1 Thursday, 16 July 2015
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand via videolink]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.32 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around this
8 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
10 IT-09-92-T, the Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic. Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 We'll continue to -- with the cross-examination, but, Mr. Lukic,
13 later today we'll deal with a few procedural matters, and the Chamber
14 would very much appreciate if you could give an update about Plan A or
15 Plan B, starting on the 10th of August.
16 Meanwhile, Mr. Kelecevic, I'd like to remind you that you're
17 bound by the solemn declaration that you've given at the beginning of
18 your testimony that you'll speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
19 but the truth.
20 Mr. Registrar, I finally would like to check whether the
21 videolink is functioning well. Can you hear me, can you see us?
22 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, Your Honour, we can see and
23 hear you clearly.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the same is true in the other direction.
25 Mr. Lukic will now continue his cross-examination -- his
1 re-examination, yes, of course. I misspoke, Mr. Lukic.
2 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
4 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 WITNESS: BOSKO KELECEVIC [Resumed]
6 [Witness testified through interpreter]
7 [Witness testified via videolink]
8 Re-examination by Mr. Lukic: [Continued]
9 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, General. Good morning, General.
10 A. Good morning.
11 Q. I will start with something we touched upon yesterday. I'm
12 afraid I'll eventually run out of time so I'd rather deal with this now.
13 At page 37292 of yesterday's transcript concerning P7479 -- well,
14 I'll read out the question and your answer and then I'll have a question
15 for you.
16 Lines 15 through 18, [In English] I'll quote:
17 "Now this is a reflection that by early April 1992 the
18 122nd Brigade had been deployed back to Bosnia from Croatia and was
19 responsible for, among other places, the area of Kotor Varos; right?
20 "A. Yes."
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. [Interpretation] Please tell us what Peulic was responsible for,
23 that is to say, the 122nd Brigade in the area of Kotor Varos. Were they
24 responsible for the towns, villages, or something else?
25 A. The brigade --
1 JUDGE ORIE: One second, Mr. Traldi.
2 MR. TRALDI: I'd just ask for a date reference in the question so
3 that it's clear whether he's referring to -- or at what point Mr. Lukic
4 is referring to.
5 MR. LUKIC: I think it was in the question: Early April 1992.
6 MR. TRALDI: It was in my question. I hadn't been clear if it
7 was in his. But with that clarification, I'm happy.
8 JUDGE ORIE: The question focuses on the responsibility of
9 Mr. Peulic, early April 1992, Witness.
10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Please tell us what Peulic was responsible for in the area of
12 Kotor Varos, both in early April 1992 and later on. If you know.
13 A. The brigade commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic was deployed
14 at the Vlasic plateau on Mount Vlasic. The altitude there is quite high.
15 His front line or his area of responsibility, I don't know exactly, but
16 it followed a 20- to 25-kilometre line. That was the AOR of his brigade,
17 including the biggest settlement in the area, Kotor Varos.
18 Q. Do you know if the army was deployed into towns themselves?
19 A. Only some patrols or security could be present in the town. Most
20 of the other soldiers were at the front line because enemy forces were
21 expected to arrive from the area of Travnik and from the direction of the
22 Muslim-Croat forces.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we have 65 ter number 2596 on
25 our screens.
1 THE REGISTRAR: This document has already been admitted into
2 evidence as P7480. Thank you.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The B/C/S version is missing.
4 MR. LUKIC: We will -- [Interpretation] Let us look at this
5 extract from the minutes of the 100th Session of the War Presidency on
6 16 October 1992 in Kotor Varos. We will require the second page in the
7 English. The second paragraph in the English, being the last
8 paragraph in the B/C/S.
9 Q. It reads as follows:
10 "Lieutenant-Colonel Peulic took the floor again and pointed out
11 that the general position and achieved agreements on population
12 resettlement and hand-over of weapons must not be abandoned."
13 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Let us go one page back in the
14 English to the first page. The last paragraph in the English version,
15 which is the fifth paragraph in the B/C/S on page 1.
16 Q. It reads as follows:
17 "President Nedeljko D pointed out that an International Red Cross
18 team had been in the area again yesterday, that the negotiators had gone
19 to Vecici too, and that the initial results from Vecici were not
20 favourable, that they had met with the other side's representatives
21 (Baltina), that a list containing the names of 1200 to 1500 people had
22 been compiled, that this will require about 30 buses. Intensified
23 activity relating to moving out should be expected in the course of the
24 day and hand-over of weapons, and that representatives of the Red Cross
25 and possibly journalists are expected."
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Lukic, just one question. The word in
2 brackets is it in B/C/S Baltina as translated or Bastina?
3 MR. LUKIC: It's hard to see. Could be both, but could be
4 Bastina too.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps the witness could clarify this.
6 MR. LUKIC: I don't think he can see it on the screen.
7 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] The witness is able to read this,
8 Mr. Lukic.
9 MR. LUKIC: Okay. Then I'll ask if he knows.
10 Q. [Interpretation] First of all, General, in this fifth paragraph,
11 if you can see the parentheses, does it read Baltina or Bastina?
12 A. I'm not familiar with that area, but my guess would be that the
13 location is on the Muslim side, if I follow the logic of the sentence. I
14 think it is Baltina.
15 Q. Thank you. Do you know anything about the negotiations that took
16 place in Vecici?
17 A. I can't tell you anything specific about the negotiations. I do
18 know that the gist of it is reflected in what Colonel Peulic said. He
19 said that we should be persistent in collecting the weapons. He was
20 addressing the Crisis Staff in Kotor Varos, insisting that the weapons be
21 handed over and that the forces in Kotor Varos be disarmed. He said that
22 the activity should continue because it was not completed.
23 Q. Do you have any knowledge of whether the arms were handed over,
24 indeed, and whether the civilians left Vecici?
25 A. I have no knowledge. I don't remember that because, at that
1 time, as I said, I was in a completely different area.
2 Q. Thank you. Next I'd like to ask you about your answer provided
3 on page 37317, line 20 till the end of the page, and it continues on to
4 page 37318, lines 1 through 4.
5 You were asked to answer a very complex question, and I will try
6 to break up the question put by Mr. Traldi. To the best of your
7 recollection, did the VRS and the 1st Krajina Corps implement the first
8 strategic goal, i.e., separation from Muslims and Croats, by detaining
9 and killing Muslims and Croats?
10 A. No. One cannot formulate it that way. We cannot say that the
11 VRS was doing it strategically. It wasn't engaged in any separation.
12 The goal was always to keep those who were loyal and who forwarded the
13 policies of Republika Srpska and who were prepared to stay in the area,
14 to keep them in the area and include them in the armed force, rather than
15 separating the peoples in a very determined way.
16 Q. The next question. Did the VRS and the 1st Krajina Corps
17 implement the first strategic goal of separation from Muslims and Croats
18 by removing Muslims and Croats through exchanges?
19 A. One also cannot say that was the case. Those who wished to leave
20 were allowed to go freely and safely. In such cases, the authorities and
21 the army enabled their passage unhindered through certain areas and
22 exchanges to take place. In my view, no pressure was made for exchanges
23 to occur, unless there was a will on both sides.
24 Q. Next --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, could you seek a clarification of that
1 last answer which is a bit ambiguous, especially the "unless there was a
2 will on both sides."
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. General, you've heard the Judge, you've heard Judge Orie.
5 A. Yes, I've heard him. I mean the Serb and the Muslim side agree
6 that the exchanges be carried out. That is the core of the matter.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Then I understand your answer to be: No pressure
8 was made for exchanges to occur and that the exchanges were made only if
9 there was a will on both sides. Is that what you meant to say?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, pressures don't have to come
11 from both sides. The most important thing is here is the following: If
12 those who wanted to leave the areas where they were, it was only natural
13 that they would be allowed to leave, if that was their will, if that was
14 their intention, but they were supposed to be able leave securely,
15 safely. That is what was supposed to be ensured for them.
16 I'm sorry, the other side. I do apologise. May I just finish
17 explaining the sense of all of this?
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please do.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The other side should ensure their
20 free passage through the zone of the brigade so that they could go to the
21 area where they said they wanted to go. So unhindered safe passage
22 through the area of responsibility.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Could I then put one follow-up question to you. You
24 said what was done for those who wished to leave. Were there any who'd
25 rather stay and did not wish to leave? And what happened to them?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In my view, in relation to, I mean,
2 the policy of the Serb authorities and thereby the army as well, those
3 who wished to stay would stay and - how should I put this? - they were
4 loyal to the authority, specifically, in this case, the authorities of
5 Kotor Varos. They could freely live there, unhindered, take care of
6 their own business, depending on the combat situation, whether there was
7 firing or not.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Then I have one other follow-up question. If they
9 wished to stay but if they disagreed with the authority, at the same time
10 not taking up weapons, what would happen to them?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, in my view -- I mean, I'm not
12 speaking specifically about this particular case but I'm speaking in
13 general terms. I mean, I'm speaking about --
14 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like you to talk about this specific case. And
15 I think we're still talking about Kotor Varos.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I cannot speak specifically
17 about that case because, as for Kotor Varos, I wasn't there then and I
18 did not have any detailed conversations with my officers who came to see
19 me at the corridor to inform me about certain matters. So specifically
20 what happened to those people who were not carrying out tasks issued by
21 the authorities of Kotor Varos, I don't know how the civilian authorities
22 treated them.
23 JUDGE ORIE: You've answered my question.
24 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. General, my next question. The Army of Republika Srpska and the
2 1st Corps, were they carrying out the first strategic goal, separation
3 from the Muslims by moving the population out?
4 A. My answer is a categorical no.
5 Q. My last question, with regard to this topic, that is: The Army
6 of Republika Srpska, the 1st Krajina Corps, were they carrying out the
7 second strategic goal, opening the corridor by carrying out Operation
9 A. I did not understand the essence of your question. Why the
10 corridor was being opened? I can explain why it was being opened.
11 Q. Was it in accordance with the second-mentioned strategic goal, to
12 the extent to which you remember it, and it is the opening of the
13 corridor and linking up with the East Bosnian Corps and Semberija.
14 A. The East Bosnian Corps and the western part of the Army of
15 Republika Srpska -- I mean, the Eastern Bosnian Corps of the Army of
16 Republika Srpska and the western part -- I mean, Kordun, Banija, Lika,
17 Dalmatia, these areas where Serbs lived, that was justified and that is
18 why it was being opened. That was the basic task for opening the
19 corridor, that was it precisely, so that they could come unhindered from
20 the eastern area so that they could get there. At that time even
21 medicine could not arrive, I've already mentioned that, also oxygen
22 bottles. And 12 babies died because of that situation in Banja Luka.
23 Q. Thank you. The date before yesterday there was some discussion
24 about Odzak. What were the forces that were in Odzak before the VRS
25 entered Odzak?
1 A. In Odzak, it was majority Muslim forces.
2 Q. Around --
3 A. Well, what was observed. That was the intelligence that was
4 there, that in the broader area there were also parts of infiltrated
5 forces from the Republic of Croatia, from the other side of the Sava
7 Q. In Odzak and around Odzak, was there fighting before the forces
8 of the Army of Republika Srpska entered?
9 A. There was fighting. Most of it around Brod because that is where
10 a group was infiltrated from the Croat side. And there was this family,
11 Zecevic, and I cannot remember the name of the other ones. Quite simply,
12 they were massacred, they were slaughtered, and the situation was very,
13 very difficult. It was harrowing, the situation around Brod.
14 Q. Do you remember when that happened?
15 A. I remember that the massacre took place on the 26th of March, the
16 26th of March. And later on, in succession, this went on until May and
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Just for clarity, which year?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 1992.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. P2886, please. Could we
22 have a look at that now.
23 Q. This is a fairly long document: Analysis of activity concerning
24 elements of combat readiness in 1992. My colleague Mr. Traldi showed you
25 page 12.
1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] So I would kindly ask to have page 12
2 in the English version and page 17 in the B/C/S version. In the English
3 version, it's the last paragraph. And in the B/C/S version, the second
4 paragraph from the top.
5 Q. There is a reference to the number of persons taken prisoner, and
6 it says that there is a certain number of prisoners of war, over 9.200
7 prisoners were exchanged, and you were asked about this.
8 Let me ask you the following. A combatant in the field that
9 finds a military-aged man in the field, does he have the right to assess
10 whether that person is a combatant or not?
11 A. He does have that right, if he can assess that or establish that.
12 If not, such a person is brought in so that other organs can assess
13 whether that person is a combatant or a civilian. Whether that person is
14 a member of an army, that would be a better term. It is more specific to
15 say a member of an army rather than just combatant, which is a more
16 general term.
17 Q. On transcript page 37221, from line 23 to 25, in response to a
18 question along these lines, there is the answer you gave and I'm going to
19 quote it:
20 [In English] "Well, again, I'm telling you, I have no way of
21 knowing whether it was a civilian or a military conscript until certain
22 checks were completed."
23 [Interpretation] What kind of checks, General? Who carries out
24 these checks?
25 A. Who carries out checks as to whether somebody is a civilian or a
2 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We could not hear the
3 witness. Now Mr. Lukic is speaking at the same time.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic --
5 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Just a moment, please. The Judge is saying something.
7 JUDGE ORIE: The interpreters noted, Mr. Lukic, that you
8 interrupted when the witness was still speaking --
9 MR. LUKIC: Okay.
10 JUDGE ORIE: -- and, therefore, they couldn't hear him. Could
11 you please resume --
12 MR. LUKIC: I apologise. I'll see where we -- [Interpretation]
13 Thank you.
14 Q. So your answer has not been recorded. After reading this out, I
15 asked you what kind of checks are carried out. Who carries out these
16 checks, whether somebody is a soldier or a civilian, if that person is
17 brought in.
18 A. Mr. Lukic, it all depends on the place where that person was
19 taken prisoner, if I can put it that way, or where that person is
20 captured. If it is in the area of combat activity, if it was on the
21 front line itself, a soldier cannot carry out such a check at the front
22 line. The only thing that can he do is take that person through the
23 combat order, hand that person over to the civilian authorities, and let
24 them establish who this person is. The army doesn't have time to do that
25 and it is not fully equipped to carry out such checks then. Those basic
1 checks, as in taking person's details, that can be carried out by some
2 orders behind the lines. But at the front line itself there is no time
3 for that kind of thing and such checks cannot be carried out there. That
4 has to be done either by civilians or the organs of the military police,
5 if that unit does have a police. Not each and every unit has its own
6 military police.
7 Q. If such a person was brought to Manjaca, who carries out the
8 checks then, and what kind of checks?
9 A. If that person was brought to Manjaca and there is a procedure at
10 the gate itself, at the entrance itself, because Manjaca is a fenced-off
11 area, it's a big area, it used to be a military facility. How do I put
12 this? There was this manufacturing there and so on and so forth. So at
13 the gate itself, a check is carried out as to who it is that's coming in.
14 Then the person is being taken to a particular facility and handed over
15 to the security organs that carry out this check once the person is
16 already within the facility. And then lists are created, name, surname,
17 date of birth, all these details that are required so that these persons
18 could be on various lists. So every person that entered Manjaca had to
19 be recorded in these lists. And I'm convinced that the police, the
20 military police, did that at Manjaca. As far as Manjaca is concerned,
21 that is.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask one follow-up question there.
23 Are you aware of persons being checked at the gate, that it was
24 established that those persons were civilians and therefore they were not
25 further admitted into the camp but, rather, sent home because the first
1 check showed that they were civilians?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know of such a check, that
3 a soldier could take him back immediately and say, You cannot go in. I
4 know of one case only and I mentioned it yesterday. The civilian
5 authorities tried -- there were about ten or eight dead bodies. They
6 tried to hand them over and that was not accepted so they --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Witness -- Witness, I'm not talking about dead
8 bodies. I'm talking about living persons arriving at the gate and at the
9 first check that it was established, or perhaps immediately after that,
10 that they were not members of the army. Are you aware of any such
11 persons then being released and being sent back home?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am not aware of any such check or
13 any such person. And if that did happen, then the person at the gate did
14 not act properly.
15 JUDGE ORIE: The answer is not entirely clear to me.
16 I have one other question going back to the text which is before
17 you about the exchanges. I slowly read what it says. It says:
18 "We achieved significant results in activities related to
19 prisoner-of-war exchanges."
20 And then it further explains that 9.200 prisoners were exchanged,
21 of which 2.300 were military personnel.
22 Now this suggests that the other close to 7.000 were not military
23 personnel but they're still described as prisoners of war and prisoners
24 having been exchanged. Do you have any comment on the -- what the text
25 suggests, that it is 7.000 who are not military men nevertheless being
1 exchanged, as the document says, as prisoners?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This refers to the entire year and
3 the area of responsibility of the 1st Krajina Corps, about 9.200. You
4 know how big the area was. I don't want to repeat that. 2.300 military
5 men. I cannot give any comment on that.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I mean, how this went -- I mean, I
8 cannot give any comment, no.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. General, the Judge asked you about the 7.000. How did their
12 exchange occur so that they were exchanged as POWs where it had been
13 established they were -- that they were not military personnel. So you
14 were asked about the 7.000 by the Judge. Do you have an explanation?
15 A. There was an exchange with the opposing side. On the opposing
16 side, there were also many people of Serb ethnicity who were taken
17 prisoner by the other side. Those exchange commissions were in contact
18 and the exchange took place.
19 Q. Very well. Let's look at P230 next.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Just for the record, this is Exhibit P230. Thank
22 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
23 Q. [Interpretation] You were asked about this document yesterday.
24 At the beginning of it, it is stated that on the 13th of July, 1992, a
25 visit was made possible to Manjaca camp and that all of the requests made
1 by the seven-member delegation were agreed to. They spent three days in
2 the camp, prisoners were allowed to write to their families. They were
3 allowed to register the prisoners and to talk to them alone "without our
4 presence." They also inspected their medical care and diet.
5 Yesterday at transcript page 37228, lines 5 through 15,
6 Mr. Traldi suggested that Colonel Vukelic reported that the Red Cross
7 team interrupted the visit and any further talks because they were not
8 allowed to meet the four prisoners designated by Colonel Vukelic as
9 criminals. They also objected to the amount of food given to the
10 prisoners and their loss of weight, as well as to the traces of blood
11 visible on the prisoners. And I wanted to read out a portion of this
12 document and see what it says:
13 "The entire team broke off today's discussion and visits [sic] to
14 the camp because, allegedly, they had not been allowed to meet with four
15 prisoners (criminals) on whom a military court had earlier been passed
16 judgement. The representatives were shown their sentences and were even
17 allowed to talk to them freely. They were surprised by this, and they
18 made observations about the quantities of food, loss of weight of the
19 prisoners, the risk of an epidemic breaking out and the like. They had
20 no valid points to corroborate their observations, and the suggestion to
21 have a group of medical experts examine them was rejected. Specifically
22 they demanded the release of 19 prisoners on account of their state of
23 health. As a matter of fact, these individuals were among the greatest
24 extremists. They rejected our explanation that these people were
25 guaranteed improved medical care, and that they could see it for
1 themselves. They levelled accusations at the treatment of the prisoners
2 and they claimed to have seen fresh traces of blood and had no answer to
3 the question of the prison commander as to" --
4 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could we have the second
5 page in English.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Could we have the second page in English. Yes.
7 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry.
8 Q. [Interpretation] "... why they had not allowed a doctor (one of
9 the prisoners) to establish that immediately."
10 General, do you remember this report and do you know what
11 followed in further discussions with the ICRC?
12 A. I don't remember this report specifically. How could I? In any
13 case, I remember some of the procedures. I can say the following. Those
14 who were included in discussions concerning food, I claim responsibly
15 that they enjoyed the same food as the fighters at the front lines. I
16 could observe that when I visited a hangar, a hall, accommodating those
17 prisoners. I talked to them in person, and none of them complained about
18 that. I always conduct such conversations in a humane way, without any
19 tension or threat. It was a civilised conversation I had with them, and
20 they didn't say anything of the sort. I couldn't, of course, visit all
21 of the hangars and visit some three and a half thousand of them, but I
22 think I saw some 6- to 700 people.
23 As for their receiving small quantities of food, I can't believe
24 that. First of all, the military camp warden enjoyed my greatest
25 respect, who was a very orderly, diligent officer who kept things well in
1 order. Second of all, these prisoners, or inmates, whatever we call
2 them, never left Manjaca to work on fortifying certain positions which
3 was the case with the Serbs in other theatres of war in
5 As for the medical care and the assertion that the 19 were not
6 receiving medical care, I remember very well that, according to the list,
7 92 people from Manjaca who were singled out by the medical commission
8 were sent to Geneva for treatment.
9 I can't remember any longer what else you wanted me to say.
10 As for the traces of blood, this is the first time I hear about
11 that and that no possibility was given to investigate that and how that
12 blood came to be there.
13 JUDGE ORIE: The situation described in the document is July.
14 You said you went to Manjaca in late August 1992. What do you know
15 specifically about the situation mid-July?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, I didn't say that
17 I visited it in late August. I can't say precisely what the date was
18 when I visited it. If I said so, even now I can't claim or say what the
19 date was. I visited one of the halls and I don't know when exactly.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, in your statement I read:
21 "On one occasion, approximately in late August 1992, I personally
22 visited the Manjaca centre."
23 You have attested to the truth of that. Is your evidence to be
24 understood now that you don't know whether it was late August?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. It was precisely that way. If
1 it has to do with the military prisoners who were transferred from
2 Omarska and Keraterm because they were --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Witness -- Witness, I'm only asking about the date,
4 nothing else at this moment, and I asked you where in your statement you
5 say it was late August that you went there, that you now say you don't
6 know when it was. Is that your testimony now, that you don't remember
7 that it was in late August?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I remember that it was -- now why
9 am I making this link in terms of dates? Because the prisoners in
10 Omarska arrived between the 6th and 10th of August. Therefore, they
11 could not have been there in July. There were some prisoners there who
12 had been there previously. I was talking about those who arrived from
13 the general area of Prijedor.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, the document before us is the 16th of
15 July, so that was what the questions were about, and that was Manjaca
16 camp. If you say no opportunity was given to further investigate the
17 traces of blood, then that was in -- established in July; at least it was
18 seen at that point in time.
19 Do you know any further specifics about what happened in July in
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'd rather not comment on July. I
22 don't know anything about that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I only know about those I talked to
25 in August.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so it was in August.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
4 Q. General, what is your knowledge about the release of people from
5 Manjaca? Do you have any personal knowledge or did you participate
7 A. Did you have in mind the exchange of those prisoners or ...
8 Q. Yes.
9 A. I understood your question.
10 President Karadzic, sometime in early December, although I don't
11 know the exact date, sent an order requesting that the POWs from Manjaca
12 be exchanged and the camp disbanded. It was supposed to be done safely
13 and securely. The exchange was supposed to take place via
14 Banja Luka-Laktasi-Topola-Gradiska and across the Sava into Croatia. The
15 exchange took place in some three to four days because not all of them
16 left at once. They left in groups of some 20 buses so around 1.000
17 people could be exchanged in one go.
18 The exchange continued. I'm personally familiar with a case in
19 the village of Klasnice near Laktasi. We had information that an ambush
20 was set up there in order to make the passage of prisoners and buses
21 impossible and to have them killed or something else. I'm not sure.
22 General Talic personally issued an order to me, because I was
23 well familiar with that area, to go there and check the situation. When
24 I arrived, the situation was quite heated and difficult. Some people
25 were there who simply wanted to block the passage of the column. With
1 the assistance of an officer, I explained to the group what the
2 consequences could be. I told them that the order had come from the
3 Supreme Commander and that it had to go through. I won't elaborate much
4 further, but --
5 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We can't hear the witness
6 because of the quality of sound.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I tried to deal with it in a safe
8 way and I talked to those people trying to prevent it from happening.
9 Had something of the sort indeed taken place, it would have been fatal,
10 not only for the city of Banja Luka but for the VRS as well. Because I
11 know what a POW is, I know that such a person needs to be made and kept
12 safe and ensured passage. Later on, the military police also secured
13 certain check-points, making sure that the column passed through safely
14 in the three or four occasions that the exchange took place. Some 3- to
15 3.500 POWs were exchanged without any incidents. Perhaps a bus window
16 was broken here and there but that was all. I know that it was done in
17 terms of exchanging those people who were at Manjaca. With that, the
18 camp at Manjaca was practically shut down.
19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Thank you. Let us look at P2243 next.
21 MR. TRALDI: This is under seal.
22 MR. LUKIC: Under seal, yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Under seal. Mr. Lukic, I'm looking at the clock.
24 If you go to a new subject, perhaps it would be better to take the break
1 MR. LUKIC: We can go to -- have a break, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We have a break of 20 minutes. We'd like to
3 see you back after the break, Witness.
4 Mr. Lukic, are you on track as far as time is concerned?
5 MR. LUKIC: Today it goes a bit slower. I agreed with my
6 colleague Mr. Traldi and I will take next half an hour and leave him half
7 an hour in the next session.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I see Mr. Traldi is nodding yes, so apparently he
10 MR. TRALDI: Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: We take the break and resume at 10 minutes to 11.00.
12 [The witness stands down via videolink]
13 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.
14 [The witness takes the stand via videolink]
15 --- On resuming at 10.57 a.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, you may proceed.
17 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Q. [Interpretation] General, I was told -- P2243, under seal. I
19 have been informed, General, that you don't have this, so we are going to
20 see it on our screens. I'm going to read out something.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi.
22 MR. TRALDI: Again, the document's under seal and for reasons I'd
23 ask that we move into private session or at least not broadcast it.
24 MR. LUKIC: I said under seal.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I think Mr. Lukic said under seal.
1 MR. TRALDI: And what I'd intended that should indicate at least
2 that it not -- an instruction that it not be broadcast which hadn't yet
3 been given.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I do agree. But I take it that Mr. Registrar is
5 already drawing that conclusion.
6 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Nevertheless, we have to move into private session
8 if any part of it is read.
9 [Private session]
8 [Open session]
9 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours. Thank
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. General, you were asked if Zeljaja was removed. Let me ask you
14 this: Were you ever informed that Zeljaja killed women or children?
15 A. I was never informed of any such thing.
16 Q. Without referring to a source, but were you familiar with these
17 documents during the war?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Very well. Thank you.
20 A. I wasn't familiar with them.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we next have P2900, please.
22 Q. It is a document from the CSB commission entitled: "Work of
23 investigation centres in the region - documents." Therefore, it is a
24 police report.
25 I'd like direct your attention to page 3 in both versions.
1 MR. LUKIC: I'm sorry, could we go back to page 2 first.
2 Q. [Interpretation] What you can see on the screen, the report was
3 compiled by the Security Services Centre in Banja Luka. The title of the
4 report is: Concerning the situation as found and questions relating to
5 prisoners, collection centres, resettlement, and the role of the SJB in
6 connection with these activities.
7 The first municipality in line is Prijedor and its reception
9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Now we need to go to the next page in
10 both versions, which is page 3. In English ... [In English] Can we see
11 the top of the page, please. We have to go one page back in English
12 version, I'm sorry.
13 There is obviously missing one part in English version. I will
14 read it. This the first paragraph on this page in B/C/S version. We
15 will ask for this translation to be revised.
16 Q. [Interpretation] I quote:
17 "In order to solve the problem that had arisen, the Crisis Staff
18 of the municipality of Prijedor decided to organise reception and
19 accommodation in the settlement of Trnopolje for persons who sought
20 protection and that prisoners of war should be held for processing in the
21 building of the Keraterm RO in Prijedor or in the administrative building
22 and work-shop of the RZR in Omarska."
23 MR. TRALDI: Just for --
24 JUDGE ORIE: That's in the English.
25 MR. TRALDI: I was going to say, I think, the same thing as you,
1 Mr. President.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's: "In order to solve the problem that had
3 arisen, the Crisis Staff," it's in the middle of the second paragraph.
4 MR. LUKIC: I'm ... I'm sorry.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
6 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. General, did the Crisis Staff of Prijedor municipality inform the
8 1st Krajina Corps about this; if you know?
9 A. I don't know of the 1st Corps being informed. I do know about
10 the camp in Trnopolje. In my understanding, it was open-type centre.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We need page 4 in the English in the
13 same document, the first paragraph, and page 4 in the B/C/S, the last
15 Q. Please follow the last paragraph which reads:
16 "On 27 May 1992, pursuant to the decision of the Crisis Staff of
17 the municipality of Prijedor, all the prisoners from the Keraterm
18 facility in Prijedor were transferred to the facility in Omarska. Under
19 the same decision, the Omarska facility was placed under the direct
20 supervision of the police and the army. The police, i.e., Omarska police
21 station, was charged with the immediate security of the administration
22 building itself, the workshops and the garages for the work machinery,
23 while the army took over in-depth security in the form of sentry posts
24 and the mining of certain areas as they saw fit."
25 Can you tell us what "in-depth security" is; and do you know at
1 what distance the army was from the facility where the prisoners were
3 A. I did not personally visit the camp at Trnopolje, and I'm not
4 familiar with the location. I do know that in-depth security is always
5 away from the facility along certain axes from which potential attacks or
6 interventions on the facility can be expected, including attacks on the
7 people accommodated there, regardless of the side included in such
8 incidents. If the army participated, and judging by the document it did,
9 according to the Crisis Staff, it was duty-bound to secure the facility
10 so that only checked personnel could enter.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi.
12 MR. TRALDI: Just to put on the record I see the witness has been
13 making some notes, and I'd just ask if he'd have an objection to a copy
14 being made and sent to us.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, Mr. Traldi observed that you're making
16 notes. Is it -- do you want to share that with the Prosecution so
17 that ...
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I'm just noting down a date or
19 two. If need be, I can tear it up now, this second, before your eyes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The question was not whether you wanted to
21 tear it but the question was whether you wanted to share it. And by
22 destroying it, I take it that the answer is no, this is --
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I would write down a date or two so
24 as to remind myself where I was at the time. That's the gist of it. If
25 I had been warned not to keep notes, I would not have.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, the witness apparently is not inclined
2 to share it with you. There's only an invitation. I leave it to that.
3 Unless you come up with something else.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
5 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. In the same document, we
6 need page 6 in the English and page 8 in the B/C/S. In the English,
7 we're interested in the third paragraph under the heading of: The role
8 of Prijedor SJB and its personnel. In the B/C/S, it is the last
9 paragraph on that page, also the third from the top.
10 Q. It reads:
11 "Pursuant to the decision of the Crisis Staff of the municipality
12 of Prijedor, police personnel attended to the physical security of the
13 Keraterm facility in Prijedor, and subsequently the transportation of the
14 prisoners to the RZR ... in Omarska and the physical security of this
15 facility as well. On the basis of the results of operative processing of
16 prisoners, the police found the persons who were wanted and brought them
17 to Omarska. After questioning, the police also looked after security
18 during transportation to the Manjaca army camp or to the Open Reception
19 Centre in Trnopolje."
20 General, do you know whether the 1st Krajina Corps ever drafted
21 reports on the work of Omarska, Keraterm, or Trnopolje?
22 A. I don't know about that. Sometimes the Crisis Staff provided
23 reports, but I don't remember this particular instance.
24 Q. Thank you. Let us look at 65 ter number 11 --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, before we do that, could we turn -- could
1 we go back to page 3 in the English of this document.
2 Witness, I read the following part of -- and I must admit that I
3 don't know where it is in the B/C/S version, but ...
4 MR. LUKIC: What do you want to read if I may help?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it's the paragraph that starts with --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I cannot ...
7 JUDGE ORIE: One --
8 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Just a moment, please.
10 JUDGE ORIE: "... the facilities of the Keraterm work
11 organisation," that's the paragraph I wanted to read from.
12 MR. LUKIC: Okay.
13 JUDGE ORIE: No, as a matter of fact, let me just see what ...
14 no, it's the -- yes, but I still have to find it in English. One second,
16 MR. LUKIC: It's page --
17 JUDGE ORIE: One second --
18 MR. LUKIC: -- 4, first paragraph --
19 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know yet which ...
20 I made a mistake. It may be the second paragraph.
21 I read the following in what seems to be the second paragraph in
22 your language. It reads:
23 "The SJB was given the task of securing the facility with
24 employees of the active and reserve forces of the police. Banja Luka CSB
25 and the Banja Luka Corps Command were informed about the capture of
1 persons and were actively involved in the solution of the situation.
2 Mixed operations teams were set up, composed of representatives of
3 national, public, and military security services, whose task it was to
4 carry out operative processing of all the prisoners and to determine the
5 degree of their personal responsibility in the armed conflict."
6 Could you tell us anything about these mixed operations where
7 military security was involved to carry out the operative processing?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I respond now?
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please do.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, specifically as
11 for the processing of these persons who came to these reception camps, I
12 don't know, except for Colonel Majstorovic, that any of the members of
13 the army were among these persons who were in charge of these operative
14 checks. These operative checks, in my view, involved, first and
15 foremost, the activities of these persons, whether -- whether they had
16 taken part in fighting, whether they --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I'm not primarily interested to hear what
18 exactly the checks were about. Do you know where these combined teams,
19 including military secret services, were doing this check?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, Colonel
21 Majstorovic was in that camp, Omarska, just in Omarska.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Because in your earlier answers it transpired,
23 more or less, that the army had nothing to do what happened in the camp;
24 whereas I now understand that -- from this document that mixed operation
25 teams were working in those camps, including military security services.
1 Is that something you can confirm or don't you know?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Later on, I found out - later on -
3 that Colonel Majstorovic was involved in these checks. I don't know
4 whether someone from the military organisation that -- decided he should
5 be there or whether this was done specifically by the town of Prijedor
6 or, rather, the police, the SUP of Prijedor.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But "mixed operations teams" suggests that
8 military and civilian or police authorities were working together in a
9 team formation. Do you know anything about that?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can just present some
11 assumptions. I personally do not know --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, we're not interested in assumptions. If
13 you know anything, tell us; if you don't know, tell us that you don't.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
16 MR. LUKIC: I have just one more document. It's 65 ter 11336.
17 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Mr. Lukic, we don't have the
18 document, the document with us.
19 MR. LUKIC: Okay. I will read then. We need the second page in
20 B/C/S, and we are on the correct page in English.
21 Q. [Interpretation] General, this is a dispatch from the SJB
22 Prijedor, that is to say, the public security station of Prijedor, that
23 is to say, the police. What is written here is as follows. This was
24 sent to the MUP of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Army
25 of the Serbian Republic of BH, and the Banja Luka CSB. I quote:
1 "We hereby inform you that, at a meeting held on the 24th of
2 July, 1992, the War Presidency of the Prijedor Municipal Assembly adopted
3 a decision ... pursuant to which the reserve police force presently
4 employed should be greatly reduced and that the security for the
5 Keraterm, Trnopolje, and Omarska Reception Centres be provided by the
6 army. The deadline for the implementation of this decision was fixed for
7 the 31st of July, 1992.
8 "The army refused to assume security duties at the centres, for
9 which our station supplies a staff of 300 police officers every day.
10 "Therefore, we hereby inform you that we are not in a position to
11 implement the above-mentioned decision on the reduction of the reserve
12 police force as long as the army does not resume its duties in accordance
13 with arrangements and decisions previously made."
14 "Signed by the chief the security station, Simo Drljaca."
15 General, General Kelecevic, what do you know about this? Well,
16 if you do know anything. When did the army take over these activities?
17 Did it play any role in these activities after the 1st of August, 1992,
18 when Simo Drljaca wrote this dispatch?
19 A. What I know is the following. Well, I'm saying this in terms of
20 the importance of the content, not the specific document, because I see
21 the time here, the 24th of July. That is when the break through the
22 corridor is starting. Now I, as Chief of Staff, for me, to find out
23 about this, there is no way I can find out because my activity was
24 exclusively focused on a very, very important operation in that period.
25 But later, I was in a position to find out from the reports of officers.
1 So I personally do not know about this, but I know this much: That after
2 the order of President Karadzic, the army did their job.
3 Q. What is it that you are referring to now when you say "after the
4 order of President Karadzic, the army did their job"? What is the
5 time-frame and what was the job?
6 A. The month of August. Was it the 10th or something like that? As
7 far as I remember, August. And then these prisoners who, I mean, in some
8 way -- I mean, well, they were examined and all of that, and some were
9 supposed to be transferred to the area of the Manjaca camp.
10 Q. Thank you, General.
11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We would like to tender this document
12 into evidence.
13 MR. TRALDI: I take it, given the witness's comment that he
14 doesn't know anything about it, that it's being tender from the bar
15 table; is that right?
16 JUDGE ORIE: Or at least through this witness, although the
17 witness cannot say anything, but it's related to his testimony.
18 MR. TRALDI: I think that's how the Chamber has generally
19 articulated the text for bar tabling documents through a witness.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but it has been criticised many, many times by
21 the Defence and I adjusted my language now and then.
22 MR. TRALDI: I -- but I --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, could you confirm that it's tendered in
24 relation to the witness's evidence, not because the witness could tell us
25 anything specific about this document.
1 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. TRALDI: On the understanding that the Defence is relying on
4 that same approach, we have no objection.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I must admit - and this is just an
6 observation - that I'm a bit confused because the document is about
7 security services in Keraterm, Trnopolje and Omarska; whereas the answer
8 of the witness dealt not with security aspects of those camps but rather
9 with what he learned later on how and when and why prisoners were
10 transferred to other camps. I leave it to that.
11 Mr. Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: The document shall be assigned Exhibit Number
13 D1111. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
15 Please proceed.
16 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. We have
17 thus completed the redirect of this witness.
18 Q. General Kelecevic, thank you for having answered our questions.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.
20 Mr. Traldi, any further questions for the witness?
21 MR. TRALDI: Yes, Mr. President. Before I start, I am going to
22 request what's left of the witness's notes, and I'd just inquire with the
23 Registry whether there's a technical way for it to be, for instance,
24 scanned and sent to us.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the first question was whether the witness was
1 willing to share it with you.
2 Witness, although torn apart, from what we can see here, it's
3 still on the desk. Do you have any problems in sharing what you wrote
4 down with the Prosecution?
5 You're pointing at them. Is that you have no problems in sharing
6 it? In which case, the Registrar at the far end of the videolink will
7 take custody of your notes. But I would first like to know whether you
8 have any problems in sharing it.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have no problem whatsoever. If
10 you have a person of confidence here, then that person can come and take
11 this straight away, and I don't mind at all.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Well, our person of confidence is the Registrar at
13 the far end of the videolink. Could you take custody of the --
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, then, let the gentleman --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Could the Registrar at the far end side of the
16 videolink take custody of the notes which were torn apart by the witness
17 and bring them to The Hague.
18 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
19 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, Your Honour, that'll be done.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, is it that you wanted immediately to
21 have that scan or --
22 MR. TRALDI: I think --
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- you wish the Chamber to scan the document
25 MR. TRALDI: If it's possible in the field office, then I'd
1 request that, just so I can determine quickly and resolve whether it's
2 necessary to have any questions asked of the witness about it.
3 JUDGE ORIE: It may take until after the break before have you
4 it, but Mr. Registrar informs me that they'll do their utmost best to
5 have it scanned. Of course, first, I see Mr. Registrar at the far end is
6 already recomposing the original order of the torn-apart pieces.
7 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, it will take me a bit to put
8 this together, but I can have it scanned and e-mail it to Mr. Traldi.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and we'll see then -- and then not only to
10 Mr. Traldi but then also to Mr. Lukic, of course. The Registry is --
11 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] And may I just add Your Honours,
12 the witness made notes from yesterday and the day before but he does not
13 have it with him so ...
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, well --
15 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] [Microphone not activated]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Let's leave it to the notes of today and let's see
17 what we can achieve if Mr. Traldi is that much interested to look at
19 Mr. Traldi, any further questions.
20 MR. TRALDI: Yes, Your Honour.
21 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Traldi:
22 Q. Sir, I want to pick up where you left off a moment ago. During
23 cross-examination, you testified that you did not know whether
24 Colonel Majstorovic was at Omarska, and that's at transcript page 37265
25 on Tuesday. Today at temporary transcript page 30, you testified that:
1 "As far as I know, Colonel Majstorovic was in that camp,
3 Did you learn this in the last two days?
4 A. No. I found out from Glas or some other Banja Luka newspaper
5 about the Crisis Staff, et cetera, and that Colonel Majstorovic was on
6 that Crisis Staff, and that surprised me quite a bit at the time. And
7 the question in my mind was who appointed him to be there on the Crisis
8 Staff when I know the position of the commander that the command does not
9 accept that military personnel should be on these Crisis Staffs. So I
10 found out that he was a member of the Crisis Staff of Prijedor from - now
11 was it Glas or Nezavisne Novine, I cannot tell you exactly which
13 Q. Sir, you just testified now, first, first, you testified that
14 Colonel Majstorovic was on the Crisis Staff, I'm going to return to that
15 point in a moment. But, first, my question had been: When did you learn
16 that he was at Omarska, and I'll add, participating in overseeing the
17 teams of interrogators? When did you learn that?
18 A. Well, I learned that maybe after the war. Let's be clear on
19 this. At that time I did not find out that Majstorovic was a member of
20 the Crisis Staff either.
21 Q. And, sir, your testimony on Tuesday that did you not know on
22 Tuesday when I asked you the question whether he was at Omarska, that was
23 false testimony; right?
24 A. No, I don't know that he was at the Omarska facility. And I
25 never claimed any such thing. I don't know whether he was there. I was
1 not checking on them where they were because that's not for me to do.
2 That is specifically up to Stevo Bogojevic, Colonel Bogojevic, his
3 superior officer.
4 Q. I'll leave that point aside. The other portion of your answer --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Nevertheless, Mr. Traldi.
6 Witness, I'd like to read to you part of your testimony today. I
7 asked you about combined teams, including military security services,
8 where they were doing these checks. You said:
9 "As far as I know, Colonel Majstorovic was in that camp, Omarska,
10 just in Omarska."
11 That's why Mr. Traldi did put to you that you gave evidence today
12 which is not the same as you gave two days ago.
13 Any comment where you again say now that you didn't know that he
14 was in Omarska whereas earlier today you told, as far as you know, "he
15 was in that camp, Omarska, just in Omarska."
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If the question is about this
17 combined, or whatever you call it, Crisis Staff, I just knew about
18 Majstorovic, that he was on that staff. And I'm saying that with full
19 responsibility. I'm telling you how it was that I found out. It's not
20 from military reports or that somebody asked for my approval that he
21 should be there -- oh, all right.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Witness -- Witness, do you have an explanation as to
23 why you said earlier today that he was in Omarska, just in Omarska?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot say. I mean, my
25 assessment is -- well, it was said that most of these people, I mean,
1 from Keraterm or, rather, from -- I mean, yeah, Keraterm were transferred
2 to Omarska and -- I don't know. Somebody said that some witness said
3 earlier that Colonel Majstorovic investigated or, rather, interrogated
4 him and that he insisted -- well, I know Majstorovic personally, and then
5 I assumed that he was in Omarska.
6 JUDGE ORIE: When that question was put to you, you said he was
7 not in Omarska. Today, not solicited in any way specifically about the
8 whereabouts of Colonel Majstorovic, you spontaneously told us that he was
9 in that camp, Omarska, just Omarska.
10 I have not heard any comment on what I asked you, neither an
12 Please proceed.
13 MR. TRALDI:
14 Q. As to the second part of that answer, sir, you claimed, even
15 though you had not been asked about Crisis Staffs, that --
16 A. [No interpretation]
17 Q. Sir --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, don't interrupt Mr. Traldi when he puts a
19 question to you.
20 MR. TRALDI:
21 Q. Sir, you claimed, even though you had not been asked about Crisis
22 Staffs, that the corps command did not accept that military officers be
23 on Crisis Staffs. As you testified earlier this week, General Talic was
24 a member of the ARK Crisis Staff. Your evidence about this is not the
25 truth either, is it?
1 A. I would rather not discuss my commander and whether he had the
2 right to do something or not.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, was he on the ARK Crisis Staff,
4 General Talic?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, he was a member
6 of the Crisis Staff. He only went there when they had things to discuss
7 about the VRS.
8 JUDGE ORIE: You've answered my question.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. TRALDI:
11 Q. Next, sir, I want to turn to your evidence about command posts.
12 When you went to the 1KK command post in the corridor, one of the
13 officers who remained in Banja Luka was Colonel Milutin Vukelic; right?
14 A. He was from the political and legal sector. I don't know if he
15 stayed in Banja Luka or went to some other units. That's something I
16 can't say. One cannot say that he was only in Banja Luka. He was inside
17 the area of responsibility of the corps.
18 MR. TRALDI: Can we have 65 ter 32716, page 40.
19 Q. Now, this is a portion of the OTP interview of Colonel Vukelic.
20 He's asked towards the top of the page and I'll read it slowly because
21 it's only in English:
22 "Okay, Colonel. And how many times did General Talic visit the
23 Manjaca camp?"
24 He answers:
25 "I don't know. But the command post for the corps was there for
1 a while."
2 He's asked:
3 "The command post for the 1st Krajina Corps was stationed at
4 Manjaca camp?"
5 And he answers:
6 "Not at the camp. The camp were renovated stables for animals.
7 Those were renovated for the prison. And there was a command post for a
8 unit there, which was then used for the command of the 1st Krajina
10 And he's asked:
11 "And did you see General Talic at this command post at Manjaca?"
12 And he answers:
13 "Of course, I saw him there."
14 Now, you testified that the 1st Krajina Corps command post was
15 not fully operational on re-examination. The truth is the 1st Krajina
16 Corps command post at Manjaca operated, and General Talic visited it;
18 MR. LUKIC: Objection.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Lukic.
20 MR. LUKIC: May I?
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. LUKIC: I'm very cautious now.
23 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. "Objection" is not sufficient. You should
24 say what the objection is based, without giving evidence yourself.
25 MR. LUKIC: Can the General remove his headphones.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Headphones.
2 Could you please take off your headphones.
3 Yes, Mr. Lukic.
4 MR. LUKIC: We'll find in the transcript that in 1995 this
5 gentleman at least claimed that way. In 1995, this command post was
6 fully operational when the western municipalities of Republika Srpska
7 were under attack and the complete command post was moved in 1995 to this
9 MR. TRALDI: I agree and I'll rephrase my description of his
10 evidence if it suits Mr. Lukic that he said --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Okay --
12 MR. TRALDI: -- in 1992 it was not operational.
13 MR. LUKIC: But then we should know -- I'm sorry. Can I?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you have brought to the attention of
15 Mr. Traldi something he could include in his question. He has offered to
16 rephrase it. If there's any other matter you would like to bring to his
17 attention which might cause him to even further rephrase the question,
18 you have an opportunity to do so.
19 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour. Because in this transcript
20 do we see about which period this gentleman is talking about.
21 JUDGE ORIE: That is clearly the point you are making.
22 Mr. Traldi.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Before do you so, Mr. Traldi. I just wanted to
24 say to Mr. Lukic, in any case, whatever you have told us is no basis for
25 an objection. If you just make a note of that. It's different evidence.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do agree with my colleague, Mr. Lukic. This
2 is not an objection but this is a gentle -- gently presented information
3 to Mr. Traldi so as to assist him in avoiding any errors.
4 Mr. Traldi, that is how I understand it.
5 MR. TRALDI: I understood it the same way and appreciated it.
6 Regarding the time-frame referred to in this portion of Colonel Vukelic's
7 interview --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that no confusion should arise. That's --
9 MR. TRALDI: Yes. And just to make clear why our position is
10 it's clear they're talking about 1992. It's in the context of
11 discussions of visits by General Talic to the detention camp there. It's
12 in the context of the discussion of the Mazowiecki visit which is in
13 August 1992. That's mentioned at the top of the page. And it's in the
14 context of the discussion of visiting Popovic, the commander during 1992
15 of the camp, that we see lower down on the page.
16 That's the basis for my putting that this refers to 1992.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and then now you'll rephrase the question as
18 you offered, Mr. Traldi.
19 MR. TRALDI: Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please, could the witness put his earphones on
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 MR. TRALDI:
24 Q. Sir -- sir, the question that I'll put to you is, you'd testified
25 that the Manjaca forward command post, the Manjaca command post of the
1 1st Krajina Corps was not operational in 1992. The truth is, as Colonel
2 Vukelic stated here, that it was working, that General Talic visited it,
3 and also visited Manjaca camp; right?
4 A. Please, in order to provide a full answer, I cannot answer it by
5 a simple yes or no. In the area of responsibility of the corps, there
6 were eight command posts. All of them could be used, if needed, in order
7 to successfully control the units. This included the command post at
8 Manjaca. We, from the army, call it this way: The basic command post,
9 the forward command post, the fake command post, and so on and so forth.
10 So I was trying to recollect. I think there were eight command
11 posts in different areas. Wherever the commander is, these posts could
12 make sure that communication means were at his disposal to communicate
13 with the units. He can even use the command post of an operational unit
14 in order to successfully manage his units.
15 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, I think we're at what would be the
16 time for the break. I'd say I have just a few minutes left, pending
17 whether I have any questions about the notes that I'm hoping we'll
18 receive during the break.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if it's just a few minutes. You know, a few
20 minutes before the break usually are shorter than a few minutes after a
21 break, Mr. Traldi, so I'll keep to you that for after the break.
22 MR. TRALDI: I can say it's eight questions, though it may be
23 necessary to follow up on some of them, so less than ten minutes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Less than ten minutes. That's accepted.
25 Witness, we'd like to see you back after the break. We'll take a
1 break until 10 minutes past midday.
2 [The witness stands down via videolink]
3 --- Recess taken at 11.50 a.m.
4 [The witness takes the stand via videolink]
5 --- On resuming at 12.12 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, let's check again whether the
7 videolink is functioning well.
8 THE REGISTRAR: [Via videolink] Yes, Your Honour, we can see and
9 hear you clearly.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. The same is true for this side of the
12 Mr. Traldi, I'm looking at the clock. Please proceed.
13 MR. TRALDI: Thank you, Mr. President. And before I start, just
14 to thank the Registry for their assistance in transmitting that material
15 so quickly.
16 Can we have P151. And I'll be looking for page 2 in the
17 English, 3 in the B/C/S.
18 Q. Now, this is a 1st Krajina Corps report from the end of May 1992.
19 In the context of Mr. Lukic's questions about Muslims and Croats serving
20 in the VRS, I'd direct your attention to point 5b, and we see in the
21 first line down that:
22 "After the actions in Kozarac, Kljuc, and Sanski Most, some
23 conscripts of Muslim nationality have asked to be released from their
24 [sic] units. They express their dissatisfaction with the massive
25 destruction of their towns."
1 You were also aware, weren't you, that non-Serbs conscripted into
2 the VRS were not comfortable remaining because of the destruction it was
3 inflicting on their communities?
4 A. I knew that in the units of the VRS there were both Muslim and
5 Croat soldiers and officers.
6 Q. Sir, answer the question. You knew that the massive destruction
7 that the VRS was inflicting on their communities was why some of them
8 were uncomfortable remaining; right?
9 A. I knew about destruction for the most part in Kozarac where there
10 was combat. It is normal that in the course of such activities that
11 covered two or three days, although I wasn't present, that there must
12 have been some destruction to facilities and buildings in the area.
13 Q. Sir, you were aware of massive destruction of Muslim and Croat
14 villages, just like the rest of the corps command and the Main Staff once
15 they received this report; right?
16 A. I knew about the destruction of a certain part.
17 Q. And you knew, too, that other Muslims and Croats were dismissed
18 pursuant to orders by General Mladic and General Talic from the VRS;
19 right? Yes or no?
20 A. They were not dismissed. They were simply sent to other
21 commands. I would say it was done with a view to resolving their status.
22 They were not kicked out of the units.
23 Q. They were sent to Belgrade to -- sir, they were sent to Belgrade
24 to resolve their status; right?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And yesterday Mr. Lukic asked you the following question:
2 "As far as you know - and you spent the war there - was the plan
3 to occupy territory or hold on to territory which was not considered
5 And you answered:
6 "No such plan existed. The plan was, as I said, to maintain the
7 territory where the Serbs were in the majority."
8 I have a few simple questions for you about this. Prijedor,
9 Sanski Most, and Kotor Varos, which we've discussed, were all
10 Serb-minority municipalities in 1991; right?
11 A. There were fewer Serbs than Muslims living there, yes.
12 Q. And after the operations by the 1st Krajina Corps, they were all
13 controlled by the Serbs and had overwhelmingly Serb populations; right?
14 A. They were dominant because Muslims left many of those parts, and
15 they went to where they felt safer and where they could be exchanged.
16 Q. You testified this morning that there was no pressure on those
17 people who were exchanged. Those people whose towns had been massively
18 destroyed, obviously they had no choice but to go somewhere else; right?
19 A. That is correct.
20 Q. And regarding -- regarding your evidence, again, that there was
21 no -- that the plan was to maintain the territory where the Serbs were in
22 the majority, there's evidence in this trial that by the end of 1992, the
23 VRS had control of 70 per cent or so of the territory of Bosnia. Is it
24 your position that that was all Serb territory?
25 A. I do not assert that. I know the size held by the 1st Corps.
1 I'm not aware of the situation in the rest of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
2 Q. Yes or no: It's your position that the 70 per cent of the
3 territory of Bosnia the VRS controlled at the end of 1992 was Serb
5 A. I don't think it was Serbian because it was still highly
6 debatable whether others should be involved in determining whose
7 territory it was supposed to be.
8 MR. TRALDI: Your Honours, that completes my questions for this
10 JUDGE ORIE: I have one follow-up question for the witness. But
11 first Judge Moloto has one.
12 Questioned by the Court:
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sir, at page 46, you were asked about the
14 dismissal of non-Serb soldiers from the VRS by Mr. Talic and Mr. Mladic,
15 and you said they were sent to other commands.
16 Mr. Traldi said to you:
17 "They were sent to Belgrade -- sir, they were sent to Belgrade to
18 resolve their status; right?"
19 You said: "Yes."
20 I just want to follow up on that one. Their status in Belgrade
21 was being resolved within the VJ, isn't it so?
22 A. It was resolved in Belgrade the way it was decided because there
23 were centres in charge of personnel that kept the officers of the VRS on
24 their registers. So in other words, their status was supposed to be
25 resolved in Yugoslavia, in order to determine whether some of them have
1 met the necessary conditions to be retired or that something else be done
2 with them.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: You haven't answered my question. They were
4 resolved in -- because you said there were personnel centres, and it was
5 personnel centre number 30 into which they were located which was a VJ
6 unit, isn't it so?
7 A. It was a command, rather than a unit, which dealt with the issue
8 of status --
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you saying -- let me ask you a question. Are
10 you saying the 30th Personnel Centre was a unit of the VRS? Is that your
12 A. I don't understand. What do you mean part of --
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Traldi suggested to you that these soldiers
14 were dismissed from the VRS. You said: No, they were not dismissed.
15 They were sent to other commands. I'm saying to you, that command that
16 you're saying they were sent to in Belgrade is the 30th Personnel Centre
17 and I'm suggesting to that that is a VJ unit, not a VRS unit. So if
18 they're there, it means they have left the VRS. Do you agree with that?
19 A. I do not because --
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. Thank you very much.
21 A. Very well.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE ORIE: I have one question for you. You were asked about
24 maintaining areas which were populated by a Serb majority. Then
25 Mr. Traldi asked you about a few municipalities where you said that there
1 was a Serb minority. Let me just check which ones they were. I think it
2 was Prijedor -- let me just find it.
3 A. Sanski Most, Kotor Varos.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think a third one was mentioned as well.
5 Now, often in answers and in documents we find reference to
6 "loyal non-Serbs." What is the basis for claiming loyalty from non-Serbs
7 where power had been taken over in municipalities in which the Serbs were
8 in a minority, why would the majority be loyal and what's the basis for
9 such a loyalty claim, if power was taken over by the Serbs?
10 A. Determining whether someone was loyal was the basis for those
11 citizens, i.e., civilians, to decide whether they were willing to
12 implement the laws and policies of the authorities then in power.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Witness, I do understand what loyalty means.
14 But on what was the claim that they should be loyal where power had been
15 taken over by a minority in those municipalities, on what was that claim
16 based? Or just on having taken over power forcefully?
17 A. I personally think it was their choice to stay freely because
18 they believed that they will continue being safe in their homes, with the
19 neighbours with whom they used to be on good terms previously, rather
20 than to change their place of residence.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I established that you didn't answer my
22 question. I gave it two tries. I have no further questions for you.
23 Then we -- have the questions by the Bench triggered any need for
24 further questions? If not, Mr. Kelecevic --
25 Yes, Mr. Traldi.
1 MR. TRALDI: Sorry. If there's no objection to it, I've gotten
2 part of the translation of the notes that have been sent to me that the
3 witness took and I would have one question based on those. If that's
5 JUDGE ORIE: Have you shared the notes with the Defence?
6 MR. TRALDI: [Microphone not activated] Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I see Mr. Lukic is nodding yes.
8 Please -- one more question by Mr. Traldi, Mr. Kelecevic.
9 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Traldi: [Continued]
10 Q. Sir, under a reference to the document coming from Mr. Drljaca,
11 what I understand to be a reference to that document that Mr. Lukic
12 showed you, I'm told you have written, among other things:
13 "Admission centre, they did not have accommodation and food."
14 Which was the centre about which you -- which was the camp about
15 which you wrote they did not have accommodation and food?
16 A. I noted down what you read out to me. For the most part it had
17 to do with Trnopolje and that there was a need to have them moved. I
18 wrote down Drljaca's name because I found it difficult to remember that
19 name and I know that he had a very important role when it involved the
20 decision-making process by civilian authorities.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is the person -- the extent of
23 the information I have.
24 MR. TRALDI: That was the only question I had, Your Honours.
25 Thank you.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Traldi, the proper question would have
2 been in what context he wrote that down. Because it came immediately to
3 my mind, having heard your questions, that it may well be, which is quite
4 normal for a witness, to jot down some words which remind him of what the
5 question exactly was and I think that should have been more transparent
6 in your question.
7 Mr. Kelecevic, this concludes your evidence. I'd like to thank
8 you very much for coming to the videolink location and to testify, and I
9 wish you a safe return home again.
10 You are excused.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you very much.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Then we can close down the videolink.
14 [The witness's testimony via videolink concluded]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Traldi, you're on your feet.
16 MR. TRALDI: I am. A couple of remaining housekeeping matters
17 from the witness's testimony.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
19 MR. TRALDI: In one document there was a discussion of whether a
20 village named was Baltina or Bastina. We've checked P7106, which is the
21 excerpt from the census for Kotor Varos municipality, there is a Bastina
22 listed and not a Baltina.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Well, at least it's clear now, which was not clear
24 from the document yet, that it is a location.
25 MR. TRALDI: Yeah.
1 JUDGE ORIE: And, Mr. Lukic, if you have any better location --
2 MR. LUKIC: No, Your Honour, we do not.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Next, Mr. Traldi.
4 MR. TRALDI: Regarding P7477 MFI, that's the letter from Bishop
5 Komarica. The book from which it is taken is described in its text by
6 the editor as containing "a selection of documents from the Bishop of
7 Banja Luka, Monsignor Dr. Franjo Komarica and the Bishopric in Banja Luka
8 written during the war from 1991 to 1995. There are many pastoral
9 letters, appeals, interventions, reports, and denials," and P7477 MFI is
10 part of a long collection of such that is included in that book.
11 Third housekeeping matter --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Well, first, if it is MFI'd, we have -- the reason
13 was that we asked for further information.
14 MR. TRALDI: That's right.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, any objection against P7477?
16 MR. LUKIC: We just now heard that it's a longer selection from
17 this book.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I did understand that the selection is more than
19 just this document.
20 MR. TRALDI: Let me rephrase slightly for precision.
21 The book includes a long collection of such correspondence.
22 P7477 MFI is only the one that I showed the witness.
23 MR. LUKIC: We do not object to the admission of this document.
24 JUDGE ORIE: P7477 is admitted into evidence.
25 Third issue, Mr. Traldi.
1 MR. TRALDI: We're willing to agree that Spiro Nikovic has only
2 one N.
3 And fourth and finally, as a housekeeping matter, if I can just
4 be excused, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: You are excused, Mr. Traldi.
6 Is the Defence ready to call its next witness?
7 MR. LUKIC: Yes, we are, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: And that would be Mr. Salipur?
9 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be escorted in the courtroom.
11 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
12 JUDGE ORIE: The notes the previous witness wrote are now in the
13 custody of the -- of the Registry although copies have been provided to
14 the parties. Should they be kept or could they be ...
15 MR. LUKIC: I don't see any probational value. I don't know, the
16 Prosecution --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
18 MR. LUKIC: -- maybe does not share my view.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger. They have been destroyed once. Would
20 we destroy them again?
21 MR. TIEGER: I would think not. Once we are in possession of
22 those it's -- I mean, it's difficult, I agree, to imagine how they may be
23 used in future. But as a matter of procedure, having received them, they
24 were referred to in the examination to a minor extent, it seems more
25 prudent to hang on to them. But, again, from a practical point of view,
1 I don't think it is going to have much impact one way or another.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE ORIE: If we're talking about the original, Mr. Lukic,
4 Mr. Tieger, you've both received copies. If you could agree on that
5 these copies are original copies and where the original -- it's pretty
6 clear that we see even on the video that the witness is tearing them
7 apart. So I have great difficulties in imagining that would ever be any
8 dispute about the authenticity of your copies being a truthful copy of
9 the original. And I think, under those circumstances, the -- there's no
10 need to keep them for the Registry. So they can be torn apart again.
11 MR. LUKIC: If I may, before the witness sits down --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. LUKIC: Mr. Mladic waived his right to be here during
14 procedural matters, and we will provide Your Honours with the written
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And Mr. Mladic is now present where you
17 pronounced those words so -- the witness can be escorted in the
18 courtroom. Mr. ... we'll then receive later the written confirmation.
19 [The witness entered court]
20 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Mr. Salipur. Would you please
22 Mr. Salipur, before you give evidence, the Rules require that you
23 make a solemn declaration. The text is now handed out to you. May I
24 invite you to make that solemn declaration.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
1 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
2 WITNESS: ZDRAVKO SALIPUR
3 [Witness answered through interpreter]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated.
5 Mr. Salipur, you'll first be examined by Mr. Stojanovic. You
6 find Mr. Stojanovic to your left. Mr. Stojanovic is counsel for
7 Mr. Mladic.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Good day, Your Honours.
10 Examination by Mr. Stojanovic:
11 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Salipur.
12 A. Good day to you, too.
13 Q. As is customary, I would like to ask you to slowly give us your
14 name and surname.
15 A. My name is Zdravko Salipur.
16 Q. Mr. Salipur, at one point in time, did you give Mr. Karadzic's
17 Defence a statement in writing, and did you answer the questions that
18 were put to you then?
19 A. Yes.
20 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, could we please
21 see 65 ter 1D04065 in e-court.
22 Q. Mr. Salipur, at one point in time, you will see before you on
23 that screen a document.
24 A. Yes.
25 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please take a look at
1 the last page of this document.
2 Q. Mr. Salipur, what you saw on this first and last page, is that
3 the document that I asked you about a moment ago?
4 A. Yes, yes, that's the document. And this is my very own signature
5 in my own hand, and I wrote the date too.
6 Q. Thank you. I would just like to ask you a few things. Would you
7 please take a look at the first page of this document. Let us focus on
8 paragraph 1.
9 Mr. Salipur, before appearing in this courtroom, during the
10 proofing did you indicate to me that, in the meantime, your work status
11 has been changed and that in line 4 in B/C/S, and in lines 4 and 5 in the
12 English statement, it says that you are currently employed in the Rad
13 public utilities enterprise in East Novo Sarajevo. You informed me that
14 in the meantime you are retired and that this means that the correct
15 information today is that you are a pensioner.
16 A. Yes. From the 1st of January, 2014, I officially ended my career
17 and retired. Everything else is the same, including my address.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please a look at
20 paragraph 31 of your statement.
21 Q. Paragraph 31 of your statement, the penultimate line in B/C/S and
22 the third line from the bottom in the English version. You told me that
23 there was a typo there. The man whose name you mentioned is not Ljubo
24 Obradovic. Rather, his name is Budo Obradovic. Is that correct?
25 A. Yes, that's correct. I don't know how come this mistake
1 happened. I knew the man personally. His name was Budo Obradovic.
2 Q. Now that you've made these two technical corrections to your
3 statement, if I were to put the same questions to you today, to the best
4 of your knowledge and to the best of your recollection, now that you've
5 taken the solemn declaration in this courtroom, would you fully stand by
6 the statement that is before us?
7 A. Yes, yes. Now, today, and in 100 years, if need be.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to
10 tender Mr. Zdravko Salipur's statement into evidence, 65 ter 1D04065.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Prosecution, any objections?
12 MR. FILE: No objections, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: It shall be assigned Exhibit Number D1112. Thank
16 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
17 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Also, I would like to tender
18 four documents mentioned in this statement. According to 65 ter, they
19 are marked 03605, 03651, 18486, and 03290.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections?
21 MR. FILE: No objections, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, 65 ter 03605 receives number?
23 THE REGISTRAR: Receives number 1113.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
25 And that's a D number.
1 65 ter 03651?
2 THE REGISTRAR: Shall be assigned Exhibit Number D1114.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
4 65 ter 18486?
5 THE REGISTRAR: Shall be assigned Exhibit Number D1115.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
7 65 ter 03290?
8 THE REGISTRAR: Has already been admitted as Exhibit Number
9 P6524, admitted on 22nd May 2014. Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore, no need to further decide upon it.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 Your Honours, with your leave, I would like to read out the
14 summary of Witness Zdravko Salipur's statement.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that you intend to read a short summary.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Witness Zdravko Salipur is a
18 pre-war inhabitant of Sarajevo and he will testify about the situation in
19 Sarajevo prior to the breakout of the war, about the circumstances and
20 conditions in the city before the elections of 1990, about the founding
21 of the SDS and about his political involvement with the SDS Municipal
22 Board in the municipality of Novo Sarajevo. He will also speak about the
23 internal organisation of SDS in Novo Sarajevo and the establishment and
24 tasks of the Crisis Staff, and also about the reasons behind the
25 establishing of the Serb Municipal Assemblies in the territory of the
1 city of Sarajevo and about the work of the War Presidency in that area.
2 He will explain these documents concerning the structure and --
3 organisation and documentation of Crisis Staffs in the area of
4 Novo Sarajevo and SDS organisations. Also the witness will testify about
5 the arming of Muslims and Croats in the territory of the municipality of
6 Novo Sarajevo and the existence of Crisis Staffs and paramilitary units
7 established by the Muslim and Croat leaderships.
8 This witness shall speak about what happened in a part of
9 Sarajevo called Pofalici. Up until he was wounded and when the clashes
10 took place in this area in May 1992 and upon his return from medical
11 treatment in October 1992, he will speak about his experience and the
12 attitude taken towards the civilian population, because he worked on
13 humanitarian affairs through the Red Cross and in the area of Grbavica.
14 Finally, he will speak about the shelling and sniping against
15 this area that came from the territory that was under BH army control and
16 about the freedom of movement in this area during the war. He explains
17 his position and the sources of his knowledge as to how the authorities
18 functioned in the territory of Grbavica.
19 This was a brief summary of his testimony. And with your leave,
20 Your Honours, I would just like to put a few questions to the witness in
21 order to clarify his statement.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed as you suggest, Mr. Stojanovic.
23 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please take a look at
24 paragraph 7 of the statement which is now D1112.
25 Q. Mr. Salipur, in your statement here, you are commenting upon a
1 document on the establishment of the Serb municipality of Novo Sarajevo
2 and you are referring to Article 3 of this document that has now been
3 admitted into evidence in this case and its number is D1114. I would
4 just like to ask you to explain the following to the Trial Chamber. The
5 Serb municipality of Novo Sarajevo founded in this way, did it function,
6 did it carry out its duties on the ground until the conflict broke out in
8 Please go ahead.
9 A. I remember that document full well, the one that's mentioned in
10 my statement, and it's true that on this day this so-called assembly was
11 held, but it was not translated into practice. It was just before the
12 war, perhaps a week before the war. It can be seen that it was sort of
13 for the future, if the worst possible situation would occur. On the
14 4th of April war broke out in Sarajevo, so during those seven days, one
15 could feel what would happen, so this was done out of caution.
16 I would like to say, as I go back to that day, that this
17 gentleman, Dr. Milivoj Prijic, it's mentioned here that he was elected as
18 president of the municipality, and Mr. Branko Radan was elected president
19 of the Executive Committee. It wasn't on that day that they were
20 elected, at that assembly. Only a decision was made --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I think Mr. Stojanovic only asked you
22 whether it carried out its duties and I think you've answered that
23 question in the first line or the second line or the third of your
25 Please focus specifically on what is asked. If we want to know
1 anything more, the parties will ask or we will ask.
2 Please proceed.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: For the sake of the record, Mr. Stojanovic, you
4 referred to an article which is mentioned in paragraph 8 of the
5 statement. With a --
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: With document number from the Karadzic case.
8 This is not 1D1114, what you said, it's not correctly recorded. It's the
9 number P6524 which was already admitted into evidence.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please always use the numbers assigned to
11 the documents, both 65 ter and the exhibit number assigned to it, rather
12 than to refer to the Karadzic numbering.
13 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I understand. So it will be
14 that way, Your Honours. Maybe I should say that I was referring to
15 paragraph 7 of this witness's statement and indicating paragraph 7 of
16 this witness's statement.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But you referred to the wrong number. You
18 referred to the Karadzic number rather than to the number assigned in
19 this case.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: But in that case, you are right, Mr. Stojanovic,
21 this is D1114.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
23 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. Yes, I
24 think I did the right thing.
25 Q. Mr. Salipur, let us look at paragraph 11 of your statement,
2 Please be as direct as possible and let us observe the time.
3 This is what you say in paragraph 11 -- can you see that?
4 "I had information about the military organisation and arming of
5 Muslims and Croats in the area of the municipality ..."
6 This is my question: In view of court practice here, tell us, as
7 directly as possible, where does this information of yours come from
8 about the military organisation and arming of the Muslims and Croats?
9 A. When speaking about information, I had many information from
10 friends and neighbours who saw this directly. I personally saw a lot as
11 well. For example, night guards, large groups, armed. They would come
12 during the night and leave in the morning. So I saw some of this
13 personally and some things I found out about.
14 Q. Who did you find this out from?
15 A. Neighbours from Pofalici, my area, towards the hill of Hum.
16 Already in the month of February, the Patriotic League and the
17 Green Berets dug trenches, they were armed, and the Serb population could
18 not even get close. And they saw that members of the Ministry of
19 Interior - that is to say, the police - brought weapons there during the
20 night. They saw this themselves.
21 Q. Thank you. And now I would like to ask for paragraph 24 of your
23 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] For the transcript, I shall
24 repeat once again now, its number is D1112. In English, can we move to
25 the next page, please.
1 Q. Here you discuss the events in the area of Pofalici. For the
2 sake of precision, please tell us when this attack on your settlement
3 occurred, that is to say, on Pofalici where you resided?
4 A. It occurred on the 16th of May, early in the morning, from the
5 direction I mentioned, which is Hum hill, where those armed formations
6 had been observed. The attack lasted throughout the day and some 60,
7 mostly civilians, people were killed in my settlement, including around
8 15 women and some people older than 90, as well as many elderly people
9 between 70 and 80. There were many more wounded, over 200. I was
10 wounded myself by a shell, and I was treated for five and a half months
11 and then I needed crutches for another year. Let me just add, to this
12 day, many people who were killed that day were never found. Their
13 bodies, that is.
14 Q. Where did you receive information about the number of those who
15 were killed and wounded, as well as missing, the information you
16 presented here in the courtroom today?
17 A. That day, when I was wounded, I was taken away, and I did not
18 have any idea how many people were killed and wounded in my settlement.
19 After the end of my treatment, I was interested in finding out where my
20 friends, relatives, and neighbours were so I investigated and looked for
21 the bodies. With the assistance of the commission for tracing missing
22 persons, I went to some locations where indications existed that they had
23 been buried. However, we did not find many of them but we did come
24 across traces indicating that they were dug up and moved elsewhere,
25 according to the information in the possession of the commission. The
1 location involved was a family graveyard in my settlement, and since I
2 hail from that area, I know who was buried there and when, as well as in
3 which part of the cemetery.
4 Q. Thank you. After the attack in the area of Pofalici, did the
5 Serbian civilian population remain?
6 A. Very few remained compared to the overall number of the people
7 who used to live there. Perhaps under 1 per cent. And over the period
8 that followed, all trace was lost of them too. Nobody knows if they were
9 killed or when they were killed, whether a week or a month later.
10 Q. Bearing in mind that you lived there, what was the reason and
11 motivation behind the attack on the area of Pofalici?
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. File.
13 MR. FILE: Before the witness answers, I would object to that
14 question, as there's no foundation for how the witness could know what
15 the motivation of the attack was.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Could you lay a foundation, Mr. Stojanovic.
17 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Salipur, at the time or after you returned from treatment,
19 did you gain any specific knowledge about the possible motivation and
20 reason for the attack of the Muslim forces on that part of Sarajevo?
21 A. I understood your question fully, and I do know what the
22 motivation was. I can provide an answer.
23 In Sarajevo, this settlement is across the town from Vrace and
24 Grbavica. It is the only settlement on that side of the city where Serbs
25 were in the majority. The Serb police and TO were established there in
1 order to provide protection. Someone did not like that in geographical
2 terms. Among the 350 Serbian houses in the settlements, there were
3 perhaps 50 Muslim or -- and five or six Croatian households. For the
4 month and a half between the 4th of April and the 16th of May, they moved
5 about freely, going into town, to work and come back. Nobody touched
6 them. The only thing that there was were the check-points aimed at
7 preventing the entry of the Patriotic League members and the
8 Green Berets, as well as the armed forces of BiH which were created
9 later. Someone did not like the fact that geographically we were present
10 there. There were reports in the media, on TV and the radio, that it was
11 the goal of us living in Pofalici, the handful of us against the entire
12 city of 600.000, to link up with the Marsal Tito barracks and then on
13 further afield to Vrace. It was absolutely impossible to do, but someone
14 obviously didn't like us there.
15 Q. Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stojanovic, I appreciate that you asked for a
17 foundation. Whether the witness gave it is a different matter.
18 And I have another question. The witness referred to his medical
20 Witness, are you referring to paragraph 29 of your statement
21 which starts with: "After receiving medical treatment ..."? Is that
22 what you referred to?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was discussing the motivation for
24 the attack when I was in Pofalici and when I was wounded. On the day of
25 my wounding --
1 MR. FILE: Your Honour, if I may be of assistance. I believe
2 there is a reference to the witness being wounded on May 16th in an
3 attack in the first paragraph of his statement, at the bottom of the
4 first paragraph.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I wondered because paragraph 29 follows
6 immediately a few redacted paragraphs of which, of course, we do not know
7 what's in there.
8 Mr. Stojanovic, could you assist us. Is there any reference
9 there to the attack there? In the earlier -- in the
10 paragraphs immediately preceding paragraph 29, where the witness refers
11 to medical treatment, or is that -- is there nothing --
12 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. It is
13 referred to, and there's some further detail about the fighting in the
14 redacted portions in the Karadzic case.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So the -- the only thing we know about the
16 attack at this moment is what we find in paragraph 1? And all the
17 details are redacted?
18 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] There's also one part which
19 discusses the situation preceding the fighting which is in paragraph 24,
20 and that is why I sought to lay my foundation for this question.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But the details about the attack, we are not
22 privy to those, are we?
23 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] No, that part is redacted,
24 Your Honour.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can I be of assistance?
1 JUDGE ORIE: No, thank you.
2 Of course, Mr. Stojanovic, if you ask further questions about
3 that situation and of being wounded, then, of course, I wonder why we're
4 not receiving the detailed information about the attack. But I'll --
5 just please move on.
6 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] There will also be a witness to
7 discuss this, and that is probably why it was also redacted in the
8 Karadzic case. In any case, there will be a follow-up.
9 Q. For the time being, I'd like to ask another question. Let us
10 look at paragraph 30 of your statement. In paragraph 30, you discuss
11 freedom of movement in the area of Vrace and Grbavica, and non-stop
12 shelling and sniping from tall buildings and other facilities controlled
13 by the Muslim forces. Many inhabitants were killed in that way of
14 different ethnicities.
15 Please tell the Court, as directly as possible and as
16 specifically as possible, to your personal knowledge, which buildings or
17 facilities were used by the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina to shell and snipe
18 the area of Grbavica?
19 A. First of all, during the war, that area was one hell to live in.
20 Grbavica was basically surrounded from three sides by the separation line
21 with the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina between the army and the VRS. As
22 regards the shelling, it was difficult to know where it was done from
23 because a shell may be sent from a kilometre or two away. As regards the
24 shooting and sniping and hundreds of victims that were targeted in
25 Grbavica, the separation line was the Miljacka river, the length of over
1 some 2 kilometres. It was the only division between the two sides.
2 On the Army of the BH side, there is a promenade across the river
3 and a certain number of buildings along it where the people did not
4 reside. They were -- there were mostly offices and that's where the
5 snipers were. Most sniping took place from the roof of the Faculty of
6 Mathematics and Natural Sciences, close to the Miljacka river, somewhere
7 halfway along the separation line of 2 kilometres.
8 On the eastern end, some 100 metres away, was also the building
9 of the Assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina which commanded the entire part of
10 town because of its height, not only Grbavica. There was much sniping
11 from there.
12 There was also sniping from the south-west side, from the
13 building of Loris, which is the first building next to the football club
14 Zeljeznicar stadium. However, there was one thing that could be observed
15 the best, and that was a position of the Army of BiH which was, so to
16 say, behind the back of entire Grbavica. They had a bunker or two there.
17 They had dug a tunnel to them and engaged from there. I saw several
18 civilians, including women, being hit in front of the building where I
19 used to live, and we know to the metre where one can move and what the
20 range was.
21 The sniping place was only about a hundred metres away from the
22 building where I lived and we could hear that one the most. All of the
23 other shots we could hear came from a distance and it was difficult to
24 distinguish whether there was some regular shooting or sniping. There
25 was daily shooting for four years.
1 Q. Please tell us the name of the building you have just described,
2 as well as the area where the two bunkers were.
3 A. It was called Debelo Brdo.
4 Q. In terms of altitude, is Debelo Brdo higher than the settlement
5 of Grbavica?
6 A. Yes, much higher. It is in the direction of Mount Trebevic, at
7 the foot of it. However, it is close, as the crow flies, not only to the
8 separation line along the Miljacka but to Grbavica as well.
9 Q. Thank you, Mr. Salipur, for these clarifications. And at this
10 moment, the Defence has no further questions for you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we'll take break in a minute.
12 I have one very short question for you. The source of the
13 sniping fire, is it that you heard where it came from, or did you ever
14 see snipers in those facilities you described?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do you have in mind the sniping
16 shooters who were active in Grbavica or against Grbavica?
17 JUDGE ORIE: The ones you described as -- in your previous
18 answer. Did you see them or did you hear that the sound was coming from
19 the facilities you mentioned?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was impossible to see. If I
21 tried to see, I would be killed.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Witness, I'm not saying that you should have
23 seen it. I'm just inquiring in what the source of your knowledge of
24 those facilities is. And apparently if you didn't see it, you may have
25 heard that the sniper fire came from those facilities. Is that well
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I could hear them. If I hear
3 a shot and a woman falls down, you can see where she could have been hit
4 from. She could not have been hit through a building. There must be an
5 open area, a window, to engage. So even a layperson could conclude, on
6 the basis of where a victim was killed or wounded, where the sniper was.
7 JUDGE ORIE: So you combined what you heard and what you did see
8 as a result of the fire, that made you conclude where it must have come
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And there's another thing --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you've answered my question. We take a break.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.
15 JUDGE ORIE: After the break you'll be cross-examined by
16 Mr. File. We'd like to see you back in 20 minutes. You may follow the
18 [The witness stands down]
19 JUDGE ORIE: We resume at 20 minutes to 2.00.
20 --- Recess taken at 1.21 p.m.
21 --- On resuming at 1.43 p.m.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE ORIE: The parties are urged to see whether they can manage
24 to conclude cross-examination and re-examination in this session, which
25 takes one hour. We'd then have another close to -- after a break, we
1 would have another 30 minutes to deal with procedural matters.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, or even we could consider to continue then,
4 but -- we would then have a short pause in order to allow Mr. Mladic to
5 leave the courtroom because he has decided that he would waive his right
6 to be present. So perhaps we would continue without a further break.
7 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] That would be convenient for us,
8 Your Honours, because we also have a scheduled call on General Mladic.
9 So as far as we are concerned, we can proceed immediately after the
10 examination of this witness ends.
11 [The witness takes the stand]
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Salipur, may I urge you to focus your answer on
13 the question, that is, not to go beyond what you are asked. Just focus
14 on that. Mr. File will now cross-examine you. Mr. File is counsel for
15 the Prosecution.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. FILE: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Cross-examination by Mr. File:
19 Q. Good afternoon, sir.
20 A. Good afternoon.
21 Q. We heard at temporary transcript page 55 today that the witness
22 statement that you've submitted in this case was the identical witness
23 statement that you gave as evidence when you testified in the Karadzic
24 case here at the ICTY. When you testified in the Karadzic case on the
25 17th and 18th of December, 2012, you told the truth; correct?
1 A. Yes, 100 per cent.
2 Q. And do you still stand by that testimony today?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. I'm going to read a quotation from your statement and then a
5 quotation from your Karadzic live testimony and then I will ask you a
6 question about it.
7 So let's look at paragraph 8 of your statement, which is D1112.
8 In that paragraph you say:
9 "Crisis Staffs were formed in Serbian municipalities in
10 accordance with the instructions of the government of the Serbian
11 Republic of BH, and this was also done in the Serbian municipality of
12 Novo Sarajevo."
13 One sentence later you say that:
14 "The Crisis Staff of the Serbian municipality of Novo Sarajevo
15 was formed in accordance with an excerpt from the above instructions."
16 Those instructions are one of your associated exhibits, D1115,
17 and they are dated on page 2 of that document as 26 April 1992.
18 MR. FILE: Now could I please have 65 ter number 32830, please.
19 And if we could go to e-court page 14.
20 Q. This is your testimony in the Karadzic case from the 18th of
21 December, 2012, at transcript page 31640, and there, after having been
22 shown several Crisis Staff documents dating all the way back to
23 December 1991, you were asked:
24 "You must accept, yes or no, that the SDS did establish the
25 Crisis Staff in Novo Sarajevo municipality at least as early as
1 December 1991? Yes or no."
2 Your answer was:
3 "Well, yes, but in the context that I've mentioned in my answers,
4 all of my answers, have a look at one of the earlier documents where it
5 says that we have a co-ordinator for contact with other Crisis Staffs."
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You should slow down when you read.
7 MR. FILE: Yes, Your Honour.
8 Q. So my question for you is: Isn't it true that your statement is
9 wrong as to the time when a Crisis Staff was first formed in
10 Novo Sarajevo? This was pointed out to you on cross-examination in 2012
11 but yet you failed to make any corrections or modifications to your
12 statement here to account for this.
13 A. Oh, I don't know. I don't have that document shown here, the one
14 that you're referring to in order to jog my memory. As far as I can
15 remember, everything is the way I said in my statement, and the documents
16 that were shown to me then, I gave the right answers to all of that in
17 the record. The only thing that is mentioned is that in the Crisis Staff
18 there were two men who were in charge of negotiating with the staffs of
19 the other political parties, which meant that what was sought was the
20 best possible solution already in that situation, before the war.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, let's keep matters short. Mr. File puts to
22 you that in your statement you say that on the 26th of April the Crisis
23 Staff was formed and that in your Karadzic testimony you said that it was
24 formed as early as December 1991.
25 That's what is put to you. Which of the two is accurate?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, of course, the end of 1991.
2 On the 5th of April there was already a war going on. I mean ... I mean,
3 if we're talking about the 25th of April, 1992, the war was already under
4 way and --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you don't have to explain why. Just, you
6 say, it's 1991, which is not what is found in your statement.
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. FILE:
9 Q. Okay. I'd like that ask you some questions about the
10 Novo Sarajevo Crisis Staff. Your Crisis Staff received instructions on
11 activity from the SDS Main Board; correct?
12 A. First the Crisis Staff had to be established, and for it to be
13 established, there were instructions that were received and the
14 instructions came from the government. Actually, from this -- this
15 Main Board of the SDS, the Serb Democratic Party, and then that went to
16 the lower organs, the municipal organs, and the Municipal Board. On the
17 basis of these instructions establish the Crisis Staff, because the
18 organisation had several members ...
19 Q. In your testimony in the Karadzic case, you were asked whether
20 you personally participated in the implementation of instructions
21 received from the SDS Main Board in December 1991. And your answer was:
22 "Yes, I did participate," and then you went on to emphasise that
23 you were an elected member of the municipal assembly. That was at T31628
24 in the Karadzic case.
25 Do you stand by that testimony today?
1 A. Yes. In 1990, at the elections, I was elected an assemblyman,
2 and I was on the list of the Serb Democratic Party. And I was one of the
3 founders in the municipality of Novo Sarajevo, one of the founders of the
4 Serb Democratic Party, the SDS.
5 Q. The Novo Sarajevo Crisis Staff co-ordinated closely with Serb
6 armed forces; is that correct?
7 A. Serb armed forces did not exist at the time. The Serbian
8 Democratic Party established the so-called TO as the war drew closer.
9 The system in pre-war Yugoslavia was such that in addition to the armed
10 forces there was the Territorial Defence comprised of the people
11 themselves. It is rather complicated to explain.
12 Q. Well, to be specific, it's true that members of the Crisis Staff
13 included the local chief of police, the local head of the Territorial
14 Defence, and the secretary of the Secretariat for National Defence;
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. File, the witness earlier apparently had
17 problems with the time-frame. Could you give a time-frame for your
18 question so that there's no confusion.
19 MR. FILE:
20 Q. In early 1992, isn't it true that members of the Crisis Staff
21 included the local chief of police, the local head of the Territorial
22 Defence, and the secretary of the Secretariat for National Defence?
23 A. Yes. And this is why, in half a minute --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, no one asked you why. Just whether they
25 were. You've answered that question.
1 Please proceed, Mr. File.
2 MR. FILE: Could we see 65 ter number 03625 -- sorry, 03635,
4 Q. As this comes up, you will see that this is a document reporting
5 a Novo Sarajevo SDS Crisis Staff meeting dated 25 December 1991.
6 MR. FILE: This does not seem to be the correct document.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please repeat the number.
8 MR. FILE: 03635.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you just say it one more time, Mr. File.
10 MR. FILE: This is correct, the one that is showing now.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
12 MR. FILE: It's 03635.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
14 MR. FILE:
15 Q. So this a document reporting a Novo Sarajevo Crisis Staff meeting
16 from the 25th of December, 1991. You will see that you have a task
17 assigned to you under number 3. And if you go further down the page, it
18 says: Tasks. They include list of military conscripts, first, second,
19 third call-up, men between 17 and 65.
20 Item 7 at the bottom says: Responsible for TO Territorial
21 Defence insignia, Dragan Vucetic.
22 So my question for you is that in December 1991, the SDS Crisis
23 Staff was already participating in military-related activities such as
24 drawing up lists of conscripts and dealing with military uniforms;
1 A. Yes. But the system was such, the system of All People's
2 Defence, was such that we all had uniforms at home, irrespective of
3 whether we were Serb, Muslim, or anything else. The TO was one thing;
4 the army another.
5 MR. FILE: Your Honour, I would tender that document.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: It will be assigned Exhibit Number P7486. Thank
9 JUDGE ORIE: P7486 is admitted.
10 MR. FILE:
11 Q. Mr. Salipur, isn't it also true that by January 1992, the
12 Novo Sarajevo Crisis Staff was calling all battalion commanders in the
13 area to attend Crisis Staff meetings?
14 A. Yes. But this TO was officially divided by that time.
15 MR. FILE: Could we see 65 ter number 03640, please.
16 Q. You will see this is a 29 January 1992 meeting minutes from the
17 Novo Sarajevo Crisis Staff. And I just would like for you to verify
18 item 10, which I believe is on page 2 of the B/C/S. This confirms your
19 testimony that all the battalion commanders are to be called to the
20 Crisis Staff meeting; correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. FILE: Your Honour, I would tender that document.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: It shall be assigned Exhibit Number P7487. Thank
1 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted.
2 MR. FILE: Could we please see 65 ter number 03243, please.
3 Q. You will see that this is a Crisis Staff order from Novo Sarajevo
4 dated 22 April 1992.
5 Now, in this order, you see the Serbian Novo Sarajevo Crisis
6 Staff issuing a military mobilisation order to local citizens that is
7 subject to the Law on Military obligation and Military Court if it's not
8 followed. Now, I note that at the beginning of this document it says
9 that this order was issued on the basis of order taken by the Council of
10 National Security of Serbian People.
11 So it's true that this order was not a spontaneous independent
12 decision by the Novo Sarajevo Crisis Staff; right? It was pursuant to an
13 order that had come from above just a few days earlier. Isn't that
15 A. Yes. Because by the time the Serbian Republic of
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina had been proclaimed by the Serbian MPs in
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina, the war was, by that time, some 20 days under way.
18 But the VRS had still not been formed.
19 MR. FILE: Could we look at P3027, please.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Are you tendering the current --
21 MR. FILE: Yes, I would like to tender that, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
23 THE REGISTRAR: It shall be assigned Exhibit Number P7488. Thank
25 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
1 MR. FILE:
2 Q. Mr. Salipur, you will see that this is a SRBiH Ministry of
3 National Defence decision concerning the establishment of the
4 Territorial Defence as an armed force of the Serbian Republic of BiH
5 dated 16 April 1992. This was the decision that the order we just looked
6 at was implementing; correct?
7 A. This does not ring a bell, but in my view, there is a link with
8 the order.
9 Q. That's fine if you don't know specifically.
10 I'm going to shift topics slightly. It's also true that from the
11 time the SDS party was created until the conflict began, Slavo Aleksic
12 was a member of the Novo Sarajevo SDS Municipal Board; correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now, in the Karadzic case, you were asked about Aleksic's command
15 of the Serbian Chetnik detachment in Novo Sarajevo and your response was:
16 "... the unit under the command of Slavo Aleksic in the war was a
17 company that was part -- I'm not sure whether it was the 1st or
18 2nd Battalion. For a time it was the Sarajevo and later the Romanija
19 Motorised Brigade."
20 Then you went on to say:
21 "Well, Chetnik detachment and so on and so forth, that has
22 nothing to do with it. You can see under whose command he operated."
23 That at transcript page 31646 from that testimony.
24 Do you still stand by that testimony?
25 A. I know for sure that the unit he commanded was part of the VRS as
1 a company. It was included into the other units. They called themselves
2 some sort of Chetnik movement, but that's a different thing. In any
3 case, they were definitely part of the VRS as a military formation.
4 My answer back then had to do with Slavo Aleksic. It was
5 suggested that he had come from elsewhere as a volunteer, but in my
6 statement I prove that he lived and worked in Sarajevo throughout the
7 time and was a member of the SDS as of its establishment.
8 Q. I wasn't asking about where he came from. I'm going to show you
9 a brief video-clip and then ask you about it.
10 MR. FILE: Could we have 65 ter number 31015c.
11 And, Your Honours, the transcript for this video has been
12 confirmed by CLSS, so I believe it can be played just once.
13 JUDGE ORIE: It may be played.
14 [Video-clip played]
15 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Journalist: From the day the war
16 began, you were part of the Sarajevo defence and spent all your time at
17 the Jewish cemetery, defending that part of Serbian Sarajevo.
18 "Slavo Aleksic: Yes, I came to the Jewish cemetery on
19 21 April 1992, after the Muslim forces had broken through to a part of
20 our territory. That day, 21 April, we were descending and clearing
21 Grbavica. I was at the Vrbanja bridge and the Vrace Police Command
22 ordered me to move together with my men to the positions at the Jewish
23 cemetery, where we repelled the Muslim attack and inflicted heavy losses
24 on them. They took away five or six civilian hostages in retaliation.
25 They were later exchanged and from then on, from 21 April onwards, I was
1 stationed at the Jewish cemetery. In May, around St. George's Day, I
2 moved to a small barracks named Bosut, under Debelo Brdo. The
3 communications centre was there, in a tunnel inside a hill. We held
4 these positions until the Dayton Agreements were concluded, and we
5 controlled the Jewish cemetery and Vrbanja, all the way from Debelo Brdo
6 to the Vrbanja bridge, Ozrenska Street and so on. In other words, the
7 area of Serbian Grbavica."
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. File, you should put on the record the time
9 when the video started to the end.
10 MR. FILE: I will have that for you in a moment, Your Honour.
11 The beginning point is 14 minutes, 32 seconds. And it ends at
12 16 minutes, 5 seconds of the original video.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
14 MR. FILE:
15 Q. Sir, you would confirm, first of all, that this is Slavo Aleksic
16 speaking in this video?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And having seen this clip --
19 A. What's he got to do with my testimony? It isn't clear to me.
20 Q. Having seen this clip, would you accept that in April 1992
21 Aleksic was taking orders from the Vrace police command?
22 A. In all of my statements, I say that the war began on the
23 4th of April. I lived in Pofalici, in a different part of Sarajevo.
24 Q. That wasn't the question, sir. That --
25 A. I had no contact with that part where Grbavica, Vrace, and the
1 Jewish cemetery are until Pofalici fell on the 16th of May. I didn't
2 know what was going on there.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, I'll stop you there. The question was
4 whether you accept --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well.
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- that in April 1992 Aleksic was taking orders from
7 the Vrace police command. Now, there are three options: Either do you
8 not accept it, or you do accept it, or you just don't know.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know. I mentioned why.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. That answers the question.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. FILE: Your Honour, I would tender that video.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
14 THE REGISTRAR: It shall be assigned Exhibit Number P7489.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
16 MR. FILE:
17 Q. Sir, I'm going to switch gears for a moment and ask you about the
18 Novo Sarajevo Assembly in 1991. I'm going to start by playing you part
19 of a recorded telephone conversation and then I will ask you some
20 questions about it.
21 MR. FILE: This is going to be 65 ter 20458, and the duration of
22 the first part that we're going listen to is 1 minute, 22 seconds,
23 starting from 0.
24 [Audio-clip played]
25 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] Radovan Karadzic: Hello. Hi.
1 "Unknown female voice: Hello.
2 "Radovan Karadzic: Is this Djurovic's cabinet?
3 "Unknown female voice: Yes, yes, it is.
4 "Radovan Karadzic: Is President Djurovic there?
5 "Unknown female voice: Is this Dr. Karadzic?
6 "Radovan Karadzic: Yes, it's me.
7 "Unknown female voice: Just a moment, please.
8 "Radovan Karadzic: Hello.
9 "Zarko Djurovic: Hello, Doctor.
10 "Radovan Karadzic: How are you?
11 "Zarko Djurovic: Pretty much so.
12 "Radovan Karadzic: I called you yesterday but you were on the
13 way between your home and work.
14 "Zarko Djurovic: Yes. As soon as I arrived home I called, but
15 you went to some kind of meeting.
16 "Radovan Karadzic: Yes, I had another urgent thing. I wanted to
17 say ... this thing with Neskovic, is it still on or not?
18 "Zarko Djurovic: It is.
19 "Radovan Karadzic: Could that wait a while so we can figure
20 something out?
21 "Zarko Djurovic: It can. It can wait a while so ...
22 "Radovan Karadzic: All right. Then its settled.
23 "Zarko Djurovic: Now, we have some discussions to attend today,
24 there are some inter-party discussions. This guy Sarovic and engineer
25 Soljic, they will hold talks today, so they'll probably leave it. I
1 don't think they'll appoint anyone yet.
2 "Radovan Karadzic: Take -- take that upon yourself, but don't --
3 let's see what we shall do, are we in his favour or what because --
4 "Zarko Djurovic: Uh-huh.
5 "Radovan Karadzic: -- I have some more information here, I'll
6 have it checked in about two or three days and then I'll ...
7 "Zarko Djurovic: All right.
8 "Radovan Karadzic: I'll see. By the way, how's business?
9 "Zarko Djurovic: Well, it's pretty good. Nobody's nervous, I
10 just gathered some people here, my closest associates and so. I can see
11 here that this is being tapped and so on. Although, these people,
12 they -- these guys from SDA, they are persistent and so ...
13 "Radovan Karadzic: What do they want?
14 "Zarko Djurovic: I see they are talking and they are constantly
15 dissatisfied, following these people and so on.
16 "Radovan Karadzic: Uh-huh.
17 "Zarko Djurovic: Incidents all the time, constant discontent and
18 so on.
19 "Radovan Karadzic: We'll teach them the law pretty soon, because
20 in Novo Sarajevo they blocked the work of the assembly."
21 MR. FILE:
22 Q. Now, Mr. Salipur, first of all, you recognise this as a
23 conversation between Radovan Karadzic and Zarko Djurovic; correct?
24 A. I recognise both voices. 100 per cent.
25 JUDGE ORIE: We stopped at 1:21.4.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. FILE: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. Zarko Djurovic was the chairman of the Executive Committee in
4 Novo Sarajevo; correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And hearing Karadzic's allegation that they - presumably this is
7 the SDA - blocked the work of the assembly in Novo Sarajevo, would you
8 agree that this conversation is taking place in November 1991?
9 A. I don't know when this conversation took place. I do recognise
10 the voices. Zarko Djurovic was president of the Executive Council,
11 coming from the ranks of the SDS.
12 Q. That's fine.
13 A. That was the division of power after the elections.
14 Q. If you don't know, it's okay. Now I'm going to play what comes
15 next in this telephone conversation which will be from 1 minute, 21.4 to
16 the end, which is 2 minutes and 19 seconds.
17 [Audio-clip played]
18 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Zarko Djurovic: Yes, they did.
19 "Radovan Karadzic: I don't know to what extent that guy Setlivar
20 is involved, but in any case the fact remains that they've blocked it.
21 "Zarko Djurovic: Yes, they did.
22 "Radovan Karadzic: And that we'll probably carry out some kind
23 of reorganisation of the city as such.
24 "Zarko Djurovic: Exactly.
25 "Radovan Karadzic: And they can go to fucking hell.
1 "Zarko Djurovic: Well, so they should.
2 "Radovan Karadzic: And exactly where in Novo Sarajevo are their
4 "Zarko Djurovic: Well, mostly it is Velesici, that can be joined
5 to the centre without problems.
6 "Radovan Karadzic: Yes, yes. How many of them are there in that
8 "Djurovic: Well, about 6.000.
9 "Karadzic: About 6.000. And what is the total number of them in
10 the municipality?
11 "Djurovic: In the municipality, there are ... you can't know for
12 sure, but there are about 30.000 and then some. However, it seems they
13 tampered with the census, but nothing can be done, otherwise that
14 would ...
15 "Karadzic: Census, huh?
16 "Djurovic: Yes.
17 "Karadzic: Yes, yes.
18 "Djurovic: But there are about 30.000 for sure, and then there
19 is Sanac, illegal settlement ...
20 "Karadzic: Yes, yes. That, that can't be annexed to anything,
22 "Djurovic: That can't -- well, it could, Sanac couldn't.
23 "Karadzic: It can't, huh?
24 "Djurovic: No, but that would be like a reservation, which
25 we ... in all possible ways. Sanac is not that important anyway."
1 MR. FILE:
2 Q. Now, Mr. Salipur, I note that in your statement you say at
3 paragraph 19:
4 "I do not have, nor did I have, information to the effect that
5 the Serbian leadership headed by Dr. Radovan Karadzic, by means of
6 regionalisation, secretly grouped territories in BH which they considered
7 to be Serbian so that these territories could secede from BH by force and
8 possibly join Serbia and the Republic of Serbian Krajina, nor was this
9 discussed in Serbian circles."
10 Now, hearing this discussion between Radovan Karadzic and
11 Zarko Djurovic, you would accept that this type of regionalisation was
12 being discussed in Serbian circles; right?
13 A. I don't know about these conversations in that sense. But
14 following this recording and the text here, it just makes me laugh,
15 really. Neither Karadzic nor Djurovic, they don't know the structure or
16 anything of these settlements that they're talking about. It's like
17 children were agreeing about things. I'm just telling you my opinion. I
18 know Sarajevo, I was born in Sarajevo. And this Djurovic came later. I
19 mean, he is a Montenegrin.
20 MR. FILE: Your Honour, I would tender that intercept, please.
21 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. File, Mr. Registrar draws my attention to the
23 fact that what was given on a CD is there indicated as being 65 ter
24 20458a. That's not exactly the same number as you used, I think. And
25 that the total duration is 2 minutes, 18 seconds, which might also --
1 does that cover all of what we heard?
2 MR. FILE: Thank you, Your Honour. I accept those corrections,
3 that's correct, it should be 20458a.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And the time what we listened to, the intercept, was
5 that all together -- was that all together 2 minutes, 18 seconds?
6 MR. FILE: Yes, the entire intercept is 2 minutes and 18 seconds.
7 We listened to it in two parts.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The two together then, we'll verify that.
9 Mr. Registrar, could assign a number.
10 THE REGISTRAR: It shall be assigned Exhibit Number P7490. Thank
12 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
13 MR. FILE: Could we please look at 65 ter number 10694.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. There is one second missing, by the way. It
15 says 2:18, whereas you indicated it was 2:19, but let's just accept that.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. FILE:
18 Q. You will see that these are the minutes of the 10th joint session
19 of the Sarajevo SDS city and Executive Boards from the 27th of November,
20 1991, presided over by Jovo Jovanovic, chairman of the city board,
21 Sarajevo SDS. There are three items in this document I would like to
22 draw your attention to.
23 On page 1 in both versions, agenda item 4, is titled:
24 Regionalisation. If we could go to English page 4 and B/C/S page 5, you
25 will see regarding item 4, in the middle of the page, that a detailed
1 report was presented "about the results of the commission for carrying
2 out regionalisation." And you'll see that that report was unanimously
4 And now if we could go to English page 5 and B/C/S page 6, at the
5 top of those pages, here this is Jovo Jovanovic who is recorded as
6 stating, and I quote:
7 "Very soon regionalisation would be carried out, and in areas
8 with a Serbian majority and places where Serbs were owners of real
9 estate, Serbian organs of government would be formed."
10 Now looking at this document, it's true, isn't it, that a plan
11 was in place and already being discussed in the SDS in Sarajevo at least
12 by November 1991 to carry out a regionalisation that would create Serb
13 territories. That's true, isn't it?
14 A. I don't know anything about this. I wasn't a member of any
15 higher party echelons for the city of Sarajevo. All I know is the
16 situation in the Serbian Democratic Party in the municipality of
17 Sarajevo. I knew Mr. Jovanovic and I know about the meeting. I know
18 that it was held in our municipal building. However, I didn't attend the
19 meeting and I'm not familiar with any of these activities. This is
20 something that never reached our Municipal Board, so this is something
21 that I am only seeing now in this document.
22 MR. FILE: Your Honour, I would tender that document.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: It shall be assigned Exhibit Number P7491. Thank
1 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
2 MR. FILE: Could we please have P353. English and B/C/S pages 93
3 in both.
4 Q. Sir, this is a notebook kept by Ratko Mladic and we're going to
5 look at an entry from the 6th of June, 1992, at the Hotel Bistrica
6 Jahorina entitled: Consultations on the military and political situation
7 in SRBH.
8 MR. FILE: Could we please go to English and B/C/S page 102.
9 Q. Sir, here you see a reference to Neskovic. Now this is reference
10 to the president of the Crisis Staff of Novo Sarajevo at that time in
11 June 1992; correct?
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. File, are you sure that these pages
13 correspond? I have some doubt.
14 MR. FILE: It may be that we need to go two more pages in the
15 B/C/S. One more page, I believe.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I think we're on the right page, isn't it?
17 MR. FILE:
18 Q. Now just to clarify, sir -- oh.
19 JUDGE ORIE: We were at the right page. I think we're not any --
20 MR. FILE: Yes, I believe we were.
21 JUDGE ORIE: One page back. No, perhaps one more --
22 MR. FILE: One more back.
23 JUDGE ORIE: We're now on the right page, I think.
24 MR. FILE: Okay.
25 Q. Now I believe you can see a reference to Neskovic. He was the
1 president of the Crisis Staff of Novo Sarajevo at that time, in
2 June 1992; isn't that right?
3 A. He was a government commissioner for the -- for Novo Sarajevo.
4 That's what the title was. He was practically above the Crisis Staff and
5 all of that. That post -- once the Crisis Staffs were established, the
6 then-government introduced that post.
7 Q. Okay.
8 MR. FILE: Could we go to English page 104 --
9 JUDGE ORIE: And what we looked at until now was page 102 in the
10 English version?
11 MR. FILE: Yes. And 103 in the B/C/S.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Indeed, 103, e-court page B/C/S.
13 Please proceed.
14 MR. FILE: It may be that we need page 105 in the B/C/S.
15 Q. So at the top of the page, you see "Karadzic," who says:
16 "We could have gone for a compact and dispersed partition of
17 Sarajevo if there had been the political means. Not all our wishes can
18 be fulfilled, we have to be a mature people."
19 Now that's the truth of the matter, that the Bosnian Serb
20 leadership desired a partition of the city of Sarajevo if that had been
21 possible; correct?
22 A. Well, I don't know what the date is of the notes and the meeting,
23 when this took place. In any case --
24 Q. For your information, it's the 6th of June, 1992.
25 A. In any case, Sarajevo was a divided city. It was never
1 encircled. Throughout the war, it was a divided city. That would be the
2 most correct way to describe it. It was divided at the beginning of the
3 war. The war divided it.
4 Q. Okay. Radovan Karadzic also participated significantly in local
5 SDS affairs. For example, by personally attending at least ten different
6 sessions of the SDS Municipal Board just in Novo Sarajevo alone, from the
7 time of the 1990 elections until conflict broke out in 1992; correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Okay --
10 A. Out of the six city assemblies, it was the municipality that had
11 the strongest SDS presence. That is where the SDS won the elections.
12 Q. Okay. I'm going to shift to another topic.
13 In your statement you talk about the Muslims arming themselves,
14 in paragraph 11. And then in paragraph 24, you talk about Serbs having
15 some weapons, like hunting rifles and pistols, that were legally in their
16 possession. But isn't it true that the Novo Sarajevo SDS Municipal Board
17 decided to give material support to Serbs who had been convicted of
18 illegal arms trafficking in February 1992?
19 A. I am not aware of that kind of support. I do know about a
20 situation with a convoy of weapons that was transported through our
21 municipality's territory and that this was seized by the military police.
22 I cannot remember it all precisely. This something that I heard. It was
23 something that was happening far away from me, and I didn't know anything
24 about it.
25 Q. I'm going to try to refresh your memory. If we --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. File --
2 MR. FILE: Yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: -- before you do so. I think the Chamber urged the
4 parties to see whether they could conclude the examination-in-chief and
5 cross-examination within this hour. Now we have seven minutes left.
6 First, Mr. Stojanovic, as matters stand now, how much time would
7 you need for re-examination? And I may point at the fact that you used
8 38 minutes in the examination of the witness rather than the 30 you
9 assessed. How much time, as matters stand now, would you still need?
10 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] I don't need a lot. I just have
11 a couple of questions so I am not going to take long at all.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Is that five minutes or is that ...
13 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I think that would be
15 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. File, I would like to urge you to conclude
16 as quickly as you can now. And that means within the next five minutes.
17 MR. FILE: Your Honour, it may, with your leave, take
18 approximately ten minutes to get through the -- if that's --
19 JUDGE ORIE: We're running out of time.
20 MR. FILE: Very well.
21 JUDGE ORIE: We have to deal with procedural matters, so ten
22 minutes is not okay. We already go beyond our schedule for more than
23 five minutes and it's really urgent.
24 Please proceed.
25 MR. FILE: Yes, Your Honour.
1 Could we look at 65 ter 03217, please.
2 Q. Now, these are the minutes from the 13th Extraordinary Session of
3 the SDS Novo Sarajevo Municipal Board dated 28 February 1992. You will
4 see on item 5, you were present there. It says "Zdravko Malipur," but I
5 would add that on page 5 of this document in both versions it quotes you
6 as "Salipur" participating in this meeting.
7 MR. FILE: Could we go to English page 6 and B/C/S page 7.
8 Q. So what you will see here is the issue arises regarding:
9 "... problems of Serbs convicted for transport of arms in Vrace.
10 They do not have money for paying the fine, trial expenses and lawyers'
11 fees (200.000 dinars are needed)."
12 And then it goes on to say --
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Next page.
14 MR. FILE: On the next page in the English, yes. And I believe
15 it's next page in the B/C/S as well.
16 Q. It says:
17 "After discussion in which majority of members present at the
18 meeting took part, the board reached the following conclusions:
19 "... payment of 200.000 dinars for helping the Serbs convicted of
20 transport in arms -- for transport of arms in Vrace has been approved."
21 So it was not the case, as you suggest in your statement, that
22 Serb arms were limited to legal possession of weapons; correct?
23 A. There's just a little time so I cannot explain this precisely.
24 It depends on the time when they did have, when they didn't have. It
25 changes from day to day. The situation changed from day to day.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you're not invited to explain the whole of
2 the situation. What Mr. File puts to you is that apparently from this
3 document you could read that Serbs were convicted for transport of arms
4 in Vrace and that money was needed for their defence, or further defence,
5 and whether that does not indicate that Serbs were also dealing with
6 illegal weapon business.
7 If I understood your question well, Mr. File.
8 Could you please answer that question?
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you tell us whether, on the basis of
11 this document, you agree that Serbs were involved in illegal arms as
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I personally know who these people
14 are. They broke the law and they had to pay the fine. Since they were
15 our members, we approved a sum of money to help them out so that they
16 don't have do go to prison.
17 As for what weapons they were, who they were transporting them
18 for, where they were supposed to be going, all these things I don't know
19 anything about.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
21 MR. FILE: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. My last question relates to paragraphs 20 and 30 of your
23 statement where you deny knowledge, in paragraph 20, that civilian
24 authorities supported or were involved with the permanent removal of
25 non-Serbs from territories claimed by Serbs; and in paragraph 30, where
1 you say the non-Serbian population was allowed access to all public
2 institutions, enjoyed all civil and human rights, and had freedom of
3 movement in the whole of Republika Srpska.
4 I'd like to show you Exhibit P307, please. When this comes up,
5 you will see that it is an UN document from UNCIVPOL, an occurrence
6 report from Sector Sarajevo regarding the expulsion of Muslim citizens
7 from Grbavica Sector Sarajevo to the area of Novo Sarajevo dated 30th of
8 September, 1992.
9 It describes the area on page 1, that it is the Bristol Hotel
10 area. The second paragraph says that the preliminary information
11 confirmed that the expulsion was in progress.
12 And then at the bottom paragraph on English page 1 and moving on
13 to B/C/S page 2, it describes a scene that was totally out of control
14 with the sound of shelling and gun-fire, people in a panic. The Red
15 Cross confirmed approximately 300 Muslim civilians had been expelled.
16 And then in English page 2 and B/C/S page 3, the penultimate paragraph,
17 the report's author found it very strange that this specific area of the
18 town was under shelling. And he said it appeared evident that the
19 shelling was directed towards the Muslim civilians.
20 Now I would also note that this was labelled by -- an expulsion
21 by SRNA, the Serb media outlet, in P6527. And it also led to a protest
22 from UNPROFOR Commander Morillon to Radovan Karadzic, which is P4592.
23 Now this event appears to have taken place just a few days before
24 you returned from Belgrade to Grbavica. It involved hundreds of people.
25 It was serious enough to provoke a protest at the highest levels and it
1 happened in precisely the part of Sarajevo that you returned to, but
2 there's no mention of this in your description of the harmonious
3 relations and life enjoyed by non-Serbs in Grbavica.
4 So my question to you is: Why did you exclude this incident from
5 your statement?
6 A. Could you please show me this first page for a second again,
8 As far as I can see, first of all, I'd never heard of this and it
9 did not happen while I was at Grbavica.
10 Secondly, as far as I can see, Hotel Bristol is mentioned in this
11 document. Hotel Bristol is not in Grbavica. It was under the control of
12 the Muslim forces.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, you say you never heard about it, which, I
14 think, answers the question why you can't tell about it.
15 Mr. File, you had used more than your five minutes.
16 MR. FILE: And that's all I will use. Thank you, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. File, before you sit down, do you have any
18 intentions with respect to 65 ter 03217?
19 MR. FILE: If I omitted to ask for that to be tendered, then I
20 would ask for that now, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: You did omit.
22 MR. FILE: Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: It shall be assigned Exhibit Number P7492. Thank
1 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
2 Mr. Stojanovic, your five minutes start now.
3 Re-examination by Mr. Stojanovic:
4 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Salipur, at some point today in
5 cross-examination you were asked if representatives of the police and
6 commanders of police stations were members of Crisis Staffs and if you
7 recall you tried to say that they were but you were stopped in your
8 intention to explain.
9 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] For the record, Your Honours, it
10 was page 75 of today's temporary transcript, lines 11 through 19.
11 Q. I would now like to ask you why were representatives of police
12 stations represented on the Crisis Staffs at that time, to the best of
13 your knowledge?
14 A. I'll be brief. After the elections, when the authorities were
15 set up, if the police commander was a Muslim, his deputy would be a Serb,
16 or in case of the TO, the principle was the same. Each of those
17 officials was a member to a Crisis Staff. As someone from a particular
18 political party, they were given that position. That is what I wasn't
19 allowed to explain. So on the same Crisis Staff there would be two
20 people from different organisations: One from the SDS and another from
21 somewhere else.
22 Q. Another question. At that time, according to the coalition
23 agreements between the national parties participating in the division of
24 power, were the staffs and duties also divided according to the ethnic
1 A. Yes. The chief of TO Staff was Idriz --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the witness kindly
3 slow down and repeat the names.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you slow down and repeat the names.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Salko Idriz, chief of the TO Staff
6 in Novo Sarajevo municipality, pre-war chief, he assumed that position on
7 behalf of the SDS and he participated in the attack on Pofalici when the
8 60 people were killed. His deputy was Momo Garic on our side, in our
9 Crisis Staff.
10 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, with your leave,
11 I'd like to consult with the client briefly.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
13 [Defence counsel and accused confer]
14 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Salipur, I'd like to thank you on behalf of General Mladic's
17 MR. STOJANOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we have no more
18 questions of this witness.
19 JUDGE ORIE: No more questions from the Prosecution?
20 MR. FILE: No, Your Honour. Thank you.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Since the Bench also has no further questions for
23 you, Mr. Salipur, this concludes your testimony in this court. I'd like
24 to thank you very much for coming a long way to The Hague and for having
25 answered the questions that were put to you, questions put to you by the
1 parties, and questions put to you by the Bench. I wish you a safe --
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you as well. I would be
3 happy if my testimony contributed to the reaching of the truth or
4 anything of the sort. In any case, to assist you in these proceedings.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for the good wishes, and you may follow
6 the usher.
7 [The witness withdrew]
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: We'll just take a very, very short break in order to
10 allow Mr. Mladic to leave the courtroom because he waived his right to
11 remain present when we're dealing with procedural matters.
12 We take a break of one minute.
13 [The accused withdrew]
14 --- Break taken at 2.56 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 2.58 p.m.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE ORIE: I'll deal with some procedural matters. We start
18 with the first one. That's an oral decision on the admission of
19 associated exhibits tendered through Witness Vladimir Lukic.
20 The witness testified on the 8th through the 10th of September,
21 2014. From the original 88 tendered associated exhibits on the exhibit
22 list submitted with the Defence's Rule 92 ter motion, 11 documents were
23 admitted into evidence during Lukic's testimony.
24 On the 25th of November, 2014, the Defence submitted a revised
25 exhibit list via e-mail and withdrew 11 of the originally tendered
1 associated exhibits. An additional six documents were admitted into
2 evidence pursuant to the Chamber's decision of the 16th of February,
4 With regard to document bearing 65 ter number 1D5295, the Chamber
5 notes that it was admitted as part of Exhibit P2508 on the 22nd of
6 June this year, and this can be found at transcript page 36159 through
8 Accordingly, the Chamber will now decide on the remaining 59
9 documents tendered as exhibits associated with Lukic's witness statement
10 admitted as Exhibit D626.
11 The Chamber recalls that documents can be an admitted as
12 associated exhibits if they form an inseparable and indispensable part of
13 the witness's written testimony. In order to satisfy this test, the
14 tendering party must demonstrate that the witness's statement would be
15 incomprehensible or of less probative value without admission into
16 evidence of the associated exhibits. The Chamber has discussed its
17 interpretation of the applicable law at transcript pages 530 to 531, and
18 5601 to 5603, and in its written decision of the 23rd of July and another
19 one, the 7th of February, 2013. The Chamber finds that without some of
20 the tendered documents, it would not be able to comprehend the witness's
21 statement and for this reason finds that these documents form an
22 inseparable and indispensable part of Lukic's written statement. The
23 Chamber therefore admits the following 22 documents bearing Rule 65 ter
24 numbers 1D2447 up to and including 1D2449, Exhibit 1D2465, Exhibits
25 1D2472 up to and including 1D2474, documents 1D2478 up to and including
1 1D2480, document 1D2484 -- documents, I should say, 1D2484 up to and
2 including 1D2487, document 1D2489, 1D2490, 1D2496, 1D2500, 1D4403,
3 1D5284, 1D5289, and 21766 into evidence as associated exhibits to
4 Exhibit D626. The Chamber hereby instructs the Registry to assign
5 exhibit numbers to the documents admitted into evidence.
6 With regard to the remaining 37 documents, the Chamber finds that
7 they either restate the witness's written evidence or in some instances
8 lack any relations with the document. Therefore, these documents do not
9 form an inseparable and indispensable part of Exhibit D626, and the
10 Chamber further finds that the exclusion of these documents does not
11 result in a lesser probative value of Exhibit D626 and consequently
12 denies their admission.
13 And this concludes the Chamber's decision.
14 The next decision I'll deliver is the decision on the Defence's
15 responses to the Prosecution's notices regarding the disclosure of the
16 expert reports of Svetlana Radovanovic, Dragic Gojkovic, and
17 Mile Dosenovic.
18 On the 9th of February, the 13th of February, and the 10th of
19 April, 2015, the Defence filed notices of disclosure of three expert
20 reports authored by Radovanovic, Gojkovic, and Dosenovic respectively,
21 pursuant to Rules 94 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.
22 The Prosecution filed its respective notices on 11th of March,
23 16th of March and 30th of April.
24 On the 25th of March, the 30th of March, and the 12th of May, the
25 Defence filed its responses to the Prosecution's notices. On the
1 1st of April, 7th of April, and the 19th of May, the Prosecution
2 requested leave to reply and replied.
3 On the 13th of May and on the 22nd of May, for the latter, the
4 Chamber delivered its decisions on the expertise of these experts but
5 deferred its decision on the 25th of March, 30th of the March, and
6 12 May filings. This can be found at transcript pages 35582 through 585,
7 and 36073 through 74.
8 On a preliminary note, the Chamber considers the Defence's
9 response filings of the 25th of March and the 30th of March to be akin to
10 a motion. As a result, the Prosecution had an opportunity to respond to
11 these motions and, accordingly, the Prosecution's requests for leave to
12 reply are moot.
13 The Defence submits that the Prosecution's notices do not comply
14 with the Chamber's previous guidance on Rule 94 bis filings insofar as
15 they failed to provide any specificity in relation to the Prosecution's
16 objections. In this regard, the Defence submits that the Prosecution
17 should be subject to the same Rule 94 bis filing standard as the Defence.
18 The Defence further submits that the Prosecution should be precluded from
19 challenging the methodology and subject matter of the three reports and
20 that its cross-examination of the expert witnesses should be limited to
21 seeking explanation of the reports' conclusions.
22 The Prosecution submits that the Defence misinterprets the
23 Chamber's guidance. It also argues that the guidance does not apply to
24 the current situation as the Prosecution's position in relation to the
25 issues challenged by the three Defence expert witnesses is already on the
2 The Prosecution further submits that the Defence's proposed
3 remedy is not contemplated by the rules and should therefore be denied.
4 With regard to the Defence's first argument, the Chamber
5 considers that the Prosecution has indicated in its notices the parts of
6 the three reports it intends to challenge. Recalling its guidance on
7 5th of December, 2011, and the 11th of January, 2012, the Chamber notes
8 that the parties are advised to be as specific as possible by identifying
9 which sections of the reports it wishes to challenge and provide reasons
10 for any challenges.
11 The Chamber notes that the aforementioned guidance was issued
12 prior to the start of the case at the stage of the proceedings where
13 there was uncertainty as to which aspects of the Prosecution's expert
14 evidence would be challenged by the Defence. In the current stage of the
15 proceedings and in light of the evidence presented by the Prosecution,
16 the position of the Prosecution and the issues in dispute are better
17 known to the parties. The Chamber further notes that some of the
18 aforementioned Defence experts have indicated in what respect they take
19 issue with the reports of the Prosecution experts. The degree of
20 specificity envisaged by the guidance does not necessarily need to be
21 made in a party's Rule 94 bis under (B) notice, but in order to expedite
22 the proceedings and to ensure clarity, should be communicated to the
23 tendering party well in advance of the expert's testimony. The Chamber
24 considers that the Prosecution could have specified more clearly and in
25 greater detail the parts of the reports that it intends to challenge.
1 Concerning the Defence's second submission, the Chamber recalls
2 that Rule 90(H) does not provide for such limitations. The Chamber also
3 recalls its decisions on the expertise of Reynaud Theunens and Ewa Tabeau
4 dated the 25th of September and the 7th of November, 2013, respectively,
5 in which it considered that arguments relating to the content and
6 methodology of expert reports can and should be addressed during
7 cross-examination. This can be found at transcript pages 17437 through
8 440, and 18874 through 75.
9 Based on the foregoing and pursuant to Rule 54 of the Rules, the
10 Chamber denies the Defence's requests. However, the Chamber invites the
11 Prosecution to further specify its objections to the expert reports of
12 Svetlana Radovanovic, Dragic Gojkovic, and Mile Dosenovic, and considers
13 that these objections can and should be addressed during
14 cross-examination of the witnesses.
15 This concludes the Chamber's decision on this matter.
16 I move on. Oral decision on the expertise of Witnesses
17 Mitar Kovac. The Chamber -- on the 17th of February, 2015, the Defence
18 filed a notice of disclosure of Milos Kovac's report pursuant to
19 Rule 94 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The Prosecution
20 filed its notice pursuant to the same rule on the 19th of March,
21 submitting that, while it does not challenge the status of Kovac as a
22 military expert or the relevance of his report, it does not accept the
23 conclusions of his report, and, therefore, wishes to cross-examine him.
24 On 2nd of April, the Defence filed a response to the
25 Prosecution's 19th of March submission. On the 9th of April, the
1 Prosecution sought leave to reply and filed a reply to the Defence
3 Today, the Chamber has addressed similar party submissions
4 corresponding to those of 2 and 9 April regarding other experts and takes
5 the same position here.
6 With respect to the applicable law concerning expert evidence,
7 the Chamber recalls and refers to its 19th of October, 2012, decision
8 concerning expert witness Richard Butler.
9 On the basis of Kovac's curriculum vitae and considering that the
10 Prosecution does not dispute Kovac's qualifications as military expert,
11 the Chamber is satisfied that he has specialised knowledge and expertise,
12 and that such knowledge and expertise may be of assistance to the Chamber
13 in assessing the expert evidence presented by the Prosecution during its
14 case in-chief.
15 With regard to the Prosecution's request to cross-examine the
16 witness, the Chamber notes that the Defence plans to call Kovac to give
17 evidence. The Prosecution will therefore have the opportunity to
18 cross-examine him.
19 Based on the foregoing, the Chamber decides, pursuant to
20 Rule 94 bis, that Kovac may be called to testify as an expert witness and
21 that he shall be made available for cross-examination by the Prosecution.
22 The Chamber defers its decision on admission of his expert report
23 to the time of his testimony.
24 The Chamber now directs the Defence's attention to a preliminary
25 observation regarding Kovac's report. The Chamber observes there is
1 information in the report that is beyond the scope of the witness's area
2 of expertise. Apart from discussing matters related to the witness's
3 military expertise, the report focuses quite heavily on ethnic,
4 religious, demographic, and historical elements.
5 For example, at pages 102 through 104 of his report, the witness
6 appears to challenge the work of expert demographer Ewa Tabeau in general
7 based on the writings of a demographer called Stevo Pasalic. Various
8 sections of the report also contain tables and figures of unsourced
9 demographic data. I refer to pages 22, 102, and 107. And three
10 attachments to the report, which the Chamber observes are not in fact
11 attached, intend to inform the Chamber on the ethnic composition of the
12 population of Sarajevo and of Bosnia. The Chamber has not received
13 material establishing the witness's expertise as a demographer, a
14 historian, or a sociologist. As a result, it expects the parties to
15 focus their examination of the witness on those aspects of the report
16 that relate to his analysis of the military.
17 The Chamber will decide upon completion of Mitar Kovac's
18 testimony on the admission into evidence of his report or portions
19 thereof as may be the case. And this concludes the Chamber's decision.
20 I now move to a few remaining issues from the testimony of
21 Svetozar Andric. On the 9th -- 29th of April, 2015, P7358 and P7360 were
22 MFI'd, pending receipt of B/C/S translations. On the 19th and the 21st
23 of May, 2015, the Prosecution informed the Chamber and the Defence by
24 e-mail that the translations were uploaded into e-court under the doc ID
25 numbers 0265-0037-BCST and R012-2224-BCST respectively.
1 The Chamber has instructed to attach these translations -- the
2 Registry. The Registry is instructed to attach these translations and
3 the Chamber admits P7358 and P7360 into evidence.
4 Also on the 29th of April, D1038 was MFI'd, pending receipt of an
5 English translation. On the same day, the Defence informed the
6 Prosecution and the Chamber that the translation was uploaded into
7 e-court under doc ID number 1D19-2016. And on the 30th of April, the
8 Prosecution stated that it had no objections. The Registry is instructed
9 to attach the translations and the Chamber admits D1038 into evidence.
10 Next item, two exhibits, P7347 and P7362, were reserved -- these
11 numbers were reserved on the 28th and the 29th of April, 2015, pending
12 the Prosecution selecting the excerpts of the two documents to be
14 On the 4th of May, the Prosecution informed the Defence and the
15 Chamber that it had selected the excerpts which are uploaded under
16 65 ter numbers 32499a and 2364a. The Defence has not objected to
17 admission. The Chamber instructs the Registry to replace the current
18 P7347 and P7362 with the mentioned 65 ter numbers and admits them into
20 Next item is a reminder about Rule 92 bis motions.
21 On 29th of June, the Defence stated that it would start filing
22 its Rule 92 bis motions during week of 6th of July. To be found at
23 transcript page 36439. As of now, no such motions have been filed. As
24 Rule 92 bis motions require significant time and effort for the
25 responding party, as well for the Chamber, this is not something that the
1 Defence can postpone until the last minute. The Chamber urges the
2 Defence to start filing its Rule 92 bis motions as soon as possible.
3 Then I move to the next decision to be delivered. It's a
4 decision on the admission of P7381.
5 On the 12th of May, 2015, P7381, a proposal for the appointment
6 of officers to the 1st Birac Infantry Brigade dated the 23rd of August,
7 1992, was marked for identification during the testimony of
8 Dragan Todorovic. The Defence objected to its admission, stating that
9 the witness had no knowledge about the document and that it lacked
10 sufficient indicia of authenticity. This can be found at transcript
11 page 35420. The Chamber granted the parties time to make additional
12 submissions, if any, until the 15th of May. No submissions were received
13 by the set deadline. A reminder e-mail sent by the Chamber's staff on
14 the 20th of May also did not result in any further submissions by the
15 parties. The Chamber will therefore now decide on the admission of
17 The Chamber recalls that the applicable law for the admission of
18 evidence is set out in Rule 89(C) of the Rules which allows a Chamber to
19 admit any relevant evidence which it deems to have probative value.
20 With regard to the Defence's objection that the witness had no
21 knowledge about the document, the Chamber recalls that this is not a
22 requirement for tendering it through a witness, as long as the document's
23 content is sufficiently linked to the content of the witness's testimony.
24 On the issue of authenticity, the Chamber recalls that prima
25 facie proof of reliability on the basis of sufficient indicia is enough
1 at the admissibility stage. The Chamber has analysed P7381 in this
2 light, a document which was allegedly generated on the 23rd of August,
3 1992, by the Birac Infantry Brigade. While the Chamber acknowledges that
4 this is the same brigade the witness was a member of, the document,
5 however, lacks other relevant indicia of reliability such as an
6 addressee. Moreover, it does not bear a stamp or signature, which raises
7 the additional question of whether the document is, in fact, complete.
8 The witness himself was not able to provide information about the
9 document that would have guided the Chamber. Finally is the relevance of
10 the document unclear to this Chamber. For these reasons, the Chamber
11 hereby denies the admission into evidence of P7381 without prejudice.
12 And this concludes the Chamber's decision.
13 I move to an oral decision on the admission of Exhibits P6858 and
15 On the 29th of October, during the cross-examination of Witness
16 Slavko Kralj, the Prosecution showed the witness a photograph, asked him
17 to comment on it, and then tendered the photograph along with a related
18 four-page transcript of Johannes Rutten's testimony from the Krstic case.
19 These were later marked for identification as Exhibits P6858 and P6859
21 The Defence objected to the admission of the transcript excerpt,
22 P6859, on the grounds that Rutten should be called to testify. The
23 Chamber understood the Defence's objection to mean that the transcript of
24 Rutten's previous testimony could not be offered in lieu of his
25 testifying in the present case unless tendered pursuant to Rule 92 bis of
1 the Rules.
2 The Prosecution submitted that, pursuant to Rule 89(C), the
3 Chamber has a great deal of discretion in the admission of evidence, and
4 that Rule 92 bis should not be apply to such a short excerpt of
5 testimony. This discussion can be found on transcript pages 27475 to
7 Rule 89(C) of the Rules allows the Chamber to admit any relevant
8 evidence it deems to have probative value, while Rule 92 bis is the
9 lex specialis for out-of-court statements prepared for the purpose of
10 legal proceedings and tendered in lieu of oral testimony before the
12 The Chamber notes that the witness Kralj was unable to comment on
13 P6858, the event depicted in the photograph, or provide any information
14 about the relevant context, and for these reasons, the Chamber finds that
15 P6858 is not relevant for purposes of admission.
16 While the Chamber agrees with the Prosecution that it maintains a
17 great deal of discretion with regard to the admission of evidence
18 pursuant to Rule 89(C), it finds no support for the argument that the
19 applicability of Rule 92 bis somehow depends on the length or the content
20 of the proffered evidence. Considering that the excerpt of Rutten's
21 Krstic testimony has been tendered in lieu of Rutten's oral testimony
22 before the Tribunal, the Chamber finds that Rule 92 bis applies and not
23 Rule 89(C) as argued by the Prosecution.
24 And for these reasons the Chamber denies the admission into
25 evidence of P6858 and P6859 without prejudice.
1 And this concludes this decision.
2 The next decision -- let me just think about it one moment.
3 Next decision, a decision on the tendering of associated exhibits
4 for Vojo Kupresanin.
5 On the 10th of October, 2014, the Defence filed a Rule 92 ter
6 motion for Kupresanin tendering 46 associated exhibits. On 11th of
7 November, the Prosecution noted that seven of the 46 associated exhibits
8 were already in evidence. On the 17th of December, the Prosecution filed
9 its e-mail of the 8th of December to the Chamber and the Defence which
10 set out its position regarding the remaining 39 associated exhibits;
11 namely, that it objected to the admission of six of them.
12 On 2nd of March, 2015, the Defence filed its response and
13 clarified that two of the documents objected to were already in evidence
14 and that three others had previously been withdrawn. The remaining
15 associated exhibit objected to was admitted on the 14th of May, 2015.
16 The Chamber also puts on the record that on the 20th of May, the
17 Defence, via e-mail, withdrew two further documents. The Chamber notes
18 that documents bearing 65 ter numbers 2628 and 06884 were admitted, P7004
19 and P7006 respectively.
20 Accordingly, the Chamber will decide on the remaining
21 29 documents. The Chamber recalls that documents can be admitted as
22 associated exhibits if they form an inseparable and indispensable part of
23 the witness's written testimony. In order to satisfy this test, the
24 tendering party must demonstrate that the witness's evidence would be
25 incomprehensible or of less probative value without the admission of the
1 relevant associated exhibits into evidence. The Chamber has discussed
2 its interpretation of this case law at transcript pages 530 to 531, and
3 5601 to 5603, and in its written decisions of the 23rd of July, 2012, and
4 7th of February, 2013.
5 The Chamber has reviewed the Kupresanin statement against the
6 background of the test for admission of associated exhibits and finds
7 that each of the following 19 documents forms an inseparable and
8 indispensable part of the statement to the extent that the statement
9 would be incomprehensible or of less probative value without them.
10 D989 and documents -- and D989 is marked for identification, and
11 further documents bearing Rule 65 ter numbers 3016, 7197, 16868, 17222,
12 1D2433, 20153, 16121, 6875, 20268, 20435, 1D2027, 20520, 17208, 2559,
13 2604, 16132, 16135, and 1D2867, and therefore admits them into evidence.
14 The Registry is requested to assign numbers by way of filing an internal
16 The Chamber finds that ten remaining documents do not form a
17 inseparable and indispensable part of Kupresanin's statement, as they to
18 some extent restate the witness's written evidence or in some incidents
19 are not sufficiently related to the content of the statement. The
20 Chamber further finds that the exclusion of the remaining documents does
21 not result in the statement having lesser probative value.
22 Consequently, the Chamber denies their admission into evidence
23 and this concludes the Chamber's decision.
24 We have a little bit less than ten minutes remaining. We are
25 otherwise running out of the table.
1 Mr. Lukic, the Chamber asked for an update on Plan A and/or
2 Plan B after resuming on the 10th of August. And the Chamber also
3 invites you to update us on whether you have made up your mind as far as
4 the list of witnesses is concerned. We're still waiting for further
6 MR. LUKIC: Our problem in connection with the first week is
7 still in effect, unfortunately, and the one witness we can bring here in
8 the first week the Prosecution objected to. It's Mr. Strbac, Savo.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger.
10 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Mr. President. I foreshadowed to Mr. Lukic
11 that based on the submission of Mr. Strbac's statement which we reviewed,
12 the Prosecution anticipated an objection to that proposed testimony which
13 consisted entirely, insofar as we could determine, of crimes committed
14 against Serbs in Croatia by Croatian forces. So if that is the
15 anticipated testimony, we would be filing with an anticipatory objection
16 with the Chamber which, although technically premature, we would ask the
17 Chamber to respond to before the witness travelled here for obvious
18 reasons, so that the schedule wasn't unduly disrupted, unnecessary
19 expenses weren't --
20 JUDGE ORIE: So therefore it's not that much the date but rather
21 at all this witness coming to testify on the basis of the statement as
22 you've received it.
23 MR. TIEGER: That's correct, Mr. President. So, I mean, there
24 may be some misunderstanding about the nature of that testimony, but I
25 don't think so based on the statement.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please further explore that, Mr. Lukic. And please
2 proceed, now.
3 MR. LUKIC: We are in the process of obtaining one expert witness
4 for that period. It's mining expert, and I informed Mr. Traldi, but it's
5 not confirmed. It has not been confirmed yet.
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And what about the recalling of Mr. Tusevljak?
7 MR. LUKIC: Mr. Tusevljak cannot be recalled because of that
8 document, 240 pages, something that the Prosecution asks to have that
9 document at least 20 days translated before Mr. Tusevljak appears here.
10 So we were informed by the translator whom we employed outside
11 the Tribunal since it would not be possible to be done in near future,
12 and he informed us that he cannot do it before the 10th of August. He
13 would try to, but if that 20-day deadline is changed, that we might maybe
14 bring -- or if we finish -- if our translator finishes the translation of
15 that document, that we might bring Mr. Tusevljak. He's willing to come
16 at any date we call him.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We have another 25 days. Could the parties try to
18 explore what is possible, for example, partly translation already to be
19 submitted, so as to see whether any solution can be reached. I know that
20 it's not ideal but that's at least another avenue to be further explored.
21 MR. TIEGER: We will do so, Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Any further update, Mr. Lukic?
23 MR. LUKIC: That's all we have potentially for the first week.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You're invited and urged to further explore
25 because the Chamber will consider what the consequences are if you do not
1 use the time which is available for the Defence to present its evidence.
2 MR. LUKIC: Well, I hope -- sorry.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No.
4 MR. LUKIC: I hope that he will have more data on Monday.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Despite the recess we'll all be kept informed
6 about anything you bring to the attention of the Chamber, even if that is
7 only informally.
8 Now, the witnesses, the reduction of the number of witnesses,
9 could you tell us anything about that.
10 MR. LUKIC: I don't have with me the final number, but I think
11 that we plan to bring 40-plus witnesses till the end of our case.
12 Including international witnesses and expert witnesses.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please try to make up your mind as
14 soon as possible, also which witnesses they are, so that everyone can
15 further prepare.
16 MR. LUKIC: We'll do so, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 Any matter before the recess? We have three minutes left.
19 MR. TIEGER: Just some quick clarification on the procedural
20 mechanism for the matter raised by Mr. Lukic, the Strbac matter. We will
21 discuss with the Defence which gives rise to a couple of possibilities,
22 either the Defence agrees with the Prosecution that the nature of the
23 witness's proposed testimony is such that he should not be called or that
24 we see it differently after discussions. But in the event it doesn't --
25 that there is an impasse, I just wanted to indicate we would be filing an
1 appropriate motion with the Court to deny the proposed admission, and
2 because of the scheduling issues we would ask to get that back as quickly
3 as possible.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I can only say that even during the recess if
5 anything is urgent is filed, we'll pay attention to it and try to decide
6 any matter which is urgent as soon as possible.
7 I'd like to thank the parties for allowing us to get a clean
8 slate, as far as procedural issues are concerned. I'd also like to thank
9 all those who have assist us - security, technicians, interpreters,
10 transcribers - for the flexibility of, again, allowing us to reach the
11 point where we are at this very moment. We'll not see each other for a
12 little bit over three weeks. I wish everyone some good recovery from the
13 stress until now, but I'm also aware that perhaps the time is needed to
14 get some additional stress. That may be true for the parties. That is
15 to some extent true for the Chamber as well because, as I said, if there
16 is any urgent matter, we will immediately deal with it.
17 We adjourn, and we resume, Monday, the 10th of August, 9.30 in
18 the morning, in this same courtroom, I.
19 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.42 p.m.,
20 to be reconvened on Monday, the 10th day of August,
21 2015, at 9.30 a.m.