1 Thursday, 19 January 2006
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 9.15 a.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Good morning to you. Madam Registrar, would
6 you call the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number
8 IT-03-68-T, the Prosecutor versus Naser Oric.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. Mr. Oric, can you follow the
10 proceedings in your mother tongue?
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours, ladies
12 and gentlemen. I can follow the proceedings in my own language.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Oric, and good morning to you. You
14 may be seated.
15 Appearances for the Prosecution.
16 MR. WUBBEN: Good morning, Your Honours, and also good morning to
17 my learned friends of the Defence. My name is Jan Wubben, lead counsel
18 for the Prosecution. In my team also is Patricia Sellers, Ms. Joanne
19 Richardson, and our case manager Ms. Donnica Henry-Frijlink.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Wubben, and good morning to you and
21 your team.
22 Appearances for Naser Oric.
23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. My name
24 is Vasvija Vidovic. Together with John Jones I appear here today, and
25 with our legal assistant Ms. Adisa Mehic.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Madam Vidovic, and good morning to you
2 and your team.
3 Yesterday, in your absence, Mr. Wubben, we had some submissions on
4 the -- on our indication that we will be proceeding with appointing our
5 own handwriting expert, and I of course reserved -- since you were not
6 here at the time, I told Ms. Sellers that we'll wait until your return.
7 I suggest that if you have submissions to make on this, we will
8 leave them until the end of the sitting, and we'll try first to finish
9 with the witness.
10 MR. WUBBEN: Your Honour, waiting for the end of the sitting today
11 will mean that I'm not able to attend to a meeting with our -- with our
12 advisor regarding this issue. I have a meeting scheduled at around 12.00.
13 So if it is possible then to make the submissions in that respect tomorrow
14 morning, first start, or at the end of the session tomorrow, then that
15 will suit me.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: It's all right with us. I suppose with the Defence
17 it doesn't make a difference. Okay. So you'll make the submissions
18 tomorrow and you will have the -- rather, we will all have the advantage
19 of your having first consulted with your advisors. All right.
20 Any other preliminaries before we start with the witness? Please
21 keep them as short as possible so that -- I want to make sure that this
22 witness is out of here today.
24 MR. WUBBEN: Thank you, Your Honour. I will keep it short. To
25 update the Trial Chamber that we are continuing organising our rebuttal,
1 we updated you that we had candidates for that. One of those witnesses is
2 not able to attend in the specific week starting the 31st of January due
3 to the fact that he's abroad. He can only come in to start giving
4 evidence on the 6th of February.
5 And in addition to the -- these candidate witnesses, I learned
6 from yesterday that the Defence intend to file a motion with a view to the
7 admittance of the interviews of the accused and that that might have a
8 consequence also to advocate that, as a kind of poisoned fruit, the
9 signatures put by the accused are also affected. That means for us that
10 we reserve from yesterday our right also in rebuttal to give evidence via
11 witnesses in that respect. Thank you, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. But we still haven't got an indication
13 of how many witnesses you're bringing over in rebuttal with this caveat,
14 because I can quite understand what your preoccupation is, but forget this
15 reservation that you have made.
16 MR. WUBBEN: We still --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: And assuming that you will get also this witness
18 that, in Manzonian terms, would be the unnamed, the innominata. Where do
19 we stand? I mean, how much time do you need? I really don't care to know
20 for the time being precisely the names, because that's more of the concern
21 of the Defence than of us, but I want -- and we came here early this
22 morning to discuss with our staff several organisational issues. We need
23 to know.
24 MR. WUBBEN: For three out of the four witnesses, a rough
25 estimation is five days, and then in addition, the possibility of
1 Docterandus Fagel, but that should be discussed within the team after the
2 testimony of Bilic, and we are quite aware that the Trial Chamber -- of
3 the possibility to include such questions also within the request to the
4 Trial Chamber expert.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll see anyway, but please by the end of the week
6 we need to have in black on white the indication of who you want to call
7 in rebuttal, with the time you estimate you need for the testimony in
8 chief, so that we will have feedback from the Defence. And of course for
9 the time being, I can't -- I can't even ask the Defence what they -- what
10 they plan. There will be a reservation, of course, on this matter
11 relating to the interview if that matter comes up. If you want to bring
12 forward evidence on that, of course you can make the application to the
13 Trial Chamber and we will decide whether to accept it or not. But of
14 course we are reserving your rights for the time being.
15 MR. WUBBEN: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: So that's the position. Any further preliminaries
17 on our part?
18 MR. WUBBEN: No, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: On your part, Madam Vidovic?
20 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I only wish to briefly
21 turn to what Mr. Wubben said and comment upon it and then we will have two
22 or three questions.
23 Based on what my learned colleague Wubben said this morning, I can
24 see that they already have names. They already know who the persons are
25 who they will invite for rebuttal, and I believe it would have been fair
1 for them to inform us of the names of these persons as soon as they knew
2 them. What we expect from them now is to receive statements in order for
3 us to prepare our defence and our cross-examination of these witnesses.
4 I wish to state here that the Prosecutor could not have been
5 surprised by the fact that we were finishing our case in January. We were
6 trying to strictly adhere to the order issued by this Honourable Trial
7 Chamber, which stated that the case should be finished by the end of
8 January. This had been planned long ago, and we should have had the names
9 a long time ago if we want to have a fair trial. That's why we expect to
10 receive the statements as soon as possible.
11 Your Honours, I have to address you this morning on another matter
12 as well. You will recall that yesterday the Prosecution addressed the
13 Chamber in relation to P598, their own Prosecution exhibit. They wanted
14 to replace their P598 with another document because they stated that the
15 front page and some other pages were missing. I am indeed content with
16 the fact that we had -- we reacted yesterday and that you refused to grant
17 the replacement before we take a look at it.
18 Yesterday we carefully reviewed the document and came to a highly
19 -- to a conclusion that is of great concern to us. I will not address
20 the matter of disclosure at this stage, although it should be, but I do
21 not have the time. If need be, we may submit a detailed analysis of the
22 disclosure matter to the Chamber as well.
23 However, there is another matter which is of far greater concern
24 to us and I wish it to be stated for the record for the sake of the
25 further proceedings. The document which Madam Prosecutor asked to be
1 replaced yesterday because she stated that the front page had been
2 missing, I have to note that -- that the page which is the front page of
3 the document is the one bearing the ERN number 04231845 and it was already
4 contained in the document. I believe this is a highly pressing matter,
5 and I would wish the paper that we prepared to be distributed here.
6 Therefore, the page number 04231845, when you glance at it you can
7 see that the first page has number 1 in the upper right corner, and as you
8 flip through the document - we haven't gone page by page but I believe
9 that this is the case - if you look at the subsequent pages, 2, 3, 4, 5,
10 through to 54, they run through to 54, the page the Prosecutor wanted to
11 submit, which was the one carrying the number 02995208, at first sight
12 even a person who is a layman can see that there is a very rough
13 alteration of names, or even retracing of names, and you will see that
14 these are the names of Kemal Mehmedovic and Senad Golubovic, names which
15 had been repeatedly mentioned in this case.
16 I wish to draw the Chamber's attention to the fact that the first
17 page of this document is not the one that is listed as number 1 in EDS,
18 but instead the page on the EDS bears the number 02995207, where it is
19 stated that three war diaries were received with attorney-at-law
20 Mr. Petrusic from Belgrade. This, however, was not submitted here for
22 Now, please take a look at page number 02995208, the one that the
23 Prosecutor wanted to submit. Fifth line from the bottom. If you look at
24 that line and then through to the end of the page, where it says Tabakovic
25 Mirsad, 10 January 1994, and then compare this item with page 1 of Exhibit
1 P598. From document P598, those important names of Kemal Mehmedovic and
2 Senad Golubovic are missing, as well as are some others that were written
3 in the other text, including the dates and everything else that we were
4 supposed to discuss with our witnesses.
5 I don't think the Prosecutor should refer to the EDS and the text
6 that is there because I assert that the document is a completely different
7 one. It doesn't bear any page marks, and to me it is a totally different
8 document. The Prosecutor was using only this P598. The last time it was
9 used was with Witness D005, and that was after the time the document was
10 placed on the EDS.
11 Your Honours, another matter which I deem is most important is as
12 follows, but first I want to direct your attention to the fact that this
13 portion of the text on the page that you were looking at, which was
14 tendered here, this particular text was photocopied three times, and then
15 number 1 was added to it, and this was supposed to be page 1 of document
16 P598. However, what I find is of most grave concern and gives rise to
17 suspicion is the name added, Himzo Hodzic, as well as the names that are
18 missing and are contained on page 02995208, which was offered by the
19 Prosecutor yesterday to be -- to replace the other page.
20 This person Popovic, or somebody else, if they appear here as
21 Prosecution witnesses, this will constitute something that goes beyond the
22 scope of what is allowed in all the criminal procedures, and we will try
23 to prevent this. Not only were we prevented or hindered from showing
24 these documents to the witnesses who were participants in these events, we
25 were also prevented from pointing to all the details concerning the names
1 and dates mentioned on the allegedly missing papers because the papers had
2 been thus manipulated.
3 Your Honours, whenever we receive such a document, we analyse and
4 examine every single detail contained in the document. We make searches
5 with regard to the persons mentioned, to the authors, to the whereabouts
6 of the persons, whether they were actually there where it was mentioned.
7 We were unable to do so. Again it will be said that this was a technical
8 error, it was an error that occurred during photocopying; however, if this
9 happens once more, I will not be able to be persuaded that this was in
10 fact an error.
11 We cannot be prevented from preparing the defence for our client
12 at this late stage in the proceedings because, Your Honours, we have had
13 numerous such errors in the case so far. We appeal to you, Your Honours,
14 to prevent the rights of our accused -- of the accused be infringed. He
15 is looking to you to prevent this. And one day there will be a written
16 record of all that we have been doing, of our conduct in this case.
17 Your Honour, at this stage we demand that the Prosecutor not only
18 give us access to the original of this document, but also that the
19 original be handed to our expert, Professor Bilic, who is here, to examine
20 the document.
21 Your Honour, I want to correct the record. I said that if this --
22 I see that the record says this person Popovic. I said Mr. Himzo Hodzic
23 instead of Mr. Popovic.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Ms. Sellers, do you want to comment on this,
1 MS. SELLERS: Yes, Your Honours. Yes. Good morning, Your
2 Honours. I certainly do want to comment. I think Madam Vidovic has
3 brought out several issues that the Prosecutor has alluded to in a much
4 more discreet manner. First of all, let me --
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Usher -- where is the usher? Please go and tell
6 the witness that we are taking some time --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Please go and inform the witness and apologise to
9 her, saying that we are discussing some procedural issues that do not
10 relate to her and that we will call her as soon as possible.
11 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I will try and be as brief as possible.
12 First of all, in response to Madam Vidovic's last request, they have
13 already made a request to the Prosecution to produce the original and the
14 Prosecution is right now in the process of contacting evidence unit so
15 that this original can be produced to them.
16 In terms of having Dr. Bilic examine this, if he is doing it in
17 informal consultation with Defence counsel, that's one thing. If it's
18 going to be part of any type of expertise, I would then remind the Court
19 that there's been no Rule 94 bis submission. So my understanding would be
20 that Madam Vidovic is talking about an informal consultation with him.
21 Might I say right away that the number 1 that Madam Vidovic has
22 pointed out on the page of 598, that that was put there by our
23 investigator because when -- and that's the entire problem that we were
24 talking about in terms of analysing the document that we've placed on the
25 record. We were -- we had a document where this appeared as a first page
1 and we had information and it did not make sense that this was the first
2 page, and therefore for reasons of the first page having three different
3 types of repeat on it, having information, because we had asked for
4 information concerning this document, knowing that there was other
5 information on a first page.
6 I really do not want to go into these details, they are very much
7 the work product that we have been alluding to, in my view. I wouldn't
8 want to present a document that we ourselves felt was not complete to your
9 witnesses in cross-examination. We were finally able to understand that
10 we had had the document, and after we clarified to ourselves that
11 document, which now contains what we believe is the real first page and
12 the missing pages, it is only at that time, and very much to the detriment
13 of the case of the Prosecution, that we have come forward with this.
14 I understand completely in terms of what the Defence is saying of
15 potential prejudice, but we thought it would be much more misleading and
16 inaccurate to continue to say that 598 was the integral document.
17 I do want to repeat some other things. In terms of what appears
18 to be rewriting on the front of the page, the Prosecution is not in any
19 way stating and certainly not concurring with the Defence as how to this
20 writing, rewriting occurred. I think that's a matter for evidence, that's
21 matter that might come before your Trial Chambers, but certainly it is not
22 a matter of conjecture. If it is a matter of expertise that Dr. Bilic
23 would have a statement upon, we just ask the Defence do that in the proper
25 We want to use this document. That is the reason that we have
1 asked that it be substituted, and certainly obey the Trial Chamber's
2 decision not to have it substituted but to come in in a proper method. We
3 certainly want the Defence to look at the originals and the Trial Chamber
4 to look at the original. We do not necessarily want the Defence to delay
5 beyond what is reasonable in examining this so that there would be no
6 witnesses in which to show the document to.
7 Your Honour, if there are any other questions concerning this
8 document, concerning what would be the work product connected with this
9 document, I would suggest in open court that we file something ex parte
10 with you because the work product of the Prosecution is not necessarily
11 meant for the public domain or for the information of the Defence. If it
12 is something that the Trial Chamber rightly feels that we should serve or
13 share with the Defence, we certainly do not mind filing that in a manner
14 which is confidential. We will be renewing our request to --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I think the best thing is -- would be to stop
16 the discussion on this here. If you have things to iron out, clothes to
17 iron out amongst ourselves on this and to clarify between yourselves on
18 this, please do so during the break. We'll, of course, discuss amongst
19 ourselves the submissions that you have made. It's not something that I
20 can comment here and now upon without consultation with my two -- with my
21 two colleagues, and will come back to you, and if -- when and if. Okay?
22 MR. JONES: Your Honour, I have one preliminary which I feel I
23 have to mention as well, so perhaps I can mention that now and then I can
24 also say one thing about P598 in any event.
25 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise to my
1 colleague. I just wish you to know that the Prosecutor had this document
2 on the EDS in July 2005, and there is nothing further for us to discuss
3 with them. If they had it on the EDS and they knew about this in 2005, I
4 don't understand why it was not disclosed to us in July 2005.
5 Your Honours, you can see that every day strange things are
6 happening, and this is being allowed to go. We wish to bring this trial
7 to conclusion within the boundaries of what is fair.
8 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I'm sorry to continue this, and I do
9 agree that we -- Prosecution still stands with a channel of open
10 discussion with Defence on this document. I would not like to think that
11 we arrived at a point where we cannot discuss this issue.
12 In terms of disclosure of this issue, we have found that this was
13 part of a disclosure that was, if I understand correctly, was part of a G
14 binder that we have written several motions on in the recent past,
15 explaining either failure to disclosure or when it was disclosed. In
16 looking at that disclosure is when the Prosecution finally understood the
17 existence and integrity of the document and immediately made plans not
18 only to use it but to turn it over. I believe that those issues of
19 disclosure have been taken care of in another form. Right now I think the
20 issue is not just disclosure and not primarily disclosure but the ability
21 of the Prosecution to use the document and for the Defence to use the
22 document or to contest the document.
23 In terms of the failure to not understand that the entire document
24 was there, I do have to emphasise and that is in no way an excuse of any
25 disclosure irresponsibility, although I think that the Trial Chamber's
1 addressed it, is that other than the three or four pages that we have
2 stood up openly in court and explained that we're missing, that the
3 Defence was not only completely aware of this document but my learned
4 friends made vociferous arguments against the document the first time it
5 was to be used.
6 Your Honours, we can continue this among the parties. I believe
7 that that would be the most productive way.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Jones.
9 MR. JONES: Yes. Well, my preliminary is going to be different
10 one. It concerns the scheduling for Lieutenant Colonel Fenzel, and a
11 problem has arisen with regard to him coming next week, I regret to say.
12 And just by way of background, we have had contacts with the witness for a
13 long time but it was only -- it was only recently and in fact during the
14 proofing of Lieutenant Colonel Dudley when we had contacts with the USG,
15 the American government, that it became clear that actually our contacts
16 had to be regulated or re-regulated through that government, which meant a
17 new request to contact the witness, to interview him, and also a request
18 for a Rule 70 order from the Trial Chamber. Due to the Christmas break
19 and recent holidays, including Martin Luther King Day recently, we could
20 only have the interview yesterday, and I -- I made them aware, of course,
21 our schedule from the start, that we wanted to have Lieutenant Colonel
22 Fenzel here next week, but firstly the US government is now, due partly, I
23 have to say --
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Do we need to stay in public session or --
25 MR. JONES: No, we can go into private session.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Because I don't think -- dealings with governments I
2 don't think are the concern of the public at this stage. When they become
3 so, of course I will go into public -- we'll go into open session. Yes,
4 let's go -- you agree I suppose.
5 JUDGE ESER: Yes.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's go into private session for a while.
7 [Private session]
11 Page 15354 redacted. Private session.
11 Page 15355 redacted. Private session.
7 [Open session]
8 MR. JONES: Your Honour, just while we're waiting, I suppose it's
9 really to bring out obvious point that if the Trial Chamber appointed
10 expert were a member of an institute organised in the European network of
11 forensic science institutes, then we might have a problem because --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: No, but listen, you can have as many problems as you
13 like. The choice of the expert is our own responsibility and concern, not
14 yours. No one bothered you when you chose your own expert or when
15 Mr. Wubben chose his own expert, and we will choose our own expert, and
16 then if you want to contest to our own expert if he is a member or she is
17 a member of this, then you're free to suggest to him that this is the
18 policy that this lady indicates in this letter. But otherwise, please
19 don't interfere with who we wish to -- to appoint.
20 [The witness entered court]
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam, good morning to you.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: I hope you are feeling better, and I apologise to
24 you for having kept you waiting in the room there, but we had several
25 issues to discuss which are not related to you.
1 WITNESS: SUHRA DJILOVIC [Resumed]
2 [Witness answered through interpreter]
3 JUDGE AGIUS: We are going to do our best to try and finish with
4 your testimony today. Let's hope we will. I'm sure that the parties will
5 cooperate to their utmost.
6 Yes. Ms. Sellers will now continue with -- with her examination
7 -- with her cross-examination.
8 Cross-examined by Ms. Sellers: [Continued]
9 Q. We are going to do our utmost.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: I hope so, Ms. Sellers.
11 MS. SELLERS: Right. My apologies to the usher, because right now
12 we have the ELMO that, when I'm standing up, is completely blocking
13 Ms. Djilovic's face. I will start asking questions while you're doing
15 Q. Good morning, Mrs. Djilovic.
16 A. Good morning.
17 Q. I would ask today because of the -- what's going to be quite
18 crucial time constraints, that if you could keep your answers as brief as
19 possible, that would assist us, and I in no way want to indicate that the
20 Prosecution does not want to hear what you have to say, but I would like
21 to convey to you that I believe that both the Prosecution but, more
22 important, the Trial Chamber understands the context of the situation of
23 Srebrenica in those days, and therefore when you are answering questions,
24 we will have the context of your situation as a -- as an understandable
25 background so you need not explain that at times to us.
1 MS. SELLERS: I would ask that P4 be placed in front of the
2 witness. That's where we left off yesterday. And at the same time could
3 I ask that D986 be placed in front of the witness, and I believe that that
4 will facilitate the examination. Yes. It's D986 and P4. P4, I
5 understand, is on Sanction. I'm trying to use the Defence exhibit because
6 I believe possibly the witness will be more familiar with it since it was
7 used during proofing and at the session. And D986 I understand was the
8 handwritten document that the Defence used.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, but I have never seen this
10 document. I don't remember this. The protocol is unclear to me.
11 Q. Right. Madam --
12 A. If I may. Under 10, it says here, "TO staff." As far as I know,
13 under 10, the services attached to the Srebrenica TO couldn't have been
14 there. If there was a staff I didn't know about, I don't know, but as far
15 as I know, there was no TO staff in 1992. The war hospital, the signals
16 and information service, the military police, all this is under 10, A, B
17 and C. All these services were attached to the municipal War Presidency,
18 and they could in no way have been attached to a TO staff of Srebrenica
19 that I know nothing about.
20 I know very well that all these three institutions were attached
21 to the municipal executive board. Avdo Hasanovic, I remember well, was in
22 charge of the hospital. Hamed Alic in charge of information. And as for
23 this military police, which I always felt was actually a civilian police,
24 the person in charge was Mirzet Halilovic. That's what I know about this.
25 Q. Okay. Thank you.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Ms. Sellers, because for -- in the
2 record we have given the impression that P4 is on Sanction. In actual
3 fact there is nothing on Sanction, at least on my screen.
4 MS. SELLERS: I'm sorry, Your Honour. I see it on our screen.
5 There might have been a technical difficulty. I believe that --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: It is on the ELMO, but it's not on Sanction. It's
7 the other one that you have to press, Judge Eser, the second one on the
8 left. The one in the middle. Yeah, that one. It is now, yes. It is now
9 on Sanction.
10 MS. SELLERS: All right.
11 Q. Mrs. Djilovic, my question to you -- and thank you for that
12 information. My question to you under the services attached to the
13 Srebrenica TO is that to your knowledge, as you've just testified, you're
14 unaware that there were any services attached to the TO. Yes or no.
15 A. As far as I know, I didn't even know there was a TO staff in 1992.
16 I'm not aware of that at all. I'm not aware of its existence at all.
17 Q. Okay. And, Madam Djilovic, that just means that in terms of Hamed
18 Alic being attached to a TO staff, you would just simply agree with me
19 that you weren't aware of that; right?
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Judge Eser.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was aware, yeah. No, no. I know
22 that he was in charge of the information service, and this service
23 belonged to the municipal War Presidency, not to the TO staff, because as
24 far as I know, there wasn't a TO staff in existence at that time. That's
25 all I know about this document.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Just one moment, Judge Eser, because I had noticed
2 Ms. Vidovic standing. Maybe you can --
3 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the witness has
4 clarified what she clearly stated before.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thought so much, actually, but anyway,
6 let's hear what Judge Eser wishes to state.
7 JUDGE ESER: Perhaps it may be a question of language again. If I
8 read the English version of P4, number 10, it only speaks of Srebrenica TO
9 and not of "TO staff," and I always thought there was a difference between
10 Territorial Defence and Territorial Defence staff. So if you please look
11 -- I think even in the B/C/S version it only speaks of TO Srebrenica, not
12 of TO Srebrenica in something like that.
13 The heading speaks of --
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Srebrenica TO --
15 JUDGE ESER: But number 10 does not speak of staff.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no, no.
17 JUDGE ESER: It only speaks of -- I just ask whether that means
18 something, the difference between "TO staff" and "TO" without "staff."
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that whoever drew up this
20 document -- well, I -- I'm not really familiar with Territorial Defence,
21 but in the heading, it says "TO Defence staff," and all these services are
22 supposed to be attached to it. But even had there been just the TO, not
23 the TO staff here, they couldn't have been attached to that either; they
24 could only have been attached to the municipal War Presidency.
25 I don't know if that's clear.
1 JUDGE ESER: It's okay. Thank you.
2 MS. SELLERS:
3 Q. Madam Djilovic, would you now look at document D986, which is also
4 in front of you, and do you recall that you looked at that Defence
5 document during your proofing session and also during your direct
6 testimony? Correct, ma'am?
7 A. Yes, that's correct.
8 Q. Yes. And when you looked at that list, you noted that these were
9 members of the War Presidency and you testified at that time that Naser
10 Oric, who is on the list, was a member of the War Presidency. Do you
11 remember that, Ms. Djilovic?
12 A. Yes, he was.
13 Q. Right. Now, you --
14 A. He was a member of the municipal War Presidency, but this document
15 doesn't mean anything to me. It doesn't say who received it or who
16 delivered it. There's no heading. To me, it looks like a copy or a
17 forgery. This is not a proper document, in my view. It doesn't say who
18 is sending it, it doesn't have an addressee. It's more like a draft.
19 Q. Would you agree that the information in this document is what you
20 came to know in terms of members of the War Presidency when you joined the
21 Municipal Staff?
22 A. Can you please clarify? I don't understand the question.
23 Q. Yes. You testified on direct when you looked at this document
24 that the information in the document was correct. Is that your testimony
25 today or would you like to change your testimony?
1 A. No. No. That's correct. When I started working, there was the
2 municipal War Presidency in place. These persons were already in the
3 municipal War Presidency. But what we're talking about now is the
5 Q. Is the information in the document correct to your understanding?
6 I'm talking about the information in the document. Yes or no.
7 A. Yes. Yes, they're correct. These were the members of the
8 municipal War Presidency, the persons listed here, at the time when I was
10 Q. Right. And included in the information on the document that you
11 were shown to by the Defence, it says Naser Oric, and next to it says,
12 "Commander TO."
13 A. I've only just noticed this.
14 Q. Okay.
15 A. I didn't know that there was a Territorial Defence. I wasn't
16 aware of that now. I didn't think, and I don't think that the institution
17 itself of Territorial Defence existed as far as I knew, and I based my
18 knowledge on what I was able to see when I started working.
19 You can see here it says TO, but this doesn't mean anything to me
20 because this has no heading, and I wouldn't consider it to be a document.
21 I don't believe anyone working in the administration would think that this
22 signifies anything. Anybody could have written this. The names are here,
24 Q. So can I just ask you one brief question, then: In relationship
25 to Naser Oric's name on this document that you were shown by the Defence,
1 you never discussed whether he was a commander of the TO staff or not in
2 relationship to this document?
3 A. As far as I know, Naser Oric was never commander of the TO,
4 especially not in 1992. I know that he was always at the front line.
5 Whenever he came to the War Presidency municipal building he was wearing
6 boots and very soon he'd be out again. So he came in, stayed briefly
8 I worked for the municipal War Presidency. And as for the
9 Territorial Defence, I don't believe it could have existed, especially not
10 in 1992. But this could also be true for 1993, in view of the general
11 situation in Srebrenica. There were great numbers of refugees, people
12 were confused.
13 Q. Excuse me, I'm going to have to ask you to shorten your answers
14 and just answer my next question, please, yes or no. Then do you know why
15 Naser Oric was a member of the War Presidency? Do you know why he was
16 chosen to be a member of the War Presidency?
17 A. Well, probably just as all the other members, he was elected by --
18 by the local group leaders, those who were around Srebrenica.
19 Q. Okay. So he would at least have been among the leaders of
20 Srebrenica. That's your testimony. Right, Mrs. Djilovic? Or not. Just
21 say yes or no. Fine.
22 A. No. He was not among the leaders, one of the leaders at the time.
23 Q. Okay.
24 A. You have confused me a bit. These members here were members on
25 paper for the most part. They were trying to do what they could to help
1 the refugees and the residents of Srebrenica. Psychologically, it was
2 important to organise something for the sake of the people. When the
3 people heard that there was someone working in the municipality, it made
4 them feel better, and then they had someone to address their needs to for
5 food, fuel, clothing. Whatever was done was done for the sake of the
6 people of Srebrenica. Believe me, Naser Oric did the same, tried to help
7 people, just as Jusuf did, Becir did, Halilovic, Bogilovic; all of them.
8 Q. Thank you. That clarifies that for us.
9 MS. SELLERS: I would now ask if those documents could be removed
10 from the witness and the witness could be shown P42.
11 Q. Ms. Djilovic, the document you have before you is dated the 1st of
12 July, 1992, and if you look through the document, it's a decision to
13 appoint and form members of the War Presidency. I would draw your
14 attention to Article 4, where you see that it says, "The following are
15 hereby appointed members of the War Presidency." And that includes
16 Hajrudin Avdic, Hamdija Fejzic, Resid Efendic, Naser Oric, Dzemaludin
17 Becirevic, Jusuf Halilovic, Becir Bogilovic, Mirsad Dudic, and it
18 continues on the next page, Lefik Mandzic - which I believe might be a
19 misspelling - Aziz Nekic, and Senahid Tabakovic.
20 Now, from your testimony, you would agree that these were persons
21 who became members of the Srebrenica War Presidency; isn't that correct,
22 Ms. Djilovic?
23 A. Yes, except for Senahid Tabakovic, who was not on the municipal
24 War Presidency from the very start. He was appointed member of the War
25 Presidency at a later stage. Therefore, he wasn't there from the start.
1 That is to say Senahid Tabakovic. But the rest, yes, they were.
2 Q. Thank you. And would you also agree that under Article 5 it's
3 correct that Hajrudin Avdic was appointed to be president of the
5 A. Just a moment. Yes, that's correct. I was not working at the
6 time. I came in later. But nevertheless, I know that Senahid Tabakovic
7 wasn't there. Hajrudin Avdic was already president of the municipal War
8 Presidency of Srebrenica. The only thing that is not correct in this
9 document is that Senahid Tabakovic was not there on the 1st of July, but
10 that's as far as I can comment on this; I did not type this out.
11 Q. Yes, I was going to ask you that later. But you can also confirm
12 that Resid Efendic, as you testified earlier, became the secretary of the
13 War Presidency? That's under Article 6.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And under Article --
16 A. He was secretary of the War Presidency.
17 Q. Yes. Right. Under Article 7, I assume that you would not have
18 any knowledge that Naser Oric was appointed commander of the armed forces.
19 Just yes or no, please.
20 A. Whether I knew. Well, I cannot give you a yes or no answer,
21 because I really do not know that there was Territorial Defence and that
22 there were some commanders. I really thought at the time that it did not
24 Q. Thank you. Fine. We also understand that sometime you can say
25 yes or no or sometime you do not know, but you do know that, and I'm just
1 going to say, under Article 8, Hamdija Fejzic was appointed to the
2 Executive Committee. I believe you testified about that earlier.
3 A. Yes, yes.
4 Q. And there are other appointments that, if I look at your testimony
5 concerning Mr. Becirevic, Mr. Bogilovic, and Mr. Halilovic, that you
6 testified that indeed they held these positions in the War Presidency;
7 secretary for the economy, public security station, and civilian
9 A. Yes. At the beginning, they were only members, and it was only
10 later that they were appointed to these posts. That was my understanding
11 of it.
12 Q. Now, do you by any chance know who was acting in any capacity on
13 the War Presidency whose name is not here?
14 A. I don't know what time period you have in mind. Are you referring
15 to this list?
16 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... let me clarify that, and I
17 believe in the transcript I meant whose name. When you arrived at the end
18 of July, was there someone who was on the War Presidency who you don't see
19 in this document?
20 A. No. No, no one.
21 Q. Thank you very much.
22 MS. SELLERS: I would ask this document to be removed and --
23 A. Give me a moment, please.
24 MS. SELLERS:
25 Q. Certainly.
1 A. If you could just give me a moment. I believe that Mirzet
2 Halilovic was there as well. I know that Senahid Tabakovic wasn't there,
3 but Mirzet was. I meant Mirzet Halilovic. He was a member of the
4 municipal War Presidency.
5 Q. Okay. Thank you very much.
6 A. I apologise for not having grasped that immediately, but it took
7 some time to look at the list.
8 Q. That's absolutely fine. Thank you.
9 MS. SELLERS: I would now ask that Ms. Djilovic be shown
10 Prosecution Exhibit 109. I believe this is also Exhibit -- Prosecution
11 Exhibit 270.
12 Q. Now --
13 A. Municipal Staff.
14 Q. Now, this is a document that is dated the 2nd of July, 1992,
15 decision -- subject matter is decision.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Excuse me, I'm going to ask you a question in relationship to it.
18 The decisions of the Territorial Defence Staff of Srebrenica. Now,
19 Ms. Djilovic, I know you've testified that you're unaware, you don't know
20 whether there was a Territorial Defence Staff, and given that testimony
21 that you've just rendered to the Trial Chamber, I did not want to ask you
22 about members on the Territorial staff. I'm asking you about -- not about
23 the existence of the Territorial staff. I'm asking you about references
24 to things that you do know. Therefore, I would like to go to the second
25 paragraph of that document, and it says the War Presidency -- "Since the
1 previous War Presidency had left the territory of the municipality, a new
2 War Presidency was formed ..." Now you would agree a new War Presidency
3 was formed at the beginning of July. Yes or no. This is in accordance
4 with your testimony.
5 A. If we're talking about these documents, then I'm afraid that I
6 cannot say anything. Everything related to these documents is unknown to
7 me, especially the fact that it says the Municipal Staff of the
8 Territorial Defence.
9 As far as the Territorial Defence is concerned, there's nothing I
10 can tell you, because I wasn't performing any other duties than those of
11 the -- those that came under the War Presidency. When I look at this
12 document, it seems there's the head -- there's the heading that is a bit
14 JUDGE AGIUS: You're not answering the question.
15 Ms. Sellers, please rephrase your question. Make it more
16 specific. The witness may have misunderstood you --
17 MS. SELLERS: Yes.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: -- but --
19 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, let me withdraw that --
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Go through --
21 MS. SELLERS: I was trying to explain I'm not talking about the
22 Territorial Defence.
23 Q. Let me withdraw the question I asked you and let me ask
24 specifically. Let's go down to the third paragraph in this document, and
25 it says: "A decision was made to form wartime military police; Mirzet
1 Halilovic was appointed commander of this unit." Ms. Djilovic, that is
2 something that you know about and you agree that happened at the beginning
3 -- around this time period, in 1992, in Srebrenica; correct?
4 A. I can give you only the following answer: I've already given a
5 lot of information yesterday concerning the military police, and I stand
6 by what I said yesterday, and I'm sorry that I cannot really provide you
7 with anything new in relation to this document because it is unknown to
9 As far as military police is concerned, I stand by what I said
10 yesterday. I believe I was clear yesterday. The military police could
11 not have existed because we didn't have an army. It could have existed
12 only on paper. As far as I know, it all came under the civilian police.
13 They all worked together and came to the meetings together. It was only
14 done on paper. It may have been the War Presidency's wish to have all
15 these institutions functioning, however, the entire situation was totally
16 improvised, as I said yesterday. It wasn't properly functioning.
17 It doesn't say who the addressee of the document is, and it seems
18 to me to be sort of a -- a sort of copy.
19 Q. Madam Djilovic --
20 A. It doesn't really look like a document, and I cannot comment on
22 Q. Thank you very much. I'm asking about some information in the
23 document, but thank you for your comments on the document.
24 So you don't know whether the military police existed or not.
25 Would that be your testimony? Because I was rather -- I was rather
1 confused by your answer. Can you say yes or no; do you know whether it
2 existed or not?
3 A. Yes, the military police existed within the civilian police, but
4 it existed on paper rather than in reality. They called it military
5 police, but in fact it worked together with the civilian police. There
6 was no difference between the two. They did the same job, to the best of
7 my knowledge. But I was there, and I was able to see, and that's the only
8 thing I can tell you, what I saw and observed.
9 Q. Thank you. Now, I would ask you to go down to the next to last
10 paragraph in this document, where it says, "Hamed Alic was appointed to
11 the chief of this service," and the paragraph above refers to
12 communication and information service.
13 Now, my question is: The last sentence says: "This service has a
14 task to ensure communication with the BH TO Staffs and the Regional Staff,
15 and ensure the rest of the time with families of TO combatants and other
17 Did you know that Hamed Alic's information communication service
18 was available to both the military and to civilians? Did you know that?
19 Yes or no.
20 A. I know that Hamed Alic was chief of the communication information
21 service and that he was at the disposal of the entire population in
22 Srebrenica. They were there to provide services to all the people living
23 in Srebrenica.
24 I -- as for the army, I guarantee to you that there was no army in
25 Srebrenica. There were local groups defending their own villages.
1 I'm sorry that I'm unable to provide to you a better answer. I
2 know that he was there to serve all the people who were there. Everything
3 went through the service and through the municipal War Presidency.
4 Q. Thank you very much.
5 MS. SELLERS: We can remove this document from the witness now. I
6 would now ask the witness be shown Defence film on the War Presidency. In
7 just one minute I'll have the number of that exhibit. It's D1003, and it
8 will be in Sanction.
9 [Videotape played]
10 MS. SELLERS:
11 Q. Now, this segment of the video, Madam Djilovic, you would agree
12 that that military police was a military police that appeared to be
13 active? It was -- the discussion was preventing shooting, and the
14 discussion was their actions, I believe, in Potocari. Would you agree
15 that this was more than just a paper military police but, according to the
16 War Presidency meeting, an active military police?
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Before she answers, for the record, the
18 witness was shown an extract from this video from 00.00 to 00.27.6.
19 MS. SELLERS:
20 Q. Ms. Djilovic, did you understand my question?
21 A. Could you repeat it, please? Could you repeat the question,
23 Q. Certainly. The question I asked - and maybe let me simplify it -
24 from looking at this segment of the video of the War Presidency meeting,
25 would you agree that the military police was a military police that
1 appeared to be active? The discussion was preventing shooting that they
2 did, and they were discussing their actions. It existed more than just on
4 A. No actions were involved here. I've said so yesterday, but I can
5 repeat it here again.
6 Q. No, that's fine.
7 A. They were discussing Mirzet Halilovic and the shooting at this
8 particular meeting, and you were able to see that. Hajrudin sent
9 Halilovic over to Potocari to see what this was about, because you know
10 that we thought that every single bullet was precious for the population,
11 the civilian population living in the area. He sent him over to see what
12 this was about. This was no action. It was, rather, an intervention on
13 his part to see who was shooting and why.
14 Mirzet Halilovic also worked within the structure of the civilian
15 police. He went out into the field, they wouldn't give him ammunition,
16 and then he beat up one of them. And then what sort of police can this be
17 under such conditions? You have to understand that the situation --
18 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
19 A. -- was such --
20 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... to maintain answers much
21 shorter. And if you misunderstand me, I was not speaking of actions in
22 what seems to be the terminology of an action being an attack or a battle,
23 I said "active." Maybe there was a misunderstanding. So can I ask you
24 this: Do you think this video is only talking about Mirzet Halilovic and
25 not about the military police?
1 A. I heard what they were saying, but I know what happened and the
2 case that they're discussing. I apologise for having misunderstood you.
3 I thought you were saying that they were going to Potocari into action. I
4 apologise, but I must have misunderstood you.
5 Q. My apologies for not having a direct question.
6 MS. SELLERS: Your Honours, I will be continuing with this video,
7 and I think that maybe we should just continue this after the break.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
9 MS. SELLERS: Okay.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll have a break now. In the meantime, if you
11 could let us have the Rule 70 motion as early as possible, I'll start
12 working on it straight away, because I think we need to move there.
13 MR. JONES: Thank you, Your Honour. We have it here in court.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but --
15 MR. JONES: File it, I mean, immediately with the Registry.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: I think you've missed the point. File it whenever
17 you like, but if you have a courtesy copy of it which you can let me have
18 now, I can start working on it while the filing and delivery process is
19 ongoing. All right.
20 Yes, 30 minutes.
21 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
22 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. [B/C/S on English channel]. I can hear it
24 from here. I can hear it from here.
25 Let me say a few words [B/C/S on English channel]. Yes,
1 Ms. Vidovic.
2 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we can hear no
3 interpretation at present. The witness has no interpretation.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Then it could be -- Usher, did you turn the volume
5 completely down? I don't know. I mean -- can you hear now?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: And you, Ms. Djilovic, can you hear me? I mean, can
8 you hear the interpretation?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, now, I can.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. That's perfect.
11 Two things: We started the ball rolling on your motion, even
12 though it has not arrived. We don't know, of course, what the stand the
13 Defence will be taking on it will be, so we are working on the assumption
14 that it is the normal stand that you have taken in such instances as in
15 the previous case we had. We're working on that assumption. But if --
16 whatever your position will be, of course it's -- we can't interfere with
17 that. Please let us have it by the end of the day, if necessary -- if
19 MS. SELLERS: Right. Your Honour, we're going to be looking at
20 that. We will try and expedite that and look at certain issues during the
21 next two sessions.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
23 MS. SELLERS: If Your Honours would allow us to file a very brief
24 possibly courtesy copy with you by this afternoon --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: I think it would be better, yes.
1 MS. SELLERS: -- and that could be formally filed tomorrow
2 morning, I think --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay, that will be much better.
4 Secondly, now let's go into private session for a short while,
5 please, because I need to clear this up with the witness.
6 [Private session]
11 Pages 15376-15379 redacted. Private session.
24 [Open session]
25 JUDGE AGIUS: We are in open session now. So, Ms. Sellers.
1 MS. SELLERS: Thank you, Your Honours.
2 Q. All right. Mrs. Djilovic, we were watching a video before the
3 break. I would ask that you look at your monitor again. We are going to
4 play the video through again, and then I will ask you some questions, and
5 I will ask you, for expediency, for time's sake, we'll try and keep our
6 answers limited, and I might have to on occasion stop you if you are
7 giving an answer that appears to be quite lengthy.
8 MS. SELLERS: Can we run the video again, please.
9 [Videotape played]
10 JUDGE AGIUS: For the record, the segment played from the video
11 D1003 is -- starts at 00.00 to 01.59.8.
12 MS. SELLERS: Yes.
13 Q. Now, Ms. Djilovic, my question is do you agree that they were
14 discussing at the meeting the military police?
15 A. The discussion here was about Mirzet Halilovic, not about the
16 military police.
17 Q. Okay. So is it your testimony that what we just saw was not a
18 discussion that was discussing the military police? You're saying no?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Okay. Now, would you agree --
21 A. Not about the military police but about Mirzet Halilovic
22 personally. It was to do with the Potocari incident and Mirzet Halilovic
23 who was there on paper and, I don't know but --
24 Q. Mrs. Djilovic, I have to stop you here because I understand
25 exactly what you have testified about before but I'd like you to
1 concentrate on answering these questions.
2 So the discussion we saw on the videotape was not about the
3 military police. That's your testimony; correct?
4 A. I know that the discussion was about Mirzet Halilovic and the
5 intervention or, rather, the incident that occurred at Potocari.
6 Q. Ms. Djilovic, Mirzet Halilovic's name came up in the discussion.
7 They talked about him. Didn't they also talk about the military police?
8 A. I really -- I myself really cannot say that there was a military
9 police in existence.
10 Q. Okay.
11 A. In my view, it was not the military police. I'm only speaking on
12 my own behalf.
13 Q. Fine. Let me ask another question concerning it. Would you agree
14 that this videotape was also discussing the issue related to curfew?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. All right. Thank you.
17 A. There were constant attempts at introducing a curfew. It was
18 impossible, though, because people were living out in the streets. This
19 idea of a curfew was never implemented simply because it was impossible to
20 do so.
21 Q. Okay. So while there might be discussions about curfew, you would
22 agree it would be difficult to implement or enforce a curfew, correct?
23 A. Yes, yes. There was the desire to introduce a curfew. This was
24 not just an idea, there were also decisions to that effect, but they could
25 not have been implemented. There were many people who stayed outdoors, in
1 the parks, on the streets. Had it been possible, it probably would have
2 been carried out.
3 Q. Yes. Thank you. I will come back to that --
4 A. And this was not just an idea that was raised once but on several
6 Q. Yes. An important issue for the War Presidency. That would be
7 your testimony; right?
8 A. This was also important for the people.
9 Q. Okay.
10 A. But it was impossible.
11 Q. Thank you. Now, would you also agree that in this videotape they
12 were discussing the fact of Mirzet Halilovic beating people?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Okay.
15 A. That was the incident at Potocari.
16 Q. Yes.
17 A. He beat up a lad and that's why he was chased away, together with
18 his men, and that was the motive for summoning -- for scheduling the
20 Q. Thank you. Excuse me for cutting you off. We understand some of
21 your testimony from direct.
22 Now, you would also agree that on the videotape they were
23 discussing incidents that happened in Potocari, and they said that the
24 representative from Potocari was there.
25 A. Yes. That's what was said. There was a representative from
1 Potocari. I heard him say so.
2 Could you clarify your question? I did hear him say that there
3 was a representative from Potocari.
4 Q. That was my question, ma'am. Do you know who the representative
5 from Potocari was?
6 A. Believe me, I don't. I don't know what he meant to say when he
7 said a representative from Potocari. I -- I didn't understand. There was
8 nothing else that he said that would clarify this to me.
9 Q. Okay. Now, do you also agree that within the videotape there was
10 discussion concerning an agreement made with Naser Oric? They said Naser
12 A. Could I be played this part --
13 Q. Certainly.
14 A. -- that the gentleman said concerning Naser?
15 Q. Certainly.
16 A. In order to be able to give you an accurate answer, I have to see
17 and hear this again.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, we need to do that. And I suggest we start at
19 the beginning and go through it. It's two minutes.
20 [Videotape played]
21 MS. SELLERS:
22 Q. Did you see that portion of the video? Now, my question is, and
23 you would agree, that they're discussing an agreement or something that
24 Naser Oric agreed to in this video?
25 A. No. I only heard him say, and probably everybody heard the same,
1 "I told Naser Oric." Now, what he had told him or what he meant to say by
2 saying that, I don't know. I only heard him say, "I told Naser Oric." I
3 cannot comment upon it any further because I don't know what he meant when
4 he said that, I'm sorry.
5 Q. And did he also say, "And Naser agreed"?
6 A. Yes, he did say that as well, but I don't know what it was that
7 Naser agreed with. I wasn't even supposed to know those things. I was a
8 technical secretary, and I explained yesterday what my duties were.
9 I'm sorry that I'm not able to give you any further information.
10 Q. Now --
11 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Ms. Sellers. We would like to see again
12 that portion of -- that segment of the video that we have just seen,
13 without interruptions, please.
14 MS. SELLERS: Certainly.
15 [Videotape played]
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
17 MS. SELLERS:
18 Q. Madam Djilovic, would you agree that in here the discussion that
19 they're speaking of, they agreed, "I told Naser Oric," is about the
20 military police?
21 A. My understanding was that they were talking about the police. The
22 person said, "The police came," and so on and so forth. It is possible
23 that they were discussing the military police, but it was only on paper.
24 In reality, in practice, it did not work properly. The fact that it
25 existed on paper was an expression of the desire to have the military
2 Q. And then one other question concerning this issue on the video.
3 You agree that that was Mr. Avdic who was talking when reference was made
4 to Naser?
5 A. To be on the safe side, could I be shown the video clip again to
6 see who is the speaker, because I only heard the voice. I'd like to see
7 the face.
8 [Videotape played]
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. That's Mr. Hajrudin Avdic,
10 president of the municipal War Presidency.
11 MS. SELLERS:
12 Q. Okay. Thank you. Now, I would like you to once again look at
13 this video, and as you're looking at the video, I would like you to
14 concentrate on how many persons are present with writing material, meaning
15 paper or pencils. Can we show it.
16 [Videotape played]
17 MS. SELLERS:
18 Q. Now, Ms. Djilovic, did the War Presidency supply them with the
19 paper, or did those men bring paper or notebooks with them to the meeting?
20 A. Believe me, I don't know. I don't think the War Presidency had
21 supplies to spare to give them. Everybody was trying to get by, as
22 regards the material, to try and find for themselves. I know that the War
23 Presidency did not have enough paper. I have said that we were rummaging
24 cabinets for paper, and whatever we were able to find was in very small
25 quantities, quite insignificant.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 A. I really don't know where they get the -- where they got the paper
4 Q. Thank you. But a significant number of men in the room appeared
5 to have paper or notebooks and pencils. Yes or no, Ms. Djilovic?
6 A. As far as I was able to see, most of them had a piece of paper in
7 front of them. I wasn't real little paying attention to pencils or pens,
8 but most of them had some paper in front of them. This was a meeting, and
9 it was only normal for them to have a piece of paper to make notes from
10 the meeting.
11 Q. Thank you. And the last question: In terms of Resid Efendic, did
12 you note in the video that he was taking -- it appeared that he was
13 writing on a notebook during this discussion.
14 A. Yes. Resid Efendic was secretary of the municipal War Presidency.
15 He kept the minutes from this meeting. I said so yesterday, and I stand
16 by what I said because this is how it actually was.
17 Q. Okay. I would now like to ask you one or two questions about
18 Mirzet Halilovic. You testified about the incident of him beating persons
19 up. Was Mirzet Halilovic a person who, when he drank, would become
20 violent? Yes or no.
21 A. Yes. When intoxicated, he was a totally different person. That
22 was the reason why he was removed from the police altogether.
23 Q. Now, this was known in the month of August that Mirzet Halilovic
24 would beat people up and would become violent. You'd agree with me;
1 A. Yes. He beat people, including the Muslims. He did not
2 distinguish between people when drunk. This was an object of discussion
3 very often. He himself was sorry about his condition, he did not wish to
4 be that way, but he drank and then acted the way he did.
5 Q. And people who were members or who attended meetings of the War
6 Presidency were aware that Mirzet Halilovic would become violent at times?
7 A. Before he was admitted on the police force, they did not know of
8 this nature of his. They probably would not have admitted it had they
9 known. In general, he was a decent lad, a sportsman. He must have been
10 affected by the war. That must have been the reason why he started
11 drinking and being violent.
12 Q. Ms. Djilovic, by August when this video was taken, it was known to
13 members of the War Presidency that Mirzet Halilovic could be a violent
14 person. Yes or no.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Jones.
16 MR. JONES: Yes, Your Honour, I think we need to know whether the
17 question is confined to the members of the War Presidency in that meeting
18 where this discussion took place or whether Ms. Sellers is asking this
19 witness whether she knows that every member of the War Presidency knew of
20 this feature of Mr. Halilovic.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that's a fair objection or --
22 MS. SELLERS: Yes. Certainly, Your Honour, we can break the
23 question down in two.
24 Q. The members of the War Presidency who were present at this meeting
25 knew that Mirzet Halilovic could have tendencies of being violent. Yes or
1 no, Ms. Djilovic.
2 A. I don't know whether all of them knew. I did not go about asking
3 them whether they knew of him being violent, but probably the meeting
4 itself was scheduled in order to inform them thereof and to talk about the
5 entire matter and possibly about his replacement. His behaviour must have
6 been the motive for this meeting, so even those who hadn't known about
7 this prior to the meeting must have learnt about it at the meeting.
8 Q. And would you also agree that people in Potocari, from what we can
9 gather by this video, probably also knew of the beating incident that
10 Mirzet Halilovic was involved in?
11 A. Do you mean the people in Potocari?
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. Believe me, I do not know. I didn't have any contacts with the
14 people over there, and I really have no way of knowing what they thought.
15 I'm sorry that I'm not able to answer your question.
16 Q. Would you agree, from looking at that video, that the military
17 police that went to Potocari during this incident were probably aware that
18 Mirzet Halilovic was violent in the very least on that occasion?
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Jones again.
20 MR. JONES: No, it's simply that in answering the question of
21 whether it was military police or Mirzet Halilovic, the witness's only
22 spoke of Mirzet Halilovic, so this question assumes that there were other
23 members of the military police, which the witness has denied, so I think
24 it's going to be difficult for her to answer that question.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, she hasn't actually denied but I don't think
1 she was specifically asked as to whether -- we're talking about just one
2 individual there in Potocari or more than one individual. So --
3 MR. JONES: Perhaps if that's clarified, that would help.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I think we need to clarify that first and then
5 we'll move -- yes, Ms. Sellers.
6 MS. SELLERS: Yes, Your Honour. I would suggest that we might
7 have to play --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: If it's important. Because if it's not important,
9 let's move forward.
10 MS. SELLERS: -- play the video again.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: But what the video says is one thing. What the
12 witness says is another.
13 MS. SELLERS: Well, the witness -- I don't want to discuss the
14 characterisation of her evidence but the witness has indicated certain
15 things about the military police as related to this video, and my question
17 Q. Madam Djilovic, if you know, do you know whether the military
18 police was aware that Mirzet Halilovic was a violent person, that members
19 of the military police were aware that Mirzet Halilovic was a violent
21 A. First of all, I didn't know that there was a unit of the military
22 police, that it existed, so I cannot tell you whether members of the unit
23 knew of this. I assert again that the military police in the strict sense
24 of the term did not exist, only on paper. There were -- these were men
25 who also worked in the civilian police.
1 To put it simply, the military police did not exist. There may
2 have been attempts at constituting one, like by terming it, calling it
3 that way. I don't know of any military police. I know of the police that
4 worked at the public security station and that they all worked together.
5 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... I'm going to have to try and
6 limit you so we'll be able to finish your testimony today.
7 So my last question on this issue: So would it be your testimony
8 that Mirzet Halilovic violent behaviour was not common knowledge? Is that
9 what your testimony would be?
10 A. Why would they have scheduled the meeting unless it became known
11 that he was violent? He wasn't violent otherwise, only when he was drunk,
12 and that's why the meeting was scheduled, in order to solve the Mirzet
13 Halilovic problem.
14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the last two questions
15 were really invitations -- was really inviting the witness to speculate
16 what the police knew, what the people of Potocari knew.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really cannot know what someone
18 thought of this or that. I can only tell you what I myself saw.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. My attention --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This places me in an uncomfortable
22 JUDGE AGIUS: My attention is being drawn by the Victims and
23 Witnesses Unit. They wish to know whether they can -- whether we need the
24 next witness here or whether we can send him back to the hotel for the
1 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I think I'll try and finish with this
2 witness today. I do not believe that we will be able to start with
3 another witness today.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Do you share that assessment,
5 Ms. Vidovic?
6 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I am not opposed to the
7 idea to start the examination of the witness tomorrow, but I would really
8 wish this witness to finish her testimony today, because the Victims and
9 Witnesses Section informed me that the witness doesn't really feel well,
10 that she would like to go home today, and I would really like my learned
11 friends to keep this in mind, and I will keep that in mind for my
13 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So Victims and -- VWS section can take
14 the next witness to the hotel, and we will proceed and tentatively do our
15 best to finish.
16 MS. SELLERS: Yes, Your Honour. It's certainly my intention.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you both, Ms. Vidovic and Ms. Sellers.
18 MS. SELLERS: I would ask now that Prosecution Exhibit P590 be
19 placed before the witness.
20 Q. Ms. Djilovic, if you would look at the document. I believe it is
21 in Sanction but also I think there's a copy on the ELMO next to you. It's
22 a document Armed Forces of Bosnia-Herzegovina military police station
23 Srebrenica, list of military police staff. The first person on the list
24 is Mirzet Halilovic. If you would turn to the second page, you will see
25 that at the end of the list it says, "commander of the military police,
1 Mirzet Halilovic," and then there's a date, Srebrenica, 31st July, 1992.
2 Now, I would ask you to look at this document and to please tell
3 the Trial Chamber now, after seeing this document, would it still be your
4 testimony that there were no other police officers, military police
5 members, that were in the Srebrenica municipality in the end of July 1992?
6 A. I stand by my earlier statement. I find this list quite
7 incredible that we had as many police officers. This list contains some
8 deletions. Something was added. I really cannot comment on this
10 Q. Can you comment --
11 A. Anyone could have drafted this. I'm really sorry, I'm not able to
12 give you an answer. The list could have been drawn at a later stage. It
13 could have been typed, retyped, added or altered. I've never seen it
14 before. That's why I cannot comment on it. I'm sorry.
15 Q. Ms. Djilovic, when you're saying the list could have been typed,
16 retyped, added, altered, this is speculation on your part, isn't it?
17 A. I haven't said that.
18 Q. No, that's my question.
19 A. I haven't said that. No.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Move to the next question, Ms. Sellers.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have not said speculations.
22 MS. SELLERS:
23 Q. No, ma'am, you didn't say speculations. That is precisely my
24 question to you. Okay.
25 A. No.
1 Q. I just want to draw your attention to number 61 on the list, Sead
2 Ademovic. Do you know this person?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Can I also draw your attention to number 15 on the list, Selahudin
6 A. No. I don't know him.
7 Q. Now, you worked for Judge Omerovic in 1993; is that correct?
8 A. In 1993, not from the very start. I worked there in late 1993. I
9 didn't work there the entire 1993.
10 Q. Do you know whether Judge Omerovic had a cousin who also was
11 living in Srebrenica?
12 A. Believe me, I don't. I worked only with Judge Omerovic, and I
13 know him only. Believe me, I didn't have the time to get to know his
14 relatives. I had my own family. I had my parents to attend to. I had to
15 visit my parents, go back to my home and find food, fuel. I didn't have
16 time to even see relatives. I wasn't even interested in --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Sellers, Judge Eser would like to know what was
18 the first name of Judge Omerovic.
19 MS. SELLERS: It was Mensud, I believe, Your Honour, Mensud
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Mensud.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] By your leave, Mensud Omerovic is
23 the person I worked with when finally conditions were created.
24 MS. SELLERS: I would ask that the document be taken away from the
25 witness at this point.
1 Q. I would now ask you, in reference to the testimony that you gave
2 to the Defence attorney, you said that there were a group of soldiers that
3 came from Tuzla in August of 1992. Wasn't that your testimony, ma'am?
4 A. Yes, yes. People came. I don't know whether there were soldiers,
5 but people did arrive. Whether there were soldiers, I don't know.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Vidovic.
7 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in order to avoid
8 confusion, the witness didn't say that they came from Tuzla but that they
9 went to Tuzla. This might be a source of confusion. That they went from
10 Srebrenica to Tuzla.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And not soldiers. I didn't see any
12 soldiers there. Not any soldiers in the true sense of the word. These
13 were just defenders. If you can call them soldiers, I don't know. I
14 would never call them an army. We just had groups of defenders defending
15 their villages and their families.
16 MS. SELLERS:
17 Q. Okay. Madam Djilovic, in reference to my last question --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Ms. Vidovic.
19 MS. SELLERS:
20 Q. -- I would like to show you a video that you saw yesterday.
21 MS. SELLERS: And if you would allow me one minute, Your Honours.
22 [Prosecution counsel confer]
23 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, if you would -- pardon me. Your
24 Honour, if you would allow me one minute so I could have the correct
1 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if the Prosecutor can
2 be more specific, to speed things up. There was mention both of people
3 who went from Srebrenica to Tuzla and others who arrived from Tuzla. So
4 could the witness be given more information in order for it to be quite
5 clear what is being referring to.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: That's my impression too --
7 MS. SELLERS: -- that when we see the video, that she'll
8 understand what she had testified to.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.
10 [Videotape played]
11 MS. SELLERS: Thank you.
12 Q. Ms. Djilovic, do you remember now --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Ms. Sellers, because in the transcript
14 there is no indication of the exhibit number of this video. Can we start
15 from there first.
16 MS. SELLERS: Right. Your Honour, this is P13 -- P18, I'm sorry.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: P18.
18 MS. SELLERS: P318.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: 318. The video, parts of which have been shown to
20 the witness, is P318. And the parts, the segments shown starts at 05.56
21 and finishes at 08.17. Yes.
22 MS. SELLERS:
23 Q. Ms. Djilovic, do you remember having been shown that video by the
24 Defence counsel?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Your testimony was that you --
2 A. I remember.
3 Q. And you testified that you had escorted persons on that video into
4 the office of Hamdija Fejzic; is that correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And you mentioned or you testified that the woman in the video was
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Where did some of the men dressed in uniform -- to your knowledge,
10 where did they come from?
11 A. From Tuzla. They arrived with Dr. Nedret. At least, that's what
12 they said to me. When they arrived, if I can repeat, because I said this
13 yesterday, Mr. Hamdija Fejzic, the president of the municipal War
14 Presidency of the Executive Board, was absent at that point in time. They
15 were looking for him. Avdic wasn't there either. They needed a permit to
16 go and talk to somebody through the ham radio operators. In order to
17 avoid them wandering through the corridors, I led them into Mr. Hamdija
18 Fejzic's office. As they came in one by one, I took them into the office
19 to avoid having them standing around in the corridor.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment because Ms. Vidovic has been standing for
21 the past minute. Yes, Ms. Vidovic.
22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
23 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I did not wish to
24 intervene in the interpretation in order not to influence the witness's
25 response, but this is the first time I have noticed this. Looking at the
1 video, a whole sentence has been left out from the translation in which
2 Mr. Oric clearly says, "Here is a lad from Tuzla." Could the Prosecutor
3 check the translations of the materials they're using. We will do so very
4 carefully now with this video. I just want this on the record.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
6 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I thank Madam Vidovic because this has
7 been a translation that we have tried to check and that we very honestly
8 put what is inaudible, what is unintelligible, and thank you for having
9 heard that, and we will certainly insert that in.
10 Now, Your Honour, I don't know whether you were about to say
11 something, but that's --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: No. But if that is so, and I do have the
13 impression, listening to the words being spoken, not just the transcript,
14 that I did hear the word "Tuzla" being mentioned. So I have that
15 impression, but of course I am no expert on the language, and I wouldn't
16 like to comment, although "Tuzla" would be "Tuzla" in that language and my
17 language and other languages.
18 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, the Prosecution is grateful --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: What I don't know is whether it was mentioned once
20 or more than once.
21 MS. SELLERS: We understand this electronic is very garbled, so
22 we're grateful for the confirmation.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
24 MS. SELLERS:
25 Q. Ms. Djilovic, the woman Ajka in there, how do you know her? Did
1 you know her before she came into the room or did you know her afterwards?
2 A. I didn't got to know her either before or afterwards. I asked her
3 for her name and who she had come to see. Then she told me her name was
4 Ajka, and she was related to Hamdija Fejzic in some way - she told me this
5 - and she wanted to go and see him. But she had arrived with
6 Mr. Halilovic. I remember that well.
7 Q. Now, did Mr. --
8 A. There was no need for me to get to know her. I didn't get to know
9 everybody who came by.
10 Q. Certainly. Did Mr. Halilovic arrive with the uniformed men from
11 Tuzla, or did he only arrive with her?
12 A. He was with her, and there was another lad with them, I think, the
13 one who was taking the video. I don't know him. The three of them were
15 When I arrived, they were there all together, and I took them into
16 the office as a group, into Fejzic's office.
17 Q. Now, did Naser Oric arrive before Ajka, Mirzet Halilovic, and the
18 person taking the video, or did he come afterwards?
19 A. He arrived before.
20 Q. Did he arrive by himself or did he arrive with some of the other
21 uniformed men?
22 A. He arrived on his own, by himself.
23 Q. Now, you've testified that when you saw Mr. Oric, when you usually
24 saw Mr. Oric during your work at the Presidency, that he was wearing
25 boots. Now, do you mean by wearing boots that he was wearing combat boots
1 or army boots?
2 A. Believe me, I know he had muddy boots on. They were dirty. I
3 can't tell you what kind of boots they were, but I know they were muddy
4 and that he was wearing them. That's what I remember.
5 Q. Did you also notice what type of clothing he was wearing, whether
6 he was wearing a uniform or whether he was wearing civilian clothing when
7 you usually saw him?
8 A. I didn't really look to see what kind of uniform it was. He would
9 just pass by, and I cannot describe what uniform he had on and when
10 because I wasn't paying attention to that. Because people wore whatever
11 they had available.
12 Q. Sure. Right. Ms. Djilovic, I'm going to have to stop you there
13 so we can concentrate on my questions. So when you saw Naser Oric that
14 day, when he came to the room first, you were not at all surprised that he
15 had on boots and a uniform. Isn't that correct?
16 A. Anyone could have come in dressed like that, because I tell you
17 again --
18 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... surprised when you saw
19 Mr. Oric come in that day with a uniform on. Yes or no, please.
20 A. Believe me, I didn't pay attention.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. I received him, took him into the office, and continued doing my
24 Q. Right. So --
25 A. I didn't pay attention to what he was wearing.
1 Q. -- Ms. Djilovic, you were so -- you were not surprised to the
2 point that you didn't even pay attention. Would that be your testimony?
3 A. No, that's not what I'm saying. I wasn't surprised at all.
4 Q. Okay.
5 A. And I wasn't not surprised either.
6 Q. Fine. Now, we have Mr. Naser Oric left in the room, and then we
7 have Mr. Halilovic coming with Ajka and the person videotaping. Who was
8 the person who was videotaping? Was that the man with the white shirt
9 holding the microphone?
10 A. Can I take a look? I can't tell you off the top of my head. I
11 have to see it.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Because it's a minute or two and a half
13 minutes. Let's see --
14 MS. SELLERS: It's quite early in the ...
15 [Videotape played]
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's the person in the blue shirt.
17 That's the person who arrived with Mirzet and Ajka. I don't know the man,
18 believe me.
19 Q. Okay. So this --
20 A. And I wasn't interested in who he was. I didn't even ask him.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. Because he was with him. Had he come on his own, then I probably
23 would have asked him.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. For the record, we are at 06.06.7.
25 MS. SELLERS:
1 Q. Yes. If you notice in the picture, in the video, that this person
2 is holding a microphone and he is being filmed, so was there someone else
3 in the room who was doing the filming at that time?
4 A. I don't believe that.
5 Q. Okay.
6 A. No.
7 Q. We're going to --
8 A. He could have done both. He could have put the camera somewhere.
9 The same person could have both filmed and conducted the interview.
10 Q. Okay.
11 A. It doesn't mean that there had to be a separate person to take the
13 Q. Now, can you just confirm to the Trial Chamber that that person
14 who is holding the microphone is not Mr. Sacirovic? Is that person either
15 Edhem Vrankovinja, the person who worked with Mr. Sacirovic, or Sabahudin
17 A. Yes, I know Edhem Vrankovinja well, known as Gedzo, and I know
18 Sabahudin Gluhic, known as a Sabit, well also. They worked with Mustafa
19 Sacirovic, known as Mule. They worked together. I don't think any of
20 them filmed this.
21 Q. Now, in looking at this video, would you agree with me that Naser
22 Oric seems to be quite comfortable sitting at the disk and speaking to the
23 men and the women in the room?
24 JUDGE AGIUS: What do you mean? But --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: What do you mean?
2 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I mean - and we can ask - he doesn't
3 appear to be tense and waiting for someone to come. He appears to be
4 seated, quite comfortable at the desk in front of the written material.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't see why he should be
6 drunk --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, interpreter's correction: Why he should
8 be tense.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Really.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He was there, waiting and chatting
12 to people just as I would. When I go somewhere and wait, I feel
13 comfortable too. I don't know. I don't know. I'm sorry.
14 MS. SELLERS:
15 Q. All right.
16 A. I'm sorry I have to respond to such questions.
17 Q. No, Ms. Djilovic, this is a fair and fine answer. Now, I would
18 like to ask you, when you were watching this videotape with the Defence,
19 were you looking or were you listening to the transcript or were you
20 looking at the -- only the visuals?
21 A. Why? I've looked at everything.
22 Q. I don't mean now, Ms. Djilovic. I mean when you were watching
23 this tape during your preparation session and when you came to court and
24 were answering questions by Madam Vidovic, were you just looking at the
25 visuals or were you aware of the dialogue, of the conversation that was
1 going on in the room?
2 A. I saw and heard everything just like in this courtroom now. There
3 was nothing different about it.
4 Q. Fine. So I would like to run the video one more time and I just
5 want to ask you a couple of questions on the dialogue that is occurring,
7 [Videotape played]
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. For the record, the segment played from this
9 video starts at 05.56 right up to 07.00.1.
10 MS. SELLERS:
11 Q. Madam Djilovic, are you surprised to hear Naser Oric referring to
12 soldiers from Srebrenica?
13 A. Yes, Ms. Vidovic.
14 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't want to
15 comment. I just want to state that we will submit in writing about this
16 translation. I don't want to comment on it now.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Yes, Ms. Sellers.
18 MS. SELLERS: Yes. Your Honour, I would just ask if the witness
19 could be directed to answer question.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you please repeat your
23 MS. SELLERS:
24 Q. Yes. My question was: Are you surprised to see Naser Oric
25 referring to soldiers from Srebrenica on this video?
1 A. You mean now? And I listened and he talks about fighters, so why
2 should I be? We did have fighters, but soldiers are soldiers. Those were
3 fighters, the local groups who were defending their villages. We called
4 them fighters. But you have to distinguish between fighters and soldiers.
5 They were just people fighting, defending their families and defending the
6 free territory we had.
7 Q. Can we continue to look at the rest of this video and I'll ask you
8 another question about the dialogue that's occurring.
9 [Videotape played]
10 MS. SELLERS:
11 Q. Madam Djilovic, were you aware that Naser Oric was able to suggest
12 employment for Ajka, either in the hospital or in Potocari?
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Before she answers, for the record the segment
14 played starts at 07.00.2 right to the end of the segment at 08.17.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm really sorry, I cannot comment
16 on this conversation. In my view, it's just an ordinary conversation. I
17 cannot discuss it. As far as I can see, it was a formal conversation
18 among them while they were waiting, and I really wouldn't like to comment
19 on it. I wasn't there. Had I participated in the conversation, I would
20 be able to comment on it, but now, just listening to it here, I cannot
21 comment on it. It was only a kind of joke. They were just chatting.
22 They are just chatting. I cannot comment on what they are talking about.
23 MS. SELLERS:
24 Q. Okay. That's fair enough. I would then ask you --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Jones.
1 MR. JONES: It's a very small matter for the transcript. She said
2 it was informal conversation --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Which line? Yes, page 66, line 1.
4 MR. JONES: Yes, thank you.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, yes, yes. Thank you.
6 MS. SELLERS: Very small matter, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Any time that's convenient for you, we will have the
8 break, Ms. Sellers. But you still have another four minutes, but I'm just
9 drawing your attention.
10 MS. SELLERS: Certainly. I was just going to ask a couple of
11 questions and then not move on to the next exhibit.
12 Q. Now, do you know why the person is at this point in time - the man
13 the white shirt - filming in this room or registering, taping what is
14 being said?
15 A. White shirt? Can I see, please, because I don't recall whether
16 it's white or any other colour.
17 Q. Sorry. I don't want to mislead you. I don't know whether you
18 said the shirt was blue. The person who is holding the microphone, do you
19 know why that person is filming or interviewing this informal
20 conversation? Just yes or no.
21 A. I think he was doing it for himself, personally. Probably -- no,
22 I'm sure it was just for himself. As I can see, and you can all see, I
23 assert that nobody was filming officially. I'm certain of that.
24 Q. And my last question concerning the video: In regard to the
25 typewriter that is still on Mr. Fejzic's desk, was there a hope of finding
1 another typewriter ribbon? Is that the reason that it remained on the
3 A. That machine was always there on that desk. I remember, and I
4 know that when we started work when I arrived in the municipality, we
5 managed to get hold of two ordinary mechanical typewriters. We got one
6 working. We found a ribbon. It was dry but it could still be used, and
7 that's the one I used. This other machine was not operational, but we
8 kept it in case we ever managed to get hold of a ribbon and make it
9 operational. But I'm absolutely certain it could not be used. I think I
10 said the same yesterday quite clearly.
11 Q. Yes. Then your answer to my question was yes. Thank you, Ms.
13 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I'll stop here and we'll continue a bit
14 after the break.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. We'll have a 30-minute break starting
16 from now. Thank you.
17 --- Recess taken at 12.29 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 1.05 p.m.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Sellers.
20 MS. SELLERS:
21 Q. Ms. Djilovic, you testified on direct examination about a stamp
22 that was used by Dr. Pilav, and I believe your testimony was that it
23 seemed unusual that the stamp would have Zvornik, Zvornik hospital,
24 included within it. My question to you is that were you aware that the
25 hospital in Srebrenica, prior to the war, the department of internal
1 medicine and gynaecology were part of the Zvornik hospital?
2 A. It's a rather longish question. Could you please shorten it?
3 Q. Yes, I can.
4 A. If you can, please.
5 Q. Yes. Did you know that the hospital in Srebrenica had two
6 departments in it, gynaecology and internal medicine, and that those two
7 departments were part of the Zvornik hospital? Did you know that? Yes or
8 no, please.
9 A. As far as I know, both the gynaecology and the internal department
10 existed but with the hospital of Srebrenica. We had our own stamp, our
11 own institution. I don't think it ever belonged to Zvornik municipality.
12 Zvornik municipality had nothing to do with it. The Srebrenica General
13 hospital had nothing to do with the Zvornik General hospital. We had our
14 own stamps, physicians, in peacetime. Before the war, therefore.
15 Q. Okay.
16 A. As far as I know, we had always had a stamp reading "Dr. Asim
17 Cemerlic." This stamp was used in our health centre, in the hospital,
18 even in the gynaecology ward. There was no need for us to have the
19 Zvornik stamp. Our hospital had its title, and the title was contained in
20 the stamp. Every stamp carries the name of its own institution. The same
21 goes for the health centre and the hospital.
22 Q. Were you also aware that the health centre in Srebrenica prior to
23 the war was separate from the hospital in Srebrenica?
24 A. It all constituted a whole. In my opinion, or, rather, not in my
25 opinion, but that's the fact, the two formed a whole. It was called the
1 Srebrenica General Hospital, Dr. Asim Cemerlic, and the health centre had
2 the same title because they formed a whole.
3 Q. All right. I'm moving to a different issue now, Ms. Djilovic, and
4 I would like you to watch another video. This video is P427.
5 [Videotape played]
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. One moment, Ms. Sellers.
7 For the record, the excerpt or the segment shown from this video
8 starts at 1.06.20, finishes at --
9 MS. SELLERS: Excuse me, Your Honour, I wanted to -- the video is
10 longer than this. I've just stopped it midway through.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: I know. I'm just stating this segment.
12 MS. SELLERS: We've already gone a little bit further than the
13 segment I wanted to stop it at, so I was going to ask to go back a tiny
14 bit so you can give the number of the segment that I'll be discussing. It
15 doesn't include this last frame.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Okay. There?
17 MS. SELLERS: Yes, thank you.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: From 1.06.20 to 1.07.22.3 -- sorry, 19.4 seconds.
19 MS. SELLERS:
20 Q. Now, Ms. Djilovic, you were working -- you were still working at
21 the municipal building on April 25, 1993. That was your testimony;
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. All right. Now, were you aware of any meetings that Mr. Avdic
25 held with persons who came to Srebrenica in a helicopter, specifically
1 Ambassador Arria, on that day of the 25th of April, 1993?
2 A. I don't remember the date or, rather, I don't remember the event
3 that I had received people.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge Eser --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is possible that he -- he
6 received them, but it is also possible that I was there.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge Eser would like to put a question. Judge
8 Eser, please.
9 JUDGE ESER: Just to avoid confusion, you had told us that
10 municipal authority had moved from the municipal building to the PTT.
11 Now, just to make clear, at that time of the video, have you worked in the
12 PTT or in the municipal building?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the 25th of April, I worked in
14 the municipal building. I had never worked in the PTT building, as far as
15 I'm concerned. Throughout the time, I worked in the municipality
16 building, and that was the case in April 1992.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Judge Eser, and I thank you, madam.
18 MS. SELLERS: Thank you, Judge Eser.
19 I would just ask that we see that segment that we've seen right
20 now of the video, and I just want to ask you another question,
21 Ms. Djilovic.
22 [Videotape played]
23 MS. SELLERS:
24 Q. Ms. Djilovic, my question to you is: Are you aware of any
25 demonstrations that happened around April 25th and what those
1 demonstrations might have been about?
2 A. Demonstrations, no.
3 Q. -- protest.
4 A. I apologise.
5 Q. I don't want to confuse you with the word "protest."
6 A. Yes, it is possible that there were protests, or I don't know how
7 to call them. That was the time when the first convoys entered the town.
8 I was a bit shaken by the scene showing people out in the street who were
9 happy to see the convoy arriving, because they knew that there was food in
10 them. But others were happy because they saw it as a chance for them to
11 board the trucks and leave Srebrenica.
12 As soon as I saw the frame with the people in it, it took me back
13 to those times, and I was shaken by it. I just need a minute to gain my
14 composure again.
15 I saw the scene out of my window. I could see the people flocking
16 toward the trucks in the convoy because they wanted to leave Srebrenica.
17 These were refugees from Konjevic Polje, Cerska, Zvornik, Bratunac
18 municipalities, and Han Pijesak.
19 Q. Ms. Djilovic --
20 A. When they realised the drastic -- drastic situation --
21 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... stop you because I would like
22 to move because I understand we'll need a time period for redirect and
23 possibly some questions from the Judge.
24 I would like you to notice at this point in time the types of
25 sandbags that are in front of the building and then I'm going to continue
1 with this tape and can I also ask you to notice, you'll see that there are
2 no leaves on the trees in this video. I'm going to continue with the tape
3 and you will see leaves on the tree. Can we go forward, and I think it
4 will become apparent what I've just said.
5 [Videotape played]
6 MS. SELLERS:
7 Q. Ms. Djilovic, I'd like to ask you --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait.
9 MS. SELLERS: Sorry.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: So the segment played from the same video now played
11 -- shown to the witness runs from 1.06.48 to 1.09.016. Sorry to
13 MS. SELLERS:
14 Q. Ms. Djilovic, I'm just going to ask, and it might not have been as
15 clear as I would have hoped in terms of the visuals, but compared to the
16 first segment of this tape, which appears to have the date April 25th,
17 could you tell the Trial Chamber, if you know, what time period this
18 second segment is taking place.
19 A. No, I can't say.
20 Q. Do you know from looking at the second part of this video, do you
21 recognise anyone from the War Presidency in the video?
22 A. I wasn't paying particular attention to that, and I don't dare
23 speculate, because the still -- or, rather, the image was quite unclear to
24 me. I don't want to venture into something which I'm not certain of,
25 whether someone was or was not there. I could not descry the footage that
1 clearly, and I'm sorry that I can't answer.
2 Q. Okay.
3 MS. SELLERS: I'd like to replay just this second portion.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we need to play it again, or if you want --
5 MS. SELLERS: Let me go back further, I understand, to see the
6 trees and the sandbags. I'm trying to show --
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Fine. Because her answer --
8 [Videotape played]
9 MS. SELLERS:
10 Q. Ms. Djilovic, did you recognise anyone on that video from the
11 War Presidency?
12 A. I can't say. I'm not sure. I could not really make out
13 the images. I can only say that we were so happy at the site of
14 the United Nations tanks, because we expected them to protect
16 Q. Just a couple of questions and we can move on. Did you
17 recognise Naser Oric in that segment of the film, the last
19 A. I saw a man who looked like Naser, but I don't dare say,
20 and I cannot say, that that was him with 100 per cent certainty.
21 I believe he was wearing a gym suit, but there were many
22 people moving about, and I donít want to say
23 that that was 100 per cent Naser because Iím not
25 And I apologise; if I could be given a handkerchief for my
2 MS. SELLERS: Your Honours, I'm going to move on to a different
3 segment now. I understand our time constraints. And I wanted to --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
5 MS. SELLERS: I'm sorry.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you have a re-examination, Ms. Vidovic?
8 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, a brief one.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: How long?
10 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Ten minutes.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Ten minutes. I'm not going to stay here a minute
12 more than quarter to two. So if we don't finish the witness, we'll come
13 back tomorrow.
14 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I will try and finish in the next five
16 Q. Ms. Djilovic, I have to ask you, at some time a yes or no answer
17 might be appropriate. You testified that there was no intervention
18 platoon in Srebrenica, and the Defence showed you Prosecution Exhibit 608.
19 MS. SELLERS: Could you please show Ms. Djilovic that exhibit.
20 And could I ask you at the same time to place before her Exhibit P84.
21 All right. Is this the exhibit that says intervention platoon,
22 list of staff members of the intervention platoon?
23 Q. Ms. Djilovic, are we looking at the same exhibit?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 A. I have a certificate in front of me, certifying that Stojan
2 Pivarski received a sum of money.
3 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I think that's -- we're looking at
4 another exhibit.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] D608, it says.
6 MS. SELLERS: No, P608. Prosecution Exhibit.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And a list for payment.
8 MS. SELLERS: No, could we change the exhibit to Prosecution
9 Exhibit 608.
10 Q. In the meantime, I'd like to ask a question. You testified
11 concerning Kemo. Is that Kemo Mehmedovic? Is this the person you were
12 referring to in your testimony before?
13 A. Are you referring to Kemal Mehmedovic, known as Kemo, the person
14 from Pale? Is that the one you have in mind?
15 Q. Yes, that's who I have in mind. Okay? And right now you're going
16 to be handed Prosecution Exhibit 608 --
17 A. Yes
18 Q. -- and I'd ask you to go down to number 35 on the list and just
19 confirm for the Trial Chamber this is the person who you're referring to
20 as Kemo.
21 A. It says Kemal Mehmedovic here, but I don't know what I'm supposed
22 to confirm. I do see that his name is indeed written here, but what is it
23 that I'm supposed to confirm?
24 Q. That's fine. That's the name that's written there. Now, you
25 testified that there was no intervention platoon that you knew of. I
1 would now ask you, with this list in front you, and Prosecution's Exhibit
2 84 --
3 A. Can we take it one at a time? Should I answer first the question
4 related to one of these and then the second one?
5 Q. You've answered the question in relationship to the document of
6 P608. I just want to show you this other document. The two are related,
7 Ms. Djilovic, and then you'll see my issue.
8 I'd like to turn to -- in the English version, it's going to be
9 page 35, and the ERN number, to help us in the B/C/S version, is 02115089.
10 MS. SELLERS: If Your Honours permit me, I'll start to read while
11 they find the page for her. It's on Sanction.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Go ahead, Ms. Sellers, and keep in mind that we've
13 got 12, 13 minutes left.
14 MS. SELLERS:
15 Q. It says it was unanimously decided to distribute food to mess
16 kitchens at the front line as follows: On page 36 within the English
17 version, toward the top one-third of the page, when one looks at the
18 different kitchens where food was to be distributed, one notes at 19,
19 intervention platoon, Maka [phoen].
20 A. Yes, I see it. It says intervention platoon.
21 Q. Yes.
22 A. It does say that.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 A. It's not very clear, but you can still read it.
25 Q. A little bit further down on that page under II, under the -- on
1 the ERN now of page 02115090, the sentence says: "The intervention
2 platoon will reconnoitre Andrici, and the Gostilj Battalion Jelah."
3 Now, Ms. Djilovic, would you allow for the fact that maybe you
4 were unaware that there was an intervention platoon in Srebrenica in 1992?
5 A. That I wasn't aware? What I'm saying is it didn't exist. I
6 really cannot say anything about this. I abide by what I said, that I
7 know that no intervention platoon existed.
8 Q. Okay. My next and last area of questioning is -- we'll stay with
9 document P84. I would now ask that we go to page 37 in the English
10 version, ERN --
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Vidovic.
12 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm afraid that --
13 excuse me, that the witness is being misled. I don't see --
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is not clear to me. How can I
15 say anything? Excuse me. I now appear to be confused, but I'm not. I
16 just can't answer the question. I don't know what you want me to say,
17 Madam Prosecutor, because I'll tell you everything I know, but I have
18 nothing to -- but as for this, it's handwritten. Anyone could have
19 written it. I mean, I don't want to talk about this. I can't answer your
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you have any further questions, Ms. Sellers?
22 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, might I please just ask one other
23 question --
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Go ahead, and please --
25 MS. SELLERS: I would ask that we now turn to the English version,
1 I believe we're on page 30 -- 37. In the B/C/S we're under ERN number
3 Q. And you will see that it's the minutes of the 10th of December,
4 1992, the Srebrenica staff. I would just like to draw Ms. Djilovic's
5 attention to the first paragraph, where it says: "Osman: On 9 December,
6 additional reconnaissance was carried out."
7 My question to you, Ms. Djilovic: Would you allow that Osman
8 Osmanovic possibly returned to Srebrenica and you were just unaware that
9 he was physically present in December -- by December 10, 1992? Would you
10 allow for that possibility?
11 A. By no means. I'm sure that on the 10th of December Osman could
12 not have been in Srebrenica. I repeat what I said yesterday: I remember
13 well --
14 Q. Might I ask that you --
15 A. -- it was our wedding anniversary.
16 Q. I'm very sorry, I understand the story about your wedding
17 anniversary, but I just wanted to get your comment or reaction to that.
18 Then the last series, three questions: Do you know whether Hamed
19 Alic is alive today? Yes or no.
20 A. Muhamed Alic.
21 Q. No.
22 A. Muhamed Alic?
23 Q. Hamed Alic.
24 A. Hamed Alic. There was more than one person called by that name.
25 I don't know which one you're referring to.
1 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... I'm sorry. The man with the
2 communications at the communications centre.
3 A. Hamed Alic.
4 Q. Do you know whether Osman Osmanovic --
5 A. I can't recall now. I can't recall really.
6 Q. Is Mr. --
7 A. I can't answer, I'm sorry.
8 Q. Is Mr. Osman Osmanovic alive?
9 A. Osman Osmanovic, the one we referred to on the 10th of December
10 was not in Srebrenica then --
11 A. He is still alive. I know him.
12 Q. And is Mr. Hamdija Fejzic alive today?
13 A. Yes, Hamdija Fejzic is still alive, yes.
14 Q. And were your -- was your husband and your brother part of the
15 Stari Grad unit under Akif Ustic during the war?
16 A. No. No.
17 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, I have no further questions.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Re-examination, Ms. Vidovic.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I just ask Your Honours.
20 I think this morning at the beginning I was confused and I probably
21 failed to express myself clearly. May I clarify something? I'll be
23 JUDGE AGIUS: By all means, go ahead.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] By your leave. When I was asked
25 about Mr. Naser and why he was in the War Presidency, I said that when I
1 started working there, please don't think I'm trying to change my
2 testimony, but I simply remembered that in my state of confusion I said
3 something. When I started working and I saw that Naser Oric was a member,
4 I thought he was the leader of the local groups and was there for that
5 reason, but later on I learned that that was not the case and that there
6 were other members of the War Presidency who were simply local group
7 leaders, such as Sefik Mandic and Mirsad Dudic, for example, in the same
8 way Mr. Naser Oric was only a member and only a leader of local group in
10 When I started working, I thought he was the leader of all the
11 groups, but then later on I heard that Naser was a person people talked
12 about. He was a hero. He had stopped the Arkan's men and so on. So one
13 thing is what I thought at the time, and the real truth is something else.
14 That's what I wanted to clarify. I don't want it to appear that I said
15 that he was then. He wasn't then. He was only the leader of a local
16 group in Potocari, holding the line between Bratunac and Srebrenica.
17 Thank you.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Vidovic, please try to restrict your
19 re-examination to what is really, really essential.
20 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Re-examined by Ms. Vidovic:
22 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, I'll only put only a few brief questions
23 to you. Osman Osmanovic, the last document you were shown was a kind of
24 diary in which you saw several names. Was Osman Osmanovic the only person
25 attending meetings? Were there other people called Osman who were members
1 of the War Presidency, members of the Executive Board, or who for any
2 other reason attended sessions?
3 A. Yes, Osman Hasanovic and Osman Suljic.
4 Q. Was Osman Suljic a member of the Executive Board and was he
5 present at sessions frequently?
6 A. Yes, he was a member of the Executive Board of the War Presidency
7 of Srebrenica municipality.
8 Q. Thank you. In this record, did you see anything apart from the
9 first name Osman? Is there a last name there? Do you have this document?
10 A. No.
11 Q. This is really important to me.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers not overlap, please,
13 interpreter's note.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, please don't overlap.
15 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Look at page P091. That's the next page. 01 -- 02115091, and
17 next page, 5092. This is the same session. It's only the next page. Do
18 you agree that Resid and Dudic are members of the War Presidency and that
19 they were evidently present and listed as present?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Do you agree that Osman Suljic could also have been present ex
23 A. Yes, he could have been.
24 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
25 Q. In connection with the last video that was shown to you, the
1 Prosecutor suggested to you looking at the trees. In one shot there were
2 no leaves on the trees and in the next there were. Can you explain that
3 in our part of the world trees burst into leaf at completely different
4 times of the year; some in May [as interpreted], some in April, and some
5 as late as May?
6 A. Yes. It would depend on the type of tree.
7 Q. Mirzet Halilovic and his behaviour, everything that was said in
8 the video that you were shown both by myself and the Prosecutor, was it
9 the War Presidency that was discussing his behaviour and his conduct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Let me remind you now if you can remember of what was said. You
12 heard the tape more than once. It was Exhibit P1003, so please try to
13 recall what they say if you can.
14 Do you remember when Avdic is referring to the police, what is
15 said is the following: "They said go away from here. You're nobody.
16 It's as if we were playing cowboys."
17 What he is saying about the military police, is that a true
18 reflection of the military police that you were speaking about?
19 A. No, no. A real police would never have allowed anyone to address
20 them in that way as these people allowed themselves to be addressed by
21 this group of men in Potocari who drove them away.
22 Q. In other words, I'm trying to ask you, does this discussion
23 reflect what was happening on the ground with respect to what was called
24 the military police?
25 A. Please, could you repeat your question?
1 Q. What was discussed in the tape in connection with Potocari and
2 what Hajrudin said, "They said go away from here. You're nobody. It's as
3 if we are playing cowboys," is this what it was really like with respect
4 to that police?
5 A. Yes, that's the true reality.
6 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I have no
7 further questions.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: There is one question by Judge Brydensholt. I
9 apologise to the interpreters, I did not have my microphone switched on.
10 Questioned by the Court:
11 JUDGE BRYDENSHOLT: You explained to us that Mirzet Halilovic was
12 appointed by the War Presidency to his position in the military police. I
13 remember what you explained about the military police. That is not my
14 question. But my question is: How can you know that it was the War
15 Presidency who has appointed him to his position? Is it something you
16 just assume?
17 A. I assume that the municipal War Presidency, which was trying to
18 introduce law and order into the town, attempted to do so by appointing
19 someone to the police, but it was impossible. The municipal War
20 Presidency appointed Mirzet Halilovic as a policeman.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Judge Brydensholt. Do you have any
22 questions, Judge Eser?
23 JUDGE ESER: No.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't have any questions either, madam, which
25 basically means we made it. We finished just four minutes in excess of
1 our schedule. I thank you so much on behalf of Judge Brydensholt and
2 Judge Eser and also on behalf of myself and the Tribunal for having come
3 over to give evidence. I can assure you that you will receive all the
4 assistance you require now to facilitate your return back home at the
5 earliest, and on behalf of everyone present here, I wish you a safe
6 journey back home.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you. I apologise.
8 If I may just briefly address everybody here in connection with my
9 protection as a witness, if I may before --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, provided you say what you have to say very
11 shortly, please. Be as brief as possible, because there are many people
12 working now beyond their time.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. I'll be very brief.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's go into private session.
15 [Private session]
12 [Open session]
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Please tell Mr. Wubben that at latest, latest, end
14 of tomorrow we need the provisional, as much as you can call it, but the
15 as complete list as possible of the witnesses you intend to bring in
17 MS. SELLERS: Certainly, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: With the, of course, caveat that I said later on
19 that it's the case we'll consider further the months, but by the end of
20 tomorrow they need to know who you intend to call because we need to
21 accelerate the process in any case. And we also need to know because we
22 may ourselves be calling witnesses. So at the end of the day we need to
24 MS. SELLERS: Your Honour, we'll be able to provide the list.
25 You're not intending that we provide a filing for a motion for rebuttal
2 JUDGE AGIUS: No. If you -- if you have a definitive list
3 already, with, of course, the reservation that -- yes, I would expect you
4 to file the motion tomorrow, with the list, so that then I can discuss
5 with the Defence a time limit within which they have to answer, and by mid
6 next week or latest sometime next week we will come down with a decision.
7 You will know whether you will be bringing over these witnesses and they
8 will know more or less in which direction they need to look for purposes
9 of a rejoinder. I mean, we can't allow --
10 MS. SELLERS: -- wanted to be clear whether you wanted us to
11 follow full-fledged motion --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I think you better start thinking about it and do it
13 by tomorrow. I'm pretty sure that most if not all of these names have
14 been in your minds for months.
15 MR. JONES: Yes, I think it has to be a motion because it's a
16 request for them to bring --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: It has to be formalised, there is no question about
18 it, especially if we have advance notice from you that you will be
19 objecting even though you don't know who they are.
20 MR. JONES: May I say we're in the afternoon, I think, tomorrow.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: No. I think there is a misunderstanding. There was
22 going to be a deal between myself -- our Chamber and Judge Orie's Chamber,
23 switching two or three sittings, but -- we were going to swap tomorrow,
24 but then there is a problem with a member of his Chamber, so tomorrow
25 stays as it is. We will be swapping on the 17th of February. We are
1 still sitting. And of course, we are swapping on the 24th of January. We
2 will be sitting in the morning where we were going to sit in the
3 afternoon. So 24th January - that's Tuesday - we are sitting in the
4 morning and they are sitting in the afternoon.
5 MR. JONES: That's reasonably clear now.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: That's okay. But things -- I mean, we were pretty
7 sure, Judge Orie and myself, that we had struck a deal, but basically
8 while I knew that it was convenient, he still had to get some feedback
9 from one of his colleagues. So tomorrow it's in the morning. Thank you.
10 I wish to thank everyone, please, for your cooperation and your
11 indulgence. Thank you.
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.54 p.m.,
13 to be reconvened on Friday, the 20th day
14 of January, 2006, at 9.00 a.m.