1 Thursday, 10 July 2014
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.32 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around this
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 There was -- there are two preliminaries. Mr. Lukic,
12 I understand that you would like to spend 50 minutes on Mr. Kecmanovic.
13 That request is granted.
14 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 MR. TRALDI: Just briefly, Mr. President, and good morning.
16 Your Honours, for the second time this week we received an updated
17 exhibit list for a witness the morning he was scheduled to testify.
18 Yesterday morning now. In this case, the additional document that was
19 added is 62 pages long in the B/C/S, 77 in the English, and it appears
20 the final page in the B/C/S may be missing from the English. And I would
21 just ask, as I did on Monday, for an explanation why we received such
22 late notice that the document would be used with this witness.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Could you tell us the additional document, what is
24 it approximately?
25 MR. TRALDI: It's the Islamic Declaration and the 65 ter is
2 JUDGE ORIE: Any explanation, Mr. Lukic?
3 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: No loud speaking, Mr. Mladic, not now, not during
5 the rest of the day. Never. Please proceed.
6 MR. LUKIC: This document is uploaded into the system as 1D172.
7 I think it's been there for a long time. And only actually in the
8 preparation with this witness I realised that I should speak about this
9 document with the witness, since he was present in Sarajevo with
10 Alija Izetbegovic for a long time and I think that he can give us an
11 insight. And if the Prosecution needs more time we have no objection.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand that you need it, but could
13 have been foreseen.
14 Mr. Traldi, the document may not be entirely new to the
15 Prosecution. Is that true?
16 MR. TRALDI: That's right. It's not entirely new to the
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we'll proceed and allow Mr. Lukic to
19 refer to the document, but it's clearly put on the record now that you
20 object against this late -- not late disclosure but at least late notice
21 of this document to be used.
22 MR. TRALDI: That's right, Mr. President, and to the pattern of
23 it that may be developing.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. LUKIC: If I may just to add one thing. We had numerous
1 times that the Prosecution changed their list a day before the testimony.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps that's the reason why we are so relatively
3 relaxed about it, Mr. Lukic --
4 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: -- also knowing that it is not something that was
6 totally unknown to the Prosecution.
7 Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom. Meanwhile,
8 I use the time to put the following on the record.
9 Pursuant to the Prosecution's responses to the Defence
10 Rule 92 ter motions for Milutin Vukicic dated the 1st of July and
11 Milan Pejic dated the 10th of June, 2014, the Prosecution has requested
12 that portions of the witness statements for Witness Vukicic and
13 Witness Pejic be excluded on the basis that they contain tu quoque
14 evidence. The Chamber would now like to invite the Defence to respond,
15 either orally or in written form, to the Prosecution's objections as set
16 out in the aforementioned responses no later than Wednesday, the
17 16th of July.
18 I continue. On the 15th of May, the Defence filed a motion
19 pursuant to Rule 92 ter seeking the admission of a statement of
20 Witness Milorad Sehovac and a number of associated exhibits. On the
21 29th of May, the Prosecution filed its response, not objecting to the
22 Rule 92 ter motion but opposing the admission of certain associated
23 exhibits. On the 4th of June, the Defence filed a request for leave to
24 reply with its reply attached as an annex. The Chamber hereby grants
25 leave to reply.
1 Next, in its response on the 29th of May of this year, the
2 Prosecution opposed the admission of the associated exhibits listed as
3 Rule 65 ter numbers 1D02057 and 1D02058, requesting the Defence to
4 correctly identify and upload the documents in e-court. In its reply,
5 the Defence stated that the correct 65 ter numbers of the documents
6 referred to in paragraphs 52 and 53 of the statements are 1D02527 and
7 1D2528. The Chamber would like to know whether the Prosecution objects
8 to the admission of the correctly identified documents.
9 [The witness entered court]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Kecmanovic. Before you give
11 evidence the rules require that you make a solemn declaration, the text
12 of which is now handed out to you. May I invite you to make that solemn
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning. I solemnly declare
15 that I will speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
16 WITNESS: NENAD KECMANOVIC
17 [Witness answered through interpreter]
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, please be seated, Mr. Kecmanovic.
19 Mr. Kecmanovic, you'll first be examined by Mr. Lukic. You'll find him
20 to your left. Mr. Lukic is counsel for Mr. Mladic.
21 Mr. Lukic, I take it that you'll finish during this first
22 session, if there are not too many interruptions.
23 MR. LUKIC: Me too, Your Honour. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
25 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
1 Examination by Mr. Lukic:
2 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Professor.
3 A. Good morning.
4 MR. LUKIC: I would just ask the usher to help us. I want to
5 hand the statement to Professor Kecmanovic.
6 And we can have on our screens 1D1633. That's the statement
7 Professor Kecmanovic has in front of him in hard copy.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you perhaps start with asking the witness
9 for stating his name for the record.
10 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Q. [Interpretation] Professor, you heard it. I forgot to ask you to
12 state your first and last name for the record.
13 A. Nenad Kecmanovic.
14 Q. Thank you. You see before you on the screen and in hard copy the
15 first page of your statement. Is this your signature?
16 A. It is.
17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We need the last page as well. We
18 see on the screen the last page.
19 Q. Do you recognise your signature?
20 A. I do.
21 Q. Did you have occasion to see the statement before signing it?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You provided this statement to the Defence of President Karadzic
24 and of General Mladic as well; correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Is it correct that we agreed to remove paragraph 54 of the
2 Karadzic statement because you are to testify as fact witness concerning
3 the municipality of Prijedor, that was the case in the Karadzic
4 proceedings, but you have no personal knowledge of the events there?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. If I were to ask the same questions of you today that you
7 addressed in your statement, would you basically provide the same
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. LUKIC: Your Honours, I would like to tender this statement
11 into evidence.
12 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, there is one correction that was made
13 in the Karadzic case that I don't think has been here. In paragraph 8,
14 there is a reference to the witness -- what I believe to be the witness's
15 party and it's translated as Serbian Radical Party, SRS, rather than
16 SRSJ, and I wonder if it could be clarified.
17 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
18 Q. [Interpretation] Professor, you remember that you were asked
19 about it in the previous proceedings. There was some confusion with the
20 abbreviations; correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. It was stated that it was the Serb Radical Party, but what was
23 the real name of your party?
24 A. The abbreviation was the same, SRS, but it was the Alliance of
25 Reform Forces, and thus -- and there was confusion.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar?
3 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D1633 receives number D556,
4 Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, I took it that by making that one
6 observation that there was no objection, therefore D556 is admitted into
8 MR. LUKIC: Thank you to my learned friend for raising this and
9 giving us the opportunity to correct this. Thank you, Your Honours.
10 Now I would like to read short summary from
11 Professor Kecmanovic's statement.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: May Mr. Lukic read slowly
13 as the booths have not been given a copy of the summary.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, you're invited to speak slowly since the
15 booths have not received a copy.
16 MR. LUKIC: I will. It's a short one so I think I won't create
17 big trouble for the booths.
18 Nenad Kecmanovic was a member of the B and H Presidency from
19 April 1992, when the Serb politicians left that body, until July 1992.
20 Nenad Kecmanovic will testify about the political crisis in B and H that
21 led to the war. He will testify about the division of political power in
22 B and H after the first multi-party elections. Furthermore, he will
23 testify about the relationship between the SDS, SDA, and HDZ, as well as
24 about the arming of Muslims and Croats before the outbreak of the war.
25 Nenad Kecmanovic will testify about the functioning of the B and
1 H Presidency after the beginning of the conflict and about the peace
2 plans. And Professor Kecmanovic will testify about the situation and
3 events in Sarajevo before and after the outbreak of the war.
4 And that was the short summary. I have some questions for
5 Professor Kecmanovic, with your leave, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Leave is granted.
7 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
8 Q. [Interpretation] Professor, we won't be long, but we need to go
9 through some of the issues. Please tell us briefly what was the sequence
10 in which the ethnic parties were founded in Bosnia-Herzegovina?
11 A. The first party to be formed was the Party of Democratic Action,
12 next it was the Croatian Democratic Union, and last the Serb Democratic
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. LUKIC: I would kindly ask to see 1D172 on our screens.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Professor, we are going to see the
17 Islamic Declaration on our screens shortly. Are you familiar with this
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Who authored it?
21 A. Alija Izetbegovic.
22 Q. How was this pamphlet received by the non-Islamic peoples in
24 A. There was much concern due to a number of theses stated in the
25 paper. For example, there is reference made to the impossibility of
1 joining Islam with non-Islamic institutions, and also that the Muslims,
2 for as long as they are a minority in a state, need to adjust themselves
3 to the constitution and the laws, and at the point in time when they --
4 their numerical strength is sufficient to make them a majority, at that
5 point they are to impose a Muslim order or Muslim theocracy of sorts, in
6 which minority peoples would enjoy limited rights. Some compared it to
7 the situation of the Ottoman empire rule in Bosnia when the non-Muslim
8 peoples enjoyed lesser rights than the members of Islamic -- the Islamic
10 The second edition of the declaration appeared in 1990. That is
11 an important fact. The first edition was published 20 years before.
12 When the first edition came out, Izetbegovic was an unknown, a clerk in a
13 construction company with a legal background. He worked on
14 administrative tasks. But at the moment of the second edition's
15 publication, Izetbegovic was already the leader of the most numerous
16 ethnic group in Bosnia-Herzegovina, in relative terms, plus the Muslim
17 people in Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time, as now, had the largest birth
18 rate, and the numerical ratio between the three groups kept changing in
19 favour of the Muslim community. And as the leader of the most expansive
20 group, he published this declaration -- republished this declaration
21 proposing that the Muslim population impose an Islamic theocracy, which
22 was rather terrifying for a relatively minority -- or minor group as the
23 Serb one.
24 Q. In your view, how did Alija Izetbegovic see Serbs in a future
1 A. Well, how did he see them? Without expanding it much further but
2 I could already see it at the time when I was a member of the
3 BH Presidency. I worked on a platform, a programme document, which
4 I initiated which was supposed to elaborate the goals of
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina. That document, which I initiated while working
6 alongside a group of colleagues in the Presidency, delineates or, rather,
7 focuses on the establishment of a House of Peoples in Bosnia-Herzegovina
8 and one of the theses was that there should be parity in the Presidency
9 of BH, including all three peoples with each having the right of veto.
10 In the parliament it would be done through the House of Peoples and in
11 the Presidency by quality representation and the right to veto.
12 The first comments about the draft of the platform, when
13 distributed to the other members of the Presidency, and when there was
14 discussion, Izetbegovic put his main objection as saying that we can see
15 from the text that the Muslims were in the majority in
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina. I responded by saying that it was the only way for
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina to function, that all three constituent peoples needed
18 to be on an equal footing. Otherwise, the state would not be acceptable
19 for the other two peoples without that precondition. Despite that
20 explanation, he still objected, and we added that it was the tradition
21 which existed at the time where such mechanisms may not have been
22 institutionally drafted but were nevertheless put into practice. There
23 was always consideration for the ethnic key, even in institutions which
24 were not directly related to politics. For example, the school of
25 political science where I worked, the dean was always chosen on the
1 ethnic key principle. In other words, all three ethnicities had their
2 representatives rotating at the helm of the school and the same applied
3 to Sarajevo university and other universities in the country, although
4 there were fewer back then. However, the principle was the same. The
5 same was in place for the president of the arts and sciences academy and
6 so on and so forth.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, could you please put focused questions to
8 the witness because part of what he says is already in his statement and
9 we don't need to hear it twice. Please proceed.
10 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Q. [Interpretation] Professor, please tell us what is Uma?
12 A. Uma is also something Izetbegovic mentions in the
13 Islamic Declaration. At some point he says that small- and medium-sized
14 ethnic states are not strong enough to be political players, but that it
15 is faith that unites the Muslim people. He discusses Uma, which is a
16 sort of Muslim or Islamic community which would be above any of the
17 states as an umbrella organisation which would encompass Muslims from
18 Morocco to Indonesia. It was supposed to be a cultural and political
19 alliance of sorts.
20 Q. What happened with the status of Serbs in Croatia in the fall of
22 A. Briefly put, the Serbs were deleted from the constitution. Until
23 then they had been a constituent people in the Republic of Croatia,
24 following which they were excluded from the constitution. They were
25 demoted from a constituent people to the status of an ethnic minority.
1 Q. How did that influence the reasoning and activities of Serbs in
3 A. At the time, it was still a single country, despite it being
4 already in the process of deep disintegration. In that situation, the
5 Serbs in Bosnia also felt concern, fear that something of the sort could
6 take place in Bosnia-Herzegovina as well, given the fact that there too
7 they were in a relative minority. It was only natural to expect that it
8 would stir the thinking, the consciousness of the people, in
9 Bosnia-Herzegovina as well.
10 Q. A few words on the internal borders in Yugoslavia. What was the
11 nature of internal borders, in terms of the republics?
12 A. Yes. Throughout the period between the wars, we called
13 administrative or internal borders. They did not have state character.
14 They were based on convention and treated as such until the 1960s. At
15 the time when the borders were created at the end of World War II, when
16 peace was reintroduced following 1945, there were several options tabled
17 that were later dropped. For example, Bosnia-Herzegovina itself, in one
18 variant, was to be seen as a third autonomous province within Serbia, and
19 a part of the Communist leadership, including Mosa Pijade, I believe, who
20 represented that variant, was outvoted as compared to the other members
21 of the leadership. And one of the opposing group leaders was Djilas.
22 They were rather in favour of Bosnia-Herzegovina being a separate
24 Q. For those who don't know that, what was the ethnic background of
25 Mosa Pijade?
1 A. He was a Jew.
2 Q. Rankovic, you mentioned in line 10 of page 12?
3 A. Serbian. If you allow me, let me add, it is a well-known fact
4 how those internal boundaries or borders were treated. For instance, a
5 part of Bosnia-Herzegovina in the first variant which was adopted
6 officially, part of Montenegro, Herceg Novi, the town which is a coastal
7 littoral town in Montenegro, was seen as part of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
8 After it was adopted, a year later, the leader of Montenegro,
9 Blazo Jovanovic asked Djuro Pucar, who was the Communist leader of
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina, he asked him, given that Montenegro was small in
11 territorial terms, to give them Herceg Novi town and surrounds, and
12 Djuro Pucar granted him his wish. And that correction was subsequently
13 introduced and then it was legalised, and it was considered legal and
15 Q. Thank you. Did Alija Izetbegovic think that war was more -- that
16 peace was more important or separation of Bosnia-Herzegovina from
18 A. Oh, you hint at his much-quoted statement before the Assembly of
19 Bosnia-Herzegovina. He was quoted as saying he would favour sovereignty
20 even if it meant war.
21 Q. Thank you. Do you know anything about visits by
22 Alija Izetbegovic to other countries in 1991? Do you remember his first
24 A. Yes, yes. His first visit to Ankara -- was to Ankara, he went to
25 Turkey first. And what was memorable about that visit, which caused an
1 incident, is that while there, he applied on behalf of Bosnia-Herzegovina
2 for introduction or joining the Conference of Islamic Organisation or the
3 International Islamic Organisation although he had not been given a
4 consent from the other two sides in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It even led to
5 an incident of sorts because Nikola Koljevic, who -- when it came to
6 internal division of labour and remit within the Presidency, who was in
7 charge of foreign relations, but he had not been informed about this,
8 neither was the Presidency, but Alija Izetbegovic, when hearing
9 objections about that, he explained it in this very naive way: Well,
10 I understood the Division of labour was that the Muslims would lead the
11 Presidency, the Serbs the Assembly, and the Croats the government, which
12 was a very naive explanation for such a move on his part.
13 Q. Thank you. Just a brief question about this. Do you know
14 Mr. Zulfikar Pasic?
15 A. I knew him personally as well as Mr. Izetbegovic and other
16 prominent protagonists of these developments. As far as Adil
17 Zulfikarpasic is concerned, at the very beginning, he was involved in
18 establishing the SDA, the Muslim political party. He was among the
19 leaders. He was one of the two vice-presidents. His importance lay in
20 the fact that during the communist regime, he helped Muslim dissidents.
21 He funded the legal fees and defence of Alija Izetbegovic before court.
22 He established an Islamic institute in Zurich which was a refuge for
23 Muslim dissidents.
24 He appeared in Sarajevo on the eve of -- of the reconstruction or
25 revival of multi-party system. He approached me with an idea of
1 establishing a multi-ethnic political party. He would lead it. I was
2 offered a place for vice-president on behalf of the Serbs. I don't know
3 who he planned for the Croat side.
4 Although he had created many favours for Alija Izetbegovic, he
5 split from Alija Izetbegovic very soon, citing religious conservatism and
6 fanaticism within the SDA. He explained it in that way. After that he
7 established his own political party, which bore no Islamic or Muslim
8 characteristics. The name was Bosniak -- Muslim Bosniak party. It was a
9 lay party. However, it wasn't very successful at the ballot box. Some
10 parts of the Muslim elite joined it, but it wasn't very appealing to the
12 At the same time, he was one of the Muslim leaders who showed to
13 be most in favour of a peaceful solution for Bosnia-Herzegovina, for a
14 peaceful settlement. He was part of an unfortunately unsuccessful
15 arrangement with the Serbs in Bosnia, with Slobodan Milosevic. That
16 agreement shows -- has two titles. First is the historic agreement and
17 the other title is the Belgrade initiative. It was a project whereby
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina would be -- remain part of a truncated Yugoslavia and
19 would be on equal footing with Serbia and Montenegro, who had opted to
20 stay within Yugoslavia.
21 One of the solutions was to make Alija Izetbegovic the first
22 president of such a truncated Yugoslavia. Alija Izetbegovic supported
23 that initiative, but on the eve of its publication, a conference,
24 televised conference, was convened. I was there as a representative of
25 the opposition parties, and Izetbegovic was supposed to come back from a
1 trip. He showed up, and he said, live on TV, that the SDA would
2 withdraw -- would like withdraw from that agreement.
3 Q. Professor, thank you. We will have to speed things up to shorten
4 your answers. We know that professors are even more talkative than
6 Could you please briefly tell us what happened in October 1991 in
7 the political life of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
8 A. That is arguably one of the turning points. I presume by this
9 you mean the proclamation of Bosnia-Herzegovina's independence. Well,
10 this is an introduction to a -- a prelude to events which would break up
11 Bosnia-Herzegovina and lead to war. Bosnia-Herzegovinians' independence
12 was proclaimed despite the opposition of Serbian deputies in the
13 Assembly. For the first time, a mechanism of the workings of
14 Bosnia-Herzegovinian parliament was broken and that mechanism was council
15 for a national equality. It was a substitute to the House of Peoples
16 which worked at the -- following the following principle: If one
17 delegation would oppose a move -- motion, then that motion would be
18 deleted from the standing orders. For the first time, SDA and HDZ
19 ignored Serbs' demands to strike it off the standing orders. They even
20 ignored the fact that Serbian deputies walked out and that decision on
21 BH independence was adopted.
22 It wasn't just about that event but the importance was that
23 ethnic equality was violated. The principle was violated, and the
24 Bosnian Serb people and the deputies saw that as a change in behaviour in
25 political life, and that it was an introduction of a different climate
1 where one of the three constituent nations would be made less equal or
2 that those mechanisms for equality would be systematically violated.
3 Q. What was the majority during the voting?
4 A. I cannot recall.
5 Q. Was it a two-thirds majority?
6 A. No. Neither was it achieved in all the subsequent votes, which
7 is requisite for such decisions which is also applicable to the
8 referendum on the independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina. I know
9 specifically that the outcome was 64 per cent in favour of
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina's secession. Of course, you needed 66 per cent for
11 that to be a two-thirds majority. So it's simply incredible how you
12 could violate and ignore such a violation, which is apparent in
13 mathematical terms and how the international community also ignored that
14 fact, including the Badinter commission and other European institutions
15 who chose to ignore that fact.
16 Q. After that, immediately after that, what was the reaction of the
17 HDZ, after, in October 1991, together with the SDA, when they voted for
18 BiH independence?
19 A. Well, generally speaking - and I could illustrate this through
20 many examples but I'm trying to be brief - it was a tactical move of the
21 HDZ, as I see it, and they used that tactic later on. On the one hand,
22 they would show solidarity with the SDA, but at the same time they made
23 moves which were symmetrical to Serb moves. Then a couple of weeks ago,
24 they started creating Croatian autonomous districts such as Serbian
25 autonomous districts. For instance, there was the Herceg-Bosnia
1 autonomous district and then there was another one, HAO, of central
2 Bosnia, where there were large concentrations of Croats among the general
4 Q. You explained how the right to veto was commonplace in political
5 life of Bosnia-Herzegovina. When Koljevic and Plavsic left the
6 Presidency, you were co-opted into the Presidency. Did you seek that the
7 rule of consensus and the right to veto be introduced?
8 A. This was the precondition for my joining the Presidency because
9 it had been demonstrated earlier that there was constant outvoting. For
10 that reason, Serbian representatives left the Presidency. This was the
11 reason. I demanded that we have consensual decision-making, which
12 implied the right to veto of course. Another condition I put, not the
13 only one, that all members of the Presidency freeze their party political
14 functions, and the third demand was that the government be changed, which
15 was incompetent. But my first and primary condition was to introduce
16 right of veto and consensual decision-making. Then Izetbegovic had two
17 weeks to mull it over and then he accepted those conditions, but later on
18 he systematically violated those demands. If you like me, I can
19 illustrate this through a couple of examples.
20 Q. Does this principle apply in the political life of
21 Bosnia-Herzegovina still?
22 A. As I initially said, I introduced that principle into the
23 political platform that we were engaged in drafting before these events,
24 because this was -- in June 1992 was accepted by the whole Presidency.
25 And even today, this document is being mentioned as a document, as a
1 platform that could have stopped or prevented the war.
2 In the Dayton documents, this principle which is contained in the
3 principle on which I insisted as a condition for my joining the
4 Presidency, this is still valid, the three-strong Presidency of
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina needs to be unanimous or there is a veto, so if there
6 is no unanimity, there is no decision.
7 Q. Thank you. Was the term of office of Mr. Alija Izetbegovic
8 limited or unlimited?
9 A. Mr. Alija Izetbegovic, first of all, did not become a president
10 of the Presidency regularly. Fikret Abdic should have been that by law
11 because he received the largest number of votes, but the circumstances
12 dictated that president -- Alija Izetbegovic become president and I can
13 explain those circumstances. His term of office was one year. He was a
14 chairman of a collegiate body. He was a primus inter pares. He had a
15 one-year term of office with the possibility of extending that term for
16 another year, but as you know, Izetbegovic continued to -- in this post,
17 contrary to the constitution, throughout the war and even in the post-war
19 Constitution dictated that in 1992, or towards the end of 1992,
20 he should have been replaced by a representative of the Croatian people.
21 That was the system, the ethnic key.
22 Q. Thank you. Let's discuss recognition of the republics.
23 When was the Badinter commission supposed to reach their decision
24 on the recognition of Slovenia and Croatia, and the conditions for
25 recognition of a republic?
1 A. I cannot recall the exact date.
2 Q. As regards that decision, which was supposed to have been made by
3 the Badinter commission, when did Germany recognise Slovenia and Croatia?
4 A. It took place in Maastricht at a European-level meeting.
5 According to the contemporaneous information and the documents I read
6 subsequently, it was a sort of blackmail, a forced decision, opposed by
7 the Americans, but that was the meeting when decisions were made on the
8 common currency, and Germany preconditioned that condition by recognising
9 the two republics first.
10 Q. As regards the referendum in Bosnia-Herzegovina which took place
11 on the 29th of February and 1 March 1992, save for the percentages you
12 mentioned, saying that there was no two-third majority, was the voting
13 itself legitimate without the participation of the Serbian people?
14 A. Of course it was illegitimate. In a way, the Serb Democratic
15 Party - actually by that time we could already refer to it as the Serbian
16 National Movement - in a certain way expressed its own political will
17 about the independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina. They had organised a
18 plebiscite before the referendum but the mechanism was the same.
19 Thereupon, the Serbs and possibly individual representatives of the other
20 two peoples voted in very high percentages, over 90 per cent, in favour
21 of Bosnia-Herzegovina remaining within Yugoslavia. Simply put, the Serbs
22 boycotted the referendum. They did not vote except in individual cases.
23 Q. Thank you. The Badinter commission proposed certain conditions
24 for the holding of the referendum. Were the conditions met? And if not,
25 what was not met, if you recall?
1 A. In the Badinter solution, it was envisaged that a majority of all
2 three peoples would have to be in favour of that decision but that was
3 not honoured.
4 Q. The government which declared independence on 3 March 1992, did
5 it include representatives of all three peoples?
6 A. The BH government? Yes, it did.
7 Q. Did Serb representatives vote in favour of independence?
8 A. They didn't.
9 Q. Briefly, on the Cutileiro Plan, did it envisage a division of
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Did all other peace plans for Bosnia-Herzegovina envisage a
13 division in Bosnia-Herzegovina?
14 A. It is interesting to look at it from this point of view, when
15 considering political developments in Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time,
16 that division was made more dramatic. It was always discussed in the
17 context of something that would destroy Bosnia-Herzegovina from the
18 inside, and I was following it, that is why I can testify to it and I was
19 also a direct participant through the political bodies. Starting with
20 the Cutileiro Plan, which included the opposition parties as well, and
21 there was always this reference made to this -- the separation. There
22 was a map expert always close on hand to Cutileiro, a British person,
23 whose last name I can't recall, but I think he died in the meantime. All
24 subsequent plans, the Vance-Owen Plan, the Contact Group, and finally the
25 Dayton Accords all make internal division operative, as if there was no
1 alternative. No one then discussed the notion of unified Bosnia. Even
2 the representatives of the Muslim people discussed it as a fully
3 legitimate proposal and preliminary -- made preliminary agreements to a
4 possible arrangement. For example, Izetbegovic initialled the Lisbon
5 agreement which included it. And then all of a sudden, it became an
6 anathema, something that ran completely contrary to the interests of the
7 Muslim people, simply putting forward the proposal that no such Bosnia
8 would be possible.
9 Some of those agreements even referred to a particular solution
10 which would be to the extent that Republika Srpska would be allowed to
11 leave Bosnia-Herzegovina after a few years, much as confederation was
12 discussed as a topic between the Muslim and Croatian community in order
13 for the Croats to join Croatia as a confederate state. So there were two
14 different solutions placed on the table.
15 Q. In the Bosnian pre-war calendar, what took place on 9 April 1992?
16 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: The 4th of April.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You mean the 6th of April? I don't
18 understand. It doesn't ring a bell.
19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Did Alija Izetbegovic at some point issue a general mobilisation
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Was it on the 4th or the 6th, if you know?
24 A. On the 4th.
25 Q. Were there any contacts between Izetbegovic and the Serb side?
1 A. Regarding that decision?
2 Q. Yes.
3 A. Yes. Serb representatives asked that the decision be withdrawn.
4 It practically meant introducing war into Bosnia-Herzegovina. I know
5 that President Karadzic and the most senior leaders of Republika Srpska
6 insisted on not taking that road. It was the first step to introducing a
7 state of war and beginning a war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
8 Q. Do you recall, from that time, who was against demilitarising
10 A. You see, the most radical person in that regard was Ejup Ganic,
11 who is otherwise a curious figure on the Bosnian scene in the ranks of
12 the Muslim community. He ran for president and was actually elected as a
13 Yugoslav representative, supranational one, but he turned out to be one
14 of the most radical SDA members, and he even enjoyed the status of
15 Izetbegovic's deputy although not formally.
16 He also objected to the Ohrid Agreement reached between the top
17 echelons of JNA and leadership of Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was supposed to
18 introduce an interim period within which for the first five years the JNA
19 was to stay in BH territory but placing itself under the authority of the
20 new leadership of Bosnia-Herzegovina. And then after the interim period,
21 during which it would be in charge of keeping order, it would be
22 disbanded, and the personnel was to freely choose where to go following
23 that. I myself worked on that agreement, and travelled to Belgrade to
24 discuss it. When it was all finally defined at Ohrid, and Blagoje Adzic
25 was present at the meeting as the chief of General Staff and by that time
1 defence minister, and there was also Alija Izetbegovic, Branko Kostic, as
2 the president of Yugoslavia, and the host, Kiro Gligorov.
3 When Izetbegovic brought the agreement to Sarajevo it was
4 rejected, although he too took part in preparing it, on Ejup Ganic's
5 insistence. He was against pacifying the situation in Sarajevo. His
6 position was that it ran contrary to the objectives of the Muslim
7 community, and that the Muslim community needed Sarajevo to be besieged
8 because it was the spotlight of world media, and that they had to make
9 sure to picture Sarajevo as a victim before the eyes of the world, the
10 victim of Serb aggression.
11 Q. Thank you, Professor. I think it was all we had for you at this
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.
14 MR. LUKIC: I would just tender 1D172 to be MFI'd since I just
15 learned that there is something missing, the last page.
16 MR. TRALDI: That's what appears to me from a quick look. I
17 don't have any objection to it being MFI'd, of course.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, we have looked at the cover page and the
19 photograph. That's the only thing we have seen from it. The witness
20 told us what he considered to be relevant or at least -- therefore
21 I wonder whether we need to learn by heart 77 pages, where the witness
22 spent a couple of minutes on the matter. Of course, that's part of the
24 MR. LUKIC: Yeah, he did discuss parts although I didn't open the
25 specific pages but he did --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would you then, please --
2 MR. LUKIC: -- comment on -- we can take out those pages.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Could you make an excerpt of the relevant portions
4 which -- because otherwise we have to read all 77 pages, most of the
5 pages, at least, I'm afraid, without any context for us. And there may
6 be not that much disagreement about the existence of the document.
7 MR. TRALDI: We don't disagree about the existence of the
8 document, no.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And the content of it neither, that it is what it
11 MR. TRALDI: We agree it is what it is, of course, and we are
12 happy to talk to the Defence about which portions should be admitted.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If the parties -- if you could make a
14 selection, Mr. Lukic, so that we find those portions where the witness
15 referred to, and then if you would come to an agreement with the
16 Prosecution about what we should read.
17 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then the document for the time being will be MFI'd,
19 awaiting both -- well, I do not know whether there is any need to
20 complete the last page if the last page is not part of the excerpt, but
21 at least waiting for further agreement of the parties of what is covered
22 by the evidence of this witness and therefore to be read by the Judges.
23 Madam Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Document 1D172 receives number P -- D557,
25 Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: D557 is marked for identification.
2 Mr. Kecmanovic, we take a break of 20 minutes. You may follow
3 the usher.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 [The witness stands down]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Before we take the break I would like to very
7 briefly address one matter; that is, associated exhibits in relation to
8 the Rule 92 ter motion of -- concerning Witness Milorad Sehovac. The
9 Defence has tendered 21 associated exhibits for Witness Milorad Sehovac.
10 The Chamber reminds the parties that it will not accept to be flooded
11 with associated exhibits. This includes the length as well as the number
12 of the tendered exhibits. The Chamber recalls that it prefers that
13 documents are tendered during the witness's examination in court, which
14 allows the witness to explain and comment on them. That's what I would
15 like to put on the record.
16 We take a break and we resume at five minutes to 11.00.
17 --- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.
18 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Bibles?
20 MS. BIBLES: Your Honour, earlier this morning the Trial Chamber
21 inquired as to whether we had an objection to the correctly identified
22 documents associated with Milorad Sehovac. We do not since -- now that
23 they are correctly identified. That would be 1D02527, 1D02528.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. That's on the record.
25 Mr. Lukic, my observations in relation to the number of
1 associated exhibits with Mr. Sehovac, of course, is also an invitation to
2 reduce the number of associated exhibits and to deal with them -- with
3 any exhibit with the witness himself and -- similarly as we did with the
4 Prosecution, because you make a reference now and then to what we did in
5 the Prosecution's case.
6 MR. LUKIC: If I may, Your Honour, I don't remember that that
7 proceeding was implied during the Prosecution case.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it was several times --
9 MR. TRALDI: Repeatedly, yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Repeatedly.
11 MR. LUKIC: I remember a witness with 60 documents.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not saying that on good cause shown that no
13 exceptions can be made, but the bottom line was a limited number of
14 five was -- of course, we now and then allowed a bit more, sometimes
15 considerably more, but we often also insisted very much on the reduction
16 of the number.
17 [The witness takes the stand]
18 JUDGE ORIE: Let's proceed. Mr. Traldi, are you ready to
19 cross-examine Mr. Kecmanovic?
20 MR. TRALDI: Yes, I am, Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kecmanovic, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr.
22 Traldi. You'll find him to your right. Mr. Traldi is counsel for the
24 Please proceed.
25 Cross-examination by Mr. Traldi:
1 Q. Good morning, sir.
2 A. Good morning.
3 Q. Now, you've provided expert reports in two cases before this
4 Tribunal. Correct?
5 A. Correct.
6 Q. The Kvocka case and the Simic case; right?
7 A. Yes, it was a long time ago.
8 Q. You also appeared and testified as an expert in the Simic case?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And in the reports you drafted, the information you provided was
11 accurate and truthful to the best of your knowledge?
12 A. In certain cases, which I pointed out, it happened, for example,
13 when some locations are mentioned, that I received such information from
14 others. It was second-hand information. Practically during the entire
15 period before the war and the first few months of the war, I was in
16 Sarajevo, so I have no knowledge applicable to any areas outside
17 Sarajevo. Based on direct experience, that is. I generally assessed the
18 situation within the political context.
19 Q. I understand that you're attempting to distinguish how you
20 acquired different types of information. My question was simply: The
21 information you provided in those reports, was it accurate and truthful
22 to the best of your knowledge and your ability to ensure that it was
23 accurate and truthful? Whatever source you acquired the information
25 A. Yes, you are correct.
1 Q. And you also gave a statement to the Karadzic Defence team;
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. I'd like to look now at the one paragraph of your statement for
5 the Karadzic case which is not included in your statement for this case.
6 In paragraph 54 of that statement --
7 MR. TRALDI: If we could have 65 ter 30943. It's page 28 in the
8 English, and the bottom of page 20 in the B/C/S. This will be
9 Mr. Kecmanovic's statement to the Karadzic Defence.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Kindly zoom in on the Serbian
12 MR. TRALDI: It's at the bottom of the page on the left-hand
13 side, under the word "Prijedor."
14 This paragraph reads:
15 "As for the expert report for Prijedor, which I wrote for another
16 case" - I think we will have to turn very soon to the next page in the
17 B/C/S, at the top - "and in which I mentioned an incident in which two
18 Serbian policemen were killed, I stand by what is written in my report.
19 It says that the killing caused terrible repression by the Serbian army
20 and police which ended with the expulsion of the Muslim population not
21 only from that village but the neighbouring ones as well and with the
22 torching of Muslim houses. In my report, I also described what happened
23 in Omarska and Keraterm, saying they were place was highly inhumane
24 conditions. I also stated that war crimes had been committed against
25 individuals and groups of prisoners there. I would like to add that
1 I gained my knowledge about these events during work tasks carried out
2 with other experts who were better informed about what was going on
3 locally. I have no direct knowledge of these events nor did I
4 participate in them."
5 Q. Do you stand by that statement today, sir?
6 A. I drew my conclusions based on the way I explained therein,
7 saying that I had no personal knowledge but that it was second-hand
9 JUDGE ORIE: That is what the statement actually says, Witness.
10 So therefore, the question was whether you stand by this, of course,
11 including those lines.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is precisely what I said, yes.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
14 MR. TRALDI:
15 Q. Just for clarity of the record I think it's important to have an
16 answer to the initial question. Do you stand by the paragraph that
17 I just read from your Karadzic statement today? In its entirety.
18 A. Not in its entirety. Only the concluding part.
19 Q. So you do not stand by the expert report you drafted for your
20 earlier trial? For the Kvocka trial?
21 A. Because in the meantime, I heard other information, since I spent
22 quite a lot of time in the territory of Republika Srpska. People from
23 the field pointed out to me that it wasn't quite as it was stated before.
24 Q. That must have happened, then, since you gave your statement in
25 the Karadzic case. Because in 2012, you did stand behind that report.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. So let's just go through. Is it no longer your position that
3 there was terrible repression by the Serbian army and police in Prijedor?
4 A. To the extent that it is unavoidable in wartime conditions.
5 Q. And you contest that there were inhumane conditions in Omarska
6 and Keraterm?
7 A. You see, in prisoner camps, as far as I know, one doesn't
8 encounter much humane principle applied because the institution per
9 definition is not a very humane one and also as per definition conditions
10 reflect that. I say so based on my presumption because I never spent any
11 time in such camps.
12 Q. Now, you've also testified under oath that you admitted
13 atrocities had occurred at those camps, haven't you?
14 A. You see, I spoke under oath, but the thing is much time has
15 passed in between and in the meantime I acquired new information, new
16 knowledge, which can relativise or rebut the information that I had
17 received previously, because these are all second-hand information. What
18 I testified about as being my personal knowledge, this I cannot change.
19 But about those testimonies that are based on second-hand information,
20 these can be changed by intervening second-hand information that
21 I received in the meantime, and this may prompt me to change my opinion.
22 Q. Let's go through the sources of information you had had by the
23 time you testified in the Karadzic case. You'd received reports while
24 you were a member of the BiH Presidency; right?
25 A. You see, I cannot take into account as relevant information that
1 I received as member of the Presidency because those information were
2 sort of wartime propaganda. If you give me time, I could explain how the
3 Presidency really functioned, not nominally but really. The information
4 that you insist on, I received later on in Belgrade via a person who
5 resided in Belgrade at the time - I could tell you his name,
6 unfortunately he's no longer alive - who hails that from that territory,
7 who went -- used to go there and go back to Belgrade, et cetera.
8 Q. So, again, you didn't directly answer the question I asked, but
9 I take it from your answer that it's right that you did receive reports
10 while you were a member of the BiH Presidency, isn't it?
11 A. Yes. We received the information that we absolutely could not
12 rely upon. I even stated something to that effect in my statement. The
13 information that we received came from mainly Sefer Halilovic, who, at
14 the time, was Chief of the General Staff of the ABiH, and who was even a
15 member of the War Presidency. And he would supply us with information to
16 the effect that the Serb army was committing terrible atrocities, the
17 Muslim civilians suffered great casualties, and as far as the military
18 part of the report is concerned, he would keep reporting about huge
19 successes on the part of ABiH. It was such implausible that -- so
20 implausible that even Alija Izetbegovic asked him to present more
21 realistic reports. So we kept hearing about terrible atrocities on
22 the -- carried out by the Serbian army against Muslim civilians and
23 successes -- a continuous stream of successes of the ABiH against the
24 aggressor. Of course, this could not correspond to the truth, but the
25 consequence of that was that none of us could really rely upon what we
1 kept hearing from him.
2 Q. So I think the simple answer to the question was: Yes, you
3 received reports. You chose not -- you choose today not rely upon them.
4 Is that right?
5 MR. LUKIC: Objection. I think the witness said at that time he
6 didn't have any trust in those information, not that he choose today not
7 to trust them.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, the witness said that he received the
9 reports. I think that part of your summary is right. And the witness
10 said that for his report, he couldn't rely on it. I think he -- let me
11 just take it -- take you back to -- one second, please.
12 MR. LUKIC: If I may help, page 31, line 9, it starts, the
13 answer: "We received the information that we absolutely could not rely
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you did not rely upon it in your
16 2012 report, Mr. Kecmanovic?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Please proceed, Mr. Traldi. So the -- and
19 you still do not rely upon it? That's what I understand.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct, yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
22 MR. TRALDI:
23 Q. Now, I want to look, then, at some excerpts from the sessions of
24 the Bosnian Presidency at the time.
25 MR. TRALDI: Could we have 65 ter 30954? This is an excerpt from
1 the 133rd session on 30 June 1992.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, could I perhaps ask one additional
3 question in relation to what the witness earlier said.
4 MR. TRALDI: Of course.
5 JUDGE ORIE: You said you had -- you got information from a
6 person who had -- in Belgrade, a person who had died. Could you tell us
7 who that was?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Bosko Baskot was his name.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And when did he die?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think last year. He was very
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is there any way the parties could perhaps
13 verify when this person died? Please proceed.
14 MR. TRALDI: We will look into it, Mr. President. Could we have
15 page 7 in the English and page 14 in the B/C/S?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise. He was a communist
17 official who had played an important role up to the half-point line in
18 the -- in a period between the two wars and up to an extent until the
19 very end.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I only asked you when he died. Please
22 MR. TRALDI:
23 Q. And at the top of the page, we see the end of a comment of yours,
24 the top of the page in the English. I believe it's toward the bottom in
25 the B/C/S. And you've been talking about some Serbs who were detained in
1 Sarajevo. You say:
2 "To be frank, the more cases like this we have, the more we would
3 indirectly tolerate this. Signing up to the anarchy that is happening on
4 the other side, where the crimes are of course incomparably worse,
5 genocide, et cetera" --
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Can we go to the next page in the English?
7 MR. TRALDI: It's at the top, right above the word "Izetbegovic"
8 in English, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes, thank you.
10 MR. TRALDI: I apologise.
11 Q. "However, this does not excuse us anything in establishing the
12 rule of law in the areas we control."
13 Now, the other side would have been the Serb side at the time;
15 A. Well, this concerns also the Serbian and the Croatian side
16 because at that time, you know --
17 Q. So it concerns both the Serbian and the Croatian side; is that
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Thank you for that clarification. So it appears that at that
21 time, you are discussing crimes, including genocide, being committed by
22 the Serb and, as you say, Croat sides. So my question is: Were you
23 relying on the reports you received as a member of the BiH Presidency or
24 had you also acquired that information from other sources?
25 A. We had opportunity to hear in the media, on the radio, for
1 instance, foreign radio stations, who at the time, if I remember
2 correctly, spoke about 300.000, as early as the first few months of the
3 war, 300.000 Muslim casualties, because those reports coming from
4 international media sounded much more plausible, more authoritative.
5 When you are in such a position, you are impressed with such information.
6 Of course you cannot verify them. And as you know, later on, even Muslim
7 institutions and international institutions reduced that number from
8 300.000, not just Muslims, but to 100.000 of all Serbs, Croats and
9 Muslims. And of course, at the time you had to select between what you
10 believe and what you do not believe.
11 Q. My question was simply: Were you relying on the reports you
12 received as a member of the Presidency or also from other sources? And I
13 understand you received reports as a member of the Presidency and also
14 from other sources about the crimes being committed against Muslims. Is
15 that right?
16 A. When such information were corresponding to one another, then
17 I would show more confidence in them, of course, yes.
18 Q. And one of the ways that the information corresponded is both of
19 them reported massive atrocities against the Muslim population in various
20 areas of Bosnia-Herzegovina; isn't that right?
21 A. Yes. After I left Sarajevo, I received more credible
22 information, and this is why I cited this example about the total number
23 of casualties. Later on, subsequently, they were shown to be untrue.
24 Q. But for 20 years, from the time you left the Presidency till the
25 time you gave your Karadzic statement, that continuing credible
1 information did not change your view that inhumane acts, crimes, had been
2 committed at camps including Keraterm and Omarska; isn't that right?
3 A. I already discussed this, that I subsequently received
4 information that these claims were overblown, and this is why I express
5 now that I have a different attitude towards them.
6 Q. Well, when I asked you about the paragraph in your Karadzic
7 statement, I didn't ask you about specific numbers of victims at either
8 camp. What I asked you was whether you stood by your conclusion that you
9 by then had expressed on multiple occasions, that crimes had been
10 committed in Prijedor municipality, including those camps. So is your
11 position that certain things you heard were overblown or that no crimes
12 were committed there?
13 A. That they were overblown, yes.
14 Q. And so you continue to agree that crimes were committed in both
15 of those institutions and in Prijedor municipality?
16 A. Yes, yes.
17 Q. And in the Presidency, the people discussing crimes against
18 non-Serb civilians including those held in camps weren't just you and
19 General Halilovic, they also included the Serb representative, the other
20 Serb representative, Mr. Mirko Pejanovic; right?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. TRALDI: If we could turn to page 10 in the English and 17 in
23 the B/C/S, and it's towards the top of the page in the English.
24 Q. Mr. Pejanovic says in pertinent part:
25 "I think we are reacting inadequately to this spreading and
1 increase in the number of camps for Muslims in the republic. We are not
2 doing enough to animate the public either in Bosnia or internationally."
3 So Mr. Pejanovic again is informing the Presidency and discussing
4 in the Presidency the increase and spread in camps for Muslims in
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina; right?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I would tender this document as the
8 next public Prosecution exhibit.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar?
10 THE REGISTRAR: Document 30954 receives number P6657,
11 Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, what's the size of the document?
13 MR. TRALDI: I admit, Your Honour, I don't recall off the top of
14 my head but we are checking.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Is it a lengthy document, that, of course, is the
16 gist of my question, and do we need all of it?
17 MR. TRALDI: It's an excerpt from the transcript. The B/C/S is
18 20 pages and the English somewhat less, 12.
19 JUDGE ORIE: 12 pages, and it mainly deals -- the excerpt is
20 focused on the questions you've put to the witness?
21 MR. TRALDI: I've inquired about the parts I'm most interested
22 in, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No objections.
24 Madam Registrar, the number would be? Oh, we already received
25 the number, yes. Yes, we received the number. Then P6657 is admitted.
1 MR. TRALDI:
2 Q. And the 30th of June isn't the first time that someone other than
3 you or other than Mr. Halilovic, General Halilovic, discussed camps for
4 non-Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina at the Presidency, is it?
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: 30th of June of which year, Mr. Traldi?
6 MR. TRALDI: 1992, Judge Moloto, as in the excerpt from the
7 transcript we just looked at. I apologise.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
9 MR. TRALDI:
10 Q. I'll ask my question again in case that would be useful. The
11 30th of June 1992, in the previous excerpt we looked at, that's not the
12 first time that someone other than you, someone other than
13 General Halilovic, discussed camps for non-Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina at
14 the Presidency, is it?
15 A. Probably no. Well, I can't remember specifically.
16 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 30945. These are the minutes of
17 the 117th session of the BiH Presidency on the 12th of June, 1992. And
18 if we could turn to page 2.
19 Q. We see a list of attendees and under members of the Presidency,
20 we see your name; correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. TRALDI: If we could turn to page 3 in both languages.
23 Q. Under items, or "taska," 1 and 2, I'm going to direct your
24 attention to Dr. Musir Brkic's comments. And it says he:
25 "... Explained the difference between immediate threat of war
1 which is now in the BiH in force and proclamation of the state of war,
2 and then" - and this will be the part that I'm asking you about -
3 "pointed to the great problem regarding the arrested civilians who are
4 being taken to Pale and other camps."
5 Now, at this time Pale was in Serb territory; right?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. He was discussing camps run by Serbs; right?
8 A. Probably.
9 Q. And discussing the arrested non-Serb civilians who were being
10 held there? Right?
11 A. Yes.
12 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I tender this document, 65 ter 30945.
13 MR. LUKIC: I would then object since it's probably lengthy as
14 well. So only the excerpt should be taken.
15 JUDGE ORIE: We do not know yet. I would have asked, Mr. Lukic.
16 MR. TRALDI: In this case, it's the minutes. It's four pages in
17 B/C/S and five in English.
18 MR. LUKIC: I don't have the documents yet for the cross with me
19 so I also don't know.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, you may revisit the issue of the length
21 if further studying the document would lead you to do so.
22 Madam Registrar, the number would be?
23 THE REGISTRAR: Document 30945 receives number P6658,
24 Your Honours.
25 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
1 MR. TRALDI:
2 Q. Sir, you've suggested that these allegations were propaganda;
4 A. You see, you insisted on something what Musir Brkic stated, but
5 you see, you have to take into account the following thing. When it
6 comes to Mirko Pejanovic, he stayed in the Presidency all the way because
7 he -- among other things, he thought about these things differently from
8 me. And I left the Presidency, Pejanovic stayed there and lives there.
9 You will notice that I insisted and discussed mistreatment of Serbs in
10 Sarajevo because I immediately witnessed those things. What happened --
11 JUDGE ORIE: That's not the issue. The issue is that you earlier
12 said that these reports were propaganda, not how you responded to that
13 propaganda, not what others thought, and that is what Mr. Traldi is now
14 asking you, whether these allegations are propaganda or not, because you
15 named them as such before. Irrespective of --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you allow me, the question was
17 how much confidence I had in what was provided as information.
18 Everything was second hand because I wasn't in Pale.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Again, you want to make your own statement
20 apparently. I'll read the question to you:
21 "Sir, you've suggested that these allegations were propaganda;
23 That was the question. Nothing else. Could you please answer
24 that question.
25 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
1 JUDGE ORIE: I didn't hear your answer, Mr. Kecmanovic.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not have confidence in those
3 information. I saw them as propaganda.
4 JUDGE ORIE: The answer, therefore, is yes. Whether you had
5 confidence in them was not the question. The question was whether it was
6 propaganda. You say: "I saw them as propaganda." That's the answer to
7 the question.
8 Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
9 MR. TRALDI: Could we have 65 ter 09723?
10 Now, this is an analysis of functioning of the RS MUP so far and
11 the outlines of its furthers activities dated 11 July 1992.
12 Could we turn to page 2 in both languages, please?
13 Q. In the second paragraph, at the beginning, we read:
14 "The meeting was attended by the following people ..."
15 We see Mico Stanisic's name and then a number of others. Those
16 are all officials in the Republika Srpska Ministry of the Interior;
18 A. What was the question, please?
19 Q. Those names there, those are all officials in the
20 Republika Srpska Ministry of the Interior; right? Mico Stanisic,
21 Cedo Kljajic, Slobodan Skipina, and a number of others?
22 A. Some of the names do ring a bell.
23 Q. Well, you're familiar with Mr. Stanisic; correct?
24 A. Yes, correct.
25 Q. And he was the minister of internal affairs; right?
1 A. In a certain period of time, as far as I know.
2 Q. That period of time included the 11th of July, when this meeting
3 was held; right?
4 A. I really can't say. I don't know.
5 MR. TRALDI: Could we have page 8 in the English and I believe
6 it's 9 in the B/C/S. It will be the top of 8 in the English.
7 Q. Here we see part of Mr. Zupljanin's remarks, which began a few
8 pages earlier. At the top of the page in the English we read:
9 "The army and Crisis Staffs wartime Presidencies demand gathering
10 as many Muslims as possible and leave such non-defined camps to the
11 internal affairs. The conditions in these camps are poor. There is no
12 food. Some individuals do not comply with the international standards
13 because, among other things, the concentration centres are not
14 appropriate or for other reasons."
15 Now, I'd put to you --
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You should, for the benefit of the witness, also
17 indicate where this is to be found on the B/C/S version.
18 MR. TRALDI: My Cyrillic is a little bit imperfect, Your Honour,
19 so it may take me a moment.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Witness, did you find the portion Mr. Traldi read
21 to you? Did you find the --
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On my screen, it says:
23 Several thousand court proceedings have not been completed, the
24 courts are not operational, et cetera. In keeping with the regulation on
25 subject matter jurisdiction of the courts, and so on and so forth.
1 MR. TRALDI: It seems we may have the wrong page in the B/C/S.
2 And I apologise for that, Your Honours. Could we perhaps go back to
3 page 8? Here I think it may be the second bullet essentially.
4 Q. Does that correspond to the English I read you, sir?
5 MR. LUKIC: Now when I have the translation, actually, the
6 original in B/C/S, I would object to the translation. It says
7 "concentration centres."
8 JUDGE ORIE: One second, one second, Mr. Lukic. If you want to
9 discuss the content and the accuracy of the translation, I'd rather do
10 that in the absence of the witness.
11 MR. LUKIC: Or the witness can just read what is written so it
12 should be translated.
13 MR. TRALDI: I'm happy to have --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you know that usually verification of
15 translation is not done by reading and then receiving interpretation.
16 So, Mr. Traldi, is there any way that you could proceed and that we could
17 discuss this later, that is, somewhere eight minutes from now, in the
18 absence of the witness? If not, then we will just ask the witness to
19 leave the courtroom for a second.
20 MR. TRALDI: I'd guess --
21 MR. LUKIC: One more thing, I don't have this document on the
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi?
24 MR. TRALDI: I have it on the bottom of page 2, and when I say "I
25 have it," I mean of course that Ms. Stewart has it at the bottom of
1 page 2 of our list.
2 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry, I stand corrected. I'm semi-blind.
3 I couldn't find it swiftly.
4 MR. TRALDI: I'd suggest, since the words Mr. Lukic mentioned are
5 not essential to my question, that perhaps we have CLSS check it later.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You could ask the witness to read in his language
7 and then ask whatever questions you'd like to put to him, and then later
8 we can deal with the accuracy of the translation.
9 MR. TRALDI: Okay.
10 Q. So could you read that second paragraph starting at: "The army
11 and Crisis Staff," sir?
12 A. I can see the paragraph, yes.
13 Q. Could you read aloud beginning at the word -- I think it's
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, whenever the witness reads anything which
16 is of concern to you, then please indicate so, Mr. Traldi, because there
17 is a standard procedure, translations are not to be corrected by reading
18 and then translating. Now, I do not know what -- where Mr. Lukic's
19 problem is. I do not know what you want to draw our attention to, so not
20 knowing the two, you can ask the witness to read aloud -- to read or
21 perhaps you indicate already what you want him to read, and then
22 Mr. Lukic will tell us whether he has any concerns with those lines.
23 MR. TRALDI:
24 Q. To start, sir, could you read the first sentence?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, any problem?
1 MR. LUKIC: I know that I saw the problem in the second-last row
2 in this paragraph.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Okay, then the witness can read the first sentence.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "The army and Crisis Staffs,
5 wartime Presidency, demand gathering as many Muslims as possible and
6 leave such non-defined camps to the internal affairs. The conditions in
7 these camps are poor. There is no food. Some individuals do not comply
8 with the international standards because, among other things, such
9 collection centres are not appropriate or for other reasons."
10 Should I go on?
11 MR. TRALDI:
12 Q. No, you've, I think in your enthusiasm, have read two sentences
13 rather than one.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Collection centres or concentration centres.
16 MR. TRALDI: I'd suggest we have CLSS check that.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is that the issue --
18 MR. TRALDI: That seems to be the issue --
19 JUDGE ORIE: At least it talks about centres.
20 MR. LUKIC: Yes, but --
21 JUDGE ORIE: What kind of centres we'll --
22 MR. LUKIC: I would suggest that this translation was a proper
23 one, not the written one.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then that will be verified and we can proceed
25 for the time being.
1 MR. TRALDI:
2 Q. So, sir, I wanted to direct your attention to a different part.
3 This reports that the army and the Crisis Staffs, the political
4 authorities, had demanded gathering as many Muslims as possible in camps
5 with poor conditions, doesn't it?
6 A. This report comes from the Serb side.
7 Q. As I noted, these are part of Mr. Stojan Zupljanin's remarks.
8 A. Then it is probably authentic.
9 Q. And --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you please -- apparently you have a
11 different agenda on your mind as just answering the questions. The
12 question was the following: Mr. Traldi wanted to direct your attention
13 to this report and this report says that the army and the Crisis Staffs,
14 the political authorities, had demanded gathering as many Muslims as
15 possible in camps with poor conditions.
16 Mr. Traldi asked you whether that is what this paragraph at least
17 in this portion says. Does it or does it not?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's what it reads. I just read
19 it out, out loud.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's what it reads, that's what it says.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. TRALDI:
23 Q. And this is around the same time you were receiving such reports
24 as a member of the BiH Presidency, isn't it?
25 A. There was a lot of difference.
1 Q. What I asked about, sir, is: Was this around the time that you
2 were receiving such reports? We saw those in June, and this is in the
3 first half of July; right?
4 A. There was a difference. In the reports we --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you're not invited to compare the reports,
6 whether they were different or the same, but whether such reports --
7 Mr. Traldi, perhaps you could clarify, you mean by "such reports,"
8 reports about detention situations of non-Serbs? Whether it was at the
9 same time that you received reports, perhaps different, that wasn't the
10 question, about detention of non-Serbs in camps or centres.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really don't understand the
13 MR. TRALDI:
14 Q. Let me try and make it very simple. This is dated July 11th;
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And it reports the detention of large numbers of Muslims;
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And we've just seen that on June 12th and June 30th, you received
21 reports in the BiH Presidency about the detention of Muslim civilians;
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And you said that during June you were receiving other such
25 reports from the media; right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And that's why, at the June 30th meeting, you were aware and you
3 talked about the crimes that were being committed by the Serb side;
5 A. In what I read out, there is no mention of any crimes. Inhumane
6 conditions are discussed.
7 Q. You consider inhumane conditions not to be a crime? The
8 maintenance of detention centres for civilians with inhumane conditions,
9 you consider that not to be a crime?
10 A. You see, there is no room for me to take a personal stance on
11 this. I'm only trying to say that if this report comes from the Serbian
12 police about their own conduct, then it is credible. I can't know that
13 better than they did. They knew what they were doing.
14 Q. And so you don't dismiss Mr. Zupljanin's comments as propaganda,
15 do you?
16 A. You see, since they are discussing what they were doing, it would
17 probably be ridiculous of me to say that they were launching propaganda
18 against themselves. If Mr. Zupljanin is asserting this, he's actually
19 addressing the activities of his organisation, of his institution. What
20 other reaction should I have?
21 JUDGE ORIE: The simple answer to the question was: No, I do not
22 dismiss these comments as propaganda.
23 MR. TRALDI:
24 Q. Just to close this topic, sir, you discuss in your statement your
25 knowledge of detention facilities operated by Muslims in which Serbs were
1 detained, don't you?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. You do not discuss your knowledge of detention facilities
4 operated by Serbs in which Muslims and Croats were detained, do you?
5 A. I repeat: I was in Sarajevo. In Sarajevo, Serbs did not keep
6 Muslims in camps but the other way around.
7 JUDGE ORIE: The question was whether you discuss knowledge of
8 detention facilities operated by Serbs. Is that in your statement or is
9 that not in your statement? That was the question. There may be good
10 reasons for not having it in the statements because it didn't happen or
11 whatever, but the question was whether you address detention facilities
12 operated by Serbs in your statements.
13 Mr. Mladic, one more word aloud and this is the last warning.
14 Yes, yes, you know exactly what the consequences are. The last word you
15 spoke allowed was "da" which means "yes," so you understood it. And this
16 really is the last time. I don't want to have any interference with the
17 testimony of a witness.
18 MR. TRALDI:
19 Q. Let me put my question again, sir. You do not discuss your
20 knowledge of detention facilities operated by Serbs in which Muslims and
21 Croats were detained, in your statement, do you? Yes or no?
22 A. I can only testify to what I have direct knowledge of.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, last time: You're an intelligent man. You
24 carefully listen to the question. Otherwise, one of the risks is that if
25 you do not answer the questions put to you by the Prosecution and are
1 always circumventing them, then your testimony, but then the whole of
2 your testimony, might be given little or no weight. You should be aware
3 of that. Apart from that, there is a duty to answer questions and not to
4 comment on things that were not asked. Is that clear to you?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Believe me, it's very difficult for
6 me to speak that way. I'm not used to it. I simply feel the need to
7 explain things.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You are not here to explain unless an
9 explanation is asked by any question. The simple question was: Do you
10 address in your statement your knowledge of Serb-operated detention
11 facilities where others, other ethnicities, Muslims and/or Croats, were
12 detained? Did you address that in your statement? Later on, in
13 re-examination, Mr. Lukic will have ample opportunity to seek further
14 explanation if he thinks he would need it. So therefore, don't start
15 explaining what you consider to be relevant but just answer the
16 questions. If you're not used to it, please get used to it now. Could
17 you please answer that question, whether you address it in your
18 statement. Simple "yes" or "no" would do.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
21 MR. TRALDI: Your Honour, I'd ask that this document be marked
22 for identification pending CLSS reviewing the translation.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Document 9723 receives number P6659,
25 Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: P6659 is marked for identification pending
2 verification of the translation.
3 We take a break now, Mr. Traldi.
4 Mr. Kecmanovic, you'll be escorted out of the courtroom. We
5 would like to see you back in 20 minutes.
6 [The witness stands down]
7 JUDGE ORIE: We take a break and we'll resume at 20 minutes past
9 --- Recess taken at 12.02 p.m.
10 --- On resuming at 12.23 p.m.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, I think I set a deadline for the
12 16th of July for the tu quoque issue. Now, could it be that one of those
13 witnesses will already be called on or before the 16th? In that case,
14 for that witness, of course, we would like to receive your response or
15 your reply earlier.
16 MR. LUKIC: My colleague Stojanovic just informed me that he
17 should be here on the 15th.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then we would like to receive your response by
19 Monday. That's the 14th.
20 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: I should say the reply.
22 [The witness takes the stand]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, you may proceed.
24 MR. TRALDI: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Q. Turning now to Sarajevo --
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: If you are going to turn to Sarajevo to the -- I
2 have one question with in relation to what we discussed before the break.
3 MR. TRALDI: After you, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Witness, you said you received information by a
5 person named Bosko Baskot. Where did you meet him?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had known him from before the war
7 in Sarajevo.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Sorry, when -- no, where did you meet him?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Belgrade.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: What did he tell you about Keraterm?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On my request, he drafted a piece
12 of text in which I intervened.
13 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Which I inserted in
14 my report.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: What did he tell you about Keraterm?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We didn't discuss it. Since I was
17 asked by the Defence team in that case to say something about Prijedor,
18 and having no direct knowledge about it, I turned to Mr. Bosko Baskot,
19 asking him to write a short text in terms of how he saw it, and I simply
20 integrated his piece of text into my report.
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Into which report?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know where it appears for
23 the first time. I don't recall any longer. I don't remember what case
24 it was.
25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You said earlier that you met him after you have
1 testified in the Karadzic case. Is that correct?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. There was a
3 misunderstanding. I said that after the Karadzic case, I was in
4 Banja Luka. While I was there, I heard from some people that things were
5 not quite like Bosko wrote and in terms of what I had integrated in my
6 text, in the sense that it was a bit blown out of proportion.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I take it that other people told you. You said:
8 "I heard from some people." Who are these people?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Well, I can't identify them
10 precisely. These were not targeted discussions or conversations, as was
11 the case with Mr. Baskot, but en passant, when I met different people.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Can you give me one name?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You don't remember the names, but the information
15 you gained from them was so important that you changed your testimony
16 between the Karadzic testimony and this case; is that correct?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You see, I was present during such
18 conversations. There was no targeted question in order to elicit a
19 response or an explanation, but these were just conversations, some of
20 which took place in cafes. I never went to see someone with the specific
21 question in mind or no one came to see me but the topic simply surfaced
22 in a conversation among people.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. No further questions.
24 MR. TRALDI:
25 Q. I have a couple of questions to follow up on His Honour's.
1 First, if I suggested that that was your report for the Kvocka case,
2 would that refresh your recollection?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Second, did you note in that report that one section had been
5 drafted by someone else that had not been reviewed by you?
6 A. I don't think I said any such thing.
7 Q. But that's the testimony you've provided just now; right?
8 A. Please let us be precise in terms of what I said. I said that
9 I asked Bosko Baskot to write that part and of course I read it before
10 integrating it into my next.
11 Q. Let me ask a more precise question, then. Did you note in that
12 report that one section had been written by someone else?
13 A. Believe me, that I don't remember.
14 Q. Well, we have it and we can check. You said you read it. Did
15 you edit it?
16 A. I don't remember. It was so many years ago.
17 MR. TRALDI: I think that completes my questions on this topic
18 unless the Bench has anything else.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I would like to perhaps put a bit more
20 pertinent question to you. Do I understand your testimony well that you
21 submitted an expert report, part of which was written by a third person,
22 without notifying anyone of that and without having properly verified the
23 content, the accuracy, and the truth of what Mr. Baskot had written? Is
24 that how I have to understand your testimony?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With your permission, I'd like to
1 answer with more than a mere "yes" or "no," to explain in a few
2 sentences, because I recall that well. It was a general expert report.
3 When I did that, the Defence team, however, asked me if possible to
4 include the location of importance for that case, and I told them that I
5 had no direct knowledge but that I could engage someone else similar to
6 my capacity at the time as expert witness. I told them I could engage
7 someone I knew who hailed from that area.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you there. I'm not interested in any
9 way in the discussions you may have had with whatever Defence. I'm
10 interested to know whether you presented a report, part of which was not
11 authored by you but under your name and as part of your report, without
12 being able to verify the accuracy of what that other person wrote and
13 without mentioning that it was authored by someone else. I'm only
14 interested in that. How it all happened is of no -- I'm not interested
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had confidence in that person and
17 I integrated that text as my text.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So the answer simply is "yes" because --
19 I didn't ask for an explanation. You gave it voluntarily. Because you
20 had confidence in a person. Thank you.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: If I may just follow up on one of Judge Fluegge's
24 Sir, Judge Fluegge asked you what Mr. Baskot told you, you said
25 he didn't tell you anything, you didn't discuss, he wrote a text for you.
1 What did he write in the text?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That which is contained in the
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: What is it? Tell us what it is he wrote.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, we had that a minute ago on
6 the screen.
7 JUDGE ORIE: You referred to the statement we had on our screen,
8 or was that part of the report, Mr. Traldi?
9 MR. TRALDI: No, Mr. President, that was part of the witness's
10 statement in the Karadzic case that addressed the report.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you tell us now what exactly then it was
12 that Mr. Baskot told you, Witness, or wrote, the content? Could you
13 reproduce what he said? Or wrote?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sometime ago you had on the screen
15 indicated what was written there and there was the sentence.
16 JUDGE ORIE: We have never seen this report. If it is exactly
17 the same, if you say what was shown to you as part of your statement
18 given in the Karadzic case, is that literally the same as we could find
19 in your report? Is that exactly the same?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think it is so. I cannot claim
21 with certainty but I think that was that. That was it, yes. I simply do
22 not have that text which refers to that. I do believe that
23 Mr. Prosecutor has the material pertaining to the Kvocka case.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sir, you wrote a report, you got information from
1 different sources, one of which was Mr. Baskot. We don't want to read
2 the whole report to find out what Baskot wrote. What is so difficult in
3 you just telling us exactly what it is that Mr. Baskot said to you or
4 wrote for you?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I can tell, you have the
6 text, don't you?
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Answer my question, please. Don't talk to the
8 Prosecutor. Just tell us exactly what Baskot told -- wrote for you.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Exactly what we had on the screen
10 one hour ago, ending with --
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: What we had on the screen, we are told, is not the
12 report that you're talking about. Mr. Traldi just told us that.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, from memory I'll try to --
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- tell you. It was ten years ago,
16 I believe. That those unsavorable incidents -- I think his note starts
17 with explaining that two Serbian policemen were killed by, as far as I
18 can remember, by a Muslim organised group. So there were two policemen,
19 Serbian policemen, murdered. After that, there were -- there was
20 repression against the Muslim population in Prijedor. This pertains to
21 Prijedor. And then he further noted that there was different forms of
22 repression ensuing. This is as far as I remember. Of course, repression
23 against the Muslim population, of course.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, the Chamber would like to receive,
1 either from Mr. Lukic or from you, the relevant parts of the report which
2 was produced in the Kvocka case.
3 Yes, Mr. Lukic?
4 MR. LUKIC: I can give you 65 ter numbers immediately.
5 JUDGE ORIE: In our case?
6 MR. LUKIC: In our case.
7 JUDGE ORIE: In our case, okay. If you would give that.
8 MR. LUKIC: 1D2002 and 1D2003, and it's visible that those texts
9 are different. So the other part, I guess, and maybe Professor could
10 recognise it, is something that is added to the original expertise.
11 MR. TRALDI: Just to be totally clear --
12 MR. LUKIC: If I'm not wrong.
13 MR. TRALDI: -- my understanding is that 1D2002 is a portion of
14 the expert report in the Kvocka case. We have uploaded the entirety as
15 30955. And 1D2003, unless I misread, is Mr. Kecmanovic's report in the
16 Simic case. But I'm happy to have that double-checked.
17 MR. LUKIC: We can check it only with Mr. Kecmanovic. I cannot
18 tell that.
19 MR. TRALDI: They do have the case numbers on them which makes it
20 a little bit easier.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Are these long reports or are they -- and
22 could the parties guide the Chamber in where to find in those reports the
23 relevant sections for the matters on which he now changed his testimony
24 compared with --
25 MR. TRALDI: I'd suggest we try to do that at the break,
1 Mr. President, if that's agreeable.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That's fine. Then one last question for the
3 witness. Could you give us a bit more information about the person --
4 no, I don't need -- I don't need that. Please proceed.
5 MR. TRALDI:
6 Q. Just to -- one more question from me on this topic, sir. The
7 information you included in the Kvocka report, though you didn't verify
8 it, you did find it sufficiently reliable to provide to a court of law,
9 right, in your capacity as an expert?
10 A. It was a very small portion of the report, maybe 5 per cent, less
11 than 10 per cent, if I remember correctly, and I -- that person who did
12 that for me had my trust.
13 Q. So for the record, you did, didn't you, find it sufficiently
14 reliable to provide to a court of law in your capacity as an expert?
15 A. The same as I used other sources, I saw that as being
17 JUDGE ORIE: Could I then ask you about other sources. Are there
18 other parts of your report which were written by other persons without
19 stating that they were authored by others rather than by yourself?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Then there were no other such
21 portions because the report concerns the general situation about Sarajevo
22 which I knew well. This particular portion concerned a locality that
23 I was not familiar with. And this is why I went about it in that way.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
25 MR. TRALDI:
1 Q. In your report for the Simic case that addressed Bosanski Samac,
2 there are sections that relate to events in that municipality. Did you
3 draft those yourself or did you have someone more familiar with
4 Bosanski Samac draft them for you?
5 A. In that case, I spoke to people hailing from that area.
6 Q. And so for the record, is your answer that you drafted those
7 sections yourself?
8 A. Yes, I consulted the people from the ground because I had not
9 resided there myself.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, if you're done with this, I would have
11 one additional question as well.
12 Do you have a record of those interviews or conversations in the
13 Simic report, with whom exactly you spoke, what they said to you, and
14 what you used as a source for that report?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure. I, of course, had a
16 sort of an archive, but whether I still have it at home in Belgrade, I
17 don't know. I can't testify one way or the other. I'm not sure.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Did you in the report state clearly what kind of
19 sources you relied upon?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I did not list the literature
21 either. This is the way an expert report -- this is not a scientific
22 paper where I would have to cite and quote and list literature,
23 et cetera.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Were there conversations in cafes, et cetera, as
25 well, as source of your information?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I met with those people in
2 different places, wherever it was convenient for them, and in certain
3 cases it happened to be in cafes, yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And do you think that -- have you mentioned
5 that, that part of your sources were just conversations with ordinary
6 locals in pubs?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You see, it was a long time ago.
8 I can't remember those details, such -- I spoke with a number of people.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That was not my question but we can verify
10 that in the report.
11 Now, finally one question, you say:
12 "... this is not a scientific paper where I would have to cite
13 and quote and list literature, et cetera."
14 Do you agree with me that citing and quoting literature is
15 serving transparency and allows the reader to verify the accuracy of
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree. But I was retained by the
18 Defence team. I performed my mission in the way that they expected me to
19 do it. And the Defence did not require of me to prepare my expert report
20 in that manner.
21 JUDGE ORIE: And do you consider it of same importance for a
22 court of law to have transparent information where the accuracy of the
23 sources can be verified? Or do you consider that not important?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Believe me, I don't know. I'm not
25 a legal expert. I simply conferred with the Defence team and I complied
1 with their requests in terms of the form of the report, et cetera.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
3 Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
4 MR. TRALDI: Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you,
5 Ms. Stewart.
6 Q. I do want to turn now to Sarajevo, and as an initial question,
7 you mentioned in your statement detention centres for Serbs. You've said
8 you didn't mention detention centres where Muslims and Croats were held.
9 Now, you heard about the detention centres where Serbs were held from
10 other people, didn't you?
11 A. No, I had immediate knowledge, direct knowledge.
12 Q. Now, what you --
13 A. Excuse me, not for each and every one of them but for a large
14 number of them, I had immediate knowledge.
15 MR. TRALDI: Can we have paragraphs 45 and 46 of the witness's
16 statement on the screen? It's -- D556 is the exhibit number. And the
17 whole section starting at 44 is valuable so if we can keep the whole page
18 in the B/C/S on the left.
19 Q. Now, I think, in paragraph 46 here, you suggest that you can talk
20 personally about one private prison in the basement of the Zagreb Hotel
21 but I put to you that in paragraph 45 --
22 A. Not a hotel in Zagreb, the name of the hotel was Zagreb.
23 Q. Agreed. I put to you that in paragraph 45 you're speaking of
24 private prisons more generally and you're saying:
25 Based on the information we received from the people who came to
1 us for help daily, we presented the specific complaints of Serbian
2 citizens, which you also include in your statement. And then you note
3 that the government formed a mixed commission to deal with the matter.
4 Now, my question is: At least some of the information you've
5 provided here is second-hand; correct? It relates to complaints of
6 Serbian citizens.
7 A. Those people would come to the building of the Presidency and as
8 victims they provided first-hand accounts.
9 Q. So you received first-hand accounts. You are -- the information
10 you're providing is not first-hand; right?
11 A. Those with first-hand accounts would come to the building of the
12 Presidency, and they were there to testify if need be.
13 Q. So I think I understand your answer to be that you are not
14 providing first-hand information yourself; right? You're talking about
15 other people's experiences which you did not see, hear, smell or
16 otherwise experience yourself.
17 A. You mean to say that I was not the immediate victim and therefore
18 that was not my experience or what?
19 Q. I mean you're relating to us what other people told you.
20 A. To you here, now.
21 Q. In -- both in the statement and in your testimony, yes.
22 A. That would be a logical trick, discussing what is first-hand and
23 what is second-hand.
24 Q. I'd like to stay away from logical tricks and I'd like to stick
25 to the simple question I asked you. You're talking about other people's
1 experiences which you didn't experience yourself; right?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. And you've included what you heard about detention centres for
4 Serbs but not what you heard about detention centres for Muslims or
5 Croats in your statement; right?
6 A. There is a great deal of difference. I -- here in this case,
7 I saw with my own eyes because I would visit those centres, Hotel Zagreb,
8 Hotel Europa, I can list a number of localities, people who had been
9 mistreated there would approach me to tell me about that. There were no
10 Muslim victims of such treatment in terms of arrests, detention,
11 investigation, mistreatment. That kind of victim, when it came to
12 Muslims, did not exist in Sarajevo, at least in that part of Sarajevo
13 which was under the control of the central government, where I resided.
14 Q. Well, let's turn to what you did experience in Sarajevo. And you
15 experienced shelling, beginning in April and May of 1992, in Sarajevo;
17 A. That's correct.
18 Q. The citizens of Sarajevo were terrified by the shelling; right?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And you were terrified yourself, weren't you?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. You and the other citizens feared for your lives, didn't you?
23 A. Well, you see, not feared for your lives but we were in danger
24 and we were afraid. That's for sure. Simply, when shelling started, we
25 would take shelter in houses, in basements. Not a single building was
1 destroyed, but there were cases where missiles would penetrate a building
2 through the window. But shelters in cellars, in basements, and edifices
3 were shelter enough. Of course, people had to go about their daily
4 errands, and during such periods there was this danger, yes.
5 Q. So if were you on the street during a shelling, you feared for
6 your life; correct?
7 A. Yes, in such a case people would enter the nearest building to
8 avoid that immediate danger.
9 Q. And yet people were killed and wounded in shelling while you were
10 in Sarajevo; right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. People were killed and wounded in May 1992 in shellings?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And continuing in June --
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Continuing in June 1992? People were killed and wounded in
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And the Serbian artillery laid waste to the central and old part
20 of Sarajevo; correct?
21 A. One couldn't say laid waste. I myself lived in that
22 neighbourhood. There were many buildings that were hit, their facades
23 were hit, but you couldn't say that the centre of the town was laid waste
24 to. I lived all my life there. I had lived all my life there and
25 I lived through that period there in Sarajevo. Those missiles were not
1 such that they would destroy a building.
2 Q. I don't want to quibble about specific language, but you yourself
3 have written that the superior Serb artillery laid waste to the central
4 and old part of Sarajevo, haven't you?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And --
7 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry, I just have to intervene because of the
8 translation. It was differently translated so that's why now you have
9 "yes" unlike before "laid waste" --
10 JUDGE ORIE: One second. That is text that exists in both
12 MR. TRALDI: Unfortunately that report, the Office of the
13 Prosecutor only has a copy of the English version, and so I don't have
14 the original B/C/S.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Let me see that is what report, then, exactly?
16 MR. TRALDI: We can call up the specific page if it would assist,
17 Mr. President.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think if it's in e-court.
19 MR. TRALDI: Could we have 65 ter 30955. Now, for the B/C/S we
20 only have the section dealing specifically with Prijedor municipality on
21 the left. For the English we have a more complete report. Could we have
22 page 29 in the English, please?
23 And I don't have in my notes where it appears on the page. Can
24 we perhaps turn to the next -- actually before we do, sorry, one second.
25 [Prosecution counsel confer]
1 MR. TRALDI: Let's turn to the top of page 30. And we see a
2 number, 29, in the bottom right-hand corner which apparently confused my
4 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps if you read it again slowly and then
5 Mr. Lukic will carefully listen. If there is any translation issue, we
6 would like to deal with that once the witness has left the courtroom.
7 MR. TRALDI: I'm interested in the second sentence:
8 "The superior Serbian artillery laid waste the central and old
9 part of the city."
10 Just that clause of it.
11 MR. LUKIC: Which paragraph, sorry, in English?
12 MR. TRALDI: It's the top paragraph under "Izetbegovic's martyred
13 Olympic city," and it's the second sentence. I'll read it again so you
14 can hear the translation.
15 "The superior Serbian artillery laid waste the central and old
16 part of the city."
17 MR. LUKIC: You are aware that you cannot compare it with the
18 B/C/S version on the left-hand side. It's not the same text, you know.
19 MR. TRALDI: I've put that on the record, I think, yeah.
20 MR. LUKIC: Because here it's about Prijedor, on the left-hand
21 side --
22 JUDGE ORIE: The witness should not read -- the witness should
23 just carefully listen to what Mr. Traldi reads about the superior Serb
25 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, only today during the translation "laid
1 waste" was translated in two different ways --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That --
3 MR. LUKIC: -- so that's maybe what created the confusion.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, you are most happy with the
5 translation -- the last interpretation? Then we would ask Mr. Traldi to
6 read it again.
7 MR. LUKIC: Very rarely I'm on B/C/S channel and I happened to be
8 at that moment. Lately I was not listening to B/C/S.
9 MR. TRALDI: I'm happy to have Mr. Lukic monitor it while I read
10 it one more time if that would --
11 MR. LUKIC: Yes, please.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please read it again.
13 MR. TRALDI: "The superior Serbian artillery laid waste the
14 central and old part of the city."
15 MR. LUKIC: This was the third translation of this and Mr. Traldi
16 is using the same term all the time. I have to say that, but the
17 translation --
18 JUDGE ORIE: During the next break, that one line will be -- in
19 one way or another be verified as far as translation is concerned. And
20 we kindly ask the assistance of CLSS to do so because this is exactly
21 what we want to avoid, that is that during live interpretation, which is
22 a different thing from sitting behind your desk with five dictionaries
23 and checking every word in great detail, but perhaps for that one line,
24 we could have that done in the next break.
25 Perhaps we could take that break now, Mr. Traldi, so that you
1 could immediately start if - which I'm still hopeful to expect - CLSS
2 could assist us.
3 MR. TRALDI: I hope so too. I wouldn't want to translate it
4 myself, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's very wise.
6 Mr. Usher, could you -- we take a break, Witness, and we would
7 like to see you back in 20 minutes.
8 [The witness stands down]
9 JUDGE ORIE: We take a break and we resume at half past 1.00.
10 --- Recess taken at 1.11 p.m.
11 --- On resuming at 1.35 p.m.
12 JUDGE ORIE: While the witness will be brought in, the Chamber
13 highly appreciates that CLSS was quite willing to help us, but of course
14 there is one remaining problem. That is that we don't have the original.
15 What we could do is to look at the English version, and that will be done
16 I do understand within the next 15 minutes, that we then see whether
17 there is one verified B/C/S translation for that. Later, you always can
18 verify, Mr. Lukic, whether that corresponds with the B/C/S original which
19 is not available, I do understand, to the Prosecution but most likely has
20 to be found somewhere in the archives of the Kvocka case or -- unless you
21 have it.
22 MR. LUKIC: I was on Kvocka case but obviously Mr. Kecmanovic
23 testified for somebody else because I left that case immediately after
24 Kvocka finished his defence.
25 JUDGE ORIE: But sooner or later I take that we'll be able to
1 find a copy of that report, a full copy, in B/C/S. That's -- but let's
2 proceed at this moment on the basis of --
3 MR. LUKIC: One exercise I would offer too, we can ask the
4 witness which of the translations offered to him best describes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: No, there's no way that --
6 MR. LUKIC: Before he is here maybe you want to hear which
7 translations he received. Always Mr. Traldi used "laid waste."
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. LUKIC: First translation was "razed to the ground;" second
10 one is "damaged." To the first one he answered no. So although the
11 question was "laid waste," the answer was "no." And then "laid waste"
12 again, but now it was "damaged," and he said "yes." So that's what
14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay, we leave it to that. And Mr. Traldi has an
15 opportunity to put the question now, in 10, 15 minutes from now, guided
16 by what CLSS -- but still not being sure that we have the -- whether it
17 corresponds with the original.
18 Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
19 MR. TRALDI: Thank you, Mr. President.
20 [The witness takes the stand]
21 MR. TRALDI: Until we get the confirmed translation of that
22 sentence, I'm going to ask a couple of other questions but about the same
23 page of that report. So if we could have it back up.
24 Q. Now, the Serb artillery was superior to Muslim artillery; right?
25 A. Yes.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think, not to be disturbed, we should remove
2 the B/C/S version on the screen because this page is not translated.
3 MR. TRALDI: That sounds like a very good suggestion,
4 Your Honour.
5 Q. And the Muslims could not threaten the Serbian artillery
6 emplacements around the city, could they?
7 A. They could threaten them. One can clearly see it if we take
8 Grbavica, for example. That part of Sarajevo was held by Serbs.
9 Grbavica was destroyed although not to the extent the centre of town was.
10 When I went there, I could see actually that the degree of destruction
11 was very high or perhaps the degree of damage, to be quite precise.
12 There was firing both ways.
13 Q. Okay. I'd like to ask a couple of questions to follow up on your
14 answer. First, you say the degree of destruction was very high. Are you
15 talking about Grbavica or about the centre of the city?
16 A. Both.
17 Q. And the centre of the city, you said, Grbavica wasn't destroyed
18 to the extent the centre of town was, so Grbavica --
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. So --
21 A. No, no. I didn't say that. I said that both were destroyed.
22 They are both part of the urban area. Pale is further away but Grbavica
23 is still an integral part of Sarajevo.
24 Q. I'd like to stay away from geography. At lines 21 and 22, you
25 were recorded to say -- lines 21 and 22, temporary page 69 --
1 A. If I may I'll explain.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, don't interrupt Mr. Traldi. Wait for his
3 question and then answer it.
4 MR. TRALDI: At lines 21 and 22 of temporary transcript page 69,
5 you were recorded to say --
6 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry. I'm really sorry. I would ask for this
7 audio to be checked. I think that the witness said the opposite what was
8 recorded here. That's what I heard.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Let's have a look. We are talking about page --
10 MR. LUKIC: 69, line 21 and 22, the end of line 21.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps you -- Mr. Traldi, perhaps you put the
12 same question again to the witness. That is:
13 "And the Muslims could not threaten the Serbian artillery
14 emplacements around the city, could they?"
15 That was the question. And we read as an answer:
16 "They could threaten them. One can clearly see it if we take
17 Grbavica, for example. That part of Sarajevo was held by Serbs.
18 Grbavica was destroyed although not to the extent the centre of the town
20 That is what was -- appears on our screen as what you are
21 recorded -- what you -- what you said as recorded.
22 MR. TRALDI: Yes.
23 Q. And is the President's recitation just now, is that a correct
24 recitation of your evidence in response to my question, sir?
25 A. It is not precise. May I repeat the answer?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you may repeat the answer.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The centre of Sarajevo is a rather
3 large area. Grbavica is part of the urban area but it is only a
4 neighbourhood of Sarajevo. The damage in that small neighbourhood were
5 more visible than if you looked at the destruction spread out across the
6 entire urban area.
7 JUDGE ORIE: That's -- the witness now apparently makes a
8 comparison between Grbavica and the totality of the town. Not a
9 comparison between Grbavica and the old part of town.
10 MR. TRALDI: I'm asking specifically for a comparison between
11 Grbavica and Bascarsija, which is what I think you were -- which is what
12 I think I'd been asking for before.
13 JUDGE ORIE: We have to be very careful we are talking about old
14 part of the town because you could refer to the old part of town, if I
15 understand well - and I'm also looking at you, Mr. Lukic - as being the
16 old city centre including Bascarsija or what is called Stari Grad which
17 means, if I understand it well, the old town which is a municipality in
18 the Sarajevo area. So whenever we use the word "old town," we should be
19 very careful to be precise in what we refer to.
20 And I do understand, Mr. Traldi, that you wanted the witness to
21 compare the damage done to Grbavica on the one hand side and the old city
22 centre including Bascarsija on the other side. Is that correct?
23 MR. TRALDI: That's correct.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could you compare that, the damage done to those two
25 parts of the town, Grbavica and the old city centre including Bascarsija?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. There was more destruction at
2 Grbavica because it is a smaller area, and the fire was focused on that
3 small area. As regards Stari Grad, including Bascarsija where I lived,
4 there was less destruction.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Stari Grad understood as limited to the old city
6 centre, therefore --
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The municipality.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Not the municipality. The old city centre including
9 Bascarsija, the old part of the town, not the entire opstina or
10 municipality of Stari Grad but just the city centre, the densely
11 populated city centre. Could you please compare these two.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] One could see the damage more, it
13 was more visible in Grbavica than one could see in the old nucleus of the
14 city, as you put it precisely. Not all of the Stari Grad municipality
15 but the inner city, including Bascarsija.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: If I may just ask a question: Was this the case
17 notwithstanding the superior Serbian artillery?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise, I do not understand.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: This statement that is being quoted to you, this
20 sentence, starts by saying: "The superior Serbian artillery laid
21 waste" -- okay, I'm not talking about waste. Now, when you say "superior
22 Serbian artillery," superior to what?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As compared with the artillery
24 nests existing in the very centre of Sarajevo.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: My question then is: Notwithstanding the fact
1 that the Serbian artillery was superior, are you saying that it caused
2 less damage than inferior artillery? Yes or no?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: What's your answer, sir?
6 JUDGE ORIE: I think you said "no" as an answer to the question
7 that -- Mr. Traldi, please proceed.
8 MR. TRALDI:
9 Q. Sir, in answer to my question a couple of moments ago you said,
10 yes, the Muslims could threaten Serbian artillery emplacements around the
11 city and then you mentioned Grbavica. Did you mean Grbavica, a
12 neighbourhood, or Grbavica as -- or to suggest that Grbavica was a
13 location of Serbian artillery emplacements?
14 A. I don't know if it was or not. I don't know if there was a
15 Serbian artillery in Grbavica but I do know that Grbavica was targeted
16 from Sarajevo city, from the town itself.
17 Q. Let me ask the question that I'd meant to ask then very
18 specifically. The Muslim army was not able to threaten the Serbian
19 artillery emplacements positioned on hills around the edge of the city,
20 were they?
21 A. As far as I know, although I am no military expert, I think they
22 did threaten those emplacements and they could do so. The distance was
23 the same, even if one looked from the Serbian positions or the other way
24 around. If they could reach one another from one direction, they could
25 have reached one another from the other. The distance was the same.
1 Q. Looking at your expert report that's still on the screen in front
2 of us and setting aside the geometry of artillery firing, the last
3 sentence of the first paragraph starts:
4 "Of course, not even when weapons started arriving in larger
5 quantities from Islamic countries," then it explains some ways that they
6 arrived, and then it ends, "was it enough for the Muslim army to threaten
7 the Serbian artillery emplacements positioned on hills around the edge of
8 the city."
9 So what you've said in that report is that even after receiving
10 additional arms, the Serbian artillery -- the Muslim army, rather, was
11 not able to threaten the Serbian artillery emplacements; right?
12 A. Can I have a look at the sentence itself?
13 Q. It's the last sentence of the first paragraph.
14 JUDGE ORIE: You can read English, don't you, Witness?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could I have it in B/C/S?
16 JUDGE ORIE: No, it's not there in B/C/S at this moment. So
17 you're able to read English?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then I'll slowly read the whole of the sentence. It
20 reads as follows:
21 "Of course, not even when weapons started arriving in larger
22 quantities from Islamic countries, in humanitarian aid containers which
23 landed unobstructed at UN-controlled Sarajevo airport or when they dug a
24 'secret' passage under the airport tarmac, was it enough for the Muslim
25 army to threaten the Serbian artillery emplacements positioned on hills
1 around the edge of the city."
2 So even when those larger quantities arrived, they were not able,
3 it was not enough for the Muslim army to have threatened the Serbian
4 artillery emplacements positioned on the hills.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand the question now.
6 This issue of threatening had to do with breaking through the ring. The
7 Muslim forces in Sarajevo tried incessantly to break through the
8 artillery encirclement around Sarajevo. In that sense, I said it wasn't
9 enough. They kept trying and never succeeded throughout the war. There
10 were constant attacks from Sarajevo, from the city towards the outer
11 ring, and even the weapons that arrived did not assist in that regard.
12 MR. TRALDI: Now, we've received from CLSS a translation of the
13 sentence in question and I'd ask the usher's assistance to distribute a
14 copy to the Defence.
15 JUDGE ORIE: For as good as it is. Perhaps -- we may not
16 conclude the testimony of the witness today. Perhaps you could give it a
17 try to find the original B/C/S version. Not to say that I stop you here
18 at this moment but that at least when the witness is still there that we
19 have it verified.
20 MR. TRALDI: Unless --
21 Q. Witness, you don't have a copy of your Kvocka expert report with
22 you, do you?
23 A. No.
24 JUDGE ORIE: No, but archives in this Tribunal might. Was it
25 presented as an exhibit in the Kvocka case, Mr. -- at least it's
1 worthwhile finding out.
2 MR. LUKIC: In this case?
3 JUDGE ORIE: No, not in this case but in the Kvocka case.
4 MR. LUKIC: Kvocka case. I understood that Professor was expert
5 witness for the Defence.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so therefore it must be somewhere.
7 MR. LUKIC: I left before anybody else except my client started
8 his defence so --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes -- no, no, I'm not addressing you, but if an
10 expert report is admitted into evidence, then it usually is somewhere
11 available, either in electronic form or in hard copy form, and then we
12 could get hold of it and avoid further discussions on it.
13 MR. TRALDI: I agree that we are in an unusual situation,
14 Mr. President. I think what I meant to be suggesting was we've done
15 fairly extensive searches of the electronic databases without finding it
16 and the same occurred before the witness testified in the Karadzic case.
17 JUDGE ORIE: And it was not found?
18 MR. TRALDI: That's right. It's not on JDB in the B/C/S, for
20 JUDGE ORIE: In hard copy? If it has an exhibit number?
21 MR. TRALDI: I haven't been into the archives so we can check
22 that overnight.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps we continue now, as in the way you
24 suggested, and you make an effort to find it in the archives.
25 MR. TRALDI: Can Mr. Lukic confirm he's had a chance to review
1 the translation that was passed over?
2 MR. LUKIC: I think this is the most harsh translation possible
3 for -- possible for this term --
4 JUDGE ORIE: For your case you mean?
5 MR. LUKIC: Not for my case. I wouldn't say it's the proper
6 translation either. But you can --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. But this now has been verified, the one line,
8 and if you want to have it verified again, tomorrow we will hear more.
9 We will proceed on this basis which is the best we have at this moment.
10 Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
11 MR. TRALDI: Okay. Actually I think it might be valuable for a
12 copy to be provided to the booth, if it hasn't been. So that it can be
13 read to the witness in this format.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the booth is not yet informed about this.
15 Meanwhile you can perhaps continue with another topic, Mr. Traldi.
16 MR. TRALDI: I can.
17 Q. Speaking of the balance of forces around Sarajevo, you've
18 mentioned the Serb artillery was superior. It's right that the VRS also
19 had an advantage in weapons taken over from the JNA; right?
20 A. It had officers who were better educated, and it had a better
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Witness, the question was not -- it was about
23 weapons. A commander is not a weapon. Trained staff is not a weapon.
24 Please answer the question. And don't put forward what seems to be your
25 case rather than -- yes, Mr. --
1 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, I think the question is actually not
2 properly posed.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Well, has an advantage that then [overlapping
4 speakers] --
5 MR. LUKIC: The witness should first be asked whether he knows
6 what was left to the VRS, what was left to Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Well, that may --
8 MR. LUKIC: He's asked to compare.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, the witness talks about persons. The
10 question was, right or wrong, was clearly about weapons.
11 MR. LUKIC: We object to the form of the question.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. You should have done that to start with
13 instead of intervening when I admonished the witness that he should focus
14 on the question that is asked.
15 MR. LUKIC: I apologise.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, could you please introduce the matter by
17 asking the witness what he knows about it.
18 MR. TRALDI: If I might, I'd call up page 33 of this document.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. TRALDI: If we could zoom in towards the bottom of the page.
21 So I'm reading again from the witness's expert report and the
22 paragraph right above the words "the NATO intervention and the Dayton
23 Agreement." The last sentence reads:
24 "Their advantage in weapons taken over from the JNA and in an
25 officer corps trained in one of the best armies in the region gave
1 General Ratko Mladic a substantial edge in the battlefield, while the
2 Croats and particularly the Muslims earned the status of the weaker side
3 which the big, strong world had the moral obligation to help survive."
4 Q. So that's the foundation for my question. And I put to you
5 again, sir, the VRS had an advantage in weapons taken over from the JNA;
7 A. If it's not a problem, I would like to ask you to put forward a
8 statement in the form of a question and not as a statement, affirmative
9 statement. If it's not problem, of course.
10 Q. I'll put again to you, the VRS had an advantage in weapons taken
11 over from the JNA; right?
12 A. This is how I -- what I wrote, yes.
13 Q. And this is a portion of the report that you drafted, right?
14 I see you've nodded but you have to articulate your answer for the
16 A. That's correct, yes.
17 MR. TRALDI: I think the booth has the translation that's been
18 provided by CLSS so if we could go back now to page 30 at the top.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, just for your information, the Chamber is
20 informed about the three ways in which -- the three different versions
21 that -- just for you to know that we are aware of it.
22 Please proceed, Mr. Traldi.
23 MR. TRALDI: So I'm going to be reading again the second sentence
24 of the top paragraph:
25 "The superior Serbian artillery laid waste the central and old
1 part of the city."
2 Q. That's right, isn't it? That's what happened.
3 A. That happened, but there is this word "damage," "destroy," "laid
4 waste," therefore it's relative or could be relative. But the gist of
5 that sentence stands.
6 Q. And the Serbian forces randomly showered Sarajevo with shells
7 from the surrounding hills, didn't they?
8 A. I believe that in the Krajisnik case there was a misunderstanding
9 concerning that particular point. In Sarajevo, we could not tell
10 incoming and outgoing detonations apart, and whatever explosion we heard,
11 we thought that it was coming from the Serbian side. Only later did we
12 find out that this was not so.
13 Another thing I would like to point out is that this was not
14 drafted as a report for the Court. It's an authored paper, text, which
15 may be imprecise in parts.
16 Q. Well, let's talk about what you said in the Krajisnik case about
17 the question I just asked you.
18 MR. TRALDI: Could we have 65 ter 30941?
19 Q. That's your Krajisnik testimony.
20 MR. TRALDI: I'm looking for page 173 at the bottom.
21 Q. Now, Mr. Tieger's question begins at the very last line of this
22 page and he says:
23 "Isn't it correct, and haven't you said previously, that
24 Serbian" - we will turn the page - "forces randomly showered Sarajevo
25 with shells from the surrounding hills? Back to that question?"
1 And you answered: "Yes. That was my impression."
2 That was your testimony, wasn't it?
3 A. I emphasise this was my impression of a person who at that time
4 resided and lived in Sarajevo, and this is why I have to emphasise this
5 difference between an impression and fact.
6 Q. That was your experience; right?
7 A. Impressions.
8 Q. And it was -- it was living with --
9 A. Impression.
10 Q. It was living with that sense that your city was being randomly
11 showered with shells that terrified you, as you said earlier, wasn't it?
12 A. This is what it also reads, yes. Of course. How could it be any
14 Q. Now, I want to turn last today to one other topic related to
15 Sarajevo. Maybe it will be brief enough that I'll get to do one more
16 thing after, but you assert in paragraph 52 of your statement that
17 General MacKenzie made allegations about Muslims shooting at their own
18 people in Sarajevo. And you state in paragraph 52:
19 "I have not read MacKenzie's book and I do not know what evidence
20 he presented."
21 Is that correct?
22 A. I did not need MacKenzie's book. I was in Sarajevo when he
23 issued that statement at a press conference in Sarajevo.
24 Q. So I'll take from your answer that you have not read his book;
1 A. I have not.
2 Q. I ask because in your testimony in the Krajisnik case, eight
3 years ago, it was put to you that General MacKenzie had denied, both in
4 his book and in his interviews, making exactly the suggestions that
5 you've repeated in your statement. And you said you hadn't read his book
6 and didn't know what it said.
7 Now, you still don't know what General MacKenzie has said about
8 this in his book, do you?
9 A. I know reliably what he said when he was in Sarajevo at the time,
10 and that statement of his caused and engendered a great deal of
11 dissatisfaction on the part of Muslim politicians in the audience. What
12 he stated later in his life, that I don't know, or what he stated in the
14 JUDGE ORIE: The simple question was that you still do not know
15 what General MacKenzie has said about this in his book. So what he
16 states in his book. Why not answer that question to start with? No, you
17 don't know what he said about it in his book. Is that your answer?
18 Because you were not asked about what he said in Sarajevo. You were
19 asked about what he said about this in his book. Do you know it or do
20 you still do not know it?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.
22 JUDGE ORIE: That would have been the short answer to the
23 question which was very clear. Please proceed.
24 MR. TRALDI: Could we have page 159 of this same document. I'm
25 looking for line 16 and below.
1 Q. What was put to you was:
2 "That's absolutely false and you know it, sir. General MacKenzie
3 has been at great pains, both in his book and his interviews, to make
4 clear that he was not in a position to assert that Bosnian Muslim forces
5 were responsible for such atrocities. You know that."
6 And in the answer, you said you hadn't read his book and you
7 didn't know what it says there, but you remembered an interview he had
8 given in Sarajevo during the war. So you were told then that were you
9 mischaracterising his position based on his book and his interviews after
10 the war and you haven't checked to see whether that's true in the
11 intervening eight years, have you?
12 A. Your Honours, I have one intervention here. I do not accept this
13 way of discussing these matters. I came here on a voluntary basis to
14 help the Court and whenever I left the Court, I received thanks about
15 helping the Court. This time round, the Prosecutor claims that I know
16 that I said I did not know.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that you do not feel comfortable and
18 happy with what happens at this moment. If there are reasons to
19 intervene, the Defence will do so. The Defence has called you as a
20 witness. It is the Chamber who controls and who supervises the
21 examination of witnesses. If we consider that something inappropriate
22 happens, we will intervene. If we overlook something, Mr. Lukic will
23 intervene. The best way of assisting the Court, and that is you said you
24 wanted to do, is to answer the questions, having carefully listened to
25 them and directly. That is what you're expected to do.
1 Mr. Traldi.
2 MR. TRALDI:
3 Q. I think you recall the question, sir. I'll put to you again that
4 you haven't checked to see whether your description of
5 General MacKenzie's position is correct in the eight years since your
6 Krajisnik testimony, have you?
7 A. Just a minute ago, you claimed that I knew that and that
8 I claimed that I didn't know it, and this is something completely
10 JUDGE ORIE: Please answer the question. Have you verified it in
11 those eight years or have you not?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have not verified. I had no need
13 to do so.
14 JUDGE ORIE: That's the answer to the question. It's even more,
15 whether there was any need is a different matter.
16 Mr. Traldi.
17 MR. TRALDI: Your Honour, I'm about to turn to a different topic.
18 I note that it's about time to end for the day.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then we will adjourn for the day.
20 Witness, before you leave the courtroom I would like to instruct
21 you that you should not speak with anyone about your testimony, whether
22 already given or still to be given, and we would like to see you back
23 tomorrow morning.
24 And I give you the following thought to consider. That is that
25 you just should answer the questions and not what is relevant and what
1 needs to be explained is for the parties primarily, and to some extent
2 also for the Chamber, to determine. As a witness, you have to follow
3 this determination of what we consider relevant and let's not forget,
4 it's Prosecution, it's also Defence, and it's also the Chamber. Please
5 keep that in mind because this Chamber has observed that you are in 60,
6 70 per cent of the cases, you're either not directly answering the
7 question or that you're adding a lot of things that were not asked. If
8 it's relevant, further questions will follow, either by the Prosecution
9 or by the Defence.
10 We would like to see you back tomorrow morning at 9.30. You may
11 follow the usher.
12 [The witness stands down]
13 JUDGE ORIE: We adjourn for the day, and we'll resume tomorrow,
14 Friday, the 11th of July, at 9.30 in the morning in this same courtroom,
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.16 p.m.,
17 to be reconvened on Friday, the 11th day of July,
18 2014, at 9.30 a.m.