1 Tuesday, 21 April 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning to everybody in and around the
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case for today.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
9 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-81-T,
10 the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Perisic.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Madam Registrar.
12 Could we have appearances for today, starting with the
14 MR. SAXON: Good morning, Your Honours. Dan Saxon, April Carter
15 and Ms. Carmela Javier for the Prosecution.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Saxon.
17 And for the Defence.
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Good morning. Daniela Tasic, Chad
19 Eric Tully, Novak Lukic, Gregor Guy-Smith, on behalf of Mr. Perisic.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
21 Mr. Prosecutor.
22 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, Ms. Carter will call the next witness.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Madam Carter, good morning.
24 MS. CARTER: Good morning, Your Honour. At this time, the
25 Prosecution calls Lieutenant-Colonel Harry Konings.
1 [The witness entered court]
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning, sir.
3 THE WITNESS: Good morning.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Would you please make the declaration.
5 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
6 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. You may be seated.
8 Madam Carter.
9 MS. CARTER: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 WITNESS: HARRY KONINGS
11 Examination by Ms. Carter:
12 Q. Colonel Konings, will you please introduce yourself to the Court.
13 A. Yes. I'm Lieutenant Harry Konings. I'm a member of the Royal
14 Netherlands Army and my current job is staff officer, land operations, in
15 the Land Forces Doctrine and Training Centre.
16 Q. Can you please describe your background both in your present
17 military as well as your position with the United Nations?
18 A. My general background in the Royal Netherlands Army is being an
19 artillery officer. My first functions in the Netherlands army was in
20 artillery units, battery commander, battery officer, operations officer
21 of an artillery battalion. I have had various functions in staffs, here
22 in The Hague
23 United Nations is that I have been a United Nations military observer
24 from the end of April 1995 until the end of October 1995, and during that
25 period I was stationed in Sarajevo
1 the Balkan being a EU observer in Croatia and an OSCE observer in
3 Q. Thank you, sir. Prior to today were you given an opportunity to
4 review your transcript of your testimony in the Dragomir Milosevic case,
5 which bears the 65 ter numbers 9453 for 12 March 2007, and 9454, for
6 13 March 2007
7 A. Yes, I have been given the opportunity to review that -- my
9 Q. If asked those same questions today would your answers be the
11 A. My answers will be the same.
12 MS. CARTER: I tender 65 ter numbers 9453 and 9454 into evidence.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: So admitted. May that please be given an exhibit
14 number, Madam Registrar.
15 A. 65 ter 9453 will be Exhibit P2290; and 65 ter 9454 will be
16 Exhibit P2291, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much, Madam Registrar.
18 MS. CARTER:
19 Q. Colonel Konings, within the transcript there were many exhibits
20 admitted. We reviewed many of those exhibits that were going to be
21 tendered in your present testimony today as well. Is that correct?
22 A. That's correct.
23 MS. CARTER: Pursuant to Rule 92 ter, I tender 65 ter 2797,
24 previously admitted -- or previously addressed in the Dragomir Milosevic
25 case, as P85.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: 65 ter 2797 is admitted into evidence. May it
2 please be given an exhibit number.
3 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2292, Your Honours.
4 MS. CARTER: Pursuant to Rule 92 ter I tender 65 ter 8603,
5 previously P359 admitted at transcript T3608.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: So admitted. May it please be given an exhibit
8 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2293, Your Honours.
9 MS. CARTER: Pursuant to Rule 92 ter, I tender 65 ter 8605,
10 previously 355, a video, admitted at T3580.
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: If I could have but a moment with regard to that
12 exhibit. Thank you.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's admitted. May it please be given an exhibit
14 number, Madam Registrar.
15 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2294, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
17 MS. CARTER: I tender 65 ter 8607, previously P361, admitted at
18 transcript 36 --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Would you mind slowing down. Thank you.
20 MS. CARTER: I apologise. Certainly. I tender 65 ter 8607,
21 previously admitted as P361, admitted at transcript 3610.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's admitted. Madam Registrar, may we please
23 give it an exhibit number.
24 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2295, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
1 MS. CARTER: And finally, 65 ter 8608, previously admitted as
2 P362, at transcript page 3610 into evidence.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Madam Carter. It is admitted. May it
4 please be given an exhibit number, Madam Registrar.
5 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2296, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
7 MS. CARTER: And finally for clarity of the record, D. Milosevic
8 Exhibit P357 admitted through this witness at page 3602 has previously
9 been admitted into this case as P67.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I just ask you to say that again, madam.
11 MS. CARTER: Certainly, Your Honour. P357 in the Dragomir
12 Milosevic case was tendered through this witness. It's already been
13 admitted into this case as P67.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you so much.
15 MS. CARTER: Thank you, Your Honour. I now turn to the present
16 evidence of this witness.
17 Q. Colonel Konings in the Dragomir Milosevic case you were shown a
18 series of five photographs and were required to annotate two. For
19 clarity of the record, we must undergo this exercise again.
20 MS. CARTER: I call up 65 ter 8606.
21 Q. Sir, at page 3605 of your Dragomir Milosevic transcript you
22 identified features of this photograph which later became P358 in that
23 case. With the assistance of the usher I would like to have you mark a
24 few items on this photograph.
25 Can you please circle the "famous library" and mark it with an A.
1 A. [Marks]
2 Q. Can you please tell the Court why is that library famous?
3 A. Well, it's one of the famous buildings inside the city of
5 completely burned, and for that reason it was he a very significant
6 landmark. And for us as UNMOs, especially working on the observation
7 post from where this picture is taken, it was a -- let's say, it was a
8 landmark that we could use for recognising other parts in the city,
9 because it is very significant.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: What is the land -- observation post from where
12 you took this photograph, sir?
13 THE WITNESS: This observation post was called OP-1, and it was
14 an observation post belonging to the team, the UNMO team that I was a
15 member of.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Where in Sarajevo is it situated?
17 THE WITNESS: The observation post is -- was situated in the
18 mountains at the south side of the city.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which mountains specifically?
20 THE WITNESS: Sorry, Your Honour, can you repeat the question?
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which mountain specifically, if you do know?
22 THE WITNESS: It were -- well, I could point it out on the map.
23 I don't recall the specific name. I think it was called Colina Kapa.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: All right. Thank you so much. Yes, Madam Carter.
25 MS. CARTER: Certainly, Your Honour. I will finish with this
1 photograph and then I'll actually undergo the exercise to identify where
2 OP-1 was actually located.
3 Q. With the assistance of the usher can I again have you circle the
4 area in which your team base was located and mark with a B?
5 A. The area was -- I have to do it very roughly because the picture
6 is not so clear. The area the team base was located is in this area.
7 Q. Okay. And what was your team base called?
8 A. In the first days that I came there the team base was called
9 Sierra Charlie 1, which stands for Sarajevo Central 1.
10 Q. And in UNMO documents how would Sierra Charlie one be designated?
11 Is there an acronym for that?
12 A. Well, we used the term Sierra Charlie 1.
13 Q. For non-military personnel, if we see it written will it be SC-1?
14 A. It will be SC-1.
15 Q. Thank you, sir.
16 MS. CARTER: I would ask that this photograph can have a screen
17 shot and it be tendered into evidence.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. The document is admitted
19 into evidence. May it please be given an exhibit number.
20 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2297, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
22 MS. CARTER:
23 Q. As the Court had asked where your observation post was actually
24 located, I would like to undergo the exercise of explaining how one
25 locates certain positions on the map of Sarajevo.
1 To the left of you is a full-size map which has been previously
2 admitted in this case as P439 as part of the map book itself. Given that
3 this is going to be a larger indication I would like your assistance.
4 Can you please describe for the Court using grid lines how one
5 located certain positions on an UNPROFOR map.
6 A. Using grid lines is not specifically limited to UNPROFOR maps.
7 It is generic military system used throughout armed forces in the world.
8 On a military map, you will find a system of squares, which are
9 visible here on the map. The blue lines forms squares. And every square
10 is one by one kilometre, and all the squares have numbers. I have to
11 bend towards the map in order to see.
12 For example, this one, this line has the number 94, which brings
13 the next line to 93, there is a logical system which counts from west to
14 east. The other lines are numbered 56, 57, 58 running from bottom to
15 top. Once you want to designate a location, you first start with the
16 vertical line and then you name the horizontal line. So, for example, if
17 you want to have a location that is in the grid square 9456, you say --
18 you take first that grid, you say 9456.
19 But within a square you can be more precise. You can divide that
20 square which is one by one kilometre. You can decide the vertical line
21 and the horizontal line in pieces equal pieces of, for example,
22 100 metres which brings you a much more precise location. So once you
23 read 941, 561 that gives you a location on 100 metres precise. What you
24 do then is you take first the vertical line 94 and from 94 you go 100
25 metres to the right, then you take 56, and you go 100 metres up, which
1 brings you on the precise position on that grid square. You even can do
2 it more precise up to ten metres. Then you say 9411, 5611, which brings
3 you on a location that has an accuracy of ten metres.
4 And in certain circumstances, but that was never done in Sarajevo
5 but in certain other military situations you need to have even an
6 accuracy of one metre, which gives you a grid reference of ten ciphers,
7 for example, 96111, 56111, which brings you an accuracy on one metre
8 exactly. For example, when you want to designate the exact point of a
9 road junction, the middle of a road junction, it might be necessary in
10 certain circumstances that you designate that absolutely within one
12 But under normal circumstances, you have enough for ten metres,
13 or as we did in UNPROFOR, we never went further than 100 metres because
14 that was for our purposes was enough.
15 Q. Thank you, sir. At this time I would like to focus on a small
16 block of the map that you have before you.
17 MS. CARTER: And I would ask that we pull up 65 ter 2719 to be
18 brought up at document ID 0361-5780-1. That will bear a 65 ter actually
19 of 021 -- I'm sorry, 02719.01.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: You haven't been transcribed, Madam Carter, for
21 the last sentence that you said. What did you say?
22 MS. CARTER: Apologies, Your Honour. I said that the 65 ter is
23 actually 0217 -- I'm sorry. My eyesight is not that good. 02719.01 and
24 the image is now before us.
25 Q. Sir, the image before you is this in fact a portion of the larger
1 map you were just speaking of?
2 A. Yes. This is a portion reflecting the central old part of
4 Q. On this map, are you able to locate the location of OP-1? And
5 with specificity, in the daily sitreps that have been admitted into this
6 case, we have indication that that location is actually at BP 940586.
7 A. [Marks]
8 Q. You have now made a triangle over a portion of the map. Are you
9 indicating that that is the location of OP-1?
10 A. Yeah, a triangle with -- I tried to make a dot in there, but a
11 triangle with a dot refers to the -- that's the military symbol for an
12 observation post.
13 Q. If you can also put to the right of that, OP-1?
14 A. [Marks]
15 MS. CARTER: I would ask that a screen shot be taken of this
16 image and it is tendered into evidence.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
18 please be given an exhibit number.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P2298.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
21 MS. CARTER:
22 Q. Sir, from Observation Post 1 we did see the photograph of what
23 was visible from there but can you describe the general areas. What
24 neighbourhoods or portions of Sarajevo
1 A. Well, actually from that observation post, my team could view
2 practically the whole area of operations that was designated to team
3 SC-1. And the most important area to that was the central old part of
4 the city, which you can see here on the map in the dark -- darker brown
5 colour along the river. But everything up to the north, which starts to
6 be in yellow above the words Stari Grad, which is in the central part of
7 the map, was also belonging to the area of operations and was also
8 visible from the OP-1.
9 Also visible from OP-1 were the confrontation lines north of the
10 area of operations. So the view we had from there, given of course
11 weather circumstances, was very good.
12 Q. Thank you, sir. And the photograph that we actually just saw,
13 what type of camera did you use in order to catch that type of view from
15 A. It was a very small private analogue camera, not digital or
16 anything, which fitted in the -- in one of the pockets of my uniform.
17 Q. So the image that we were able to see, that is pretty much the
18 image you were able to see on site. Is that correct?
19 A. That is absolutely correct.
20 Q. Thank you, sir. I would now ask that -- pardon me.
21 MS. CARTER: With the assistance of the usher, I would actually
22 ask to call up 65 ter 8604 and we will be making additional markings on
23 that photograph.
24 Q. Sir, in your Dragomir Milosevic transcript at 3608, you were
25 asked to circle the twin towers on this photograph, which became an
1 annotated photograph, P360, in that case.
2 Can you, with the assistance of the usher, undergo the same
3 exercise here today?
4 A. [Marks]
5 Q. And if you will mark the twin towers with an A.
6 A. [Marks]
7 Q. At that same point in the Dragomir Milosevic transcript you were
8 also asked about the location of Major Knustad and Major Conway on
9 28 August 1995
10 please mark this location with a K and C?
11 A. [Marks]
12 Q. And for clarity, there was indication in the Dragomir Milosevic
13 case that where you have now marked that as, in fact, you on site at the
14 time; is that correct?
15 A. Yes, that is myself, yes.
16 Q. Okay. Thank you, sir. And I would --
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which one is yourself? The one with the blue
18 beret or the other --
19 THE WITNESS: The one with the blue beret, that's myself. The
20 other two were Danish soldiers helping up building a proper OP, because
21 we were standing completely in the open, as you can see. So we got some
22 help from a Danish unit, Danish UN unit in the city.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just so that we understand unit, this is not the
24 day you observed the Markale II thing. This was --
25 THE WITNESS: No.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: [Overlapping speakers] ... standing where the
2 people who observed stood.
3 THE WITNESS: That's correct, Your Honour.
4 MS. CARTER: Thank you, sir. And if I could have this photograph
5 screen shot and then an exhibit number given to it.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
7 please be given an exhibit number.
8 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P2299, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
10 MS. CARTER:
11 Q. I would now like to turn your attention to air bombs. In your
12 time in Sarajevo
13 A. I, at least, can recollect two -- two times that an air bomb was
14 used and that I did an investigation.
15 MS. CARTER: I would call up 65 ter 8135.
16 Q. And while that is being brought on screen can you please describe
17 the investigations you performed on these two air bombs?
18 MR. GUY-SMITH: Excuse me, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes.
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: With regard to the testimony not being sought to
21 be adduced, as I understand this witness's testimony, this witness is
22 being called pursuant to 92 ter. Under the guidelines that were
23 promulgated and specifically paragraph 21, it states that the party
24 calling a witness under 92 ter may be permitted by the Trial Chamber to
25 read out a short summary of the witness's statement and/or conduct a
1 limited direct examination of the witness where such examination is
2 focussed on clarifying or highlighting particular aspects of his
4 With regard to the issue of air bombs, no such testimony was
5 adduced through the 92 ter statement and is therefore outside of the
6 92 ter offerings that are made here and would seem to be in violation of
7 the guidelines as set forth for purposes of the conduct of this trial.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Carter.
9 MS. CARTER: Certainly, Your Honour. Rule 92 ter itself
10 indicates that a Trial Chamber may admit in whole or in part the evidence
11 of a witness in the form of a written statement. The Prosecution is
12 relying upon the in part aspects of the Rule 92 ter. While we understand
13 that the Prosecution is limited when it does submit certain aspects of a
14 witness's testimony pursuant to 92 ter that it will not be allowed to
15 lead evidence in full on those points but rather left be only to
16 highlight certain aspects or to clarify other aspects.
17 The portion in regards to air bombs we are actually tendering as
18 live testimony as indicated in the witness's 65 ter summary where it
19 specifically indicates that this witness will also give evidence of
20 investigations he made on the firing of air bombs which took place on
21 16 June 1995
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: Then it is our respectful submission that this
23 witness should have been identified as a viva voce witness and not a
24 92 ter witness from the very beginning. As early as the 23rd February,
25 2007, he listed as and identified as a 92 ter witness.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm not quite clear. I thought -- when you first
2 answered I thought you were at cross purposes with Mr. Guy-Smith, and at
3 the end of your explanation I then thought you have answered this
5 Let me understand the objection, Mr. Guy-Smith. I thought you
6 were saying that a 92 ter witness is restricted to giving a summary of
7 issues that were mentioned in his previous testimony if it is his
8 testimony that is being tendered or a report or statement.
9 Now, are you saying that whatever it is that is -- that this
10 witness wrote previously, does not refer to air bombs?
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: That is correct.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: That therefore he is going outside the ambit of
13 what is being tendered by way of his previous testimony or statement.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: That is correct.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is it your position that he didn't testify like --
16 what is the document that is being tendered --
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: It's a -- the document that -- the documents that
18 have been tendered to the Chamber by way of the 92 ter package are the --
19 are parts of the former testimony in the form of a transcript in the
20 Milosevic case and the exhibits that were discussed --
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mm-hm.
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: -- therein.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: And you're saying in that -- in his testimony in
24 the Milosevic case he didn't refer to air bombs at all.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: That's correct.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Then, Madam Carter, it does then seem as if you
2 are talking at cross purposes with your colleague.
3 MS. CARTER: Yes, Your Honour. The -- Mr. Guy-Smith appears to
4 indicate that -- if a witness is called pursuant to Rule 92 ter, only the
5 aspects that were addressed in that prior transcript will be allowed to
6 be led. However, Rule 92 ter itself at Rule 92 ter (A) indicates that a
7 Trial Chamber may admit in whole or in part the evidence of a witness in
8 the form of a written statement.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Indeed.
10 MS. CARTER: Thus we are not relying on the previous transcript
11 of the witness in relation to air bombs but rather leading that evidence
12 here today.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: But let's understand what that paragraph means.
14 That part of the paragraph means -- that part means that can you either
15 admitted the entire previous statement or part of it. Not that you can
16 add to it new evidence.
17 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, I know that there is it jurisprudence
18 in other Chambers before the Tribunal that indicates the opposite. That
19 it -- the 92 ter package addresses only what is going to be coming in by
20 that written evidence. However, it has been understood by other Chambers
21 to mean that that means you can also call other aspects live. For
22 example, in the Milutinovic Chamber we were held by that same rule. If
23 it the indication of this Court that they do not follow that
24 interpretation of 92 ter, I will abide by the Court's rulings.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is not the interpretation of this Chamber.
1 MS. CARTER: If I may have one brief moment to restructure my
2 examination, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 MS. CARTER:
6 Q. Colonel Konings, I will now move to your investigation of a
7 shelling which took place on 28 August 1995, involving three little
8 girls. At Dragomir Milosevic transcript 3603, you indicate that a
9 128-millimetre rocket hit a flat apartment block killing a four-year-old
10 child and injuring two others.
11 MS. CARTER: I would like to call up 65 ter 1465.
12 Q. While that is being called up, if can you please describe for the
13 Court your investigation that took place involving these three little
15 A. That investigation took place along the same lines as we did
16 every investigation, which, briefly, was initiated after a phone call
17 from the Sarajevo
18 from our UNMO HQ, we went over to the scene with an UNMO team, most times
19 consisting of two or three UNMOs, including an interpreter, and on the
20 spot we met a police team and together we investigated.
21 In this particular investigation, we went to the location and we
22 found parts of the 128-millimetre rocket. We found a -- the impact
23 place, and we also saw some human body parts of one of the children.
24 After that, we went to the morgue in one of the hospitals, and we
25 identified the girl. She was lying at the entrance of the morgue and we
1 identified her being the young girl that was killed before.
2 After that, we went to the hospital, inside the hospital, and we
3 had a brief talk with the doctor that treated the other two girls and we
4 had a brief meeting. We briefly saw the two girls that were taken care
5 of. And after that, of course, we filed our report which was a necessary
6 thing to do, and we filed that report and we sent that report to our
7 UNMO HQ in Sarajevo
8 Q. Thank you, sir. Prior to today's date, have you had the
9 opportunity to review this Bosnian report on the same incident?
10 A. Yes, I had.
11 Q. Does this investigate --
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you mean by
13 "Bosnian report."
14 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, the report that we see before us is not
15 the UNMO report but rather the corresponding Bosnian report on the same
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: When you say "Bosnian report," you mean report by
18 the army of the BiH.
19 MS. CARTER: By the police department of Bosnia.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: The police of the --
21 MS. CARTER: Correct.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I think put it clearly.
23 MS. CARTER: Certainly, Your Honour.
24 Q. Have you had the opportunity to review the report done by the
25 joint investigation or the -- I'm sorry, the corresponding investigation
1 by the Bosnian police into this incident?
2 A. I have seen that report, yes.
3 Q. Does the investigation report and its findings correspond with
4 the investigation you personally performed?
5 A. Yes. It corresponds, yes.
6 Q. And in fact if we move to page 3 of the document in English and
7 page 2 in B/C/S, your name is actually specifically mentioned at
8 number 5; is that correct?
9 A. Yes, my name is -- that's my name.
10 Q. And you indicate to the Court that you did not work in
11 conjunction with the Bosnian police. However, you did have parallel
12 investigations; is that correct?
13 A. Yes, we did parallel investigations but we always took
14 independent data. So we never took data that were brought in by the
15 Bosnian police. We always relied on our own data even in cases that
16 they -- that the data were different which happened. We kept our own
17 data. We never gave our information to the Bosnian police because that
18 was had -- that were the strict orders from the UNMO HQ to guard our
19 impartiality in the situation.
20 Q. However, you've indicated that in relation to this specific
21 investigation were your findings as an UNMO officer the same as the
22 findings that were made by the Bosnian officers?
23 A. In this particular case, our findings were the same.
24 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, I would ask to tender this document
25 into evidence.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
2 please be given an exhibit number.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P2300.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
5 MS. CARTER:
6 Q. I would now like to move on to discuss Markale II.
7 When was the first time you saw the Markale market on
8 28 August 1995
9 A. First time must have been somewhere in the morning around 9.00 or
10 8.30, I'm not quite sure about the exact time anymore, when I came across
11 the Markale market on my way to the UNMO HQ, where I had a daily meeting
12 with the Senior Military Observer and the other team leaders.
13 Q. Okay. And when you passed by Markale market that morning, can
14 you please describe for the Court in detail what the market appeared
16 MR. GUY-SMITH: Objection; asked and answered. The information
17 is contained in the package.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Carter.
19 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, the information is briefly touched upon
20 within the package. I'm asking for more detail from the witness. And so
21 I would ask to be able to lead that evidence.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: I thought the purpose is to -- is not to expand on
23 the evidence but to give a summary of what is already in the evidence.
24 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, the guidelines of this Court indicate -
25 and let me find the Rule - that we are allowed to expand upon -- thank
2 That we are allowed to conduct a limited direct examination of
3 the witness where such an examination is focussed on clarifying or
4 highlighting particular aspects of the statement.
5 What we are trying to do is to clarify and to highlight those
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Not expand, ma'am.
8 MS. CARTER: Pardon?
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Clarifying or highlighting is one thing completely
10 distinct from expanding and leading new evidence.
11 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, perhaps I -- in when we are discussing
12 what we are intending to do is to clarify specifically what the scene was
13 like that morning. In detail what -- you know.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: The idea is to clarify the evidence, ma'am. To
15 clarify the evidence that's already been tendered. Not to give new
16 evidence on the scene.
17 MS. CARTER: If I may discuss with co-counsel, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Please do.
19 [Prosecution counsel confer]
20 MS. CARTER: Your Honours, the Court has indicated in relation to
21 this evidence I will not go any further on that point.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
23 MS. CARTER:
24 Q. And you did speak extensively in the Dragomir Milosevic testimony
25 about the shelling itself and your investigation thereof. I would like
1 to focus on a few specific matters.
2 MS. CARTER: I would call up -- it was 65 ter 2797.
3 Unfortunately, I don't have the exhibit number now before me.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: I believe that's 2292.
5 MS. CARTER: Thank you. I would call up P2292.
6 Q. Sir, the item in front of you, is that the report that you
7 drafted on the day of Markale II?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Okay.
10 MS. CARTER: I would like to move to page 3 of this document.
11 Q. You touched, in your previous testimony, on the fact that there
12 were actually five shells that landed on and near Markale II on
13 28 August 1995
14 If you can please describe for the Court or inform us, the chart
15 that we're looking at before us, what -- what does that mean? We've got
16 time stamps, we've got certain bearings, grid markings. Can you please
17 describe what are we looking at?
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you could be made visible, please. It is
19 hardly readable. Thank you.
20 THE WITNESS: This form was a standard form issued by the UNMO
21 organisation in UNPROFOR, in order to provide data on crater analysis.
22 And when you start on the left-hand side, and I will take as an example
23 the bottom -- the top line, it gives you the first line called line Alpha
24 or A, gives you the time of the investigation, 281145 says 28 of August,
25 quarter to 12.00 in the morning. Time B gives you time of the incident
1 that occurred, which is 28 of August, 1114, quarter past 11.00.
2 Line 3 gives you the grid so the location of the police of the
3 incident. Line 3 is the bearing which gives you direction that was taken
4 from the place of the incident to the origin of, in this case, the --
5 where the mortar projectile came from. That means that the direction was
6 170 degrees, and since that direction was taken that bearing was taken
7 with a magnetic compass, there might be a difference between plus or
8 minus 5 degrees.
9 Then is stated in line 5 the type of weapon used, in this case
10 120-millimetre mortar, including the markings that were found on the tail
11 of the projectile.
12 Line 6 says whether there were fragments, shrapnels were found,
13 yes or no; in this case, yes. Number of impacts, there was one impact.
14 Casualties, 33 dead, 79 injured. And other damage, which in this case
15 was superficial damage was to the main market buildings, and some extra
16 remarks that were mentioned there in case they were applicable. And you
17 see in this case, there were some extra remarks made as a result of the
18 investigation we did on the spot.
19 And in the last line, line number 11, you find the names of the
20 patrol team of the UNMOs that did the investigation.
21 Q. Thank you, sir. And now I would like to move back to P22 - I'm
22 sorry - 98, the map in which you marked the observation post.
23 Sir, on this map, with the assistance of the usher, I would like
24 you to mark where each of these shells landed. We're going from the
25 first in time to the last in time. If you can please mark where the two
1 shells landed at 10.50 in the morning. The grid reference on the item we
2 just saw indicated that one landed at 927590 --
3 A. 92 and?
4 Q. 927590.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Was it 10.50 that it landed or 11.15 or 11.14?
6 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, two shells hit at 10.50, two shells hit
7 at 11.00 and the final shell on the Markale market hit at 11.14.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
9 THE WITNESS: Can you replete the grid, please?
10 MS. CARTER:
11 Q. Certainly. Based on that crater analysis you indicated that the
12 first shell landed at 927590. And if you can mark it with a 1.
13 A. [Marks]
14 Q. Okay. The second shell landed at the same time at 927591.
15 A. [Marks]
16 Q. The third shell landed at 11.00, at 928591.
17 A. [Marks]
18 Q. The fourth shell landed at the same time at the same location.
19 If you can mark that with a 4.
20 A. [Marks]
21 Q. And finally, the shot that hit the Markale market landed at
22 11.14, at grid reference 927594.
23 A. [Marks]
24 MS. CARTER: I would ask that a screen shot be taken of this
25 exhibit and it be tendered into evidence.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's admitted into evidence. May it please be
2 given an exhibit number.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P2301.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
5 MS. CARTER:
6 Q. Sir, I would now to look at map P647.
7 Just for future reference, the map before you purports to be an
8 UNPROFOR map with grid lines as well. Would one be able to locate
9 objects on this map in the same way that you previously did on the
10 map ...
11 A. Yes, you can locate objects on this map in the same way because
12 it is the same system of grid references.
13 Q. Thank you, sir. After 28 August, did you have any other meetings
14 relating to Markale II?
15 A. On the 28th and the 29th of August, I had several meetings
16 concerning the Markale incident.
17 Q. Okay.
18 MS. CARTER: I call up 65 ter 2798.
19 Q. Sir, do you recognise the document in front of you?
20 A. I recognise the document.
21 Q. What is this item?
22 A. This document is a handwritten report by myself of a meeting that
23 I had on the 29th, a long meeting, with the investigation team,
24 consisting of various representatives of the Bosnian authorities from
25 the -- the high court in Sarajevo
1 who were trying to establish a report and an opinion what happened on the
2 28th of August.
3 MS. CARTER: I would like to move to page 2 of this report.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before we do that, can we clarify at this
5 point, sir, I thought you said a little earlier that you kept strict
6 lines between the two of you, because you wanted to maintain an
7 impartially. From that, I got the impression that you didn't exchange
9 THE WITNESS: We didn't exchange notes, Your Honour, because this
10 report is not given to -- to -- on that date, not given to the
11 investigation team. What I did do is, in order of my Senior Military
12 Observer, take part on the 28th and the 29th in the work of the
13 investigation team of the Bosnian authorities. But we kept strictly
14 apart and I only was there as a kind of observer, not taking part on any
15 discussion that was made. So there were separate reports. There was a
16 report of the Bosnian investigation team; and there was our own report
17 that was made on the 28th; and added to that, was this patrol report.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: And at this meeting on the 29th, where you are
19 meeting some authorities of the -- of Bosnia, amongst them are police.
20 THE WITNESS: Amongst them were police.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are we to understand that at that stage your
22 report had been written and immutable, couldn't be changed by any
23 exchange of views between you and the police, and they had their own
24 report also at that stage.
25 THE WITNESS: That is correct, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
2 Yes, Madam Carter.
3 MS. CARTER: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. Sir, now I'd like to move on to page 2 of this document.
5 What does section 4 indicate?
6 A. Section 4 --
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: If can you refer us to what you are referring to
8 on this document, Madam Carter.
9 MS. CARTER: On page 2, the very first bit is saying three
10 restrictions of movement. Number 4 is indicating meeting, and I'm just
11 trying to illuminate what that meeting was and what the ultimate results
13 Q. Sir, if we can move to 4. Can you please tell me is this the
14 meeting that you're referring to, where all participants -- took place or
15 is this something different?
16 A. No. This is the report of that -- of that second meeting that
17 took place on the 29th. Of course, a very summarised version because we
18 were only there as observers. We did not take part of the discussion,
19 and the meeting took place in order to finalise the Bosnian investigation
20 that started on the 28th, and that continued on the 28th, in the evening,
21 and continued again on the 29th, in order to write their separate report
22 on what had happened.
23 And the fact that we were there, again, that was in order of the
24 UNMO HQ, even on order of the UNMO HQ in Zagreb, to be part of the -- an
25 independent part of the investigation and the only thing we did there was
1 listening and comparing the data that we had from the day before which
2 were the same. We kept our data. We not -- not changed our data in one
3 way or the other.
4 Q. Thank you, sir. And given that this is a handwritten document
5 that has clearly been photocopied several times, it is a bit difficult to
6 read. If you are able, can you please read into the record what the
7 results of that meeting were. If you're having difficulty on the screen,
8 I do have a hard copy available for you.
9 A. Well, on the screen it's quite hard to read, so I would prefer to
10 have a hard copy.
11 MS. CARTER: If I can ask the assistance of the usher. Thank
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you can show that document to your opposite
14 parties first.
15 THE WITNESS: What is the part that you want me to read?
16 MS. CARTER:
17 Q. If can you read section 4, please.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: About the meeting.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes.
20 It say that -- who were the participants --
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm sorry. If we could have this read verbatim.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yeah, if you could read it verbatim, please. I
23 was just going to say that. Don't summarise this summary. Read it as it
25 THE WITNESS: I'm trying to read, but it's very hard to read the
1 middle part.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: It looks like it says: "Participants."
3 THE WITNESS: "Participants to the meeting to this report." I
4 cannot read. Main
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: That word is in parenthesis including --
6 [Overlapping speakers].
7 THE WITNESS: Including Lieutenant-Colonel Konings, yes.
8 "The aim of the meeting was to compare the reports made by UNMO
9 patrol and the rest of the investigation team, representatives of various
10 Bosnian authorities. Following aspects were not mentioned in the first
11 report and can be mentioned as UNMO confirmed. In the" -- that's very
12 hard to read. "In the time" -- and then I can't read. And it says, "of
13 the 4 impacts, UNMOs of India-Charlie-Zulu team working on OP-1 haven't
14 heard the outgoing nor -- neither rounds neither from Bosnian territory,
15 general area Bicilik [phoen]" --I cannot read that, "and Colina Kapa nor
16 from Bosnian Serb army territory. The minimum angle of impact of the
17 120-millimetre mortar projectile which hit the marketplace, grid 927594,
18 was 76 degrees."
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: 76 or 67.
20 THE WITNESS: 6 -- sorry. 67 degrees. 67 degrees.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
22 THE WITNESS: "The patrol received a list of killed and injured
23 people, 35 killed and 78 wounded, which is added as an annex to the
24 patrol report. See also patrol leader's remarks."
25 MS. CARTER:
1 Q. When you indicated that the UNMOs were now able to confirm
2 certain information, who were they receiving the information from and who
3 was confirming it?
4 A. I'm not sure I understand the question. Could you be a bit more
6 Q. Certainly. When you started reading number 2 or bullet point
7 number 2, you indicated that the UNMOs were now confirming certain
8 information. Who was providing that information?
9 A. The extra information that we could confirm is that on the
10 28 of August, on the moment of the -- on the moment that the fire of
11 shells -- fire of projectiles hit the specified places, there were two
12 UNMOs on OP-1, and the fact that is stated here is that they did not hear
13 any outgoing rounds from around their area, neither from the territory
14 that was held by the BiH, neither from the territory that was held by the
15 Bosnian Serb army. And that is quite valuable information.
16 Q. Why is that valuable information, sir?
17 A. Well, it at least told us that the projectile did not come, first
18 of all, from Bosnian army -- BiH territory and that the projectile was
19 fired with -- with great certainty from somewhere behind the mountains
20 south of the city.
21 Q. Who held the area behind those mountains?
22 A. The area behind that mountains was held by the Bosnian Serb army.
23 Q. Would you have normally have expected the persons on OP-1 to have
24 heard a mortar shell?
25 A. Well, the outgoing -- when a 120-millimetre mortar is fired, it
1 gives a very loud sound. When that is done in your vicinity, not the
2 direct vicinity but even a larger vicinity, you will hear that, and you
3 will also notice a flash, or a small smoke. And especially on that
4 morning because it was very clear, very silent, there were hardly any
5 wind, sounds can carry very far in a mountainous area like there. For
6 that reason, when a mortar would have been fired in -- in an area that
7 was in their vicinity, they would have heard or seen it, especially since
8 they were experienced UNMOs.
9 Q. Okay.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: I have some clarification, if you can give us,
12 If you look at on your screen at page 28, starting with lines 18
13 to line 24, you said: "The extra information that we could confirm is
14 that on the 28th of August on the moment of the -- on the moment that the
15 fire of shells -- fire of projectiles hit the specified places, there
16 were two UNMOs on OP-1, and the fact that is stated here is that they did
17 not hear any outgoing rounds from around their area, neither" - this is
18 the point I wanted you to look at - "neither from the territory that was
19 by the BiH, neither from that side was held by the Bosnian Serb army."
20 I understand you to be saying they heard noise from neither of
21 the two.
22 THE WITNESS: That is correct, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, if you go further down after that, you say at
24 page 29, line 1: "Well, it at least told us that the projectile did not
25 come, first of all, from BiH territory and that the projectile was fired
1 with great certainty from somewhere behind the mountains south of the
3 How do you make that determination if you heard nothing?
4 THE WITNESS: You can make that determination, Your Honour,
5 because there were already investigating much more facts on the scene on
6 the 28th of August. First of all, we had found a very clear crater.
7 Secondly, we could designate a very clear bearing, a very clear direction
8 which was --
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm going to interrupt you. We're talking here
10 before people moved down to go and do investigations. We're talking
11 about when people are still hearing or not hearing anything. Now, you
12 have just told us they heard from neither side any noise, and you have
13 said that, in fact, the very fact that they didn't hear anything is
14 valuable information. And you were asked why is it valuable? And that's
15 how you explain that. You explain that is valuable because -- then you
16 make a determination that the noise -- the projectile came from behind
17 the mountains.
18 But you are at this stage where, in fact, you have heard nothing.
19 Now I just want to know how that determination is made, if nothing has
20 been heard.
21 THE WITNESS: With all respect, Your Honour, I -- such an
22 investigation builds up and is a combination of various factors. If the
23 only fact had been that we had not heard anything, then that would have
24 been saying absolutely nothing. That would only have said no shelling
25 from the Bosnian -- from the BiH side and no shelling from the Bosnian
1 Serb side. But we cannot deny or we could not deny the fact that there
2 were much more information gathered already before. And information,
3 military information, once you gather that, you combine all that
4 information together and then you have a piece of a puzzle again; and if
5 you bring that all together, then you can come to the conclusion, and I
6 was not the guy who makes that conclusions, then can you come to the
7 conclusion, as has been done later in higher ranking reports, that there
8 was only one possibility that the projectile came from the Serb side.
9 So, I cannot isolate one fact on its own. I never value facts on
10 their own. They are all part of the investigation took part on 28th and
11 29th and during those investigations, factors came in, new facts came in.
12 The first fact that we found was the crater. The second fact that we
13 found was the projectile tail. The third fact that we found was the --
14 the calculation that the minimum angle of impact was 67 degrees. The
15 fourth fact that we found was that the direction, the bearing that the
16 projectile came from was 170 degrees. The fifth fact that came in was
17 the fact that my UNMOs on OP-1 did not hear any sound from either Bosnian
18 territory or Bosnian Serb territory, which excluded the fact that it was
19 fired from BiH territory. And all these facts together might bring you
20 to the conclusion that because there was one simple very clear fact,
21 Your Honour, there had landed a projectile in the streets of Markale.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: All right. Sorry, I obviously was on the wrong
23 page. Thank you so much.
24 Yes, Madam Carter.
25 [Prosecution counsel confer]
1 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, I was just informed that we may be in
2 time for a break.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: In another four minutes.
4 MS. CARTER: Another four minutes. Thank you, Your Honour.
5 Q. Sir, you had indicated that final conclusions were made and that
6 was actually made in the UNPROFOR G2 report, admitted in this case as
7 P67. Is that correct?
8 A. That's one report where conclusions were made, yes.
9 Q. And can you, please, describe for the Court who or what a G2 is?
10 A. The G2 in any military organisation, or sometimes called the S2,
11 is the intelligence officer who is responsible for gathering and
12 analysing all the information concerning an enemy, opponent, adversaries,
13 no matter how you call them. And what is important is he brings that
14 analysis before his commanding officer, so that the commanding officer of
15 an armed force can take his decisions what to do in the next period to
17 Q. Thank you, sir.
18 MS. CARTER: Finally, I would ask that P526 be brought on screen
19 at page 37. Apologies, Your Honour. And if I could 65 ter 2798 admitted
20 into evidence.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: 2798 is admitted into evidence. May it please be
22 given an exhibit number.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P2302.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
25 MS. CARTER:
1 Q. Sir, both in your Dragomir Milosevic testimony as well as your
2 indication today, you indicate that the shell that caused the crater at
3 Markale had fallen as opposed to what had been intimated in
4 Dragomir Milosevic as having been a staged event.
5 Can you please tell us, first of all, do you recognise the
6 photograph in front of you?
7 A. Yes, I do recognise.
8 Q. What is this photograph?
9 A. This is a photograph of the impact of the 120-millimetre mortar
10 projectile in -- in the street before the market.
11 Q. What do you -- what can we see or learn from this crater that
12 indicates it is in fact an impact as opposed to any sort of other
13 detonation on site?
14 A. Well, this is a very clear example of the impact of a
15 120-millimetre mortar. In fact, it is a typical mortar crater which is
16 the outline which will be recognised by any military expert. Projectiles
17 from -- impacts from artillery projectiles look quite differently. The
18 impact on the street from an artillery projectile is differently and when
19 you use other types of explosives, the shape charge or whatever you can
20 think about, the impact will also be differently.
21 Mortars were used quite often inside Sarajevo, so all involved
22 personnel, and I mean UNMO -- UNMOs and UNPROFOR personnel had quite some
23 experience in recognising craters created by a mortar.
24 In the central part of the crater, you can also find the place
25 where the fuse impacted on the -- on the soil and in the concrete, and
1 that are the most specific aspects that can you see in a crater. One
2 other thing is that on a 120-millimetre mortar used in that time, you
3 quite often can find the projectile tail somewhere in the vicinity of the
5 MS. CARTER: I have been notified it may be time for the break
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is indeed, ma'am.
8 Sorry, are you saying something?
9 MS. CARTER: No, Your Honour. I will finish questioning after
10 the break. Thank you, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: We will take a break and come back at a quarter to
13 Court adjourned.
14 --- Recess taken at 10.18 a.m.
15 --- On resuming at 10.48 a.m.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Carter.
17 MS. CARTER: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 Q. Sir, before the break, we were discussing the scene itself and
19 what we can learn from the crater itself.
20 Can you please describe for the Court, if the scene would have
21 been staged in any sort of way, in relation to the projectile itself,
22 what, if anything, would be different about the crater?
23 A. Well --
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well --
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: It would be my submission that the -- first of
2 all, he is being asked to comment on a hypothetical. He has not been
3 called as an expert but rather as a fact witness, and the opinion that is
4 being sought at this point is an opinion of an expert. That's my first
5 objection. I have a second objection on which I can also put forth at
6 this time or wait, depending on what the position is with regard to the
7 first objection.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Put all your objections.
9 MR. GUY-SMITH: Very well. The second objection is that with
10 regard to the hypothetical as is presently constituted, it is
11 insufficient for an opinion to be drawn, because a staged, as it's put --
12 if the scene would have been staged it could have been in any sort of
13 way. There are a variety of factors that go into a staging of a scene,
14 so in the absence of knowing what other foundational basis upon which the
15 opinion is being sought, the hypothetical as it presently stands has an
16 insufficient foundation for the rendering of opinion independent of the
17 fact that this gentleman has been called as a fact witness not as an
18 expert and should not be rendering such an opinion.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Carter.
20 MS. CARTER: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 First, the witness is capable of giving testimony in regards to
22 things that he knows for a fact -- his personal experience and that's all
23 that we are asking for. As the last time, Mr. Guy-Smith gave the same
24 objection before me myself, that we're not asking for an expert opinion.
25 We're not asking for -- for him to extrapolate on things outside of his
1 specific knowledge. So he is not being asked as an expert whatsoever,
2 and based on the -- one moment. There's case law in regards to this, in
3 regards on the Limaj case, the Chamber indicated that a reservoir of
4 knowledge and understanding about a subject would be -- is what we're --
5 THE INTERPRETER: Thank you for slowing down when reading.
6 MS. CARTER: I apologise yet again. That what we're asking him
7 to draw to upon is his reservoir of knowledge and understanding, not a
8 specific expertise. That's as to the first objection.
9 As to the second objection, I'm trying -- I believe that I did
10 narrowly tailor the question to the projectile itself and to the crater
11 impact itself. I'm not intending to delve any further than that because,
12 frankly, in regards to the staging itself, I chose that word because that
13 was the word that was selected in the Dragomir Milosevic case where the
14 remainder of the scene was addressed; however, that specific item was not
15 addressed. So I believe that I have narrowly tailored my question to the
16 point that I'm asking.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Starting with the second objection, I don't think
18 you have sufficiently narrowed it, Madam Carter. And with -- in relation
19 to the first objection, I think you can arrive at the same destination by
20 asking the witness to tell us what was his findings on his investigations
21 of this particular incident and then, of course, his -- whatever his
22 findings were -- are, will exclude any other hypothetical situation.
23 That will keep you on to the facts rather than on hypothesising.
24 MS. CARTER:
25 Q. Colonel Konings, you have heard the advice of the Trial Chamber
1 and I want to ask you specifically: Can you please tell me what about
2 the crater that we see before us, what markers indicate that this is an
3 impact crater as opposed to anything else?
4 A. Well, as I tried to explain before, this is a -- I -- I hate to
5 use the word "perfect" but this is a perfect explanation of the explosion
6 of a mortar projectile in a tarmac or concrete cover of the street. This
7 kind of example -- such an example you could even use in training,
8 because you will not find them better and more clear than here. The
9 pattern is just as a -- as a mortar explodes, which is a not complete
10 circle but it looks like an ellipse, and on two sides, which are aimed at
11 -- to the left and the right of the central part of the projectile of the
12 impact, you see a more widened pattern of shrapnels that hit the ground.
13 Those two -- well, longer sides give you the angle of impact, direction
14 that the projectile came from. The fuse funnel in the central part is
15 also a very typical thing that can you see once an artillery or mortar
16 projectile hits the soil.
17 The difference with an artillery projectile is that due to the
18 lower impact angle of an artillery projectile, the shape of the crater is
19 differently. It is very distinctive again. If you would have used any
20 other type of explosive here, you would have seen a different pattern,
21 another pattern. Also around the scene of the crater, many aspects fit
22 with the use of a larger mortar projectile, like shrapnels that can you
23 find and that we did find, the tail that we found, the impact of
24 shrapnels in the wall of the houses, broken windows, but of course broken
25 windows can be caused by any explosions, that's not a proof. But I only
1 can stress once more that the crater is such a, again, perfect example of
2 what a mortar crater looks like, added to that the shrapnels and the
3 tail, well, it is nothing else.
4 Q. Thank you, sir. I thank you for your time and for your evidence.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Madam Carter.
6 Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
7 Cross-examination by Mr. Guy-Smith:
8 Q. Good morning.
9 A. Good morning.
10 Q. Before you went to Sarajevo
11 did you receive any training with regard to the duties you were to
12 perform whilst in Sarajevo
13 A. Yes, I received specific training, not in a direct relation with
15 training was done in the Netherlands
17 Q. Could you tell the Chamber what you understood your mandate to
19 A. Our mandate was to act impartially and to report all incidents
20 that occurred along the area -- in the area that you were posted. And
21 incidents, I mean military incidents like shelling, sniping, and breaking
22 any agreement that was -- was applicable in the area.
23 Q. Would it be fair to say that you were considered to be the eyes
24 and ears of the Security Council and the UN Secretary-General in the
1 A. Well, yes, I can -- I can agree with such a statement.
2 Q. You have indicated that you worked - if I understood your
3 testimony correctly - with UNPROFOR. Before you answer anything, my
4 question is: Were you part of UNPROFOR, as far as you were concerned, or
5 were you a distinct organisation from UNPROFOR?
6 A. I would choose the word -- the second part, a distinct
7 organisation. UNMOs were administrative seen a part of UNPROFOR but they
8 were strictly separate from that because they had their own chain of
10 Q. With regard to the information that the UNMOs received in the
11 field, did the UNMOs transfer that information to anyone in UNPROFOR on a
12 regular basis?
13 A. I did not. My team had only one responsibility. That is, report
14 directly towards the Senior Military Observer inside Sarajevo and from
15 there, all reports from the Sarajevo
16 the UNMO headquarters in Zagreb
17 not to my knowledge.
18 Q. Could you tell us as you sit here today, how many different UNMO
19 units were responsible for engaging in observations during the time that
20 they were in Sarajevo
21 A. Inside the city of Sarajevo
22 times. I'm not quite sure anymore about the number. And outside
24 five teams.
25 Q. Did you have a schedule or routine whereby the UNMO units that
1 were within Sarajevo
2 with each other or conferred with each other on a regular basis?
3 A. Yes, we had regular team leader meetings, which were chaired by
4 the Senior Military Observer or his deputy, and as far as I can
5 recollect, they happened at least once a week and when was necessary, of
6 course, we were called in on a more frequent basis.
7 Q. With regard to the regular meetings that you've referred to once
8 a week, I take it that the purpose of those meetings was to coordinate
9 and share information between the various units so that all units were
10 similarly educated with regard to the situation on the ground, for
11 example, that past week?
12 A. Yes. It was an opportunity of the Senior Military Observer to
13 speak to his team leaders, acting as a regular, normal military commander
14 that we all were, and to coordinate all our activities and to share extra
15 information concerning the past and the future.
16 Q. With regard to the observations that were being made, and once
17 again, for the moment I'm speaking in a general sense, I take it that
18 apart from the issues that you have mentioned concerning shelling and
19 sniping you also were mandated to engage in actual military observation,
20 and by that I mean, what was occurring between the conflicting parties;
22 A. That is correct.
23 Q. You were also mandated to liaise between the conflicting parties.
25 A. That was not given to the teams in the city. We had special
1 liaison officers working on the Bosnian Serb side and on the BiH side.
2 So that was not part of my duties.
3 Q. With regard to the special liaison officers, the special liaison
4 officers relied, in part, upon information that you gave them so that
5 they were in a position to have discussions with the conflicting parties.
7 A. As far as I can remember, they were present during the team
8 leader meetings. Not always but they tried to be there, especially the
9 liaison officer from the Bosnian Serb side was frequently not present
10 because he was not allowed to cross the lines quite often. But generally
11 spoken, you are right.
12 Q. To your knowledge, were -- was contact had with the liaison
13 officer on the Bosnian Serb side from the BiH side of UNMO by telephone
14 or radio, so that the liaison officer on the Serb side would be in a
15 position to have accurate information from the UNMOs?
16 A. Well --
17 Q. To your knowledge.
18 A. I don't -- no, I don't know. No, I don't know.
19 Q. Did you, in your capacity, working I believe, it was in a sector
20 Charlie 1?
21 A. SC-1.
22 Q. SC-1. Did you, in your capacity working in SC-1, ever receive
23 information from your superior that had come from the Serbian liaison
24 officer for purposes of being able to confirm or otherwise analyse
25 information concerning an incident?
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Telephonically? I ask -- only ask that simply
2 because he has already testified to the fact that there were team
3 leaders --
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, yes, telephonically.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Telephonically --
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes, telephonically. Thank you, Your Honour.
7 THE WITNESS: I did not have telephone contacts with the liaison
8 officer on the Serb side. I met him not very often during the team
9 leader meetings, and I can recall that he sketched, in that situation
10 when he was present, the situation on a generic overview on the Serb
11 side. But as you might recall, starting from June, there were no UNMOs
12 left at the -- at the Bosnian Serb side because they were taken hostage.
13 Q. We'll get there.
14 With regard to the team meetings where the team leaders were,
15 during those meetings, did you share information with anyone in those
16 meetings about information you had received from the Bosnian police?
17 A. Yes, we had -- during the team leader meetings we had a
18 professional exchange of information between team leaders, and issues
19 that we discussed, of course, there was how to cooperate with the Bosnian
20 police forces on the guidelines of the Senior Military Observer, and we
21 informed each other about the way each team was doing that, and what type
22 of information we received through that cooperation.
23 Q. What were the guidelines of the Senior Military Observer?
24 A. That we were allowed to work in cooperation with the Bosnian
25 police. In fact, he ordered us to go to an investigation site after an
1 incident to get in contact with the Bosnian police. Most times it
2 happened vice versa that the Bosnian police phoned us. But we were only
3 allowed in each case, in each separate case, to do that after discussion
4 with the Senior Military Observer so that we got in each case his
5 personal approval to work with the Bosnian police.
6 Q. Above and beyond that, one of your regular tasks was to verify
7 all claims made by the conflicting parties; correct?
8 A. Can you give an example of what you mean by "claims"?
9 Q. A claim would be, for example, the use of United Nations cars by
10 one of the conflicting parties.
11 A. While that was -- it might have been a task for UNMOs in other
12 areas on the Balkans, but I have never had to work on such a claim.
13 Q. Okay. Understanding that you have never had to work on such a
14 claim, were any claims made by the Bosnian Serb forces that you became
15 aware of that you had to verify?
16 A. Not to my knowledge, and saying that, I have to come back to my
17 last answer, because I had to do an investigation on my own stolen cars,
18 to find them back, because they were twice -- two or three times my cars
19 from my team were stolen. And you might call that a claim, but we never
20 found the cars back. To make the whole story complete.
21 Q. I'm sorry. I'm referring to claims by the conflicting parties,
22 not of losing them --
23 A. Okay. Okay. Well, then --
24 Q. [Overlapping speakers] ... you losing a car by virtue of being
25 stolen by somebody in the area in which you were.
1 With regard to claims made by the Bosnia-Herzegovina army, did
2 you have occasion to verify or investigate claims made by the army?
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: He answered that question already.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: [Overlapping speakers] ...
5 THE WITNESS: There were no claims made.
6 MR. GUY-SMITH: I first said the Bosnian Serb forces, Your
7 Honour, and now I'm giving the Bosnia and Herzegovina forces.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: In fact both questions had been answered earlier
9 because he said to you earlier --
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: Then I stand corrected.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you stand corrected then I won't go back. I
12 won't go further.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH:
14 Q. With regard to issues concerning any confrontations, did you
15 verify what was occurring at the confrontation lines?
16 A. We had hardly any possibility to do that because we had a
17 restricted movement close to the confrontation line, especially after
18 June, when the UNMOs at the Serb side were taken hostage. At both sides
19 there were very strong regulations that we were not allowed to come close
20 to the confrontation line.
21 Q. Let me ask you this: Before you went to Sarajevo, did you
22 understand that you were going to be working with UNPROFOR as a
23 peacekeeping activity?
24 A. Well, that was the general thought that was teached -- that we
25 were trained was the general background of peacekeeping, yes.
1 Q. When you arrived Sarajevo
2 peacekeeping was in fact non-existent in the area; correct? Because
3 there was a war going on. So there was no peace to keep.
4 A. Well, I think that's a long story. But I'm now entering my
5 personal thoughts, and I'm not quite sure that this is the place that I
6 reflect to that.
7 Q. Well, let me ask you this question then. When you were being
8 trained prior to the time that you arrived Sarajevo, were you trained in
9 distinctions between peacekeeping and peace making with regard to what
10 rules of engagement could occur?
11 A. We were trained in the whole range of peacekeeping, peace
12 enforcing, peace making. And besides that, I'm a professional officer
13 already all my life. So I have also knowledge of combat, war, et cetera.
14 We have been trained in that all our life.
15 Q. With regard to the mandate that you went into Sarajevo with,
16 would it be fair to say that you were informed that your mandate was one
17 of peacekeeping not of peace making or peace enforcing?
18 A. I'm not quite -- I'm not able to recollect the exact words that
19 were spoken to us in our training in the Netherlands and in our training
20 in Zagreb
21 mission in -- the operation in Bosnia
22 the thoughts about the peace to keep, in 1995, were very distinct, were
23 very far away from that. As well, in the Netherlands, as well in our
24 training in Zagreb
25 mandate that we had, which was to act impartially, to be the eyes and the
1 ears of the international community, specify the UN, as you've said
2 before, and to report any break and any incident that occurred inside the
3 area that you would go to, because the training that we got in Zagreb
4 referring to a posting in either Croatia
5 anywhere in the conflict. Only at the end of the training, it was a
6 generic training, we were told where we were to go.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith, I don't want to interfere with your
8 examination of the witness. Do I understand your line of
9 cross-examination to be suggesting that there is no distinction between
10 UNPROFOR and UNMO? And I'm asking this question because the witness told
11 us what his mandate was from the beginning of your cross-examination,
12 which -- and his -- in his mandate, there was no reference whatsoever to
13 peacekeeping. He has reiterated it right now without any reference to
14 peacekeeping, and now, so far as I have understood, it seemed to me like
15 that the job of peacekeeping was assigned to UNPROFOR rather than UNMOs.
16 If you just sort of help me.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure. I'm happy to do that. Since you have
18 asked for clarification on -- on two points.
19 Q. First of all, is it your position that you as a member of an
20 UNMO, United Nations Military Observer, were in a distinct organisation
21 from UNPROFOR?
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Distinct mandate.
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: Distinct organisation. First of all is whether
24 they're part of the same organisation.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: He answered to that. He said they had a different
1 command structure. But if you want any further clarification on that,
2 you go ahead.
3 THE WITNESS: We were a separate organisation, if that's what you
4 mean by distinct. There was one line -- one chain of command which
5 was -- I was the team leader. I had one boss, which was the Senior
6 Military Observer. He had another boss which was the Chief Military
7 Observer in Zagreb
8 because you both were working for UN, but we had a separate line of
9 command which meant that my report went only to my Senior Military
10 Observer who reported straight to the chief military observer, who
11 reported straight to the UN council in New York, as far as I recollect.
12 And of course, in a military operation you try to cooperates and share
13 information on various levels. It would be stupid not to do that.
14 But we were and I would classify it UNMOs are meant to be an
15 independent, impartial organisation and can operate even without a
16 military force being present. For that reason, they are independent.
17 For that reason, we were not relying on logistics or whatever from other
18 troops. So I had no contacts with UNPROFOR troops in the formal way.
19 The only thing that we did is try to cooperate as well as we could with
20 other UNPROFOR units inside Sarajevo
21 share information on the level that we were allowed by our Senior
22 Military Observer, and, a very practical thing, in order to find some
23 protection on some moments in time when it was quite dangerous to move
24 around inside the city of Sarajevo
25 observers have no weapons, they are on their own, and we had been
1 threatened a lot inside the city of Sarajevo
2 contacts with some of the battalions of UNPROFOR inside Sarajevo to be
3 protected on certain moments during my stay there.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH:
5 Q. With regard to the issue of your mandate, is it your testimony
6 that the mandate of the UNMOs was distinct from the mandate of UNPROFOR?
7 A. I -- I can -- I cannot answer that question because I cannot
8 recall exactly anymore the mandate of UNPROFOR in that period. I only
9 know that we had the order to observe all the aspects that I already
10 explained. I cannot make a comparison anymore. It's 15 years ago. I
11 don't recall that anymore.
12 Q. Very well. One of the things you that have told us is that it
13 was important for you to be impartial. Before you arrived in Sarajevo
14 were you briefed on any of the concerns that had been voiced by the
15 Bosnian Serb army or by the Bosnian-Herzegovinian army with regard to
16 issues that could affect impartially? And by that mean, their view of
17 you being not impartial?
18 A. Of course, that fact was quite known in -- in any country that
19 took part in UNPROFOR or delivered UNMOs to the conflict on the Balkan.
20 Sorry. And I'm convinced that we were told about that in our training,
21 because our training went into that kind of detail, that we had to expect
22 different opinions about UNMOs, either being impartial or not. The
23 conflict was ongoing already for several years, so the -- I was familiar
24 with the fact that UNMOs were looked upon not being impartial or that
25 UNPROFOR was looked upon as one of the parties in the conflict.
1 Q. Okay. When you say that UNPROFOR was looked on -- was looked
2 upon as one of the parties in the conflict, were you given specific
3 examples of those assertions or allegations being made before you came to
5 A. Well, I cannot recall any specific example, but as the public
6 opinion was well aware of the role of UNPROFOR and the way UNPROFOR was
7 looked upon in --
8 Q. But you can't remember any specific examples --
9 A. I cannot refer any specific example.
10 Q. Very well. With regard to your statement that you were familiar
11 with the fact that UNMOs were looked upon not being impartial, can you
12 give us any further information, before you went, as to what you were
13 told in that regard? What kind of things you were going to have to guard
14 against or what kind of things you were going to have to convince the
15 parties of in order establish your impartiality?
16 A. Well, in a generic sense, we were told to -- to treat all the
17 involved parties in the same manner. Which means that you do not favour
18 any party, that you are working with, or that you -- that you look upon
19 the whole situation and try to see it from both sides, and that you just
20 mere state the facts that you see. The best point to reach impartiality
21 is that you just state -- you observe and report the facts that you see
22 as they are happening. You don't make your own analysis on that. The
23 analysis is done by others. Just by stating those facts you reach a
24 certain level of impartiality.
25 The other things is that you have to treat all parties that are
1 involved in the same manner, which means that you meet them in the same
2 manner, in the same open way, that you listen to them, and that you do
3 not make promises that you are not allowed to make, or that you give
4 advantages to a certain party more than advantages that you give to
5 another party. Those are all types of generic guidelines that we were
6 given in trying to act impartial as an UNMO.
7 Q. Were you informed with regard to what I'm now going to call the
8 general view of the international presence in Sarajevo during the
9 conflict period that allegations had been made by Mladic that UNPROFOR
10 was supplying military equipment to the Presidency forces?
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: UNPROFOR or UN --
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: UNPROFOR.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- or UNM
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: UNPROFOR.
15 THE WITNESS: I cannot recall that I got that information. I
16 really don't know.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH:
18 Q. Did you ever receive any information that any UNMO assets were
19 being accused of being used by the Bosnian Serb army for purposes of
20 assisting the Presidency forces? Not whether it is true or not but
21 whether any allegations were made?
22 A. I don't know. No. No, I have not received any information, no.
23 Q. Okay. During the time that you were in Sarajevo, were you
24 communicating information that you received with regard to your
25 observations by telegraph, radio, telephone, fax, and other forms of
1 electronic transmission?
2 A. We used radio and telephone.
3 Q. Were you aware of any of your conversations being intercepted by
4 any of the parties to the conflict?
5 A. Yes, I was very well aware of that.
6 Q. With regard to your conversations being intercepted by parties to
7 the conflict, what measures, if any, did you engage in, in your capacity
8 to protect against the interception itself?
9 A. Well, we had very limited means. The only thing we could do is
10 not use telephone or radio at all, and work with written reports that
11 were brought as quickly as we could to the UNMO HQ. And in sensitive
12 incidents, and most of them were sensitive, we tried to solve the problem
13 as I described before.
14 Another thing that we did is that when we had to use the radios,
15 we made our own, well, secrecy system in giving grids. We never used the
16 grid system that I described to you before. We had our own UNMO grid
17 system that we changed by the day in order to avoid that any of the
18 listening parties, Bosnian Serb or BiH, could get the information that we
19 were sending. But especially later during the conflict, after July,
20 we -- we refrained from using radios. If we could refrain that, we did.
21 Q. During your tenure in Sarajevo
22 that your particular communications had been intercepted and had been
23 used by either of the conflicting parties?
24 A. I have had no specific feedback on that. But I -- I know that --
25 no, I don't know that. I cannot prove that. But I'm convinced that the
1 information was used by both parties.
2 Q. With regard to the issue of rumours, would it be fair to say,
3 first generally, that in your capacity as a military observer, the issue
4 of rumours was something that you had to guard against?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. You received information with regard to rumours that the BiH
7 snipers were targeting their own people. I'm not suggesting that they
8 were true, I'm not suggesting that they were false. I'm just saying you
9 received such rumour, did you not?
10 A. I'm not quite sure, so ... I try to memorise that, but I really
11 don't know anymore.
12 Q. Okay. Did you receive rumours concerning the issue of the
13 planting or moving of bodies by either the BiH or Bosnian Muslims in
14 order to stage an event, or to increase its apparent gravity? Once
15 again, I'm only talking about the rumours; I'm not talking about the
16 truth of the information.
17 A. We had specific guidelines from the Senior Military Observer
18 during one of our team leader meetings that we had to take that into
20 Q. And what were those guidelines?
21 A. Those guidelines were that we had to check, as far as we could,
22 bodies that we were investigating in the morgue and try to establish an
23 opinion about the status of the people that there were, the killed
24 people, and try to find out whether they were -- well, I hate to use it,
25 whether they were fresh killed people or that they were dragged around.
1 Q. When you say that they were fresh killed people, they were
2 dragged around, are you putting a time-frame on that, in terms of fresh
3 killed people or dragged around?
4 A. Well, that has to do, of course, with the time-frame because that
5 might be the difference that you -- when people are dragged around,
6 that -- that means that they are dead for a longer period, several hours
7 maybe, I don't know. But that's the only issue, the only guideline that
8 the Senior Military Observer could give us knowing that we were --
9 neither of us was a medical expert or neither of us was a doctor. We
10 only had to work with the experience that we had in our teams and maybe
11 some personal experience that you have in looking to dead people, but
12 after six
13 Q. With regard to issue of time of death and length of time between
14 death and your examination, you've told us you're not a medical expert, I
15 take it you received no training with regard to that issue?
16 A. We received no training to that, no.
17 Q. You, as you sit here today, cannot give us information with
18 regard to the various factors that go into the physiologic changes that
19 occur to a body after it has ceased living, can you?
20 A. There are a few things we take into account. This were the
21 stiffness of the body, whether blood was still coming out of wounds, very
22 small issues that we tried to look upon than was the only thing that we
23 could do because the time that was given us in the morgues to walk around
24 and to check people was merely enough to count the people and to have a
25 generic overview of -- of how many people there were, and how the
1 situation was. We were not allowed by the Bosnian police to stay longer
2 as necessary in the morgues.
3 Q. With regard to the issue that you just mentioned, being the
4 stiffness of the body, I take it what you're referring to is the issue of
5 rigor --
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. -- that occurs in a body at some period of time after death. Do
8 you know what the period is that a rigor is onset?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Okay. With regard to the issue of blood still coming out of the
11 wounds, can you tell us what training you received with regard to
12 post-mortem blood flow?
13 A. We had no -- as I said before, we had no special training. We
14 tried to -- to do -- sorry.
15 Q. I'm asking what -- what you did generic -- I'm asking what you
16 did specifically. [Overlapping speakers] ...
17 A. I had no -- I had no training in that.
18 Q. With regard to issue of rumours concerning planting or moving of
19 bodies, are you aware of the fact that this was a concern that was
20 discussed not only in UNMO but also in UNPROFOR with people as high as
21 General Nicolai and General Rupert Smith?
22 A. I have heard that fact afterwards in the preparation of the
23 General Milosevic case. I did not know that in that time because I had
24 nothing to do with General Nicolai or General Rupert Smith.
25 Q. Very well. Were you aware that, during the time that you were in
2 in the nature of Leopard tanks?
3 A. I was aware of that fact. I knew that.
4 Q. Were you aware of the fact that UNPROFOR had engaged in an
5 operation in 1994, before you came, called Operation Bollebank in Tuzla
6 in which they used heavy tanks?
7 A. I don't recall the specific name of the operation and whether it
8 was in Tuzla
9 Q. Okay. While you were in Sarajevo
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we have 1D00-7912 up on the screen, please.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Carter.
12 MS. CARTER: Thank you, Your Honour. Your Honour, I would object
13 to the use of this exhibit and, frankly, any exhibit by Defence counsel.
14 We have yet to receive any notification of any exhibits to be used during
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: Let me double-check.
18 At 10.56 a.m.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: 10.56, what day, sir?
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: Today.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Carter.
22 MS. CARTER: Can we please have identification of who
23 specifically that e-mail was sent to?
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: It was sent to Carmela Javier, Viktorija Taseva,
25 subject cross-examination, Konings. And it starts off:
1 "Dear Carmela, the Defence for Mr. Perisic reserves the right to
2 cross-examine Mr. Konings on any of the documents disclosed by the
3 Prosecution in relation to his testimony, all of his prior testimony in
4 those cases he has testified in at the Tribunal, in addition, all
5 documents provided in the e-court system today." And then after that it
6 says, "Potential exhibits," and there is a list that follows.
7 MS. CARTER: Well, I know -- Prosecution has not received that.
8 I'm not certain about Ms. Taseva.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters kindly request that counsel speak
10 into the microphone.
11 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm looking at a message here that says
13 41 minutes ago. I'm more than happy to have it sent again. It has been
14 our practice to send them --
15 THE INTERPRETER: Kindly speak into the microphone, please.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: You're asked to speak into the microphone, sir.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm sorry. I'm more than happy to send it again.
18 I don't know why it has not been received. We have an indication that it
19 was sent. I can't take it any further because I'm not an electronic
20 expert. I'm more than happy to have it sent again.
21 MS. CARTER: That would be at minimum. If we could also have
22 that somehow written down in the event that we have another electronic
24 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure. Two seconds, so that I can take care of
25 the administrative issue.
1 [Defence counsel confer]
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 MR. GUY-SMITH: I have no desire whatsoever to put Ms. Carter at
4 a disadvantage by not having those exhibits that we intend on using. I'm
5 happy to take two minutes here to see whether it comes through in
6 electronic transmission. We've sent someone out to get a hard copy. And
7 I'm also happy to proceed. Whatever the Court wishes me to do.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's going to depend on what Ms. Carter's
9 objection's fate is.
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: For purposes of the record, it has just been sent
11 again. And it has also been released in e-court.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Send it also to the registry.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: Yes. I guess this is the usual labour of the
14 Defence, which is our systems don't work all that well.
15 MS. CARTER: With the assistance of the usher, may I have the
16 document that is being gestured.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: May I proceed?
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: No, not yet.
19 MR. GUY-SMITH: Very well.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you going to be much longer, Madam Carter?
21 MS. CARTER: My apologies, I didn't realise that you were still
22 waiting on me.
23 If I can just have an extended break, I know that we're coming up
24 soon. I will deal with the first exhibit but if it -- once we have a
25 little bit more time.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: What I do want to find out from you, Madam Carter,
2 is what you want to do with your objection now that that you have
3 received the documents, and apparently they were sent at 10.56 this
4 morning electronically. They were sent a couple of minutes ago
5 electronically, and now you have them in hard copy.
6 What do you want to do with your objection?
7 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, given it appears that Defence counsel
8 have made their best efforts to get them timely, then I would withdraw
9 the objection.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
11 You may proceed, sir.
12 MR. GUY-SMITH:
13 Q. During the time that you were in Sarajevo, did you have occasion
14 to see the kind of tank that is presently being shown on the screen, as
16 A. No, I haven't seen it.
17 Q. Very well. Were you aware of whether or not such a tank was in
18 the region? Independently of having seen it, were you given any
19 information with regard to such a tank being in the region?
20 A. Can you specify "region"?
21 Q. Bosnia
22 A. I was aware of the fact that the Leopard 1 was -- was in the
23 armed forces of the UNPROFOR.
24 Q. And the tank that you see before you is that a Leopard 1?
25 A. That is a Leopard 1.
1 Q. And what is the capability of a Leopard 1 with regard to the kind
2 of artillery fire?
3 A. The Leopard 1 is not an artillery asset. The Leopard 1 is a
4 direct fire platform.
5 Q. Perfect. Thank you for the correction. And what is a direct
6 fire platform?
7 A. This is a, as we call it in NATO terms, a main battle tank which
8 is used for its fire-power, its flexibility, its manoeuvrability, and
9 combined with infantry troops it can be used to conquer terrain, to
10 perform an attack, to perform a defence. For that it has a -- it's a
11 lethal -- a very lethal instrument with a 105-millimetre gun in it, heavy
12 armour. It's quite fast, 60 kilometres on the road, so it's a real
13 fighting machine.
14 Q. I see. Thank you.
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we please have that moved in as defendant's
16 next in order.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: 1D00-7912 is admitted into evidence. May it
18 please be given an exhibit number.
19 THE REGISTRAR: That will be D78, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we please have P647 up on the screen.
22 Q. I think you may be well familiar with this map, sir.
23 A. I am.
24 Q. Looking at this map, with the assistance of the usher, would you
25 be able to identify the confrontation lines that you were aware of during
1 your tenure in Sarajevo
2 A. In all honesty, I cannot draw an exact line of the confrontation
3 line anymore. We had that information on that time. It changed every
4 day, so I really -- I'm not able to draw an exact line around Sarajevo
5 where the confrontation line was in that period.
6 Q. With regard to the confrontation line, are you in a position to
7 give us an approximation of where the confrontation line was, using the
8 grid system that you have explained to us during your direct examination?
9 A. I only are able to draw a rough line on a -- on a map that
10 recollects or that gives you the area that I was responsible for, not
11 around the whole Sarajevo
12 Q. With regard to the area that you were responsible for, can you,
13 looking at this map, identify the area that you were responsible for?
14 A. I can give a rough estimation of the area that I was responsible
15 for, yes.
16 Q. Can you please do so, sir.
17 A. [Marks]
18 Q. Now, with regard to the area that you were responsible for, were
19 you aware of any BiH troops being present in that area?
20 A. In that area, there were some command posts located with some
21 soldiers present.
22 Q. Could you please mark where those command posts were located?
23 A. No, I'm not able to give you any precise location anymore.
24 Q. Could you tell us how many command posts were located in the area
25 that you have -- that you have designated you were responsible for by the
1 drawing of the red box?
2 A. To my recollection, I have been at at least four or five
3 different command posts. One of them was located in one of the main
4 streets inside the city of Sarajevo
5 Q. And when you say one of them was located one of the main streets
6 inside of the city of Sarajevo
7 A. Somewhere here.
8 Q. Okay. Could you mark on the outside of that box RA, for
9 responsible area.
10 A. [Marks]
11 Q. That's a failure of English and Dutch. I believe it's A, not E.
12 A. Oh, I'm sorry.
13 Q. That's okay. Now, during the time that you were in Sarajevo
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we have that admitted as the defendant's
15 next in order, please.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted. May it please be given
17 an exhibit number.
18 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit D79, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we have 1D00-8658 up on the screen.
21 [Defence counsel confer]
22 MR. GUY-SMITH: This would be identified, I believe, as D118 in
23 the -- as the former Milosevic number, I believe.
24 Q. Did you receive information that a gentleman by the name of
25 Brigadier Prevljak discussed the firing of weapons between 15th of
1 June and the 3rd of July, 1995?
2 A. I haven't seen this document or information.
3 Q. You have not seen this document?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Are you able to confirm the information that is contained in this
6 document is information that would comport with observations that UNMOs
7 made, not your specific UNMO, but UNMOs made, who were in Sarajevo
8 the period of 15 June to July 3, 1995
9 A. I have no detailed recollection of having heard or seen this
10 information. I really don't know.
11 Q. Going to the second -- going to the second page.
12 Does -- do you recognise the information is information that
13 comes from the -- what we would call the BiH army?
14 A. I don't recognise the document, so I'm not able to say anything
15 about this document.
16 Q. Were you aware of the fact during the time that you were in
18 A. I cannot recall that name.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: One second, Mr. Guy-Smith.
20 There is a persistent noise in the --
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm hearing the same.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- over here, so I'm not sure whether people who
23 are typing or doing something, I would ask that we stop, please, except
24 for the stenographer, of course.
25 MR. GUY-SMITH: Well, I'm hearing a low-level hum. I don't know
1 if you're referring to that.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, I'm continuously hearing some -- I don't
3 know whether it's a low-level hum, but there's a lot of hum which
4 suggests somebody's doing something. Thank you so much.
5 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure.
6 Q. You can take this -- well, if you have no information about it,
7 then we can go no further with regard to this document at this time.
8 In your briefings, did you receive information about who were the
9 commanders and active members of the BiH army in Sarajevo?
10 A. Yes. I -- I am convinced that we got that information and, in
11 fact, I met several battalion commanders of the BiH inside my area of
12 operations. But I'm not able to recall any name anymore.
13 Q. Is the information that you were just -- you were just looking
14 at, the kind of information that would be important to you in terms of
15 making an analysis and an assessment of what was occurring during the
16 period of 15 June to 3 July 1995
17 A. Well, not specifically to me. As I told before, we were not
18 there to analyse the situation. The analysis of anything that happened
19 in and around Sarajevo
20 for UNPROFOR itself. Any information that was given by the UNMOs was
21 analysed in the HQ -- the respective HQs that I described.
22 The thing that I was doing, my team was doing, was observing and
23 stating the facts that we saw, and all these things that you showed me
24 did not occur in the area that I was responsible for. So with the
25 minimum -- with the limited resources that we have, and with limited
1 resources, I mean personnel and materiel, we tried to see, to observe all
2 the aspects, the incidents that were occurring in our area, and our main
3 priority was concentrating on reporting on sniper and shelling incidents,
4 and --
5 Q. I'm sorry to interrupt you and perhaps I was mistaken, but I
6 thought that UNMOs independently collected and analysed information and
7 reported directly to New York
8 was in fact the collection as well as analysis of information.
9 Am I incorrect in that regard?
10 A. Well, the UNMO organisation itself might do some analysis but
11 teams on the ground, as my team did, we were the lowest part of the UNMO
12 organisation, we did not make an analysis of the situation --
13 Q. I appreciate that. As a collector of information, you would
14 understand, of course, the importance of collecting information so that
15 people who were superior to you could analyse that information to make
16 informed decisions how best to proceed. Correct?
17 A. That's absolutely correct but then you need to -- you only can
18 inform the superiors about those things that you actually saw, that you
19 actually observed.
20 Q. I appreciate that. My question to you was: Whether or not the
21 kind of information that is contained in that document, which is an
22 assertion of multiple firings by the ABiH within Sarajevo from the
23 discrete period of time of the -- of June through July, would be
24 information that was important.
25 A. Of course, that's information that's important --
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we have P647 back up on the screen.
3 You know what? Considering the time, why don't we start with
4 P647 because that's going to come up on the screen, and by the time I ask
5 the first question I think it will be time for the break.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: We will take a break and come back at half past
8 Court adjourned.
9 --- Recess taken at 12.00 p.m.
10 --- On resuming at 12.31 p.m.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Guy-Smith.
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Could we please have P647 up on the screen.
14 Q. And while that's coming up, I'm going to ask you a question which
15 is: In your capacity working as an UNMO, were you made aware of the
16 demilitarised zone and the total exclusion zone that existed in Sarajevo
17 A. I'm not aware of such a zone, no.
18 Q. Okay. And I mentioned two different kinds. One was a
19 demilitarised zone and the other was a total exclusion zone. I take it
20 that you're not aware of either of those zones?
21 A. I'm not aware of either.
22 Q. Very good. With regard to the map that is up on the screen,
23 looking at that map, can you identify the area where Sharpstone is?
24 A. I can.
25 Q. If you could mark that with an X?
1 A. I would appreciate if I would have a--
2 Q. A little bit bigger?
3 A. A bit bigger outcut of this --
4 Q. Okay. Before we start making anything bigger, is there any
5 particular part of the map that you would like bigger, if would you
6 divide it into quarters?
7 A. Well, I would like to have that part that I marked earlier on as
8 the areas of operations of the team because that is the area that I'm
9 rather familiar with.
10 Q. Okay. Very well. If we could then have --
11 MR. GUY-SMITH: I'm going need some help from Madam Registrar, if
12 I could. It's -- I was going say D next in order, but that's going to be
13 no help to you. D79? D79 up on the screen, please. Thank you very
14 much. Great.
15 Q. Now, would you like to -- I think we can have this area expanded.
16 Would you like to have the area where you have --
17 A. Yeah, I appreciate to have that area on the screen.
18 Q. Okay. Sure. You want it a little bit bigger?
19 A. Well, I think then the view will be blurred even more than it is
20 now, so it is very unclear to me.
21 Q. Looking at that view, can you identify where Sharpstone is?
22 A. I give you a very rough drawing, because the grids of Sharpstone
23 are mentioned in various reports, but it is north -- here is the word
24 Sedrenik mentioned which is the area where my team base was located.
25 Sharpstone is about in this area.
1 Q. Okay. And could you mark that with an S.
2 A. [Marks]
3 Q. Thank you very much. And with regard to the area where
4 Sharpstone has been indicated, and I understand that it is rough, was the
5 Sharpstone area an area where there was a confrontation line?
6 A. Yes. In -- in the vicinity of Sharpstone there was a
7 confrontation line.
8 Q. Okay. Using the same marker, I think we can go into the colour
9 of blue, could you give us a rough idea of where the confrontation line
10 was with relation to the Sharpstone area that you have marked on the map.
11 A. Given the fact that the marking of Sharpstone here is very -- a
12 rough identification of Sharpstone, it's not precise in the way I would
13 like to see it as a military, but I'm quite sure that somewhere here was
14 running part of the confrontation line, and the Serb army occupied
15 this -- the front part of Sharpstone. How the confrontation line run
16 further, I don't know. And how it run here in the forests, I'm also not
18 Q. When you say here in the forest, could you mark with an F where
19 there would be forests?
20 A. I'm sorry. On the right-hand side seen from our team base, so in
21 the east part of Sharpstone, in this area there were forests visible from
22 my team base, which is an F.
23 Q. Thank you very much. And with regard to the area in between the
24 edge of the box which is your area of responsibility going up towards
25 Sharpstone, in that hiatus, is that an area that was occupied by the BiH
2 A. I wouldn't use the word occupied because I never have seen any
3 BiH troops, with the exception of the fact that some -- during the night
4 we had an exchange of troops that came from the confrontation line and
5 passed our house and -- but there were no visible signs of areas that
6 were occupied by troops.
7 Q. Very well. Would it be fair to say that between where the hiatus
8 -- what I'm calling a hiatus is, is an area that was under the control of
9 the BiH?
10 A. The area between Sedrenik and Sharpstone you might use the word
11 control of the BiH, yes.
12 Q. Could you please designate that area by inserting the letters
14 A. [Marks]
15 MR. GUY-SMITH: Could we have that admitted as the Defence next
16 in order, please.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is so marked. May it please be given an
18 exhibit number.
19 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit D80, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
21 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you. I'm done with that exhibit, please.
22 Q. You were asked some questions concerning P67, which is a report
23 of the G2, and you explained to us what G2 was. And you were asked the
24 following question on page 32:
25 "You indicated that final conclusions were made than was actually
1 made in an UNPROFOR G2 report as P67 in this case. Is that correct?"
2 And your answer is: "That's one report where a conclusions were
3 made, yes."
4 My understanding is that you were unfamiliar with that report;
6 A. At the time that -- when I was UNMO I was unfamiliar with that
7 report. But that report has been shown to me in the preparation of the
8 Milosevic case.
9 Q. Did you have a proofing session with the Prosecution concerning
10 testimony before you came to testify here?
11 A. You mean --
12 Q. With regard to your testimony here, on the 20th of April?
13 A. I had a session with the Prosecution, yes.
14 Q. Did you indicate to the Prosecution that you had no opinion of
15 report P67 as you were not familiar with it, referring to paragraph 17 of
16 the proofing notes that I received. Did you make that statement to the
18 A. If I made that statement then I probably have made that
19 statement, I don't know.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Carter.
21 MS. CARTER: In fairness to the witness, if we also look at
22 paragraph 23 he does make comments in relation to P67.
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: You can deal with that in redirect if you wish
24 I'm going to ask him a specific question regarding the information that
25 he received from the Prosecution.
1 MS. CARTER: Then I would ask that the witness at least be
2 allowed to look at the document that he is being basically impeached
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: Sure. If I can, I will give the witness a -- my
5 copy. If I could just --
6 Q. If you could just take a quick look at --
7 Oh, here we go. Great.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm a bit lost. What is the witness being
9 impeached upon? The document on the screen or --
10 MR. GUY-SMITH: No. He's being --
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- on the proofing note?
12 MR. GUY-SMITH: The proofing note.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we all see the proofing note, then?
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: I don't have the proofing note up on the screen
15 because I received it at the last minute and was not able to upload it.
16 Q. I will read to you what it says. Paragraph 17 reads:
17 "Colonel Konings has no opinion of the report P67 as he is not
18 familiar with it."
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Carter.
20 MS. CARTER: Your Honour, since we are -- in fairness to the
21 witness I would also ask, since we're reading it into the record,
22 page 20 --
23 MR. GUY-SMITH: I would appreciate if I would be allowed --
24 MS. CARTER: -- paragraph 23, so as not to leave an incorrect
25 description before the Court.
1 MR. GUY-SMITH: I would appreciate if I would be allowed to ask
2 my questions in a fashion that will fully examine the entire issue.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed, Mr. Guy-Smith.
4 MR. GUY-SMITH: Thank you.
5 Q. Did you make that statement to the Prosecutor, sir?
6 A. I made this statement yesterday, yes.
7 Q. Looking at paragraph 23, it says:
8 "The G2 report, P67, was drawn up with full intelligence. The G2
9 gathered all evidence and composed a report which would be given to the
10 commander which in this case was Rupert Smith, commander of UNPROFOR."
11 Did you make that statement to the Prosecutor?
12 A. I made that statement.
13 Q. When you used the language "full intelligence," were you
14 referring to what was done by UNPROFOR alone, or what was done by
15 UNPROFOR and other organisations?
16 A. I made that statement as to explain also to the Prosecution that
17 a G2 uses all intelligence that he can receive or can use in order to
18 build such a report, and this report, as far as I could judge about that,
19 is that it used also the UNMO information. I'm not quite aware that
20 other information from other organisations was used but it is quite clear
21 that the G2 UNPROFOR report written for General Smith that the UNMO
22 information was used.
23 Q. With regard to your statement that you have no opinion of the
24 report because you were not familiar with it, I take it that the
25 statement that you just made to us here is something that you determined
1 after you spoke with Ms. Carter concerning P67; is that correct? Since
2 you were not familiar with the report prior to that time?
3 A. As I stated before, some moments ago, is that I have seen this
4 report before and so I made a mistake yesterday in the Prosecution in
5 stating that I have not seen this report before because the report was
6 shown to me in the Milosevic case.
7 Q. I see.
8 A. So I'm sorry I made a mistake.
9 Q. Well, mistakes are made.
10 With regard to the conclusions that are contained in the
11 G2 report, are you in agreement or disagreement with those conclusions?
12 A. Could I see the document on the screen?
13 Q. Sure.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: P67.
15 THE WITNESS: I don't see any conclusions from the report. I
16 only see the first page, the message.
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: Move to the next page.
18 THE WITNESS: This page states facts, so I just can agree -- I
19 only can agree with the facts that are stated there.
20 MR. GUY-SMITH: Next page.
21 Q. Looking at the summary, which are the conclusions.
22 A. I can agree with that summary.
23 Q. Okay. And with regard --
24 A. With the exception -- with the exception of the fact that it
25 states here that all impacts were from the same weapon or part of the
1 same salvo. In my investigation I came to a different conclusion.
2 Q. As a matter of fact, the conclusion that you came to is that
3 there were different points of origin, correct?
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. So to the extent that this report indicates that the point of
6 origin of all shells were from the same point, you disagree. True?
7 A. Looking to the facts that I saw on the -- on the spot, I disagree
8 with that, yes.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 During the time that you were in Sarajevo and you were
11 investigating shelling incidents, to your knowledge, were any members or
12 authorities from Belgrade
13 A. I have no knowledge about that.
14 Q. To your knowledge, were any members of the Bosnian Serb army
15 invited to come investigate the shellings?
16 A. I have no information about that either.
17 Q. To your knowledge, were any police personnel from Belgrade,
18 experts in the area of shelling, invited to come investigate?
19 A. I have no information about that.
20 Q. And with regard to the Bosnian Serb civil authorities in the
21 Republika Srpska, are you aware of any individuals, such as police
22 personnel, being invited to come and investigate the shellings that you
23 were involved in?
24 A. I have no information about that at all. I haven't seen any
25 personnel in my vicinity.
1 Q. Okay. If could you to me a favour, please --
2 MR. GUY-SMITH: If we could have P2292 up on the screen.
3 Q. Now, as I understand it, this document which is coming up on the
4 screen is the UNMO patrol report that was created on the 28th; correct?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. And that would have been at 1900 hours. True?
7 A. The report is written at 1900 hours.
8 Q. And this is a report that you personally penned; correct?
9 A. The biggest part of the report is written by myself, with the
10 exception of the cover remarks and the first sentence of the general part
11 which was written by Flight Lieutenant Higgs.
12 Q. The report before it was filed was reviewed by you and signed by
13 you; correct?
14 A. I have reviewed the whole report, and I signed it.
15 Q. And with regard to -- I believe it's the very last section of the
16 report on the second page --
17 MR. GUY-SMITH: If we could go to the second page.
18 Q. There's a section which I -- says PTLLDR's remarks. Does that
19 stand for patrol leader's remarks?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And under patrol leader's remarks there are three separate items
22 ; correct?
23 A. That is correct.
24 Q. The -- these are your remarks; correct?
25 A. They are written by myself.
1 Q. And these are remarks that were written on 28th at the time that
2 you compiled this report, right?
3 A. They were written shortly before the time that is in the top of
4 the report, yes, somewhere between 1800 and 1900 hours that evening.
5 Q. And could you please read for us, because I'm having difficulty
6 reading it, point number 3?
7 A. Can it be made -- okay.
8 Q. Sure.
9 A. That remark reads: "The investigation team tried very hard to
10 prove that the attack came from the Serb side. Due to the normal use of
11 heavy mortars that is likely but there is no hard proof on that fact."
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. GUY-SMITH: I have no further questions.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Carter.
15 MS. CARTER: Thank you.
16 Re-examination by Ms. Carter:
17 Q. As a follow-up to that remark, did you learn anything further or
18 did your opinion change in regards to who was responsible for that kill
20 A. Yes, there were more facts coming in later that evening and the
21 day afterwards, which gave extra evidence to underline the remark that
22 due to the normal use of heavy mortars that is likely. Especially the
23 evidence that came from OP-1, from the both observers that were working
24 there, which I was able to speak on the 28th on the radio, but due to the
25 limitations that we had with radios, I preferred to speak to them in a
1 private session on the day after. That made the whole picture complete,
2 when they stated that there were no outgoing rounds from their vicinity,
3 which brought me to the conclusion that the round came from the Serb
5 So, after the 29th, my personal opinion, which was actually of no
6 interest on that moment, because I have to state the facts, and the facts
7 were there was round fallen in the Markale. We had a found a bearing, we
8 had found evidence of shrapnels and the tail, and we had the fact that
9 there were outgoing rounds from the vicinity of OP-1. Well, then, that
10 were the facts and that were the facts that we stated. So the conclusion
11 that the round came from the Serb side was made by UNPROFOR, by
12 General Rupert Smith, not by the UNMOs, not by me at least. But my
13 personal opinion on the 29th was that the round came from the Serb side.
14 Q. Thank you, sir.
15 MS. CARTER: I have no further questions.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Madam Carter.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 Questioned by the Court:
19 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Yes, Witness, I have a question
20 for you.
21 I'd like to know precisely where the mortar came from? Did it
22 come from the south or the north of Sarajevo, in your view?
23 A. As we designated the bearing to be 100 -- as we designated the
24 bearing, the direction to be 170 degrees, which means that practically
25 due south from the city. It came from the southern direction from the
2 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] So am I to understand that it came
3 from the area where OP-1 was, from the same direction, that is?
4 A. That is correct.
5 JUDGE PICARD: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just one point I would like to raise with you,
9 You told us that you used to have meetings of the UNMO leaders
10 from both the Serb side and the BiH side.
11 A. Then I did -- did -- then I did not express myself maybe very
12 clear. We had team leader meetings with the team leaders on a regular
13 basis from only -- that were working on the Bosnian BiH side. Because
14 the team leaders that were working on the Serb side were in, I think,
15 90 per cent of the cases that we had a meeting were not allowed to cross
16 the confrontation line.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: I thought that is what you said.
18 A. Yes, correct.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: And in fact you even said that in such situations
20 there would telephonic contact with them.
21 A. Then our Senior Military Observer, or one of his staff officers,
22 they would have telephone contact with them. I never had reason to have
23 a telephone contact with team leaders at the other side.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Now, the idea had been to have these meetings
25 because it couldn't happen because they were not allowed to cross.
1 A. Of course. Because having a combined team leader meetings with
2 all the teams of the sector of Sarajevo
3 thing to have.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Right. Now at least in 10 percent of the time you
5 did have these meetings.
6 A. I'm not quite sure about the figure but once or twice I met one
7 of the team leaders that were able to cross the confrontation line.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let me make myself clear: I'm not asking about
9 you personally meeting the team leaders. I'm talking about a meeting of
10 the team leaders from the Serb side and from the Serbs -- Bosnian side,
11 where you exchanged notes. When I say "you," I mean UNMOs, UNMO
12 leadership. Did that happen?
13 A. I can only judge about the time that I was there. As far as I
14 can recall, it only happened once, maybe twice, that one or two team
15 leaders from the Serb side were available.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Were you personally privy, to -- let me not
17 use the word "privy."
18 Did you have access to the minutes of their meetings of the
19 leaders, as and when they did happen?
20 A. I even do not recall whether there were specific written minutes
21 of those meetings. I really don't remember that.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did you have any access to any information that
23 was exchanged between them?
24 A. Of course, most of the time I was present myself, and when I was
25 not present my deputy team leader was present and then we could share
1 that information orally.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Now, you were present yourself in the
4 A. Yes.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Now let's confine ourselves to those
6 meetings were you were present and some leaders from the Republika Srpska
7 were present.
8 In those meetings, do you have any recollection on whether any
9 exchange of information was given to you by the leaders from the
10 Republika Srpska concerning incidents of this nature, like the Markale
11 incidents, that may have taken place on their side?
12 A. I have no -- no.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Never had --
14 A. Not about -- there were no reports about incidents in the same --
15 parallel to what happened on Markale.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: But incidents of any --
17 A. Of course there were --
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: -- shelling or sniping by the -- any attack?
19 A. They were, of course, reports about fire exchanges, because that
20 happened. There were fire exchanges around the confrontation line
21 between Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian army troops.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did they exchange information with you about
23 incidents which they investigated?
24 A. They did investigations, yes.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: All right.
1 A. But they were very restricted, that was what I recall. They had
2 not the opportunities that we had on the Bosnian army side to go there
3 together with police forces. They most times were restricted to their
4 houses and had hardly any freedom of movement. That's very something --
5 something that is very clear to me from that time-frame.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: What -- how did they then conduct the
7 investigations if they were restricted to their houses?
8 A. It means that they only on a very occasions were allowed to get
9 out of their house to do an investigation. So most of the incidents that
10 occurred were not investigated by UNMOs.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: All right. Let's confine ourselves to the few
12 incidents that they did investigate.
13 Did you -- did they report to you -- when I say "report,"
14 exchange information on any such investigations which they did indeed
16 A. Well, they filed, of course, towards the Senior Military Observer
17 their patrol reports and their incidents reports, as have you seen in the
18 way that I did. And there were no specific detailed discussions during
19 the team leader meetings on highlighting one of those reports.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: In your exchange of information, are you aware
21 whether when they did go out for investigations they were accompanied by
22 any representatives of the Republika Srpska, either the army or
23 authorities of the Republika Srpska?
24 A. I think they were controlled -- they were -- they were in -- they
25 were only allowed to do that in very close cooperation with Serb
1 authorities, either police or army. I don't know that.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: In the exchange of information with you did they
3 mention whether BiH authorities had been invited?
4 A. No. I don't think they mentioned that. I'm not quite sure
5 but ...
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you have any knowledge whether indeed BiH
7 authorities were invited?
8 A. No, I have no knowledge about that, sir.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. I have no further questions.
10 Madam Carter, any questions arising from the questions by the
12 MS. CARTER: No, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Guy-Smith.
14 MR. GUY-SMITH: None.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much. That brings us to the end of
16 your testimony. Thank you so much for taking time off from your busy
17 schedule to come and testify. You are now excused. You may stand down.
18 Travel well back home.
19 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you so much.
21 [The witness withdrew]
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Saxon.
23 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour. Three points. First of all,
24 may Ms. Carter please be excused so that she may bid farewell to the
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Carter, do you want to bid farewell to the
3 MS. CARTER: Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Your Honour.
5 MR. SAXON: Secondly, Your Honour, I'm mindful of the time and
6 that normally we would continue for another 40 minutes today. It is my
7 understanding that the next witness, Mr. Starcevic, at this time is in
8 the middle of a proofing session with Mr. Harmon, and the Prosecution
9 would seek leave to call Mr. Starcevic beginning at 9.00 tomorrow morning
10 with the leave of the Chamber.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Actually, the Prosecution is asking for an
12 adjournment now.
13 MR. SAXON: Effectively right, yes, Your Honour. Absolutely
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: The matter stands adjourned to tomorrow --
16 MR. SAXON: Well, except that I also have a procedural matter,
17 Your Honour, that I wanted to raise with you. I'm very sorry.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you. You may proceed.
19 MR. SAXON: Your Honour, the Prosecution has received a courtesy
20 copy of a decision that I believe will be filed forthwith by the Chamber
21 granting a recent Prosecution motion to lead evidence via videolink
22 technology for three witnesses from Sarajevo. Your Honour, the decision
23 of the Trial Chamber consistent with the motion sets the date for that
24 videolink testimony as the 5th of May. And the Prosecution would
25 respectfully ask that the videolink testimony actually be moved up to
1 this coming Monday, the 27th of April, because we believe that that day
2 will actually be vacant at this time, and so we would respectfully
3 request a modification of your videolink decision, bringing the date
4 forward to Monday, the 27th.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: It is so modified.
6 MR. SAXON: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: You're welcome. That's all?
8 MR. SAXON: Yes.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: That brings us to the end of the session for the
10 day. Court stands adjourned to tomorrow at 9.00 in the morning,
11 Courtroom I. Just a second, Judge. Indeed, Courtroom I.
12 Court adjourned.
13 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.07 p.m.
14 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 22nd day of
15 April, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.