I believe there were only six
6 of them, for the most part were mosques that had not yet been formally
7 inaugurated. They were under construction. At some cases they had been
8 in informal use as overflow areas for holiday prayers, but basically they
9 had not been registered with the civil authorities as active mosques yet,
10 they hadn't been inaugurated.
11 Q. What did you take from that?
12 A. My contention is that given that very often in close vicinity to
13 these unfinished mosque, older mosques had been destroyed, that there
14 must have been some sort of list which excluded these buildings. If one
15 considers that during the war things like explosives, manpower,
16 transportation were all in high demand, I can -- it's a reasonable
17 conclusion to take.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: If I might just ask a question, Mr. Traldi.
19 Mr. Riedlmayer, you say at page 35, line 25, that you -- the
20 mosques that were lightly damaged you believe had not been inaugurated
21 and you believe there were only six of them.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: And --
24 THE WITNESS: These were mosques, Your Honour, that were under
25 construction on the eve of the war.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: The six referred -- the six number refers to those
2 that were under construction?
3 THE WITNESS: Yes.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: I beg your pardon, because the transcript was
5 saying that those that you -- that were slightly damaged and I was just
6 going to ask that --
7 THE WITNESS: Yeah --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- how do you reconcile that with the yellow dots
9 but you have answered that.
10 MR. TRALDI: Your Honour, if I might --
11 MR. LUKIC: Sorry, I'm sorry for interrupting. If we just can
12 get a number of the document, which number is the document we are looking
14 MR. TRALDI: The slide show's prepared using images in the
15 formatted entries, and so, for instance, this one, the formatted entry
16 for Vrhpolje, appears on page 109 of 65 ter 28816. I'm told that the
17 slide show has been assigned 65 ter 30417 and can be viewed separately
18 that way.
19 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I would add also that the number before
20 Vrhpolje and on each of these slides refers to the number of the
21 formatted entry.
22 MR. TRALDI:
23 Q. Sir, I'd like to return briefly to the question
24 His Honour Judge Moloto asked you, and when you say --
25 MR. LUKIC: I'm --
1 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] --
2 MR. TRALDI: Sorry.
3 MR. LUKIC: This 30417 is not on the list so for us it is really
4 hard to follow this.
5 MR. TRALDI: Your Honour, this is created like a clip from a
6 video that is on the list. This is essentially clips from the formatted
7 entries. Each of these images is taken from a page of 65 ter 28816.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, does this assist you?
9 If Mr. Lukic would need more time do you know from what pages?
10 MR. TRALDI: For each slide, Your Honour, I can put on the record
11 where that site's entry begins. So the Vrhpolje entry begins at page
12 169 of 28816. And I'll do that as I start each new site.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. TRALDI: If that's useful.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that you can find it on the relevant page,
16 Mr. Lukic.
17 MR. TRALDI: There is also the database, of course, which is
18 searchable by the name of the site.
19 Q. But I'd like to go back, sir, to Judge Moloto's question, if I
20 might. And he asked you about the number of lightly damaged sites.
21 A. Mm-hmm.
22 Q. And I believe, in your report, you referred to six lightly
23 damaged sites --
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. -- and you discuss each of them individually?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Now, that's a different number than the number of yellow dots on
3 the map?
4 A. Yes, sir. The yellow dots on the map cover all of Bosnia and
5 they're concentrated mostly in municipalities that were on the front
6 line, like near Doboj in the Posavina corridor. The fact that there are
7 so few of them in the municipalities covered by this report is simply due
8 to the choice of indictment municipalities. So the two numbers represent
9 different basis.
10 MR. TRALDI: If we could go to the next slide, please.
11 Q. This is still the same site.
12 A. Yeah. This is a photo taken in the first summer after the war,
13 summer of 1996. And I've included it just to show a close-up of what
14 really happened to this minaret. The minaret had been finished before
15 the war and you can see there's only a massive stump left. The way one
16 can tell that it was destroyed is you can see hanging down from the
17 minaret strips of masonry connected by the iron rod within. This is a
18 modern construction method where originally you had the rebar, the iron
19 bars, connected to the concrete structure and cladding. And in the way
20 that I described in the report, explosives were placed inside the
21 stairwell and the force blew it out. I believe we can see it more
22 clearly on the next slide.
23 MR. TRALDI: Could we go to the next then.
24 And, Mr. Lukic, this is the Sanica mosque in Kljuc and begins at
25 page 173 of 28816.
1 THE WITNESS: Yes. This is another mosque, it was a mosque that
2 was heavily damaged. My damage categories apply here to the extent not
3 only was the minaret damaged but the mosque itself is completely burned
4 out, it's lost its roof, the walls are deteriorated. But here you can
5 see very clearly the phenomenon I was referring to, the strips hanging
6 down from the minaret. They had been forced apart by the force of the
7 blast, and so the iron bars were bent out very much like a wilted flour.
8 MR. TRALDI: Your Honour, regarding events in Sanica I would
9 refer you to the evidence of RM10 and 21.
10 If we could go to the next slide.
11 Q. This slide refers to the Kotor Varos church. In 65 ter 28816 it
12 begins on page 191.
13 A. Okay. This is a photograph that I took during my field visit.
14 It's the interior of the church of the Nativity of the
15 Blessed Virgin Mary in Kotor Varos, it's the main parish church, and you
16 can see that the church is completely burned out. I was able to
17 ascertain the fact that it was burned out by the fact that wooden
18 elements, such as the cross on the wall behind what used to be the altar
19 were completely charred. Not visible in this photo but behind where I
20 was standing there were Serbian graffiti on the walls, the roof was
21 missing, and the two steeples of the church had been blown up and one of
22 them had fallen into the parish house which was next to the church. So
23 this I would call a heavily damaged building.
24 MR. TRALDI: And, Your Honours, I would refer you to adjudicated
25 fact 818.
1 And then ask that we turn to the next slide.
2 Q. This -- the formatted entry for the Hanifici mosque begins on
3 page 183 of 28816.
4 A. Yeah. This is the mosque in Hanifici, in Kotor Varos
5 municipality. It is a photo taken by an OTP investigator in 2001, and it
6 shows the entrance facade of the mosque, so one is looking from the
7 north-west towards the south-east. You can tell that first of all that
8 it is a burned-out building because you can see the charred roof
9 structure. At the time I was there, I went inside and also took photos
10 of the other side of the building which had soot marks on it. And to the
11 right of the entrance is the stump of the minaret. You can see it. It
12 is broken off at an odd angle. At the time the OTP investigators were
13 there in 2001 the body of the minaret was still lying next to the mosque.
14 By the time I was there a year later, it had been moved in preparation
15 for reconstruction.
16 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, as to how the damage occurred, I'd
17 refer you to the evidence of Witness Pazic at transcript page 605 and I'd
18 also refer you to adjudicated facts 817 and 819. If we could go to the
19 next slide. In 65 ter 28816 this formatted record starts at page 88.
20 Q. Can you describe for us what we are seeing here?
21 A. This is a building I would include in my almost destroyed
22 category. Almost destroyed means that the building is damaged beyond
23 repair, but there are still identifiable elements above ground. You can
24 see here that three of the four walls of the mosque had been completely
25 blown-out and that a roof slab made of reinforced concrete has simply
1 collapsed on to the body of the mosque. At the left you can see the
2 minaret has been blown up as well, so the building is a total loss but it
3 has not been cleared away so I couldn't -- wouldn't call it fully
5 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I'd refer you to the evidence of RM15
6 and adjudicated facts 1192 and 93. I'd ask that we turn to the next
7 slide. The formatted record for this begins on page 213 of 65 ter 28816.
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, this is the mosque in the village of
9 Ahatovici. It's about 6 kilometres from Sarajevo in the Novi Grad
10 municipality. It belongs in the almost destroyed category simply by
11 virtue of the fact that it still has a few identifiable elements, the
12 massive stump of the minaret and next to it upside down is the "serefe"
13 or the balcony of the minaret where the muezzin used to come out. On the
14 other side of the site there is -- there are also scattered other
15 building elements, but basically the building is almost destroyed.
16 MR. TRALDI: I'd refer Your Honours to adjudicated fact 1231 and
17 ask that we turn to the next slide in 65 ter 28816 this entry begins on
18 page 1.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes. This is the mosque in the village of Atmacici
20 and this illustrates the fact, simply, that if something was a
21 border-line case between totally destroyed and almost destroyed or
22 heavily damaged or lightly damaged, I tried to be conservative about it
23 and always assign it to the higher category. You can see part of a
24 lintel and to the right of the rubble is the stump of the minaret, but
25 the mosque with very few modification could have fallen into the next
1 damage category.
2 MR. TRALDI:
3 Q. When you say the higher category?
4 A. Meaning -- I'm sorry, what I meant was if there was a choice
5 between calling it totally destroyed and almost destroyed, if it was a
6 border-line case I would make it the lighter degree of damage.
7 MR. TRALDI: And I'd refer Your Honours to adjudicated fact 517
8 and ask that we turn to the next slide. And this formatted record starts
9 on page 42.
10 Q. Can you help orient us a little bit for the two pictures next to
11 each other, sir?
12 A. Yes. The photo at left is from a book en masse published in
13 1990, so just two years before the war. If Your Honours look very
14 closely, you will see that the picture is taken from a road which runs in
15 front of the mosque, and at the right-hand side of the mosque between the
16 fence that runs along the road and the mosque itself is a tall
17 Bosnian Muslim tombstone. The photo at the right is one that I took in
18 my 2002 fieldwork. You can see the same road running on the left-hand
19 side of the photo. The same tombstone standing next to the road and next
20 to the fence, and you can see very clearly on this one how you can tell
21 the foundations, where they had been. So basically it's a
22 90-degrees-revolved picture. Imagine you're looking at the pre-war and
23 you move 90 degrees counter clockwise and you get the photo on the right.
24 Q. And we discussed earlier some of the comments that you cited in
25 your report regarding the effect of what happened to a mosque on the
1 community that worshipped there. Were you aware of any similar comments
2 made about mosques in Prijedor municipality?
3 A. Yes, and this was included in some of my prior reports for the
4 Tribunal. In August of 1992 Simo Drljaca, who was the police chief for
5 Prijedor and the five municipalities in Bosanska Krajina, was interviewed
6 by Chuck Sudetic for the New York Times and Mr. Drljaca is reported to
7 have said: With their mosques it's not enough to break the minaret. You
8 have to shake-up the foundation because then they cannot build a new one.
9 You do that and they will want to leave, meaning the Muslims. They will
10 leave on their own, and that's more or less the quote as I have it from
12 MR. TRALDI: For this site, Your Honour, I'd refer you to the
13 evidence of, inter alia, RM080 and Exhibit P485. And I'd ask that we
14 turn to the next slide. The formatted record for this site begins at
15 page 38 of 65 ter 28816.
16 Q. Can you explain to us what we're looking at here?
17 A. The photo at left -- this is the -- first of all, this is the
18 parish church of St. Joseph in Prijedor, the only Catholic parish church
19 in town. The photo at left was taken by the photo journalist
20 Andreas Kaiser in September of 1992. The church had been destroyed by an
21 explosion. The woman in front is collecting firewood and the only parts
22 of the church that remain is -- are the large arch which stood between
23 the altar and the congregation on the interior of the church. And not
24 visible in the photo but known to me from an interview with the parish
25 priest is that the church steeple -- a modern one was lying at an angle
1 in the front. The photo at right was taken in the summer of 1995 after
2 the church had been blown up a second time. If Your Honours will look
3 carefully to the right of the tree at right, meaning near the right edge,
4 you can see part of the arch. You can see it's broken off, but the rest
5 of the building is simply gone.
6 Q. And is --
7 A. So this shows destructioning in stages.
8 Q. Is that next to what looks like part of a wall?
9 A. Yes. It's next -- next to the group of trees in the background
11 MR. TRALDI: For this site I'd refer Your Honours to the evidence
12 of RM57 and adjudicated fact 1103 and I'd ask that we turn to the next
14 THE WITNESS: Yes.
15 MR. TRALDI: This begins on page 180 of the formatted records.
16 THE WITNESS: So, and this is the parish -- Catholic parish
17 church in Kljuc, the church of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed
18 Virgin Mary. Again I will ask Your Honours to take a careful look at it.
19 The road that is in both pictures is a little bit deceptive because the
20 two photos are actually taken from opposite ends of the road. So on the
21 picture at left the church is to the left of the road. The picture at
22 right, the pile of stones that marks where the church stood is to the
23 right of the road. The building to the left of the church in the
24 pre-destruction photo can be seen behind a tree on the right-hand side of
25 the post-destruction photo. The pre-destruction photo came from the
1 Catholic church authorities. The post-destruction photo was taken by the
2 Council of Europe survey team which went to Bosnia two years after the
3 war --
4 MR. TRALDI:
5 Q. Then there are three remaining sites I think that you wanted to
6 point us to and I would like to go through those quickly, but if we could
7 go to the next slide this will be the Pudin Han-Velagici mosque starting
8 on page 162 of the formatted records. Is this a site you visited
10 A. This is a site I visited myself. At the time I was there it was
11 under reconstruction.
12 Q. And this picture we see a date, February 1993. What stage of --
13 what damage level would you say is reflected here?
14 A. I would call this almost destroyed.
15 Q. And then if we could turn to the next slide, please. What do we
16 see here?
17 A. And this is the same building which has again undergone a second
18 phase of destruction.
19 Only one of the little domes is left. The rest is a field of
20 rubble and the imam's house behind is completely gone. This is another
21 Council of Europe shot.
22 Q. Do the stages of destruction of a site like this allow you to
23 draw any conclusions?
24 A. Well, the conclusion is that whoever did this wanted it to be
25 gone, so they weren't satisfied with the first stage.
1 MR. TRALDI: I'd refer Your Honours to adjudicated fact 762 and
2 the evidence of RM18 and ask that we turn to the next slide beginning on
3 page 218.
4 Q. Is this also a site you visited yourself?
5 A. This is a site I visited myself --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Kindly slow down for the sake of the
7 interpreters please. Thank you.
8 THE WITNESS: Sorry. It's the market mosque in the centre of
9 Srebrenica. This particular photo is a composite from the
10 Zoran Petrovic Pirocanac video which is how we have the date. In the
11 video the camera pans upward and so this was taken by adding together the
12 various frames. I would draw Your Honours' attention to the three small
13 square windows at the bottom which you will see in subsequent pictures as
15 MR. TRALDI: I would ask that we turn to the next slide.
16 THE WITNESS: Yes. This is taken a few days later, on the
17 19th of July, by the Serbian photo journalist, Mr. Djordje Vukoja, who
18 visited Srebrenica that day. He was told that he had arrived just after
19 the minaret had been blown up and he saw sappers laying the explosives
20 for destroying the mosque itself. They told him to get out of there. He
21 took the photo clandestinely from the car. You can see scattered stone
22 work, the destroyed minaret at left. At right you can see one of the
23 other Srebrenica mosques, the so-called white mosque, its minaret still
25 MR. TRALDI:
1 Q. What happened to that mosque, sir?
2 A. That mosque was almost destroyed sometime between this and the
3 end of the war.
4 Q. If we could go to --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, would you mind to take me back one --
6 MR. TRALDI: Sure --
7 JUDGE ORIE: -- page where the composite -- I just wanted to have
8 another look at it. That is the photograph where the stills from the
9 video --
10 THE WITNESS: Yes --
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- are put together.
12 MR. TRALDI: Yes, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I've one question. In this composite photograph
14 consisting of various shots from the video, the mosque is not damaged yet
15 in any way at this moment?
16 THE WITNESS: In no way at all.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, because we see only one side.
18 THE WITNESS: No. I have other photographs in the formatted
19 entry for this mosque that were taken by DutchBat before the fall of the
20 town and the mosque was fine.
21 MR. TRALDI: If we could turn to the next slide and the one after
23 Q. And what do we see here --
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before that, Mr. Traldi --
25 MR. TRALDI: Sorry.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: -- can we see the other one just before this one.
2 You said what happened to that mosque so --
3 THE WITNESS: It --
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And I would just like to clarify, which mosque?
5 The mosque with the minaret which was still intact?
6 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Okay. Thank you.
8 THE WITNESS: That's the white mosque. It's the oldest mosque in
9 Srebrenica. The market mosque is the one on the left.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And that white mosque was also destroyed --
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, but it was destroyed after this.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Okay, thank you very much.
13 MR. TRALDI: Can we turn to the next slide, please.
14 Q. What do we see here, sir?
15 A. On the left is a photograph taken by an Amnesty International
16 team which came visiting Srebrenica in March of 1996. You can see the
17 blasted minaret, again with that characteristic pattern of spreading out,
18 indicating that there was a blast within. And the three square windows
19 which were in the basement of the building, and you can see the building
20 is simply gone, it used to be several storeys high. And the roof has
21 landed on top of the foundation. And at right is a photo I took during
22 my visit in July of 2002. The site is empty. You can see the same
23 building in the background and the ritual deposit of garbage at the site,
24 which is now overgrown.
25 Q. Why do you call that a ritual deposit of garbage, sir?
1 A. Because we are in the centre of Srebrenica, in the main market
2 square, and the garbage is at the site of the mosque. It doesn't strike
3 me as a logical place for a town dump.
4 Q. Was that --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, would you mind to take me back to the
6 previous one as well. I have the problem that I can't switch from one
7 page to another.
8 MR. TRALDI: I apologise, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: So as to compare again. Let me see, yes. And the
10 previous one.
11 Could we now go forward again. And the last one again.
12 Thank you.
13 THE WITNESS: If it would assist, Your Honour, the formatted
14 entry has additional photographs.
15 MR. TRALDI:
16 Q. Was that deposit of rubbish at the site that you were mentioning,
17 was that something you often saw at a site where a mosque used to be?
18 A. Very often, and I have a list of examples in my report.
19 Q. And then I'd turn to the last example, the mosque in Novoseoci,
20 the formatted record begins on page 130. Can you describe for us what we
21 see on the left and right?
22 A. On the left what you see is a copy of the invitation to the
23 dedication of the mosque which was built in 1990 in place of a mosque
24 that had been destroyed in World War II. At right is a photo of the site
25 after the war. You can see there it's gone.
1 MR. TRALDI: Can we turn to the next slide.
2 Q. Now, you describe this as rubble of the Novoseoci mosque. Can
3 you describe for the Bench what your -- what you see in this picture that
4 you can identify as part of the mosque?
5 A. Okay. Well, first of all, you know that it is material from a
6 monumental building because you have large dressed stone blocks right at
7 the centre of the photo. Below the large square-dressed stone blocks,
8 you have a fragment of a column, typical of the columns that supported
9 the interior space underneath the dome. And you can see other very large
10 pieces of stone everywhere. This was a rubbish dump and also the site of
11 a mass grave excavation, and the mass grave was found under the tonnes of
12 stonework of the mosque. The mosque itself was half a dozen kilometres
13 away from the dump site.
14 Q. Sir, finally, in your research did you identify any mosques which
15 survived the war intact?
16 A. Not in any of these municipalities.
17 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, that completes my examination.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
19 Mr. Traldi, before we continue, I would have one question seeking
20 clarification on a document which originated from the Committee of the
21 Islamic Community of the municipality of Kljuc. I have not written down
22 the number, as a matter of fact, but perhaps you could assist.
23 MR. TRALDI: 03120, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could we have a look at it.
25 And while waiting for that, my question, Mr. Riedlmayer, is about
1 the, as you said, the calculation of the damage. You said it was
2 calculated on the basis of what square metre of house construction would
4 THE WITNESS: Yes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Could you take me to where this is described. Is it
6 described as a general -- general --
7 THE WITNESS: It's --
8 JUDGE ORIE: -- kind of assessment or is it on specific items?
9 Could you give me some more information about that.
10 THE WITNESS: My understanding is that the document was
11 originally compiled with a view to raising money for reconstruction
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 THE WITNESS: The costs are mentioned towards the end of the
15 document and they're expressed in terms of square metres.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me see. You say to the end of the -- I
17 see --
18 THE WITNESS: It's part --
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- on page 23 -- no, let me see.
20 MR. TRALDI: Page 21, for instance, Your Honours, in the middle
21 of the page includes the language:
22 The approximate estimate cost for one square metre comes from one
23 amount of marks to another, and so that may be the part you're looking
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I now see it because reconstruction cost I saw
1 are mentioned several times in the -- on other pages on specific items
2 where apparently a similar system was not used. I was just wondering
3 where exactly ...
4 I see the square metres calculations on page 20 and 21. Now I'm
5 just trying to find where the -- and under it says the approximate
6 estimate cost for one square metre comes from 1200 to 1500 marks. Is
7 that what you refer to?
8 THE WITNESS: Yes. And basically these are costs for modern
9 construction, whereas many of these mosques were historic mosques.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, because in the report itself I saw and I have
11 had no opportunity to read the whole of the report, I saw some reference
12 to damage calculations, which were sometimes far higher, up to 8- or
13 10.000 Deutschemarks for a square metre as described. They say it's a
14 mosque of 10 by 10 metres and they say the damage is 400.000, 500.000 --
15 THE WITNESS: Anyway, their goal was to raise money for
16 reconstruction. My reference was to the fact that I've been involved in
17 at least one historic reconstruction project in Bosnia and the costs were
18 much higher and I've also been involved in two reconstruction projects in
19 Kosovo involving historic mosques and they were also much higher.
20 JUDGE ORIE: So --
21 THE WITNESS: The Centre for Islamic Architecture which provided
22 the plans and the amounts --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Could I stop you for one second. Higher than what?
24 THE WITNESS: Meaning much higher than even the high estimate he
1 JUDGE ORIE: You --
2 THE WITNESS: I can give you figures. For example, a historic
3 mosque in Kosovo I worked at cost more than a quarter million dollars for
4 repairs and the mosque had not collapsed. Basically there had been a
5 fire and the lead on the roof had melted and the masonry needed repairs
6 and so forth and the minaret needed reconstruction.
7 JUDGE ORIE: And how many square metres was --
8 THE WITNESS: I don't remember the exact square metres. A lot of
9 the money had to do with the minaret. The problem was that this -- these
10 are estimates for basically prefabricated minarets and concrete and
11 hollow brick construction.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, I started my question with the key square
13 metres to reconstruction costs.
14 THE WITNESS: Yeah.
15 JUDGE ORIE: You said here we read 1200 to 1500 marks --
16 THE WITNESS: Yeah --
17 JUDGE ORIE: I said that elsewhere in the report I saw square
18 metre figures and amounts which would, if divided, would come to far
19 above what is mentioned here. And then you started comparing your
20 experience, but that was renovation and reparation in -- to some extent,
21 and in total numbers without knowing the square metres, which makes it
22 very difficult for me to --
23 THE WITNESS: Well, I can give you an idea. Most mosques in the
24 Balkans are not in excess of 10 by 10 metres.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 THE WITNESS: You know, some of the brand new monumental mosques
2 in Sarajevo are larger, the ones that were built after the war, but the
3 traditional ones are generally quite small. The great costs come from
4 traditional materials. For example, minarets have to be built out of a
5 very light but strong stone, which only can be sourced from certain
6 quarries. It needs specific kinds of craftsmen. The dome, if it is
7 covered by lead, costs much more than if you just put on one of these
8 prefab aluminum covers.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, the only reason I asked it was because I
10 know you have taken me to the end of the report where the low numbers are
11 appearing whereas in the report itself far higher numbers are appearing.
12 THE WITNESS: Well, I --
13 JUDGE ORIE: I leave it to that. I explain to you why I asked
14 the question and --
15 THE WITNESS: Well, I must say, I was not paying a huge amount of
16 attention to the monetary aspects. I was simply pointing out that
17 historic mosques cost a lot.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for those answers.
19 Mr. Lukic, are you ready to --
20 MR. LUKIC: I'm ready, but I think we're already for the break.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we are already beyond the time for the break.
22 Mr. Riedlmayer, would you please follow the usher. You'll be
23 cross-examined by Mr. Lukic after the break.
24 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
25 [The witness stands down]
1 JUDGE ORIE: We will resume at 25 minutes past 12.00.
2 --- Recess taken at 12.03 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 12.32 p.m.
4 JUDGE ORIE: The witness will be escorted into the courtroom.
5 Mr. Traldi.
6 MR. TRALDI: Your Honour, I can inform the Chamber that under a
7 different ERN we've found a colour version of the same map. It -- the
8 file as a JPEG is too large to load into e-court, so we can offer both
9 the colour version and a disk with the JPEG file on it to the Chamber if
10 either would be of assistance.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that certainly would assist. Thank you,
12 Mr. Traldi, for having found a solution for this problem.
13 MR. TRALDI: I should say, Your Honour, as usual it wasn't me
14 that found the solution.
15 [The witness takes the stand]
16 JUDGE ORIE: That's true for many of us with responsible tasks in
17 this courtroom.
18 Mr. Lukic, if you're ready you may start your cross-examination.
19 Mr. Riedlmayer, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Lukic.
20 Mr. Lukic is counsel for Mr. Mladic.
21 Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic:
22 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Riedlmayer.
23 A. Good day, Mr. Lukic.
24 Q. I will be pausing between question and answer so that the
25 interpreters can interpret what we're saying. First of all, can we see
1 MFI T2503 [as interpreted] in e-court, please. This is your report
2 referring to our case, and we can see the heading of this report which
3 says: Destruction of cultural heritage in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
4 You were warned a number of times that this was not the correct
5 title for your report. I don't know if you recall having a discussion on
6 this topic with Judge Antonetti?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And would you agree --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, if you have any practical problem in
10 this courtroom, ask Ms. Stewart to resolve it for you.
11 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 Q. This title would mislead any observer who was not professionally
14 involved in this case, i.e., our objection is that this title would
15 indicate that you were dealing with all the cultural monuments that were
16 destroyed in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but actually this is not the case,
17 isn't that so?
18 A. I would note that there is a subtitle which both limits the
19 geographic area and the scope of the report. The report was prepared in
20 accordance with the terms of reference that I received and the title in
21 its entirety, not just the main title but the subtitle as well, reflects
22 as best as it can in its brief form what the report covers. I don't
23 think it's a misdescription.
24 Q. And from the title you can also see that you did not look into
25 Serb religious facilities that were destroyed; is that correct?
1 A. Serb religious facilities were not included in the terms of
2 reference for which I prepared this report, but I did in fact look into
3 the destruction of Serb religious facilities. I took my own
4 documentation for my own purposes, and I would be happy to share it with
6 Q. And for purposes of this report, who was it who decided that you
7 should not look into the Serb -- rather, to look into just the non-Serb
8 religious facilities? Was that your decision or a decision of the
9 Prosecutor's office?
10 A. It was the decision of the Prosecutor's office which drew up the
11 terms of reference for the mission.
12 Q. In your report you did not differentiate between civilian
13 facilities and militarily justified targets; is that correct?
14 A. What I was describing is religious facilities. I was not aware
15 that any of them were military facilities.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Was it part of your brief to make a distinction
17 between militarily justifiable facilities and those that were not?
18 THE WITNESS: It was not.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
20 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. How much time did you spend in the field and how many
22 municipalities did you visit at that time?
23 A. Well, that's a rather complex question because I -- I can tell
24 you the main field survey that I conducted consisted of about a month in
25 the field, but I also went on repeat visits and I also collected
1 documentation by correspondence. At the time I did my field survey in
2 the summer of 2002 in approximately three weeks I visited 19
4 Q. Thank you. And just for the record, would you agree that you
5 don't have any formal education in the field of Islamic architecture; is
6 that correct?
7 A. No, it's not correct. I have degrees in Islamic studies. More
8 importantly, I have nearly 30 years of experience running a documentation
9 centre for Islamic architecture. I don't think I am not a -- let me
10 rephrase that. I have published articles and given lectures on the
11 subject of Islamic architecture. I think it's fair to say that it is
12 part of my expertise.
13 Q. My question was a little bit different, that you don't have any
14 formal education. You never received any kind of diploma in the area of
15 Islamic architecture?
16 A. That is correct. My degrees are listed on my curriculum vitae
17 and I'm not by training an art historian; I'm a cultural historian. I --
18 and on the other hand, in the 30 years since I've worked as director of
19 the documentation centre for Islamic architecture, I've attended courses,
20 lectures, and I have documented Islamic architecture. So a degree is not
21 the sole prerequisite for knowing something about the subject.
22 Q. I agree with you, but the question -- the answer to my question
23 would be "yes," and all the explanations that you provided was something
24 that we could have heard from subsequent questions. But now I would just
25 like to ask you to focus on my questions, please. My next question is
1 that you don't have any formal training from -- in the area of Catholic
2 architecture; is that correct?
3 A. No -- I mean it is correct, no, I don't have any. But I work as
4 an art documentation specialist and I know something about the history of
5 architecture, including Catholic architecture and Byzantine Orthodox
7 Q. In your opinion, what constitutes cultural heritage?
8 A. Cultural heritage is the products of the cultural development and
9 history of peoples, such as works of art, such as architecture, such as
10 manuscripts and other embodiments of cultural production.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Lukic, just to -- for the record, this
12 question is answered on page 7, line 23, to page 8, line 5, in much
14 JUDGE ORIE: And the question then was, Mr. Lukic, can you
15 briefly summarise for the Chamber what you view as included within the
16 ambit of cultural heritage ... and then it was focused on the former
17 Yugoslavia. So why ask the same question to the witness twice?
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
20 Q. A newly built mosque, would that constitute cultural heritage in
21 your opinion?
22 A. Yes. It is, after all, first of all, every mosque was at one
23 point a newly built mosque. What makes it cultural heritage is its
24 cultural uses and the fact that it expresses artistry, belief, and it
25 plays a cultural role. Obviously not every mosque is of the same
1 cultural and historical value, but all religious monuments to one degree
2 or another, mosques, churches, chapels, are part of cultural heritage.
3 Culture is a living thing.
4 Q. And would that be the principle that you applied when you were
5 drafting your report?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you. In your report, which we can see on our screen and
8 which you have in front of you marked for identification as P2503, could
9 you please look at paragraph 4. This is page 4 in e-court in both
10 versions, the English and the B/C/S.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. In the English version it begins on the previous page,
13 paragraph 4. In that paragraph you say that in December 2001 the
14 commission was reorganised by a decision of the Presidency of
15 Bosnia and Herzegovina. And since then, the commission has been active
16 in documenting and designating cultural heritage sites for protection.
17 Are the criteria applied by this commission different from those that you
18 applied in your own work?
19 A. I don't think it's the same criterion. It's meant for different
20 purposes. In my report, I describe what a listed monument is. A subset
21 of the monuments in my report were listed monuments. The designations by
22 the commission for national monuments are the equivalent of the pre-war
23 designations of listed monuments.
24 Q. I would briefly like to go back to your relationship with the
25 Prosecution, and you describe this in paragraph 8 of your report in both
1 versions of the e-court. It's the same page. I don't know how it is in
2 the hard copy.
3 A. Yes, I have it in front of me.
4 Q. I think it's the same. In this paragraph at the beginning you
5 say that the fieldwork in Bosnia and Herzegovina in July 2002 was
6 supported by the OTP, which set the terms of reference for the mission
7 and also provided transportation and daily fee and per diem costs. And
8 then in the last sentence of the same paragraph you say:
9 "At no stage in the process did the OTP seek to exert any
10 influence or pressure on the author regarding the methodology of this
11 study, its findings, or its conclusions."
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Does this seem logical to you?
14 A. Entirely --
15 JUDGE ORIE: I think you've answered the question.
16 THE WITNESS: Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
18 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Would you agree that there was no need to exert any influence on
20 you subsequently when the Prosecution did this anyway for its own needs
21 by asking for this study in the first place?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, Mr. Lukic, this question is answered by
23 the previous answer, that there's no illogic in it at all. Apparently
24 you don't understand what the witness clearly expressed here that what he
25 was to focus on in his research was determined by the Prosecution. The
1 witness has explained that, but whilst performing that task that there
2 was no influence or pressure exerted on him nor on findings nor on
3 conclusions. There's no illogic about it in any way. If you have
4 questions about conclusions, please put them to the witness, but don't
5 ask these kind of questions which are -- do not in any way assist the
6 Chamber, at least the answers. Please proceed.
7 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 Q. Did you propose a different approach perhaps to the OTP or did
9 you just do what was asked of you?
10 A. I did not set the terms of the mission. I was given the terms of
11 reference and the only thing I asked is at times for clarification. But
12 it was not up to me to question why they are sending me or where -- which
13 municipalities they specified. If you look at my report it says that
14 they named certain municipalities and in the Milosevic trial they also
15 said up to six of my choosing. So I chose those within each
16 municipality. It was I who chose the sites to visit, when to visit them,
17 how to examine them, and what conclusions to draw from them.
18 Q. In paragraph 16, which is on page 8 of both versions, you mention
19 to -- you mention heritage sites. When were the monuments or the
20 facilities that you studied designated as heritage sites?
21 A. I think I explain in my report what I consider to be a heritage
22 site. I don't think they need to be specially designated as such by an
23 outside party.
24 Q. So you designated all of these facilities as heritage sites, not
25 someone else?
1 A. No. It's not that I designated them in any formal sense. I
2 simply had criteria for what I would include and what I would not
3 include, and I think I've described what those criteria are.
4 Q. I would kindly like to ask for your assistance. Was it some
5 other body, other than yourself, designate these facilities as heritage
6 sites or did you, yourself, determine what heritage sites were involved?
7 A. I worked from my understanding of what constitutes cultural and
8 religious heritage and went from there.
9 Q. Thank you. In some of your studies you also talked about the
10 national library in Sarajevo. You would agree that the national library
11 in Sarajevo is not an Islamic monument; right?
12 A. No, but it is a cultural monument.
13 Q. Have you heard that actually it was set on fire by the Muslim
14 paramilitaries, specifically Celo's combatants?
15 A. That's not my understanding of what happened. For my first
16 expert report for the Tribunal, I investigated as much as I could
17 first-hand accounts, including those of people who were in the building
18 at the time, journalists, firefighters. This did not happen at some
19 isolated place. It was in the middle of a large city. Both the attack
20 on the library and the fire were observed by many people. The evidence
21 is on deposit with the Tribunal. I don't think I -- it would necessarily
22 assist this Chamber for me to review it. I would, however, point out
23 that I presented the same material before the
24 International Court of Justice which in one of its very few original
25 findings of fact concluded -- made conclusions as to the responsibility,
1 namely, that it was more likely than not that the library was destroyed
2 as a result of an attack by Serb forces. You can refer to the ICJ's
3 judgement for the relevant paragraphs.
4 Q. We'll come to your testimony before the
5 International Court of Justice at a later stage. Today you mentioned 900
6 mosques and in paragraph 35, which is page 16 in both versions, you say
7 that of the 36 mosques that had been officially designated as listed
8 monuments before the war, therefore, you had information which was
9 actually a heritage site and what was not.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, may I ask you, you have put a few
11 questions to the witness about who designated. Shall we make a clear
12 distinction between what the witness was tasked with and where he
13 describes what outside agencies have designated certain monuments as
14 official designation as such. I think what the witness did is he never
15 denied that this may have been done by outside agencies, but that his
16 work was not guided primarily by that. That's how I understood your
17 testimony until now. It seems - but I -- perhaps I first seek
18 confirmation from the witness. Have I understood your testimony in this
20 THE WITNESS: Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Now you are mixing up all these things in your
22 questions by saying: Therefore, you had information which was actually a
23 heritage site and what was not. We have two different categories. The
24 one is where the witness himself on the basis of his own understanding of
25 what a heritage site is performed his task, and the other one is whether
1 agencies deal with protection, et cetera, and it has been mixed up
2 before. And that's different category. Would you please clearly
3 distinguish between the two? Please proceed.
4 MR. LUKIC: I am challenging the methodology applied by this
5 witness and that's exactly --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if you think you're doing, then I'm afraid at
7 least this Chamber is not understanding what you're doing. These are two
8 different things.
9 MR. LUKIC: There is a title of this document: Destruction of
10 cultural heritage --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
12 MR. LUKIC: -- in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and we want to show
13 that work of this gentleman and the title are wrong.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the title should be understood in the context
15 of the report. If the report is wrong, take us to areas where the
16 witness draws conclusions where you say for this and this reason it's not
17 right, instead of staying at a kind of an abstract level and saying:
18 Well, what did you consider to be heritage site? But others have decided
19 in a different way. That is not a flaw in the methodology, but that's
20 just two different animals. Please proceed.
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Let me briefly add "listed documents" are not
22 identical with "cultural heritage." They are two different words for two
23 different things.
24 MR. LUKIC: Your Honours, I noticed this problem in all trials
25 this gentleman testified and it was raised every time --
1 JUDGE ORIE: That doesn't justify do it again. There should be a
2 proper basis for it. Please proceed.
3 MR. LUKIC: I think the proper basis [overlapping speakers] --
4 JUDGE ORIE: I would invite you to --
5 MR. LUKIC: I --
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- put the next question to the witness. And as --
7 and to follow the guidance that where there are two different animals,
8 don't make them one. Please proceed.
9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 Q. In your report you did not accept the classification that you
11 yourself quoted in paragraph 35; is that correct?
12 A. I think we're still on the same subject. I dealt with cultural
13 heritage at large, not just the monuments which had been designated for
14 special protection.
15 Q. Thank you. In paragraph 39 and today in examination-in-chief you
16 spoke about the damage caused by explosives.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. The conclusions relating to the explosions, are these your own
19 conclusions or were they drawn up by an explosive expert?
20 A. No, these were my own conclusions. I did not draw upon a
22 Q. Thank you. Let us check once again that you are not an expert in
23 explosive and you have no training in that area; is that correct?
24 A. I am neither a munitions expert nor am I a military expert.
25 However, I would say that having looked at close to a thousand
1 war-damaged buildings in the former Yugoslavia and applying simple common
2 sense criteria, I have some basis for drawing the limited kinds of
3 conclusions I did. Nowhere in my report do I seek to distinguish between
4 different types of explosives or between different kinds of munitions
5 even. I talk about a blast having occurred. If you look at a building
6 and they -- there is -- there are effects, such as stonework being thrown
7 at some distance from the site or what I showed with respect to minarets
8 with the force of an explosion bending steel rods or splitting the
9 minaret, I think these are all effects that any rational person who has
10 looked at a lot of these could conclude without either technical training
11 or applying technical tests. I know something about the structure of
12 buildings and how they react to various kinds of forces. For that, I
13 don't need to be a structural engineer.
14 Q. In this same paragraph 39, you say in the last sense that:
15 "In a number of towns, including Bijeljina, Foca, Kljuc,
16 Kotor Varos, Prijedor, Rogatica, Sanski Most, Srebrenica, and others, the
17 destruction of mosques and other Islamic heritage sites took place after
18 the area had come under the control of the Serb forces at times when
19 there was no military action in the immediate vicinity."
20 What was the basis for this conclusion that you have reached?
21 What was the source of your information there?
22 A. Well, in my report I took great care to try to establish, to the
23 extent possible, the date when destruction occurred, the date when
24 military action happened. When particular towns changed hands are a
25 matter of public record. There are books where you can look these up.
1 Among the examples you mention are -- is, for example, Bijeljina. I
2 don't think any reasonable person would conclude that in the spring of
3 1993 when the five mosques in the town of Bijeljina were blown up, that
4 there was military activity or that Bijeljina was not under the control
5 of Serb forces. Similarly, the example shown in the slide show of
6 Srebrenica. I took great care to try to establish when the market mosque
7 was destroyed. At the time when it was destroyed, Srebrenica had been
8 taken by the VRS. I don't think there is any question that at the time
9 of the destruction Srebrenica was under VRS control.
10 Q. Thank you. In the next paragraph, 40, you say:
11 "Destruction of Islamic religious monuments in
12 Bosnia and Herzegovina occurred throughout the 1992-1995 war. The great
13 majority of the destruction of Islamic sites documented in the survey is
14 reported to have taken place during the spring and summer of 1992."
15 And then again you give the examples of Bijeljina and Srebrenica.
16 However, as far as other sites are concerned, is it true that most of
17 them were destroyed in the spring and summer of 1992?
18 A. It's what my report states.
19 Q. Is it true that in Foca, Kljuc, Kotor Varos, Prijedor, Rogatica,
20 Sanski Most, there was fighting in the spring and summer of 1992?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. In your report paragraph 43 and you also made reference to it
23 today when you said that the destruction of religious monuments appears
24 to have been aimed to eradicate the existence of Muslims. And then in
25 the next paragraph you mentioned the name of Milan Tupajic, the war time
1 chief of the Crisis Staff. You located this statement of Tupajic in a
2 newspaper; is that correct?
3 A. Yes -- no, actually, the Tupajic statement comes from a
4 transcript in the Krajisnik trial.
5 Q. [In English] Okay. My mistake. Sorry.
6 [Interpretation] So in your report you relied on a text written
7 by Tim Judah. In this text, as you may recall, people actually said that
8 the intentions were quite opposite and they said that they intend to stay
9 particularly because of the mosques. Do you remember that?
10 A. It's what the title of the article indicates, that people were
11 saying that in defiance or that lovely Bosnian word "inat" they would
12 stay on. In fact, as we know, the great majority of the Muslim
13 population of Banja Luka did not stay despite the bravado.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- Mr. Lukic, could I just seek clarification of
15 your question. The first was you asked about the quote of Tupajic, that
16 was then clear where it came from. And then you said, "In your report
17 you relied on a text written by Tim Judah," I take this to be a reference
18 to footnote 24, paragraph 45:
19 "In this text, as you may recall, people actually said that the
20 intentions were quite opposite and they said that they intend to stay
21 particularly because of the mosques."
22 Could you perhaps clarify with the witness how the second quote
23 demonstrates that the intentions were opposite. I do understand your
24 quote from paragraph 44 to be what Mr. Tupajic said they intended and I
25 understand the quote in paragraph 45 to say what the response to the
1 actions was. So therefore, I have difficulties in understanding how the
2 quote in 45 would in any way demonstrate a different intention. Could
3 you perhaps clarify this by putting questions to the witness, but it's
4 totally unclear to me. Please proceed.
5 MR. LUKIC: We can see 65 ter number 28800 in the e-court, so
6 maybe it would be more clear then.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we'll have a look at it. But from what
8 you've drawn our attention to it does not appear in my view.
9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Speaking about Tupajic's intentions or those of other
11 representatives of the authorities in Republika Srpska, we can see that
12 at the beginning of the second paragraph on the right, and I'm going to
14 "A quarter of a mile away the diggers have almost finished their
15 work. The Arnaudija mosque, built in 1584, has been completely razed.
16 Ten minutes' walk from there stand the charred struts that once supported
17 the minaret of the small Pobrdje mosque. 'They set it on fire two weeks
18 ago,' said a Muslim community official too frightened to give his name.
19 'The fire brigade came and put it out, and then they set it on fire
21 Do you know who "they" are in this text who are acting contrary
22 to what the authorities are doing, that is to say sending the fire
23 brigade to extinguish the fire?
24 MR. TRALDI: Your -- Your Honour, I think I'd object. There's a
25 fact not in evidence. There's no showing that the fire brigade is an
1 official fire brigade or that any particular authority sent it.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Now in itself to make a fact not yet established
3 part of your question in cross-examination is not under all circumstances
4 prohibited. But, Mr. Lukic, if you could break down your question and
5 make clear where you refer to authorities whether the witness has any
6 knowledge about whether it was authorities or what is the basis for it.
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. LUKIC: Our understanding that fire brigade is not just
9 cruising around and extinguishing fires --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Well, ask the witness -- ask the witness how --
11 MR. LUKIC: I asked --
12 JUDGE ORIE: You are drawing conclusions as part of your question
13 which should be made explicit before the witness can respond to it.
14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. All I can ask you, sir, is what I already asked you. Do you know
16 who this pronoun "they" is referring to? Who were "they" who set the
17 facility on fire?
18 A. I have no specific knowledge of this incident. I was not
19 present. I can only draw conclusions from the article which I think the
20 Court can do all by itself. What I can see here is interviews with local
21 people, some of whom are devastated and some of whom are trying to be
22 very brave about it, but in fact there are mosques destroyed. And we
23 know that people left en masse. After the war Banja Luka retained less
24 than 5 per cent of its original Muslim population.
25 Q. Thank you. But that was not the answer to my question. Do you
1 know who set this building on fire or maybe you don't know?
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: This question was answered, "I have no specific
3 knowledge of this incident," was the answer of the witness.
4 MR. LUKIC: Then I will move on. Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. [Interpretation] Now let's move to paragraph 50 of your report.
6 Here you speak about the Aladza mosque, that's schedule D5 of the
7 indictment, and you said that Safet Jahic from the Islamic community
8 provided information to you with regard to this mosque. He said that
9 this mosque was set alight by Serb extremists; is that correct?
10 A. That is what he said.
11 Q. Would you agree that Mr. Jahic meant that it was not done by
12 members of the army which at the time was still the JNA?
13 A. Having spent a day with Mr. Jahic who used the phrase "Serb
14 extremists" whenever he made a statement regarding responsibility, it is
15 my understanding that it was a way of not blaming all Serbs. It was not
16 a question of whether they were official or unofficial. It was simply he
17 meant that whoever did this did this on ideological grounds. I don't
18 think at all he meant to exculpate the authorities.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, we're approximately at the time for a
20 break. Just to refer, before we take the break, you referred to what
21 Safet Jahic from the Islamic community provided this information. Where
22 exactly is that to be found? I'm just --
23 MR. LUKIC: I can call 1D1330, which is transcript from Krajisnik
24 trial page --
25 JUDGE ORIE: That --
1 MR. LUKIC: 13301.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That's fine, but you take us to paragraph 50 and you
3 say your said Safet Jahic -- we have no idea where he said it, what he
4 said exactly, what the witness said. But if you say I referred to the
5 testimony of the witness in the Krajisnik case, then it's clear.
6 We take the break but we'll invite the witness -- then still we
7 do not know exactly what was said then.
8 MR. LUKIC: We can call it into the e-court --
9 JUDGE ORIE: If you would like to do that. Could we just --
10 MR. LUKIC: I'm just trying to rush a bit.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could the witness be escorted out of the
13 [The witness stands down]
14 JUDGE ORIE: We take a break and we'll resume at ten minutes to
16 --- Recess taken at 1.29 p.m.
17 --- On resuming at 1.54 p.m.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, you're on your feet.
19 MR. TRALDI: Yes, Your Honour, just to follow-up on the map
20 issue. We have CDs with colour version of the map on them openable in
21 Microsoft -- openable on a Windows machine. I should clarify one matter
22 about the CD which is that the ERN on the label is the ERN associated
23 with the map we used in court and the ERN on the file is the ERN
24 associated with the colour version of the map that you'd be opening. And
25 we can provide them after court to the Senior Legal Officer if that's
1 [overlapping speakers] --
2 JUDGE ORIE: That's okay. As long as we are able to consult the
3 material in a legible way, then ...
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
6 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 So as I announced before the break we will need one document in
8 the e-court, it's 1D1330. It's transcript from Krajisnik trial from
9 May 23rd, 2005, and we need transcript page 13301 which is page 35 in the
11 From line 1 and there were quotations marks there as well and I
12 will quote:
13 "'The Aladza mosque, among the most beautiful in all of Bosnia,
14 were blown up by Serb extremists in April 1992.' And your informant
15 there is Mr. Safet Jahic, of the Islamic community and longtime resident
16 of Foca ..."
17 And then in line 6 we have your answer:
19 So this is just the reference for my question, Your Honours, so
20 you know where I found this data.
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: But the answer was in relation to the question.
22 You left that out. And the question was, I quote:
23 "At this distance of time, do we have any more information" and
24 then the witness answered "yes."
25 MR. LUKIC: You're right, Your Honour.
1 MR. LUKIC:
2 Q. Was this information given to you by Mr. Jahic, just for the
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And he told you that this mosque was blown up actually in
6 April 1992; is that right?
7 A. Actually, he said that, but there are various dates mentioned for
8 the destruction of the Aladza mosque, some of them as late as the summer.
9 My understanding is that many of the mosques in Foca were destroyed, once
10 again, in stages. Some were burnt and then later on knocked down or
11 blown up. And it's the only way I can explain the discrepancy. But the
12 business about extremists being used in this way as a way of avoiding
13 blaming an entire ethnic group is something that was quite common at the
14 time in Bosnia and I asked Mr. Jahic about it and that's -- that was more
15 or less his explanation, that he didn't want to blame all Serbs.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Now I would like to put a question to you that
17 is not directly related to this mosque. Not directly connected to Foca
18 but that relates to all religious monuments. Would you agree with me
19 that when you have damage from shelling, that would indicate the army and
20 fighting; but when you have damage from burning and dynamiting, that
21 would indicate more that the perpetrators were civilians?
22 A. I would agree that shelling is an indication of military
23 activity. However, I would disagree that the military would have nothing
24 to do, for example, with explosives. Since you brought up Banja Luka
25 earlier in the cross-examination, I have informant statements that speak
1 about Bosnian Serb RB sappers being involved in the destruction of the
2 Ferhadija mosque in Banja Luka. Sappers are people who know how to deal
3 with explosives. Not everybody does.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: If I might just ask clarification on part of the
5 question that came from Mr. Lukic.
6 Would shelling necessarily mean fighting? That was part of his
7 question, shelling would mean fighting?
8 THE WITNESS: Not necessarily.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Thank you.
10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. When we're talking about planting explosives or setting fires,
12 would that rule out civilians and their participation? In other words,
13 you could not really tell with certainty whether something like that was
14 done by the army or by civilians?
15 A. In the absence of other information, no.
16 JUDGE ORIE: The question was a bit -- yes. So you could not
17 rule that out? Because the question first asked for a different answer
18 than the second part of the question, Mr. Lukic. The first part is then:
19 You couldn't rule out civilians and in the positive sense without any
20 further information you couldn't say that it was military?
21 THE WITNESS: And the answer in both cases is no.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
23 Please proceed.
24 Well, I'm a bit -- if you say you could not really tell, then the
25 answer would be yes? Yes, I'm trying to [overlapping speakers] --
1 THE WITNESS: I couldn't rule out civilians and in the absence of
2 other information I couldn't rule out the military either. I --
3 JUDGE ORIE: No, you could also not positively establish that it
4 was the military?
5 THE WITNESS: Exactly.
6 JUDGE ORIE: I think it's clear now to everyone.
7 MR. LUKIC: Thank you for your help, Your Honour.
8 Q. [Interpretation] But all in all you did not really get into who
9 the perpetrators were; is that right?
10 A. It was not my task as I saw it to establish responsibility. I
11 think properly that is the task of the Chamber. I was able to bring up
12 evidence such as how -- describing how the building was damaged, when it
13 happened, and in the cases where I had informant statements, I simply
14 reproduced them, but they don't necessarily represent my conclusions as
15 to responsibility. I think responsibility is for the Judges to
17 Q. Thank you for that answer. However, in your study you said that
18 it was all part of a plan. My question is that this does not mean that
19 you saw any document that would confirm this allegations of yours. Is
20 that correct?
21 A. No -- I'm sorry, I -- this is again one of those questions where
22 yes and no are tricky. I did not actually see any document that, you
23 know --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Sets out such a plan --
25 THE WITNESS: Right.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Is that the -- please proceed.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: A plan to do what, Mr. Lukic? I don't know.
3 MR. LUKIC: This witness in his document is claiming that there
4 was a plan on destruction of religious --
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Plan by whom to do what?
6 MR. LUKIC: -- facilities. A plan -- I can ask the witness what
7 he wanted to say.
8 Q. Can you tell us what's the plan and why do you think that it's
9 part of the plan?
10 A. Could you point to where in my report I said anything about
12 Q. Actually, I'm trying to locate -- I cannot say from the top of my
13 head. We'll have one short part tomorrow morning so we'll come back to
14 this issue.
15 MR. LUKIC: If you agree, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I do agree. At the same time if you put a question
17 so clearly referring to what is said in the report, you should have
18 prepared for that. But if you've done that by tomorrow, that's -- that's
20 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
21 Q. [Interpretation] Would you agree with me that religious
22 facilities or monuments were not very well maintained during the rule of
23 the communist party of Yugoslavia?
24 A. That is correct.
25 Q. I would just briefly like to touch upon paragraph 50 of your
1 study. We're still on document P2503, MFI, and the church in Brisevo is
2 discussed. It's on page 22 --
3 MR. LUKIC: E-court in paragraph 57.
4 THE WITNESS: Fifty-seven. Yes.
5 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. On this topic in the trial in the case against Vojislav Seselj
7 you had a long discussion and Judge Antonetti asked you if today you
8 would remain by your assertion that the church in Brisevo was destroyed
9 by Seselj's paramilitary units?
10 A. I don't recall the exact circumstances of that. You'd have to
11 bring up the transcript. I think what I was asserting, and which the
12 defendant objected to, is that I found graffiti inside the burned-out
13 church that consisted of his name. I did not say that it was necessarily
14 an indication that it was done by his forces.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Could we see the beginning of paragraph 57,
16 please. Thank you.
17 MR. TRALDI: And just in case it would assist, we've got the
18 database entry for this site available in Sanction.
19 MR. LUKIC: And I would like to have 1D1331 in the e-court. It's
20 transcript from Seselj trial. We need page 55 in the e-court. It should
21 correspond to page 7446 of the transcript from the Seselj trial. From
22 line 3 I will quote.
23 Q. Judge Antonetti asks you from line 5, I quote:
24 "Witness, before you were asked to draft your report, which I
25 remind you that the expert is unbiased, you draft a text,
1 22 December 2004, in which, without adding too many niceties, you say the
2 paramilitaries -- you mention the paramilitaries of Mr. Seselj, the
3 cleaning of Brisevo, and anybody who reads this text can see that the
4 person responsible is Mr. Seselj, and that is -- in fact, you add,
5 'awaiting trial in The Hague,' so you indicate there is a case -- a
6 lawsuit in The Hague, and after that you accept to become an expert.
7 Can't you see any problem in this?"
8 And then from line 24 Judge Antonetti goes:
9 "In the text of 2004, what allows you to say that Seselj's
10 paramilitaries cleansed or cleaned --" then we need the next page, "what
11 did you base yourself to reach such conclusions?
12 "THE WITNESS: Various materials. Again, this is not a formal
13 conclusion, it's an informal text, but it also emerges from having read
14 reports on what happened in Brisevo. Again, it's not a legal document in
15 the sense that I footnoted anything or, you know, put in elaborate
16 sources. What suggested to me to include that phrase is the information
17 in reports on the destruction of Brisevo and the fact that there were
18 graffiti inside the destroyed church."
19 [Interpretation] So the question is: Could it be concluded from
20 your testimony then that you asserted that the paramilitaries that were
21 part of Seselj's forces were responsible for this mosque?
22 A. It was a church.
23 Q. Sorry, yeah, Brisevo was a Croat village. Yes.
24 A. So your question is that I asserted that in court or -- I did not
25 assert that in court. What this is referring to is not my expert report,
1 but a blog posting from 2004. A friend asked me to provide him with some
2 pictures and I provided him with some pictures. It's -- you know, what
3 suggested it at the time was the presence of the graffiti and at that
4 time I had not been asked to write any report on the Seselj case.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: If I might just get clarification.
6 Mr. Riedlmayer, what Mr. Lukic quoted to you was what was said by
7 Judge Antonetti to you in court. Do you have anywhere in your reports or
8 your writings where you stated what Judge Antonetti attributes to you?
9 THE WITNESS: So --
10 MR. TRALDI: Your Honour, if I might just for clarity, a couple
11 pages earlier in the transcript this discussion begins with the
12 discussion of a blog post which I think the witness was just referring
13 to. And there's a little bit more context about what's in the post at
14 that point in the transcript. We can try to pull that document up before
15 tomorrow's session.
16 MR. LUKIC: Because it goes on many pages so I --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's fine. But, first of all, Mr. Traldi
18 explains that we could look at it tomorrow. At the same time, I would
19 try to avoid to evaluate the evidence in other cases and I would also
20 like to make a clear distinction, although you're still fully entitled,
21 Mr. Lukic, to ask questions about these kind of things, but we should
22 make a clear distinction when someone expresses opinions not primarily as
23 an expert but just as a newspaper reader or whatever. Again, it may be
24 relevant for the case, but we should clearly distinguish between that
25 kind of expressions and what is found in an expert report. And again
1 preferably an expert report which is tendered as evidence in this case
2 and not in another case. So if we could keep that in mind, we'll
3 continue tomorrow.
4 Before we adjourn, Mr. Lukic, could you tell us how much time you
5 would still need approximately tomorrow?
6 MR. LUKIC: I think I will stick to my time estimate.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Which was two and a half --
8 MR. LUKIC: Two hours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Two hours.
10 MR. LUKIC: Yeah.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll check with the Registrar.
12 MR. LUKIC: I'll finish within the first session tomorrow
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Riedlmayer, I'd like to instruct you that
15 you should not speak or communicate in whatever way with whomever about
16 your testimony, whether that's testimony given today or testimony still
17 to be given tomorrow. And we'd like to see you back tomorrow morning at
18 9.30 and I am hesitant to say in this same courtroom. Although we are
19 scheduled in the same courtroom the Chamber wondered why -- oh, I see
20 that we have been rescheduled now to Courtroom I. So we'd like to see
21 you back in another courtroom tomorrow morning, Courtroom I, 9.30. You
22 may follow the usher.
23 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 [The witness stands down]
25 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
1 JUDGE ORIE: We adjourn for the day and we will resume tomorrow,
2 Thursday, the 17th of October, at 9.30 in Courtroom I.
3 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.18 p.m.,
4 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 17th day of
5 October, 2013, at 9.30 a.m.