1 Wednesday, 19 November 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning to everybody in and around the
8 Madam Registrar, will you please call the case.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
10 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-81-T, the
11 Prosecutor versus Momcilo Perisic.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
13 Could we please have appearances for today, starting with the
15 MR. HARMON: Good morning, Mr. President and Your Honours. Good
16 morning, counsel. My name is Mark Harmon. Appearing today will be
17 Carolyn Edgerton and present is Carmela Javier.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
19 And for the Defence?
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: Good morning, Your Honours, counsel. Today we
21 have Daniela Tasic, Chad Mair, Milos Androvic, Tina Drolec, assisting,
22 and two of our interns Eadaoin O'Brien and Akila, whose last name I
23 always have a hard time pronouncing, which is Radhakrishwan, which I'll
24 get to the reporter the spelling. My name is Gregor Guy-Smith and Novak
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Guy-Smith.
2 Dr. Donia, I know you know the rules of the trade, but still we
3 have to warn you that you are still bound by the declaration you made at
4 the beginning of your testimony to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
5 nothing else by the truth.
6 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
8 Madam Edgerton.
9 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honour, and good morning. Just
10 one very quick administrative matter, just dealing with an exhibit that
11 Mr. Lukic spoke to yesterday, P149. You will recall I had mistakenly
12 designated the wrong B/C/S passage as the highlighted passage. We looked
13 into the matter yesterday and found the highlight passage to be at
14 e-court page 138, and I just wanted to let everyone know that passage
15 continues to e-court page 139 as well, just to put that on the record.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, ma'am.
17 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
18 WITNESS: ROBERT DONIA [Resumed]
19 Examination by Ms. Edgerton: [Continued]
20 Q. Good morning, doctor. I trust you've slept well?
21 A. Good morning. Yes.
22 Q. Yesterday we left having dealt with your comments on an ethnic
23 map of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and just related to that, I would like to go
24 back to further explore the strategic objectives of 12 May 1992.
25 Talking specifically about the first objective, which was the
1 demarcation of the state as separate from the other two national
2 communities, could I ask you this: Are you aware of any specific
3 expressions by RS leaders as to how important this objective was?
4 A. Yes. Mr. Krajisnik, in his first exposition of the six strategic
5 goals, highlighted that as a -- the most important and overriding goal.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Can I then ask that 65 ter number 2134 be
7 displayed, please. In the English, page 52, line 9 from the top of the
8 page to line 15; and B/C/S page 42, line 9 from the bottom of the page.
9 The transcript records my saying 3421. I indicated, I think, 2134.
10 Now, let's deal with the English first. To page 52, please.
11 Could I see page 52 in the English, please. Your indulgence for a
12 moment, Your Honour, while we get warmed up, so to speak. Thank you.
13 Can we have amplified line 9 from the top of the page. And can we go to
14 B/C/S page 42, line 9 from the bottom of the page.
15 Q. But perhaps in the interests of the time, Dr. Donia, while we
16 have the English version in front of you or in front of us, could I draw
17 your attention to the line which begins -- or the sentence which begins
18 "The first goal is the most important one ..."
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Is this the passage from Mr. Krajisnik that you were referring
22 A. Yes. This is the first passage to which I refer, yes.
23 Q. And in the event I haven't asked you already, who was
24 Mr. Krajisnik?
25 A. Mr. Krajisnik was the President of the Bosnian Serb Assembly.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, I wonder whether this could be marked
3 as the next exhibit, please. So page 52 of the English and page 42 of
4 the B/C/S. 65 ter 2134.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes. I'm advised that the B/C/S page is not the
7 appropriate page.
8 MS. EDGERTON: No. That's correct. If we could go to the proper
9 display page, page 42, e-court page 42 of the B/C/S.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's the correct page?
11 MS. EDGERTON: It is.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: The exhibit is entered into evidence. May it
13 please be given an exhibit number.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P339, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
16 MS. EDGERTON: In accordance with the practice prescribed
17 yesterday, as no pages from this large document has been previously
18 admitted, if we could have page 1 admitted in there as well.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Indeed. Yes, that's a standing order, Madam
21 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Could we go next to 02151.02, which is a
23 transcript of the 42nd session of the RS Assembly held in Pale, 19 July
24 1994. 65 ter number again 2151.02. This will be an extract of comments
25 given by Radovan Karadzic.
1 Q. Now, on the English page, which appears on your right, Dr. Donia,
2 could I direct you, please, to a sentence about halfway through the
3 second paragraph on the right-hand side.
4 MS. EDGERTON: If you could scroll up, please, Mr. Registrar, the
5 paragraph on the right-hand side, beginning with "We know ..." You'll
6 see it three lines under the number 56 on the right-hand side of this
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, I see it.
9 MS. EDGERTON: Before I ask for your comment, we'll wait for the
10 B/C/S to be pulled up. And the B/C/S pages have been extracted. That's
11 page 71.
12 Q. Do you attribute any significance to Karadzic's comments as to
13 what their primary strategic aim is here in this passage?
14 And, for the record, the highlight passage goes to the sentence
15 which ends with "... anymore."
16 A. Yes, this is his statement of the first strategic goal, or
17 primary strategic aim, as he calls it here, in more explicit form than he
18 stated it on the 12th of May or that is stated in the published version
19 in the Official Gazette of November 1993 when he says, "Our primary
20 strategic aim is to get rid of the enemies in our house and not to be in
21 the same state with them anymore."
22 Q. And in this sentence, when Karadzic refers to enemies in the
23 house, does he stipulate any enemies in particular?
24 A. Yes. Croats and Muslims.
25 Q. Now, based, then, on this and other remarks, have you, Dr. Donia,
1 have formed an opinion as to what achieving this objective means?
2 A. It meant the creation of a purely Serb state, devoid of Croats
3 and Muslims.
4 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours, could I ask that 2151.02 be admitted
5 as an exhibit, and I should note that this is an extract of 65 ter number
6 2151.01, pages of which are admitted as P00219. And the reason for the
7 slightly different 65 ter number is here we're dealing with -- in terms
8 of the English translation, a CLSS finalized translation, so we
9 highlighted the pages on which the highlighted excerpt is contained.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: And must, then, this be admitted as a separate
11 exhibit or must it go with 219?
12 MS. EDGERTON: I think because we've extracted it out - my
13 opinion, subject to what Your Honours think - because we've extracted it
14 out and provided a revised translation of the highlighted pages, it would
15 be best to cross-reference it, rather than make it part of P219.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: It's admitted as Exhibit P340.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: You can proceed, ma'am.
19 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honours.
20 Could I take us next to 65 ter 6703. 6703.
21 Q. Do you see a document? At this moment we have only the B/C/S
23 MS. EDGERTON: I'm sorry, the English version I don't recognise
24 at all as 6703. Perhaps we can deal with the B/C/S version for the
25 moment until the English version is -- thank you.
1 Q. Do you see the documents in B/C/S and English on the screen in
2 front of you, Dr. Donia?
3 A. Yes, I do.
4 Q. Do you recognise what these documents are?
5 A. Yes. These are the B/C/S and English versions respectively of
6 minutes of a meeting held in the office of Croatian President
7 Franjo Tudjman with Nikola Koljevic, then a member of the Presidency of
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina; and Franjo Boras, a Croat representative, on 8 June
10 Q. The document I see in front of me reads as a date 8 January --
11 A. I'm sorry, 8 January 1992
12 Q. Are you familiar with this meeting?
13 A. Yes, I am.
14 Q. Are you familiar with the topics recorded in these minutes?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Do you have a view relating to the thing we've just been
17 discussing, the first strategic objective as to the significance of some
18 of the topics discussed at this meeting?
19 A. Yes. In the meeting Koljevic initiates a discussion about
20 possible population transfers in order to achieve the first strategic
21 goal as it was expressed earlier and approaches the representatives of
22 the Republic of Croatia
23 achieve ethnic separation and separate states.
24 Q. Do you attribute any significance to the fact that this meeting
25 took place some four months before the announcement of the strategic
1 objectives in May of 1992?
2 A. Yes. This would be one of many expressions by Bosnian Serb
3 leaders well in advance of May 1992 of the general concepts that were
4 inherent in the strategic goals and the first strategic goal in
5 particular, the notion of separation and population transfers.
6 Q. Did Nikola Koljevic hold any formal position in the structures of
7 the Bosnian Serb republic, of Republika Srpska?
8 A. Not at this time because it did not exist yet. But he was
9 subsequently a member of the Presidency of the Serbian Republic
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina and after that a vice-president of the Republika
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MS. EDGERTON: Could this be marked, please, as the next exhibit.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's so marked. May it please be given an exhibit
16 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P341, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
18 MS. EDGERTON: I'd like to go next, please, to 2144.01,
19 transcripts of the 34th session of the RS Assembly held in Jahorina on 30
20 September 1993, one page of which has previously been marked as P200.
21 Thank you. I see the B/C/S version in front of me. In that regard, I'd
22 like to direct us in the B/C/S to page 230, and in the English
23 translation, page 212 to extract -- an extract from a comment by
24 Velibor Ostojic. So English page 212; B/C/S page 230.
25 Q. Dr. Donia, I know you explained this yesterday, but perhaps you
1 could remind us who Velibor Ostojic was.
2 A. At this time Mr. Ostojic was the Minister of Information of
3 Republika Srpska.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MS. EDGERTON: English page 212. Thank you. Yes, I think we
6 have the display appropriate on the B/C/S.
7 Q. Could I direct you, please, to the very last paragraph where you
8 see Mr. Ostojic speaking on page 212, the second and third line from the
9 bottom of the page, which begins with the sentence "We were aiming to
10 achieve our goal ..."
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Do you attribute any significance to this comment?
13 A. Yes. Mr. Ostojic is referring to a single goal which very
14 probably is the first or primary strategic goal which we've been speaking
15 and, by content, is identical, which was the ethnical geographic
16 continuity of the Serb population, and of course that would mean -- refer
17 to the notion that all Serbs should be connected somehow geographically,
18 which would also mean the movement of non-Serbs from that territory.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MS. EDGERTON: In this same document, could we please move over
21 to page 33 of the English translation and page 32 of the B/C/S. Your
22 indulgence for just a moment, Your Honours.
23 Now, I'd like to direct us to the last sentence on the bottom of
24 page 33 and -- of the English, that begins with the words "Alija is
25 offering ..." Thank you. And then on the English, if you could go over
1 to page 34, the next page, at the very top of page 34 after this.
2 Q. Dr. Donia, this is an excerpt from comments by one
3 Dobrislav Milinkovic. Are you familiar with that name?
4 A. He was a delegate to the Bosnian Serb Assembly. Further, I
5 couldn't identify him.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Could we go over to page 34, please, the very top
7 of the page. Thank you. The end of the highlighted paragraph that began
8 on page 33 with "Alija is offering ..." now appears at the top of page
9 34, ending with "... there has to be relocation." About four lines down
10 from the top.
11 On the English, could you please scroll back up to the top of the
12 page. Thank you.
13 Q. Have you had a chance to see those comments now, Dr. Donia?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Are they consistent with your view of what the first objective
17 A. Yes. They are consistent and amount to a reaffirmation of the
18 first strategic goal in the specific circumstances of that time.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours, at this point I wonder if I could
21 ask that these two pages -- no, actually, it would be four pages,
22 pages 212 -- sorry, let me deal with the ones that are in front of me on
23 the screen now. Pages 33 and 34 of the English and page 32 of the B/C/S,
24 and then with respect to the first excerpt, that's page 212 of the
25 English and page 230 of the B/C/S, if they could be admitted as exhibits
1 as part of P200. P200 is this larger document, but only one page has
2 been previously exhibited.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Those pages are admitted into evidence as part of
4 Exhibit P200.
5 MS. EDGERTON: And before my friend, Madam Registrar, stands up,
6 I have a note here that the first page of P200 was never previously
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, page 1 and relevant pages discussed
9 today will be added to the exhibit.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
11 MS. EDGERTON:
12 Q. Now, given, Dr. Donia, the mix of ethnic communities on the
13 territory of the former Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina
14 spoken about, given the observations that we've made about the meaning
15 behind and importance of the first strategic objective, I'd like to ask
16 you this: Do you have an opinion as to whether these strategic
17 objectives could have been achieved without the use of force?
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well --
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: If he's testifying as a historian, then I believe
21 this is outside of his expertise whether or not -- that particular issue.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Edgerton.
23 MS. EDGERTON: As an expert witness, Your Honour, he's perfectly
24 entitled to express an opinion based on the breadth of his research,
25 which is exactly what I'm asking him to do here.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: The objection is that you are asking for an
2 opinion which is outside his area of expertise. That's the nub of the
4 MS. EDGERTON: In my submission, Your Honour, we have ample
5 evidence before us that he's well-versed in and has conducted an
6 extremely large amount of detailed research into the statements of
7 various Bosnian Serb Assembly delegates, leaders at the Bosnian Serb
8 Assembly sessions, reviewed a breadth of documents, and has conducted
9 detailed researches into demographic changes in the population
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina in the period leading up to and after the war. I fail
11 to see how this would be outside his area of expertise.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'll allow the question.
13 THE WITNESS: In my opinion, it would have been impossible to
14 achieve these objectives without the use of force or the immediate and
15 credible threat of force, in other words, at the point of a gun.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we have this exhibit enlarged, please? I'd
17 like to read something from it. The English version. No, no, no, I'm
18 not suggesting you remove the --
19 Do you hold that view, Dr. Donia, notwithstanding the fact that
20 the speaker here on this document says that: "Gentlemen, there is no
21 Serbian state in Bosnia
22 relocating. If you want ethnically pure Serbian state, and we do, don't
23 we, if we all know and emphasise --"
24 Could we please have it enlarged? Thank you. Thank you so much.
25 "If we all know and emphasise that we cannot live with them, then
1 we have to realise that these draft maps are offering exactly that, and
2 there has to be relocation. This plan has to be accepted and signed by
3 all three sides in order to get three republics. Let us pray to God that
4 other sides accept. And we should chase the devil and accept the offer
5 from God."
6 It comes from the previous page where Alija is allegedly offering
7 something. Now, this seems to me to be a basis for a negotiated
9 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, I would agree that it -- in the
10 perception of the speaker, Mr. Milinkovic, it was an objective that could
11 be obtained by negotiation.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: And if the people were prepared to take that
13 perception, then they could sign and do it by negotiated settlement.
14 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. But I think that the problem was
15 the people which he claimed to speak for proved themselves to be quite
16 unmoved by the prospect of relocating voluntarily in response to some
17 diplomatic agreement.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: But then it doesn't seem to me as if that violence
19 was the only alternative here.
20 THE WITNESS: I think from the point of view of those people who
21 were on the ground living in these communities, as I say, it was -- or
22 the immediate and credible threat of violence would be required to
23 achieve that end. And I base that on seeing so many situations or
24 observing, as a historian from a distance, so many situations in the war,
25 in the course of the war, in which territory changed hands and people
1 wanted to stay in their homes. They were not eager to relocate until
2 they saw the point of the gun directed at them. The leaders had a very
3 different notion that this would somehow be a very easy, acceptable
4 process, if only the leaders of the three groups could come together on a
5 solution. The response on the ground was very different.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Doctor, do I understand you to be saying that you
7 come to this conclusion based on your observation of other situations
8 elsewhere or based on what you observed happening within Bosnia and
10 THE WITNESS: Based on what I observed as a historian among the
11 ethnic groups in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Right. And I'm just suggesting that amongst these
13 groups, there is this viewpoint that is expressed by this person here and
14 I'm asking, are you holding to the view that that situation could not be
15 resolved but through violence or the threat of it, notwithstanding this
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
19 Madam Prosecutor, I am advised that you are left with about 15
20 minutes of your time.
21 MS. EDGERTON: That's fine, Your Honour. I'll endeavour to move
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
24 MS. EDGERTON: As efficiently as possible.
25 Q. Dr. Donia, this statement by Mr. Milinkovic made at the 34th
1 session of the RS Assembly was made in September 1993.
2 Are you aware as to whether ethnic cleansing on the territory of
3 Bosnia-Herzegovina had taken place by that time?
4 A. Yes, it had.
5 Q. Thank you. Have you, Dr. Donia, seen any evidence of expressions
6 in the course of your research, expressions by Bosnian Serb leaders that
7 they contemplated the use of force in achieving their territorial
9 A. Yes.
10 MS. EDGERTON: Could I ask, then, that 65 ter number 9150 be
11 displayed. Thank you.
12 Q. We have a B/C/S document on the screen in front of us. Do you
13 recognise that document, Dr. Donia? And I see the English is now
15 A. Yes. This is a transcript in B/C/S and English respectively of a
16 telephone conversation between Dr. Karadzic and his long-time friend and
17 fellow writer Gojko Djogo on the 12th of October, 1991.
18 Q. Do you attach any significance to this conversation in terms of
19 the question I've just asked you?
20 A. Yes. It is demonstrably a very forceful statement of Karadzic's
21 -- of his contemplation of physical violence and preparedness to use it.
22 MS. EDGERTON: In that regard, could we go over, please, to page
23 3 of the translation and page 2 of the B/C/S.
24 Q. When you refer to the contemplation of physical violence, looking
25 at the statements at the top of the right-hand -- top of the
1 English-language document on the right-hand side, is this what you're
2 referring to?
3 A. Yes, it is.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MS. EDGERTON: Could I ask that the transcript of this
6 conversation, Your Honours, be marked as the next exhibit.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: The exhibit is admitted into evidence. May it
8 please be given an exhibit number.
9 THE REGISTRAR: P342, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
11 MS. EDGERTON: Your indulgence now for one brief moment, Your
13 Your Honour, just having a look at the rest of the material, I'd
14 like to go through, I think to be as effective as possible, I would take
15 until the end of this session in my examination-in-chief, and while
16 recognising that this does go over our original estimate, I note that we
17 may, in the event we have saved time with the examination-in-chief of
18 other witnesses, we may transfer that time as the examining party to
19 witnesses. And I'd ask your leave, Your Honour, given that we have saved
20 time in the witnesses up to this date, to just be allowed to go over to
21 the end of this first session.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Where did you save time, by the way?
23 MS. EDGERTON: I don't stand corrected, Your Honour. I can't
24 answer your question as directly as I would hope because I need to -- I
25 would need to double-check on which witnesses we have managed to save
1 some time, so my apologies in that regard, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are forgiven.
3 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, sir.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed.
5 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, sir.
6 Q. At what level, in 1992 particularly, Dr. Donia, did ethnic
7 cleansing take place?
8 A. The ethnic cleansing in the spring and early summer of 1992
9 really took place at the municipal level. It took place one municipality
10 at a time on different dates over a period of about six, seven weeks, and
11 was executed by local SDS
12 the JNA or paramilitary groups or police forces. So it was very much a
13 municipality-based activity in the spring and early summer of 1992.
14 Q. Now, you've noted that the JNA had a role in that activity.
15 MS. EDGERTON: And in that regard could I direct you to 2065,
16 please. 2065. Page 159 of the English transcript and page 75 of the
17 B/C/S original.
18 Q. And while we have, albeit sideways, a cover of a document in
19 Serbo-Croatian on the screen, I'd like to ask you: Do you recognise
21 A. Yes, I do. It's the cover of a book, a memoire volume by
22 General Veljko Kadijevic, "Moje vidjenje raspada," or "My View of the
24 Q. Who was General Kadijevic?
25 A. I believe he was the Chief of Staff of the Yugoslav People's Army
1 at that time, in 1992.
2 Q. Thank you. Now could I direct you to the passage half way
3 through this page, the middle main paragraph that begins with the
4 sentence "Since the JNA ..." and ends with the words "... never closing
5 the door to cooperation with others." Have you seen that passage?
6 A. I'm sorry, I don't see the passage.
7 Q. On the right-hand side, the large paragraph in the middle of the
8 screen in front of you begins with the sentence "Since the JNA ..."
9 A. Yes, I see that.
10 Q. Does that document support your view that the JNA was involved?
11 A. Yes, it does.
12 MS. EDGERTON: Could we move one page over now to page 160 of the
13 English translation and page 76 of the original. Just the next page on
14 the English. Just the next page, page 160, of the English. Are you not
15 finding the next page?
16 THE USHER: Just one moment.
17 MS. EDGERTON: If it's not found --
18 THE WITNESS: There it is.
19 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
20 Q. Could I direct you, Dr. Donia, to the third sentence in this top
21 paragraph that reads "The commands and units of the JNA ..."
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: If it could be centralised, please. Could we
23 centralise that page, please, so that we can read the rest of the page.
24 No, to the left. Move it to the left, please. Thank you so much.
25 MS. EDGERTON:
1 Q. Yes. And the highlight -- the end of the highlight paragraph
2 ends with "... which would reflect its national interests and goals."
3 Dr. Donia, is this further support of your position?
4 A. Yes, it is.
5 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, could I ask these pages be marked as
6 the next exhibit, please.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: They are so marked. May they please be given
8 exhibit numbers.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P343, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
11 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
12 Q. Now, Dr. Donia, have you seen evidence during the course of your
13 research that the VJ, the Yugoslav Army, had a role in supporting the VRS
14 in their operations during the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina?
15 A. Just to clarify, the VJ didn't exist at that time. We're talking
16 about the JNA, the Yugoslav People's Army. And with that proviso --
17 Q. Sorry, Dr. Donia, my question took us forward in time, and my
18 question was: Have you seen evidence during the course of your research
19 that the VJ had a role in supporting the VRS --
20 A. Yes. Excuse me.
21 Q. -- in the operations during the conflict?
22 A. Pardon me, I misunderstood the context of your question. Yes, I
24 MS. EDGERTON: Could I take us, please, to 65 ter 00532. 00532.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: We seem to be having a difficulty with
3 Mr. Perisic seeing the B/C/S screen.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is very small, as it appears here.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: It's been consistent for him all day. He hasn't
6 been able to read it.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we suggest that -- thank you, Mr. Guy-Smith.
8 We'll make sure that ...
9 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you. Could we go to page 51 of the
10 English -- of the English, page 51. And, Your Honour, I am -- I may at
11 the end of the session be asking for a brief period of your indulgence in
12 the next session because of these technical things, but, as I said, I am
13 trying to move forward as efficiently as possible.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let's deal with that at the time.
15 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you. And page 42 of the B/C/S, please.
16 Q. Now, this is an excerpt from the transcript of the tape-recording
17 of the 50th session of the RS Assembly, dated 15 April 1995, a report
18 given by General Ratko Mladic.
19 MS. EDGERTON: Could I -- your indulgence for a moment.
20 Q. Could I direct your attention, Dr. Donia, to the paragraph that
21 begins with the words "As an illustration ..." and concludes with
22 "... this year's requirements."
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Can I have your comment, if any, on this report by
25 General Mladic?
1 A. General Mladic here is providing very specific information about
2 the source of materiel, weapons, and ammunition from various sources,
3 including from the VJ, and he makes clear that the VJ was a major
4 provider of those provisions in the course of the war up to that point.
5 Q. Up to that point being spring 1995, then?
6 A. Yes. April 1995.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Could we move in this same document to page 191,
8 which is an extract from a comment by General Manojlo Milovanovic.
9 English page 191, and B/C/S page 163.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: And could we enlarge the B/C/S sufficiently for
11 Mr. Perisic to see.
12 MS. EDGERTON: English page 191, please.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Your 15 minutes are up, ma'am. Are you ready now
14 with where you saved time?
15 [Prosecution counsel confer]
16 MS. EDGERTON: Your indulgence for a moment, Your Honour. No,
17 I'm not ready, but people are working to gather the information as to
18 where we saved time.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: And what do we do if we don't find it, and in the
20 meantime you have gone beyond your 15 minutes?
21 MS. EDGERTON: I would be asking the Court's indulgence, Your
22 Honour, given the technical and administrative matters that are implied
23 in presentation of testimony that involves such large documents to bear
24 with me for a short period of time.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: You mean you haven't taken them into account when
1 you gave the estimate of the amount of time that you would need for this
3 MS. EDGERTON: Perhaps I may have been optimistic, Your Honour,
4 to be perfectly honest. I had some familiarity with the import, but I
5 was optimistic.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you for your honesty. You may proceed.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 And I'm just not sure, if I can recover myself for a moment, that
9 we have the pages that we're looking for. Page 191 of 532. Thank you.
10 That should be the fourth paragraph on the page. That would be the large
11 paragraph I'd like to direct everyone's attention to, the eighth to
12 eleventh line from the top of the paragraph, and on the B/C/S transcript
13 it's page 163, first paragraph, fifth to ninth line, as I indicated, an
14 extract from a comment by General Milovanovic.
15 Q. First of all, Dr. Donia, are you familiar with who
16 General Milovanovic is?
17 A. Only that he was a high-ranking general in the VRS by virtue of
18 the fact that only high-ranking generals spoke to the Bosnian Serb
20 Q. Thank you. Now, if I can direct you down to about the seventh
21 line, General Milovanovic begins a comment regarding salaries.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And notes in particular --
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, I think we're having some --
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: We've got two counsel standing on the opposite
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: We have difficulties with the B/C/S page. If you
3 would just read it in English, it could be translated, and then you can
4 figure out what the appropriate page would be at a later point in time.
5 But that way Mr. Perisic would at least be in a position to hear what's
6 being said and would be aware of the particular information that's being
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Edgerton.
9 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you. Just for the record, I'll indicate
10 again, it will be page 163 of the B/C/S, first paragraph. I'm sorry now
11 I can't read the English version.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: I was just going to say I hadn't caught up with
13 you where you were talking about salaries on the English, so if you can
14 also sort of show us where.
15 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Right.
17 MS. EDGERTON: Seventh line down from the top of this large
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Starting with "Consequently ..."
20 MS. EDGERTON: Starting with "We did not regard these salaries as
21 charity, nor did we accept them, as somebody from the benches is
22 shouting, in order to serve them ..."
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Now I'm fine. Attend to the B/C/S for
24 Mr. --
25 MS. EDGERTON: I'll continue reading, then, as my friend's
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
3 MS. EDGERTON: "We received them following an agreement which the
4 RS Presidency made with the Presidency of Yugoslavia. We never accused
5 you, or rather the state, Why don't you pay us? We know that with your
6 signatures, you made sure that we should be paid by Yugoslavia."
7 Q. Dr. Donia, in relation to this theme of support, do you attribute
8 any significance to this comment?
9 A. Yes. It specifically demonstrates the payment of salaries from
10 the Yugoslav government, the Government of Yugoslavia, to officers of the
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MS. EDGERTON: Then dealing with these lines from document 00532,
14 or these pages, I'd like to tender them, please, as a Prosecution exhibit
15 and note that already some pages of 532 have been admitted as P312. So
16 my submission, Your Honour, would be that page -- pages 51 and 191 of the
17 English and pages 42 and 163 of the B/C/S be admitted as the -- as
18 Prosecution exhibits, part of P312, please.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: They are so admitted, and they will form part of
20 Exhibit P312.
21 THE REGISTRAR: The pages are added, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
23 MS. EDGERTON: And could we turn, please, to 2160.01, parts of
24 which are admitted, as far as I understand - and I'll double-check with
25 Ms. Javier - as P231.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: That is correct. And what pages of that 65 ter
2 number do you now want?
3 MS. EDGERTON: Your indulgence for a moment, please, Your Honour.
4 Page 73 of the English and page 93 of the B/C/S. Would you please scroll
5 down to the third paragraph. No, I'm sorry, that's not the correct page,
6 and my apologies, Your Honour. Your indulgence for a moment. I'll move
7 on, Your Honour, rather than take some time.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: What do you want to do with this 65 ter number?
9 MS. EDGERTON: No, Your Honour. I want to scroll up. I've
10 actually just spotted the sentence that I was looking for. Thank you.
11 Q. Halfway through this first paragraph, which is an extract of a
12 passage from General -- from Dr. Karadzic during the 53rd session of the
13 RS Assembly held in Jahorina on 28 August 1995. I'd like to direct
14 everyone to the line that begins halfway through this first paragraph
15 "Gentlemen, one should know that we took over personnel ..."
16 Do you see that, Dr. Donia?
17 A. It's within this sentence, yes.
18 Q. Yes.
19 A. The sentence actually begins "You know that well ..." and then on
20 the following line, continues, "Gentlemen, one should know that we took
21 over personnel." Yes, I see that.
22 Q. Down to the sentence that ends with "... we were also given a
23 large amount."
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Is this articulation by Dr. Karadzic consistent with your
2 A. Yes, it is.
3 MS. EDGERTON: Then, Your Honour, could I ask that this page be
4 admitted, please, as the next Prosecution Exhibit? That's page 73 and
5 B/C/S page 93. I should note some pages have been exhibited, as I said
6 earlier, as part of P231. Could they be added to P231.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: This page is so admitted, and it is added to
8 Exhibit P231.
9 THE REGISTRAR: The page is added, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
11 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, we have the basic data that we were
12 looking for. We'd like to compute this at the break and then report back
13 in detail to you after the break, if that could be possible.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's fine.
15 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, sir.
16 Q. I'd like to move on to one final area now please, Dr. Donia, and
17 that's related to the fifth strategic objective, partition of the city of
19 effective state authority in each section. Do you have a view based on
20 your detailed research into Sarajevo
21 background of the siege of Sarajevo
22 of the city?
23 A. Yes. The Bosnian Serb leaders viewed the siege of Sarajevo
24 necessary to prevent the functioning of the government of
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina and as a critical collective hostage, creating in
2 concessions from the Government of Bosnia-Herzegovina and from the
3 international community.
4 MS. EDGERTON: Could I turn to 65 ter 2301.01, which is an
5 excerpt from a transcript of the 17th session of the RS Assembly, held in
6 Jahorina in July 1992. English page 15; B/C/S page 13. Do you recognise
7 the -- thank you. I'd like to draw everyone's attention to an excerpt
8 from a comment by Radovan Karadzic in the English page at line 8 and
9 B/C/S page 13, lines approximately 17, 18, and 19.
10 Q. Dr. Donia, do you see the sentence that begins with the word
11 "Thanks to the Sarajevo
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Ending with "... was never established outside Yugoslavia
14 this consistent with your position?
15 A. Yes, it is.
16 MS. EDGERTON: Could this page, please, be marked as the next
17 Prosecution exhibit?
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is admitted into evidence. May it be so
19 marked, please.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, pages 1, page 13 in the English and
21 page 13 in B/C/S will become Exhibit number P344.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
23 MS. EDGERTON:
24 Q. Can you comment or describe for the Trial Chamber the
25 geographical situation of the city of Sarajevo, Dr. Donia?
1 A. The city grew up in a narrow valley, east-west valley that is
2 narrowest at its east point and widens as one goes to the west in the
3 city to become actually a plain, the Sarajevo plain, to the west.
4 Consequently the historic centre of the city is surrounded by -- flanked
5 on at both north and south by relatively high hills which render the
6 valley position very visible and vulnerable to anyone who would come in
7 and wish to subdue the area.
8 Q. Now, in your report prepared for the Dragomir Milosevic case, you
9 talk about the political and military surrounding of the city of
11 fifth objective, partition of the city of Sarajevo? Do you see any
12 congruity between the surrounding of the city and the partition of the
14 A. Yes. And that congruence lies in the demographic distribution
15 within the city itself and in its surrounding hills, or perhaps more
16 accurately, the Bosnian Serb leaders' understanding of the demographic
17 distribution. Specifically, the city itself, the urban part located in
18 that valley, that east-west valley, was very ethnically mixed and at many
19 points in the highrise communities, ethnically indeterminate or
20 completely mixed by individual apartment.
21 The surrounding hills had historically, that is, say, from the
22 nineteenth century, been largely inhabited by Serb -- by Serb peasants
23 and rural villages. That was diluted somewhat in the course of the
24 latter part of the twentieth century, but nonetheless the distinction can
25 still be seen in the census numbers from 1991.
1 Therefore, the concept of division really amounted to
2 encirclement in this situation based on the Serb notion, the notion of
3 the Bosnian Serb nationalist leaders that the surrounding areas would be
4 Serbian and the centre of the city would be what they call its Muslim
6 Q. Thank you.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Your indulgence for a moment, please, Your
9 Q. Have you seen evidence in your research that would reflect how
10 important the Sarajevo
11 A. Yes.
12 MS. EDGERTON: One final exhibit, then. 65 ter 2301.01, please.
13 English page 15; B/C/S page 12.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: We have just had that as Exhibit P344, ma'am.
15 MS. EDGERTON: Could we please go back to P344, then. Thank you,
16 Your Honours. There's a further passage I'd like Dr. Donia to highlight.
17 After that, Your Honours, one or two very short areas, and I note the
18 time that I estimate wouldn't be longer than ten minutes.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: We're at the time for break actually right now.
20 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, I see that.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: You can't add two more points, but go back to
22 P344, please.
23 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
24 Alternatively, Your Honour, if we -- with respect, if we take the
25 break now, I might be able to profit from a few minutes to deliver the
1 figures that I had promised to Your Honour accurately and make sure the
2 technical side of this goes smoothly so we can conclude with some measure
3 of alacrity.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. We'll then take a break and come back at a
5 quarter to 11.00. Court adjourned.
6 --- Recess taken at 10.16 a.m.
7 --- On resuming at 10.48 a.m.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Edgerton.
9 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 If I may, I'd like to report back to you on the matter of where
11 we had gained time, Your Honour, from our estimates. Shall I do that?
12 Although it won't be a complete picture, you can appreciate it's a
13 complicated calculation that Ms. Javier has been doing exclusively, but
14 I'd like to advise you and report back, as I indicated, if I may.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes.
16 MS. EDGERTON: In respect of the evidence of Mr. van Lynden, it
17 was estimated 3 hours, and the Prosecution took 2 hours and 27 minutes,
18 approximately, so a gain of approximately 30 minutes. In respect of the
19 estimated time for the witness MP-229, the estimated time for
20 examination-in-chief was 30 minutes and the Prosecution took
21 approximately 15 minutes, so there a further gain. In respect of the
22 witness Slavica Livnjak, the estimated time was 1 hour; the time for
23 examination-in-chief, 30 minutes, so again an approximate gain of 30
24 minutes. Would you like me to go on, Your Honour?
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: I've just been doing calculations. So far you've
1 got 45 minutes saved, which taken the time you've taken with this
2 witness, you have a credit of 45 minutes.
3 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, I hope I'll only need to ask for your
4 indulgence for a credit of about half of that, 20 minutes or so, to
5 conclude, if I may.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Please do so.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you. Having looked at P334, the passage I
8 would have highlighted is incorporated into the exhibit. So I'd like to
9 move to two more final exhibits, but let me ask this question of the
10 witness first.
11 Q. Dr. Donia, we left talking about -- we left where, at page 28,
12 lines 15 to 18, you equated the concept of division to encirclement with
13 regard to the situation in Sarajevo
14 you date -- or have you seen any evidence of Bosnian Serb leaders
15 contemplating encirclement of Sarajevo
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Do you recall where that might have been?
18 A. The 16th Assembly session discussed encirclement. It was
19 referenced in a number of other -- Bosnian Serb nationalist leaders
20 referenced the concept of encirclement in a number of other Assembly
21 sessions as well.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Perhaps I could ask that 65 ter 9148 be displayed,
23 which is a transcript of an intercepted telephone conversation between
24 Radovan Karadzic and Slobodan Milosevic on September 9, 1991. It appears
25 in B/C/S on the left.
1 Q. Are you familiar with this transcripted conversation, Dr. Donia,
2 which now appears in B/C/S -- or in English on the left?
3 A. Yes, I am.
4 MS. EDGERTON: If I could take us to page 4 of the English and
5 page 4 of the B/C/S, the very last paragraph in respect of both of those
6 versions. Can we at all have the -- all right. We have B/C/S on the
7 left. Can we have the English on the right? Wonderful, thank you. Can
8 I direct you to Radovan Karadzic's comment at the very bottom of the
9 page, please, on the English, very bottom of the page. Thank you.
10 Q. Where Karadzic says: "Let them do this as soon as possible ..."
11 to Slobodan Milosevic. I'd like to ask you two questions. How do you
12 interpret Karadzic's comment in this conversation?
13 No, actually, first, could I just ask you to, in a nutshell,
14 explain to the Trial Chamber the context within which this conversation
15 takes place.
16 A. Yes. The conversation took place in the midst of a situation
17 along the border between Bosnia-Herzegovina on the one hand and Croatia
18 on the other in which Milan Martic, the designated Minister of the
19 Interior of the Serb entity in Krajina had been detained by police of
20 Bosnia-Herzegovina in the tiny town of Otok, and this had angered
21 Karadzic to the point where he was calling for the -- he was asking
22 Milosevic to get the JNA to intervene to liberate Martic from the custody
23 of the Bosnian police.
24 This touched off a number of conversations between Karadzic,
25 Milosevic, and several other leaders of the Bosnian Serbs, in an effort
1 to make this happen. And in the course of this particular conversation,
2 Karadzic is reporting that he has received word that the people from the
3 area of Romanija were preparing to cut off access to the city of
5 Q. Do you attribute any significance to this comment?
6 A. Yes. It is the first time that I've seen -- chronologically it's
7 the first time that I note Karadzic expressing the possibility of
8 isolating, cutting off, Sarajevo
9 retaliation against something that the Bosnian Muslim leaders were doing.
10 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, could I ask that this transcript 9148
11 be tendered as a Prosecution exhibit, please.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is admitted as an exhibit. May it please be
13 given an exhibit number.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P345, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
16 MS. EDGERTON: And the final exhibit, 65 ter 9149, being a
17 transcript of an intercepted conversation, the same date, between
18 Radovan Karadzic and Nikola Koljevic. 9149. I see the B/C/S version.
19 Q. Dr. Donia, I'd like to ask you, is this one of the string of
20 conversations you -- or a number of conversations you were referring to
21 at page 33, line 11, just now?
22 A. Yes.
23 MS. EDGERTON: Could we move in both documents over to page 2,
24 please. Could I just direct everyone in the English version to the
25 seventh line from the top where Karadzic is noted as the speaker and
1 he -- can you scroll up, please.
2 Q. And he says, "They'll cut off Sarajevo ..."
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Do you have any comment or attribute any significance to this
6 A. This is very similar to the statement that he made to Milosevic
7 in approximately the same time frame and refers to the isolation or
8 cutting off of Sarajevo
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MS. EDGERTON: If this is the next exhibit, please.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is admitted. May it please be given an exhibit
13 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P346, Your Honours.
14 MS. EDGERTON:
15 Q. And a final area, please, Dr. Donia. I'd like to know, given
16 your experience in events in the city of Sarajevo, in particular over the
17 years, have you seen public evidence that the citizens of Sarajevo were
18 targeted by -- or were the subject of shelling and sniping during the
20 A. Yes, I have.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: You see --
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: A couple of things. First of all, this is
24 certainly outside the proffered area of his testimony, that being an
25 expert historian, and he is now -- is he now being offered as a fact
1 witness? I mean, if so, so be it, and I'll deal with it as you will.
2 But I'm somewhat taken aback.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Edgerton, do you have any response?
4 MS. EDGERTON: I do, Your Honour. If I can just have a moment to
5 turn to the page of Dr. Donia's report. Actually, it's a series of
6 pages, and without having the e-court number, there's a chapter in his
7 report called "Sarajevo
8 and on the actual document it's pages 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, and part of
9 page 35, that touch on the subject of public exposure of events in the
10 city of Sarajevo
11 merely relating to that.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: You say that's from page?
13 MS. EDGERTON: Of the document, page 29. In fact, that whole
14 chapter, Your Honour, generally deals with the international reaction to
15 the events in Sarajevo
16 about public evidence, and depending on the witness's answer, I may go
17 further with that.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is this the chapter that's headed "International
20 MS. EDGERTON: No. It's headed "Sarajevo and its Siege in the
21 International Spotlight."
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: On reflection, I'll let it go.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
24 You may proceed, madam.
25 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you. If I may just have a moment to go back
1 to my question.
2 Q. So, Dr. Donia, have you seen evidence during the course of your
3 research that the citizens of Sarajevo
4 evidence that the citizens of Sarajevo
5 sniping during the conflict?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And is that evidence in the media?
8 A. It was -- there was a great deal of evidence that was
9 disseminated by international media and regional media about shelling and
10 sniping directed against the city of Sarajevo
12 Q. When you say "regional media," can you identify any media sources
13 in particular?
14 A. Well, the media sources are numerous. Certainly the media within
16 as well as publications like The New York Times, Christian Science
17 Monitor, Washington
19 Q. And do you recall, and if you don't, please indicate, but do you
20 recall which media sources based in Belgrade -- or any media sources
21 based in Belgrade
22 A. Well, the wire service TANJUG carried very pointed, very
23 excellent coverage of the siege and the general situation in
24 Bosnia-Herzegovina throughout the war, and that was often picked up by
25 other publications, print publications. And visual media in Belgrade
1 well did from time to time. I recall seeing such reports, but I don't
2 remember the specific origin of the footage that was carried.
3 Q. And just one last question to round things off. Could you
4 explain what TANJUG was?
5 A. TANJUG was the -- originated in the Yugoslav socialist era. It
6 was the official wire-service provider for newspapers throughout the
7 former Yugoslavia
8 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, with that answer, that concludes my
9 examination-in-chief. Of course, at the end of his testimony altogether,
10 I'll have a motion with respect to his report.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Edgerton, before you sit down, yesterday you
12 referred to a couple of 65 ter documents, and when I asked you what you
13 intended to do with them, you said I'm still using them. I'll deal with
14 them at the end, an nothing ended up happening to those documents. That
15 was 65 ter 02619, 02290, and 09224. What do you want to do with those 65
16 ter documents?
17 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, I recognise the first two numbers you
18 gave me as the 65 ter numbers of the reports upon which Dr. Donia has
19 based his testimony, and at the beginning of his testimony, I indicated
20 that the way I interpreted the Chamber's guidance in their decision as to
21 Dr. Donia's reports overall was that the Chamber would be prepared to
22 consider the admission of those reports at the conclusion of his
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. So 02619 and 02290 are Dr. Donia's reports.
25 MS. EDGERTON: Correct.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good. Now, 09224?
2 MS. EDGERTON: That was -- oh, and if I may, Your Honour, you've
3 just mentioned 2619, but the 65 ter is 2169, I'm advised. Oh, I don't
4 know. I think Ms. Javier is going on my list of those numbers, and
5 before I correct anybody, I should double-check what exactly --
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: I think you should.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, thank you, Your Honour. You've seen I have
8 this tendency now.
9 9224, Your Honour, is the map. I'll just check which one it was.
10 But there was a map which Dr. Donia used to illustrate ...
11 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Madam Edgerton.
13 Madam Registrar has helped us. That was the census map, and it was
14 admitted as Exhibit P338.
15 MS. EDGERTON: And that was his marked map which was admitted as
16 P338, and I'm wondering if it would assist everyone, for our
17 record-keeping, if I asked now for the unmarked map to be tendered as
18 well. If it's useful, I think, for everyone in reviewing things later on
19 to have a map that's unmarked with nothing obscured with the marks the
20 witness might have made.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: What is the 65 ter number of the unmarked map?
22 MS. EDGERTON: 9224, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: But 9224 is now the marked map.
24 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, Your Honour.
25 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's the whole question of technology, and some of
2 us are completely illiterate in that field.
3 MS. EDGERTON: You're not alone, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Then the registrar says that 09224 will also be
5 admitted as the clean map, the unmarked map, and at the same time as the
6 marked map. Don't ask me how that happens. The registrar can help us.
7 Yes, Madam Registrar.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P347, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
10 All I say, and I still say this with my admission that I don't
11 understand technology, we now have two 09224 65 ter numbers, being
12 Exhibit P338 and Exhibit P347. This is what we are trying to avoid all
13 this time. Now we're creating it.
14 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, ma'am. You have finished
16 your cross-examination, you said?
17 MS. EDGERTON: No, that concludes my examination-in-chief.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm so sorry.
19 MS. EDGERTON: That's all right, Your Honour. That's fine.
20 Thank you very much, and thank you for your patience.
21 Thank you, Dr. Donia.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
23 Mr. Guy-Smith.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Fifteen seconds, please. Thank you.
25 Cross-examination by Mr. Guy-Smith
1 Q. Good morning, sir.
2 A. Good morning.
3 Q. Just so I want to make sure that we start off on the right foot,
4 do you prefer to be called Dr. Donia or Mr. Donia?
5 A. You may call me Mr. Donia or anything you wish.
6 Q. You can call me Ray, you can call me Jay, one of those.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Okay. I'd like to start for a moment, if I could, to see if I
9 can get an understanding of your background, and by that I'm specifically
10 referring to your background with regard to your studies in history and
11 what you've done in your life, if I may.
12 A. Certainly.
13 Q. And as I understand the review of your CV, you, I believe, went
14 to the University of Michigan
15 A. From my graduate studies, yes.
16 Q. Okay. And there you became enamoured with, and I use the word in
17 a positive sense, you became enamoured with a particular region of the
18 world and a particular people.
19 A. Yes. My first encounter and becoming enamoured with the former
21 then I renewed that in graduate school in Michigan.
22 Q. I see. In that regard, I think it would be fair to say that
23 you've travelled a long road in terms of attempting to understand many of
24 the disparate views and disparate issues that revolved around, for the
25 moment what I'll call, the former Yugoslavia
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And you spent some time, and I don't want to go way back in
3 history because, among other things, I don't think we really have the
4 time, but apart from that, I don't know how fruitful it will ultimately
5 be, but you spent a fair amount of time dealing with the history of those
6 peoples, and I'm using that as a collective sense for the moment, before
7 the twentieth century.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. There came a time when you left college and you went into the
10 world of business.
11 A. Yes. I left -- went into the world of business to work for
12 Merrill Lynch in 1981 when I was -- at that time I'd been teaching at the
13 University of Oregon
14 Q. When you left to move into the world of business, that occurred
15 at a point in time when the economy of the United States was slightly
16 different than it is today.
17 A. It was closer to the same, unfortunately, at that time. It was
18 not good.
19 Q. It got better.
20 A. It got better.
21 Q. And better and better, if you were, for example, in the market,
22 and by that I'm referring to the stock market.
23 A. I think it got better in general.
24 Q. As a matter of fact, you profited handsomely from your work, did
25 you not?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And as a result of what you were able to do in that regard, you,
3 as a matter of fact, if I'm not mistaken, have endowed the University of
6 A. Yes. Altogether that's the sum, yes.
7 Q. And that endowment is an endowment for the purposes of studying
8 various aspects of history; is that correct?
9 A. No. It is an endowment for a professorship, the Fred Cuny
10 professorship, a university professorship, in the history of human
12 Q. Okay. Apart from that, I take a slight digression for a moment.
13 I know that you've testified on a number of occasions here, and I believe
14 that this is a question that you've been asked a number of times. I ask
15 you that same question which deals with what I believe to be the
16 Donja Vakuf foundation, which is a foundation that you started; correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And that's a foundation that focuses itself on any particular
19 issue, or is that a foundation, once again, a generalised foundation that
20 gives -- that gives funds to those people that are deemed to be deserving
21 within the context of historical studies?
22 A. Well, first of all, let me say it doesn't exist anymore.
23 Q. Oh.
24 A. I closed it three years ago.
25 Q. Okay.
1 A. The board of directors closed it three years ago with a terminal
2 donation to the University of Michigan
3 Q. So what happened is those funds -- the Donja Vakuf funds
4 transferred over into the charitable trust that I mentioned a few minutes
6 A. Directly to the endowment.
7 Q. Okay. While the Donja Vakuf Foundation was in existence, who
8 were the individuals who made a determination as to how those funds, if
9 funds were to be dispersed to anyone?
10 A. Our family. The --
11 Q. That's fine. I need no more than that. And did you at that --
12 during the period of time that the foundation was in existence, did you
13 make a determination to fund individuals in Bosnia who were involved in
14 historical research or human rights work?
15 A. No.
16 THE COURT REPORTER: Is there another mic to your right that you
17 could use instead? I'm just picking up --
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm happy to do whatever you want me to do, and
19 if my voice is dropping, I told her to yell at me.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Your neighbour was fidgeting.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: I also told her to yell at me whenever she
22 couldn't hear me. Is that better?
23 THE COURT REPORTER: Yes, thank you.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH:
25 Q. You mentioned in your testimony earlier, I believe --
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: And I tell all parties right now that we are
2 struggling a little bit with regard to the issue of reference pages for
3 yesterday. The printers in the Defence room, one is out of ink; the
4 other one is not working. We have the -- the daily from yesterday which
5 we have been operating off of. We have attempted to transpose the
6 numbers over to the daily that I was using yesterday. So if I misstate a
7 page at any point in time, if you need a page reference, I apologise.
8 But we're trying to get an appropriate official transcript printed;
9 however, there are X number of teams working, and it's an administrative
10 issue. Hopefully, I don't think we are going to run into too many
11 problems. Just so you know.
12 Q. You mentioned, I believe, yesterday that you were going to be
13 teaching this summer; is that correct?
14 A. I'll be teaching this winter.
15 Q. This winter.
16 A. Starting in January.
17 Q. And is that at the University of Michigan
18 A. Yes, it is.
19 Q. That's the university that you've endowed?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. You're going to be teaching history of some fashion?
22 A. No. I'll be teaching -- I will be teaching and coordinating a
23 survey course in the study of Eastern Europe, interdisciplinary course.
24 Q. Is that a course that you teach as a full professor, as an
25 associate professor, as a visiting professor?
1 A. As a visiting professor.
2 Q. I see. Now, again, you indicated that you have been appointed to
3 the academy, if I'm not mistaken, and I want to make sure I've got this
4 term correct, The Academy of Sciences in Bosnia-Herzegovina, somewhat
5 recently, as a member.
6 A. As a corresponding member.
7 Q. Corresponding member, thank you.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And that particular academy, that's for Islamic studies, is it
11 A. The -- no.
12 Q. It's not?
13 A. No.
14 Q. What is that academy for?
15 A. The Academy of Arts and Sciences of Bosnia-Herzegovina is a
16 academic consortium which admits members or regularly recognises people
17 by membership for their scholarly achievements. It's been there since --
18 it's been there about 55 years.
19 Q. And at this point in time, there are a fair number of -- there
20 are a fair number of Serbian members, are there?
21 A. You know, I don't know. I actually was going to look.
22 Certainly, the majority of members are not Serbs or Croats, but there are
23 some Serbs and some Croats who are members of the Academy of Arts
25 Q. And do you think that the majority being such fall into some of
1 the same theoretical bases that you've suggested to us here, which is
2 that the decision as to who is going to be in that particular academy is
3 a constructed one, as opposed to a primordial one? In this sense, what
4 I'm trying to suggest to you is that if it was a primordial one, then the
5 issue would be one of, as a term you've used, intellectual merit, and if
6 it was a primordial one, then it would be one that would be, let's say, a
7 group identifiable, and in this particular situation a group identifiable
8 of individuals as being neither Croat or Serb, as you mentioned.
9 A. No.
10 Q. Okay. You are not -- just so we're clear, because you know a
11 number of times I've stood and objecting with regard to the area of your
12 expertise, so I'd like to make sure we've defined the area of your
13 expertise. You are not a political scientist.
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. You are not an anthropologist?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. Sociologist?
18 A. Right.
19 Q. Psychologist?
20 A. Correct.
21 Q. Psychiatrist?
22 A. Very much not so.
23 Q. Very much not so. A demographer?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Statistician?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Political scientist.
3 A. That's the second time I'm not, yes.
4 Q. I apologise; I don't think I said that. So I did. Lawyer?
5 A. No, I'm not.
6 Q. Anthropologist I've mentioned. Archaeologist, obviously, you're
7 not, because that would be a harder science.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. I believe that I've covered the social sciences generally, have I
11 A. You could say geography, if you wish. I'm not a geographer.
12 Q. Okay. Very well. And once again, just in terms of dealing with
13 your expertise, you are not a linguist?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. And you learned what I will call B/C/S late in life; is that
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And without asking your age, because as my constitutional law
19 professor told me the two questions you never ask a woman, one is her age
20 and the other is whether she's a member of the communist party, being an
21 American, I have no interest in your age, but --
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: You're not suggesting the witness is a woman.
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: No, I'm not, Your Honour.
24 THE WITNESS: Neither am I a member of the communist party.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay.
1 Q. How old were you when you first learned the language?
2 A. I'm 63 years old now, and I started learning B/C/S before it was
3 called B/C/S by anybody at graduate school at the University of Michigan
4 in 1973.
5 Q. Okay. So you've been working with the language for some 30-plus
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And you've told us that your speaking is good, your reading and
9 your writing, I believe, are both very good, or something like that. I
10 mean they are above adequate, in any event.
11 A. I said my speaking was very good.
12 Q. Okay.
13 A. My reading is very good, and my writing is good.
14 Q. Okay. In that regard, when you were doing research in the
15 original language, did you do all of the work by yourself? And by that I
16 mean did you read the original documents and then translate them for
17 purposes of your work?
18 A. It varied.
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. There are some documents for which -- first of all, there are
21 some documents in English. There are --
22 Q. With no translation, obviously.
23 A. There are some documents that I encountered only in B/C/S,
24 typically noted, those documents -- that is, made notes of is documents
25 in English, and then in some cases subsequently translated them myself.
1 In general, I prefer to work with English translations; mine if I have
2 to, other peoples if they are available.
3 Q. With regard to the issue, first of all, of your translation
4 efforts and those alone, and I understand that you're not in a position
5 to quantify the number of documents that you translated on your own and
6 then used for purposes of your research or your reports, in that regard
7 did you obtain the benefit of anybody who was conversant in the language
8 to a greater degree than you are? And by that I mean it was their mother
10 A. Very occasionally. Every once in awhile I would consult someone
11 about a phrase that I couldn't quite understand or didn't make sense to
12 me, but probably in the course of the whole thing, not more than 10, 15
14 Q. Okay. And as you've told us, you preferred to work in English,
15 so to a certain extent what you were doing is you were relying on
16 documents that had been translated by someone else for purposes of your
17 reports and research, the documents initially being in B/C/S.
18 A. No. In almost all cases I either encountered those in B/C/S or
19 had the benefit of seeing them in both languages if the document
20 originated in B/C/S.
21 Q. Okay. As I understood your testimony, your craft consists of
22 principally writing history. Those were the words that you used.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And in that regard you've described, among other things, that you
25 use -- and now I'm referring to the reports that are the subject matter
1 of your discussion here, and that was a report that you prepared, I
2 believe, in 2002, which is presently identified as 20619, 65 ter number,
3 and a report that you prepared in 2006, which is presently identified as
4 65 ter number 02290. And I'm just doing that for purposes of the record
5 and for nothing more.
6 You've described to us that you used a narrative form in those
7 reports for purposes of conveying the information that you deemed
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Before you wrote the first report, and that's the report in 2002,
11 could you tell us, please -- and that's the report -- do you remember
12 which case you did that report for?
13 A. Yes. That was the report for the Krajisnik case.
14 Q. Okay. Before you began writing that report, were you supplied
15 with any documents by the Prosecution?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. What were you supplied with?
18 A. I was supplied with the transcripts and minutes of a number of
19 sessions, not all but a number of sessions, of what you have suggested we
20 call the Bosnian Serb Assembly.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. I also was provided with some documents from the SDS minutes and
23 correspondence that were left in the SDS -- were acquired by the Office
24 of the Prosecutor from SDS
25 Q. You were also supplied with a copy of the indictment, were you
2 A. Yes, I was.
3 Q. And the same would be true in regard to the report that you
4 prepared in 2006. You were supplied with a series of documents; correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And you were supplied with a copy of the indictment.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. With regard to the report that you prepared in 2002, were there
9 any memorialised conversations or communications with regard to the
10 purpose of your report?
11 A. Not that I recall.
12 Q. With regard to the report in 2006, were there any memorialised
13 conversations or communications with regard to the purpose of that
15 A. Not that I recall.
16 Q. Okay. With regard, then, to the first report, the report that
17 you prepared in 2002, who were you dealing with for purposes of this
18 report? And by that I mean who called you or how were you contacted in
19 the first instance for purposes of determining whether or not you were in
20 a position to supply the Prosecution with a report?
21 A. Alan Tieger contacted me, a prosecutor with the Office of the
23 Q. And when Mr. Tieger contacted you, he indicated -- once again,
24 I'm putting this in terms of general subject matter, not in terms of
25 specific words, he indicated that he was involved in a prosecution, was
1 the prosecution of a particular individual, that individual was
2 Mr. Krajisnik, and he wished for you to assist him in preparing a report
3 with regard to information that he was concerned with to further his
4 prosecution, and in that regard he also gave you a copy of the indictment
5 so you would be aware of the facts as he perceived them to be.
6 A. Aware of the facts?
7 Q. The facts, as he perceived them to be.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And aware of the -- without getting involved in the law, aware of
10 the theoretical bases upon which he was intending to proceed with his
12 A. No. I wouldn't say he -- he didn't provide me with that.
13 Q. Well, when you read the indictment, the indictment supplied that
14 to you, did it not? The indictment said more than just fact, fact, fact.
15 It gave you information concerning what the theories were upon which the
16 Prosecution believed there was liability as regards Mr. Krajisnik.
17 A. I'm not familiar enough with the legal interpretation of this,
18 but he never, nor did the indictment, give me an idea of the theory that
19 he was proceeding on.
20 Q. Did the indictment give you an idea of what criminal activity
21 Mr. Tieger believed Mr. Krajisnik was guilty of?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And it identified certain crimes; right?
24 A. Alleged crimes, yes.
25 Q. And it -- very well. And it identified what Mr. Tieger believed
1 Mr. Krajisnik's role was in those crimes.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Okay. And that was information that you were armed with before
4 you undertook the writing of this report.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And the same would be true for the report that you wrote in 2006
7 with regard to Mr. Milosevic, Dragomir Milosevic.
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Now, those are not the only cases that you've been involved in.
10 This is either your ninth or tenth case here.
11 A. Somewhere around 12 or 13, I believe.
12 Q. Okay. I was looking at your CV. I think I got up to -- I got up
13 to nine
14 supplied with an indictment by the Prosecutor to assist you in an
15 understanding of what they were seeking to prove against particular
17 A. Yes, either supplied with or directed to on a web site.
18 Q. Okay. And as a matter of fact, an examination of the indictment,
19 for your purposes to be fair, is a critical document in understanding the
20 nature and contours and parameters of the report that you were going to
22 A. Yes, and the topic of the report.
23 Q. Very well. Just in passing here, you were asked the question, I
24 believe, of whether or not you've ever testified or been approached by
25 the Defence for purposes of writing a report on behalf of the Defence.
1 A. I answered that I had -- I never had.
2 Q. And the answer was you had not. Well, considering your
3 expertise, I wish to pose to you just for a moment just a quick
4 hypothetical question, which is based upon your view, if the Defence were
5 to approach you and ask you to submit a report which, for example, the
6 assertion of a defence for purposes of countering the charges against the
7 defendant, for example, a defence that an attempt to legitimise the
8 Bosnian war by arguing that Serbia
9 been long-standing and that Bosnia-Herzegovina was and still is part of a
10 medieval Croatia
11 A. Well, I'm always looking for work.
12 Q. I understand that.
13 A. But I think the answer to the question is, if I prepare the
14 report that I am prepared to prepare on such a topic, will it be accepted
15 by the person commissioning it as useful, and the answer to that question
16 has normally been yes, but not always.
17 Q. My question is slightly different, I think, which is: As an
18 expert historian, if you were asked to -- if I called you up on the phone
19 and said, Listen, my client is being charged, and this is the defence,
20 and I believe there is a historical basis to this defence and I would
21 like to have your involved, I'd like for you to write this report for me,
22 sir, because you're the expert, would you undertake that task? For
23 example, the example that I just gave you, which is that the Bosnian war
24 was legitimate and the argument that I wish to pose is that Serbia
1 Bosnia-Herzegovina was and still is part of medieval Croatia. Would you
2 do it?
3 A. I would do it, yes.
4 Q. You would do it.
5 A. Mm-hm.
6 Q. Now, similarly, if I was going to make a --
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just for my own understanding, when we say the
8 Bosnian war is legitimate, who is speaking? Is this from the perspective
9 of the Bosniaks?
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: This is -- this would be from the standpoint of
11 an individual who is being charged who is either Serbian or Croatian.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Not Bosnian.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: Not Bosnian, no.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: So by "Bosnian war," you mean that the attack of
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, it's difficult -- I think you've focused on
17 one of the issues as kind of difficult. It's hard to really determine
18 who -- and I'm doing this internally here for the moment. There were a
19 number of different factions or sides within what has been called the
20 Bosnian war, so let me be more specific because I think I understand what
21 your concern may be.
22 Q. Having the Judge's question in mind, I'm defending a Croatian
23 general. Based upon all of the information that you have, would you
24 undertake the task, as I've framed it here?
25 A. I'm not sure how you've framed it, actually.
1 Q. Okay, which is -- let me do it again. Which is to legitimise --
2 my position is that -- as Croatian general is that my activity was
3 legitimate. The war I fought was a legitimate war. And the reason it
4 was legitimate was because the -- my claims to the area have been
5 long-standing and that area, Bosnia-Herzegovina, was and still is part of
6 medieval Croatia
7 A. Not that report, no.
8 Q. Okay. So if I called you up and said, This is what I want, this
9 is my defence, you would say, Listen, I can't do that, I'm sorry, because
10 based upon my assessment of history, that is not something I can do.
11 A. That's correct. I would not.
12 Q. Okay. Now, if I were to mount -- if I were to mount another
13 potential defence argument that -- well, I won't do that. That's okay.
14 And the reason that you wouldn't do what I suggested is because
15 you have at this point, and you've had for some years, a definite view of
16 who is responsible for criminal behaviour with regard to the
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina conflict between the years of 1990 - I'm starting a
18 little bit before - up to and including the signing of the Dayton Accord,
19 don't you?
20 A. No.
21 Q. In all fairness -- you don't?
22 A. As you've posed that question, no. You've kind of mixed two
23 concepts here of criminal behaviour and the sources of the conflict.
24 Q. Okay.
25 A. And I think those are different issues. My views on criminal
1 behaviour would have to be further, you know, broken down by particular
2 situations, and those of the conflict in general would be -- may be more
3 germane, more accessible.
4 Q. Okay. With regard to the cases that we've discussed in a very
5 general sense in terms of cases you've been asked for assistance by the
6 Prosecution, were you asked to assist the Prosecution with regard to the
7 Delic case, to write a report in Delic?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Halilovic?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Oric?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Or Hadzihasanovic?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Those are all cases that involved Muslim defendants; correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. You said just a moment ago that your views on criminal behaviour
18 would have to be broken down by particular situations. So I'd like to
19 spend a moment there, if I could.
20 With regard to your views on, for example, Slobodan Milosevic,
21 you have a definite view with regard to his criminal responsibility, do
22 you not?
23 A. Yes, I do.
24 Q. You believe that he's guilty of the crimes for which he was
25 charged, don't you?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. That is a view that you have, as a matter of fact, articulated on
3 more than one occasion.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. That is a view that you have, as a matter of fact, and we may
6 discuss it later, you've actually sent at least one letter concerning
7 your position about the judgement that was rendered by the International
8 Court of Justice as being a political decision because they didn't use
9 certain information.
10 A. I don't believe I sent a letter.
11 Q. You signed a letter that was sent by 54 -- you and 54 of your
12 colleagues; do you recall that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And in that letter you made it very clear that in your
15 estimation, Milosevic was guilty.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And you also made it very clear that as far as you were
18 concerned, the judgement finding -- the finding of that court was a
19 political decision that, as a matter of fact, avoided what you believed
20 to be compelling evidence that should have brought them to a different
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, concerning Milosevic, I want to talk about Milosevic now for
24 a moment not as an individual but as a leader, because one of the terms
25 that you have used I think a fair amount is "Serb leaders" or "Bosnian
1 Serb leaders"; correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And I have, as a matter of fact, have asked -- and you have been
4 very kind in that regard to identify when you were dealing with Bosnian
5 leaders, as opposed to when you were dealing with Serb leaders.
6 A. Yes, I normally use the term Bosnian Serb nationalist leaders in
7 reference to the people we were talking about in the SDS.
8 Q. When we're talking about Bosnian Serb nationalist leaders, you're
9 discussing such people as Mr. Karadzic?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And General Mladic?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And based upon your historical review, am I correct -- not am I
14 correct, but is your view that General Mladic was subordinate to
15 Mr. Karadzic, as the president?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And Mr. Karadzic, he was the -- he was like -- he was like
18 George Bush, the one who's just -- who will be leaving shortly. He was
19 the Commander-in-Chief.
20 A. Don't tempt me, but -- he was the Commander-in-Chief of the VRS.
21 Q. Well, I just want to make sure you were on the same page there.
22 A. I think we are, sir.
23 Q. Now, in terms of the -- in terms of the Serb leadership, and now
24 I'm not using the term "Bosnian Serb nationalist leadership" but the Serb
25 leadership, you count among those, I would take it, Mr. Milosevic?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And by that I'm talking about Slobodan Milosevic, not the
3 Milosevic in whose case you testified in.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Although you testified in both, did you not?
6 A. Two Milosevics, yes.
7 Q. You've done two Milosevics. You've done Slobodan and you've done
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And in the Dragomir Milosevic case is the case involving the 2006
12 A. Is the report before you, yes.
13 Q. He was in a slightly different position. You wouldn't consider
14 him to be Serb leadership, would you?
15 A. Well, I would consider him to be part of the Bosnian Serb
16 leadership on the military side.
17 Q. Okay. And for the moment, taking a look at Milosevic, would you
18 consider Lilic -- do you know who he is?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Would you consider him to be part of the leadership?
21 A. Part of the leadership of the Republic of Serbia
22 Q. And --
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith, now that we have introduced two
24 Milosevics, may I suggest that each time you refer to a Milosevic, you
25 tell us which one.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: I shall.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: You've just said at line 13 --
3 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm with you. I'm totally with you, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH:
6 Q. When I said "take a look at Milosevic," I was speaking about
7 Slobodan Milosevic."
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And with regard to Slobodan Milosevic, he was involved with his
10 group of people involved, for example, Mr. Lilic.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And Mr. Lilic was the president of what, precisely, if you know?
13 A. I believe he was the President of the Socialist Federal Republic
14 of Yugoslavia
15 Q. Okay.
16 A. As reconstituted in April 1992.
17 Q. When you say "as reconstituted," that's when the Socialist
18 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia became the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
19 A. The FRY, yes.
20 Q. Okay. We'll talk about that in a bit.
21 Have you -- I want to move away from that for a moment or two and
22 discuss the issue of how you compiled the information that you used for
23 your first report, the report that you submitted in 2002, "The Origins of
24 Republika Srpska, 1990-1992 - A Background Report."
25 A. Okay.
1 Q. Now, with regard to that report, did you, as you were preparing
2 that report, apart from the documents you discussed with us earlier that
3 you received from the Prosecution, did you ask the Prosecution for an
4 index of a list of the documents that they had available so that you
5 could search through that list and make a determination of what documents
6 they had that were available might be germane to you compiling your
8 A. No.
9 Q. You did not?
10 A. I did not.
11 Q. Okay. And as a matter of fact, the same would be true, would it
12 not, of the report that you compiled in 2006, that report which is
13 entitled "From Elections to Stalemate: The Making of the Sarajevo Siege,
15 A. That's correct, I did not.
16 Q. At some point, I think at some point in time in some previous
17 case, you were asked the question of whether or not it would be an
18 important thing to do, so that you had gone through a comprehensive
19 analysis and research of all the information that was available, and I
20 believe you said something to the effect, and I may be paraphrasing,
21 that, No, life is too short to do that.
22 A. Well, it is too short to do that. But at the same time, I ask
23 them to give me whatever they can.
24 Q. My question was slightly different than that, Dr. Donia. When
25 you were asked the question in the previous proceedings, and you said
1 something to the effect, No, that's not something I would do.
2 A. I don't recall exactly what I said. I would have to see the
3 document to be able to affirmatively answer that.
4 Q. Let me see if I can refresh your recollection.
5 A. Okay.
6 Q. You were asked the following question, and this is the
7 proceedings on Wednesday, 10 May 2006, in the Prlic case, page 1861, case
8 number IT-01-74-T, you were asked the following question and gave the
9 following response, which is --
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you give us the line, please.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: Starting at line 9 through 17.
12 Q. "All right. Do you by chance ask for an index so that you would
13 know the documents they might have, because, after all, let me cue you
14 in, the Prosecution has been going around the former Yugoslavia having
15 access to various archives. All right. Did you ask by any chance, Could
16 I look at the list of the documents from the various archives, be they
17 from the BiH, be they from Croatia
18 ask for that list?"
19 And your answer is: "No, life is too short to look over that
20 list in one of those archives alone."
21 Does that refresh your recollection?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. That was your position then?
24 A. Yes, it's my position.
25 Q. And that's your position now?
1 A. Mm-hm.
2 Q. So the body of information that you're relying upon -- I'm sorry,
3 that you relied upon, because we're now talking about two reports you've
4 done in the past, is that information which, in large measure, was
5 supplied to you by the Prosecution.
6 A. No.
7 Q. Okay. Do you think, while we're here just at this moment, do you
8 think that it's important for a fact-finder to have available to them
9 from an expert, such as yourself, as comprehensive a report as possible
10 that discusses all sides of the situation?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And is that something which you believe with regard to the two
13 reports that we're discussing right now, the one prepared in 2002 and the
14 one that you prepared in 2006, is something that you did, that you
15 prepared as comprehensive a report?
16 A. Within the limits of the guidelines that were requested of me by
17 the Prosecution at the time.
18 Q. Okay. You've -- within the limits of the guidelines.
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now, with regard to the issue of preparing as comprehensive a
21 report as possible, you've taken a different position in that regard,
22 have you not, in your testimony here before the Tribunal?
23 A. I don't recall. You'll have to suggest a ...
24 Q. Let me see what I can do here. I'm referring the Court and
25 counsel to 1858, proceedings on 10 May 2006, case number IT-04-74-T,
1 commencing at page -- at line 15, on page 1858.
2 Question: "Okay. Do you think --"
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: You said you're referring to? There's a word I
4 don't understand on the screen. When you started that sentence. "I'm
5 referring to ..." something something, "... counsel to 1858."
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: Got it. I'm with you.
7 Q. "Okay. Do you think, do you think, and help me out here, but do
8 you think it would be member for the honourable members of our Trial
9 Chamber to have that information so at least you could say, Well, here's
10 what I looked at, here's what I agree with, here's what I don't agree
11 with, here's what I came up with my conclusion and here's why. Do you
12 think that might be important?"
13 And your answer is: "I think that would be up to the honourable
14 judges to decide. My own purpose is, let's say, more restricted than
15 that. It is to provide a narrative account which can, in fact, be
16 challenged and alternative interpretations presented. But, again, I
17 don't want to run into 200 pages or multiple volumes for the purpose of
18 historical background."
19 I continue, moving to page 1859, line 3:
20 Question: "That wasn't my question. Do you think it would be
21 important for the Trial Chamber to have a comprehensive report from an
22 historian such as yourself, if indeed that is what you are coming here to
23 testify about, historical facts and drawing conclusions?"
24 And your answer: "No."
25 So my question to you is: You've taken a different position with
1 regard to this same issue in a previous proceeding; correct.
2 A. I don't see how it's different.
3 Q. Okay.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just so that I don't forget, my question wasn't
5 answered. What case is that? Maybe it will answer the question.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: That case is the Prlic case, and the case number
7 is IT-04-74-T.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you for that. Would that be a convenient
9 point in time?
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: Absolutely.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: We'll take a break and come back at half past
12 12.00. Court adjourned.
13 --- Recess taken at 12.02 p.m.
14 --- On resuming at 12.29 p.m.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Q. To pick up where we left off, if I could, since your work on
18 these two reports, am I correct in my understanding that you have not
19 edited, modified, them in any substantial regard. I know you've made
20 some corrections. But with regard to the report that has been submitted
21 here, a report that you've done in 2002, that report remains essentially
22 in the same iteration that it was when you initially submitted it;
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And the report that you did in 2006, that report similarly
1 remains in the same iteration. There have been some, I think, maybe
2 minor modifications, corrections.
3 A. Corrections, I believe.
4 Q. You haven't -- you haven't really --
5 A. I haven't rewritten it.
6 Q. You haven't worked it over.
7 A. No.
8 Q. Okay. And with regard -- with regard to those two reports,
9 because the question I have is the same for both of them, have you had a
10 chance to reflect and make a determination of whether or not any further
11 information should be included in those reports based upon the work that
12 you've done since 2002 or the work you've done since 2006?
13 A. Yes. I actually did expand substantially the topics that I
14 covered in the 2006 report in my book on Sarajevo.
15 Q. Okay.
16 A. So the answer is yes, I have contemplated and certainly see areas
17 that could be added or expanded through both documentation that's newly
18 available to me and other work.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: But you do that -- you did that expansion in your
20 book, you say?
21 THE WITNESS: Yes.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Not with the reports themselves.
23 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH:
25 Q. Would it be fair to say that at the time that you wrote those
1 reports, that your purpose was not to be comprehensive; it was, in fact,
2 to be synthetic, to be a provider of a digested, abbreviated account of
3 these topics.
4 A. No. I would say concise.
5 Q. Okay. Did you take a different position or, put in other terms,
6 did you take the precise position that I just mentioned to you when
7 testifying in the Prlic case?
8 A. I don't recall.
9 Q. Okay. Let me see if I can refresh your recollection in that
10 regard, Mr. Donia. I don't believe we need the specific language before
11 us because it's a relatively long question and answer on page 1863. But
12 going on to page 1864, lines 4 through 6:
13 "I would again say my purpose here is not to be comprehensive.
14 It is, in fact, to be synthetic, to be as much a provider of a digested,
15 abbreviated account of each of these topics."
16 That was your answer on Wednesday, May 10th, 2006, with regard to
17 your purpose of writing reports; correct?
18 A. No. That was my answer to the question of writing the Prlic
20 Q. I see. So the Prlic report you distinguish from all other
21 reports that you've written?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. All other reports but for the Prlic report obtain a different
25 A. The Prlic report was the only report that was not in narrative
1 form that I have prepared for the Office of the Prosecutor --
2 Q. Okay.
3 A. -- before this body.
4 Q. So if I take your answer as you stated, then with regard to the
5 two reports that exist here, you went through extensive archival
6 research; correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. You wrote as comprehensive a report here?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Okay.
11 A. Not as comprehensively as I possibly could. That would be a
12 voluminous undertaking.
13 Q. Do you consider, as you review your reports, that your reports
14 deal with the, apart from in passing, the critical issues as they relate
15 to, for example, the Badinter Commission and the effect the Badinter
16 Commission had upon what was occurring during late 1991 and 1992.
17 A. I've treated it briefly.
18 Q. You've given it a whiff of perfume, haven't you? You haven't
19 discussed the effect of Badinter was, did you?
20 A. I belive I have in the report.
21 Q. Okay. When you say "briefly," you mentioned Badinter, but you
22 didn't get into the effect of what Badinter had, did you?
23 A. I believe I did.
24 Q. Okay. We'll discuss that more fully.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Edgerton.
1 MS. EDGERTON: I'm not rising by way of objection at all, but
2 you'll recall yesterday that Dr. Donia had his previous reports in front
3 of him, and I have those copies that were returned to us --
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: Please --
5 MS. EDGERTON: I'm wondering if it would assist anybody if we
6 could be provided with them again.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, it would assist Dr. Donia, then I'd be
8 happy for him to have them.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH:
11 Q. Now, you mentioned -- we'll get to Badinter. You mentioned that
12 with regard to archives that -- you've been in archives primarily in
14 your research.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And with regard to the report that you did in 2002, did you go to
17 all of the archives that you mentioned in your direct testimony?
18 A. No.
19 Q. With regard to the report that you did in 2006, did you go to all
20 of those archives that you mentioned in your direct testimony for
21 purposes of - not there yet - for purposes of preparing that report?
22 A. No.
23 Q. With regard to both of these reports, during the period of time
24 that you were preparing these reports, did you have occasion to speak
25 with any of what I will call the "principals" who were involved in
1 the on-the-ground activity, movement, argument, discussions, for example,
2 Mr. Izetbegovic?
3 A. No.
4 Q. He's a pretty important character, and I mean that in a neutral
5 fashion, with regard to the development of what was going on during this
6 period of time, is he not?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. He was alive, was he not?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Did you attempt to speak to any of the principal players?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And who did you speak with?
13 A. Well, I spoke extensively with Mirko Pejanovic, who was a member
14 of the Presidency at the time.
15 Q. When you say "Presidency," that's the Bosnian nationalist --
16 A. I'm sorry, the Presidency of the government of
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and he was a member of the Presidency through much of
18 the war.
19 I've spoken to a number of party leaders from the HDZ,
20 Stjepan Kljujic, a number of HDZ leaders, various municipal leaders.
21 Remember, this is after the war that I'm speaking to them. But who had
22 experienced the, let's say, life on the Serb side of the lines during the
23 course of the war.
24 Q. And with regard to those individuals, are those -- did you record
25 those sessions or take notes of those sessions?
1 A. In many cases I did, yes.
2 Q. Okay. Did you then include those recordings and notes in the
3 reports that you've submitted to us --
4 A. I didn't include them, no.
5 Q. So did you cite them?
6 A. I didn't cite to them, no.
7 Q. Okay.
8 A. I think I -- I don't recall that I cited to any of them.
9 Q. So we're not, at least for purposes of either a cursory or an
10 in-depth review of your report, concerned whether or not some of the
11 information -- the body of the information you have in your own head
12 which forms the basis of some of the things written in your report are
13 predicated upon conversations that you had with others or not. We can't
14 do that.
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. I was thinking. I forgot. Do you know who Mr. Sacirbey is?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Did you have occasion to speak with him?
19 A. Yes. There's two Sacirbeys. One is the senior, Sacirbegovic,
20 who was around for a long time and then his son, who was the foreign
21 minister, I believe, in the course of the war. I've spoken to them both
22 very briefly.
23 Q. Now, the son, he was somebody who was quite active in the
24 negotiations through 1991/1992, was he not?
25 A. I believe a little later in the course of things, he was very
2 Q. And he had a definite perspective with regard to the developments
3 in Bosnia-Herzegovina, did he not?
4 A. Certainly.
5 Q. Am I correct in my understanding that the purposes of these two
6 reports were to offer enlightenment on the background of the major
7 developments of events institutions that are referenced in the
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. When you said that, you're referring to the indictment that we
11 have here in this case, and that's the indictment against Mr. Perisic.
12 A. Well, I certainly looked -- am familiar with that indictment or
13 looked over that indictment and saw some relevance. But the reports were
14 prepared in response to reviewing the indictments of the particular cases
16 Q. Okay. So with regard to -- with regard to the statement made
17 that they were enlightenment with regard to, as I said, the major
18 development of events and institutions referenced in the indictment,
19 meaning the Perisic indictment, that statement is not entirely accurate,
20 is it?
21 A. I don't think you cited the statement accurately. I think my
22 statement was that I was responding to the --
23 Q. I don't want to misquote you. I don't want to misquote you.
24 "What were the objectives, then, of these reports"? And your
25 answer was: "I was asked by the Prosecution to prepare a report which
1 explained in light of the background of the major developments, events,
2 and institutions referenced in the indictment."
3 So when you made that answer, considering what you've just said,
4 that answer dealt with those two indictments and did not deal with the
5 Perisic indictment, would be a proper interpretation of what you said
7 A. That's correct.
8 Q. Okay. Then we're on the same page.
9 Your reports are, as I understand it, based upon a particular
10 theory, as you've suggested to us, an overarching theory upon which you
11 approach this particular subject. And by that I'm referring to the
12 language that you used, and here I want to make sure that we're talking
13 to each other and that I'm accurate, because I don't want to be
14 inaccurate here, which is you said, in terms of discussing the method of
15 preparation - and I believe we start on page 1635 and go on to page 13 --
16 there it is. Perfect.
17 You discussed the method of preparation, and then you say that
18 there is a "viewpoint," at the bottom of page 1635, at line 25, "or
19 perhaps one could call it a theory underpinning these reports." And I
20 just want to stop there for a moment. I'll continue on with what you
21 said. But when you say there's a "viewpoint" or a theory, I take it that
22 that means that you were approaching these reports from a particular
23 historical perspective, a school of thought, as it were.
24 A. A school of thought that is shared by history and several other
1 Q. I understand that. I'm just trying to, first of all, make sure
2 I'm understanding precisely this -- the point here, which is that your
3 work is predicated upon a theoretical view of history that guides you
4 through your application of the historical facts to a particular event or
5 a particular question that's being asked of you.
6 A. That's kind of a long complex question. I would probably say
7 "informed by" this approach, rather than "predicated upon."
8 Q. Now, this is, would it be fair to say, one of a number of
9 theories that exists with regard to historical interpretation of facts in
10 general? That's my first question. And by that I mean nationalities and
11 national movements are constructed entities rather than primordial ones.
12 A. Well, I can't accept quite the way that you've put that question.
13 It's more than historical. It's anthropological, political scientific,
14 and sociological. And it's one of many theories that pertains to
15 knowledge in general. It's one of two primary viewpoints with regard to
16 nationalities and national movements and their origins and development.
17 Q. Can you parse out for us. Since you've told us that you are not
18 an expert in sociology and you're not an expert in anthropology, can you
19 parse out for us the extent to which your reliance as an historian is in
20 those fields in which you're not an expert in terms of this particular
22 A. Well, as an historian, I'm always consuming information from
23 other fields, and I've done so extensively from anthropology, which is
24 really the, I'd say, origins of this notion. It really began as a debate
25 between Clifford Gertz who articulated the notion that nationalities are
1 primordial and was contested by people like Benedict Anderson who, the
2 very title is suggestive, "Imagined Communities." And then two
3 historians who've edited a book of essays called "The Invention of
4 Tradition." These things overlap disciplines very easily, and the
5 theoretical work by people like Anderson
6 carried out in, let's say, a more historical context by a number of
7 authors who've applied this point of view to different parts of the
9 Q. You've mentioned -- you've mentioned two authors, and perhaps now
10 would not be a bad time to just put some more names into the mix to see
11 whether or not these are also individuals upon which you have focused or
12 thought about, relied on, considered. Henk Dekker?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Okay. Eric Hobsbawm?
15 A. Very much so.
16 Q. And Homi Bhabha?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Eric Hobsbawm, he has, a matter of fact, wrote a book
19 specifically -- or has done a lot of work specifically in the area of
20 nations and nationalism, has he not?
21 A. Yes, he has. And he was co-editor of one of the books I just
23 Q. Okay. There's another fellow. I think his name is Gellner.
24 A. Yes, Ernst Gellner.
25 Q. Ernst Gellner. And the issue here of nationalism and national
1 movements and nationalities is a bit, for the moment, confusing to me
2 because I want to make sure that we're using terms that we understand,
3 which is when you said that nationalities and national movements are
4 constructed entities. Are you equating here nationalities and national
5 movements as one and the same?
6 A. Not equating them but stating that both are constructed entities.
7 Q. Okay. So could you give us a definition for your historical
8 purposes of what a nationality -- how you would define "nationality"?
9 A. The term or the meaning that I use in this context is national
10 identity, the identity of a group which claims to be a nation.
11 Q. And in that regard, if you were to use the term, for example, "a
12 people," a people who claim to be a nation, would that be the same term?
13 Would we be using the same term here? Who "nationalities" equate with
15 A. In my usage here, yes, it would.
16 Q. Okay.
17 A. Unfortunately, the term "people" is the most common translation
18 and, in my view, correct translation of the word in the B/C/S, "narod"
19 and that has a specific meaning within political discourse in the former
21 as --
22 Q. Please do because we're going to have to spend a moment or two
23 here, if you could.
24 A. A narod, translated "people," is a nation which, and again this
25 is in the political discourse of the region, has a homeland within the
1 country in question. It has a republic homeland. It may have peoples
2 in -- members of the group in other republics and even in other
3 countries, but it is a group that is identified with a particular
4 republic in the socialist federal republic arrangement.
5 Q. Does that, as you've defined it just now, go back to -- and I
6 think this is only the time that I'm going to go back over 50 years, does
7 that go back to the concept that was promulgated, in the
8 Corfu Declaration I believe in 1917 or 1918, in which there was a
9 recognition of sovereign states of peoples?
10 A. I think it goes more back to the Stalinist understanding of a
11 nation and a people, in his nationality theory.
12 Q. When I referred to the Corfu Declaration, you know what I was
13 referring to?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. At that point in time that many years ago, there was the
16 establishment of a number of distinct states predicated upon it
17 definition, as I understand it, and please do correct me if I'm wrong, of
18 peoples, which were the Serbs, the Croats, and the Slovenes.
19 A. Among others.
20 Q. Among others. And there was a recognition then of a nationality,
21 as we're defining it, by those distinct groups.
22 A. Yes. Let me revise that, when you refer to the
23 Corfu Declaration, my answer, among others, is not correct. It's wrong.
24 Q. Let's make it right.
25 THE INTERPRETER: Would the speakers kindly not overlap.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are being requested not to overlap. You are
2 being requested by the interpreters not to overlap.
3 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.
4 THE WITNESS: Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH:
6 Q. So the concept of the identity of people and the concept of a
7 sovereign state is something that has resonated within the region, and by
8 that I'm going to talk about the former Yugoslavia, for an appreciable
9 period of time, has it not?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And as a matter of fact, over time, moving away from Stalin and
12 into Tito, there was, in fact, a recognition of the importance of an
13 equality between the peoples that was expressed through something that
14 I've been told is called the key system, but I'm sure there's a specific
15 name in B/C/S for that.
16 A. Well, the key system is kind of a different subject, but your
17 fundamental question is quality between peoples in Tito's socialist
18 federal scheme, yes.
19 Q. And within Tito's socialist federal scheme, there was a
20 recognition, was there not, of distinct -- the necessity to give distinct
21 peoples who've identified themselves as such some form of identity above
22 and beyond the identity of being Yugoslavian. I'm sorry, I wouldn't say
23 necessarily above and beyond the identity of being Yugoslavian. That's
24 probably incorrect. But in addition to that of being Yugoslavian.
25 Because he had -- he had, in fact, a real -- a real dynamic situation to
1 work with, which were all these different peoples who identified
2 themselves as distinct groups.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, are those peoples who identified themselves as distinct
5 groups, are those peoples, in your terms when we're talking about the
6 underlying theory, are they constructed entities?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Rather than --
9 A. In the viewpoint of -- yes.
10 Q. In your viewpoint.
11 A. In my viewpoint they are, yes.
12 Q. Okay. Now, in Bosnia-Herzegovina, we have -- I believe we have
13 three major identifiable groupings, if I might.
14 A. Give me a time frame that you're talking about.
15 Q. I'm in 1990 through 1995.
16 A. Okay. Well, I think three -- the three largest being Serbs,
17 Croats, and Bosnian Muslims.
18 Q. Okay. Now, with regard to the Bosnian Muslims, the Bosnian
19 Muslims find themselves for purposes of what we're talking about here,
20 constructed entities, in I think somewhat of a unique position, do they
21 not? And by that I mean that there were both ethnic as well as religious
22 components unique to the Bosnian Muslims that held them together as a
23 cohesive group in their mind.
24 A. There's two questions there. Number 1, are they unique or
25 somewhat unique, and my answer to that is no. Were there religious --
1 ethnic and religious components unique to the Bosnian Muslims? Yes,
2 there were, just as there were to Serbs, Croats, even Jews.
3 Q. Well, let's leave the Jews out of this one, shall we, just for
4 the purposes of the discussion.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. With regard to -- with regard to the three groups that you've
7 mentioned, can you define for us what you mean by "constructed entity"?
8 Because as I'm understanding what you're saying, a constructed entity is
9 something that occurred -- and I'm putting that in terms of rather than a
10 primordial one, is a constructed entity is an entity that exists from the
11 top down, whereas a primordial one is an entity that would grow from, and
12 I can't resist in a certain sense, from the primordial views. It's
13 something that is a natural construct over the history of time. And so
14 I'm trying to make -- I'm trying to make sure I understand what you're
15 saying here when you're talking about the theoretical basis upon which
16 you're relying, which is that you have a top-down definition of a group,
17 as opposed to something that is defined by the people to which a leader
18 may emerge.
19 A. No.
20 Q. Okay. Could you explain.
21 MS. EDGERTON: I'm sorry.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
23 MS. EDGERTON: With your leave, I'm just -- there's so much
24 packed into this question, I'm not sure what part of the question "no"
25 was an answer to, and I wonder if you could clarify.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH:
2 Q. Can you clarify what part of the no, or do you need me to break
3 the question down? I'm happy to do it either way.
4 A. If you'll give me lead to try to explain the -- I think your
5 description of a primordial concept is pretty accurate to what their the
6 viewpoint of those thinkers is. But on the constructed side, what
7 constitutes a constructed entity is not necessarily top-down. It may
8 very well be a result of inter-action between elites who were seeking to
9 define and order a national identity or national movement and the masses
10 who may or may not to already differentiated along the lines that the
11 elites wishes -- whish to create.
12 In most cases you're looking at a constructed process in which
13 intellectuals or political leaders come along and seek to create new
14 lines of division or differentiation between peoples. If they find no
15 response in the populous, then the construction doesn't happen. There
16 have been many efforts, for example, to create a Bosnian identity, going
17 back to the 1860s. None of those have worked because they didn't
18 respond -- there was no response from the populous.
19 Q. Let me understand -- see if I understand you correctly here. I'm
20 going to, for a moment, ask you to consider someone else, if you would,
21 because this might help us all. Are you familiar with Edward Bernays?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Okay.
24 MS. EDGERTON: Again, I'm not rising by way of objection at all,
25 but I just note some of these names might be unfamiliar to my colleague,
1 the court reporter, and for the accuracy of the record, perhaps, my
2 friend, if you could spell sometimes for her, it will save us doing work
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: We've got a deal that whenever there are any
5 problems she comes to me, and it's taken care of. So if she doesn't know
6 how to spell something, it's been dealt with.
7 Q. You said no. I won't take that any further, except that I invite
8 you to take a look at him. He was a nephew of Freud's and instrumental
9 in manipulating the masses.
10 A. Thank you.
11 Q. You're welcome. Based upon what you've said right here, if I
12 understand you correctly, if we were to take a look at the historical
13 view of the movements, and I'm going to give you a couple, which are the
14 revolution in Cuba
15 the elite, and by that I mean Mr. Castro, his brother, and others,
16 created lines of division or differentiation between people, that they
17 found -- that they're the ones who did that and that was not a popular
19 A. I'm not sure that the case you're pointing to is one of national
20 movement or national identity.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. It may be a revolutionary movement. But I'm not, in any case,
23 saying that this was not a popular movement.
24 Q. The movement that we're dealing with here is not a popular
1 A. No, that's not what I --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Again, would the speakers kindly not overlap.
3 MR. GUY-SMITH:
4 Q. And by here I'm talking about Bosnia-Herzegovina.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Again, you're being asked to please not overlap.
6 Could you please break in between question and answer and answer and
8 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes. Yes, Your Honour.
9 THE WITNESS: Can you ask the question again, Mr. Guy-Smith.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH:
11 Q. Yes, I can, Dr. Donia. You've said as far as you're concerned,
12 what occurred in Cuba
13 revolutionary movement, as I understood your answer, and you were drawing
14 a distinction between a revolutionary movement and a national movement.
15 A. I said I wasn't certain whether the movement in Cuba
16 national movement.
17 Q. Okay.
18 A. I don't know enough about it, really, to call it a national
20 Q. In days gone by, when we were -- when we were young and gay,
21 there was a movement in the United States which was considered to be a
22 national movement. That was the Civil Rights Movement. I take it that
23 for purposes of your analysis here, that is not a national movement. And
24 I'm asking the question just to see if I can understand.
25 A. As great as my affection is for the Civil Rights Movement, I
1 would not classify it in terms I am using here as a national movement,
3 Q. And with regard to -- if we were to take the survey of the world
4 and we were for a moment to stop in South Africa with regard to the
5 struggle to overcome apartheid, would that be considered to be a national
6 movement by your definition or would that be another form of movement?
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. Okay. And with regard to the indigenous people in Mexico
9 presently in a struggle to obtain independence, once again, is that a
10 situation that you don't know about?
11 A. I would say it's more likely to fall into the definition that I
12 have for national movement, but I really don't know enough about it to so
14 Q. So part of what -- so part of what is involved in your definition
15 of a national movement has to -- has to do with perhaps indigenous people
16 or some kind of particular way of identifying the group; is that correct?
17 A. Some particular way of identifying the group. Yes.
18 Q. Okay. And if we have -- and I'm going on with what your
19 answer -- what your answer was with regard to your theory. You say:
20 "That is a debate that has flourished in a number of disciplines
21 over the past three decades, with the view that I share being that ethnic
22 groups ..."
23 So that's one area where I think we're clear about what you're
24 defining, an ethnic group.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. "And national movements," and national movements, as I understand
2 it, are defined as potentially a group of peoples who have a particular
3 national identity.
4 A. A people that has a particular -- or seeks to define a particular
5 national identity.
6 Q. "Are dynamic, constantly changing phenomena that mutate over
7 time." I understand what you're saying there. "Depending on the actions
8 of the elites that form them and lead them."
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And that's the area in which I was asking you the question about
11 being an organised movement from the top down, because as I understand
12 the language there, as I understand this particular language, it seems to
13 me that you're implying something in the form of a ruling intelligentsia
14 or a ruling elite of some form that determines what is good for the
15 people, and based upon that determination, then makes policies and
16 decisions for the people, as opposed to listening to what the people have
17 to say and working with their -- with what galvanises the people
19 A. If you were to use the word "aspiring" instead of "dominant" or
20 "ruling," I would, I think, accept -- agree with your statement. The
21 makers of these movements are rarely power-holders or preordained holders
22 of wisdom, as recognised intellectuals. They are entrepreneurs. They
23 are aspiring intellectuals or aspiring rulers.
24 Q. And that would be your definition then, I take it, of
25 Mr. Karadzic and Mr. Milosevic. They were, as you put it, aspiring
2 A. They certainly were in 1990.
3 Q. And throughout the period of which you wrote your reports.
4 A. They ceased to -- or became less and less innovators and
5 entrepreneurial as the period goes along.
6 Q. And is that because from a historical perspective, they had
7 obtained a certain level of power which they were holding on to, as
8 opposed to, using your language, "aspiring towards some entrepreneurial
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Okay.
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: There should be. If we could have a correction
13 on line 85, I said Karadzic and Mladic. It's written as Milosevic. I
14 meant to say Mladic.
15 Q. I take it you would take the same position with Mr. Milosevic,
16 since his name was mentioned on the transcript?
17 A. Yes, I would.
18 Q. Now, with regard to -- and I have a better understanding of what
19 you meant, and I hope we all have a better understanding of what you
20 meant by that particular theory. Now, is this a theory that has been
21 tested empirically? Do you know?
22 A. I haven't seen any efforts to test it in, let's say, an applied
23 mathematics sense, if that's what you mean by "empirically."
24 Q. Yes, I am talking about --
25 A. There are many studies that have applied the theory through a
1 process of assessing the historical record or the contemporary record and
2 concluded that the theory illuminates and holds as valid for the
3 particular subjects being discussed.
4 JUDGE DAVID: May I ask a question.
5 Professor Donia, when you speak of theory, as you know, there is
6 a very epistemological meaning of theory, which is to say a set of
7 propositions, empirical, verifiable, and with predictability for the
8 future. The paradigm of this law are mathematical laws. Rather than
9 theory, in this context of social sciences which could not equate the
10 theorys of social sciences, what you call viewpoint or theory would be
11 rather a theoretical orientation.
12 THE WITNESS: I fully agree. That is a better description of it
13 than --
14 JUDGE DAVID: So the usage of "theory" does not correspond in
15 your usage to either strict theorys in the political sciences, but rather
16 what will be called empirical generalisations apart from theory and are
17 just viewpoints, workable hypotheses of explanation. So what you call
18 theory is rather an instrumental or realistic way of an hypothesis to be
19 applied to a given mass of data.
20 THE WITNESS: I absolutely agree, and you put it certainly much
21 better than I ever could or would. But I think the -- one of the points
22 that you're making is its explanatory power is the test, in a sense,
23 in lieu of the strict empirical kind of result that one would have in
24 such a theoretical --
25 JUDGE DAVID: You use also the term, and I hope you will discount
1 my intervention from the time allotted to the Defence, you have used also
2 "empirical narrative ." In one of the phrases in the last session, you
3 said in page 17, lines 3 to 4, "empirically based narrative accounts,
4 topically organised of the major developments and institutions pertaining
5 to these topics," and then you refer, as the Defence said, about the
7 To what extent is theoretical broad orientation which is that
8 vessel like this. I have been familiar for the last four years with all
9 the theories in relation from anthropologists, from Radcliffe, Rowan and
10 Malinovski to Robert Redfield and whatever, you know. I have tragically
11 enough taught sociology for 20 years at an US university.
12 To what extent your report will have been oriented in different
13 way had you accepted the primordial structure of the theory? And give me
14 concrete examples, given the fact that you're saying here it's an
15 empirically based narrative account. It's not a theory. It's not a
16 prediction. It's not amenable to verification because of the large mass
17 amount of data. And I don't know of any theory in history or sociology
18 who has been able to empirically be verified. And I'm talking of all the
19 literature of sociology in the last 50 years up to this point.
20 THE WITNESS: Yes. How would it be different if it were informed
21 by the primordial view? I think it would be much more related to the
22 distant past as a factor that molded behaviour in the period in question,
23 starting with 1990. By "distant," I mean as far back as the Middle Ages,
24 as recently, perhaps, as the Second World War, and viewed those
25 developments as sort of baked into the identity of the primordial entity
1 that we are examining. So it would have a much longer, let's say,
2 horizon and argue for direct causation from events in the relatively
3 distant past.
4 JUDGE DAVID: Do you believe that your conclusions in the report
5 given the constraints of the past outlined by the Prosecutor? Because
6 you said, "I was asked by the Prosecutor --" on page 16, lines 24:
7 "I was asked by the Prosecutor to write a report which explained
8 and enlightened the background of the major institutions and referred to
9 in the indictment," which the Defence has just cited. In what ways -- or
10 in which ways the conclusions of your report will have been different
11 from the present ones in relating decisions, in analysing the data?
12 THE WITNESS: That's a very good question. I'm kind of
13 hard-wired to think the other way, and so it's difficult maybe for me to
14 think through that. But I would say, at least preliminary, without
15 giving it a bigger think, is that I would trace the origins of the major
16 institutions to much earlier time periods and the proclivities or the
17 behaviour of the actors to reprising those of historical personalities.
18 JUDGE DAVID: Thank you very much, Dr. Donia.
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour. May I proceed?
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: I think you may.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.
22 Q. You've given us four separate criteria that you applied in your
23 analysis of the documents that you used as being important in determining
24 how to choose, what to choose, why to choose. Those were relevance,
25 reliability, verifiability, and richness; correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. With regard to the issue of relevance, you chose, based upon the
3 information that was given to you by the Prosecution and the particular
4 question that they asked you to proceed upon, which was pertaining to
5 that which was referenced in two indictments, the Krajisnik indictment
6 and the Dragomir Milosevic indictment, that information that you felt
7 applied directly to those two indictments; correct?
8 A. No. That's a long convoluted question. I can parse it, if you
9 wish. I would say that the information was referenced or the issues set
10 forth in the indictment. I don't know I would accept the formulation
11 that it was applied directly. The materials that I used were only in
12 small matter those that were given to me by the Prosecution, and the
13 import of your question suggests that I based it on the information given
14 to me by the Prosecution. I certainly was seeking to respond to the
15 particular question that was asked of me but not solely or even
16 principally upon the information that was given to me by the Prosecution.
17 Q. What was the specific question that was asked of you by
18 Mr. Tieger with regard to your report concerning the Krajisnik
20 A. I don't recall, sir.
21 Q. What was the specific question asked of you -- was it someone
22 other than Mr. Tieger, that asked you to become involved in the
23 Dragomir Milosevic report?
24 A. Yes. I believe it was Susan Somers, but I can't recall.
25 Q. Assuming that you're correct, and we can identify a Prosecutor,
1 assuming it was Ms. Somers, be that as it may, once again, what was the
2 specific question, what was the specific task, that you were asked to
3 perform as regards the Dragomir Milosevic indictment, if you recall?
4 A. I can't recall the specific question. The task that I was asked
5 to perform, I indicated, I believe, yesterday, it was to address those
6 issues, institutions, and developments suggested or referenced in the
8 Q. And did you -- was -- after you received the original request,
9 were you involved in any kind of colloquies back and forth, or just after
10 receiving the original request, for example, from Mr. Tieger, did you go
11 off and write the report, submit it to him, without any further
12 conversation? That's my first question.
13 A. I did submit a draft for the Prosecutors to review.
14 Q. Before you submitted the draft, did you have any conversation
15 with the Prosecution concerning the direction in which the report was
16 going, concerning questions that had arisen in your mind as you were
17 writing the draft report?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Once you submitted the draft for review, did you have any
20 memorialised, once again, communications with the Prosecution concerning
21 the draft that you had prepared and submitted for their review?
22 A. No.
23 Q. After you submitted the draft for their review, did you have
24 occasion to modify, edit, the report in any manner?
25 A. Certainly to edit, yes.
1 Q. I take it the same would be true, so we don't have to go through
2 all the same questions, I take it the same would be true with regard to
3 the report that you submitted in the Dragomir Milosevic case.
4 A. Yes, it would.
5 Q. Okay. Now, you've indicated that another important factor for
6 you is that of reliability.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And if I'm not mistaken, reliability was defined in two different
9 ways. How you determined a document's reliability, you defined it in two
10 different ways. That's what you told us yesterday. Do you remember
12 A. I don't remember the two different ways that I defined it.
13 Please could I --
14 Q. Sure. The question was asked: How do you determine reliability?
15 How do you make an assessment of the document's reliability? And your
16 answer, this is on page 1367: "There are two ways one can do that.
17 First you look at the source. The words of an actor in a particular
18 event clearly bear more weight and have greater validity than there was
19 of a third- or fourth-hand person or someone who is not in a position to
20 directly observe events."
21 So in that situation, when, for example, you are reviewing the
22 stenographic notes of an SDS
23 are hearing -- hearing or reading verbatim what the individual said.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And with regard to the document's reliability, there are two
1 issues, then, that flow from that, which is, 1, is the document itself is
2 an accurate account of what transpired. That's one kind of reliability,
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And the other is is whether or not the words that are being
6 spoken are, in fact, internally true words.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And in that regard you have to take a look at a series of other
9 issues. You have to take a look at, for example, what was the purpose of
10 those words in any given context. Were they political in nature? Were
11 they directive in nature? Were they in response to a particular
12 situation or were they in response to an argument that was had on the
13 floor? I mean, there are a myriad of different things you have to make a
14 determination about with regard to the issue of reliability, meaning that
15 the words spoken actually mean, have a particular meaning; correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And you say that the second -- then you go on to say: "So that
18 character of the source is the first important thing," and I think we
19 understand what you mean by that.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. You're not talking about the character of the individual, whether
22 somebody has a good character or a bad character, for example, in your
24 A. Nature of the source.
25 Q. Nature of the source. The second thing would be from the
1 outside, the value of the document from other documents that were
2 generated at the time.
3 And if I understand, what you mean by that, what you're saying is
4 that if I'm looking at one particular document, I'm going to engage in a
5 comparative analysis with other documents to see whether or not I'm
6 picking up the same information, contradictory information, how the
7 document -- how the document responds to the issues that are addressed
8 within itself as an internal matter.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Is that fair?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Now, in terms of the sources -- in terms of the sources that you
13 used in your report, you've used a variety of different sources.
14 A. Yes, I have.
15 Q. Okay. Some of those sources, for example, are what I would call,
16 just for the moment, primary verbatim sources, like the one we were just
17 talking about where you have the actual words of a speaker.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And there can be little dispute over whether there's any
20 interpretation with regard to those -- to the actual words that are
21 spoken. The meaning may be different, but the actual words can be little
22 dispute about.
23 A. There will inevitably be disputes about them, but in general it
24 is the highest level of reliability.
25 Q. Okay. You also -- you also have documents which are documents
1 that you received that were interpreted documents, and by that, where the
2 spoken word in B/C/S was translated into the English word, written. Am I
3 correct in that regard?
4 A. Very rarely in this case was -- or in my long investigations and
5 in preparing specifically for these papers was that the case. Very
7 Q. Okay. And with regard to those, those sources that you relied
8 upon where you were listening to the -- did you have any audio?
9 A. I never listened to any more than a few audiotapes.
10 Q. So you did not have to worry about the age-old adage "Tradutiore
11 e traditore"?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Translation is trigger; right? Trigger. With regard to another
14 source that you used, another source that you used were newspaper
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And another source that you used were books.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And papers.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Okay. Now, with regard to the books and papers, what you did
22 then is you read the views of others who you either deemed to be experts
23 in the field or deemed to have some knowledge in the field or had even
24 written about in the field and drew your own conclusions from that
25 information. So you were interpreting their interpretation -- you were
1 doing two things. You were interpreting their interpretation of facts,
2 and you were gleaning from them those facts that they presented.
3 A. Not all books are scholarly accounts. Some of those books are
4 memoirs and personal recollections.
5 So I think the answer to your question is partially, yes, I'm
6 involved in a process of reading and assessing secondary accounts,
7 accounts by scholars, but a lot of that information that comes into my
8 world of preparation is, in fact, the written words of participants.
9 Q. And you mentioned there memoirs and personal recollections.
10 Now, with regard to the issue of -- with regard to the issue of
11 reliability and accuracy, I'm now paraphrasing here, and I'm wondering
12 whether or not you take this on -- you took this on when you were doing
13 that, I believe it may have been Mr. Churchill who said, "History will be
14 kind to me, since I'm writing my own memoirs."
15 A. That is typical of memoirs.
16 Q. Right, which is that the individual casts themselves in a
17 particular position. So when you're dealing with memoirs, that is ann
18 area which you take with a grain, and I'm asking you here, you take with
19 a grain of salt.
20 A. No. I wouldn't say a grain of salt. I think it has to be
21 critically assessed in the sense of "critically" that we referred to
22 yesterday, an objective assessment of the account is more likely to be
23 objective or accurate if, in fact, the writer does put him or herself
24 into an unfavourable light at times.
25 Q. Okay. And in that same regard, when you're dealing with memoirs,
1 do you take into account, for example, something else that was said,
2 which is that anyone who believes you can't change history has never
3 tried to write his memoirs?
4 A. I'm sorry, I missed that.
5 Q. Sure. Anyone who believes you can't change history has never
6 tried to write his memoirs. That would been expression, a pretty clear
7 expression of the power of the pen to change the facts that actually
8 occurred, would it not?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. For your purposes, that was said by Mr. Ben Gurion.
11 Now, with regard to the issue of richness, one of the things I've
12 noted in your report, and refreshingly so, is that you use not only
13 language but you use a tone of presentation which is, let me put it this
14 way, convincing to the reader, and I commend you for that, and I'm very
15 serious when I say that.
16 A. Thank you.
17 Q. And as I understood, since your craft is that of writing history,
18 one of the things you've attempted to do both in your writing away from
19 these reports as well as in terms of the writing of these reports is
20 you've attempted to present the information in a way that is not only
21 palatable, but it is also convincing.
22 A. That's a major aim, yes.
23 Q. Okay. And in terms of being convincing, it's convincing with
24 regard to -- with regard to the conclusions that you've drawn. I mean,
25 you just don't throw out a bunch of facts and say, Here's a conclusion.
1 A. Right. And the narrative itself is partly persuasive in
2 character, in that I'm attempting to persuade the reader that I have
3 correctly connected the facts referenced in the paragraph.
4 Q. In that regard, and perhaps we'll speak about this probably not
5 in the time that we have left today, probably tomorrow, but in that
6 regard, for example, what you've done in a number of places in your
7 report is you've quoted somebody and then you have a bridging sentence
8 and then there's another quote, and in leading that whole phrase, one
9 comes away with a particular viewpoint based upon the bridging sentence.
10 Do you understand what I'm talking about?
11 A. Yes. Mm-hm, yes.
12 Q. That, as a matter of fact, is a function of what you did as a
13 writer in order to convince the reader of the position you take. You
14 take a fact, you then put in your opinion or interpretation, and you put
15 in another fact. There's nothing wrong with that.
16 A. Not quite that simple, but I agree, in essence, that that's the
18 Q. Okay. I want to return just for a moment to the issue of the
19 newspaper that you used. As I recall, you relied on a newspaper, and I'm
20 sure I'm going to mispronounce it, so I apologise to everybody, you
21 relied on a newspaper that was called Oslobodjenje.
22 A. Very good, yes.
23 Q. Thank you. And you also relied on NIN and Glas.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. But Oslobodjenje obtained a kind of a different position than NIN
1 and Glas, if I'm not mistaken, because I believe you define that one as
2 being a newspaper of record. Am I correct? Or were all three of them
3 newspapers of record?
4 A. I don't believe NIN was. But Glas and Oslobodjenje were
5 newspapers of records -- of record, yes.
6 Q. Okay. And a newspaper of record is something that has, and I'm
7 asking whether you would agree with this, high standards of journalism?
8 One component.
9 A. Yes. To distinguish between its function as a newspaper of
10 record and its editorial approach, newspaper of record will try to
11 maintain very close position to the actual sources of information --
12 Q. Mm-hm.
13 A. -- and to provide essential data, it may have an editorial
14 approach which may tend to discount the information that it conveys or
15 argue with it. But the essential function of the -- a function of the
16 newspaper of record is, indeed, to do that reporting.
17 Q. In that regard, would you agree that the articles that are
18 presented in a newspaper of record such as Oslobodjenje, which was a
19 newspaper of record, as I understand it, in your estimation.
20 A. It served that function, yes.
21 Q. Established a definitive record of current events; is that --
22 A. Good.
23 Q. Do we like that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Okay. And would you also agree with me that such a newspaper
1 would have a policy, both in its editorial aspect and its news-gathering
2 functions, which would be considered to be professional and unbiased?
3 A. No.
4 Q. So for purposes of our discussion, the issues -- I take it your
5 "no" was probably more focused on the "unbiased" than it was on the
7 A. You asked me a question about its editorial aspect and its
8 news-gathering functions.
9 Q. Okay.
10 A. My answer to the news-gathering functions is it seeks to be
11 objective and unbiased, but I don't -- I don't think there's a newspaper
12 that has an editorial policy that is deliberately neutral or even
14 Q. Okay. With regard to the one newspaper that you have identified
15 as a newspaper of record, that being Oslobodjenje, I take it that you
16 take the position that with regard to its news-gathering function, the
17 manner in which it gathered news, it was, in your estimation, unbiased?
18 A. Let me correct you and say I also identified Glas --
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. -- as a newspaper of record.
21 Q. But just with regard to Oslobodjenje first. Glas is another
23 A. Not quite. I think the news-gathering function includes being a
24 newspaper of record but also includes gathering news through
25 investigative journalism, reports of commentators. So I would say the
1 news -- the paper-of-record function is only part of its news-gathering
3 Q. What I'm driving at, and I appreciate that expansion of your
4 answer, what I'm driving at, and this is my last question, and I was
5 hoping to be able to go quite at it now, is that in your estimation, they
6 were unbiased. There was no bias in the gathering of the news.
7 A. No.
8 Q. Not at all.
9 A. That's not my position.
10 Q. Oh, okay. Then we will pick up tomorrow what your position is.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. We'll then stand adjourned
12 to tomorrow morning, 9.00, Courtroom I. Court adjourned.
13 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.45 p.m.
14 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 20th day of
15 November, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.