1 Tuesday, 1 September 2015
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.31 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around this
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case
9 IT-09-92-T, The Prosecutor versus Ratko Mladic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 The Chamber was informed that the Prosecution would like to raise
12 a preliminary matter.
13 MR. TIEGER: Yes, good morning, Your Honours. The Trial Chamber
14 inquired at the end of the day yesterday whether the Prosecution accepted
15 that there were quite a number of Serb victims in Sarajevo and then noted
16 Ms. Edgerton's tacit assent. I hope it was clear that it was no way a
17 ratification of the list or affirmation of the list presented by the
18 witness. Instead as the Trial Chamber will recall, the Prosecution
19 referred on several occasions when this general issue arose that we had
20 been engaged in discussions with the Defence aimed at reaching agreement
21 on a reliable minimum number of victims by ethnicity in Sarajevo in order
22 to obviate the need for further court time regarding this issue.
23 Those discussions have continued, and I believe have never been
24 closer to resolution, but as the Defence and now the Trial Chamber are
25 well aware, we do not accept the reliability of MFI 1216, D1216, and
1 consider, instead, that reliable and accurate figures of Serb victims can
2 emerge from the ongoing discussions with the Defence which have been long
3 under way and hopefully are about to be resolved.
4 Thank you.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. When the Chamber invited stipulation that at
6 least larger numbers of Serb victims were -- fell victim in Sarajevo then
7 in no way - and that was obvious from the cross-examination and that it
8 was in no way understood as a stipulation that D1216 was an accurate and
9 reliable document in this respect, and I think, Mr. Lukic, you would not
10 have understood it in a different way, would you.
11 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] The only thing that we think is
12 that this list is correct and authentic.
13 JUDGE ORIE: That was not my question, but at least you've now --
14 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] But in any case, I believe we
15 should check all the data, all the information from that list, because it
16 is not final as the witness himself has said.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Whether that needs to be done, I think I said
18 yesterday something at the end of the -- at the session. The -- there
19 was an admission of what has happened, although not reliable on the
20 accuracy but that should be kept in mind also so that we don't start
21 proving again which is not -- what is not in dispute. That is for the
22 Defence, I think, as well. The parties are, under the Rules, under an
23 obligation to seek to establish what is in dispute, and the Chamber tried
24 to assist slightly in that respect yesterday.
25 If the -- yes, the witness may be escorted into the courtroom.
1 [The witness takes the stand]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Tusevljak.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, I'd like to remind you again
5 that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given at the
6 beginning of your testimony. It was already a long time ago.
7 Ms. Edgerton will now continue her cross-examination.
8 Please proceed.
9 WITNESS: SIMO TUSEVLJAK [Resumed]
10 [Witness answered through interpreter]
11 Cross-examination by Ms. Edgerton: [Continued]
12 Q. Good morning, Mr. Tusevljak.
13 Mr. Tusevljak, and Your Honours --
14 A. Good morning.
15 MS. EDGERTON: We've actually brought a hard copy of D1216 for
16 Mr. Tusevljak in his own language for him to leaf through as the
17 cross-examination goes in an effort to speed things up, and I wonder if
18 that might be shown to my friend, if he has no objection, and then be
19 given to the witness.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Usher, could you assist.
21 MS. EDGERTON: Great. Thank you.
22 Q. Now, Mr. Tusevljak, yesterday at transcript page 38492 to 38498,
23 we looked at entries on page 3 of D1216 in the B/C/S versions, and, at
24 the same time, we looked at entries at page 2 of a book by Dusan Zurovac,
25 and that's 65 ter number 32976.
1 MS. EDGERTON: And, Your Honours, if we could just have those
2 delayed again in B/C/S, we will then be able to display English language
3 versions of the same pages we looked at yesterday, and Ms. Stewart has
4 those pages in Sanction.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we'll wait for them to appear on our screens.
6 MS. EDGERTON:
7 Q. So for everyone and Mr. Tusevljak, these are the same documents
8 we looked at at the beginning of your cross-examination yesterday, aren't
9 they, and you agreed with me that the entries in D1216 at numbers 3, 4,
10 5, 6, and 9 were almost identical with the entries of the people,
11 relating to the people by the same name in Mr. Zurovac's book; do you
12 remember that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Thank you. If we could now move to these same pages in English,
15 please. And those will also come up in Sanction.
16 MS. EDGERTON: Unfortunately, it looks as if we have a technical
17 issue, Your Honours, I would like to come back to this briefly, because I
18 would like that ask to tender the pages of the Zurovac book. My friend,
19 Mr. Registrar, he may be able to assist. So what we would be looking at,
20 Mr. Registrar, is English page 3 of D1216, and ...
21 Ms. Stewart advises me she might have it. Ah, wonderful. Thank
23 Q. Now we see in English on the screen on the left-hand side page 3
24 of D1216, and on the right-hand side, the English translation of B/C/S
25 page 2, 65 ter number 32976, showing, in fact, what the witness has
2 MS. EDGERTON: And that being the case, Your Honour, I wonder if
3 I might have this excerpt from 32976 admitted as a Prosecution Exhibit,
4 please, with, of course, the cover page of the book so that we are able
5 to see the author.
6 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
7 Madam Registrar.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Document 32976 receives exhibit number --
9 MR. S. LUKIC: Sorry, I have an objection.
10 JUDGE ORIE: We only have heard the number by now.
11 Yes, what's the objection, Mr. Lukic.
12 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We don't know what is the
13 probative value of the document being tendered because we don't see what
14 they are trying to prove with this, because there has been no question
15 asked in order to dispute or confirm the way in which the witness
16 obtained this information, i.e., how his ministry obtained the
17 information about what is included in the list of the missing and the
18 people killed of Republika Srpska.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I understood the purpose of tendering this in
20 evidence to be to demonstrate what was published in 2005 by one person is
21 approximately the same language as what was later found in a list which
22 was prepared by the government and not -- that that's the purpose of it.
23 Have I understood the purpose well, Ms. Edgerton?
24 MS. EDGERTON: Of course, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So, therefore, not necessarily the intention
1 of the ones who published the earlier list are decisive for the probative
3 The objection is denied. The exhibit number, Madam Registrar,
5 THE REGISTRAR: The exhibit number is P7525, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: P7525 is admitted into evidence.
7 Please proceed.
8 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
9 Q. Now, yesterday, Mr. Tusevljak, we also talked about a woman whose
10 name appears at number, entry number 2597 on your list and her name is
11 Jadranka Tenzera than name is English page 193 and B/C/S page 213 of
12 D1216. Her father's name is listed in D1216 as Gradimir and her date of
13 birth that appears in that document is listed as 1963.
14 And we talked about her yesterday when I showed you a report
15 in -- that was part of P867 which was the investigative file in relation
16 to a shelling incident.
17 Now, yesterday at transcript page 38519, I offered you a copy of
18 her death certificate. The death certificate of the woman who died along
19 with eight others in the shelling of Dobrinja on 4 February 1994 by the
20 name of Jadranka Tenzera and I wanted to do that now.
21 Could we please have 65 ter number 11229.
22 So here in front of us is the English and the B/C/S copies of the
23 death certificate for, as I said, the woman who was killed in the
24 shelling of Dobrinja on 4 February 1994. Now you see in the top of the
25 death certificate that her surname and first name are identical to the
1 Jadranka Tenzera who appears at 2597 on your list. Her father's name is
2 identical and she was born in 1963.
3 Now, on this basis are you prepared to agree that this is the
4 same person who appears on your list?
5 A. I cannot say anything about that because I don't have her case
6 file and it's obvious that here in the explanation we've read yesterday
7 was -- it was information from the centre from Belgrade. It's their
8 information, and we indicated that clearly so without additional checks I
9 cannot agree, because the reference there is to Vojnicko Polje and here
10 it is to Dobrinja Jedan. The distance between the two is 3 or 4
12 Q. So what you're saying identical biographical data is not enough
13 for you to confirm that this woman who appears at 2597 on your list is
14 one and the same as the victim of the shelling of Dobrinja on
15 4 February 1994; right?
16 A. No, I cannot confirm that for the reason I've explained. We've
17 seen here that you have two completely different locations:
18 Vojnicko Polje and Dobrinja 1. Two different places of death. It is
19 reason enough to run additional checks. It's sufficient reason for more
20 verification. We have only the -- that data and two different places of
21 death, and that incident was not reported to the Ministry of
22 Republika Srpska. We got this information from the centre for research
23 into war crimes in Belgrade. We have two places of incident:
24 Vojnicko Polje and Dobrinja 1. And it's enough for us to suspect that
25 there may be additional checks needed.
1 Q. Now --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you one thing. You have several times
3 referred to the information coming from the centre for the research into
4 war crimes in Belgrade.
5 Now, were you provided with just the outcome or do you also have
6 the underlying documents on which they have based their reports?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, we received documents on the
8 basis of which they made their reports. We didn't receive original
9 documents. We received copies of the documents underlying their reports.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would that mean that, for example, for this
11 incident that you have an underlying report on Vojnicko Polje, what
12 happened there on that same date with a person with the same name and the
13 same year of birth? Would you be able to provide that underlying
14 document which is, again, at the basis of the report from Belgrade?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That document was shown to me
16 yesterday on the screen, a record of the on-site investigation.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I mean --
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We had it on the monitor yesterday.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I mean the document underlying the other place of
20 the incident, and I think it was Belgrade that said that it happened at
21 Vojnicko Polje.
22 So would you have the underlying document from Belgrade which
23 states that this lady died in Vojnicko Polje? Would be able to provide
24 that document so as to verify what exactly was found and by whom?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's truly impossible for me, with
1 all these 3.300 names, to remember off the cuff today what is contained
2 in each of the files.
3 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... that's not what
4 I'm asking you. I'm asking you whether you would be able to provide the
5 underlying documents - and I understood these were copies - the
6 underlying documents which are at the basis of Belgrade's report that
7 this lady died in Vojnicko Polje?
8 Would you be able to provide that?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We certainly have in her case file
10 what we received from Belgrade, and we can provide that to you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that would -- perhaps would be appreciated so
12 that the verification which still may have to be done, to see whether
13 it's identical purpose can be taken one step further.
14 So if you would be so kind and perhaps you be given later a note
15 with the details of the entry in your database and ...
16 Please proceed, Ms. Edgerton.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 MS. EDGERTON: I'm going to ask that this be tendered as a
19 Prosecution Exhibit, Your Honour, and I'd just like to -- and, in fact, I
20 must say, I'm advised by my colleague that this may be part of P867.
21 Ms. Stewart is checking the translation. So if I could just reserve my
22 request for the moment and -- with respect to this certificate, and I'll
23 put it on the record as soon as I know, I can move on.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, your request is put on hold and you may move
1 And perhaps I immediately ask the witness now: Who's going to
2 provide the exact name, date, et cetera, so that's able to -- would the
3 Defence and the Prosecution perhaps do that together so just to provide
4 the witness after ...
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, could you please note down that what the
7 Chamber would like to be provided with is the -- are the underlying
8 documents -- yes. Madam Registrar will put it on a piece of paper - of
9 number 2596 -- I beg your pardon -- 2597 of your list so as to be
10 provided with the underlying documents supporting the Belgrade
11 information which is contained in your list.
12 Would you -- perhaps you make an arrangement with the Victims and
13 Witness Section that you provide it to them so that it will finally land
14 on our table, and the tables of the parties.
15 Please proceed.
16 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you. And this certificate is, I'm advised,
17 part of P867, e-court English pages 63 and 64.
18 JUDGE ORIE: That's hereby on the record.
19 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
20 Q. Now, Mr. Tusevljak, after we discussed this woman and --
21 yesterday the case of Markale I where I pointed out to you at transcript
22 pages 38520 to 38522 that your list included names of some victims of the
23 February 1994 market-place shelling, you were asked whether you would
24 agree that your list includes some Serb victims of shelling and sniping
25 in Bosnian-held Sarajevo, and you said you could not. Now, that's at
1 38523, lines 21, to 38524, 16. Do you remember that?
2 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not understand what the
3 witness said.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please repeat your answer.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I need a moment to find which
6 number 3. You mean the --
7 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- cardinal numbers here?
9 JUDGE ORIE: That's what Ms. Edgerton said. It has got nothing
10 to do with the numbers on that list.
11 The question, therefore, is whether you remember that you were
12 asked whether you'd agreed that your list includes some Serb victims of
13 shelling and sniping in Bosnian-held Sarajevo.
14 Do you remember that you were asked about that?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I remember that, and I said
16 that such persons should not be in this list. If somebody reported their
17 victimisation, that reason was not mentioned.
18 MS. EDGERTON:
19 Q. So, based on your answer just now, can we understand that there
20 was no intention to report Serb victims of shelling and sniping in
21 Bosnian-held Sarajevo when you compiled this list? You excluded Serb
22 victims of shelling and sniping in Sarajevo? Or you meant to exclude
24 JUDGE ORIE: In Bosnian-held Sarajevo you were referring to,
25 isn't it?
1 MS. EDGERTON: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. That was not our
5 We included in this list those persons that we realised had lost
6 their lives. I have already mentioned our sources. Our intention was
7 absolutely not to leave anybody out. List of Serb victims in Sarajevo,
8 so it's only the information that we had available that was the criterion
9 for us to put someone on the list, or not, and absolutely, the mode of
10 death, et cetera, I have to tell you that many Serbs were killed at the
11 actual front line because they were human shield there, they were digging
12 trenches, they were work platoon members, et cetera, they were killed by
13 Serb shells because they were intentionally exposed to that kind of fire
14 and --
15 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... now you keep going outside
16 of the question that I ask. You just told us that you -- when you were
17 asked yesterday whether you agreed your list included Serb victims of
18 shelling and sniping in Bosnian-held Sarajevo, you just told us now that
19 such persons should not be included in this list.
20 A. I think that you totally misunderstood what I was saying. Our
21 objective was as follows: On the basis of the information available at
22 the moment we should compile a list of Serb casualties in Sarajevo and it
23 was made exclusively on the basis of information, proof, evidence, that
24 we had available because in every one of these explanations next to the
25 name of each and every victim, we gave information as to roughly where we
1 got this information, from the centre for war crimes in Belgrade or the
2 centre for missing persons of Republika Srpska or some other archives or
3 some witness states and so on and so forth. So it's on that basis that
4 we actually -- we did not have any other objective.
5 Q. Let's move on.
6 Keeping in mind that you do not agree that your list includes
7 Serb victims of shelling and sniping in Bosnian-held Sarajevo, I want to
8 take you to some more examples on your list.
9 Yesterday we talked about entry number 1316, a woman by the
10 name - on your list on D1216 - a woman by the name of Vera Kovacevic and
11 her name appears at entry 1316 on English and B/C/S page 109.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let me just try to fully understand.
13 Ms. Edgerton, you referred to what the witness testified
14 yesterday, that Serb victims from the Bosnian-held Sarajevo should not be
15 on the list and today the witness said something different. And you now
16 continue on the basis of what he said yesterday?
17 MS. EDGERTON: Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: And we more or less, then, ignore what he said today
19 which is contradicting what he said yesterday?
20 MS. EDGERTON: Well, he indeed contradicted what he said
21 yesterday and I'm trying through another example, Your Honour, to see if
22 I can get to the bottom of the reasons for that contradiction.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But today I think the witnesses said: All
24 victims are there. So if you want to establish that what he said
25 yesterday is not correct, then he corrected himself today by saying, All
1 Serb victims are to be on that list. So what you're now demonstrating
2 is, on the basis of today's testimony, admitted by the witness, isn't it?
3 MS. EDGERTON: What I noticed, Your Honour -- yes, Your Honour.
4 So perhaps we'll just go back to this to try and have some more
5 clarification. I'm very conscious of my time, Your Honour, and that --
6 JUDGE ORIE: That's why I tried to assist you, as a matter of
7 fact. Please proceed.
8 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
9 Q. So, Mr. Tusevljak, keeping in mind what is His Honour Judge Orie
10 has said and the evidence that you've given, that this list was meant to
11 include all victims, do you mean to say that this list does include
12 victims of shelling, Serb victims of shelling and sniping, in
13 Bosnian-held Sarajevo?
14 A. I have told you - very clearly at that - that we made this list
15 exclusively on the basis of the information we had available. So this
16 list is not the only number of Serb victims in Sarajevo. There's a lot
17 more. The reasons that you are referring to may be correct and may not
18 be correct. Just as I said. Each and every name and surname that is
19 placed here with the year of birth, it's a preliminary list. It hasn't
20 been adopted anywhere because the commission that was supposed to work
21 that was established for Sarajevo precisely because of this list never
22 finished its job and they didn't want to deal with it in this way. They
23 wanted to have proper files with proper evidence to show the suffering of
24 all, not only Serbs in the territory of Sarajevo. So this commission no
25 longer worked, and they never completed their mandate. Without any
1 explanation. Although the High Representative in Bosnia-Herzegovina
2 insisted several times that this should be completed. So that is the
3 reason why this list was compiled.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I'm stopping there because you're not answering the
6 The simple question was whether that list was supposed to include
7 or to exclude Serbs that fell victim in the Bosnian-held part of
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It should include all victims, but
10 this list is not final. That I said at the very outset.
11 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- this is a job that hasn't been
13 completed, and it should include all victims. That is very clear.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore, it would not surprise you or us if
15 Ms. Edgerton comes with names of persons - Serbs - who fell victim in
16 Bosnian-held Sarajevo.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely. There's a large number
18 here of people who were killed in the territory of Sarajevo. However,
19 the main thing is who the perpetrator is. And the Prosecutor keeps
20 trying to impose who the perpetrator is. There is no doubt that these
21 persons were victims, but the Prosecutor is trying to prove that it was
22 Serb shells and Serb snipers that killed these people. That's where I
23 degrees with the Prosecutor but she keeps insisting on that and that is
24 her basic point.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whether that's her basic point or not is --
1 the Chamber will consider that.
2 But I think the matter has been clarified, Ms. Edgerton.
3 MS. EDGERTON:
4 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, the examples that I've put to you so far from the
5 4th and 5th of February, 1994 relate to cases that have been tried and
6 adjudicated by Chambers of this Tribunal.
7 Do you disagree with me because you don't accept the findings of
8 this Tribunal?
9 A. No. First of all, it's not that I can accept or not accept
10 something that I'm not familiar with. First a person has to read
11 something and then accept it or not accept it. That is a very basic
13 Q. Let's go back to the woman I was speaking about initially and
14 read something more. Vera Kovacevic, entry number 1316 in D1216 her name
15 appears at English and B/C/S page 109. Father's name is Djordjo. Now
16 your information relating to this woman, this victim, is that she's a
17 teacher and that she was killed by an artillery shell in Sarajevo.
18 Information from the centre for investigating crimes against the Serbian
19 people, Belgrade.
20 Now, having looked at this, I'd like us to go to 65 ter number
21 32993. This is an investigative file on the shelling that date in which
22 not only Vera Kovacevic but three additional people were killed and nine
23 wounded. And if we could please go over to -- if I can just have your
24 indulgence for a moment. In B/C/S, the next page, this is the
25 investigative official report on the shelling that day. And if you go
1 down the list to page 2 in this report, both languages, you see that
2 Vera Kovacevic, born in 1948, was one of the people in Sarajevo,
3 Bosnian-held Sarajevo, who was killed by the shell that day. And she has
4 the same date of birth as the woman listed at entry number 1316 on your
5 list --
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: We only see a year of birth.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Pardon me, again. My apologies.
8 Q. She has the same year of birth as the woman who's identified on
9 your list.
10 Now, if we could go further to the very last page of the B/C/S
11 version of this file. And, unfortunately, there's no English
12 translation. And if we could just enlarge the entry on the bottom
13 right-hand corner, this is the death notice for Vera Kovacevic, the woman
14 who was killed in that shelling incident and her father's name appears in
15 this entry, Djordje, which matches the biographical data of the woman who
16 appears at entry number 1316 on your list. So the same person --
17 actually it's the second person with identical biographical data to an
18 entry on your list is killed by a mortar shell in Bosnian-held Sarajevo
19 and we have that information from contemporaneous documents.
20 Are you prepared to concede on the basis of the identical
21 biographical information and the information that she was killed in your
22 list on the same day as this woman was killed by an artillery shell in
23 Sarajevo, that's what your list says, are you prepared to concede that
24 these two victims are one and the same.
25 A. That is evident now. This is the first time I see this
1 documentation, but also we didn't make any mistakes here. It says
2 teacher, killed by a shell in Sarajevo, on 30th of August, 1993. You see
3 here that it is the 30th of July, 1993 that there is this notice in the
4 newspaper so there's one month difference and we also wrote that this is
5 information for the centre for investigating crimes against the Serb
6 people from Belgrade. Do you see somewhere that we wrote something
7 different except for what --
8 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Witness,
9 witness, you are defending yourself against what you assume to be
10 allegations against you that you did something wrong. The simple
11 question is whether you would agree that these are the same persons and
12 you have answered the question by the first time part of it by saying
13 that is clear to knee now, having looked at the material. That's an
14 answer to the question. And carefully listen to the next question that
15 Ms. Edgerton will put to you. And don't imagine all kind of allegations
16 or accusations which are not, in any way, expressed by Ms. Edgerton.
17 Please proceed.
18 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
19 Q. Now, when we talked about Vera Kovacevic yesterday, you said at
20 transcript page 38525 that when your information simply said "Sarajevo"
21 as the place of the incident, you understood that that could refer to
22 either Bosnian- or Bosnian Serb-held Sarajevo. Would you agree with me
23 that we were only able to determine that this woman was killed by
24 shelling in Bosnian-held Sarajevo as a result of additional
25 investigation? The information on your list was deficient?
1 A. Now that we've seen all of this we can agree that she was killed
2 by a shell and that's the only thing we can agree on. Whose shell? In
3 which way? That I cannot see. This cannot be seen on the basis of all
4 of this, that is.
5 Q. My question was about the place in which this woman fell victim.
6 My question is this: Can you agree that we're unable to determine, based
7 on your information, where she fell victim without additional
8 investigation; right?
9 A. No. I already said that this was preliminary and there have to
10 be more investigations for this person. That is to say, all of these
11 facts have to be looked at and then on the basis of that it should be
12 established that --
13 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... you already answered the
14 question. Thank you. I'd like to move on. I'd like to go to another
15 case. And it's -- relates to entry number 1289 on your list. And the
16 entry relates to a woman by the name of Vanda Mihajlo Knezevic and her
17 name appears at English and B/C/S pages 107 of D1216.
18 MS. EDGERTON: And, Your Honours, if I could have this page of
19 the investigative report, which is 65 ter number 32993, the last --
20 actually, what I'll do with -- in consultation with Ms. Stewart because I
21 don't see a need to tender the whole file, is I'd ask for ...
22 Your indulgence.
23 [Prosecution counsel confer]
24 MS. EDGERTON: We will create a 65 ter number for the excerpt of
25 32993, Your Honours. We'll create 32993a with the excerpt.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you tendered that. We'll wait until it's
2 uploaded and then we'll decide on admission.
3 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
4 Q. So we were talking about Vanda Knezevic, who is entry 1289 on
5 your list and she appears at English and B/C/S page 107.
6 Your information?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
8 MR. S. LUKIC: It's not Vanda; it's Vera.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, let me see. Is the B/C/S -- let me just have
10 a look. 2 --1289, even in the B/C/S version it seems to be Vanda, not
12 We yesterday looked at another lady.
13 MR. S. LUKIC: My mistake.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
15 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
16 Q. Now your information with respect to this individual is she was
17 killed by an artillery shell on 12 April 1992 and the information comes
18 from federal Oslobodjenje, and there's no more information as to the
19 place of the incident. We have absolutely no idea where that took place
20 based on the information you've got in your list; right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. So it could be anywhere. It could have been in Bosnian-held
23 Sarajevo, could have been in Serb-held Sarajevo, it could have been
24 anywhere in Bosnia-Herzegovina; right?
25 A. If we read this from Oslobodjenje, the newspaper clip --
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: [Previous translation continues] ... can we move
2 the documents a bit to the left?
3 JUDGE ORIE: Could we move it such that, in both languages, we
4 can -- it's done.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
6 MS. EDGERTON:
7 Q. So my question is: Based on the information in your list, this
8 could have taken place anywhere in Bosnia-Herzegovina; right.
9 A. No. Because it's about Sarajevo. We also have other areas where
10 there were Serb victims in Bosnia-Herzegovina, so there's no reason for
11 us to repeat anything. There can be a technical error concerning persons
12 who worked on the list but that should not be the case so this should
13 just be persons who fell victim in Sarajevo. The only possibility is a
14 technical error, but the percentage of the likelihood of that is
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: My question to you, sir is where do we see on this
17 entry that had happened in Sarajevo?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot see that either in this
19 list, but I'm telling that you there is a file that accompanies each and
20 every name. So we are talking about lists here that somebody made and we
21 are not talking about files.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... you're not
23 answering my question. You just told us that a few minutes ago about
24 thousands of files you can't remember. You are telling us that this
25 happened in Sarajevo and I'm asking you where on this document in this
1 entry can we find that this incident happened in Sarajevo. So you're
2 saying that you cannot find it there.
3 Thank you so much. You've answered my question.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I cannot find it now --
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Previous translation continues] ... thank you.
6 Thank you.
7 MS. EDGERTON:
8 Q. Let's go to another entry -- actually, no, let's stay with this
9 entry for a moment.
10 Now you said that among the sources you consulted in carrying out
11 your investigations, you would talk to family members who were searching
12 for their nearest and dearest. Do you remember giving that evidence
13 during your examination-in-chief?
14 A. In certain cases, people spoke to family members as well because
15 there are reports to the commission for missing persons and we had that
16 documentation available to, but it wasn't in each and every case, but in
17 certain cases where we had the possibility to do that.
18 MS. EDGERTON: Let's have a look at 65 ter number 32994, please.
19 Q. This is a report, an Official Note, on an interview with
20 Mihajlo Knezevic and you'll recall that Mihajlo is listed at entry 1289
21 as being the father of Vanda Knezevic and in that interview, he makes
22 clear that not only was his daughter killed by a shell in Sarajevo, in
23 Bosnian-held Sarajevo, because that's where Mis Irbina Street is but her
24 mother was killed at the same time.
25 So -- and, by the way, not in April as your information
1 indicates, but in July 1992. So even at the most basic level, there's no
2 guarantee of the accuracy of the information in your list, is there?
3 A. No, you cannot say that because you have -- have you been talking
4 only about individual cases, and this list contains 3.300. You are
5 talking out only a few. If we had more information or broader
6 information, then we would have included this. This is data that we had
7 at that time.
8 Next to the name of this girl it says she was killed on the 12th
9 of April and the information from the federal newspaper Oslobodjenje.
10 MS. EDGERTON: I see from Ms. Stewart that it's break time,
11 Your Honour, and I would not want to go over that time.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you're still on track as far as time is
14 MS. EDGERTON: Oh, yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: That's fine.
16 Witness, you may follow the usher. We'd like to see you back in
17 20 minutes.
18 [The witness stands down]
19 JUDGE ORIE: We resume at ten minutes to 11.00.
20 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.
21 --- On resuming at 10.52 a.m.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 [The witness takes the stand]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, Witness, I do understand that
25 there has been contact with the VWS, and you'd very much like also to
1 have the name and not only the number on your list, and I'll just find it
2 for you. It was 2597.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. 2597. The name involved is Tenzera Jadranka,
5 father's name Gradimir, born 1963. That's what we're talking about.
7 THE WITNESS: Okay.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we'll receive any underlying
10 Please proceed, Ms. Edgerton.
11 MS. EDGERTON:
12 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, you said a little while before we took our break
13 that this commission for whom this list was prepared no longer works and
14 that they never completed their mandate. So what I'd like to know from
15 you is, then, can you tell us now who and how many people are actively
16 engaged in working on the investigations relating to this list, if the
17 commission doesn't operate any longer?
18 A. This work is now being done by the operative officers of the
19 centre for public security of Sarajevo and there are six investigators.
20 Not only these crimes but also war crimes, and these are auxiliary
21 dossiers because their main purpose is to submit criminal complaints to
22 the prosecutor's office of Bosnia-Herzegovina. That's the work they are
23 engaged in. And when they come across a new person or new evidence
24 pertaining to these persons, this evidence is included in the relevant
25 case file. They are not constantly engaged in this work, therefore, they
1 only go back to it when they come across new evidence.
2 Q. So there's no active, focussed investigations going on related to
3 anyone on this list. That's what you're telling us; right?
4 A. No, no, that's not the way it is. These are case files and all
5 the persons on this list, because it's a huge number of people on the
6 list, concerning these events, an official report was submitted to the
7 prosecutor's office. The witness statements and the evidence that we
8 have. And we have this official report submitted against the commander
9 of the 1st Corps of the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina and against 280 other
10 persons. Official reports were also submitted. These reports include
11 information on the suffering of these persons. This work has not been
12 completed --
13 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
14 A. -- and we have trials that are not completed yet.
15 Q. I want to know what's going on now related to these people on
16 this list. You keep talking about what has been completed and reports
17 which have been submitted. What's going on now relating to
18 Jadranka Tenzera, what's going on now relating to Vera Kovacevic, what's
19 going on related to Vanda Knezevic, and everybody else on this list who
20 you allege was victimised somewhere in Sarajevo. What's going on right
22 A. Well, we can begin with number 1 and then down the list and I can
23 talk to you about each of the people. You have mentioned only four or
24 five. I told you at the beginning, this is just an auxiliary resource in
25 the work of the Ministry of Interior of Republika Srpska. We have case
1 files for all the people killed. These case files are being supplemented
2 every time when we come across new information and new evidence. The
3 basic documentation concerning the suffering and the killings of these
4 persons has been submitted either to the prosecutor's office of
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina or the district prosecutors or the cantonal
7 This is just an additional resource for the MUP. Our objective
8 was not to create any kind of list. This list is just an aid in our
9 work, just as have you your own lists and schedules. But we have
10 criminal complaints and official reports submitted to the prosecutor.
11 That is the basic criterion. The prosecutor's offices and the courts are
12 there to continue working on it.
13 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
14 A. Very frequently, we have orders from the prosecutors that
15 concerns -- concerned these persons.
16 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... let's go back to the list to
17 finish up because I want to finish up with this quite soon.
18 MS. EDGERTON: And just before we do that, could I have 65 ter
19 32994 which we discussed before the break as a Prosecution Exhibit,
21 JUDGE ORIE: Were you not announcing that you upload an a version
22 or is that a different one?
23 MS. EDGERTON: That's a different one, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Then 32994 receives what number, Madam Registrar.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number P7527, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: P7 --
2 THE REGISTRAR: My excuses. P7526.
3 JUDGE ORIE: P7526 is admitted into evidence.
4 MS. EDGERTON: Let's have a look at your list again and I want to
5 look at the entry number 139 and it's on English and B/C/S page 14,
6 related to Ratka Bilcar. We've been talking about shelling cases, and I
7 want to have a look at a couple of more -- of different examples.
8 You have a long description in your list relating to
9 Ratka Bilcar, whose father's name is Borivoje, who was expelled from her
10 apartment and taken to a detention facility in Sarajevo. And it's
11 alleged in your list that she was killed at a check-point on the road to
12 Dobrinja while attempting to leave Sarajevo. The probable motive was
14 Now, I'd like us to have a look at 65 ter number 32942 in regard
15 to this woman, Mrs. Bilcar.
16 32942 is a statement, an Official Note, on an interview with
17 Dusan Bilcar who is the husband of Ratka Bilcar who was killed on
18 4 April 1993, according to him, by a sniper bullet fired from the
19 direction of the positions of Serbian forces around Sarajevo. That she
20 was -- and -- and Dusan Bilcar said that his wife was killed by a sniper
21 shot to the head that day.
22 So my question to you is this: You said in your testimony
23 yesterday that you've never run away from corrections, and you have just
24 told us that these files are being supplemented every time your
25 investigators come across new information.
1 So I want to know: Are you going to supplement the file on
2 Mrs. Bilcar which says something completely different about her fate,
3 which doesn't refer to a date of death with this new information.
4 A. Yes. But you know why? May I explain? Do you allow me?
5 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether Ms. Edgerton -- you said you
6 would update it? If Ms. Edgerton is interested to know why would you do
7 it although it may be obvious that new information should find its way in
8 your list, but if she's interested, she will ask you.
9 MS. EDGERTON:
10 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, if my friend sees a need, you can explain that to
11 him in his redirect examination.
12 MS. EDGERTON: I'd like to have this admitted as a Prosecution
13 Exhibit, please.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Document 32942 receives exhibit number P7527,
16 Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
18 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I apologise for reacting so late
19 and objecting belatedly, but we do not see any references or information
20 here to the effect that Mr. Bilcar signed this document confirming its
22 JUDGE ORIE: I see that. Is there a challenge to the
23 authenticity; and, if so, on what basis?
24 MR. S. LUKIC: Yes.
25 [Interpretation] We cannot know whether he, indeed, gave this
1 statement or not, when he was interviewed. We don't see his signature to
2 confirm all of this. We only see the signature of the person who made
3 this Official Note, but we don't even see the name of that person.
4 MS. EDGERTON: If I may respond, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And could you include in your response the
6 source of where you obtained this document.
7 MS. EDGERTON: I corrected what I had initially said, explaining
8 what 65 ter number 32942 is, by saying it was an Official Note on an
9 interview with Dusan Bilcar. I made clear that it's not a statement.
10 It's an Official Note on an interview with the man. I am simply and was
11 simply offering that to Mr. Tusevljak as additional information relating
12 to an incident for which the description is completely different to see
13 if he was prepared to take this information on and update the file. It's
14 not being tendered as a statement of Mr. Bilcar.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Now, it's -- it's -- an exhibit is tendered and it's
16 clear that it's an Official Note compiled by a person apparently of the
17 Agency for Investigation documentation in Sarajevo. But my question was
18 where did you get it from?
19 MS. EDGERTON: OTP files received from the Agency for Research
20 and Investigation in Sarajevo.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 Mr. Lukic, anything to add or ...
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Edgerton, I see that this document is
24 accompanied by two attachments. Are they also part of it? And can we
25 perhaps have a look at them, if they are there.
1 MS. EDGERTON: I'll speak with Ms. Stewart and I am sure that
2 she'll get on to it in very short order, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then perhaps we wait to decide on admission until we
5 have heard from you through Ms. Stewart.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, thank you.
7 Q. I want to move away a little bit from this topic and these
8 individuals to go back to the list in a different way. Now,
9 Mr. Tusevljak, when we spoke yesterday about soldiers on this list, you
10 said -- and I asked you how many soldiers are on the list, you said: We
11 did not make that kind of a distinction. But you said: It's very clear
12 here it's always mentioned here if somebody is a soldier.
13 But, in fact, Mr. Tusevljak, it's not always obvious in this list
14 when somebody is a soldier and, in that regard, I want to direct you,
15 first of all, to two names on your list who appear at English -- first at
16 English and B/C/S page 15. The first one is number 150, and the person
17 listed at that entry relates to -- is Radmila Bjelica who, it say was
18 killed on 6 October 1993 at a place called Caklje on Mount Igman.
19 And if we go over to the next page in B/C/S and have a look at
20 entry number 157. At number 157 we see Tanja Bjelica, date of birth 1973
21 who was born in Trnovo, who was also killed on Igman.
22 Now, having looked at those two entries, I'd like to us go over
23 to 65 ter number 32950.
24 So here what you see, Mr. Tusevljak, is a Sarajevo regular combat
25 report to the Bosnian Serb army Main Staff dated 7 October 1994 reporting
1 on the personal details of officers and soldiers killed in the attack.
2 Now, if we could go over to the next page in this document in
3 both languages, and we may be looking at page 3, please. And in B/C/S as
4 well. Thank you very much.
5 Now, if you go down on this list to number 15 and 16, we see that
6 the two names we've just looked at on your list appear. The first one is
7 Private Radmila Bjelica, daughter of Marinko, born 3 June 1974 in Trnovo.
8 She's a signalswoman.
9 The second one is the second name we just looked at,
10 Tanja Bjelica, daughter of Slavko, born 1972 Sarajevo, also a
12 And just to go down one further, number 17 on this list,
13 Private Stojanka Golijanin is also appearing on your list, D1216 as entry
14 number 611. They're all identified as signalswomen.
15 So --
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Could we --
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: I just note that number 16 on the previous list
19 was born in 1973. Here they say 1972 is that just a typo or ...
20 MS. EDGERTON: I don't know where that typo might be,
21 Your Honours, between Mr. Tusevljak's list and this SRK list.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: But, of course, it would be fair to not suggest to
25 the witness that these are identical persons. If there are differences
1 there may well be, there may not be, but the witness who sees this for
2 the first time might not notice that there are potentially differences
3 and, therefore, I'd like to look at the entry for Golijanin to see
4 whether that completely corresponds to what is found in this VRS report.
5 And you said it was number --
6 MS. EDGERTON: 611, and it's in English and B/C/S page 53.
7 JUDGE ORIE: 53. One second.
8 MS. EDGERTON: Of D1216.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. There the ...
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It's D1216.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Here, at least, the year of birth is
13 MS. EDGERTON: As is the father's name, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So we have at least -- what we can see in the
15 one document, and in the other there seems to be no ... no discrepancies.
16 MS. EDGERTON: And would Your Honours like to go back to pages 15
17 and 16 --
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Just a moment.
19 MS. EDGERTON: Oh, I'm sorry, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The father's name is not identical. It says
21 Petar and Petra.
22 MS. EDGERTON: I would respectfully suggest that is likely a typo
23 because Petra would be a woman's name.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: But if you say it's identical, the father's name,
25 you should refer to a possible typo.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed, Ms. Edgerton.
2 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
3 Q. So, Mr. Tusevljak, here we've got a contemporaneous VRS document
4 referring to three women by the same first name and surname as three
5 identified in your list, killed in an attack on the same date as VRS
6 soldiers. So, in fact, it's not always mentioned in the description of
7 your list if somebody is a soldier, is it?
8 A. Well, I haven't made this list and all that you see here, all
9 these soldiers were victims of a war crime. There was no combat
10 operation then. It was a truce time at Caklje and the units of the
11 Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina --
12 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
13 A. -- were next to UNPROFOR units --
14 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... I didn't ask you about that.
15 My colleague can raise that in his re-direct examination, if you want.
16 My question to you was simple. It's not always mentioned in the
17 description of your list whether somebody is a soldier, is it?
18 A. You keep talking about my list, and I am talking about the list
19 of the Ministry of Interior of Republika Srpska. I'm not the author of
20 this list.
21 JUDGE ORIE: If we are talking about your list, then it is the
22 list that was brought by the Defence during your testimony and which you
23 have worked on it one way or another, or at least that your department
24 has worked on. That's what we call your list and that there's no one
25 that suggests that you authored that list entirely.
1 And then could we then go back to the question, because
2 Ms. Edgerton asked you whether you would agree that it's not always clear
3 from that list whether a victim was a soldier, yes or no.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it's evident that this fact is
5 not always indicated.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 Please proceed.
8 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you. Could I have this document as a
9 Prosecution Exhibit, please.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter number 32950 receives exhibit number
12 P7528, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ORIE: P7528 is admitted into evidence.
14 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
15 Q. Now, to go on to another area. When you talk about people who
16 were victims, Serbs who were victims of war crimes vis-à-vis this list,
17 did you include, did you intend to include people who fell victim to the
18 actions of other Serbs? Just putting shelling and sniping completely
19 aside for the moment.
20 A. No. In these lists, you will never see - or hardly ever - that
21 it's mentioned who was responsible. I've already said that the list was
22 made only on the basis of available documentation that is contained in
23 files, and nothing else. There was no other motive. I really cannot
24 understand this question.
25 Q. Well, let's see if we can get to -- if I can clarify this by
1 going to another example.
2 Now, let's go to 2783 on your list. That relates to an
3 individual by the name of Novo Furtula and his name appears at English
4 page 201 and B/C/S page 226.
5 And maybe if we could -- if could you manage, if we could have
6 both of them magnified a little bit.
7 Now -- and if we could move everything a little bit over so that
8 we see the descriptor on the right-hand side, please. It says that
9 Novo Furtula born in Vlahovici was killed on 2.6.1992 in Dvorista.
10 Now without anything further about this man's fate, we're unable
11 to make a determination as to its relevance to any aspect of the case
12 against General Mladic today, are we? We don't know how he was killed.
13 We don't know who the perpetrators might have been. The information is
14 deficient; right?
15 A. As I've already told you, again, you are speaking about something
16 that someone took out of a file, so whoever took this out of a file said
17 born in Vlahovici, killed on the 2nd of June, et cetera. Killed how?
18 Was it a sabotage group that killed that person? Whether it was
19 something else, whether somebody planted a land-mine and whether he was
20 killed by the enemy side, that is something that I cannot say. At this
21 moment I cannot say this or that, but obviously this person is a
22 victim --
23 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
24 A. -- so here it says killed and somewhere else it says lost his
25 life. So that's the only difference. People use the words they wanted:
1 Killed in Hrasnica, et cetera.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Could you tell us [Overlapping speakers] ...
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Overlapping speakers] ... killed
4 in Kazani so on and so forth.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Do you tell us where Dvorista is.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Dvorista is in the direction of
7 Jahorina. It was under VRS control but a few times terrorist groups made
8 incursions into that territory.
9 JUDGE ORIE: I've just asked you where it was and you've told us.
10 Please proceed.
11 MS. EDGERTON:
12 Well, in fact, Novo Furtula wasn't killed by a terrorist group
13 who might have made an incursion.
14 Could we have a look at D437, please.
15 Q. And this document is a report on crimes for the months of August,
16 September, October 1992 by the military prosecutor's office at the
17 SRK ... for Han Pijesak. And if we could please go over to page 12 in
18 both languages.
19 The paragraph numbered 6 on this page indicates, Mr. Tusevljak,
20 that Novo Furtula was one of three people who were killed in Pale
21 municipality in the village of Dvorista by a man by the name of
22 Vlatko Galinac who attached a bomb to the door of a weekend house.
23 So here's, again, a contemporaneous document that shows the
24 unreliability of the information in your list. This man, Novo Furtula,
25 wasn't victimised by anyone who might have come from the enemy factions.
1 The military prosecutor's office was dealing with him as a victim in a
2 crime committed by a member of the VRS. That's what this document shows,
3 doesn't it?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Thank you. Let's move onto another entry in your list, D1216,
6 and it's going to be the last one dealing with this list.
7 The entry is 1288, and it refers to Zelimir Knezevic and the
8 entry appears at English and B/C/S page 107.
9 Now, you see here that Zelimir Knezevic is simply listed as:
10 Missing in Sarajevo. That's the extent of the information you have about
11 him; right?
12 A. Yes. Information received from the office for missing persons.
13 That's what it says afterwards.
14 Q. All right, let have a look with regard to this man,
15 Zelimir Knezevic, at 65 ter number 32920.
16 So here you've got a statement to the SDB to the MUP by a man
17 named Muhamed Babic on 3 October 1992. Now if you could go over in both
18 languages to page 2, please. In the penultimate paragraph in English
19 and -- your indulgence for a moment. The final paragraph in B/C/S, you
20 see how Mr. Babic describes what happened on 15 June 1992 in the morning
21 when Veselin Vlahovic, known as Batko, and another man he didn't know
22 came in a green Opel to their building and eventually saw Zeljko Knezevic
23 and two other non-Serbs and took all three of them into the car. And if
24 you go further down the paragraph, Muhamed Babic says: "After Dzonlic
25 and the two other" -- pardon me. "After Knezevic and the two other
1 non-Serbs were led away, we never saw them or heard anything of them
3 Now, Mr. Tusevljak, you worked in criminal investigations since
4 before the course of the war and you've worked in criminal investigations
5 in Bosnian Serb-held territory from April 1992 throughout the war. You
6 continued to work in criminal investigations. So you know who Batko was,
7 don't you?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. He was a completely notorious man who was terrorising Grbavica in
10 1992, right, even the Serbs?
11 A. Yes, as far as I know in the beginning of 1992, not throughout
12 the year.
13 Q. So Zelimir Knezevic who you say on your list was missing was
14 taken away by Batko, according to this witness statement, and I'd like to
15 show you -- I'd like to leave that statement for a moment and show you
16 65 ter number 32974.
17 MS. EDGERTON: Oh, pardon me, I have the wrong number. Your
18 indulgence for a moment.
19 [Prosecution counsel confer]
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 MS. EDGERTON: Just your indulgence for a moment, Your Honours.
22 Ms. Stewart is going to help me with the correct 65 ter number. Or P
23 number perhaps.
24 Could we have 65 ter number 12222, please.
25 Q. So this is the exhumations report for the year 2000 by
1 Judge Ibrahim Hadzic and if we could go over to page 35 in English and
2 page 44 in B/C/S, I'd appreciate that.
3 So what you see here in front of you is that in September 1999 in
4 Trebevic, if you go down to entry number 9 on this page,
5 Zelimir Knezevic, the man who appeared at entry number 1288 on your list,
6 was exhumed from a mass grave of 28 people. Trebevic -- pardon me. And
7 now -- so, Mr. Tusevljak, here's a witness statement that's more
8 contemporaneous than your list, and an exhumation report that's more
9 contemporaneous than your list, that shows the man who you say went
10 missing was taken by a notorious criminal operating in Bosnian Serb
11 territory and his remains were recovered in what's now part of RS.
12 So here's a couple of questions to you. You know, because you're
13 a police officer involved in criminal investigations, that Batko was
14 arrested a short time ago, tried and convicted in Bosnia-Herzegovina;
16 A. Yes, I know that.
17 Q. So while this related case with the same alleged perpetrator here
18 was going on, you didn't do anything to update these files. Your team
19 didn't do anything to update this file. SJB Sarajevo didn't do anything
20 to update this file, did they? The file's not updated; right?
21 A. Well, as I've already said, first of all, we put Zelimir Knezevic
22 there on the basis of the information that we had. That is to say, the
23 office of the missing persons. And that is stated clearly there. It's
24 not that we were evading anything. We put on this list all the persons
25 that we had aware of. What you're showing to me now is something that I
1 see for the first time. It had been not made available to us.
2 Q. Right. So you're not in any position to say whether or not there
3 aren't other cases on your list where Serbs were victimised by Serb
4 criminals, by VRS soldiers, by RS policemen. You're not in a position to
5 confirm any of that, and this is just one example, isn't it? This is an
6 example that shows that you can't confirm who the perpetrators might have
8 A. We do not refer to perpetrators anywhere, and I've already told
9 you there are 3300 names, and we can go one by one and I can tell you
10 whatever I know about each and every name. Now you're trying again to
11 get me to answer questions on the basis of one name only.
12 Q. All right. So I want you to tell me what you, working in
13 criminal investigations in 1992, did about Batko.
14 A. At that time -- or actually it was only at the end of 1992 that
15 the crime prevention police started working. There weren't enough people
16 there, there weren't enough operatives there. Our duty was only to deal
17 with crimes that were not committed by members of the military, rather by
18 civilians. Whenever we received information that any kind of crime had
19 been committed, the on-site investigation team would go out on orders
20 from the prosecutor or investigative judge and would carry out an on-site
21 investigation and would provide information to the prosecutor's office in
22 charge. As far as I know when the operation that was being -- was being
23 prepared to arrest Vlahovic, this was seriously being prepared and he
24 fled from Grbavica and from Republika Srpska and he was no longer
25 accessible to us. We would have arrested him had we been in a position
1 to do so. That's for sure.
2 Q. That wasn't your priority at the time, was it? Your priority was
3 investigating the theft of Golf cars from the Volkswagen factory in
4 Vogosca; right?
5 A. That's not right. We're talking about authority, powers. First
6 of all, you are have to know what kind of powers we have and then can you
7 say something. What the crime prevention police deals with and then what
8 the national security department deals with, what the military security
9 deals with, and so on and so forth. You know, we are talking about
10 different powers in that period. So you cannot talk about priorities in
11 the work of the crime prevention police, you can only talk about our
12 powers at the time and also what the scope of our work was in 1992. It
13 was not the investigation of such crimes. It was the national security
14 department that was supposed to deal with that then. That's a completely
15 different service.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Edgerton, you said you were on track as far as
17 time is concerned, and I think had you one and a half hours for today.
18 MS. EDGERTON: If I could have probably five more minutes,
19 Your Honour, I'll be done.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But I'd -- I would have preferred if you would
21 have asked it once you were running out of time rather than to wait until
22 I respond.
23 Five minutes is what you get.
24 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
25 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, I just want to ask you one question, and it's --
1 but can you confirm to us that you know Dr. Svetlana Radovanovic, don't
3 A. No, I don't think I know her.
4 Q. But in April 2009, you both took part in a conference in Moscow
5 put on by the Russian Academy of Science?
6 A. That? Yes.
7 Q. And you know her from that conference.
8 A. I absolutely cannot remember. There were over 100 people at that
9 conference. Perhaps 150. I did meet some people, but to remember
10 someone after having met that person just once, I mean, I meet people
11 every day.
12 Q. Now, that conference was about the ICTY, wasn't it?
13 A. No. At that conference, I presented a paper, and it spoke about
14 the NATO bombing of Republika Srpska. That was my topic --
15 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... I didn't ask you about that.
16 The title of the conference was the Operation of the ICTY, its scope,
17 results, and effectiveness; right?
18 A. Probably. But you have my paper. I went there on account of
19 that paper --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Translation continues] ...
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- I was a presenter there and --
22 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Witness,
23 Ms. Edgerton asked about the theme of the conference, not about what
24 exactly your contribution was. She asked about the theme and, therefore,
25 please try to focus your answers on what is asked.
1 MS. EDGERTON: Could we have look at P7515, please.
2 Q. And what I'm going to show you, Mr. Tusevljak, is the conclusion
3 to the collection of papers published that were presented at this
5 And if we could go over to English and B/C/S page 2, please. I
6 think that's the wrong page in B/C/S, but I'll read the title because we
7 ask to move on to the relevant paragraph. Thank you.
8 What --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr.
10 MR. S. LUKIC: I'm sorry that's not the B/C/S. It's the Russian
12 MS. EDGERTON: That's fine. If we could, in Russian and in B/C/S
13 the title of the next section that I'm going to direct you to says,
14 "Conference participants have reached the following conclusions."
15 Now if we go over to English page 3 and B/C/S page 7, I believe.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MS. EDGERTON: Russian page 7. My sincere apologies.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, to show Russian to the witness only makes sense
19 if he can read Russian.
20 Are you able to read Russian?
21 One second, Mr. Lukic.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, very little. I did study
23 Russian but that was a very long time ago. I cannot really use it.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then you'll receive it a translation of what
25 Ms. Edgerton reads in the English language.
1 MS. EDGERTON:
2 Q. Yes, now --
3 A. No.
4 Q. Under this heading in the first paragraph it says: "Conference
5 participants embraced the conclusion that the [sic] ICTY should be shut
6 down immediately and that all its activity must be subjected to serious
7 review. In addition to crude violations of international law and the
8 [sic] ICTY's own rules of procedure, the principle of Rebus Sic Stantibus
9 is in itself sufficient to effect the Tribunal's immediate abolition."
10 Now, if we skip down, move down two paragraphs to the fourth
11 paragraph on this page, it reads: "The responsibility of judges and
12 other Tribunal personnel for violations of international law and of the
13 Tribunal's own rules of procedure should be raised and actively pursued."
14 Now, these are just two that I'm reading you of some of the core
15 recommendations of the conference participants.
16 These are your recommendations as well then, aren't they?
17 A. I've already told you that I was a participant here. I
18 participated with my paper that had to do with the NATO bombing of
19 Republika Srpska and the non-prosecution of that war crime. This is not
20 the only gathering that I attended and that I participated in where the
21 participants criticised the work of The Hague Tribunal. I do not see how
22 somebody cannot be criticised or not criticised. I'm a policeman, a
23 professional policeman. I just presented my paper, and there were many
24 experts that attended here in international law, criminal law, Russian
25 academicians, academicians from other countries. I was way down that
1 chain. I already said yesterday that, as I did my work and my service, I
2 studied the bombing and also the effect of depleted uranium on the
3 citizens of Republika Srpska and Bosnia-Herzegovina and --
4 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
5 JUDGE ORIE: Witness you go far beyond the question but no
6 foundation was laid yet.
7 Did you at any point do you recognise that conversation, was --
8 were these conclusions put to the audience in your presence?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore --
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I see for the first time this
12 paper --
13 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... you've answered
14 my question.
15 Did you ever vote in any way either in favour of or against these
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I don't think I was even there
18 when these conclusions were adopted.
19 JUDGE ORIE: What was read to you, do you share those
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, this is only a part, one
22 passage, I would need to read all. But if I can be honest, on many
23 points regarding the Tribunal and their attitude to the cases where Serbs
24 were the victims, that attitude was not adequate and it was deficient and
25 we have the same situation today. I continue to fight in the
1 prosecutor's office in Bosnia-Herzegovina and to date we have many crimes
2 that have not been treated. There is not a single, final judgement in
3 any of the major cases where the perpetrator was a Croat or a Bosniak.
4 Very serious war crimes and I can tell you about all of these cases with
5 many victims in Sarajevo, in Zenica, in Mostar, perpetrated by the
6 5th Corps, also cases in Srebrenica. With the MUP of Republika Srpska
7 and the prosecutor's office we are working on bringing a new indictment
8 against Naser Oric. There are many cases which were accessible to the
9 OTP. That is my personal position. That's the way I see it.
10 JUDGE ORIE: You've answered my question. And I do understand
11 that you added to what was not asked but that at least you have concerns
12 about the way in which the crimes against Serbs were treated by Courts.
13 Any further questions, Ms. Edgerton.
14 MS. EDGERTON: No, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
16 MS. EDGERTON: I would like to come back to His Honour
17 Judge Moloto related to Ratka Bilcar that he and Your Honours had a
18 question about.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the annexes to it.
20 MS. EDGERTON: Yes. We --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Death certificate and a MRK, from what I remember.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, exactly, Your Honours. The complete -- we've
23 located the complete Official Note and attachments and we uploaded into
24 e-court the death certificate of Mrs. Bilcar as 65 ter number 32942 --
25 oh, the complete ERN. So for the Official Note and the death certificate
1 attached it's 65 ter number 32942a.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Could we have it on our screen. I know what a death
3 certificate is but what an MRK is -- I might the Chamber might want to
4 have look at it.
5 MS. EDGERTON: And, Your Honour, there's no translation as yet
6 for the death certificate yet, but we submitted it immediately a request
7 for translation.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And, oh, it was not MKR but MKU, and MKU is --
9 could we look at that attachment. Could we have a look at ...
10 MS. EDGERTON: Ah, MKU could, I respectfully suggest, be the
11 acronym for [B/C/S spoken].
12 JUDGE ORIE: I now see that it's explained in the text. An
13 excerpt from the MKU the register of death in her name and her death
14 certificate. Yes, and these are the -- I take it that we'll MFI it
15 awaiting it to be uploaded -- awaiting translation.
16 Mr. Lukic.
17 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I agree. But I would also
18 like to note that this document is connected not only to Ratka Bilcar but
19 also the late daughter -- no, sorry. Sorry.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and it also apparently at least, I see some
21 description of apparently wounds having been found after a few years. I
22 know more or less what vulnus trans-sclopetarium - that's Latin - refers
23 to. We'll wait for a translation of the annexes.
24 Madam Registrar, the number?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 65 ter number 32920a receives MFI
1 number P7529.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And is marked for identification.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Give the 65 ter number again, Madam Registrar.
4 THE REGISTRAR: 32920a Your Honours.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: I thought it was 32942a.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour is correct.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: There should be P7527 MFI.
9 MS. EDGERTON: Yes.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, 27 is 32942 which was ... it is given 7527.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Excuse me, Your Honours if I could correct that,
13 65 ter number 32942a receives exhibit number P7527, Your Honours.
14 And the exhibit number P7529 will be vacated again. My excuses.
15 JUDGE ORIE: That's hereby on the record --
16 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
18 MS. EDGERTON: I'm sorry, Your Honour, just two more
19 exhibit-related housekeeping matters that I haven't tendered yet.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I first wanted to MFI this document.
21 MS. EDGERTON: I apologise.
22 JUDGE ORIE: And I wanted to ask Mr. Lukic, since the annexes
23 seems to be full of stamps and signatures, et cetera, does the objection
24 to the authenticity of the Official Note itself stand?
25 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Yes, certainly because the
1 accompanying documentation relates to the excerpt from the register of
2 death and has nothing to do with what Mr. Dusan Bilcar provided as
3 information contained in the Official Note.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you don't see any link between what he
5 describes as the cause of death and what most likely in your language is
6 explained in the annex? I mean, I read only the bullet wound. I did not
7 read the word "capitis," which if my Latin is still okay stands for at
8 the head. But if you say it stands, then we'll decide on it. If you
9 want to add anything to it, then you have an opportunity to do so.
10 Otherwise we'll proceed.
11 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Right. But from the Official
12 Note, we do not see who compiled the Official Note or whether it was made
13 based on what Mr. Dusan Bilcar said. Also, from the document attached to
14 this Official Note, the excerpt from the register of death and the
15 certificate of death, we only see that death occurred and in which way it
16 occurred. We do not see that it was caused by a sniper, that it was due
17 to sniper activity or shelling or any projectile coming from the Serb
19 JUDGE ORIE: What you are doing is to explain that the probative
20 value is not covering all elements. This doesn't deprive it from its
21 probative value, but we'll decide once we've seen the translation of the
22 attachment, we'll decide on admission.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I just, for the record, mention that earlier
24 we had ...
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I continue.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Earlier the number P7527 had been provisionally
4 assigned to 32942 that's when we asked for this underlying documents.
5 Now if we give 7527 to 32942a and the 7527 at 32942 must be
6 vacated. And then 32942 has, then, not been tendered.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Correct.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. As long as that is understood.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And I earlier said that I wanted to MFI the
10 document but gave an opportunity to Mr. Lukic to -- to express whether he
11 would still stand by his objections, I didn't MFI but I hereby MFI the
12 document, awaiting the translation.
13 MS. EDGERTON: I could deal with the exhibits after the break,
14 Your Honour. It would be very brief.
15 JUDGE ORIE: It's better to do that.
16 Mr. Lukic, as far as timing is concerned, any changes in your
17 assessment you gave yesterday?
18 MR. S. LUKIC: Okay.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Are there any changes?
20 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] No, no changes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll first take a break. We'll -- after the
22 break, first deal with some other documents, and you'll then have an
23 opportunity to cross-examine [sic] the witness, Mr. Lukic.
24 Mr. Tusevljak, we'd like to see you back in 20 minutes.
25 [The witness stands down]
1 --- Recess taken at 12.04 p.m.
2 --- On resuming at 12.26 p.m.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Edgerton, if you would already start when
4 waiting for the witness to enter the courtroom.
5 MS. EDGERTON: Absolutely. The exhumation report that we
6 discussed with respect to Mr. Zlatko Knezevic, that was 65 ter number
7 12222, I would ask be admitted as a Prosecution Exhibit, please.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
9 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter number 12222 receives exhibit number P7529
10 Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
12 MS. EDGERTON: And 65 ter 11229, the death certificate for
13 Jadranka Tenzera, if that could be the final last Prosecution exhibit,
15 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
16 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter number 11229 becomes Exhibit P7530, Your
18 JUDGE ORIE: Admitted into evidence.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: [Overlapping speakers] ... I had understood that
20 this was already part of P867.
21 MS. EDGERTON: We've been looking into that, and we'll be able to
22 sort it out outside the courtroom. We're unable to verify at this moment
23 whether or not it is.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, if you're ready to re-examine the
1 witness, you may proceed.
2 MR. S. LUKIC: Yes, I am.
3 [The witness takes the stand]
4 Re-examination by Mr. S. Lukic:
5 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Tusevljak.
6 A. Good morning.
7 Q. My learned friend asked you yesterday about persons who
8 disappeared in the area of the municipality of Olovo. That's page
9 T38488, lines 16 through 18. I should like to call up D1216.
10 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would only like to ask for
11 assistance because I don't have the page at this moment. I only have the
12 number of the person I'm looking for. It's under number 299. I don't
13 know if that's enough.
14 I apologise, just a moment. Yes, thank you.
15 Could we just move the page a little, both in English and in
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: But yesterday at that page you indicated
18 Ms. Edgerton talked about number 229.
19 [Defence counsel confer]
20 MR. S. LUKIC: My mistake. I should say 229. That's the page 21
21 on B/C/S. Same page on English -- in English.
22 [Interpretation] Could we again move the document to the left,
23 both versions?
24 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, it was shown to you that this person disappeared
25 in Olovo in December 1993. In the course of your investigations, what
1 did you establish, where were Sarajevo Serbs taken? What are all the
2 places to which they were taken?
3 A. Well, the Sarajevo Serbs who went missing in Sarajevo now we see
4 that their bodies are being exhumed in Zenica and in other areas outside
5 Sarajevo. They're being found elsewhere. The persons who went missing
6 in Sarajevo, their bodies were transported after the war. There have
7 been many sanitisations of the terrain drives and their bodies were
8 scattered everyone where. We addressed to the office for missing persons
9 of Bosnia-Herzegovina and other services in charge of sanitisation and
10 the city funeral homes of Sarajevo but we never got many answers. Also,
11 the prosecutor who was working together with us and who was giving us
12 orders tried to get this information but the answer we most frequently
13 got was that documentation had been destroyed.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Witness, do you have any specific knowledge about
15 this entry? I mean, you're telling us in general terms what happened to
16 people, taken where, transported after the war. Do you have any specific
17 knowledge about this 229 entry?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I told you, I really have no
19 specific knowledge about this.
20 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... thank you.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Lukic.
22 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now look at page 61 of
23 this same document, both English and B/C/S.
24 Q. We should focus on number 707 here. Denda, Tihomir Denda, son of
25 Krsto. Looking at these notes, can you tell us what Unis, Unis, is?
1 A. Unis was a large company in Sarajevo that had its shops and
2 warehouses in different area, including one warehouse in the territory of
3 Hrasna. This is a reference to the Unis warehouse that was one of the
4 camps and one of the detention facilities holding Serbs during the war.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I ask Ms. Edgerton, if you yesterday referred
6 to 707 or 706? The transcript of yesterday indicates 707 but you
7 referred specifically to Olovo yesterday and I see in 706 the person went
8 missing on the 16th of January, 1994 in Olovo.
9 Was that what you wanted to refer to.
10 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, only Olovo.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: But then yesterday the number was wrongly
12 recorded at least. It's not 707 but 706; right.
13 MS. EDGERTON: It could well have been my mistake in the numbers,
14 but, yes, Your Honour, correct.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Just to alert you, Mr. Lukic, what the topic was
16 about yesterday about that part of the cross-examination, it was related
17 to Olovo.
18 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand that the
19 reference was to Olovo, but completely different numbers and different
20 names were put on the transcript.
21 Q. You were also asked yesterday by my learned friend where the
22 village of Kijevo is located. Can you tell us whose municipality is
24 A. That's the municipality of Trnovo, and it's one of ten Sarajevo
1 Q. Could we now look at document 33024? That's the 65 ter number.
2 MR. S. LUKIC: I think there is only English version.
3 Q. [Interpretation] You will find your way around in this document
4 because we're only interested in names. It's a list of potential
5 duplicates that you discussed with my colleague yesterday.
6 Could we look at the first two names, please, and could you
7 explain to the Trial Chamber whether there are any differences or
8 similarities between these two?
9 A. The first name is Babic, Bosa and the second name is Babic,
10 Bosko. The first is a woman; the second is a man.
11 Q. Thank you. Could we now look at number 868 and 872. The same
13 A. Kosa Djuric, a woman; and Kosta Djuric, a man. We see Ilijas as
14 the place of death in the case of Kosa; and in the case of Kosta, the
15 man, it's Dobrinja 2.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you please repeat the family name of the
17 man. Number 872?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Kosta Djurica. Dobrinja 2.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. That means also the family name is
20 different from the previous entry. Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, to the extent you want to draw our
22 attention to the fact that what are presented here as potential
23 duplicates there are considerable differences in many respects. I think
24 I put that on the record already yesterday myself so, therefore, that's
25 clear whether these are duplicates yes this are presented as potential
1 duplicates is still to be seen. I said yesterday there's some
2 differences in spelling very often so, therefore, what the potential of
3 those potential duplicates is, is still to be seen because there are
4 noticeable differences as well.
5 So that's -- if that's the point you want to make, it's clear to
6 us that every name, every other information should be compared before you
7 would ever conclude that these are duplicates, and I do not know whether
8 the Chamber finds it's necessary to establish whether these are
9 duplicates or not.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I'll move to a
12 different topic.
13 Could we now look at document P6482. I should like to see page 4
14 in B/C/S and 4 in English.
15 No, sorry, it should be the second page then. Yes, that's
16 correct. Thank you. Could we focus on number 39.
17 Q. Yesterday on page 38520 of the transcript --
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Could you enlarge the English side, please.
19 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Yesterday on page 38520, lines 22 to 24, we discussed the person,
21 a female, under number 39, named Ruza Malovic, daughter of Zivko, born on
22 15 August 1945.
23 Could we now call up D1216. The number of the entry is 1601,
24 page -- I'm sorry I'm moving so slowly. The page number is 132.
25 Yesterday my learned friend asserted --
1 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we just move this a little
2 to the side.
3 Q. In the note, it says the civilians killed in Sarajevo, date of
4 death 5 February 1993, data of the centre for researching crimes against
5 Serbs, Belgrade.
6 My learned friend stated yesterday that it is the identical
7 person to the one whom we just saw on a different list. Do you see any
8 difference in the name, surname, father's name, or date of birth of this
9 person under number 1601 and the woman from the previous list?
10 A. We see clearly here that the year of birth is 1901 and the date
11 of death is 5 February 1993. It's not the same day as Markale I
13 Q. And in the previous list?
14 A. I don't have the previous list here now, but I --
15 MR. S. LUKIC: [Previous translation continues] ... 482, page 2.
16 Yes, yes, yes. Aha, sorry. P6482, page 2, both English and
18 Q. [Interpretation] 39. Person 39.
19 A. We see here that the date of birth is the 15th of August, 1945.
20 Q. Can we go to the top of the page, please.
21 A. We see that this is the 5th of February, 1994.
22 Q. What is your conclusion when you saw these two documents?
23 A. Additional checks have to be run here but obviously there's a
24 difference in terms of date of birth and date of death.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Also note that this list is entitled, List of
2 persons killed at Markale market on 5th of February, 1994, not 1993.
3 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right.
4 Q. Likewise, yesterday we had the opportunity to see maps.
5 P7522, could that please be displayed so that we could see ...
6 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I do apologise now. I don't know
7 the exact transcript page when this was discussed yesterday, but it was
8 the tanks, mortars and APCs that were discussed.
9 Q. My question is: What kind of symbols are these marked on the
11 A. I cannot discern this. These are military symbols. I'm not a
12 military man. I have no idea whatsoever what this means.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: To assist you, Mr. Lukic, at least where the witness
15 for the first time said that he saw tanks too, he said that at page
16 38532, line 8. And tanks are further dealt with in the few three or four
17 pages after that.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
20 Q. After this map, two other maps were shown to you but with
21 different locations but the symbols were similar. Perhaps they were even
22 the same. Would your answer be the same as this one in relation to the
23 symbols that we see on this map?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please take a look at
2 document 32993, page 4 in Serbian, in B/C/S. As far as I can remember,
3 page 4 has not been uploaded into the system. Page 4 of the English
4 translation, that is, if I'm not mistaken.
5 Q. We see that there's just -- oh.
6 Mr. Tusevljak, do you see this document before you?
7 A. Yes, it's a dispatch.
8 Q. Please, I don't think we have a translation for this page. Can
9 you please read out what is written in line 2 underneath paragraph 1?
10 You see those bullet points, those hyphens. There's one name and then
11 there's another name.
12 A. You mean Radovic Marka Ruzic.
13 Q. No, no, underneath the first paragraph.
14 A. Hadzimuratovic Elvira born on 1 July 1963, street
15 Palmira Tojatija 106.
16 Kovacevic, Vera, born 10 August 1948, the street is
17 Palmira Tojatija, number 106.
18 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could counsel please pause
19 before putting his question. We did not hear it. Thank you.
20 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 Q. Could we now please look at the document 32993, I think it's page
22 29, the last page?
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Could you give us the 65 ter number again, please.
24 MR. S. LUKIC: It's the same 65 ter number.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Oh.
1 Q. [Interpretation] Could we please take a look at the lower part of
2 this document, the lower right-hand corner.
3 My learned friend tried to establish that the persons mentioned
4 in these notices are identical or rather the person mentioned in this
5 notice is identical to the person mentioned in the previous document. So
6 I'd just like that ask you to read out what is written here in the
7 Serbian language so that all of those present in court could get the
8 right English interpretation because it hasn't been translated into
10 A. Vera Djordjo Kovacevic. It's probably Vera, father's name
11 Djordjo, Kovacevic. Born Crnogorac.
12 Q. Can you go on.
13 A. Killed on 30th July 1993 at the age of 45.
14 Q. Can we please go back to document D1216 now. Page 109 in B/C/S
15 and in English. 1316 is the number, so we're looking at that person so
16 could we please enlarge that section.
17 Since it's only the first and last names that are relevant here,
18 the date of death as well as the information that has to do with the
19 father's name, could we just go back a bit to the left so that we could
20 see in that list ...
21 Do you see the father's name of the mentioned person in this
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. What is written there?
25 A. Kovacevic Djordjo Vera.
1 Q. Do you remember the previous document, the one that we read, what
2 the father's name was of the deceased person?
3 A. I'd have to take a look at it again. I think we'd have to take a
4 look at the on-site investigation report -- no, or, actually, the
6 Q. [In English] 32993, page 4, B/C/S.
7 [Interpretation] I hope that you see it now, that you see it
8 before you what we were discussing just now.
9 A. Yes. Here it says father's name, Corco.
10 Q. For you, is that name identical to the one here from the official
11 document, the document of Republika Srpska?
12 A. Evidently it's not the same name.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 Could we now please take a look at -- I'm sorry, could we keep
15 the same document now and could we just move document 1D -- sorry. D1216
16 to the left so that we could see the note that pertains to this person,
17 Vera Kovacevic.
18 When you look at the information there about the death of this
19 person, in your view, does that differ from the information that was
20 entered in document -- in this document of the Ministry of Interior of
22 A. Here the document is the 30th of August, 1993; and in the
23 dispatch, it is the 30th of July, 1993.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 Could we now move on to document number 32942, 65 ter.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The entire document is now P7527, MFI. Including
2 the two attachments.
3 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I had written it down,
4 but I didn't read it on time. Thank you once again.
5 Q. You had the opportunity to discuss this document with my learned
6 friend. This is what I'd like to ask you: What has to be attached to an
7 Official Note? I'm asking you this question as a policeman who is
8 involved in this line of work.
9 A. An Official Note, first of all, has to have a date and a number
10 of its own because, according to instructions, all Official Notes have to
11 be recorded in the book of Official Notes. Therefore, they have to have
12 a number. That is the first thing.
13 Secondly, in the service, it is impossible for someone to write
14 an Official Note and sign it without its -- without the document being
15 signed by a person whose name we can see legibly, and there has to be a
16 proper number. So this kind of thing cannot be done in the service.
17 That is the first thing.
18 And, secondly, that means that this Official Note was not
19 properly recorded in the official records of the AID. That is one thing.
20 And, secondly, since I know the structure, the police structure in
21 Bosnia-Herzegovina, the AID of Bosnia-Herzegovina is a classical
22 intelligence service at that point in time. That is not a service in
23 2001 -- in the year 2000 that is involved in this kind of work. There is
24 the federal department of The crime police and the cantonal MUPs, and
25 they have their own departments for investigating war crimes.
1 I would like to note -- or, actually, if you could go back to the
2 explanation on the list of the MUP of Republika Srpska where it is seen
3 very clearly that Dusan Bilcar, in 1992, was detained in Sarajevo. He
4 was in prison, and he was detained precisely by these people and he can
5 testify about all of that. So in accordance with the Law on Criminal
6 Procedure, a statement was supposed to be taken from him at orders from
7 the prosecutor only. He should be interviewed about his wife's death and
8 it is obvious that the place of death, according to the information that
9 we wrote, was at this check-point in Dobrinja, and it's impossible for
10 her as a woman to get to the check-point because that is the separation
11 line, and it's a war zone. Being a woman, she couldn't get there. How
12 could she get there? How could she be hit there? Since we have a series
13 of similar incidents, civilians, Serb civilians, I'm not speaking about
14 state organs now but criminal groups took them out of Sarajevo took money
15 from them, brought them to the front line, and then at the moment when
16 the line was being crossed, they would be killed, and they would try to
17 portray this as these people being their victims. And it was not only in
18 that case but also in other cases, where did the bullet come from? How
19 were these persons killed? This was not investigated. Rather, all cases
20 were ascribed to sniping.
21 Now I'm speaking on the basis of the knowledge I have now, not
22 what I knew in 1992, but our current information shows that the unit of
23 the larks, Seva, in Sarajevo that shot people in Sarajevo and we have
24 statements from their members and --
25 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... witness you're
1 moving far away from the question.
2 Mr. Lukic, could you please -- and it also, I think, has got
3 nothing to do any further with what was raised in cross-examination.
4 So would you please take the lead again.
5 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you.
6 Q. Talking about this Official Note, what would be its probative
7 value in a criminal proceedings before the competent courts in
9 A. Absolutely none. None whatsoever. Nobody would ever even
10 consider it.
11 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... relevant that
12 what probative value it would have elsewhere because we apply our rules
13 and not the rules of any other state. That's clearly in our rules that
14 we're not bound by any rules of evidence other than ours.
15 Please proceed.
16 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] We are precisely seeking an answer
17 to the question that I would put to Mr. Tusevljak now, which would
18 clarify my previous question.
19 Q. As you said that this document would have no probative value --
20 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Just a second.
21 [Defence counsel confer]
22 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I withdraw this question.
23 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, we had occasion to discuss the documentation
24 underlying this list. Can you tell us where it is now?
25 A. In the archives of the Ministry of the Interior of
1 Republika Srpska at Pale.
2 [Defence counsel confer]
3 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Thank you. One more short question. Yesterday you also
5 discussed the facility called Zlatiste and who took over that facility
6 and when.
7 Can you remember - or do you know - in which year the Army of
8 Republika Srpska was founded, on which date?
9 A. On 12 May 1992, I believe.
10 Q. Thank you. Is the name Dusan Zurovac familiar to you?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Did you have occasion to read his book that has been shown,
13 together with the list of the missing?
14 A. I leafed through it. I never read it. I think that in that book
15 Mr. Zurovac gives his acknowledgments to the MUP of Republika Srpska for
16 the assistance given him.
17 Q. You said you leafed through the book. Did you notice the number
18 of victims cited in his book?
19 A. I believe it's over 5.000. I'm not quite sure, but I think it's
20 over 5.000.
21 Q. Thank you. In conclusion, can I ask you again: This list that
22 we have been discussing all this time, for whose requirements was it
24 A. This list and the case files on which it was based was made for
25 the commission for investigations into the suffering of Serbs, Croats,
1 Bosniak, Jews and others in Sarajevo, for the members of that commission.
2 Q. You've told us that job was never finished. Can you tell us why?
3 A. For one simple reason: The only condition set by the Serbian
4 side was that we should proceed precisely in this way with case files,
5 with clear indicators showing why somebody is a war victim, with the
6 birth certificate, the death certificate and other evidence, and only
7 based on that to qualify the person as a civilian victim or a military
8 victim, and we continue to believe it's the only way to determine the
9 exact number of victims in the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina during the
10 war and to avoid all manipulation. And we continue to require for every
11 victim to indicate not only the name, surname, father's name, and date of
12 birth but also the JMBG, the unique identity number. That would preclude
13 all manipulation on any side. We wanted to finish this job in that way.
14 However, it was made impossible for that commission to complete its work
15 because, if it had, then the exact number of the victims would be known,
16 and they didn't want it, and it was a result of sheer obstruction that
17 the commission stopped working.
18 Q. To which part of Bosnia-Herzegovina was this list supposed to
19 pertain and to which part of Bosnia-Herzegovina does it relate?
20 A. The ten Sarajevo municipalities. But our plans at that time was
21 to finish that work, including all territories, Podrinje, Krajina, all
22 the other parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina, preceding in exactly in this way,
23 to make it a complete scientific research paper showing the number of
25 That commission that worked in Sarajevo did not have for its
1 purpose to establish criminal liability for the killing of any person.
2 That is criminal liability. As far as that aspect is concerned, we filed
3 reports to the prosecutor's offices, in the cantonal ones, the district
4 ones or the municipal one in Sarajevo.
5 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, I wanted to thank you on behalf of the Defence
6 team of Ratko Mladic for coming to The Hague for the second time. I have
7 no further questions for you. Thank you.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.
9 Any questions in re-examination, Ms. Edgerton? In -- yes, in --
10 no. It's not the re-examination. Mr. Lukic has re-examined the witness.
11 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, if I may just ask one quick question,
12 Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if you do so, then meanwhile I would have a
14 short question for the witness.
15 Witness, Djura Salaja Street, where is that in Sarajevo?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Honestly, I can't remember at this
17 moment. It sounds familiar but all the streets have changed names in
18 Sarajevo. Not an single pre-war name remains and it was all 20 years
19 ago. I can't remember.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that name is mentioned in the report which
21 states what happened to Mr. Zelimir Knezevic. You remember the Batko
22 story. Do you remember having looked at that, being examined on that?
23 It was suggested to you that this happened in Grbavica. Does this
24 refresh your memory that Djura Salaja Street indeed is Grbavica?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If it's related to Batko then it's
1 certainly in Grbavica. There's no need to discuss it further.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And on the 15th of June, 1992, who was in control of
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Authorities of Republika Srpska.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
6 Any further questions, Ms. Edgerton?
7 MS. EDGERTON: Just one quick one related to an issue my friend
8 raised which is the book of Mr. Dusan Zurovac. Now -- which have I here,
9 actually, in hard copy in my hand. It's the copy that Mr. Zurovac
10 provided in the context of his coming to -- the preparation for his
11 coming to testify in the Karadzic case.
12 Further cross-examination by Ms. Edgerton:
13 Q. Now, Mr. Tusevljak, you were asked whether or not you had
14 occasion to read this book, and you commented that you leafed through it,
15 you never read it, and you think that in that book, Mr. Zurovac gives his
16 acknowledgements to the MUP of Republika Srpska for the assistance given
17 to him and Mr. Tusevljak, that's 65 ter number 32976. With Your Honours
18 permission, and my friend's permission I would like to invite
19 Mr. Tusevljak to have a look through this book and point out exactly
20 where he sees Mr. Zurovac give acknowledgments to the MUP of
21 Republika Srpska and the only marking on this document is the 65 ter
22 number and P number?
23 JUDGE ORIE: Do we really need whether he did or not, how
24 relevant is that.
25 MS. EDGERTON: That's fine, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Any further questions?
2 MS. EDGERTON: No.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic.
4 MR. S. LUKIC: [No interpretation]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Usually there's no room for further questions. I
6 don't know what your plans are --
7 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I have no questions. I only
8 forgot to tender 65 ter 32993.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter number 32993 receives exhibit number
11 D1217, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: In the absence of any objections, D1217 is admitted
13 into evidence.
14 Mr. Tusevljak, this concludes your testimony in this court. I'd
15 like to thank you very much for coming a long way to The Hague, not only
16 once but even twice, and I wish you a safe return home again.
17 You may follow the usher.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 [The witness withdrew]
20 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the Chamber would like to use the time that is
23 remaining today to deal with two agenda items and to read two oral
24 decisions. Now we can do two things: Either use the time now and it
25 would be my assessment that we would need some 12 minutes, approximately,
1 or take a break, then resume at a quarter to 2.00 and to read it then. I
2 leave it entirely in the hands of the Defence, and if you wish to consult
3 with Mr. Mladic, that's fine.
4 MR. LUKIC: We received a sign from Mr. Mladic that we can
6 JUDGE ORIE: That we can continue.
7 Then I'd like to first deliver an oral decision on the
8 Prosecution's request to replace P3207.
9 P3207 being a redacted statement of Witness Predrag Radulovic's
10 with -- to be replaced with document bearing Rule 65 ter number 30594A,
11 an unredacted version.
12 This decision is related to prior decisions, which the Chamber
13 will recall first.
14 On the 4th of October, 2013, the Prosecution filed a motion
15 seeking to admit Radulovic's statement and 29 associated exhibits
16 pursuant to Rule 92 quater. The Defence opposed this motion.
17 On 20th December 2013, the Chamber admitted the statement with
18 the exclusion of paragraph 133 and denied admission of the associated
19 exhibit bearing Rule 65 ter number 26215.
20 On the 26 February 2014 the Chamber upheld its decision following
21 a Prosecution motion to reconsider.
22 Paragraph 133 of Radulovic's statement quotes documents -- the
23 document bearing Rule 65 ter number 26215, which states that at a meeting
24 Mladic and Colonel Slavko Lisica "pointed out that ethnic cleansing
25 should be carried out in Teslic municipality as soon as and as
1 efficiently as possible," and that "Mladic allegedly advised some members
2 of the Serbian army and the SDS to set on fire and kill Muslims and
3 Croats wherever they could, that they would not be held responsible in
4 any way and that he could issue them with a written guarantee for that."
5 The Chamber, at that time, concluded that the admission of
6 paragraph 133 of the statement, as well as document bearing Rule 65 ter
7 number 26215 without the benefit of cross-examination would be unduly
8 prejudicial to the accused and therefore merited exclusion under
9 Rule 89(D).
10 On the 30th of September, 2014, the Defence filed a motion to
11 present Nedjo Vlaski's evidence pursuant to Rule 92 ter and included
12 document bearing Rule 65 ter number 26215 as an associated exhibit on its
13 exhibit list. In his statement and during his testimony Vlaski commented
14 on this document. The Prosecution then tendered the document and it was
15 admitted into evidence as Exhibit P6890.
16 The Prosecution then sought to replace the redacted statement of
17 Radulovic with an unredacted version currently bearing Rule 65 ter number
18 30594A. The sole difference between the two versions is the exclusion of
19 paragraph 133 in the redacted version.
20 On 4 November 2014 the Chamber directed the Defence in court to
21 respond to this request at a later time.
22 On the 15th of December, 2014, and the 2nd of March, 2015, the
23 Chamber, via e-mail, again asked the Defence to respond.
24 As of today's date, the Defence has not responded and the Chamber
25 will now decide on the Prosecution's request. When the Chamber delivered
1 its original decision excludeing paragraph 133 of Radulovic's statement
2 document bearing Rule 65 ter number 26215 was not in evidence. Now, this
3 document including the alleged statements of the accused during the
4 meeting, the citing of which formed the basis for the initial exclusion
5 of paragraph 133, has been admitted into evidence, as P6890. Radulovic
6 did not participate in this meeting and only commented on the document.
7 As such, paragraph 133 does not add significantly to the document's
8 probative value.
9 Accordingly, the Chamber finds that the admission of
10 paragraph 133 into evidence without the benefit of cross-examination of
11 Radulovic is no longer unduly prejudicial to the accused.
12 The Chamber therefore grants the Prosecution request and
13 instructs the Registry to replace P3207 with document bearing 65 ter
14 number 30594A.
15 As a final matter, the Chamber recalls that the weight to be
16 attributed to paragraph 133 of Radulovic's statement will be assessed in
17 the context of all the evidence before the Chamber, and that this
18 decision deals only with the admission of this paragraph.
19 And this concludes the Chamber's decision.
20 Ms. Edgerton.
21 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, if I may, and it's with regard to
22 tomorrow morning at the end of proceedings yesterday, you had asked me --
23 you had indicated it might be helpful if I was to remind you of my wish
24 to make a submission with respect to the admissibility of -- pardon me.
25 To make a submission asking for the reconsideration of the decision to
1 admit the list we've been discussing for the last two days, D1216 but I
2 very much note the time, Your Honour and I don't want to make the day any
3 longer, so I'm wondering if Your Honours might be prepared to hear this
4 brief submission in that regard tomorrow morning when we resume.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's fine. As far as the Chamber is
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Lukic, I thought that your next witness
9 would arrive yesterday evening and that we would continue on Wednesday.
10 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour. I just want to briefly address
11 your ruling on Predrag Radulovic's 92 bis statement. I just wanted to
12 inquire if that changes the rules so that we can include in our 92 bis
13 statement's acts and conducts of the accused.
14 JUDGE ORIE: We are not, at this moment -- you have not responded
15 to the --
16 MR. LUKIC: Still, the rules are the rules. Acts and conduct of
17 the accused.
18 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... Okay.
19 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then it would have been preferable you would have
21 brought that to our attention. At this moment the ruling is there and
22 whatever the consequences are for the future, you can try to make up your
23 mind yourself. But Judge Moloto would like to add something.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: This paragraph was excluded because it was being
25 tendered as a 92 quater statement and without cross-examination that was
1 the reason.
2 JUDGE ORIE: And.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: And then you, the Defence, tendered the same
4 paragraph. Now when you tender it yourself.
5 MR. LUKIC: Not the paragraph, the document.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document which contains the paragraphs.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Remind me, Mr. Lukic, by telling me where exactly in
8 Rule 92 quater where the acts and conduct of the accused is excluded as a
9 subject matter in a statement.
10 Could you read -- I mean, I rather that's in 92 bis. It doesn't
11 apply in 92 ter but could you remind me because you relied on 92 quater
12 where that is to be found as exclusive.
13 MR. LUKIC: 92 quater is also without cross-examination
14 [Overlapping speakers] ...
15 JUDGE ORIE: No, but I'm asking you where in the rule because I
16 think Rule 92 quater is pretty precise on that. But I am asking my
17 colleagues to -- let me see. I don't have my glasses with me, but.
18 "If the evidence goes to proof of acts and conduct of an accused
19 as charged in the indictment, that may be a factor against the admission
20 of such evidence or that part of it."
21 Which means that Rule 92 quater explicitly allows, though with
22 caution, admission of a statement going to the acts and conduct of the
23 accused and that therefore if you compare it to 92 bis you're missing
24 part of what Rule 92 quater says.
25 So although it would have been if you first consulted Rule 92
1 quater before asking the question, I hope that the Chamber has assisted
2 you in this matter. Because you insisted on the rules to apply and
3 that's exactly the reason why I took you to that rule.
4 Now everyone is interfering in my programme, which I thought
5 would take 12 to 13 minutes. I'll --
6 Mr. Mladic is supposed not to speak at audible volume.
7 I now deliver the Chamber's decision on the Defence motion to
8 admit the evidence of Elliott Moore pursuant to Rule 92 bis of the
9 Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence.
10 On the 20th of July 2015, the Defence filed a motion pursuant to
11 Rule 92 bis of the Rules seeking admission into evidence of the undated
12 and marked witness statement of Elliott Moore. The Defence submitted,
13 inter alia, that although the statement is already in evidence as
14 Exhibit D371 in the present case, the entirety of the statement should be
15 admitted for the truth of the matters asserted therein.
16 On the 3rd of August, the Prosecution responded to the Defence`s
17 motion not opposing the provisional admission of the statement pending
18 the attachment of a declaration from Moore in compliance with Rule 92
19 bis (B) of the Rules.
20 Moreover, the Prosecution requested that should the marked
21 version of the statement be admitted, Moore's declaration should also
22 encompass the markings on the statement.
23 The version of the statement attached to the Defence's Rule 92
24 bis motion differs from the version admitted as D371 insofar as a number
25 of boxes surround portions of the statement and as it contains one
1 illegible handwritten note. However, the Chamber notes that the content
2 of both versions is identical.
3 Under these circumstances, the Chamber is of the view that the
4 markings and the note do not affect the substance of the statement to an
5 extent that they would create a different statement.
6 The Chamber recalls that the statement was admitted through
7 witness John Clark on the 23rd of September, 2013, as Exhibit D371,
8 pursuant to Rule 89(C) of the Rules. And this can be found at transcript
9 page 17245.
10 The Chamber further recalls that no limitations were requested or
11 set regarding the document and therefore finds that the statement was
12 already admitted for the truth of its content.
13 And based on the forgoing, the Chamber declares the Defence`s
14 motion moot.
15 And this concludes the Chamber's decision on the matter.
16 Although I would have a few small items, I think it would be
17 wiser, since we have spent now all the 12 or 13 minutes I assessed we
18 would need and leave that perhaps for tomorrow or the day after tomorrow.
19 Mr. Lukic.
20 MR. S. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I do apologise for taking up your
21 precious time this way, but 65 ter number 32993 is now D1217, and I
22 wanted to tender the fourth page of that document in the B/C/S version.
23 Since there is no translation for this fourth page, it should be MFI'd.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we overlooked that earlier because
25 it's D1217 and I think it was -- we decided to admit. Whereas, since
1 there is no full translation it should have been MFI'd. Thank you very
2 much, Mr. Lukic. If you would use our precious time - and your precious
3 time - always so constructive, that would certainly be appreciated.
4 We -- I leave the few other items for the days to come, and we'll
5 adjourn for the day, and we'll resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the 2nd of
6 September, 9.30 in the morning, in this same courtroom, I.
7 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.42 p.m.,
8 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 2nd day of
9 September, 2015, at 9.30 a.m.