1 Tuesday, 4 April 2006
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.19 p.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Moore.
6 MR. MOORE: Your Honour, yes. I hope that you have before you a
7 small disclosure note in relation to what occurred yesterday evening and
8 this morning for Dr. Bosanac. My learned friends have got copies of the
9 note, and perhaps the document speaks more eloquently than I would.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
11 MR. MOORE: That being the case, we would seek to call Dr. Bosanac
12 in relation to what I will call the blue file index and for her to give
13 evidence in relation to this matter. It may well be -- can I just
14 indicate what the professor apparently has said is that they have not
15 looked at those documents for some considerable time. The fax paper tends
16 to lose the printing ability or hold its message, and they were
17 photocopies taken of that. So what has been done at the moment is checks
18 are being made to see whether the documents are actually fully in
19 existence, although it's believed that the vast majority are.
20 Certainly as far as we are concerned, we would try and prioritise
21 and ask for the individuals who are named on the Annex A of the
22 indictment, for -- if there are any files in relation to those
23 individuals, for that to be revealed. And if needs be, and with obviously
24 the leave of the Court, perhaps to call the professor to give evidence on
25 the methodology that was used, unless my friends are now satisfied.
1 The problem that I see may well be one of translation, although I
2 believe it's correct to say that it would have almost certainly gone off
3 in B/C/S; and therefore, that should not create insurmountable problems.
4 So the final submission that we would make is that we would seek to call
5 Dr. Bosanac in relation to the blue file and the additional two documents
6 that were revealed to the Defence as Christmas. There is another file
7 that we are not going to rely on this -- at this juncture, but my learned
8 friends are aware of its existence and have it served on them.
9 JUDGE PARKER: And if required by the Defence, you propose to call
10 a further witness?
11 MR. MOORE: Well, we would -- if the Defence require it, we would,
12 I would have thought, try and locate the person we believe is most
13 suitable to deal with this area of the compilation of material and to call
14 evidence in relation to that, if it's needed.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Yes. Very well.
16 Mr. Vasic.
17 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Good
18 afternoon to everyone. I have heard the explanation of my learned
19 friend. It's just that I think that from this letter it follows clearly
20 that the documentation exists, in part in photocopied fax messages and
21 another part in stored electronic messages, so there is no problem. That
22 is, indeed, why the Defence presented its request yesterday, to verify the
23 documentation we have received based on the original documents, and we
24 would appreciate it if our learned friends from the Prosecution could do
25 that, namely, request the documentation from the Ministry of Health in the
1 Republic of Croatia.
2 We will examine the witness. Professor Ivica Kostovic I see is
3 mentioned here who has processed this documentation. I suppose that is
4 the person I have in mind. As for the witness, Mrs. Bosanac, the Defence
5 has no objection to her being examined by the Prosecution to these
6 circumstances. The only question in our mind is whether it would be
7 possible to cross-examine her on the contents of the blue notebook, which
8 seems to be the basis for the documentation we have asked to be
9 requested. So we understand that she could be questioned about the
10 technicalities, but we would also like to cross-examine her on the
11 contents. And perhaps we should even examine Mr. Kostovic, Professor
12 Ivica Kostovic, if the Prosecution has no objection to that.
13 Thank you, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Lukic.
15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I have a very brief, specific
16 suggestion. I fully accept the proposal of the Prosecution to hear
17 Witness Bosanac now in chief, that we cross-examine her on these documents
18 under Rule 68, and I completely agree that when we receive the
19 documentation, either she or Professor Kostovic confirm that side of the
20 facts with a proviso that if the Defence would reserve the right to
21 question Mrs. Bosanac later after we receive the documents and see if
22 there is anything relevant to her, as long as we have a relevant witness
23 in these proceedings that could be examined on these documents. But
24 without having seen them, we cannot give a decided answer now.
25 JUDGE PARKER: I understand from his clear signal that Mr. Borovic
1 has nothing that he wishes to add to what has been said by Mr. Vasic and
2 Mr. Lukic.
3 Is there any difficulty you see from what has been said,
4 Mr. Moore?
5 MR. MOORE: I would have thought not.
6 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. The position will be that the Chamber
7 will hear Dr. Bosanac now and she will be cross-examined. If it then is
8 considered by the Defence that there is need to cross-examine her further
9 or to hear another witness, that can be specifically raised, and it will
10 be ruled upon in light of the circumstances as they appear at the time.
11 Yes, Mr. Moore.
12 MR. MOORE: Could I please call Dr. Bosanac, who I believe is in
13 the waiting-room outside.
14 [The witness entered court]
15 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon, Dr. Bosanac, welcome back. May we
16 ask you once again to take the affirmation that is on the card? It's been
17 such a long time.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
19 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Please sit down.
21 Yes, Mr. Moore.
22 WITNESS: VESNA BOSANAC [Resumed]
23 [Witness answered through interpreter]
24 Examination by Mr. Moore: [Continued]
25 Q. Dr. Bosanac, you may remember that you gave evidence in October -
1 a long time ago - and that you provided to the Office of the Prosecutor a
2 CD which had within it a number or a large number of details about
3 individuals who had been to the hospital, and it dealt with their
4 administrative -- their administration. Do you remember that? It
5 recorded things like names, occupation, date of entry, and diagnosis.
6 Now, do you remember providing OTP with that particular document, or with
7 that compact disc?
8 A. Yes, I remember.
9 Q. Thank you very much.
10 [Prosecution counsel confer]
11 MR. MOORE:
12 Q. Your CD actually comes out like this when printed. You will be
13 relieved to know I will not be asking you any details about that, but what
14 I have had done, I have had compiled a list which is in a blue folder
15 beside you on the left-hand side. Could you just reach for it, please?
16 And would you be kind enough to open it? And I just want to deal with the
17 actual, not the first page, but the actual second page. So not the
18 coloured page, because that's an index. Yes. The next one.
19 Now, you can see on the left-hand side a space where various names
20 were originally included. Do you see that? Now, would you be kind
21 enough, please, if you look at the bottom right-hand corner, you get the
22 page numbers. So if you look to the bottom right-hand corner and go to
23 page 3 and 4, I'd just like to direct your attention to one or two
24 matters. Now, page 3 should have on it -- approximately one-third of the
25 way down, there is a name in that column. Do you see it?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And then if we turn over the page we can see that there are again
3 names, one of them coloured. To assist you, I think it's right to say
4 that when you gave this CD and details to the Office of the Prosecutor, it
5 was on the basis that many of the people whose names were recorded here
6 were still living and you felt bound by medical privilege that their
7 details should not be released. Is that right?
8 A. Yes, that's correct.
9 Q. However, the names that we find occasionally marked in these pages
10 are individuals that the Prosecution say these people were buried at
11 Ovcara, just to give the context for you. Now, can we deal, please, with
12 the method of recording of individuals who came to the hospital throughout
13 1991? And clearly in 1991 there was a period of peace, and then matters
14 got a little worse. And at the end, before the fall of Vukovar, it was
15 extremely difficult. But could you please, in very general terms, explain
16 to the Court how it was if a person came to the hospital they were
17 recorded or their names were recorded and registered within the -- the
18 documents of the hospital? Can you do that for us, please?
19 A. When somebody would come to the hospital - in those months of the
20 year 1991, there were mostly wounded - they would first go through the
21 emergency admission department, emergencies. If the person was able to
22 speak, their personal details would be recorded, their full name, date of
23 birth, a working diagnosis would be made, and the admitting doctor would
24 decide whether the person would go immediately to X-rays, examination,
25 surgery, or if there was a wound, it had to be dressed. And after that
1 the patient would be either hospitalised or sent home or to one of the
2 shelters in town.
3 Every day, pursuant to the protocol prevailing in the infirmary,
4 the protocol of surgeries and inpatients, we would type into the computer
5 the name and surname of every patient, father's name, date of birth, place
6 of injury, and diagnosis, and initially we would send it by e-mail to the
7 information section of the Ministry of Health. When in the beginning of
8 November that communication was broken, then we typed the lists on a
9 typewriter and sent them by fax, again to the information section of the
10 Ministry of Health headquarters.
11 Every patient had his or her chart indicating existence of fever,
12 procedures undertaken, surgeries, if any, and developments.
13 Q. Thank you very much. Could I ask you, please, to look at the top
14 line of -- well, actually perhaps a better example is if we go to page 3,
15 and we have got the name of Babic, Drazen. So bottom right-hand corner,
16 page 3. Can we deal, please, with what the headings at the top of each
17 column means? So obviously the first column relates to what, please?
18 A. The first column is the title of that person, ZNG means Home Guard
19 Corps. It was actually an organisation that later developed into the
20 Croatian army.
21 Q. We have got on the third column, "Datum," and then another word,
22 what does that prefer to, please? What does that mean?
23 A. Date of wounding or date of injury. The means the date when the
24 injury or wound was sustained.
25 Q. Can we move to column four, "Mjesto," and again that column.
1 A. Place of injury or wounding, the place where it was sustained.
2 Q. Then clearly number five is diagnosis. Do you know, out of
3 interest, exactly what this diagnosis refers to?
4 A. This means "vulnus explosivum genus sinistri." That means a blast
5 wound to the left knee.
6 Q. Thank you. And then we have an entry, which is "Datum Unosa."
7 What does that refer to, please?
8 A. Date of entry, meaning entry of data into that database. That
9 means this information was sent by us, and entered into this database of
10 wounded persons on the 25th of October, 1991.
11 Q. And then the final column, please, column 7, what does that refer
13 A. The seventh column relates to the area of origin of that person or
14 perhaps organisation. In this case we have the place name Nasice, it's a
15 small place between Vukovar and Osijek.
16 Q. Can I deal with one or two other matters, and I will remain on
17 page 3, if I may. If we go to the top of page 3, we can see clearly that
18 there is no name entered. We have got then the title, which is Civodr,
19 then we have the date of wounding. Now, in this instance there is no date
20 of wounding and there is no diagnosis, and that is not the only time that
21 that occurs. Can we deal firstly with the absence of diagnosis on some of
22 the entries that we see throughout this document? Why was it that
23 diagnosis was not entered on many occasions?
24 A. [No interpretation]
25 Q. Doctor, could I ask you just to stop for a moment, please? We
1 have a system in this Court where your words are then transposed into
2 English and French, and unfortunately the machine isn't working, certainly
3 my machine isn't working. And therefore, we have no record of what you
5 THE INTERPRETER: Can you hear the interpretation now?
6 MR. MOORE: I can her the interpreter now.
7 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, it is now through. There was no
8 interpretation for that last answer.
9 MR. MOORE: Shall I ask the question again?
10 JUDGE PARKER: Can it be confirmed whether it has reached the
11 transcript? No, it hasn't. It will need to be given again.
12 MR. MOORE: Well, I'll ask it word for word.
13 Q. Doctor, I'll ask the question again, if you wouldn't mind. Can I
14 deal with one or two other matters, and I'll remain on page 3, if I may.
15 If we go to the top of page 3, we can clearly see that there is no name
16 entered. We have got then the title, which is Civodr, and then we have
17 the date of wounding. Now, in this instance there is no date of wounding
18 and there is no diagnosis, and that is not the only time that that occurs
19 in this document. So can we deal firstly with the absence of diagnosis on
20 some of the entries that we can see throughout the document itself? Why
21 was it that the diagnosis was not entered on these occasions?
22 A. It was because of the --
23 JUDGE PARKER: Once again, we need to stop, we are not get an
25 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
1 JUDGE PARKER: I wonder whether we would hear the English
2 interpreter's voice, please.
3 THE INTERPRETER: Can you hear me now, Your Honour?
4 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, we can now. Thank you.
5 I'm afraid we must try again, Mr. Moore.
6 MR. MOORE: I'll not read it; I will try and ask the question.
7 Q. Doctor, on page 3 - we'll try one more time - and we take the top
8 line, we can see that there is no name clearly there for obvious reasons,
9 but there is no date of wounding and there is no diagnosis. When one
10 looks through this document you find on several occasions, or many
11 occasions, that there is no diagnosis recorded. Are you able to help us
12 why it is that the diagnosis section is blank?
13 A. I assume -- or rather, I believe I can explain that there is no
14 diagnosis because the lists of wounded persons were not always compiled by
15 medical staff only. This was also done by police officers in their
16 special section for wounded persons. It was a special section within the
17 MUP police administration. What they needed was the person's first and
18 last names as well as the place where the person was wounded; likewise,
19 the Vukovar ICR, International Red Cross, also compiled lists with
20 persons' first and last name as well as the place of wounding.
21 Q. Can I deal with this document itself? My understanding - and
22 please can you just clarify whether I'm right or wrong about this - that
23 this document only relates to either people who are wounded or people who
24 are ill. Is that right or not?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. So when one has an absence of diagnosis, it doesn't mean that the
2 person was not wounded or not ill. Is that correct or not?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. You have told us about the completion of the document; you have
5 told us that sometimes it would be the police, the Red Cross, and perhaps
6 other persons. Why was it that individuals who were not medically trained
7 were compiling this -- or compiling this material? Because clearly
8 sometimes there is diagnosis and sometimes there isn't. Can you explain
9 to us the circumstances that were existing at the hospital which caused
10 the absence of diagnosis?
11 A. I spoke earlier on about the circumstances under which we had to
12 perform our duties. There would sometimes be as many at 90 new wounded on
13 a given day. All of the medical staff were busy seeing to it that these
14 patients got proper medical attention. It wasn't always possible to enter
15 into this database everything that was written down when patients were
16 admitted, everything that was written down in their case histories,
17 everything that the anaesthetics people wrote down. It wasn't that often
18 that it was possible for some of the medical staff to use this database in
19 order to include this new information. The top priority was to have all
20 the information forwarded as quickly as possible to Zagreb.
21 Q. That brings me on to my next question, which relates to the
22 forwarding of the information to Zagreb. Why was the information
23 forwarded to Zagreb?
24 A. Because those were our instructions -- or rather, our agreement
25 with the information office of Croatia's health ministry. They said that
1 we should do our best to forward all information from the hospital as
2 quickly as possible, pass it on to Zagreb so that their information would
3 be as accurate as possible as to what exactly was going on, how many
4 wounded were being admitted each day. And the police section that I spoke
5 about had the same assignment, but all they sent was the first and last
6 names, the place of wounding. They had special lists for those wounded
7 and special lists for those killed.
8 Q. And what was the method of transmission? How did you send it?
9 A. As I have already pointed out, we had a computer which was set up
10 in August for the hospital's use. We used e-mail to forward all sorts of
11 information, not just this type of information, but also whatever our
12 needs happened to be at the time in terms of medical equipment, in terms
13 of medicine. However, in early November, sometime around the 6th of
14 November, I believe, this line of communication was disrupted, making it
15 impossible for us to forward information like this. So we just typewrote
16 our reports and faxed them. There was a fax machine at the Vukovar
17 defence headquarters; that was the only fax machine that was still
18 operating in the entire town.
19 Q. Can I deal then, please, with the original, what we now call hard
20 copy, the original paper -- papers that were within the hospital that were
21 records of patients. What happened to those records, please?
22 A. Most of the records remained at the hospital when the troops
23 arrived. In 1997 upon our return to Vukovar, we found none of those
24 records. Some still exist, I mean some of the original records, but we
25 only managed to obtain this at a later stage. These records are in
1 relation to those wounded who had been taken to other hospitals in Croatia
2 before the siege was complete as well as in relation to those wounded who
3 left town on the 18th of October convoy organised by Medecins Sans
4 Frontieres. There are a number of hospitals, such as one in Koprivnica,
5 the one in Virovitica, or the Zagreb clinical centre who later sent us the
6 medical records in relation to the wounded who left town on that convoy.
7 However, concerning all of those who had not yet left town and who
8 were still in the hospital on the 20th of November as well as those whose
9 information had been recorded in the hospital records previously,
10 including their case histories, protocol, and any painkillers that were
11 administered, we found no records or documents about those patients. All
12 of those records were taken to Belgrade after the fall of Vukovar along
13 with the computer that was there.
14 Later on I read something about this in an interview by [as
15 interpreted] Dr. Stankovic; that was after the fall of Vukovar. He worked
16 as a pathologist, and he identified some of the bodies in Vukovar. I
17 personally spoke to him when we had the negotiations in Hungary in 1992,
18 negotiations concerning the missing persons. They had all the records;
19 they probably still have those, as we speak.
20 Dr. Stankovic, I read, has recently become Defence minister in
21 Serbia and Montenegro. If there is any further interest from the Court on
22 this issue, I believe he will make himself available and perhaps testify
23 to these issues.
24 Q. May I ask then please about the accuracy of the document that you
25 received back from Zagreb. The first question is this: You obtained, I
1 believe, a compact disc from Zagreb containing these records. When was
2 that; can you remember?
3 A. That was back in 1997 on our return to Vukovar. We received a CD
4 containing this information. I had requested our information office to
5 make copies of those documents, thinking that we would be needing them.
6 There are still quite many people requesting certificates about the
7 original circumstances of their wounding, those people, all of those who
8 were in Zagreb at the time, those who still live as refugees, all of those
9 who had been wounded. For example, recently I received a request from a
10 gentleman who was wounded and his left leg was blown off. He remained in
11 Vukovar during the occupation; he's still there. He wanted to have a new
12 certificate now. We tracked down his information in our database, and we
13 were thus able to issue an accurate certificate on the original
14 circumstances on his wounding so that he may now obtain some of his
15 entitlements as a victim of war.
16 Q. Clearly you did not know all the patients who were in your
17 hospital at Vukovar in November of 1991, but have you had an opportunity
18 to look at the collated material from Zagreb and try to ascertain whether
19 it is accurate or not and corresponds with your memory?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And can you tell the Court whether you believe that the collated
22 material from Zagreb is accurate or not and why.
23 A. Based on the material that I've gone through, not all of it
24 though - simply because there is so much information in relation to that
25 particular year, but I can talk about those patients who I know were
1 there, those patients I know personally. In relation to those, I can say
2 that this material is accurate. Information is not very detailed, though;
3 there is only four types of information there.
4 Q. And the individuals that you recognise, did -- and the injuries
5 specified, did that correspond with your recollection?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. If you were to estimate the number of people that you can
8 remember, the injuries that they had, and the actual collated material,
9 what sort of number would you be talking about?
10 A. You mean how many recorded wounded persons in those documents? Do
11 you mean how many or what different types of information I was talking
13 Q. No. I'm really trying to ascertain if, for example, you were able
14 to remember 20 or 30 people, and then you look at the collated material,
15 whether that collated material corresponds with your memory, with your
16 recollection. If you're not able to say, do say so.
17 A. I can't be very specific. I would need to give it some thought.
18 I would need to go back to the original documents to check the details.
19 Q. Now, I think it's right to say, and indeed the Court are aware,
20 that yesterday, last evening, and I think also this morning, you contacted
21 Zagreb. Is that right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And the purpose of that phone call was to ascertain what happened
24 at Zagreb and whether the material that was sent electronically to Zagreb
25 was still retained there. Is that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And you spoke, I think, to Professor Kostovic. Would you be kind
3 enough, please, to tell us who Professor Kostovic is.
4 A. Professor Ivica Kostovic is director of the brain institute, which
5 is an institution attached to Zagreb's medical faculty. He is a
6 neurophysiologist, and that is what he used to teach at Amsterdam
7 University before the war broke out. During the war he worked as a dean
8 of Zagreb's medical faculty, and he was also in charge of the information
9 office of the health ministry's medical headquarters.
10 Q. I have got what is called a disclosure note if front of me. And I
11 have the following: During 1991 Professor Kostovic was the chief of the
12 Ministry of Health medical headquarters information department at -- or in
13 Zagreb. Is that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Did you communicate with Professor Kostovic in 1991 when you were
16 sending this material? Can you remember?
17 A. Yes, by telephone.
18 Q. Having spoken to Professor Kostovic yesterday and today, can you
19 tell us, as far as you are aware, what actually happened to the documents
20 that were compiled from the e-mails and the faxes in Zagreb? What was the
21 method and what was the methodology involved?
22 A. Information office that was attached to the health ministry is now
23 part of the medical faculty. They still have the original data. He told
24 me that at the time records were printed by a -- using a method that he
25 referred to as the VOX method. All the incoming faxes were photocopied
1 and are still kept in the files of the information office in a section
2 known as the crisis section, and this is within the medical faculty. He
3 also told me that these originals are available for inspection, that they
4 can be made available -- that copies can be made available for the benefit
5 of the Tribunal. Likewise, he indicated that there was a need to track
6 down the original medical files, because these are probably still in
8 Q. Did the professor indicate whether in actual fact there was a -- a
9 separate database created for the patients admitted to the Vukovar
11 A. Yes, there is a separate database created for Vukovar and the
12 Vukovar Hospital. Furthermore, the information office gathered
13 information from all other hospitals across Croatia. They have records on
14 all of Croatia's different regions and areas. They have also copies of
15 case histories for other hospitals, but that is simply because most of the
16 other hospitals were not under siege or indeed occupied at any point in
17 time and thus still have complete records.
18 Q. Thank you very much. There are no other questions that I would
19 wish to ask you in relation to that file, unless the Court wishes me to do
21 MR. MOORE: I wasn't intending to go through each named person,
22 because I've tried to cover that with the fact that they are either
23 injured or ill persons within the schedule. So I don't know if the Court
24 wishes me to deal with any additional matters.
25 Q. Doctor, I think you came last week, and you very kindly brought
1 this particular batch of documents, which I have in my hand. Is that
2 right? Which I'm not going refer to, but it may well be the Defence may
3 want to ask you some questions. But I think it is right to say just in
4 general terms that it is a list of three groups of people, the names of
5 which have come as a result of discussions with various sources such as
6 the Croatian government Ministry of Health, the Croatian Mothers'
7 Association, and Vukovar Hospital, the police, and the Vukovar-based NGO
8 called the Croat Association of Former Prisoners of Serbian Concentration
9 Camps. Is that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And in very general terms, it deals with each person and gives a
12 biography of them, their age, their name, and various other details. Is
13 that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. May I move on then to two other matters. You have been asked to
16 return obviously to deal with what I will call the blue file, but in
17 addition there were two other documents which have been served on the
18 Defence at Christmas after you had concluded your evidence and you have
19 had an opportunity of reading them. Is that right? One deals with the
20 reconstruction of the evacuation of the Vukovar Hospital, and the second
21 relates to court proceedings on the 26th of February, 1996, a criminal
22 case against Kadijevic. Is that right?
23 A. Yes. Veljko Kadijevic and others. He was not the only one.
24 Q. No, but I think the document that says et al., but the document
25 that you have, you've now got copies of that in B/C/S. I think that's
1 right, isn't it?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Yes. You're going to be asked some questions in relation to that.
4 MR. MOORE: I have no further questions for this witness.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Are you planning to tender the document?
6 MR. MOORE: I was going to wait and see the nature of the
7 cross-examination, and then if it was appropriate to make application for
8 it to be tendered as an exhibit.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Could I suggest for ease of reference, because we
10 have more than one document, that at least the blue be marked for
12 MR. MOORE: Certainly.
13 JUDGE PARKER: And probably the other as well.
14 MR. MOORE: The large one.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
16 MR. MOORE: Yes, certainly.
17 JUDGE PARKER: And then we can quite easily identify which, if
18 either, is being referred to by Dr. Bosanac in cross-examination.
19 MR. MOORE: Certainly. Perhaps the first one can be -- actually
20 has blue file in the title in some way.
21 JUDGE PARKER: Can you suggest a name, Mr. Moore?
22 MR. MOORE: Yes, I was going suggest the name that actually is at
23 the top, which refers to the comparison between the Vukovar Hospital
24 admittance register and list of victims.
25 JUDGE PARKER: "(Blue File)"?
1 MR. MOORE: Yes.
2 JUDGE PARKER: That will be marked for identification.
3 THE REGISTRAR: The number will be 345, Your Honours.
4 MR. MOORE: And the second document to be marked for
5 identification perhaps could be titled, Biography/history of either
6 killed or missing persons from Vukovar.
7 JUDGE PARKER: That will be marked for identification.
8 THE REGISTRAR: The reference will be 346, Your Honours.
9 MR. MOORE: Thank you very much.
10 JUDGE PARKER: Now, has a copy of 346 reached the registry officer
12 MR. MOORE: Your Honour will be pleased to hear it's on e-court.
13 JUDGE PARKER: What a delight. Very well.
14 Mr. Vasic, as soon as you have assembled the equipment.
15 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] All right. Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Thank you, Your Honour, I'm ready.
17 Cross-examination by Mr. Vasic: [Continued]
18 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mrs. Bosanac.
19 A. Good afternoon.
20 Q. I am Defence counsel Miroslav Vasic, as you know; we've met
21 already in this courtroom. I will be asking you questions regarding this
22 chapter relevant to the documentation and reports you sent to Zagreb. And
23 as for the contents of those reports, we'll see about that when we get the
24 documentation from Zagreb.
25 Mrs. Bosanac, responding to a question from my learned friend, you
1 said that you entered the names of patients, their injuries, the date when
2 they were brought in to the hospital, et cetera, into this electronic
3 programme inside your computer. Can you tell me, what kind of data did
4 you daily enter into your database in addition to names and types of
6 A. Name and surname, father's name, date of birth, diagnosis, every
8 Q. I suppose you did that in the evening, so as to be able to --
9 A. We made lists and then based on those lists, administrators
10 entered those details. In the beginning of the war and perhaps even
11 throughout the war it was a gentleman named Emil Aleksandar who did that.
12 He was in charge of electronic mail and he worked at the post office in
13 Vukovar. And there was also Verica Graf, who was our administrator and
14 who also dealt with data entry.
15 Q. Thank you, Mrs. Bosanac. In responding to another question you
16 said you received this data from the admissions desk, from the protocol of
17 the surgical ward, and I would like to know the details. Did these
18 details coincide? Did you compare them at all before you entered them for
19 all the patients into the electronic system?
20 A. We used the details from the protocols of admissions, and in every
21 admission these details would be taken down into infirmary records and
22 they would be also entered into the case history of patients who were
24 Q. If I understood that correctly, you found it sufficient to get the
25 details from the admission desk to enter this information into your
2 A. The admission desk, as you call it, was actually our emergency
3 department, our emergency infirmary. The procedure was such that
4 everybody who came to the hospital had to go through this emergency
5 infirmary, where his personal details would be noted.
6 Q. Thank you. These details, were they given just to this service of
7 the hospital that developed this database, or they were accessible to
8 third parties as well?
9 A. Apart from the computer service of the hospital that made lists
10 for sending by fax and entered data into the database, these details were
11 also taken down by the special service of the police administration in
12 charge of the wounded, and they would forward this information to the
13 Ministry of the Interior in Zagreb. These details were also accessible to
14 Red Cross officials, who made their own lists to be sent to the
15 headquarters of the Red Cross in Zagreb.
16 Q. Thank you. Did they copy these details from the admission
17 protocol, or did they make a copy in longhand?
18 A. They did not Xerox them; they just copied them, name and surname,
19 date of birth, and such but not the diagnosis. They were not interested
20 in the medical side. They were only interested in who was wounded, who
21 was killed, and the personal details of that person.
22 Q. Thank you. Could you tell us about this database, the electronic
23 version. Were the details entered into a specific folder on the hard
24 disc, or were they copied on to floppies at that time in 1991, I mean your
25 hospital computer?
1 A. On the hard disc, and they were e-mailed on. They were not copied
2 on to floppies in the hospital.
3 Q. Thank you for that. Could you tell us about the reports that were
4 forwarded by e-mail. Were they sent in the form of a letter, or did you
5 have some forms to be filled in?
6 A. We had questionnaires to fill in, and what was sent in the form of
7 a letter were reports about the general situation at the hospital, our
8 requirements for medical equipment, medication, bandages, and things like
9 that, everything that's necessary to the work of the hospital.
10 Q. This electronic mail, did it operate in the way it functions
12 A. Well, I could not tell you that precisely. That was back in
13 1991. There is probably some difference.
14 Q. Did you ever send these reports personally by e-mail?
15 A. I would dictate them to the administrator, who did the typing at
16 the computer, so I saw how it works, but I didn't do it myself. I was not
17 computer literate at the time, to be able to do it myself.
18 Q. What I would like to know is that since you saw how it worked, was
19 there an e-mail address they typed in to which they sent this
20 information? Can you remember?
21 A. I cannot recall that, but I think it was a direct line that was
22 reserved only for that exchange between our information section of the
23 Ministry of Health in Zagreb and the Vukovar Hospital. I also saw the
24 computer at the Defence headquarters, where I would also go sometimes to
25 tell them about the supplies we needed. In October and November there was
1 a direct line to that computer at the defence headquarters and the defence
2 headquarters in Vinkovci, although I'm not sure about that. I don't think
3 it worked exactly the way it works today, when you have internet and you
4 can go anywhere. I think those were direct, secure lines.
5 Q. Thank you. And did it work with the help of PTT traffic?
6 A. I think -- in fact I know that it was a dial-up connection, a
7 telephone line.
8 Q. Did you sign those reports, did somebody sign in your name, or did
9 they go unsigned?
10 A. As for those reports that were e-mailed, I didn't sign them
11 because I couldn't, of course. As for the lists of wounded that we sent
12 by fax, some I signed, some I didn't. I believe I signed most of them.
13 Q. Did you check those reports that were e-mailed before they were
14 sent, or did you just dictate them and they were sent on?
15 A. Do you mean did I check whether they reached their destination or
17 Q. No, I also mean did you check the contents as well?
18 A. No, I didn't check. I suppose that they reached their
19 destination. In those times I really had no time to spend more time than
20 necessary on administration.
21 Q. Could you tell me this: With all the reports that were sent from
22 the hospital to this information section of the Ministry of Health, did
23 you quote the exact diagnosis for every patient?
24 A. As for those reports we sent from the hospital, yes, they included
25 the diagnosis, as was the case with all medical institutions. But that
1 information section also received reports from other sources, and if they
2 received information about the wounded or killed from the police or from
3 the Red Cross, then it was possible that those reports did not include the
4 diagnosis. I also saw cases where only one diagnosis and one case of
5 wounding was recorded, although I knew specifically that they had more
6 than one injury.
7 Q. How about the processing and collection of that information at the
8 Ministry of Health of Croatia, was it more for statistical purposes rather
9 than to determine the actual state of affairs?
10 A. Well, the purpose of statistics is to establish the actual state
11 of affairs. At that time it was really necessary to find out what the
12 situation was really like in order to establish medical needs and
13 requirements. Medical assistance at that time in Croatia was organised at
14 several levels, starting from first defence lines and front lines, field
15 hospitals in the rear through infirmaries that were always ready to
16 receive patients who had been evacuated. And it served the purpose of
17 analysing the military situation and the number of the wounded from the
18 view-point of medical needs. And we are now working on a project that is
19 called an "Analysis of Effectiveness of Wartime Health Care" that is to be
20 published in several medical publications.
21 We, at the Vukovar Hospital, are analysing the wartime
22 effectiveness of our work by analysing the number of cases during the war
23 and comparing those cases to present-day cases of persons who are coming
24 in for check-ups after wounding, and we have been doing this for five
25 years now.
1 Q. Thank you, Mrs. Bosanac. I understand that you sent daily e-mail
2 reports to the Ministry of Health. Am I right?
3 A. In 80 per cent of cases they would be sent every day, or if for
4 some reason we couldn't send the report the same day, we would send it a
5 few days later.
6 Q. Bearing that in mind, the information section of the Ministry of
7 Health had no need to take information about the patients from the Vukovar
8 Hospital from other sources when they received updated information from
9 the hospital itself. They were able to verify if the same patients were
10 in question by cross-referencing them with other sources, but you would
11 agree that you were the most reliable source?
12 A. It's difficult to say now, after 15 years, how, using what
13 methodology and procedures, they arrived at their own database in order to
14 make it as complete and as reliable as possible.
15 Q. Could you then explain why, in cases where no diagnosis was
16 entered in relation to a certain patient - I'm talking about the blue
17 file - why wasn't your information used, your accurate information in
18 relation to all the patients?
19 A. It's difficult to say now whether any such information was
20 available at the time or not. In theory, a person may have been wounded
21 in Borovo Naselje, for example, and never reached the Vukovar Hospital to
22 begin with, so we had no records of this person's wounding, but the MUP or
23 the Red Cross perhaps did. It is for this reason that I find it very
24 difficult to answer your question.
25 Q. What about those patients for whom we have no diagnosis in the
1 blue file? Were those patients who were not brought into the hospital?
2 Were those patients who had been wounded and were seen to elsewhere?
3 A. It's difficult to generalise. I can't say about each and every
4 one of them. I would have to study each and every one of these cases
5 individually in order to be able to specify.
6 Q. But there were a number of such cases, such as the one about
7 Borovo Naselje that you described; right?
8 A. It certainly was possible. This database - I'm not sure whether
9 you've noticed - is not about the Vukovar Hospital only, but rather it
10 relates to the entire area, Eastern Slavonia. If you go back to the files
11 you can see that there is information on Erdut, which is a different town,
12 with all the data recorded. And now the question is: Was a patient
13 brought to Osijek or to Vukovar, because the distance was equal in both
14 cases. We should have files printed out in relation to each and every one
15 of these patients, such as the files that I have in this document here.
16 If you look at any of these documents, you can see information such as
17 father's name, date of birth, profession, date of wounding, place of
18 wounding, hospital admission, Vukovar or another hospital, the date when
19 personal details were taken, is this person still receiving treatment, and
20 more information like that. You could print a special file with all the
21 relevant details on any given person. It is only once you've done this
22 that you can go on and analyse this information.
23 Q. Can such printouts be made based on the medical files in
24 possession of Croatia's health ministry; is my understanding correct?
25 A. Yes. The last time I was here I realised that there were some
1 doubts about this, and this is precisely why I prepared this comprehensive
2 document about all these wounded whose bodies were later identified at
3 Ovcara. And there are medical files in relation to all of them.
4 Q. What about this extended database, was it not available to
5 Croatia's health ministry back in 1991, because all you were sending at
6 the time was information on wounded persons, plus their diagnosis and
7 there were some who weren't even sending that, just their name and place
8 of wounding.
9 A. Yes, the place of wounding and the person's name. In actual fact,
10 it was based on our information, not just us, but, rather, also the Osijek
11 hospital and the Vinkovci hospital that provided information for this
12 database that is now in the blue file. We can now obtain case histories
13 in relation to each and every one of these individuals recorded here. If,
14 for example, you happen to be in Vukovar on that day and you were wounded,
15 you would likewise be able to obtain your own case history and diagnosis
16 if you so wished.
17 Q. Thank you very much.
18 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm not sure if this
19 might be a convenient time for a break.
20 JUDGE PARKER: Very well then, Mr. Vasic, and we will resume at
22 --- Recess taken at 3.42 p.m.
23 --- On resuming at 4.05 p.m.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Could I indicate that Judge Thelin is unable to
25 continue sitting this afternoon. We anticipate he will be able to sit
1 again in the morning, and we think, pursuant to the rule, we should
2 continue the sitting this afternoon.
3 Yes, Mr. Vasic.
4 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. There is
5 something wrong with the microphones. I am trying to reduce the feedback,
6 but -- I hope it's all right now.
7 Q. Mrs. Bosanac, may I now pick up where we left off before the
8 break? There is something I would like to ask you about the diagnosis
9 that you mentioned. You said that whenever a patient was admitted to the
10 hospital in emergency, the working diagnosis was established, but you also
11 said that eight different protocols were kept in relation to each
12 patient. What I want to know is whether entries into these protocols were
13 ever reconciled, whether they were checked for consistency from the
14 admission stage and then all the other protocols that followed, the ones
15 that you have enumerated for us.
16 A. I don't know what exactly you mean by "reconciled." Each patient
17 had his own case history. They would be admitted, and their admission
18 would be recorded. If they were outpatients, they would get a case
19 history; if they were inpatients, there would be a temperature chart and
20 findings attached to their case history. If a patient had to undergo
21 surgery, there was an anaesthesia protocol also. I'm not sure what you
22 mean by "reconciled".
23 Q. Thank you for explaining this. There were different medical
24 workers who kept different kinds of information on a patient at various
25 stages throughout a patient's treatment. The records that were taken at
1 admission reflected one thing, but any records made during a patient's
2 treatment were different; right?
3 A. In some cases this was the same, but you always have a working
4 diagnosis, which is the first initial diagnosis that is established when a
5 patient is admitted. For example, if you have an explosive wound to the
6 right knee, this can be a working diagnosis, but this can also end up as a
7 leg amputation. There are various situations that can occur during
8 treatment, and medical records can be kept in a variety of ways.
9 Q. The reports that you sent to the information department of
10 Croatia's health ministry were based on whatever initial information you
11 received from your emergency admission; that is where information was
12 first gathered. Right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. It was for this reason that these reports only included
15 information, the personal details of patients and their wounding, but
16 nothing to reflect how their condition evolved during treatment. Right?
17 A. Yes, that's right.
18 Q. Thank you. Therefore, neither in the reports nor in the blue file
19 do we find any sort of information on the release of any patients; is that
21 A. There's nothing in the blue file. If you look at all the
22 subfiles, as it were, there are detailed printouts of all this information
23 in relation to each of the wounded at a given time. If a patient was sent
24 to a different institution, or if they had to remain in order to receive
25 treatment, there were ways to add this new information to the already
1 existing information.
2 Q. I understand that, but the information is not complete in this
3 blue file. We can only see when a person was admitted to the hospital,
4 but we can't see anything about the treatment or the date when a person
5 was released. Would that be right?
6 A. Yes, that's right.
7 Q. Thank you. What I would like to consider now is one particular
8 column from the blue file. I will not be dwelling for too long on this,
9 but let me just remind you that you testified today about column 6, column
10 number 6. If you could please turn to page 2 of the blue file or
11 any page, because I'm not after information in relation to anybody in
12 particular. Column number 6 on the right-hand side, which says "place,
13 ZAP 1." You testified that this denoted the territorial affiliation of a
15 A. Yes, based on our information. This reflects where a patient was
16 brought from.
17 Q. Further in relation to that, if you look at page 1, the first
18 entry, it says "Omis," which is a town in Croatia. What does that mean,
19 page 1, entry 1?
20 A. I can't say with certainty. In order to provide an accurate
21 answer, I would need the person's name and surname. I would need to check
22 the information. But based on what I do know at present, this suggests
23 that this patient was first recorded in Omis or its surroundings. He was
24 probably a member of the National Guards Corps and he arrived in Vukovar
25 as a volunteer. He was wounded on the 17th of October, and there is a
1 description here of his injury. This information was entered on the 6th
2 of December, and he appears to be from the Omis area.
3 Q. He arrived from Omis in Vukovar in order to fight. He was
4 wounded, but this was only recorded in the Omis area at a later stage. Is
5 my understanding correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you. Would you please look at the same column on page 2?
8 The first entry is "HV," I suppose that means Croatian army?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Can you explain to us, in view of what you just said, that this
11 column reflects the place of origin. Croatian army does not mean the
12 place of origin; what can that mean?
13 A. Well, that means that the patient was registered with the Croatian
14 army, regardless of the place. I cannot explain this precisely; you have
15 to ask those who created this database. You can understand from this that
16 he was a member of the ZNG, that he was wounded on the 9th of October in
17 Vukovar, that his diagnosis was taken, and the date of entry is the 12th
18 of October.
19 Q. I understand you can't help us with the contents of this
20 document. It was made at the Ministry of Health, so I won't ask you any
21 more questions about this. You are as competent a reader as we are.
22 A. Correct.
23 Q. Let me move on to another subject. You said at some point this
24 line of communication with the Ministry of Health, more precisely its
25 information section, could not proceed any longer through the dial-up
1 connection, so you had to type up the reports and send them by fax. You
2 said you sent these fax messages from the police station or from the
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Could you tell us about the format of that report you sent. Did
6 it have -- did it have the letterhead of the Vukovar Medical Centre, and
7 what approximately was the format of that document?
8 A. It was printed on an A4 sheet of paper, and it contained a list,
9 number, name, surname, father's name, date of injury, and diagnosis.
10 Q. Did it have a letterhead in the left upper corner, medical centre?
11 A. Not always.
12 Q. Did it indicate the addressee?
13 A. No, it was just a list of the wounded.
14 Q. Could you help us with this: Was there a date indicated in the
15 left or right bottom corner?
16 A. Well, I can't tell you that because I don't remember every
17 report. There was a seal and a signature on every one of them, but I
18 don't remember about the date. I suppose there was a date.
19 Q. And you signed these documents as the director?
20 A. I did. I suppose it could have happened a few times that I didn't
21 sign, but for the most part I did.
22 Q. Would you agree with me if I said that you moved to typed-up
23 reports as early as the 26th of October, that already by that time the
24 other mode of notification for the Ministry of Health did not work?
25 A. I can't tell you precisely. We made those lists of the wounded
1 even earlier because the police needed it for their reports, and the Red
2 Cross needed them for their reports, so I can't tell you the exact date
3 when we moved from electronic mail reports to typed reports.
4 Q. But is it possible that it was in end October, 1991?
5 A. It's possible.
6 Q. Another thing, did you have an opportunity in Zagreb to look up
7 those reports we are discussing now, or have they been archived and you
8 were just shown the electronic version of the report that was made on the
9 basis of that documentation, and you were not able to see the original
11 A. I didn't go there prior to this trial. They probably would have
12 shown me the documents, had I asked to see them, but I didn't. I saw some
13 of those documents on an earlier occasion when I went to Zagreb, but not
15 Q. I did not express any doubt as to the existence of those
16 documents. I'm just asking you if you were aware the contents. I hope we
17 will be able to see what they contain. But my point was this: Were you
18 able to compare the contents to this blue file?
19 A. No, I didn't. I didn't compare them.
20 Q. Thank you. I too am unable to deal with the contents even of this
21 other documents that my learned friend introduced as an MFI because we
22 received it only on Friday, but even that documentation is based on the
23 records in the possession of the Ministry of Health of the Republic of
24 Croatia. I just wanted to ask you in respect of this second file, did you
25 have occasion to see the complete documentation underlying this file, this
1 other one that was introduced as MFI --
2 A. You mean the file which indicates the medical aspect for every
3 single designated victim of Ovcara events? I brought those documents, and
4 I analysed each and every one of them individually, if that's what you're
6 Q. So you could give us some information with regard to these
7 documents if the Defence decided to ask you about each individual case?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Thank you. Could you clarify one more thing for me, please. In
10 this blue file, in several places we see that the date of entry is 1992,
11 and even 1994 in some cases. Could you explain, perhaps, why some entries
12 were only made in 1992, 1994, and even 1996?
13 A. It's quite difficult for me it talk about it in general terms. I
14 suppose that this was done after all the medical documentation was
15 gathered, and based on the case histories of these people I suppose that
16 they were only entered at that time. They were not entered, therefore, on
17 the basis of our information sent in 1991, but only when those people
18 turned up with their medical files. That is my explanation, but without
19 looking at every individual case, I could not give you the exact reason.
20 Q. Thank you, Mrs. Bosanac, very much. I have no further questions
21 for you, and I thank you for your answers.
22 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the Defence has no
23 further questions in this area, and we have to reserve our position for a
24 later stage as regards the contents of the documents.
25 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Vasic.
1 Mr. Borovic.
2 Cross-examination by Mr. Borovic: [Continued]
3 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon. I will be very brief, and I will
4 question you only about the record of questioning of a witness made in the
5 Court in Zagreb. You have it in front of you, don't you?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. You said you were exchanged on the 13th of December, 1991?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Is it the case that a couple of days before that exchange you made
10 a statement to the military court in Belgrade?
11 A. Yes, I did.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Could I ask the usher to show this
14 document to the witness.
15 Your Honours, the English version of this document is 2D01-0029,
16 and the B/C/S is 2D01-0022.
17 Q. Do you see this document?
18 A. Are you asking me? Yes, I do.
19 Q. What do you see at the top?
20 A. It says, "Record of questioning of the person brought in."
21 Q. What is the name of the person?
22 A. Vesna Bosanac.
23 Q. Could you leaf through this record. Go on, please, to the end.
24 Have you looked at all the pages of the record?
25 A. Yes, I did.
1 Q. Is that your signature?
2 A. Yes, it is.
3 Q. Thank you. Would you be so kind as to go back to the first page?
4 On the first page is it written that you confirm for the criminal offence
5 of armed insurgency, Article 124 of the Criminal Code of the SFRY, that is
6 the reason why you were questioned?
7 A. It says, "Record of questioning, 9th December, 1991, military
8 investigating judge in Belgrade. For the criminal act of armed insurgency
9 from the Article 124, paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code of the SFRY."
10 Q. Can you confirm that this is the record of the questioning made
11 from your interrogation on the 9th of December, 1991?
12 A. I cannot confirm that until I read it through. I can only say it
13 is my signature indeed and that I was indeed questioned at the military
14 investigation prison in Belgrade.
15 Q. Was it really on the 9th of December?
16 A. It could be. Two -- three or four days before the exchange.
17 Q. Thank you. Could you please look at that other document.
18 A. This one?
19 Q. It says there --
20 MR. MOORE: I'm sorry, may I just interrupt, and I'm sure it is my
21 fault? I have got document my learned friend is referring to, clearly a
22 document from the Defence. But my understanding was that the
23 cross-examination of the witness was to be restricted to the documents
24 that had been revealed late in December and the documents that related to
25 the witness -- or the patient from hospital. For my part, I cannot, as
1 yet, understand how this document is being cross-examined on.
2 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Borovic?
3 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] I will explain. Your Honour, that's
4 very simple. Since we subsequently received the record of witness
5 interview before the court in Zagreb, the fact of exchange cropped up, and
6 we don't see from the record whether she had been interrogated before the
7 military court. Now the witness confirmed this, and we know now that the
8 record exists and the witness confirmed it is her signature.
9 On the 28th of October, 2005, and you remember that, Your Honour,
10 on page 810 when we asked the witness whether she was questioned or tried
11 before the military court for serious crimes - and you can check that on
12 page 810 - she said she could have answered only for the so-called verbal
13 crime for something that she wrote about the JNA. Now we see that she was
14 questioned about armed insurgency, and after her interview the military
15 court issued instructions to conduct an investigation. That is all, I
16 have just a few more questions, and I hope that by the time I'm finished
17 you will understand what this is all about.
18 JUDGE PARKER: Pause a minute, please, doctor.
19 You will recall, Mr. Borovic, that the re-calling of the witness
20 was for some specific subject matters; this was not one of them. It would
21 have been appropriate for you to seek leave to raise this different
22 matter. We will assume that you now do that and you are granted leave,
23 and that's the end. Okay.
24 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Your
25 experience in litigation of 35 years is obvious.
1 Q. Can I ask the witness: Could you please look at this other
2 document, it's MFI D0043 -- sorry, sorry, my mistake. The number is
3 B/C/S, 2D01-001 [as interpreted]; and the English version, 2D01-0019.
4 Have you found it, "Request to conduct an investigation"?
5 A. Yes. 2D01-0016.
6 Q. All right. Now, look at the last page, the reasoning. Do you see
7 in the fifth line that this request to conduct an investigation relates to
8 your questioning of the 9th of December, 1991? Is that written there?
9 A. Yes, yes. I see that. For the first time in my life though.
10 Q. All right.
11 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I seek that these two
12 documents be admitted into evidence. At the very beginning of my
13 cross-examination, since I'm about to a wrap up now, I tendered four
14 documents. The Chamber has only admitted one of those as an exhibit.
15 Three were refused at the time, and the Defence was asked to provide a
16 record of the accused's interview in relation to crimes and not in
17 relation to a verbal offence. But she now appears to have confirmed this,
18 and we have the statement dated the 9th of December. It was based on this
19 statement that a request was made to conduct an investigation of this
20 crime. We have a ruling, it's 2001-0010, this is something that we
21 tendered a while ago, and this is precisely in relation to this request to
22 conduct an examination.
23 So all these five documents should be admitted as a single exhibit
24 or individually because they are clearly linked. Let me say this again.
25 We had those three documents that were exhibits. The first was
1 information on military casualties, the second document was an official
2 note, and the third document was a decision to conduct an investigation.
3 Since all of this is in relation to the record of the interview of an
4 accused -- and then there was a request to conduct an investigation, after
5 which there was a decision to conduct an investigation. This suggests a
6 link because the name is the same and the legal description is the same.
7 It is for this reason that I would like all of these to be admitted into
8 evidence, please.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Has the Prosecution been served with copies of
10 these new documents, Mr. Borovic?
11 MR. BOROVIC: [No interpretation]
12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
13 Mr. Moore, any objection.
14 MR. MOORE: Yes, we do have an objection. We would like it marked
15 for identification, please. I need to be able to clarify various matters.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Very well.
17 The additional documents tendered today will be marked for
19 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, regardless of this,
20 can the Prosecutor please explain why I am tendering these additional
21 documents, because we have just had the witness confirm that this is
22 indeed her signature. It is necessary for these to be admitted into
23 evidence so that I may be able to tender the October documents. This is a
24 great opportunity, since we have the witness here now. You have been very
25 kind in allowing the Defence to verify these aspects. Therefore, I think
1 it would be a very good idea for the OTP to tell us exactly what their
2 objection is about. I don't think this is a very complex matter. I do
3 not need to have these two new documents admitted into evidence, because
4 that would take us back to October 2005, wouldn't it?
5 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Borovic, I'm doing, in respect of the
6 Prosecution, what I would do in respect of you and have done on earlier
7 occasions. And I'm going to wait until the end of re-examination to see
8 then what it is, if anything, that is raised in respect of this document.
9 So it's being marked at the moment for identification or they are. Thank
11 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the first document will be -- the
13 reference number will be 347, while the second document will be marked for
14 identification with the number 348.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
16 Yes, Mr. Borovic.
17 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I have no questions on
18 any of the other documents. Thank you.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
20 Mr. Lukic.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic: [Continued]
23 Q. [Interpretation] Mrs. Bosanac, good afternoon to you.
24 A. Good afternoon.
25 Q. Let me introduce myself. I am Novak Lukic; I am counsel for
1 Mr. Sljivancanin. I will be asking you certain questions --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note, can counsel please be asked
3 to speak closer to the microphone. We cannot hear him at all.
4 MR. LUKIC:
5 Q. [Interpretation] I'm talking about two of your statements, one was
6 in the Kadijevic trial. I will also --
7 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] There appear to be some difficulties
8 with my microphone. I'm not sure if the interpreters can hear me now.
9 The microphones really are very short.
10 Q. I will ask you a number of questions in relation to an interview
11 that you gave to Canadian investigators in 1993, if you remember. You
12 received these documents from the OTP back in December. It's an extensive
13 interview that you provided to the investigators before this Tribunal was
14 ever set up. Also, I have questions in relation to one or two other
15 documents that have been disclosed to us. I also have questions in
16 relation to today's testimony as well as the documents that we received
17 from the OTP over the last couple of days.
18 I will now refer to one of Mr. Vasic's questions because your
19 answer did not strike me as completely clear. I am talking about the
20 reports that you sent to the health ministry, the daily reports. What you
21 would include in these daily reports was information such as a person's
22 name, possibly a person's status, if that was available, and what you
23 called working diagnosis established at the time. And if there was a
24 permanent diagnosis, that was probably included in the same report.
25 My question is: In these daily reports, did you inform the health
1 ministry about persons by mentioning their names, persons who, between the
2 15th of August and the 20th of November, were released from your
3 hospital? For example, such and such a person was recorded as being
4 admitted to the hospital 10 days ago; we hereby inform you that this
5 person has now been discharged.
6 A. No.
7 Q. Can you please make a pause after my question.
8 A. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you had finished your question.
9 Q. Yes, indeed, I had, and your answer has been recorded, too. I am
10 about to ask you something in relation to a different topic. This is
11 about the October evacuation organised by Medecins Sans Frontieres. I
12 would like you to look at a document that the OTP disclosed to us, it's a
13 Rule 68 document.
14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] If the court officer could please
15 place 0D04-0108 on our screens.
16 Q. You can have a hard copy, if you find that more convenient to use.
17 MR. LUKIC: [In English] Mr. Usher, please, give one copy to the
19 Q. [Interpretation] Mrs. Bosanac, back in October, the 28th of
20 October, and the transcript page is 832, I asked you, if you remembered -
21 and I was talking about the October evacuation - if Bogdanovci was under
22 JNA control at the time, and you said you weren't sure about that, but you
23 did believe Bogdanovci to have been under JNA control at the time. That
24 was what you stated at the time.
25 Now, in relation to the present document, did you produce this
2 A. No.
3 Q. Have you ever seen this document before? I believe you were shown
4 this document at some point in the Milosevic case, but I'm not sure about
6 A. I don't remember, I would need to go through it to know. This is
7 certainly not my handwriting. I wasn't the person who produced this
8 document. I'm not sure if somebody produced this on my behalf, though.
9 Q. Can you please take some time to familiarise yourself with the
11 MR. MOORE: I'm terribly sorry, again it may be me, but this is
12 not one of the two documents that was subsequently revealed in December.
13 And again, unless I'm wrong, it is not one of the areas that was agreed
14 upon for cross-examination.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Lukic?
16 MR. MOORE: I'm just surprised Mr. Lukic is doing it now. It's
17 just being mentioned --
18 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I do have to say I don't think
19 Mr. Moore is right this time. I'm talking about batch number 79 of the
20 22nd of December. This batch contains four documents that were disclosed
21 at the time, and that's why I was surprised that Mr. Moore actually asked
22 Dr. Bosanac about two of those documents. There were four documents
23 included in that batch under Rule 68. One of these is her statement in
24 the Kadijevic case; another document is her interview to the Canadian
25 investigators, this runs into about 60 pages; and the third document is
1 the one that we have on our screens now; the fourth document being the one
2 that Mr. Moore referred to, the reconstruction of the hospital. All these
3 were contained in batch 79 on the 22nd of December.
4 JUDGE PARKER: Does that resolve your problem, Mr. Moore?
5 MR. MOORE: I don't think it does. My understanding was that
6 there was to be cross-examination on documents that had not been
7 disclosed. I understand that there was a batch of documents that were
8 disclosed in December. The Canadian investigation, I think, was
9 cross-examined on at one stage, but I'm working from memory, it may have
10 been another witness. Is Mr. Lukic saying that this is one of the
11 documents that they have never seen before?
12 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Lukic is saying this document was discovered in
13 batch 69 [sic] on the 22nd of December.
14 MR. MOORE: I have information it was disclosed in August; that's
15 why I'm rather surprised. So therefore, it was not a document that was
16 disclosed after Dr. Bosanac had given evidence.
17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is the very thing
18 that I checked during the last break just because I was surprised when
19 Mr. Moore told me that there were only two documents. If that's what it
20 takes, I can provide copies, this is batch 79, dated the 22nd of
21 December. It was the first time that we received this document;
22 likewise, it was the first time that bee received the extensive interview
23 that Dr. Bosanac gave to the Canadian interviewer. I just checked during
24 our last break.
25 MR. MOORE: Can I help? It's -- we've got it down as batch 31,
1 which was disclosed on the 29th of August, and the receipt, I think, was
2 in early September. So my learned friend -- if our documents are right --
3 may I just clarify?
4 [Prosecution counsel confer]
5 MR. MOORE: I have got an acknowledgment by the Defence on behalf
6 of Mr. Sljivancanin that received this by the 6th of September.
7 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I really can't accept
8 the fact that this is all a matter of confusion. I do know that we
9 received a copy of the Canadian interview back in December. If the OTP
10 can prove that I received the document in September, I would like to have
11 that. But I think they should go back to batch 79, because that contains
12 a list of documents and documents are listed individually. There, that is
13 the whole point of this exercise.
14 MR. MOORE: Well, again, we work from our records. It is document
15 999 on the 65 ter list.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Which is that, Mr. Moore?
17 MR. MOORE: It is under the heading, "A report on anticipated
18 evacuation of the wounded from Vukovar."
19 JUDGE PARKER: This is the document that's presently on the
21 MR. MOORE: As far as I am aware it is.
22 JUDGE PARKER: We've been speaking of two documents. You
23 mentioned one; I asked which it was.
24 MR. MOORE: Well, the number that I have is concluding 0502. What
25 the confusion for my learned friend may be is that we have disclosed it in
1 August and we have also disclosed it in December, but it's certainly on
2 the 65 ter list as document 999.
3 JUDGE PARKER: And while you are dealing with it, what about the
4 Canadian investigation?
5 MR. MOORE: Might I just check on that? One moment, please.
6 Thank you very much.
7 [Prosecution counsel confer]
8 MR. MOORE: Has my learned friend got the ERN number of that,
10 MR. LUKIC: Yes, 0059-6194. It's the first page, and it has 60
11 pages, around 60 -- 70 pages.
12 MR. MOORE: That document was disclosed on the 22nd of December
13 and not before. So in relation to that document, the cross-examination on
14 that we can have no objection to.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Lukic, unless and until you can demonstrate to
16 the contrary, it appears that this present document has been disclosed to
17 you twice and you are looking at the second. But in any event, it is a
18 document the doctor says was not prepared by her personally. So if would
19 you like to move on to Canada, we'll have another effort there. Thank
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I imagine there will have to be a
22 break at some point during my cross-examination, so I will check about the
23 first document, but I will move on to the other document now.
24 Q. Mrs. Bosanac, I will be asking you questions now about your
25 testimony, based on your statements, your testimony in the Kadijevic case,
1 and the statement that you gave to the Canadian investigators. Let us
2 begin. Let me remind you that on the 27th of October you testified about
3 the 18th of November, 1991. On page 682 you said that a large number of
4 civilians arrived in those last days who were awaiting evacuation. You
5 mentioned at the time, that provided a much more detailed description in
6 your statement to the Canadian investigators, that you had advised those
7 people not to go to the hospital. Do you remember that?
8 A. Yes, I do.
9 Q. Why, what was the reason you said they should not come to the
11 A. Well, according to the information I had then, the hospital should
12 have been evacuated on the 18th of November, that means the wounded, the
13 patients, and the staff; and only after that, after the evacuation on the
14 18th of November, the back-up hospital in Borovo would be evacuated. And
15 only on the 20th of November, on Wednesday, the populace, the civilians
16 would be evacuated. My position then was they should not come to the
17 hospital prematurely to avoid crowding because the hospital by that time
18 had no electricity, water, or food. We were unable to admit such a number
19 of civilians. On the 18th we only had dry food, toast, and some tea for
20 the children because a lot of children had been brought as well, and that
21 was the reason why I decided so on that day.
22 Q. Do you remember -- first of all, do you remember that at that
23 time, on the 18th of November, there was already in existence a collection
24 centre at the Velepromet enterprise on the fair-grounds?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Are you trying to tell me that on that occasion you did not tell
2 any of those civilians that they should not go to the hospital, but that
3 they should go to Velepromet instead?
4 A. No, I told the civilians to go back to the basement of their
5 building, and that the evacuation of civilians would be organised in the
6 next few days.
7 Q. I'm going to read to you part of what you said to the Canadian
8 investigators regarding this. But before that I'm going to ask you: Do
9 you remember on the 7th of March, 1993, you talked on -- you talked about
10 Vukovar events with Canadian investigators, Colonel Carter?
11 A. I couldn't say that I remember now that those were Canadian
12 investigators or Colonel Carter specifically. I have spoken since to many
13 organisations and many individuals about that, but I don't remember a
14 Colonel Carter.
15 Q. I think it's actually Lieutenant-Colonel Jean Carter, a woman,
16 who, at that time worked for an expert commission of the United Nations.
17 A. I remember giving statements to, for instance, the Commission for
18 Missing Persons that was brought by Mr. Mazovjtski. I remember a female
19 person wearing civilian clothes rather than a uniform, but I don't
20 remember that she was either a lieutenant-colonel or that the name was
22 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] May I now ask the usher to take this
23 document to the witness?
24 This document, Your Honour, was drafted simultaneously in English
25 and in B/C/S.
1 Q. Mrs. Bosanac, please turn to page 45.
2 A. 45, you say? Just a minute. I just have to add about this
3 document; I have already discussed it in the Milosevic trial. I have to
4 say that this document was made after the interview and that the fax
5 message was compiled subsequently, and I have not seen this document
6 before in writing in its complete version.
7 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could I just give a clarification to
8 the Trial Chamber? This is actually a transcript from an audiotape.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I never saw it in this form before.
10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] By virtue of a decision of the Trial
11 Chamber the Prosecutor was able to familiarise the witness with this
12 document before she came to testify.
13 Q. Let us just go through a couple of questions concerning this
15 A. Which page did you say?
16 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... [In English] is ERN number.
17 [Interpretation] 45, 00596238.
18 Here, Mrs. Bosanac, I'll read, and you check, as I read, because
19 we have interpretation here. I'm reading from line 7, let's say, your
21 "At the hospital, apart from patients, the wounded, and the staff,
22 many more people have come in. They had arrived back on the 18th from the
23 Olajnica shelter in their basements, and they were all waiting for the
24 hospital to be evacuated. I tried to dissuade them from coming to the
25 hospital because we were overcrowded and we had no electricity or food.
1 Marin Vidic, the mayor, and Zeljka Zgonjanin from the Red Cross in Vukovar
2 were taking care of those civilians who had gone up to the first and
3 second floors of the hospital."
4 As far as I can see, this corresponds to what you just said,
5 Mrs. Bosanac. Can we say that this reflects the reason which you cited
6 back in 1993 for telling the civilians not to come to the hospital?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. At any rate you claim that you didn't know then on the 18th, that
9 the civilians were also coming into Velepromet?
10 A. They were not on the 18th. They were not.
11 Q. I'll move to another subject now that you also covered in this
12 interview. And it relates to what interests me, namely, the arrival of my
13 client to the hospital on the 19th of November, the arrival of
14 Mr. Sljivancanin at the hospital.
15 In your earlier testimony before this Court, and that was page
16 680, you said that you returned to the hospital around 1600 hours after
17 the meeting with Mr. Mrksic. You also said that you had seen - and I
18 suppose it was that afternoon - you had seen Sergeant Sasa Jovic talking
19 to some persons, and you told him to stop talking to them because you
20 needed him for a statement to the Red Cross, the International Red Cross?
21 A. Yes, that was on Tuesday, the 19th, in the afternoon.
22 Q. That same afternoon you testified you had seen some
23 paramilitaries, including the son of Dr. Ivankovic, trying to come into
24 the hospital, and you tried to enter into a dialogue with this Ivankovic?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. My question is: How much time elapsed from the moment, if you can
2 recall that now, from the moment when you ran into Ivankovic until the
3 moment when Zeljka Zgonjanin asked you to come out, which was the first
4 time that you saw my client?
5 A. I couldn't tell you now. I couldn't tell you now how much time
6 elapsed. It's very difficult to say to now.
7 Q. All right. Let's take it --
8 A. It was the same afternoon, but which exact hour I cannot tell you.
9 Q. Let's try another tack. On page 682 you said you saw my client
10 for the first time between 17 and 1800 hours?
11 A. Yes, I saw him that afternoon.
12 Q. Would it refresh your memory if you tried to think whether it was
13 already dark or not?
14 A. No, it was still daylight.
15 Q. On the same page you stated that you saw then men being separated
16 from women and children and you saw with your own eyes, I suppose, those
17 men being put on a truck?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And I will also remind you, on page 683 you said you addressed
20 Sljivancanin on that occasion when you saw him for the first time. You
21 said on the 27th October before this Court that on that occasion he had
22 told you not to interfere with things that are none of your business and
23 to return to your office instead. Do you remember saying that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Now, let us look for a moment how you described that when you
1 testified in the Kadijevic case. Do you have your statement from that
3 A. Shall I put those Canadians aside?
4 Q. Yes, you can do that. Page 5 of the statement you gave in the
5 Kadijevic case. I want to ask you -- I suppose you definitely recall
6 giving that statement before the Court in Zagreb, the district court in
7 Zagreb, and that you stand by what you said?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. I'm reading from paragraph 2.
10 "Sometime between 15 and 1600 hours on that same day when I
11 returned from Negoslavci to the medical centre, Major Veselin Sljivancanin
12 arrived with JNA soldiers. From the first and the second floor, where
13 civilians were quartered, about a thousand of them were taken, I don't
14 know where, probably to the fair-grounds at Velepromet."
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. I don't see that you mentioned the separation of men from women
17 here. You just mentioned that around 1.000 civilians were taken away
19 A. I didn't mention it in answering this question. This statement
20 that I gave before the court in 1996 was also taken in the form of an
21 interview, as a verbal statement, after which the judge who questioned me
22 dictated to her -- to his clerk what she should type up. I cannot tell
23 you now why I didn't mention that, but perhaps if I was asked a
24 specific -- if I had been asked a specific question I would have said
1 Q. But what you meant to say was that only men were taken away, men
2 [as interpreted] and children were left behind?
3 A. I asked at that time why men were being separated from the others,
4 and he told me it's none of my business. And I had the feeling, or I was
5 even informed, that the men were being separated for a purpose. I think
6 Zeljka or somebody told me that men would be listed or something and then
7 women and children would follow. I cannot tell you how long this lasted,
8 but the fact is that when it was happening on Tuesday, the 19th, it was
9 still daylight, but I can't tell you the hour.
10 Q. Is it coming back to you now, according to your later testimony,
11 Nicholas Borsinger also arrived together with Sljivancanin?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. When you came back to the hospital did you see that this was going
15 A. Yes, but the time Borsinger arrived with Sljivancanin it was
16 already dark, and I saw that they brought supplies, medical supplies, but
17 I can't tell you anything more specific. I didn't go to look again. I
18 think that by that time all the civilians had been shipped away. Soon
19 after that was done, Borsinger and Sljivancanin took the lists, the
20 soldier who had taken me to Negoslavci before came again. But whether all
21 the civilians, those who came subsequently to the hospital, whether by
22 that time all of them were taken away, I don't know.
23 Q. Those from the first and the second floor, can I understand that
24 you saw only that moment?
25 A. Yes, only when the transport began, but I didn't see it all, or I
1 can't tell you until when it lasted.
2 Q. Let us now look at what you said to Canadian investigators with
3 regard to this same incident. Can you please take that statement, page
5 [In English] 00596240.
6 [Interpretation] This is how you described that incident on that
7 occasion in 1993. Have you found page 47?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. I'm reading from line 5.
10 "And then I saw Sljivancanin. And asked him, 'What are you doing?
11 Where are they going?' He said that they were going to Velepromet. He
12 kept saying to those people, Everybody will go wherever they please. The
13 Yugoslav federal army freed you. Those men are just going to be listed,
14 and you will reunite at Velepromet. And you will go anywhere you want
16 Now, I'm asking you: Do you remember that in 1993, when your
17 memory of this was more recent, whether you actually heard Sljivancanin
18 say it in this way?
19 A. I said on that occasion when I talked to those investigators, and
20 I wrote the same thing in my statement that I wrote in the prison. It is
21 a fact that he came out with those words. He said: The Yugoslav army
22 freed you, you will go wherever you would like, and he said that again the
23 next morning at the meeting we had. And even at that time he was doing
24 one thing and saying another.
25 Q. What I'm asking you if he said it using those very words on the
2 A. Yes. He said exactly what I reported. I can't remember any other
3 details as to who said what and when, but I assume that this is accurate,
4 what I said back in 1993 in my statement.
5 Q. Very well. Just to go back to your statement in the Kadijevic
6 case, a very short question about that. One thing I have noticed is that
7 there is no reference to Mr. Borsinger's arrival on that day in your
8 statement, is there?
9 A. I don't really know. I didn't go through it very carefully. I
10 must have mentioned this at some point. I'm not sure if it was recorded,
11 to be quite truthful. It's very difficult for me to go through it quickly
12 and be thorough at the same time. He arrived in the evening, another
13 doctor from the ICRC arrived.
14 Q. We'll get to that eventually, but let's not dwell on this now.
15 That isn't really that important. Perhaps you can have a look during the
16 break and then just simply confirm afterwards that you make no reference
17 in the statement to Borsinger's arrival on the 19th?
18 A. That may be, because I did give another short statement about the
19 hospital evacuation later on. I probably said something about that, they
20 included that in the chapter that says "General Information," and then
21 after that you had the document entitled "Reconstruction of the Hospital."
22 Q. We're getting to that now.
23 A. That wasn't signed, but I assume, or suspect that it must be a
24 part of the same document.
25 Q. Do you remember that although this document was not signed your
1 words were recorded accurately?
2 A. Yes, I do remember that.
3 Q. Do you have that in front of you?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. If you could please have a look, this is how it reads: "On the
6 19th of November at around 1800 hours, Mr. Nicholas from the ICRC arrived
7 and Major Sljivancanin arrived with him. However, 30 minutes later they
8 left the hospital. At around 1930 they took me away to Negoslavci."
9 Now, about this document, there is no reference here to
10 Mr. Sljivancanin arriving separately from Mr. Borsinger?
11 A. No, not in this document. But if you look at the hospital
12 evacuation reconstruction, the short interview that I gave, you will see
13 what the facts are. It's probably what I said before, and I suppose they
14 just didn't realise that there was a need to repeat this information.
15 I've given multiple statements before this Tribunal. I have testified a
16 number of times, and this is what I remember about the exact succession of
18 Q. I hear you, Mrs. Bosanac, and I think I am making the position of
19 my client crystal clear to you, and that's what I'm asking questions you
20 about. You didn't agree with me back in October when I asked you about
21 this, but now I am showing you documents indicating that he arrived,
22 together with Nicholas Borsinger, on the afternoon of that day bringing
23 medicines and he that was the only time he arrived on that day. Do you
24 remember me saying that?
25 A. Yes, I am aware of the fact that you said so at the time, but you
1 must allow for the possibility, since it has been a very long time, that
2 perhaps not even your client remembers everything with perfect clarity.
3 What I do remember for certain is that I met him on afternoon of the 19th,
4 and it was already night-time by the time he reached my office with
5 Borsinger on the evening of that Tuesday. What time was it exactly, I
6 really can't say. This was the 20th [as interpreted] of November, even if
7 it was 6.00 p.m., it was probably already dark. I do tend to believe that
8 it was 6.00 or 6:30; however, upon my return from Negoslavci, I remember
9 it was a sunny day - and my memory is particularly vivid - I ran into him
10 along the approach road to emergency. I'm not sure if he has forgotten
11 that, but one thing is certain: I remember that are perfect clarity.
12 Q. Let me just draw your attention to something that you said on page
13 57 of the transcript, line 18, you mentioned the 20th and we're talking
14 about 19; right?
15 A. Yes, we're talking about Tuesday, the 19th.
16 Q. Very well. As you said a while ago, and as you testified on 856
17 on the 30th of October, when Mr. Sljivancanin arrived with Borsinger it
18 was dark already, and you have just repeated that, haven't you?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. All right. You also described your conversation with
21 Mr. Borsinger, saying that he had brought some medical supplies and you
22 were disappointed by the fact that he refused to stay there overnight with
23 you. I would like to have a look at how you described this dialogue to
24 the Canadian investigators on page 54.
25 [In English] For the Prosecutor, 0059-6247.
1 [Interpretation] Page 54. This is the bottom of the page.
2 "This man named Nicholas was there too -- or rather, this
3 representative of the International Red Cross, and this lady who was
4 interpreting. Mr. Nicholas asked me if I believed that his presence
5 during the evacuation was necessary. I was greatly surprised by this
6 question. I said" -- and there is something that is slightly unclear
7 here. "In Zagreb an agreement was signed indicating that he had to be
8 involved in the evacuation because he was there on behalf of International
9 Red Cross. He then said, 'Fine, he said that he would be there. I said
10 it was his duty to be there because there were a lot of Croatian soldiers
11 among the wounded and I was afraid for them. He then said he wished to
12 warn me that if the JNA refused to allow these people to be evacuated,
13 there was nothing he could do to prevent that. I became even more scared
14 at this point and asked him to please make sure he was present for the
16 Now that I have read this out to you, this is your statement from
17 1993. Does this refresh your memory as to what exactly the substance was
18 of the conversation that took place between you and Mr. Borsinger?
19 A. Yes, it does.
20 Q. He asked you at the time whether you believed that he had to be
21 there, that he had to be present; right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. While testifying in chief you explained that you gave him a list
24 of wounded persons who were awaiting evacuation, and you thought
25 Sljivancanin took the other list that was there, that's what you believed;
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. What about the fact that he told you this: If the JNA decided to
4 hold back a particular wounded person, there was nothing he could do to
5 prevent that. What was your reaction when he told you that?
6 A. I said I was at a loss. I couldn't understand what he meant, but
7 I said that he certainly was duty-bound to be there, to be present. I can
8 explain why I reasoned like this, and why I was afraid. Because in the
9 case of the previous convoy, the one organised by Medecins Sans Frontieres
10 to evacuate the wounded, there were a number of wounded Croatian soldiers
11 who were afraid of this evacuation. They didn't know how they would leave
12 town, who would be taking charge of them, and where they would be taking
13 them to; and one of those wounded asked me whether I or anybody else could
14 offer guarantees that they would be safe leaving Vukovar and whether I
15 could guarantee that they would reach Zagreb safely. I said I could offer
16 no such guarantees and that they needed further treatment and that they to
17 continue their treatment as soon as possible. It was for this reason that
18 I was afraid for those wounded because nobody could say at the time how
19 exactly the evacuation would unfold or which route they would take;
20 however, based on the agreement that had been signed in Zagreb between the
21 JNA, the Croatian government, and the ECMM, it was quite clear that the
22 hospital would be neutralised and the European monitors, I'm sorry, would
23 carry out the evacuation.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Sorry. You were racing ahead of the interpreter
25 who wasn't able to keep up with you. I was trying to slow you down. I
1 think he has managed to get there in the end, but if it's possible to go a
2 little slower, it would help the poor interpreter. Thank you.
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Mrs. Bosanac, I just have one question, and then we can have a
5 break. I believe the interpreters might need a break by this point.
6 Do you remember on that day, the 19th, early in the evening, you
7 talked to Borsinger, or at least that's what you say. Did you know at the
8 time that on the previous day, 180 members of the Croatian army, or ZNG,
9 had surrendered at Mitnica, people who were led by Filip Karaula, did you
10 know that on this day?
11 A. No.
12 Q. When did you learn about this?
13 A. When I arrived in prison in Mitrovica and I shared a cell with
14 other women from Mitnica.
15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I believe this would be a convenient
16 time for a break, Your Honours, or perhaps I can move on to another topic
17 if you so prefer.
18 JUDGE PARKER: I could give you four minutes, but I think probably
19 your first idea was the better one. You're clearly wanting to collect
20 your thoughts.
21 I think, Doctor, we will have a break now and we will resume just
22 after a quarter to 6.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 5.27 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 5.52 p.m.
25 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Lukic.
1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Q. Mrs. Bosanac, I will remind you of your testimony in October. I
3 want to ask you questions about some documents that we received later on.
4 On the 31st of October, on page 846 you testified that you had informed
5 Mr. Hebrang that 400 people were awaiting evacuation and that there were a
6 total of 180 wounded who required ambulances to be evacuated. You also
7 testified, what I asked you about a while ago, you said that you gave a
8 copy of wounded persons and those requiring evacuation to Mr. Borsinger
9 and that Sljivancanin had all of the remaining copies. You testified
10 about this on the 27th of October. Do you remember that portion of your
11 testimony, or do you want us to go back to your transcript?
12 A. I do remember.
13 Q. If we're talking about evacuation lists comprising about 400
14 persons, and if, according to your testimony, there were 180 persons who
15 required transport in an ambulance, not a bus, this would leave us with
16 about 220 persons wounded or sick who were fit enough to be taken away on
17 a bus; right?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. However, I'm taking this figure of 220 as a ballpark figure, and
20 I'm putting it to you that not all of those were wounded. When you
21 informed Hebrang about this figure, did you also take that to include
22 persons who were not inpatients, but rather outpatients of the hospital
23 who had been spending the previous days at home?
24 A. When I spoke about the number of ambulances that we would require
25 in order to conduct the evacuation, I took into account all of the wounded
1 and sick who were in the hospital or who came to the hospital on a daily
2 basis to have their wounds dressed. There were many more wounded in
3 shelters around town. But based on my recollection, their condition was
4 not serious enough to warrant transport in an ambulance, since we expected
5 that everybody else would be evacuated two days later from the hospital
7 Q. So this figure of about 400 would include everybody who you
8 believed to qualify as wounded and sick, those who were inside the
9 hospital, regardless of whether they were inpatients or outpatients;
11 A. Yes, these people were in the hospital at the time receiving
12 treatment. If you go back to my statement in the Mitrovica prison when my
13 memory was still very vivid, I spoke about 396 patients, most of them in
14 surgery but also in other wards.
15 Q. Yes, we did go through your statement in Mitrovica. You mean the
16 statement that you gave to the European monitors; right?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Because that figure is referenced in that statement, too.
19 A. I'm talking about the one from Mitrovica; I should have it
21 Q. The one you gave to Colonel Branko; right?
22 A. Yes, Colonel Branko. I mentioned the exact number of patients
23 there. If you want me to, I can track that down for you. 396. 396,
24 200-something in surgery and about 80 of them in other wards of the
1 Q. Very well. Let's go back to your statement to the Canadian
2 investigators, page 51. For the benefit of the OTP the ERN is 0059-6244.
3 This is what you said in relation to the figures, that's midway
4 down the page: "There were those 180 seriously wounded and about another
5 80 slightly wound who were at the hospital. But there were a number of
6 outpatients who had some documents with findings from a specialist, but
7 those people were not on any of the lists. I thought that my
8 father-in-law, my mother-in-law, and other such elderly people, as well as
9 those unable to walk, would be in one of the hospital lists but they
11 If I look at this, I see that on the 18th of November the figure
12 mentioned in relation to persons who were patients of the Vukovar Hospital
13 was 180 seriously wounded and about 80 slightly wounded persons. The rest
14 being persons which you describe as persons you believe required
15 evacuation as sick, infirm, and elderly; right?
16 A. But not quite. You can read here that there were 180 seriously
17 wounded person who is required transport in an ambulance, and there were
18 about 80 slightly wounded persons who could be taken away on a bus. As
19 for the rest, there were pregnant women or women who had just recently
20 given birth and a number of other patients totalling about 400 persons who
21 required evacuation from the hospital, plus about 300 medical staff, plus
22 their families, on top of which a number of wounded persons also had
23 people accompanying them and their families. Your client was very
24 important for many of those. He was to decide whether they could join the
25 sick and infirm. Some of those people survived the evacuation, but some
1 ended up at Ovcara. Therefore, you can't hold me to every single figure.
2 It's difficult to know precisely. We are only able to say now what the
3 exact figures were, having obtained the figures in relation to the wounded
4 and in relation to Ovcara.
5 Q. Madam, please just answer my question, if you can. You claim that
6 the most accurate information is the one you provided in Mitrovica because
7 your memory was still fresh; right?
8 A. Yes, I should assume so, although in Mitrovica I provided this
9 information based on my memory in the hospital. But not even in Mitrovica
10 was I able to know how many newcomers there were or outpatients who on
11 that day arrived at the hospital and applied to be evacuated, those who
12 never were.
13 Q. Very well. Let us look at another different testimony of yours
14 before the Court. You testified before the Court here that at that time -
15 at least that's the way I understood it - you gave Borsinger one copy of
16 the list of the wounded for evacuation and another copy to Sljivancanin.
17 I understood it all happened in your office at the hospital.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now, look at your statement in Kadijevic case, page 5. It may be
20 a small detail, but there is a slight discrepancy and I would like to
21 understand. The third paragraph, halfway through the paragraph.
22 A. Just give me some time to find it. Which page?
23 Q. Page 5. Yes, paragraph 3. You describe how you went to
24 Negoslavci in the evening -- in fact, you were taken there, you thought
25 you were going to see Mrksic, and it was Sljivancanin instead. And then
1 you say: "I was summoned to talk to Sljivancanin by him to tell him how
2 many wounded exactly there were in the hospital, how many staff, and where
3 the defenders of Vukovar were. He questioned me also where" --
4 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel please repeat?
5 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Lukic, you've run ahead, and you're asked to
7 THE INTERPRETER: Not everything, from the "where the defenders
8 of Vukovar were."
9 JUDGE PARKER: From the passage about the defenders of Vukovar.
10 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour.
11 Q. So I will repeat the whole sentence. "I was invited by
12 Sljivancanin to talk to him about how many wounded there were exactly at
13 the hospital, how many staff, and where the defenders of the town of
14 Vukovar were located. And he also asked me where Jastreb was. At that
15 time I had the list of the wounded with me from the hospital that I had
16 prepared previously and that I had submitted to the International Red
18 Now, my question is: Is it possible, as you said in the Kadijevic
19 case, that it was in the evening in Negoslavci that you gave this to
21 A. No, I didn't take anything with me to Negoslavci, nor did I have
22 any special list to hand to Sljivancanin that evening. I had given him a
23 list the evening before, before I was taken to Negoslavci. I gave one
24 copy to Borsinger and Sljivancanin took all the other lists, but I wasn't
25 carrying that with me to Negoslavci, no.
1 Q. So you say that it happened the way you testified in October?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. All right. Now I have a couple of questions about the meeting on
4 the 20th; you gave a statement about that and you also testified about
5 it. When you testified before this Tribunal, and that was on the 27th of
6 October, page 692, as well as during cross-examination on the 31st of
7 October on page 868, but in neither of these segments did you mention that
8 you said anything about that meeting. I'm asking you now: Did you say
9 anything at that meeting in the plaster room?
10 A. No. I don't remember saying anything at that meeting in the
11 plaster room. It was Sljivancanin who spoke.
12 Q. Now, let us look at how you described this on page 63 of your
13 statement to Canadian investigators. 0059-6256 is the ERN number. This
14 is a transcript from an audiotape made in 1993. I'm reading from halfway
15 down the page. Have you found it? Page 63.
16 "Major Sljivancanin came and said that I should convene all
17 surgeons into one room so that we can hold a meeting, including doctors
18 who were in charge of patients. I sent a nurse to fetch all doctors, and
19 we gathered in one room that served as a plaster-cast room during the
20 war -- that is, before the war. There were about 20 of us, and there were
21 five or six men in uniform. It's the olive-grey uniform, the former
22 uniform of the JNA. And Major Sljivancanin wore the camouflage uniform
23 like the one our army had. And he said those men were doctors of the
24 military medical academy in Belgrade who were going to take over the
25 hospital, because from that point on the hospital was under the command of
1 the Yugoslav People's Army.
2 "That Dr. Mladen Ivankovic, who was head of the surgical ward,
3 said that he was transferring immediately to work at the hospital under
4 the command of the JNA. I said that this hospital could not operate any
5 longer, that all patients had to be evacuated from it because it was
6 completely destroyed, and that, in fact, we should wait for the
7 International Red Cross and the evacuation. Major Sljivancanin said that
8 we should hand over our patients to the military doctors because they
9 would be in charge of the evacuation, and that I was no longer needed
10 there, so that I should return to my office. They escorted me back to my
11 office, and that captain was still sitting there."
12 Now, two questions follow from this. Does this refresh from your
13 memory that you took the floor, after all, and said something at that
14 meeting? That's my first question.
15 A. It's possible that I said that on that occasion or some other
16 occasion, I can't remember exactly. But that meeting happened in such a
17 way that everybody just came into that room, the doctors and I and all the
18 others, we were standing there while Sljivancanin was making a speech. He
19 talked, I cannot tell you for how long, but he was saying that the JNA had
20 freed Vukovar, that the situation would return to normal, that they would
21 take over the hospital. And it's possible that at that point I said the
22 hospital had to be evacuated because we had no electricity, nothing. I
23 don't see what's important about this.
24 Q. I'm not saying that anything is important or isn't; it's a matter
25 of judgement. But that's your testimony, and I'm asking you now: Do you
1 remember that he said on that occasion, which you testified to the
2 Canadians, namely, that you should hand over the patients to the military
3 doctors, because they would be in charge of the evacuation? That's what
4 you said in 1993.
5 A. No, he said that the hospital will be taken over by the experts
6 from the military medical academy. I don't remember whether evacuation
7 was mentioned at that point. I don't know. It's possible that I said
8 that in 1993. This seems a transcript of the interview, I cannot tell any
9 longer, but it's a fact that he said on that location that experts from
10 the military medical academy would take over the hospital.
11 Q. Did perhaps later one of your colleagues, doctors, in Mitrovica -
12 if you had occasion to see any of them later - did any of them tell you --
13 since you had been taken back to your office, did anyone tell you that the
14 doctors who had gathered there had earlier that morning made rounds, Biba
15 Kolesar or somebody?
16 A. I don't know. At that time I had some information that they had
17 made rounds and looked at patients. I can't recall anymore to told me
19 Q. I would be grateful if you could tell me, if you remember, which
20 of the doctors, Serb doctors was at the meeting then. You mentioned
21 Ivankovic. Do you remember Stanojevic or anybody else?
22 A. Well, I can only assume it was them. I can't remember exactly
23 anymore who I attended.
24 Q. Do you remember Dr. Manojlovic maybe?
25 A. I think he was there, but I'm not sure.
1 Q. All right. We'll move on to yet another subject, that is, related
2 to your testimony earlier today to these documents, and we'll go back
3 again to statements to Canadian investigators. You confirmed again now
4 that from what you remember - and that's what you said on the 25th October
5 as well - that around 700 people were to be evacuated, including patients,
6 accompanying people, staff, and others. Those lists, evacuation lists,
7 we're talking about the paper, the hard copy, now that were given to
8 Borsinger and Sljivancanin, you didn't give them to Hebrang, did you?
9 A. No, I did not.
10 Q. When you testified here in October last year, since you testified
11 over several days, you said that you had a list indicating the place where
12 everybody wanted to go. Was it indicated on that list the desired
14 A. I cannot recall anymore what this list looked like, but I remember
15 we did ask people where they wanted to go. There were some people who
16 said they didn't care. I can't visualise the list anymore. I don't know
17 for sure anymore whether the desired destination was indicated by every
19 Q. All right. But on the 18th, in those several days when you were
20 keeping in touch by telephone with Hebrang and passing on this
21 information, did you know then, based on what you knew about where
22 everybody wanted to go, did you have in mind the figure of 50 people who
23 wanted to go to Serbia?
24 A. I can't recall that figure, but I do know that some people said
25 they wanted to go to Belgrade or to Novi Sad but I can't remember how
2 Q. All right. Let's forget about the number. In any case, there
3 were some people among the patients and the staff, the wounded and the
4 sick. You would not have included those people in the convoy to Croatia,
5 towards Hebrang, would you?
6 A. I can't tell you precisely. I know that I kept constantly a
7 record how many wounded I had in which ward, but I cannot tell you how
8 many people did not wish to go to other parts of Croatia.
9 Q. All right. Let us not go into speculation. There is another
10 detail that interested me in your testimony, and it has to do with the
11 document that you covered today, namely, the records of the wounded and
12 the sick, the database. I will tell you now what you said about this
13 database to Canadian investigators. It's page 21 when you mentioned it
14 the first -- 0059-6214. This is what you said then. Have you found page
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. "That computer was connected with the head office in Zagreb, and
18 on a daily basis reports were sent. In the medical school at the
19 university there is in existence this database that was updated until the
20 6th of November. However, due to devastation, this communication was
21 broken, and after the 6th of November we have no data here in Zagreb as to
22 who was wounded and who was killed."
23 Is that what it says?
24 A. We don't have the data in that format, but we continued to send
25 information by other means.
1 Q. Now, look at page 54, it's the same subject.
2 [In English] 0059-6247.
3 [Interpretation] "The computer was also in my office, but it
4 hadn't been working for a long time. It stopped working on the 6th of
5 November. All the wounded who were hospitalised received each a white
6 nylon bag containing their temperature chart, their case history, et
8 Now, what you testified today is that the computer either broke
9 down or the communication line was broken, and that every day or every
10 other day you used the fax machine to send your reports to Zagreb to the
11 Ministry of Health. Did I understand you correctly?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. How long did you continue to send these reports for?
14 A. I can't remember the exact date, but it was probably sometime
15 around the 12th or the 13th of November. That was the last time I went to
16 Jastreb's headquarters, which was the only place that I could send reports
17 from, but again I can't remember the exact date.
18 Q. Can you specify perhaps in relation to the 18th of November when
19 the Zagreb agreement was signed. I suppose you were sending reports by
20 telephone, reports about the evacuation. How much later did you stop
21 sending fax messages to Zagreb concerning the situation of the wounded?
22 Let me remind you, you said that on the 18th there were no new wounded in
23 the hospital, didn't you?
24 A. Yes, that's right. The last new wounded were admitted on the
25 15th, that was a Friday, I'm not sure about the following Saturday. On
1 Monday, the 18th, a young girl underwent surgery, Sanja Vidic, who had
2 been wounded on the previous Friday, but no new wounded arrived in the
3 hospital. I can't really remember. It may be a week before this time
4 that we were last able to send fax messages to Zagreb.
5 Q. Could they be, as you specified in October, on the 6th of
6 November, all communication lines broke down and you stopped faxing
7 messages to Zagreb. It's in all of your statements. You speak about the
8 6th of November as the date when all communication ceased?
9 A. We still had the fax machine, but I can't give you the exact
10 date. Maybe the records in Zagreb will show which fax messages are still
11 available for inspection. All I can tell you is that I have all of my
12 written appeals. The last one that I faxed, the last couple of ones were
13 phoned in, but I can perhaps go back to these documents to see the last
14 date. This is the 9th, this is the 11th of November. This one wasn't
15 signed, so this may well be the last one that I sent out. My last appeal
16 on the 9th of November, this was signed, there is an official letterhead,
17 and this certainly wasn't phoned in, this was faxed. So the 9th of
18 November might be the date you're looking for.
19 Q. I will have to take you back to what we heard today. I think
20 there is a significant discrepancy between that and what I heard from you
21 on the 31st of October; it has to do with the sending of reports and
22 with what there was at the other end in Zagreb. You testified today, and
23 we still remember this -- rather, I will read to you now what you stated
24 before this Chamber on the 31st of October on page 863. It was actually
25 me cross-examining you on that occasion.
1 [English] "Q. When exactly did you begin to send those reports?
2 "A. The 15th of August.
3 "Q. On a daily basis?
4 "A. Yes.
5 "Q. You also testified on Friday that when you reached Zagreb and
6 were eventually free, you had an occasion to look at some of those reports
7 that you had previously written. Did you in fact and where was that?"
8 "A. Yes.
9 "Q. Dating to which period?
10 "A. August, September, October, all the way until the 6th of
12 "Q. Did you continue to send reports after the 6th of November?"
13 "A. Yes. We typed them into the computer and we sent printed
14 copies too, but I never actually saw those arrive.
15 "Q. Did you ask Mr. Hebrang or whoever was in charge of those
16 documents why the other reports from after the 6th of November were
18 "A. They said that there had been a communication breakdown, the
19 lines broke down after that date, and the reports were no longer able to
20 reach them via computer, and the same applied to the printed copies.
21 Those that were meant for the defence staff, for the Ministry of Internal
22 Affairs, and for the Red Cross. All those remain in the hospital. I was
23 never aware of anyone taking those files away. I think they all stayed
24 back at the hospital.
25 "Q. How were printed copies forwarded, by fax?
1 "A. Yes, by fax.
2 "Q. There is not a single printed copy at the health ministry
3 dated after the 6th of November, but the appeals are there?
4 "A. Yes. The appeals are there because those documents were
5 preserved by some lady working with the European Commission Monitors," et
6 cetera, et cetera.
7 [Interpretation] Mrs. Bosanac, you were answering my questions
8 several months ago when you stated clearly that after the 6th of November
9 there were no reports, and this is what you were told at the health
10 ministry, whereas today --
11 A. No, not even then. Well, you have just read it yourself, haven't
12 you? We were not able to send our reports via computer, to e-mail them,
13 but we used the fax machine instead, but I don't see any discrepancy
15 Q. My question was: Did you ask Mr. Hebrang about the whereabouts of
16 those reports, those after the 6th of November, and he said that the
17 communication lines had broken down, the network was down?
18 A. You are misinterpreting this. What do you mean by saying the
19 reports are not there? I know exactly what it was that we sent. I don't
20 know the exact date we stopped sending, but I know we both e-mailed and
21 faxed messages, and we phoned some of the reports in. What I can't
22 specify is the date the last report was sent, and I'm not sure why you're
23 pressing this matter.
24 Q. Only because my impression is that your answers to the Prosecutor
25 in relation to the information you provided to Mr. Ivica Kostovic were
2 A. That's just a different perspective. There is a database they
3 gave us back in 1997, which we are now using to get information on the
4 people wounded back in 1991, because there is no other way through this
5 Tribunal or the health ministry or the Red Cross that we could possibly
6 obtain these medical files. I think it would be a fair and humanitarian
7 gesture for these files to be sent back to Vukovar. There is no reason
8 for these files to remain jealously guarded in Belgrade.
9 Q. Verica Graf, at least as far as I understand your testimony, was
10 the person who was entering this information into the database; right?
11 A. Yes, for the most part, but she was not the only one entering
13 Q. She gave a statement to the Croatian authorities saying that the
14 computer had been destroyed on the 14th, possibly 15th of October, 1991.
15 Do you know anything about that? Is she wrong?
16 A. I think that's wrong. That's not accurate. Maybe she meant that
17 there had been a breakdown but the computer survived, as it were, and it
18 was still in my office, later on. I later saw that interview of
19 Dr. Ivankovic to the Politika magazine, where he discussed that particular
21 Q. I will ask you about the person. This arose from the set of
22 documents that we received on the 22nd of December. Among other
23 documents, we were given Dr. Sadika Bilus's statement. I won't ask you
24 questions about her; I will be asking you something about her statement.
25 But I will ask you this: Were you aware of the fact that Dr. Sadika Bilus
1 of those days in Vukovar videotaped anything?
2 A. Yes, I was aware of that.
3 Q. Do you know what happened to those tapes?
4 A. No, I don't.
5 Q. What exactly was she filming?
6 A. I think I remember seeing her filming some wounded being admitted
7 to the hospital, but I don't know what exactly she was filming because I
8 didn't watch the tapes.
9 Q. Thank you very much.
10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this concludes my
11 cross-examination. As Mr. Vasic has already pointed out, once we are in a
12 position to further analyse these documents we shall decide whether we
13 shall be calling somebody else to answer these questions or maybe we shall
14 be recalling Dr. Bosanac. But this is all for the time being in relation
15 to our Rule 68 documents.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Moore.
17 Re-examination by Mr. Moore:
18 Q. Doctor, you have been asked about contact with Zagreb. The 6th of
19 November has been a date that has been used in relation to the computer
20 failing, and you appear to be saying that you sent faxes and contacted
21 Zagreb in other ways. Is that right or not?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Would you be kind enough to turn up the blue file? And just let's
24 deal with the first -- the first page, perhaps even the second page. Now,
25 we have got dates of wounding. It is the third column in. Do you see
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. If you move -- I'm going to refer to various parts. If you move
4 13 lines down, you can actually see it, it relates to Nustar. Do you see
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. 20th of the 11th, and indeed if we move on down to lines 25, 26,
8 and 27, we've got the 15th of November and the 16th of November. There's
9 a number of November dates.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. How is it that these dates are incorporated in this schedule if
12 the communications were down, or can you tell the Court how it was Zagreb
13 knew this material and the date?
14 A. Well, if you look at the date of entry column you will see. For
15 example, Nustar is close to the Vinkovci hospital. This information was
16 probably forwarded from Vinkovci, the information on this particular
17 wounding on the 20th of November in Nustar. You see that the date of
18 entry is the 24th of November, 1991. This was after Vukovar had fallen
19 and everybody had already been taken away from the hospital. Exactly
20 where this information was recorded and where it happened can only be
21 established if you get a printout for this patient, such as the printouts
22 contained in this extensive document. You see information such as where a
23 patient was wounded and where his information was recorded.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Lukic?
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] The witness was in the middle of
1 answering a question, so I didn't mean to interrupt. But I believe on
2 page 77, line 10, Mr. Moore was leading the witness on something,
3 something that the witness had previously confirmed she didn't know. What
4 is essential here is not how Zagreb learned about the document, but when
5 they learned about it. It can hardly be extrapolated based on this that
6 Zagreb knew about the wounding at this point in time. We should first be
7 given documents about this before we can speak about it. What is
8 essential is when these documents became available to Zagreb.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Excuse me. I don't see any difficulty, Mr. Lukic,
10 I'm sorry, with the line of questioning here. It's searching for
11 information - not putting an answer into mouth - and it is relevant to
12 questioning that was being taken, an obvious question, if communication
13 did break at an early date in November or even earlier, is how is there
14 information recorded later. If that throws some different light on it,
15 fine. If it doesn't, as we confirmed by the answer, well then we're left
16 with the answer.
17 Carry on, please, Mr. Moore.
18 MR. MOORE:
19 Q. Doctor, can I just ask you, please, to drop down the page. You
20 see, I hope, there are three gaps for the diagnosis normally would be,
21 actually I think it's five. But there are entries on the 15th of the
22 11th, 1991; 16th of the 11th, 1991; 16th of the 11th, 1991, Vukovar. Do
23 you see that or not?
24 A. Yes, I do.
25 Q. So I ask the question simply this: That if communications were
1 destroyed, as being suggested to you, totally destroyed, how is it that we
2 have these entries in the -- on the 15th and 16th of November relating to
4 A. If you look at the next column, the one next to "diagnosis," if
5 you look at the date of entry. For example, somebody was wounded on the
6 15th or 16th of November, so the date of entry seems to be the 15th of
7 March, 1992, which is at a later stage. These people were probably
8 wounded at some time or other somewhere, but this wasn't information that
9 we provided to Zagreb. It must have been a different source, the police,
10 possibly the Red Cross. If you want me to, I can go through every single
11 individual on this list. If we open the file, if we see where the person
12 was hurt, I think we see where the information had come from.
13 Q. I don't want to take up a lot of Court time. You see, what has
14 been suggested is that your computer stopped on the 6th of November, and
15 therefore you didn't have an ability to contact Zagreb. And all I'm
16 trying to do is, by looking briefly at this document, where we've got
17 entries for date of injury, whether they could have been entered as a
18 direct consequence of communication by telephone or fax. Now can I just
19 direct your attention to five lines from the bottom, perhaps that's
20 another one.
21 A. As possible.
22 Q. 11th of the 11th, 1991. If you look across, date of entry, 19th
23 of the 11th. Do you see that?
24 A. Yes, I see that.
25 Q. And if you look over the page, in the middle of the page you've
1 got again other entries in November. All I'm simply asking is: Are you
2 able to indicate whether, in actual fact, some of these entries may be as
3 a consequence of you telephoning or faxes after the 6th of November?
4 A. Of course. That's possible. Not only after the 6th. It wasn't
5 always the case prior to the 6th that information was e-mailed; sometimes
6 information was faxed, the daily lists. Those were sometimes faxed, they
7 weren't necessarily always e-mailed, because the fax in the police
8 building was used, the fax in the defence headquarters, as well as the one
9 that was actually at the hospital while it still worked.
10 Q. Thank you very much. I just want to move on to -- I have only
11 three topics, I think. I want to ask you, please, about the Canadian
12 transcript. You have been asked by my learned friend, Mr. Lukic, the fact
13 that in the Kadijevic transcript there was a suggestion that you gave the
14 list to Sljivancanin when you went to Negoslavci. Now, I'd like you,
15 please, to look at the Canadian transcript, and I'll give the -- the page
16 number, if I can locate it. Yes, here we are. 0059-6194, and what I'm
17 looking for is the page which starts at 6251 in the English, bottom
18 right-hand corner, number 58. Now, page -- if you look at the bottom of
19 the page, right-hand side, page number 58. The top of the page should
20 start: "Interpreter: But Mrs. Sarlota, who works here, would know it, I
22 Have you got that page?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. I want to drop down approximately five questions, and the
25 interpreter asks the question, because it relates to, I believe,
1 Negoslavci: "I asked where Colonel Mrksic was." Do you see that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. I'll read in English and try and read slowly to assist the
5 "And Major Sljivancanin told me that he had been transferred to
6 another task... I want to talk to you. And I waited to hear what he
7 wanted to discuss... He asked me, 'Doctor, where are the members of the
8 Croatian army.' I said I did not know. He said, 'How come that you don't
9 know?' I said I did not know..."
10 And then you go on to say that you "received instructions from the
11 minister... that in the evacuation... the Croatian army should not be
12 present at the evacuation... and that there would not be Yugoslav army
13 either... only the truck will arrive with drivers... and the evacuation
14 will be conducted by the International Red Cross... and EC monitors. He
15 again pressed me saying: 'What do you mean you do not know where the
16 Croatian army is. It's impossible that the army is not there.'"
17 Can I perhaps abbreviate it in this way, and my learned friends
18 can contradict me if I'm wrong, but through that discussion, as has
19 suggested at Negoslavci with Sljivancanin, is it right to say that there
20 was never any suggest by you that you had a list? I see Mr. Lukic
21 agreeing. So I think the answer is "Da." Let's move on, if I can?
22 JUDGE PARKER: Have we got an answer, Mr. Moore, from the witness?
23 MR. MOORE: I saw a nod and a smile, and I apologise.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Perhaps the transcript would be happier to have the
25 nod and smile recorded in words.
1 MR. MOORE: It's a quarter to 7.00, I apologise.
2 Q. Is that right, Dr. Bosanac?
3 A. Yes, it's correct. At that time I didn't have any list, not when
4 I was in Negoslavci.
5 Q. Finally, I would like to deal, if I may, please, with the
6 questions that Mr. Borovic was asking you about your interview, and the
7 documents that were referred to. Let me just locate them, if I may. They
8 were the two documents that were shown to you. They were compiled on the
9 9th of December, basically when you were a person in custody. Do you
10 remember that at the military court in Belgrade?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you very much. I notice that Defence counsel was Captain
13 First Class Vladimir Biskovic [phoen]. Now, had you ever met him before?
14 Did you know him?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Now, with regard to the allegations against you at that time, were
17 you able to deny, contest, or choose anyone to represent you when it came
18 to this allegation, apart from a person that was given to you?
19 A. At that time there was a military officer who said that the matter
20 was now before the military court, and that the investigation proceedings
21 were underway. He told me that I was under investigation because I had
22 been sending documents that spoke against the JNA and that I was free to
23 put up a defence. I asked if I would be allowed to call Minister Hebrang
24 to ask him for advice as to what kind of defence I could put up in
25 Belgrade if I was under investigation, and the officer said yes I was
1 allowed to, but if I decided to do that it would take a couple of days,
2 whereas if I agreed to a court-appointed defence counsel, the matter could
3 be solved quickly and I would be free to go to Zagreb.
4 In response to that I said that of course in that case I agreed to
5 a court-appointed attorney and maybe I could even defend myself. I just
6 want to say that through those appeals and fax messages that I sent, and
7 some of them I had on me when I was detained, I only heard in October last
8 year that the investigation was mentioned, the investigation regarding the
9 treatment of several Serb soldiers.
10 While I was under investigation in Belgrade there was not a word
11 about that, and even that court-appointed defence counsel told me, because
12 I had asked him, among other things, to notify a relative of mine who used
13 to be on the Supreme Court in Belgrade before the war. He told me that it
14 was unnecessary because the only charge was verbal offence. Not a word
15 was said to me about what Mr. Borovic raised here. That was how it was at
16 the military court. And only last year, at this trial, I saw the official
17 record made in December, or perhaps later in 1992, after I was exchanged,
18 or rather released from Belgrade.
19 Q. Can I just conclude in this way: When you apparently signed this
20 document, did you realise there was allegations about you inhumanely
21 treating individuals in your hospital?
22 A. No. No.
23 MR. MOORE: I have no further re-examination. Thank you very
25 JUDGE PARKER: Well, Doctor, I am in a position of indicating to
1 you yet again that we are grateful that you have been able to come back,
2 and for the assistance that you've given. There remains a question
3 whether this will be entirely the end of your evidence or not, depending
4 on what might emerge from the documents that come from Zagreb. And in due
5 course, the prosecuting officers will be in touch with you if there is
6 need for any further attendance. But in the hope that that may not be
7 necessary, we would like to thank you, and you may, of course, now return
8 to your own home and interests.
9 Before we, I think, finish for the day, Mr. Moore, the two
10 documents that you were considering, are you in a position to deal with
11 those now, exhibits -- or marked for identification 345 and 346.
12 MR. MOORE: Your Honour, the witness has said that she signed them
13 and the basis upon which she signed them, and therefore we will allow them
14 to be exhibits. We will not object to that course, clearly within the
15 context of the reply.
16 JUDGE PARKER: They will now each be received as an exhibit.
17 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
18 JUDGE PARKER: There is a question whether the second should be
19 under seal, Mr. Moore. It's a detailed list of patients and medical
20 conditions, is it not?
21 MR. MOORE: The -- the document, the large document, yes. It
22 should be under seal.
23 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
24 MR. MOORE: And I think we had communicated that through to the
1 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
2 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
3 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Vasic.
4 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] I'm afraid the Defence is at a loss
5 now. We just discussed two documents, 345 and 346. I think they were
6 tendered by Mr. Borovic.
7 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
8 MR. VASIC: [Interpretation] And my learned friend just said I
9 did. As for the documents tendered by Mr. Moore, they are still MFI
10 pending receipt from Zagreb of the documentation. Did I understand
12 JUDGE PARKER: Two documents which Mr. Borovic wanted to tender as
13 an exhibit, the Prosecution wanted to consider them further, so they were
14 marked for identification. The Prosecution has now considered them
15 further and no longer objects to their being received. So the document
16 marked for identification as 345 is now Exhibit 345. The document marked
17 for identification as 346 is now Exhibit 346 under seal.
18 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
19 JUDGE PARKER: And you are correct, and I am wrong, not unusual,
20 Mr. Vasic. My numbers are mixed. It's documents number 347 and 348 under
21 seal are now exhibits. So Mr. Moore is still swinging, but Mr. Borovic
22 has succeeded for the day.
23 MR. BOROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour -- I'm sorry.
24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
25 JUDGE PARKER: 348 is not under seal. The document I was
1 concerned about is that one which Mr. Moore still has pending, which
2 really is 346. So if you will excuse me all for having got all that
3 wrong, but I think it's now straightened.
4 We will now adjourn. We resume tomorrow at 9.00.
5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.57 p.m.,
6 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 5th day of
7 April, 2006, at 9.00 a.m.