1 Wednesday, 25 March 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 8.59 a.m.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning to everybody in and around the
7 courtroom. Madam Registrar, will you please call the the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours, case number
9 IT-04-81-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Perisic.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. Could we have appearances for
11 the day starting with the Prosecution, please.
12 MR. SAXON: Good morning, Your Honours. Mr. Salvatore Cannata,
13 Dan Saxon, Lorna Bolton and Carmela Javier for the Prosecution.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. And for the Defence.
15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. Good
16 morning to all the participants in the proceedings. The Defence of
17 Mr. Perisic today is Chad Mair, Tina Drolec, Daniela Tasic,
18 Gregor Guy-Smith, and Novak Lukic.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Lukic.
20 Good morning, Mr. Suljevic.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I hope you had a good rest last night. I've been
23 told that you've been here for ten days, I must apologise to you, these
24 are the vicissitude of trials, things happened that we haven't planned
25 for and it does happen that you stay long here. Mr. Suljevic, you took
1 made a declaration at the beginning of your testimony to tell the truth,
2 the whole truth, and nothing else but the truth, I'm just reminding you
3 that you are still bound by that declaration. Thank you very much.
4 WITNESS: EKREM SULJEVIC [Resumed]
5 [Witness answered through interpreter]
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Lukic.
7 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 Cross-examination by Mr. Lukic: [Continued]
9 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Suljevic.
10 A. Good morning.
11 Q. Yesterday, you will remember we left off by looking at parts of
12 that Official Note and the fragments of shells that we saw, the
13 photographs of which we saw relating to the event of the 22nd of
14 December, 1994?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. We saw two photographs and I assume that they were made in such a
17 way that one photo shows fragments that were collected at one crater, and
18 that the second photograph depicts fragments that were collected around
19 some other crater. I assume that was the method that you pursued?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. You've already said that in your written report, that was
22 compiled regarding this incident, there were no detailed descriptions of
23 the fragments themselves which can be found in some other reports, these
24 descriptions; correct?
25 A. As you can see from the -- yes, that can be seen from the very
2 Q. You also said yesterday that there were not many on-site
3 investigations relating to incidents into shellings with M-76 millimetre
4 shells being involved?
5 A. Well, I said that I did not participate in many such on-site
6 investigations. I cannot speak for my colleagues who may have been.
7 Q. All right. But I understood you to mean it as a general
8 practice. But could you tell us, were you personally present on this
9 particular occasion or on any other occasion where 76-millimetre shell
10 was involved?
11 A. Well, at this point in time, at this distance at the time I
12 account no recall all the on-site investigations I participated in.
13 Q. All right. Now, based on the fragments that we saw in the photos
14 that were shown to you, or rather, that were submitted to you for
15 analysis, we were able to establish that the fuse that was found was an
17 A. That's correct. But I just want to clarify something, we did not
18 receive photographs to analyse, we actually analysed the trace evidence
19 that was found on site.
20 Q. I think you've said this on a number of occasions and that's not
21 at issue here.
22 What is the difference between the M62 and M68 fuses.
23 A. I don't know what the cross-section of the M62 or M68 fuses looks
24 like, but it is to be assumed that there are some differences, but I
25 don't know about them. There are a great number of fuses, and without
1 consulting literature on it, I wouldn't really be able to tell you
2 anything more specific.
3 But as a general rule, fuses are marked, and on the body of the
4 fuse you can see an embossed marking indicating what type of fuse it is.
5 Now, what the difference is in the cross-section, their dimensions and
6 weight, that is something that you need to look up in a book.
7 Q. Does that mean that if you are unable to find a marking on the
8 fragment of the body of the fuse, you cannot actually determine what type
9 of fuse it is, or what fuse specifically?
10 A. If we find pieces or fragments of a fuse by comparing such
11 fragments with the fuses that we had in our department, it was possible
12 to determine based on the fragments themselves by comparing them to the
13 actual fuses that they had, it was possible to determine what type of
14 fuse was involved. Not every time, but it was possible.
15 Q. Do they look alike visually?
16 A. Visually, these fuses look alike if you look at them just
17 externally. They are usually on top of the projectile, and they are
18 similar. They are different though in their construction, and
20 Q. When I asked you about UTI
21 of mortar shells; correct?
22 A. I'm not an expert and I can't really know all these things,
23 but -- and I don't remember that there was a UTI M62 fuse, that it exists
24 at all, but by consulting books, and again I have to repeat he how we
25 performed our analysis. More often than not we had unspent fuses and
1 also fragments and then shell bodies, and we were able to determine what
2 type of fragments or what type of shell the fragments actually belonged
3 to and that's how we did our analysis.
4 Q. Would you please just slow down a bit, witness.
5 Now, yesterday on page 23, line 8 of the working transcript, you
6 said that the M68 fuse is not used for mortar shells for 82-millimetre
7 mortar shells, are you sure of that? You said this yesterday.
8 A. Officially, if you consulted any literature, the UTI M68 fuse is
9 not used for mortar shell, it is used for gun projectile, gun rounds, or
10 cannon rounds --
11 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter kindly request that the witness
12 repeat the type of the type of shell.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: There's a request from the interpreters to the
15 Mr. Suljevic, the interpreters request that you repeat your
16 answer where you referred to the type of shell. Your answer was not
17 fully interpreted. You said:
18 "Officially, if you consulted any literature, the UTI M68 fuse is
19 not used for mortar shell, it is used for gun projectile, gun rounds, or
20 cannon rounds," and they didn't hear the rest of your answer, sir. Could
21 you help.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] According to the literature that we
23 could consult, these fuses are used for some cannon rounds, projectiles,
24 including 76-millimetre shells.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. And the interpreters are also asking
1 that you slow down.
2 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please see document D74
3 on the screens for a moment, Ms. Registrar. We have microphone problems.
4 All right. Now it's all right. Could we please zoom in on the encircled
6 Q. Based on this photograph, could you tell me how you could
7 determine that this is an M68 fuse? Can we see that from this
9 A. Well, based on this photograph alone, you cannot really
10 determine, but as I said, we had concrete trace evidence and on the body
11 of the fuse we found this inscription or this marking.
12 Q. But you never mentioned that in your report, the description of
13 the fuse?
14 A. That's correct, we did not, not in the part which deals with the
15 description of the fuse, but we did mention it in our opinion the
16 fragments are from a 76-millimetre grenade shell --
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Bolton
18 MS. BOLTON: I was going to object to the question my friend
19 asked because it was a misstatement of the report but the witness has
20 corrected it.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So let me continue. In the report
23 we mentioned that the fragments were those of a 76-millimetre shell, and
24 this fragment was completed with an M68 UTI fuse.
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. What I was asking you about is that once you find fragments in
2 the very report itself, you would enter data that could be read on or
3 from a fragment; correct? And this was something that Ms. Bolton
4 explored with you?
5 A. That's correct, I mentioned that yesterday, but not in every
7 Q. That was exactly my question, and this particular report you did
8 not give us a description of anything that could be read about this fuse?
9 A. As I said yesterday, I said that we did not have trace evidence.
10 Q. Yesterday when you testified on this on-site investigation, you
11 mentioned that there were also UNPROFOR members who came to conduct their
12 own on-site investigation; correct?
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. And you know that members of the UNPROFOR in their report
15 mentioned that this was an 82-millimetre shell. You do know that that
16 was the gist of their report?
17 A. Yes, I know and I only learned of this two years ago.
18 Q. That's correct. While you were being proofed for your testimony
19 in the Milosevic case, the Prosecutor actually told you that there was an
20 on-site investigation and the opinion of one of the members of that team,
21 and that's when you learned of it. Now, regarding this, during your
22 testimony in the Milosevic case, you said that you did not agree at all
23 with the findings of the UNPROFOR members; correct?
24 A. That's correct. And my position remains unchanged today.
25 Q. What is the range of an 82-millimetre shell?
1 A. I don't know. I know that mortar shells that were used including
2 the 120-millimetre shell, their range was up to 6 kilometres, but what
3 the range of the 82-millimetre shell precisely is, I really don't know
4 without consulting a book.
5 Q. Do you know what the range of the B1 gun is?
6 A. I do, I think it's over 8 kilometres, but what it is exactly, I
7 don't know.
8 Q. Now a general question. If you need to determine the location
9 from which the projectile was fired, in addition to the direction in
10 order to determine the distance and the range, it was important to know
11 what the type of charge is or what type of the shell is; correct?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. When Ms. Bolton asked you yesterday about the on-site
14 investigations conducted by the representatives of the UNPROFOR, you said
15 that their representatives did not inspect the fragments that you
16 analysed subsequently, the fragments that we could see on the photo that
17 we collected on site?
18 A. They conducted an on-site investigation and they made photos.
19 But they did not take away with them the fragments, so if he they did
20 perform an analysis they didn't have any trace evidence. I think I
21 stated this clearly.
22 Q. Were they shown these fragments on the scene, if you know?
23 A. I think they photographed these fragments on the scene. And as a
24 matter of principle they were always allowed to inspect the site. There
25 was no point in hiding anything from them. In other words, they
1 attending almost all on-site investigation, but as a general rule, they
2 would come and whatever was being done on the scene itself, they were
3 able to see and observe, and it was in a way under their supervision, if
4 I may use that word.
5 Q. Do you remember if they came to your offices in order to inspect
6 the fragments again?
7 A. As far as I can recall, they did not come to our offices while we
8 were conducting the analysis. Whether they actually inspected these
9 fragments at the CSB
10 about that.
11 Q. All right. Now, Mr. Suljevic, were you ever asked to conduct an
12 on-site investigation by the BH Army?
13 A. No, I did not attend on site investigations conducted by the BH
14 Army. These on-site investigations always dealt with the shelling of the
15 city of Sarajevo
16 received requests from the CSB
18 conduct an on-site investigation.
19 Q. Were you in a situation where you went to an on-site
20 investigation and then to be barred from attending it by the BH Army or
21 did this happen to any of your colleagues do you know?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Did you hear of any cases where UNPROFOR members were not allowed
24 to attend an on-site investigation or that they were removed from the
1 A. Where I was present, where I attending on-site investigations, it
2 never happened, and I don't think they were ever prevented from attending
3 by at least in this portion where the investigations were conducted by
4 the CSB
5 Q. Just one more question regarding the projectile type and then
6 we'll move to another topic. Am I wrong in saying that your conclusion
7 that these were M-76 shells, cannon shells, was based primarily on the
8 fact that you didn't find any trace evidence that is usually found in
9 instances where mortar shells are used, such as stabiliser or the
10 tail-fins, and so on?
11 A. In this case, based on the fragments that were submitted to us
12 for analysis, we did not analyse what was missing. We analysed the trace
13 evidence that we had and based on those fragments, we found -- we
14 reported -- we prepared our report.
15 Q. Just several more questions concerning the trajectory. The
16 direction from which this particular shell came was determined only on
17 the basis of the axis of symmetry determined in the crater; is that
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. But the distance from the place from which the shell was fired,
21 you couldn't determine?
22 A. No, we did not determine that.
23 Q. The fact that in front of the point of impact of the shell, there
24 were no barriers, there were no buildings or any other barriers, this, I
25 assume, influences the way you determine the angle under which the shell
2 A. These facilities could possibly determine the minimum angle of
3 impact of the shell.
4 Q. And if there are no such facilities, there are no walls, for
5 example, then obviously you cannot use that when you are assessing the
6 angle of impact; is that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Maybe this is entirely lay question but it took me sometime to
9 try to find my way through all these things. So if you cannot determine
10 the angle of impact, then you cannot determine any other parameter apart
11 from the trajectory, so you cannot determine the distance where the shell
12 was fired from?
13 A. Well, we said this already yesterday. Even if you were to
14 determine the angle of impact, still without another parameter, and this
15 is the charge of the projectile, you cannot determine the distance from
16 the place where the shell was fired from.
17 Q. You also said that personally in your analysis you were not
18 determining the angle of impact, that this was not an element of your
20 A. That's correct, I did not determine the angle of impact.
21 Q. But whoever was tasked to do that within an investigation team,
22 if there was a person who was determining the angle of impact, that
23 person was supposed to compile a corresponding report; is that correct?
24 A. Well, if this is specifically requested from the investigation
25 team, then it was supposed to be done, so for example, if the
1 investigating judge requested that this be done, then it would have been
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, Madam Registrar, I
4 would kindly ask you now to put on the screen the evidence P415 page 5 in
5 B/C/S and page 2 in the English version. Can you kindly scroll down a
6 bit. I need the lower part of this page, of the page -- first page of
7 the report. And I apologise, it seems that this is on the next page in
8 the English version, so page 3 in the English version. And if you can
9 kindly scroll down. That's fine, thank you.
10 Q. Now, I'm reading the last paragraph, this is an official report
11 which I believe is kind of general report on what was done on the site.
12 And the last paragraph that reads, the forensic investigation and so on,
13 and then it says:
14 On the basis of the angle of impact and the damage caused by the
15 explosion, it was determined that the shells were fired from the south,
16 which corresponds to the position of the aggressor's army.
17 Now, my question is the following: If this sentence is included
18 in an official report, that the angle of impact was determined, then I
19 would assume that that angle of impact had to be registered somewhere in
20 a form of a report, in a form of an expert opinion?
21 A. In this particular case, we did not measure the angle of impact,
22 so I'm not sure what -- whoever compiled this official report thought,
23 what he meant to say. Now, I can tell you what I believe he meant to say
24 but I'm not sure that this is relevant.
25 Q. No, I would not like you to do that, but you said to Madam Bolton
1 that you read this entire file and you can agree with me that nowhere in
2 the file is there a report or an opinion about the angle of impact?
3 A. I already said that we never determined the angle of impact, so
4 there is also no official report on the measurement of the angle of
6 Q. Yesterday when asked by Ms. Bolton on the angle of impact, you
7 said that the parameters to determine that angle also include the crater
8 dimensions, so this is one of the parameters for that determination?
9 A. No. The crater dimensions are not relevant but as far as I know
10 when you have a mortar shell then the traces left by the shell fragments
11 around the crater are relevant for determination of the angle of impact.
12 Q. Thank you. I would just like to have your comment on something
13 that was stated yesterday, if you can just allow me a minute.
14 On page 11 of the yesterday's transcript, when you were asked by
15 Madam Carter [sic] about the parameters to decide on angle of impact you
16 said the following:
17 [In English] "You have to calculate the dimensions of the crater
18 or either the traces left by the shrapnels, but you also have to
19 determine the centre of the explosive charges and the projectile."
20 MS. BOLTON: Sorry, I'm just rising because I need a moment
21 before my friend continues to actually locate the part of the transcript
22 he is talking about. My transcript has continued page numbers into the
23 4.000s, so I'm trying to find page 11, if my friends could just give me a
24 moment to catch up, I'd appreciate it.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Madam Bolton.
1 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I used the unofficial transcript from
2 yesterday's session, page 11. I'll just now determine which page it is
3 in the official version of the transcript.
4 MS. BOLTON: Sorry, can my friends assist me with the line
6 MR. LUKIC: 4739, line 10 and 11.
7 MS. BOLTON: Thank you, I've found the passage. It's actually, I
8 think, line 17 to 20 that I think my friend is talking about.
9 MR. LUKIC: His answer starts with, "Well, these are
10 calculations," and so and so. Line 17.
11 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
12 MR. LUKIC: May I continue?
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may continue, sorry. I thought you were
14 talking to your colleague when you need to find out whether she was
15 finished with you. Sorry.
16 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. So Mr. Suljevic, from this answer of yours, I understood that the
18 crater dimensions were a significant parameter in determining the angle
19 of impact of a shell?
20 A. As I said, I'm not an expert for this, but it is important to
21 determine where the centre of the crater is, and the marks left by the
22 shell fragments. And then you take measurements, and through a
23 mathematical formula, you can determine the angle of impact. This is as
24 much as I know.
25 Q. Do you remember when you look through this file, investigation
1 file of this entire incident, a couple of days ago, do you remember that
2 you found any data concerning the crater dimensions or any such data
3 relevant for the determination of the angle of impact?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Thank you. All right. I will now very briefly address a
6 different topic. While you were preparing for this testimony, you spoke
7 to Ms. Bolton, and I received notes, proofing notes; and in these
8 proofing notes you stated that the possibility that these shells, these
9 bombs were planted in the market, that this made no sense at all. So
10 this is what I received in my proofing notes.
11 Do you remember saying that?
12 A. Yes, that's correct.
13 Q. Just one question concerning this topic. Such planted bomb
14 theories, did you hear about these theories during the war and after the
16 A. I heard about such theories, and I can provide my opinion
17 generally speaking concerning these theories. I believe that nobody ever
18 produced a projectile the fragments of which would change direction
19 during the flight. If the projectile was planted, it had to be seen. It
20 would be visible. One of the projectiles fell in front of a shop, I
21 can't remember now whether the shop owner was killed on that occasion,
22 whether he was one of the victims, but as he entered the shop or people
23 that moved around the market, they would have seen it.
24 Q. I just wanted to hear whether you knew about these theories, I'm
25 not interested in your comment. And just one final question, when the
1 Prosecutor showed you one of the reports, this is document P677, there is
2 no need to put it on the screen now; but in that report you mention the
3 book SSNO, and the year 1974, so is this a book that was actually
4 published in 1974?
5 A. Yes, so whatever was written there was copied from that book
6 edition of 1974. This was the book issued by the federal ministry, I
7 can't remember the exact title, ammunitions and something.
8 Q. During your work on these investigations, did you have any
9 literature, did you consult any literature published in 1990s concerning
10 the artillery ammunition that you analysed?
11 A. We had prospectuses for all the shells that were produced at the
12 time, and they even accompanied these products when they were exported.
13 They were published by the SDPR, that was the federal administration for
15 Q. Could you tell me which period they came from, so what was the
16 [indiscernible] of these prospectuses?
17 A. I don't remember exactly, but they were certainly published much
18 later than in 1974.
19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Suljevic. Your
20 Honours, with this I have completed my questioning.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Lukic. Yes,
22 Madam Bolton, any re-examination?
23 MS. BOLTON: Just a few questions, Your Honour, thank you.
24 Re-examination by Ms. Bolton:
25 Q. Sir, just a few moments ago my friend was questioning you and
1 asking you whether you had heard any theories during the war or after
2 about the possibility of these bombs having been planted. Do you -- and
3 I don't think you indicated when you actually heard those theories. Was
4 it during the war or after?
5 A. During the war there were also such theories. As far as I knew,
6 they mostly came from the radio and television of Republika Srpska that
7 was transmitted from Pale, so they spread such theories. They made some
8 analysis as far as I know by some alleged experts who never were on the
9 scene. They never saw any traces or anything else that could contribute
10 to a valid analysis of these traces.
11 Q. Okay. Another area of questioning today from my friend was a
12 about reference in the report from the 22nd of December, 1994 incident.
13 And he put to you a portion of that report which is P415 page 5.
14 MS. BOLTON: And could that be brought back up again, please.
15 Page 5 in the -- yes, in the English version.
16 Q. In the English version, sir, and I don't know how this translates
17 in B/C/S, make sure I have the right page. Yes, in the English version
18 the sentence reads:
19 "Judging by the incoming descent angle of the shells." There's
20 not a use of the word, the phrase "angle of impact." Is there a
21 difference between commenting on the descent angle in a report like this
22 and calculating the angle of impact?
23 A. Look, the angle of impact without determining how large it is, it
24 determines the direction from which the shell came, so there are two
25 possible directions whereby the shell could come; so you can determine
1 that visually or you can determine -- and in this way you can determine
2 the direction from which the shell came.
3 Q. Approximate I'm not sure, sir, that you responded to my question,
4 and it just may not make any sense to you the way it was worded. If
5 there's a reference in a report it to a descent angle, does that
6 necessarily mean that the angle of impact was calculated?
7 A. As I said, we never calculated any angle of impact. We never
8 took any parameters that would be relevant for doing that. In this
9 report, however, it is said on the basis of the angle of impact, but I do
10 not know that anybody ever calculated the angle of impact. These are
11 just preliminary reports from the scene itself.
12 Q. Okay. Yesterday, I will take you back to yesterday's
13 questioning, my friend was asking you if you would take photos -- if you
14 would rely on the photographs to, and his words were "later determine
15 the trajectory." Do you remember that line of questioning, sir?
16 A. Could you please reword your question?
17 Q. Sure. Did you rely on the photographs to determine the
19 A. No, we determined the trajectory on the spot by analysing the
20 impression that was left by the projectile, and then following that we
21 would enter this into a map to show the direction from which the
22 projectile was fired. We never used photographs to determine the
23 direction because that's not even possible when you orientate yourself to
24 the true north side.
25 Q. My last question, sir, is my friend was asking you about
1 production that was carried out in the Zrak factory, which was a special
2 production facility, you told us, and during the war was in an area
3 controlled by the ABiH. And in answer to his questions yesterday, you
4 indicated that the area was under the control of the ABiH, that they did
5 continue production, and then you said what could be produced -- sorry,
6 you said production was much reduced but then you said that what could be
7 produced without proper raw materials, that's different issue.
8 What did Zrak produce before the war?
9 A. Before I answer this question, let me just say that the factory
10 itself was not under the army control before 1993; before I moved to the
11 Ministry of Interior, I had occasion to visited the factory, and I spent
12 sometime there and worked sometime there. There was no military presence
13 there. It was in the area that was under the control of the ABiH Army.
14 I mean, if this was not clear from what I said yesterday, I wanted to
15 clarify it now.
16 Now, the Zrak company was a special purpose facility that
17 produced sighting devices, optical devices, electronic devices for
18 weapons and for the needs of the army. The very term "special purpose
19 production" means military contractors. They all -- all special purpose
20 factories produced products or manufactured products for the military.
21 Q. And did they produce any actual weaponry, guns, cannons, shells?
22 A. That factory did not have the necessary equipment, the necessary
23 machines and tools for the production of weapons and pieces, artillery
25 MS. BOLTON: Thank you, sir. Those are all my questions.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Madam Bolton. Judge?
2 Questioned by the Court:
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just one question, sir. Is there a difference,
4 and if there is, what is it, between descent angle and angle of impact?
5 A. I think we mean the same thing. The angle of descent or angle of
6 impact, they mean the same. But there is a difference between the fire
7 angle -- firing angle and the impact angle. The angle at which the
8 projectile actually strikes or falls.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, I'm getting a little confused. What is a
10 firing angle?
11 A. The firing angle is the angle under which the shell is fired from
12 a -- from an artillery piece. So it is the initial angle of the
13 projectile compared to the horizontal line, that is the angle at which
14 the projectile actually is fired from the barrel of a weapon, and this
15 angle can be determined by determining the cosine and the tangent line.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. And can you determine the firing angle by
17 inspecting the scene where the projectile landed or do you have to be at
18 the firing place to determine that?
19 A. Based on the impact angle, or the angle of descent, so if you can
20 exactly establish the angle at which a projectile landed, it is possible
21 to determine the firing angle. However, depending on the number of
22 charges, there would be different angles of firing, so depending on how
23 many charges and the type of charge, a projectile would land at a certain
24 spot, depending on the angle at which it is fired. In other words, the
25 number of charges that are used at the firing point would also determine
1 the range of the projectile. The higher the angle or the greater the
2 angle, the longer the range.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Back to the descent angle and the angle,
4 but you say descent angle and angle of impact are one in the same thing?
5 A. If we are talking about the very spot where the projectile lands,
6 that is the same thing. However, when the projectile actually begins its
7 descent, the descent angle changes as it is landing, as it is falling.
8 So at the point where it impacts the ground, that would be the angle of
9 impact. In other words, a projectile in flight, that angle as compared
10 to the horizontal line is constantly changing as the projectile is
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not quite sure that you've answered my
13 question. My question can be answered by either a yes, no, or I don't
14 know. Is the descent angle and angle of impact one and the same thing?
15 A. In the literature, we don't deal with the angle of descent.
16 There is the angle -- the impact angle. So if you logically speaking, if
17 you are thinking about the spot where the projectile lands, it's one in
18 the same thing. There is no mention in Bosnian of the angle of descent,
19 we only use the impact angle. That is the angle at which the projectile
20 actually struck the surface. If this concept of the descent angle is
21 taken in that sense then it's one in the same thing.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: From your knowledge, from your training, from your
23 experience from what you have been doing, do you have any knowledge of
24 the concept of descent angle?
25 A. No.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: In fact, you cannot tell us what a descent angle
2 is because you have no knowledge of it?
3 A. I did mention and use the angle of impact.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Listen to my question, please. I haven't
5 mentioned angle of impact. I'm talking about descent angle. Because you
6 have no knowledge of it, what a descent angle is, you can't tell us what
7 it is, can you?
8 Q. Yes?
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. Any questions arising,
10 Madam Bolton?
11 MS. BOLTON: I think the record -- I don't know that Your Honour
12 can see what the witness was doing with his hands while he was talking
13 about this area, and I think the record should simply reflect that when
14 was talking about the path -- when you were asking questions about the
15 angle of descent and the path the projectile takes, he was making a
16 motion with his arm, his hand in the shape of an arch, which I think
17 might assist you in understanding. I can ask the witness one follow-up
19 Further Re-examination by Ms. Bolton:
20 Q. Sir, when a projectile is fired from a cannon and subsequently
21 lands in another place, is there a shape or -- to the, I guess, to the
22 path that it takes in flight?
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Shape to the path.
24 MR. HARMON: Maybe he could draw a picture.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam, I saw his hands.
1 MS. BOLTON: Okay. I couldn't tell if you could see that from
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: I saw his hands and I understood what he said,
4 that an angle of descent is constantly changing. I can understand that,
5 I can see that.
6 MS. BOLTON: Then I have no further questions, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: But an impact angle is static, it won't change.
8 That's the difference, and all I wanted to understand from him is whether
9 he is saying that these two are one in the same thing or are they
10 different. That's all I wanted to know.
11 MS. BOLTON: No, I think Your Honour has demonstrated to me
12 during that exchange that you understand the concept. I don't need to
13 ask any further questions. Thank you.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: But you don't have to -- you got to put your case
15 on record, so don't do it for me because if there's something that you
16 want to have placed on the record, by all means ask your questions.
17 MS. BOLTON: No, the purpose of the question was simply to
18 clarify for the Court's understanding and that's not necessary any
19 further so I thank you.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Mr. Lukic.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I have no questions, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. Sir, that brings us to the end
23 of your testimony. After staying in The Hague for so long, finally you
24 can now go home. Thank you so much for coming, and you are now excused.
25 You may stand down. Do travel well back home, and I hope you do get
1 better. I see you've still been coughing today.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I hope so too and thank you,
3 Your Honours.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
5 [The witness withdrew]
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Bolton.
7 MS. BOLTON: I'm just wondering if I may be excused, please,
8 Your Honour.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are excused.
10 MS. BOLTON: Thank you.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are welcome.
12 Yes, Mr. Lukic, you are excusing yourself, too. Okay.
13 Mr. Saxon, I see you are on your feet.
14 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour. Mr. Cannata will lead the
15 next witness.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning. I know you need time to sort
18 MR. CANNATA: Your Honours, good morning. Can I have some time
19 to switch?
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: You do, Mr. Cannata.
21 [The witness entered court]
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Cannata, this is the witness you want to call?
23 MR. CANNATA: Yes, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Name.
25 MR. CANNATA: The Prosecution calls Dr. Bakir Nakas.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning, Doctor. Will you please make the
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning. I solemnly declare
4 that I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
5 WITNESS: BAKIR NAKAS
6 [Witness answered through interpreter]
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may be seated, sir.
8 Examination by Mr. Cannata:
9 Q. Thank you. Good morning, sir.
10 A. Good morning.
11 Q. Sir, can you please state your full name for the record.
12 A. My name is Bakir Nakas.
13 Q. Thank you. Sir, do you remember testifying before this Tribunal
14 in the case Prosecutor versus Dragomir Milosevic on 25 and 29th January,
16 A. Yes, I remember. I remember.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MR. CANNATA: Can I please have 65 ter number 9427 on the
19 e-court, please. Page 2 of both documents.
20 Q. Sir, do you see a document in front of you on the screen?
21 A. I do. But I can't quite make it out, but I do see it.
22 MR. CANNATA: Can we zoom in. Thank you.
23 Q. Now, did you have an opportunity to review your testimony in the
24 case Prosecutor versus Dragomir Milosevic?
25 A. Yes. On both those days, the 25th and the 29th.
1 MR. CANNATA: Thank you. Can we now have 65 ter 9428. And I
2 will seek the admission of both documents at a later stage, Your Honour.
3 Page 2 of both documents, thank you.
4 Q. Did you also review this document, sir? Can you see that?
5 A. Yes. Yes.
6 Q. Now, do you confirm that your previous testimony is true and
7 accurate to the best of your knowledge?
8 A. Yes, I confirm that the record is true and accurate.
9 Q. Would your answers be the same if you were asked the same
10 questions again today, sir?
11 A. I think that I probably could not provide identical answers, but
12 yes, they would be the same.
13 MR. CANNATA: Your Honours, at this stage I will move into
14 evidence 65 ter number 9427, and 9428.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: 9427 is admitted into evidence. May it please be
16 given an exhibit number.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the document will become
18 Exhibit P2219.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. And 9428 is also admitted
20 into evidence. May it also please be given an exhibit number.
21 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P2220, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. Mr. Cannata.
23 MR. CANNATA: Thank you.
24 Q. Sir, what is your current occupation?
25 A. I'm currently the director of the general hospital,
1 Dr. Abdulah Nakas in Sarajevo
2 hospital actually that was once a military hospital and the general
3 hospital until 2002. State Hospital
4 Q. Thank you. Can you tell the Court what was your profession
5 during the war?
6 A. My background is medicine. I'm a doctor. I specialised in
7 infectious diseases. And up until April 8, 1992, I was the chief of the
8 infectious department -- department for infectious diseases in the
9 military hospital in Sarajevo
10 People's Army. As of May 10, after I returned to the hospital, up until
11 the 25th of May, I organised, together with a staff, the hospital staff,
12 the work of the hospital, and I was then appointed general manager of the
13 hospital in the wartime period. And I remain in that same position to
14 this day.
15 During the war, I did not practice my own field of medicine. I
16 was in charge of organising the work of the hospital, medical supplies,
17 ensuring that there was power supply, that there were medical supplies,
18 and all the necessities for a hospital to operate.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: As of May 10 which year, sir? You said, "As of
20 May 10, after I returned to the hospital, up until the 25th of May, I
21 organised ..." what year are you talking about?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 1992.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
24 MR. CANNATA: Thank you, sir.
25 Q. Now, as the general manager of the State Hospital
1 obligations and duties with regard to the official documents and records
2 of the State Hospital
3 A. As the general manager, I was primarily responsible for the legal
4 operation of that hospital which means that I had to ensure that all
5 basic documents for any hospital to operate should exist such as the
6 bylaws, the rules of operation, and so on. All the other documents that
7 were necessary for the hospital to operate.
8 I was also in charge of the entire administrative aspect of the
9 hospital, and reporting to the superior institutions, in this particular
10 case that was the Ministry of Health, as well as the UNPROFOR, the
11 World Health Organisation and other institutions that assisted us in
12 providing supplies for our hospital.
13 Q. Sir, thank you. Now, in performing your duties as the general
14 manager of the State Hospital
15 and the medical records of the State Hospital
16 A. Yes, absolutely. These were protocols and documents that we
17 actually just inherited as it were from the military hospital, and we had
18 the entire medical and hospital records that we kept in the same manner
19 using these documents. In other words, we had these protocols that we
20 used for medical histories of our patients. They were identical to the
21 ones used by the military hospital. Also the medical history forms, they
22 were forms where we entered all the patient information. These were also
23 documents that is we continued to use as they were used in the military
24 hospital. And also all our specialist findings were entered on forms
25 that had been inherited from the military hospital.
1 MR. CANNATA: Thank you. Can we move into private session,
2 Your Honours, please.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the Chamber please move into private session.
4 [Private session]
11 Pages 4818-4825 redacted. Private session.
14 [Open session]
15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. Yes, Mr. Cannata.
17 MR. CANNATA: Thank you.
18 Q. Sir, now, in addition of being the general manager of the
19 State Hospital
20 professional community in Sarajevo
21 A. In addition to my job of a general manager, between May 1992 or
22 after May 1992, I was also an expert advisor at the Ministry of Health of
23 the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina for humanitarian issues. I was also
24 head of the commission for the receipt and distribution of medicines for
25 the besieged Sarajevo
1 which we had managers of all health institutions who met on a daily basis
2 to resolve any current issues.
3 I was often in a position to discuss issues with representatives
4 of the international community, particularly representatives of the
5 UNPROFOR, and WHO, and all the others who tried to supply our health
6 services with the needed materials.
7 Q. Thank you, sir. I'm interested particularly in your position as
8 the expert advisor at the Ministry of Health. Can you please describe
9 what were your duties and responsibilities in that capacity?
10 A. The then minister of health Mr. Beganovic was a dentist, and he
11 needed to have some physicians around him from the medical profession in
12 order to be able to make appropriate decisions. For that reason, some of
13 us were engaged as advisors, and my task was primarily -- concerned
14 primarily the communication with NGOs who provided us with humanitarian
16 Also I dealt with the preparations for the development of the
17 plan of health reform which was to be implemented in the future in
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and I was also in charge of communication with WHO
19 and communication with representatives of the Ministry of Health of
20 Republika Srpska that was organised by WHO. This communication primarily
21 had to do with unimpeded passage of injured persons, medical supplies,
22 and other issues that appeared from time to time. Things such as
23 fighting epidemics, different hygenic problems and so on this also has do
24 with the fact me high background was in infectious diseases to this was
25 my field.
1 Q. Thank you, sir. In performing your duties as an expert advisor,
2 did you have an opportunity to work in connection with other medical
3 institutions in Sarajevo other than the State Hospital?
4 A. As I said previously, the crisis centre met nearly on a daily
5 basis in 1992, and in that crisis centre we had general managers of all
6 health institutions, all medical institutions, be it primary medical
7 treatment, secondary medical treatment, hospitals, and hygenic and
8 epidemiological wards. So we met on a daily basis, we would visit one
9 another; so I was fully informed about the functioning of medical
10 services, University Medical Hospital Kosevo, all the medical centres and
11 all other health institutions in the besieged Sarajevo.
12 Q. Thank you, sir. Can you actually name any of such of these
13 medical institutions that you had regular contact with?
14 A. Primarily medical centres, these were institutions in charge of
15 primary medical care, primary health care. It consisted of several
16 services, and they were distributed in various municipalities, so you had
17 medical centre Novo Sarajevo, medical centre Stari Grad, and so on.
18 Another institution I regularly contacted was the emergency service.
19 This was a service especially tasked for providing first aid and
20 transportation of injured and sick. Third institution I cooperated with
21 were hospitals, the University Medical Centre Kosevo, so this was a
22 training hospital used by the faculty of medical sciences.
23 And I also cooperated as much as I could, given the
24 circumstances, concerning the supplies and admission of injured with the
25 hospital in Dobrinja. This was a hospital organised there during the
1 war. Is so these are the medical institutions that were involved in
2 taking care of the injured and sick in Sarajevo.
3 Q. Thank you. Now, on account of your experience both as the
4 general manager of the State Hospital
5 the Ministry of Health, have you become yourself familiar with the
6 protocols and medical records of other medical institutions operating in
8 A. Absolutely. Even before the aggression when I was head of the
9 infectious disease department of the military hospital, I was fully aware
10 of the entire medical documentation as it was kept by all the medical
11 institutions in Sarajevo
12 medical centres at the level of municipalities, I was aware of the
13 documentation kept by the university hospital because I started also my
14 career at the university hospital. I specialised there at the department
15 of infectious diseases. So I was fully acquainted with all the
16 administration and documentation as it was kept prior to the year 1992
17 and also during the year 1992 because we continued with the same type of
18 administration that we encountered in 1992. So the documents were kept
19 before that year and they continued to be kept in the same way during the
21 MR. CANNATA: Thank you, sir. Can we please move into private
22 session, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the Chamber please move into private session.
24 [Private session]
11 Pages 4830-4844 redacted. Private session.
13 [Open session]
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Madam Registrar. Can
16 somebody help us with the curtain, please.
17 MR. CANNATA:
18 Q. Sir, do you see the document?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Can you please describe it?
21 A. This is the document prepared at the general hospital by prim
22 Dr. Abdulah Nakas, and this is an excerpt from the protocol of the
23 emergency room of the general hospital of Sarajevo; and here you can see
24 the victims killed by sniper fire during this period. The total number
25 also segmented as to adults and children, and also those who belonged to
1 armed forces.
2 In the second table, you can see again persons killed by snipers
3 who arrived to the emergency room of the general hospital of Sarajevo
4 between -- in 1995. You can once again see the segmentation whether they
5 were adults, children, or members of the armed forces.
6 The source for this data are all the protocols of the emergency
7 room of the general hospital of Sarajevo
8 The document is signed by me as general manager of the hospital.
9 MR. CANNATA: Can this document be given an Exhibit number,
10 Your Honour.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
12 please be given an exhibit number.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the document becomes Exhibit P2238.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. Yes, Mr. Cannata.
15 MR. CANNATA: Yes, Your Honour, before I conclude my examination,
16 I shall read a short summary of Dr. Nakas's evidence today with your
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may, sir.
19 MR. CANNATA: Thank you very much.
20 Dr. Bakir Nakas has been the general manager of the
21 State Hospital
22 records and forensic reports issued by various medical institutions in
24 indents, including scheduled scheduling indents: A4, A5 and A6, as well
25 as scheduled sniping incidents B7, B8, B9, B10, B11, and B12 of Perisic
2 And that concludes the examination-in-chief, Your Honour. Thank
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour. If I could have a
7 Cross-examination by Mr. Guy-Smith:
8 Q. Good morning.
9 A. Good morning to you too.
10 Q. In your testimony earlier this morning, you mentioned, as I
11 understood it, that you took over the hospital on May 10th, and I believe
12 that would have been 1992; is that correct? You are going to have to
13 speak into the microphone.
14 A. Yes. On May the 10th, 1992, the Yugoslav People's Army left the
15 former military hospital with all the people who did not want to continue
16 to work there, so the hospital was left without a founding entity and
17 without anybody to organise its work. The presidency of Bosnia and
19 of delegation of the International Red Cross decided that the hospital
20 will continue to operate and provide health service to the citizens of
24 of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the decision was made on
25 the establishment of the hospital. It was entered into the court
1 registry, and at that time on the 26th of May, it was determined who
2 would be the managerial board of the hospital. It included myself, Dr.
3 Lovrincevic and Dr. Kojovic, so we were members of the managing board, so
4 I did not take over the hospital personally; but at the time I was tasked
5 by the ministry of health to organise the work of the hospital following
6 all the standards of the wartime medicine.
7 Q. Thank you for that very complete answer, sir.
8 When you were tasked to become part of the managerial board of
9 the hospital, at that time were you also a member of the
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina army?
11 A. No, I wasn't: I was a member of the Yugoslav People's Army until
12 April the 8th, 1992
13 People's Army. This request was approved orally by my superior or by
14 head of the hospital at the time; and then I reported to the regular
15 authorities of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina and
16 Bosnia-Herzegovinian Army, but they did not deploy me as such. I started
17 to work as a civilian person at the department of infectious diseases at
18 the clinical medical centre Sarajevo
19 came back under the control of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. So I
20 worked all the time as a civilian. I was never a member of the Army of
22 Q. Understood. And when you say that this request was approved
23 orally by your superior, or by the head of the hospital at that time in
24 April at the time, if I understand your evidence correctly, and you can
25 answer this question either yes or no, is it a hospital at that time was
1 a military hospital under the Yugoslav People's Army; correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Now, when you decided to leave on the 8th of April, 1992
4 point in time was the government of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina in
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And the Ministry of Health at that time in April was also in
8 existence; correct?
9 A. Yes, minister was -- physician specialist in internal medicine.
10 I can't at this moment remember his name. Oh, actually, it was Dr. Lipa,
11 specialist of internal medicine. He was then the minister of health.
12 Q. Now, at that point in time when you decided to leave, what was
13 your understanding of the status of the Republika Srpska, if you had one?
14 Had they also formed a government at that time?
15 A. My decision to leave the Yugoslav People's Army was made on the
16 basis of my personal conviction that Sarajevo was shelled, and that
17 Yugoslav People's Army did not do anything to protect citizens of
19 legitimate government of Bosnia-Herzegovina, I wasn't aware of any
20 government of Republika Srpska.
21 Q. And when you say the legitimate government of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
22 as you sit here today, do you recall at any point in time there being, as
23 you've put it, a legitimate government for the Republika Srpska?
24 A. I can't really say that. I wasn't even interested to know
25 whether there was one or not. I just know that there is a legitimate
1 government of Bosnia-Herzegovina which came into existence following the
2 referendum and everything that happened in Bosnia-Herzegovina, so there
3 was the presidency that was operational, and this, to my opinion, was
4 legitimate authority.
5 Q. Would it be fair to say that you did not concern yourself with
6 any of the political realities of the formation of the Republika Srpska?
7 Is that a fair statement?
8 A. Absolutely.
9 Q. As I understand your testimony, when you came into a position of
10 what I'll call director, you had, among other things, established medical
11 protocols at the hospital; correct?
12 A. Yes, there was the founding act and after that we also made
13 certain stamps. We also organised certain organisational units within
14 the hospital, and organised the way the hospital was supposed to work,
15 and the way the medical services were supposed to be given. So as
16 general manager of the hospital, I was in charge of the -- of organising
17 the entire system. Also staffing the hospital, providing all the
18 material preconditions, equipment, documentation, and all the other
19 resources necessary for our work. This was my task.
20 Q. And apart from there being a pre-existing established protocol,
21 as I understood your testimony, there were also pre-existing documents
22 that were available for you to use to continue the work of the hospital;
24 A. Absolutely. We used identical documents to those that existed
1 Q. And would it be fair to say that before the hospital passed out
2 of the control of the Yugoslav People's Army it was a well-functioning
4 A. You see, I worked in this hospital after 1979 as a civilian, and
5 then after 1980 as captain 1st class of the Yugoslav People's Army. It
6 was highly appreciated institution which provided medical services to
7 members of the Yugoslav People's Army, members of their families and also
8 all other citizens of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. In last years,
9 more than 50 per cent of the patients that were treated there were
10 civilians, so those treated by the military hospital.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: Would this be an appropriate moment.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: It would indeed. Thank you so much. We'll take a
13 break and come back at 12.30. Court adjourned.
14 --- Recess taken at 12.00 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 12.30 p.m.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Q. Doctor, we left off with you discussing the fact that the
19 hospital was a highly appreciated institution which provided medical
20 services, and I'd like to continue for a moment with regard to some of
21 the testimony that you gave earlier in which you indicated that the --
22 and this is at page 28, starting at line 11 would be the question; and
23 the response goes from line 14 through 23, that will be the area in which
24 I'm discussing the matter with the doctor. You indicated that you
25 inherited the protocols and the documents from the military hospital. I
1 want to discuss with you this concept of inheriting protocols and
2 documents from one institution and using them in another institution.
3 Because as I understand it, certainly by May 25th, the hospital was no
4 longer a military hospital run by the JNA, but rather was a civilian
5 hospital run by the Republic of the Bosnia-Herzegovina; correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. The protocols that had been in existence before were protocols
8 that were time proven and valuable to the running of the hospital;
10 A. Those were standard protocols containing names, surname, number
11 of the protocol date. There was a box for diagnosis. There was a box
12 for whatever medical treatment was received. So these were not
13 personalised in any way from any other standard universally applied
14 documents, so possibly there was a stamp, but the sole purpose was
15 statistical treatment of data. There was nothing else specific about
16 them that a would make them be of military use.
17 Q. I understand that. In terms of efficient running of the
18 institution, however, as I understood your testimony, there certainly was
19 no reason to deviate from a system that had existed beforehand even
20 though it was a military system? The system worked and there's an old
21 statement in English, I don't know if you have the same thing in your
22 language which is if it's not broken, don't try to fix it. And you had a
23 system that worked; right?
24 A. Absolutely.
25 Q. And with regard to the forms that were being used, the forms that
1 were being used fall in the same category, once again you inherited a
2 system from a pre-existing institution which you used to the benefit of
3 the hospital and the people that the hospital was treated; correct?
4 A. Absolutely, just as we inherited the equipment, the surgical
5 hall, surgical instruments, it was only logical to use this other part
6 which could be used.
7 Q. It makes good sense I take it in your position as director of the
8 hospital it made good sense to utilise the equipment that had been left,
9 to utilise the procedures that had existed in order to keep the
10 institution running the best you could; right?
11 A. I believe that we may have been the only medical institution in
12 which most of the personnel was trained to -- on how to work under
13 wartime conditions. This may have been the reason for the fact that this
14 particular hospital was operating so well regardless of the conditions so
15 we had no electricity, no power, no food, it was shelled and it's normal
16 operation was in a way prevented, but we nonetheless operated throughout
17 this period. We haven't stopped for a single hour.
18 Q. Okay. Now, with regard to the documents that we've been
19 discussing here today, I take it that you had an opportunity before you
20 came to court today to review those documents with Mr. Cannata to make a
21 determination about their, shall I say, source?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And when you were reviewing the documents, did you have a chance
24 to review the documents both in B/C/S and now I'm going to make an
25 assumption, and in English; and I am assuming that you read and speak
1 English. I don't know if that's a fair assumption or not, so if it's
2 not, please correct me?
3 A. In most cases I looked simultaneously one and the other side of
4 the screen, so I could conclude that the originals on the BiH side were
5 translated into the text on the English side, but the English side of the
6 screen also contained some other documents. However, the part of the
7 translation that reflected the original document in B/C/S were correctly
8 translated apart from the parts in which the translator obviously could
9 not read what was written by hand, so possibly there were some parts that
10 were missing because sometimes the handwriting is very difficult to read.
11 Q. Understood. And just before we go my further with regard to
12 examining some of these documents, am I correct in my understanding that
13 none of these documents are documents that you personally produced? And
14 by that I mean, that you personally wrote?
15 A. Out of the documents which were letters of discharge or
16 specialised findings, none of them were written by me personally, so I'm
17 not the source, so to say, of this document. I simply recognise them as
18 the kind of documents that were used at the time.
19 Q. And with regard to one specific document which we will spend a
20 moment with, which was P2238, the author of that document was, I believe,
21 Abdulah Nakas is that your brother?
22 A. Possibly, if he was the author of this document, that's what I
23 mean, but he is my brother, yes.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: We'll get there in a moment. Can we please have
25 P2230 up on the screen. Only the B/C/S version first, please.
1 Q. Now, in looking at the B/C/S version of this particular document,
2 as I understand it, there are a number of different form boxes that are
3 to be filled out so that there is information concerning the history of
4 the patient as well as the date the patient --
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Cannata.
6 MR. CANNATA: Yes, this is an under seal, document, Your Honour.
7 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm sorry. I do apologise.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can you please redact that part of the [Microphone
9 not activated]. May the Chamber please move into private session.
10 [Private session]
11 Pages 4856-4858 redacted. Private session.
24 [Open session]
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Madam Registrar. Mr. Guy-Smith.
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, could I have the English version up too,
4 Q. Now, let's start off with the top of the document in the
5 left-hand side it says "prim" which assume it primary, "Dr. Abdulah
6 Nakas." And my question is first of all, I take it that is your brother,
7 and is he the individual who created this document, to your knowledge?
8 A. No, this part is part of the name of the hospital because senior
9 consultant Dr. Abdulah Nakas died in 2005 and the general hospital at the
10 proposal of the authorities and the citizens of Sarajevo changed its name
11 into the hospital of named after senior consultant Dr. Abdulah Nakas, so
12 that's the name of the hospital.
13 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... of his work?
14 A. I haven't understood you, I didn't get the translation.
15 Q. In honour of his work?
16 A. Yes, yes.
17 Q. And he is your brother?
18 A. Yes. The only brother I had.
19 Q. I congratulate you and your family.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith --
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: I see there's a problem between the English and
22 the B/C/S, will you go to page 3 of the B/C/S.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's right. Thank you so much.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH:
25 Q. Now, as I understand this document, what you have here is the
1 total number of people who were wounded, we'll start with the month of
2 August, according to your records by sniper fire. And for the month of
3 August, there would be five people wounded, two of whom were adults, and
4 three of whom were armed forces; is that correct?
5 A. Yes. There were no children.
6 Q. Okay. Now, based on the information that we have here, when you
7 were asked on direct with regard to this particular document, I believe
8 what you said is, and I'm referring Court and counsel to page 57
9 specifically lines 21 and 22, but to put into context, you say:
10 "This is the document prepared by the general hospital, and this
11 is an excerpt from the protocol of the emergency room of the general
12 hospital of Sarajevo
13 fire during this period."
14 And I'm trying to understand how you -- how we get to that
15 particular statement that this document indicates that people were killed
16 by sniper fire when the document itself indicates that these are people
17 who are wounded and treated in the emergency centre? I wonder if you can
18 give us some help there, please.
19 A. If I said killed, then I misspoke, because what it says here is
20 wounded. These are not killed individuals. Whether there were some dead
21 among them, that's possible. But it was either I misspoke or there was
22 an interpretation error.
23 Q. And with regard to -- with regard to the second table, once again
24 the word there is "is killed" and I take it you would take the same
25 position once again because the table itself doesn't discuss killing, it
1 discusses wounding and treatment in the emergency room; correct? Just to
2 clear up the record.
3 A. Yes, wounded.
4 Q. Now, did you have an opportunity when you first looked at this
5 particular chart to compare it with the supporting material that existed,
6 because if we could have 65 ter 06059432 is a 37-page document which
7 includes the monthly reports that were used in order to compile this
8 chart. Are you with me?
9 A. Yes.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not. I don't know what is 65 ter 06059432.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: If we could have the original document 65 ter --
12 what is the ter number? 4449 up - I'm sorry, I gave you the wrong
13 number, I apologise - up on the screen.
14 This document, as I understand it, is comprised of 37 pages, am I
15 correct in that regard, Madam Registrar?
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which document now, Mr. Guy-Smith?
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: The document that's presently up on the screen,
18 which I believe has been introduced in its entirety, has it? Okay.
19 Good. I'm having one of those technological problem days, Your Honour.
20 I apologise. Now, if we could go to page 4 of the English on this
21 document, which is page 4 -- I believe it's page 4 of the B/C/S as well.
22 No. Try page 5 of the B/C/S. Yeah. Perfect.
23 Q. Now, if you look on this document, I take it that we should be
24 able to determine from looking at this document where the figure of five
25 people being injured by sniper fire comes from.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: And maybe could we scroll down in the English:
3 Q. And if you look specific lie at item number it says number of
4 surgeries per type of wounds, and it says number of newly injured by
5 sniper and it has the number 5 there; right?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Is that the number -- is that number 5 the number that then was
8 translated over to the chart that you discussed with Mr. Cannata at the
10 A. That number was also confirmed by comparing with the protocols,
11 but this is a protocol that was actually one from the operations theatre,
12 so there could be surgeries at outpatient clinics, not in the operation
13 theatres. The other protocol was actually maintained at the theatre, the
14 operations theatre.
15 Q. With regard to the next month, the month of September --
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: If we could go back to the chart itself, we'll
17 find once again the number of 5, the total number of persons injured, and
18 it's page 13, I believe, in the English and I think it's page 14 of the
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith, I must confess to being at a loss
21 and I'll tell you why I'm at a loss. You have just referred the witness
22 to the number 5 on the document that has just been moved from the
23 screen -- if it can be -- on this document. Now you are taking us back
24 to the chart.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, because what is -- let me explain to you
1 precisely --
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: You won't know what you are explaining because you
3 don't know my problem.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: My problem is that this document on the screen is
6 giving the number 5 for the month of August. The chart is dealing with
7 wounded people for the period August to December.
8 MR. GUY-SMITH: It's dealing with wounded people, as I understood
9 the chart, who were wounded by snipers.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: For a period August to December.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: No, for the period of August -- yes, August to
12 December on a monthly basis, correct.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: On a monthly basis.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure, in August if we look at the very first--
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we go to that chart.
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: -- part. In the month of August, as I understand
17 this chart, five individuals were injured by sniper fire. In the month
18 of September, five individuals were injured by sniper fire. In the month
19 of October, 16 individuals were injured by sniper fire.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: My apologies, I'm with you. I'm with you.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Are you with me?
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm with you.
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay. First of all, let's make sure I'm actually
24 interpreting the chart correctly because if I am making a mistake I
25 shouldn't be doing this examination in this particular way.
1 Q. Am I correct in what I just said in my conversation with
2 His Honour that what we have here is a monthly --
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Breakdown.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH:
5 Q. -- breakdown - thank you - of the number of people who were
6 injured by sniper fire?
7 A. Do you mean this -- the B/C/S version that I see, the individual
8 reports from the operations theatre.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Once again can we have page 3 in B/C/S.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At the end of this, you can see the
11 source where the protocols kept at the emergency centre of the
12 State Hospital
13 victims who were brought to and treated at the centre. Some of these
14 victims were operated in the operations theatres, some, because they were
15 severely injured, were not even admitted to hospital, nor taken to the
16 surgery because they were treated at outpatient clinics and they were
17 sent home. So these reports that you see here in this chart were based
18 on the protocols that we kept on a daily basis.
19 MR. GUY-SMITH:
20 Q. I understand. I'm ... [Previous translation continues] ... the
21 significance of this particular chart. As I understand the chart for the
22 month of August, five people were injured by sniper fire and treated at
23 the emergency centre: September 5, October 16, November 12, December 5
24 for a total of 43 individuals; correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. The further breakdown is to whether or not they were adults,
2 children or armed forces; correct?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. With regard to the issue of whether or not they were armed
5 forces, can you tell from looking at this chart whether or not the
6 individuals who are designated as being wounded by sniper fire who are in
7 the armed forces were wounded by sniper fire while they were engaged in
8 military operations, by looking at this chart?
9 A. No, by looking at this chart, no, nor did we keep such record.
10 Q. Okay. Now, with regard to now going back, I want to go to the
11 month -- we've determined that for the month of August that five were
12 injured and we found out that looking at the monthly information that it
13 compares, it's a one-to-one correlation. For the month of September --
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: If we could go to the month of September, which I
15 believe is page 13 in the English and page 33 in the B/C/S. Once again
16 if we could go down to, I believe it's item number 10 or once again the
17 number of newly injured by sniper is five?
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Cannata.
19 MR. CANNATA: Your Honours, my screen I have for the English, I
20 have the report for the August 1995.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: You are right. Try page 37. My apologies.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: And on the B/C/S screen I seem to have a list of
23 doctors, or what is that DR standing for, for the names of the people in.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, these doctors were sniped too, all of them?
1 MR. GUY-SMITH:
2 Q. Well, obviously we are running into a couple of different
3 problems with this document. I notice -- I note what the Judge says
4 about this document which is there are a number of doctors on it. If you
5 look at -- which is one issue. If you look at item number 10, under item
6 number 10, does it indicate under item number 10 the number newly injured
7 by snipers was five; is that what says?
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Does he see it in the B/C/S. That's the question.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm asking the question under item number 10.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: We don't see item number 10 on the B/C/S.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure you do, look on the right-hand side of the
12 screen, it says 10.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Sorry. Okay.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, here under item 10 in the
15 B/C/S version it says newly injured by sniper 5, and the same thing is
16 repeated in English, number of newly injured by sniper 5.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: If you go to the next month, which is the month
18 of October --
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before we do that can I be clear on why we
20 don't have this list of doctors on the English and what does this -- are
21 these the same documents, are these two versions of the same document or
22 are we dealing with two different documents here? There's a whole list
23 of doctors on the one document and we don't see it on the other.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: I think, I understand what you are saying. I
25 think what we have is we have something that's been cleaned up in the
1 English version. Let me ask the following question:
2 Q. You indicated you do read English. Could you look at the English
3 version of this document and go to -- down to item number 5 on the
4 English version, and under that it says list of names and numbers, and
5 then under item number 6 it says list of names and numbers. Do you see
6 that and can you recognise that in English?
7 A. Yes, I can see it. Under 5 is the number of surgeons -- number
8 of surgeries per surgeon so those surgeons who were team leaders. And it
9 also indicates the total number of surgeries performed by Dr. Nakas for
10 instance, 103; Dr. Vuletic, 12; Dr. Dzogovic [phoen], 9; and so on and so
11 forth. Under 6 we have the list of surgeons as first assistants in the
12 operation theatre.
13 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... this analysis or not. But
14 what has happened here, is if you look at the total number of surgeries
15 that were done under item number 1 which is the same in both documents,
16 that being 209, that the difference between these two documents is there
17 is a breakdown here by doctor who performed the medical procedure and in
18 the English what you have is a breakdown not by the doctor that performed
19 the medical procedure, but rather by subject matter?
20 A. Here in the English version, the portion that is missing is the
21 information per doctor. It just states that there is a list of names
22 following and the number of surgeries or medical procedures.
23 Q. Okay. That creates other issues, but those aren't issues for
24 you, those are issues for me.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, I guess the witness is correct and items 1
1 to 4 are globular summaries. In fact, they say exactly the same. It's
2 number 5 which is itemised, and number 6 which is itemised in the one
3 version and not itemised in the other version; and I think to that extent
4 I'm now with you.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: And I thank you for that intervention, because
6 I've been trying to figure out a variety of things with these documents.
7 Could we go to the next month which would be October. And in October, so
8 we don't have to jump back and forth between all the pages, if you take
9 it from me, and Mr. Cannata can double-check, the total number of
10 individuals who were injured and treated in the emergency centre were 16.
11 If we could go to page 35 of the English and 35 of the B/C/S. Or is it
12 34? Okay. Now, if we could go to item number 10 once again.
13 Q. As I read item number 10, it says "number of newly injured by
14 sniper, 7." And that seems to be the number both in the English and from
15 what I can tell, and help me here, if I'm looking at number 10 in the
16 B/C/S, that would be the middle entry where it says 7?
17 A. Yes. What we have here is the number of surgeries and the type
18 of wounding. Where it relates to snipers the number is 7, so this is the
19 number of surgeries performed in operation theatres.
20 Q. Okay. Now, with regard to the information that's contained on
21 the page of the chart where it indicates the number of 16, could you tell
22 us what the difference is for the months of August and September where
23 there was a one-to-one correlation with a number of 5 between the
24 English, B/C/S and the chart, and October where you have an indication of
25 the number 7, and the chart indicates that there was a wounding of an
1 additional 9 people?
2 A. The difference is in the severity of the injures. In August and
3 September of 1994, these were all seriously wounded, so they requested
4 surgery in the operation theatre under general anaesthesia. In October,
5 we had seven such operations of people wounded by snipers, and
6 altogether, the emergency room took care of 16 patients which means that
7 this remaining number of 9 could be treated in the examination room. So
8 they did not request any general anaesthesia. Possibly the wounds just
9 needed to be stitched up or cleaned or something similar. So these were
10 injured that did not call for an operation to be performed in the
11 operation theatre. So this is the number which you can see here of the
12 real surgeries carried out under general anaesthesia, so this is the
13 difference that you can see: The number of operations, the surgeries,
14 and the number of patients treated altogether.
15 Q. I understand your answer but I'm somewhat confused. Looking at
16 the document in front of us it says for item number 10 it doesn't
17 indicate anything with regard to the issue of surgeries it says number
18 newly injured by sniper 7?
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith look at number 10 and read the line
20 directly opposite number 10.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Number of surgeries per type of wound. Okay,
22 that's fine.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: So that list is dealing with surgeries. And the
24 surgeries that were dealt with that resulted from sniping were 7.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay.
1 Q. Now, my question is, where do I find the additional nine -- where
2 do I find in this document here the additional nine snipers?
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: But does this document purport to deal with the
4 globular figure of snipers or does it purport to deal with the surgeries?
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: My understanding was that this document here is a
6 compilation of the breakout by month which we were discussing in terms of
7 each of these documents, but let's find out.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: But that was your interpretation which you put to
9 the witness with respect to the month of August. But I don't know --
10 before that I haven't had the witness give us that testimony.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: Let's find out. That's the best way of doing it.
12 Let's find out.
13 Q. With regard to the documents, the 35 pages of documents that are
14 attached to the chart, did you go through an analysis of those 35
15 documents to make a determination of whether or not the chart as it's
16 constituted, that being citizens of Sarajevo wounded by the snips and
17 treated --
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Cannata is on his feet.
19 MR. CANNATA: Sorry to interrupt, but before we confuse the
20 witness, I would just like to have it clear on the record that page 35,
21 the document that is now on e-court, is a report for the surgeries
22 carried out. The chart at page 3, which the doctor has been asked to
23 compare with the report deals with surgeries and other medical treatment.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: I thought the doctor actually did explain that a
1 couple of minutes ago.
2 MR. CANNATA: Yes, it is in evidence.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: And that here he is dealing with surgeries, which
4 is why I intervened when Mr. Guy-Smith persisted.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Understood.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: So I don't know whether sitting where he is
7 without all these documents in front of him he will be able to tell you
8 where you will find the remaining nine if he doesn't have the documents,
9 but you go ahead and let's see.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: All I can do is work with the documents that were
11 given to me by the Prosecution.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: All I'm saying is let the witness have the
13 documents that you are looking at.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay. Well, it's probably easier to do this in
15 hard copy than it is electronically.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Technology has its own limitations.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: If I were to do it, I would do it in hard copy
18 rather than electronically.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do it the way you want to do it, Mr. Guy-Smith.
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: If I might supply the witness with a hard copy.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, certainly. Mr. Usher, can you help us and
22 can the opposite counsel please have a look at that document before it
23 goes to the witness.
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: And I only have the hard copy in English. And I
25 don't know if that will constitute a problem.
1 Q. First of all, if give you the hard copy only in English will that
2 constitute a problem for you in being able to read it, or are you okay
3 reading it in English?
4 A. That should be enough.
5 Q. First of all you'll note there's some highlighting on the
6 document, the highlighting has no significance whatsoever it was my
7 attempt to understand what was going in the document. So you don't need
8 to pay any attention to that at all.
9 Looking at the document and starting with month since we'll go
10 back now of August.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which document are we looking at, the one on the
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: No, I'm talking about the hard copy for a moment.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: I want to know is the hard copy the same thing on
15 the screen or is it something else.
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I'm about to go through that with him.
17 Q. If you can go to page 4 of the hard copy.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Cannata.
19 MR. CANNATA: Yes --
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: We can't put it on the ELMO.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Cannata.
22 MR. CANNATA: Since the witness is provided only with the English
23 copy, can I suggest that we make reference to the B/C/S either on the
24 ELMO or e-court, but it's been solved, thanks.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: What about the B/C/S, Mr. Cannata?
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: We have a B/C/S copy now.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you.
3 MR. GUY-SMITH: Why don't we do this because it might be of some
4 assistance, on the screen let us put up on the screen page, I believe
5 it's, 1 of the English and the chart, just the chart, in 3 of the B/C/S.
6 So that will just be a fixed document which is the first page of the hard
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: We can't see e-court and ELMO at the same time on
9 the screen ourselves.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: That's one of the reasons I hate this electronic
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: You can either give us all copies of these
13 documents in hard copy, sir, we are welcome to have them in hard copy.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: All right. Well, I did not expect to be engaged
15 in a hard copy discussion and don't have hard copy distribution.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Fine. Then let's go the best way we can bearing
17 in mind that on our screens [Microphone not activated].
18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: We cannot simultaneously look at the ELMO and
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Fine we will dedicate it to this page and go
22 back. I have figured out a way of doing it. If we could go to page 4 of
23 the hard copy document in English, which is where we started our journey.
24 Q. Looking at this document, and if we could have this now up on the
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is on the ELMO.
2 MR. GUY-SMITH:
3 Q. Going to item number 10, when it deals with number of surgeries
4 per type of wound, it says: "Number of newly injured by sniper, 5."
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And if we look at the top of this particular document in terms of
8 what it identifies, it identifies a report on number and type of
9 surgeries for August 1994; correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Okay. Now, if we were to go back to the chart, is the entry of
12 the number 5 that is reflected on the chart --
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. -- the same as the entry in number 10 which is reflected on
15 page 4 under the designation of number of newly injured by sniper?
16 A. Yes, this is the identical number.
17 Q. With regard to October, 1994, the chart indicates an entry of 16
18 individuals injured by sniper; correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. First of all, did you have an opportunity to review these
21 documents to see whether there was a correlation between the entry on the
22 chart of that number and the breakout sheet for that particular month,
23 that being the month of October 1994?
24 A. The numbers can be corresponding if these were such injures that
25 called for a surgery under general anaesthesia. If these were minor
1 injures that only called for treatment in the check-up room, then the
2 numbers should not necessarily correspond because one of these reports
3 has to do with severe injures which called for general anaesthesia
4 surgeries. So this can simply mean that there were more minor injures in
5 October so that only seven of them called for general anaesthesia
6 surgeries. Whereas nine of them were treated in the check-up room.
7 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... at the chart for November of
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith, can you please start your question
10 from scratch because you overlapped with the interpretation --
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: I do apologise.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- and you were not transcribed.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay.
14 Q. With your previous answer in mind, can we look at the entry in
15 the chart for November of 1994, which indicates the total number of
16 wounded and treated in the emergency centre for snipers was 12; correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Now, if we could go to page 33 of the hard copy.
19 Q. And if you like, I think we can also have that up for you in
20 B/C/S in hard copy, if you would like that, sir?
21 A. This is sufficient, thank you.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: What item are we looking at now?
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: Trying to get to any -- page 33.
24 Q. If we go down once again to 10, it says number of newly injured
25 by sniper is 5; correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And with regard to the report, the monthly report that was done
3 for November 1994 what information contained in the monthly report for
4 November of 1994 reflects the additional 7 individuals who are claimed
5 having been wounded by sniper fire in the chart that's been produced?
6 How do we find that information, sir?
7 A. You can find it in the protocols of the emergency centre where
8 these patients were received, checked up, some of them because of the
9 severity of the wounds were operated on, and this is the number of 5, the
10 rest of them were treated on the spot, and they went home.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: If we could take a look at page 32 in the hard
13 Q. This is as I understand it a report of the emergency centre for
14 the month of November 1994. Is this the protocol that you were referring
15 to when you discuss the issue of the protocol of the emergency centre?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. With regard to this particular document, could you tell us where
18 we would find the corresponding figure of 12 individuals injured by
19 sniper fire?
20 A. You can find them among this total number of 43. This is the
21 total number. So they are a part of this number and then also you have
22 the segmentation into members of armed forces or civilians, so next line
23 is the number of admitted patients, those admitted to the hospital.
24 There was a total of 21. Out of these 21 admitted patients, 10 were
25 members of armed forces, and 11 were civilians. These were small
1 surgical interventions so those that were not carried out in operation
2 theatres; so this is this number 14 and among them you will find the
3 remaining 7 out of that number that we had in total.
4 Q. So from -- I'm supposed to determine, if I understand it, from
5 the number 14 that you've just discussed with us, that we pull out that 7
6 individuals to make up the 12 that are on the chart?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. How do you -- how do you do that? What indicates to you on this
9 document here that we are looking at right now, which is the report of
10 the emergency centre for the month of November, that any individuals who
11 were treated were treated for sniper fire? There's no indication here at
12 all, is there?
13 A. No, not on this part. This is something that's registered in the
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: And this is something that I think the doctor has
16 been trying to explain, Mr. Guy-Smith. This document is not drafted to
17 give you that information. It doesn't purport to give that information.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH:
19 Q. If you would take a quick look at the documents that were
20 supplied by the Prosecution in support of the chart that's in front of
21 you, could you tell me whether there are other documents that exist that
22 would be of assistance for us to understand the numbers that are
23 contained in the chart, or whether these are all the documents that
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Cannata.
1 MR. CANNATA: Yes, I'm afraid that my learned friend misstates
2 the evidence. This chart was not produced on the basis of documents that
3 the doctor was provided with by the Prosecution.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: I am sorry, I didn't mean to leave that
5 impression. And if I did, they were supplied to the Defence in support
6 of this particular exhibit.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sure. You see the thing is, I don't even know
8 whether Mr. Cannata referred the witness to this document in chief. I
9 don't remember that.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: He referred the witness to the chart. He then
11 moved into admission a 37-page document which included, as its front
12 page, the chart.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: The documents that we have been examining are the
15 monthly breakouts as we understand it with regard to the chart that was
16 shown to the witness; and the document, as I was supplied it by the
17 Prosecution, the chart is page 1 of 37 and the various entries that we
18 have been discussing as part of that 37-page document.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
20 MR. CANNATA: And Your Honours, for ease of reference, I will
21 direct your attention to page 57, line 19 to 58 to line 5 of today's
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sure. Thank you. Now, I don't dispute if these
24 are documents that are in evidence, that's fine, but the only thing is
25 just by looking at the headings and the way that they are drafted, I'm
1 left with the impression that these documents are drafted for different
2 purposes; and the purpose for which you were asking the witness didn't
3 seem to be apparent from this document. You asked the witness --
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: Are we referring now to the report of the
5 emergency centre for the month of November?
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm trying to look at ... I'm trying to look for
7 the question that you put to the witness which has now disappeared. I
8 can't see it. Okay. I'm not going to waste more time on it. Go ahead.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Okay.
10 Q. Well, let me ask you this about this set of documents then, see
11 if we can get clarification. Are the 35 pages that follow the chart
12 documents that can be used to support the conclusions that are found in
13 the chart? That's my first question.
14 A. In part.
15 Q. Are there other documents above and beyond those 35 pages of
17 A. Yes, there are protocols, ledgers with protocols.
18 Q. And when you refer to protocol, are you referring to a protocol
19 different than the protocol that is presently up on the ELMO? I'm sorry,
20 different than protocol that we were referring to before which was a
21 report of the emergency centre for the month of -- for any particular
22 month? Are you referring to a different protocol?
23 A. I'm referring to the ledger consisting of protocols, in this
24 protocol every patient is recorded individually by name. These wer
25 monthly reports that were used by me as a manager when I needed to
1 organise our work and present our work to somebody else, and this is why
2 in this document we had the number of newly injured, injured children,
3 dead on arrival, and so on; reports from the gynaecology on the number of
4 newly born children. So this is a report that was used by me to report
5 to the Federal Ministry of Health, to the WHO, and whoever requested data
6 from us. In these kind of protocols, or in these kinds of reports, we
7 never had segmented data on the number of injured by snipers, numbers of
8 injured by shell fire, and so on. We simply had reports on the
9 admissions, surgeries, civilians or military, and so on. So on these
10 reports, we did not register shell fire versus sniper fire.
11 And the tables were compiled following the request of the
12 Prosecution to provide the number of people who were treated because they
13 were injured by sniper fire. This is why these numbers that were
14 provided in the charts are included into this general number, but in this
15 report, they are not segmented as such. The official source of report
16 are protocols which are our official documents.
17 Q. With regard to --
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: If we could have page 35 of 37 up on the screen.
19 And I do -- the markings on it are my own.
20 Q. With regard to this particular document, you said, so I
22 "We simply had reports on admissions, surgeries, civilians or
23 military and so on, so on these reports we did not register shell fire
24 versus sniper file and the tables were provided following the request of
25 the Prosecution."
1 And you go on. Now, with regard to this particular document, if
2 you would scroll down, please, is the information that is contained in
3 part number 10 concerning the number of surgeries per type of wound, is
4 that information that was compiled at the time, and by that I mean at the
5 time -- at the conclusion of the month, or is this document a document
6 that was compiled at the request of the Prosecution?
7 A. This is a document that was compiled at the end of the month.
8 This is a copy of a document that I received at the end of each month.
9 So it was not compiled upon the request of the Prosecution.
10 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... identifies the very kind of
11 injures, the very kind of injure that is you just indicated you did not
12 identify and by that I mean shrapnel sniper, does it not?
13 A. This document from the surgical ward does say that, but the
14 documents coming from the emergency ward do not say that. So when we are
15 talking about surgeries carried out under total anaesthesia, then you
16 have this breakdown per type of wounds which caused the surgery, because
17 in most cases the amount of material that had to be used and the very
18 length of surgical intervention depended on the type of wound.
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: I note the time and I would say this is an
20 appropriate time to break. I have probably quite a few more questions
21 for the gentleman, and I do apologise.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: In any case we wouldn't be able to excuse him
23 because there are still re-examination. Sorry, sir, unfortunately we've
24 run out of time, we've got to give the court to another case to sit.
25 We'll have to postpone to tomorrow. In Courtroom I, not this one,
1 Courtroom I at 9.00 in the morning. If you could be there at 9.00 in the
2 morning. Court adjourned to tomorrow morning 9.00. Courtroom I.
3 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.
4 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 26th day of
5 March, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.