1 Wednesday, 28 March 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.19 p.m.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: So, good afternoon, everybody. Madam Registrar, to
6 you too. Could you kindly call the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case number
8 IT-05-88-T, the Prosecutor versus Vujadin Popovic et al.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, ma'am. All the accused are here. From
10 the Defence teams I only notice the absence of Mr. Sarapa, if I am not
11 mistaken. And Mr. Bourgon, yes. And Mr. Bourgon.
12 From the Prosecution we have Mr. McCloskey, Mr. Thayer and
13 Mr. Elderkin and Mr. Nicholls. Sorry. The column is always in the way.
14 The end of yesterday's sitting, while we were dealing with
15 exhibits to be introduced with the testimony of PW-161, we had left
16 pending the exhibits that the Beara Defence team wished to introduce, and
17 we agreed that we will come to that first thing today.
18 Mr. Ostojic.
19 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. President, and good afternoon,
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Good afternoon.
22 MR. OSTOJIC: Your Honour, with respect to Witness PW-161, we
23 again would like to offer into evidence a document, which is a proofing
24 note of April 21st, 2004, marked as 1D168, which was shown to the
25 witness. It's a one-page document.
1 We also, Your Honour, with respect to the interview and the
2 testimony, we think we covered it actually modestly sufficiently enough
3 citing the page numbers and there were some objections. We clarified it
4 with the witness. We don't think it's necessary, and to maintain
5 consistency in our position that interviews should not just in one hand or
6 another be brought in immediately, we don't think it's necessary, but if
7 the Court would like this interview of the 13th of October, 2000, we don't
8 have a problem, but we don't see the need, although we did use it
10 Also we would also like to tender into evidence the March 20th,
11 2007 proofing note that the OTP offered us, which is 2D96; as well as the
12 proofing-note letter from the OTP dated the 21st of March 2007; 2D86, and
13 just if I can quickly explain the difference in the numbering. We didn't
14 put the March one in the system until after 10 other documents were placed
15 in the system, so we got that automatic date.
16 Then the Prosecutor has requested for completeness to include the
17 2007 March 22nd proofing note, which corrects the March 21st one, which
18 revises the March 20th one, although no one showed it to the witness, we
19 think for completeness, the Court should take a look at it.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: And this is -- does it have a --
21 MR. OSTOJIC: 2D87. And then we had also yesterday requested
22 2DIC79, which again was the issue with respect to the witness marking, I
23 think he said volunteers; and then 2DIC80, which is where he marked the
24 headquarters. And that would be our submission.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
1 Mr. McCloskey.
2 MR. McCLOSKEY: No objection. Mr. Ostojic and I had a chance to
3 talk about that and just the last -- the March 22nd proofing note makes
4 reference to the witness's little chronology that he wrote himself out, so
5 it -- it should be attached to it for completeness, and that he -- you may
6 recall he acknowledged writing a little chronology out for himself.
7 Otherwise, I think we're all set.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. One moment. I need to discuss something
9 with my colleagues.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's clarify this, Mr. Ostojic, and I'm sorry to
12 ask you to stand up again. Yesterday for some time there was an
13 indication that you wished to tender the parts from the witness's
14 testimony in a previous case. You're dropping that?
15 MR. OSTOJIC: I think I covered it, with all due respect, quite
16 extensively. I don't know, if the Court wishes to have that, we can break
17 it down and give the Court the exact pages, but I think I cited it
18 sufficiently and I think he answered it and I thought we showed it on a
19 number of occasions, so I don't believe that it is necessary for our
20 transcript. So I would withdraw that specific request.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: I also wish to make it clear that that means that we
22 will not have before us the transcript of his testimony in the other case.
23 And although in some instances you read verbatim what shows in the
24 transcript or various parts of it, in other parts you didn't, and you just
25 referred to -- but you're leaving at that, in other words?
1 MR. OSTOJIC: I think so. If the Prosecutor felt that it was out
2 of context, I'm confident he would have on re-direct have raised those
3 issues, which he did not.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Then we don't have a problem. As regards to the
5 Ruez statement, Ruez interview.
6 MR. OSTOJIC: Our policy is that we don't believe the interview
7 should go in, generally speaking, Your Honour. We made an exception based
8 on the Court's ruling. On the prior witness we made an adoption so the
9 Court can see that the contact the witness prior to this one had with our
10 client did not get mentioned at all. We thought it was significant. And
11 this one, we thought we covered it quite extensively. If the Court wishes
12 to have it, we don't have an objection to it. It's only 37 or so pages.
13 Me and the OTP disagree a little bit on this.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, our position on the Ruez interview is the
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. We have had discussions on this in
18 anticipation of what you were going to offer for admission as Defence
19 exhibits. And as I said in relation to the Blagojevic testimony, no
21 In regard to the interview, we have considered the totality of the
22 witness's testimony, particularly when he tries to convince the Chamber
23 that the interview by and with Mr. Ruez was totally confusing to him, and
24 we need to know -- to have that statement in its totality to be able to
25 assess whether -- how much weight we give to the witness and his statement
1 that he was not following and he couldn't have possibly followed what Mr.
2 Ruez was asking him during the interview.
3 So what we suggest is that you tender this document in its
4 entirety with the understanding that it will not be used as proof of its
5 contents. In other words, the same line that we have followed in some
6 instances before. Otherwise it will be very difficult for us to assess.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ostojic.
9 MR. OSTOJIC: Thank you, Mr. President. That would be fine and
10 we'll tender it as 1D167 as previously identified. I just want to make my
11 position clear for the record. We don't believe the document should be
12 introduced into evidence because it was extensively used. We think as we
13 did with the prior witness, if there's impeachment, or for the purpose
14 that the Court requested now, that documents or interviews should be
15 allowed in, so I just want to make sure I draw a distinction between that,
16 but we will tender it as such.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Can I have the number, the 65 ter, or exhibit
21 MR. OSTOJIC: We marked it as 1D167, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. So all these are being admitted. I
23 think with the exception of the last two, which are the photos, that the
24 witness marked, all the others need to be under seal. Do you agree?
25 MR. OSTOJIC: We don't have an objection to that, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: I think they have to be under seal. Because there
2 is his name indicated in -- I think in all of these documents. So they
3 are all so admitted.
4 As I stated in regards to the Ruez interview, it will not be used
5 by the Trial Chamber as proof of its contents, as it relates to facts
6 testified upon by the witness.
7 All right.
8 MR. OSTOJIC: Yes. There's one other thing, if I may,
9 Mr. President. Yesterday evening we mentioned -- or I mentioned that
10 there was a possibility of a stipulation between the Office of the
11 Prosecutor and ourselves in connection with this witness on a specific
12 topic. We're still working on it. We're very close to resolving it. It
13 involves some of the testimony the witness gave where he references
14 mistakes and we just wanted to clarify, that's why we don't object to the
15 March 22nd, 2007, proofing note that the OTP, so that there is no
16 confusion, the stipulation in essence, I believe, will say that it was not
17 a mistake made by the Prosecution or its staff as to any changes he may
18 have made, but it was the witness himself who changed, or whatever term
19 we'd like to use, made the mistake and then converted it back to what he
20 thought he remembered. So we're going to prepare that stipulation and
21 present that to you, because I think he was vague in his testimony and on
22 that one point we were stopped from asking further questions. We're not
23 saying the Prosecution made the mistake and the Prosecution is and clear
24 that he unequivocally changed it from one day to the another, and that's
25 why we're offering those proofing notes, and I think we're going to get
1 consistent with that. Thank you.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Ostojic.
3 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, we agree with that and I think this is the
4 simplest and most [sic] time consuming way of getting that point to the
5 Trial Chamber.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: Least time consuming, sorry, least time
8 consuming. Otherwise, the witness would still be here.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you both.
10 Are there any other Defence teams that wish to tender?
11 Yes, the Pandurevic team wishes to tender one document under
13 MR. HAYNES: Yes, that's correct. It's 1D169, which is the
14 testimony from the previous case. It's only at page 32, lines 8 -- line
15 16 to 22, which Mr. Sarapa put to the witness yesterday. I wouldn't
16 normally tender into evidence transcript, but it didn't read into the
17 transcript effectively yesterday, and so in these circumstances I do ask
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Can I ask you to clarify this for us,
20 please. The indication that we have here is that it is -- carries 65 ter
21 number 1D169.
22 MR. HAYNES: Yes.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: In other words, that this is a document of the
24 Popovic Defence team. Is 1D169 the entire testimony of the witness in
25 that other case, or not?
1 MR. HAYNES: Yes, it is.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: It is. So I think we need to avoid confusion,
3 because I don't want to have the entire transcript of the witness's
4 testimony in that trial entered into the evidence, and I understand it
5 will create problems for the Registry to -- so what I will ask you to do,
6 and this will apply across the board to all parties in future, if you are
7 only intending to introduce in the record a particular excerpt, a
8 particular page or particular excerpts from a transcript of testimony in a
9 previous case without wanting to introduce the entire transcript, then
10 please try and copy and paste that part or those parts together in one
11 document that you would then ask to be entered into the electronic --
12 e-court system that we have, and it will be given a name -- a number, and
13 it will be that excerpts or those excerpts only that will be introduced.
14 MR. HAYNES: In that case, we will call it 7D305.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. 7D305.
16 MR. HAYNES: And it will be in e-court this afternoon.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you so much for your cooperation.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE AGIUS: And yesterday we introduced, upon the request of the
20 Popovic Defence team, 1D169, which is basically the transcript that I have
21 been referring to. If you could kindly copy page -- the -- I don't want
22 to mention the page, because it would reveal who the witness was. So the
23 pages --
24 MR. ZIVANOVIC: (redacted)
25 MR. HAYNES: The number I was using was the e-court number, not
1 the page of the transcript.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: That's because you are not wearing the headphones,
3 Mr. Popovic [sic].
4 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Well --
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Zivanovic, yes.
6 MR. HAYNES: Mr. President, the mistake is entirely mine. I
7 didn't appreciate that the whole of 1D169 had been admitted into
8 evidence. I'm not going to put a separate piece of -- a separate passage
9 of that transcript in and duplicate it now.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: No. We are -- no, no, no. I think you're
11 misunderstanding me. What we are telling Mr. Zivanovic is what we told
13 MR. HAYNES: Thank you. Okay.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: If he -- if someone might have been -- might have
15 been carried away with the idea that the entire evidence, transcript of
16 evidence of the witness in that other case has been introduced --
17 MR. HAYNES: Yes.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: -- that's wrong.
19 MR. HAYNES: Right.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: -- so what we are asking Mr. Zivanovic to do is
21 precisely what we asked you to do.
22 MR. HAYNES: Right.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: In other words, you will copy on a separate sheet of
24 paper, or sheets of paper, the excerpt that you wanted to introduce in
25 evidence yesterday from that evidence, from that testimony, and it will be
1 marked -- it will be given another number.
2 Mr. Zivanovic.
3 MR. HAYNES: I'm sorry. We were at cross purposes. I will then
4 introduce 7D305, which will be that pasted passage and there will need to
5 be a redaction of line 11.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Do you follow me, Mr. Zivanovic? It's a
7 simple operation, basically. You copy that part and introduce that part
8 on a separate -- as a separate document and not as an integral part of the
9 witness's testimony in that other case, yeah. It's simple, I think.
10 MR. HAYNES: Yeah.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Problem is that you didn't have the headphones on,
12 and I think Ms. Condon was following exactly what we've been saying.
13 Thanks. And we are redacting the reference to the page number from --
15 I think that clarifies. Now, we will soon have in the courtroom
16 Witness number 48. We agreed yesterday, or we intimated yesterday that we
17 will be interviewing this witness and that before we go through that
18 exercise, or begin that exercise, we would ask you for an input of the
19 questions that you would have us put to the witness to decide whether to
20 grant him the protective measures sought or not. So what I suggest is
21 that we go into private session so that we hear what questions you would
22 like us to put to the witness and then we can bring the witness in.
23 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, for my part, I could do it in open
24 session and would rather it was done in open session. I can't speak for
25 others, of course. They may have rather more specific questions than the
1 ones that am going to invite the Chamber to pose.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you for that clarification.
3 Is there any other Defence team that would be contributing in this
4 context or not? I hear none. I see none.
5 Mr. McCloskey or Mr. Thayer. I see you somewhere -- somewhat
6 bewildered or -- what's the problem?
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: It's just one of those days, I think. But these
8 questions in open session may themselves implicate the person's identity,
9 I think.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. But -- I understand that, but also I give
11 weight to Mr. Josse's good judgement. If it's not the case, in other
12 words, if the questions that he suggests deserve to be heard in -- in
13 closed -- in closed session, then we will redact and we will go into
14 private session.
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: Is the suggestion that the -- excuse me, that
16 the -- Mr. Josse is going to be asking questions specifically to the
18 JUDGE AGIUS: No. I think yesterday we made it clear that it will
19 be more appropriate if the witness is interviewed by the Trial Chamber and
20 not by the parties for the purpose of us deciding whether to grant
21 protective measures or not. So my suggestion at the time was that of
22 course you may questions that you would like us to put to the witness that
23 you would put yourselves if you had that opportunity. I will give you the
24 chance to tell us what questions you would put to the witness, and then
25 we'll decide to -- to put those questions ourselves and we'll put them
1 ourselves. This is what I suggested yesterday.
2 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President. And at this time we're
3 satisfied with the Court putting whatever questions it feels necessary,
4 and if -- we'll let you know if anything in addition is needed.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. So we are relying on your good
6 judgement. We will remain in open session for the time being, Mr. Josse.
7 Go ahead.
8 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, of course what we would invite the
9 Chamber to do, as I'm sure the Chamber will do, is a general and careful
10 scrutiny of the application. Specifically, what concerns as described in
11 the motion amount to, and probe those concerns carefully and sensitively,
12 whether the witnesses have received any actual threats in the past; in
13 addition to that, what threats or actual violence the witnesses are
14 fearful of in the future, and to probe whether those are real or fanciful.
15 We would also invite the Chamber to examine with the witnesses
16 whether there is any possibility, and I know this is rather unusual, that
17 they might only require facial and/or voice -- facial protection and/or
18 voice distortion. The real difficulty, so far as these witnesses is
19 concerned and in particular 49, is the pseudonym. And that in particular
20 is because a lot of 49's evidence would have to be in private session.
21 So we would particularly invite the Chamber to see whether the
22 fears of the witnesses might be allayed by facial protection,
23 notwithstanding that their names would still be known to the public.
24 Finally, Your Honour, we would invite the Chamber to allow counsel
25 obviously on both sides to make submissions as to the evidence prior to
1 the Court making any final determination as to whether or not to grant
2 protective measures. Realistically, we need to be in a position to do
3 that, we submit.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: That's what we had in mind in the first place, so I
5 don't need to address that.
6 Mr. McCloskey.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: Nothing in particular, Your Honour. I think we
8 both want the same thing, I'm...
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you. Members of the public need to
10 note that we will be bringing down the curtains for a short while. We
11 will have a witness come in who is seeking protective measures, and we
12 will need to interview him to decide if -- to grant protective measures or
13 not, and that will be done in private session, in closed session. So it
14 will take us some time before we can continue the proceedings in open
16 [Closed session]
11 Pages 9577-9586 redacted. Closed session
9 [Open session]
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Josse. There have been some similar cases in
11 the past, and, fortunately or unfortunately, I had some of those. In some
12 instances I made a suggestion to the parties, and they agreed to it, that
13 in the absence of proper protective measures, certain safeguards be
14 resorted to to allay, as much as possible, the concerns of the witness.
15 In the past the instances that I am referring to, we resorted to the
16 following measure, and that's again with the consent of both parties;
17 Prosecution and Defence. Namely, that we try to do our utmost, without
18 granting a pseudonym, to conceal the identity of the witness as much as
20 And that mainly involved two measures. One measure is not
21 referring to him or addressing him as Mr. X during the course of
22 examination-in-chief and cross-examination. And the other is to have him
23 or the witness, I won't -- use gender neutral language, to have the
24 witness sworn in private session. In other words, when he is asked for
25 his name, surname, date of birth, place of residence and whatever, that's
1 done in private session and then we will move immediately to open session
2 and we proceed with the rest of the testimony in open session as much as
3 possible. There may be occasions where we may need not to broadcast a
4 particular document because it would immediately reveal his -- the
5 understanding is that his name will appear in the transcript and in other
6 words, it's partly hidden from public consumption, from the public domain,
7 but not completely.
8 We'd like to hear your comments on this.
9 MR. JOSSE: I hope, speaking on behalf of all the Defence counsel,
10 there can't be any possible objection to that. If any of my learned
11 friends think I'm speaking out of turn, no doubt they'll inform Your
12 Honour, but I can't see any difficulty with that, with respect, very
13 sensible suggestion.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you.
15 Do you have any comments to make, Mr. McCloskey?
16 MR. McCLOSKEY: No, Mr. President. I think that sounds like a
17 good idea.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Let me please confer with my colleagues,
19 because we haven't actually decided to put in place in this system, not
20 knowing what your response would be.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I think...
23 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So we will be putting in place the
1 procedure that you've kindly agreed to, and I think we need to explain to
2 the witness two things. First, that he's not being granted the protective
3 measures. Secondly, that with the cooperation of the Defence teams, there
4 is going to be, in substitute, this kind of procedure. We will do that
5 with the curtains drawn down for the time being and in private session.
6 And then immediately after, we will revert to open session and lift the
7 curtains up.
9 My apologies to the members of the public again, but you have to
10 bear with us.
11 [Closed session]
11 Pages 9590-9591 redacted. Closed session
21 [Open session]
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, it's break time. I didn't realise. Judge Kwon
23 has just pointed out, drawn my attention that it is time for a break. So
24 you will have a 25-minute break and so will we, and we will reconvene soon
25 after and start with your testimony. Thank you.
1 --- Recess taken at 3.46 p.m.
2 --- On resuming at 4.13 p.m.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Good afternoon once more. So, Witness, you have
4 already made the solemn declaration that you will be testifying the
5 truth. I don't think it's the need of repeating it, going through it
6 again. Mr. Elderkin from the Office of the Prosecutor will be examining
7 you in chief. He will be referring to a previous statement that you have
8 made to the office, summarising it for us and for you. And then we will
9 continue with some questions from Mr. Elderkin and finally
10 cross-examination from some of the Defence teams. I don't think we will
11 finish today, there is no chance of finishing today, so we'll try and I
12 will encourage everyone to make it possible for us to finish with your
13 testimony tomorrow. Thank you.
14 Mr. Elderkin.
15 MR. ELDERKIN: Thank you, Mr. President. Please may I start by
16 asking to go into private session for just one question.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you. Let's go into private session.
18 [Private session]
25 [Open session]
1 MR. ELDERKIN:
2 Q. Witness, did you make a statement here on Friday of last week?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Was that statement read to you in a language that you understand?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And do you attest that the witness statement accurately reflects
7 what you stated and that your answers would be the same if you were asked
8 the same questions again today?
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. ELDERKIN: Your Honours, I would offer the witness's statement
11 into evidence pursuant to 92 ter as P02486, and if I may read a brief
12 summary of that statement.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Go ahead. Thank you.
14 MR. ELDERKIN: Could I ask just for the first paragraph that I go
15 again into private session.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: For the time being let's say yes and then we'll see.
17 [Private session]
24 [Open session]
25 MR. ELDERKIN: In September 1991 he was mobilised into the reserve
1 police forces, reporting to Zepa. In February 1992 he went back from Zepa
2 to Rogatica. His family moved to Zepa in April 1992, where they lived
3 with his parents. On the 21st of July, 1992, he fled from Rogatica to
4 Zepa with the rest of the local population. In Zepa he joined the
5 Territorial Defence until October 1992. Thereafter he returned to the
7 Between September 1991 and May 1993, he had an automatic rifle.
8 He surrendered the rifle to UNPROFOR. Thereafter he did not wear a
9 uniform or carry a weapon.
10 In 1992 and 1993 the living conditions in the Zepa enclave were
11 desperate. The conditions improved after the arrival of UNPROFOR in May
12 1993 and a convoy with food came every week. In 1995, about a month and a
13 half before the military offensive against the Zepa enclave, the convoys
15 During the 1995 military offensive there was artillery and
16 infantry fire into Zepa. There was heavy shelling all the time,
17 especially from the north near Han Pijesak. The shells hit homes and the
18 health centre; however, the Serbs did not shell the school because the
19 Ukrainian Battalion (UkrBat) was housed there.
20 The Zepa enclave was never fully demilitarised. Some people kept
21 personal weapons, rifles and pistols. Zepa fell on the 24th of July,
22 1995. The transportation of the Zepa population started that night and
23 continued until the 27th of July. The witness remembered VRS General
24 Tolimir and a Serb officer named Pecanac both being present during this
25 time. There was panic among the population; the people of Zepa feared for
1 their lives. None of the Bosnian Muslim population dared to stay after
2 the fall of the enclave.
3 The witness was wounded in 1992 and his wounds became infected in
4 June and July 1995. As a result, he received hospital treatment and could
5 not carry out any police duties in July 1995. UNPROFOR doctors examined
6 him, registered him and issued him with a certificate that he was
7 wounded. For this reason, he was permitted to leave Zepa with the
8 children and the elderly.
9 He left on the last bus in the last convoy at around 11.30 a.m. on
10 Thursday, the 27th of July, with 11 other wounded and sick men. The
11 convoy headed in the direction of Kladanj. General Mladic came on to the
12 bus at an UNPROFOR check-point at Boksanica and spoke briefly to the men.
13 There was a long delay; sometime between 1900 and 2000 hours the commander
14 of the Rogatica Brigade of the VRS, Rajko Kusic, came on to the bus and
15 verbally abused the men. At 23.45 hours the bus set off again, arriving
16 in Tisca in the early morning.
17 At the last check-point of Tisca, a Serbian military policeman who
18 was an officer came on to the bus looking for the wounded men. The
19 witness saw him go to General Tolimir and get a list of the wounded and
20 sick men. A police officer came back and told the men to get on to
21 another bus. The they did so and were taken about 500 metres towards
22 Vlasenica. They waited there for about 15 minutes and were ordered on to
23 another bus that had arrived with the elderly. The witness heard that
24 those elderly men had been robbed of their valuables by a military
25 policeman. The bus went to the Rasadnik farm prison camp in Rogatica,
1 arriving at about midday on the 28th of July.
2 About 15 minutes later, General Tolimir spoke to the prisoners.
3 He told them that a misunderstanding had occurred with the planned
4 exchange of 48 Serb prisoners from Tuzla. He said that they would stay
5 there for two to three days, but that there would not be any problems; no
6 one would beat them and they had to abide by the rules. On the same day
7 the prisoners were registered by the International Red Cross.
8 The witness stayed in the prison camp until January 1996, during
9 which time he and the other prisoners were abused. On the 11th of
10 January, 1996, they were visited by the Red Cross and told that they would
11 be exchanged. On the 15th of January, 1996, they were transferred to the
12 Kula prison near Sarajevo, and on the 19th of January, 1996, they were
13 exchanged at Butmir airport.
14 Having read that summary, may I ask the witness just a few
15 questions, please.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Certainly, Mr. Elderkin.
17 MR. ELDERKIN:
18 Q. Witness, first of all, apart from your immediate family, your
19 parents, wife and children, did you have any other relatives who were in
21 A. I had two other brothers and their families, so there were quite a
22 number of close relatives there.
23 Q. Were any of your relatives, apart from the immediate family
24 involved in the defence of Zepa?
25 A. In a certain sense all the inhabitants participated in the
2 Q. Did any of your relatives have any kind of command responsibility
3 within the defence?
4 A. None of my close relatives did.
5 Q. Could I ask you also the same with respect to your more distant
6 relatives, insofar as they were in Zepa?
7 A. Some of my more distant relatives did participate.
8 MR. ELDERKIN: Mr. President, if I could ask to go into private
9 session for one question, it would speed up perhaps one point I would like
10 to ask.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's see what the question is. Let's go into
12 private session for a while.
13 [Private session]
21 [Open session]
22 MR. ELDERKIN:
23 Q. Could I ask, please, what was the role of this person you
24 mentioned, in the defence?
25 A. He was the commander of a company.
1 Q. Thank you. I would like to ask now what was your personal
2 situation in June and July 1995. Were you working?
3 A. In June and July I wasn't working because my wounds had become
4 infected and I spent most of the time in the clinic, since we didn't have
5 a -- the traditional kind of hospital.
6 Q. And were you involved in any military or defence activities during
7 the military offensive against Zepa?
8 A. Not during that period of time.
9 Q. Could I ask you whether there was a process of demilitarisation
10 when the UNPROFOR troops arrived in 1993 in Zepa?
11 A. Yes, there was.
12 Q. Do you know if the enclave was completely demilitarised by
14 A. It wasn't completely demilitarised since some of the weapons had
15 remained in the hands of the inhabitants.
16 Q. What kind of weapons did the inhabitants keep in the enclave?
17 A. On the whole, they had personal arms, light infantry weapons,
18 hunting rifles, carbines, and perhaps the odd automatic rifle.
19 Q. Do you know the number of people who were armed in the enclave in
21 A. I can't be certain, but out of about a thousand fit for military
22 service, I would say that between 30 and 35 per cent, at the most, were
24 Q. And during the final military offensive against Zepa what happened
25 to the weapons that the UNPROFOR troops had previously seized?
1 A. A day or two prior to the attack UNPROFOR returned the weapons.
2 Q. Could I refer to one thing that you said in your statement: "It
3 is hard to describe the feeling of panic that the people of Zepa felt. No
4 one could stay in Zepa. No one dared to stay."
5 I have one question regarding this. Can you say what it was that
6 those people were afraid of?
7 A. They were afraid that they wouldn't survive if they stayed on
8 there. That's quite natural.
9 Q. Do you know of anybody who did intend to stay in Zepa after it
11 A. I don't think so.
12 Q. Also in your statement you said that you saw General Tolimir in
13 Zepa during the evacuations. Can I ask how you knew who he was?
14 A. It's very difficult to provide you with a precise answer to that
15 question. Perhaps I had seen him on TV or perhaps a member of his escort
16 said that he was General Tolimir and that he was one of those
17 participating in the negotiations with representatives of our government.
18 Q. Thank you very much, Witness.
19 MR. ELDERKIN: Your Honours, I have no further questions.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Mr. Elderkin.
21 Who is going first? Mr. Josse.
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Josse:
23 Q. Witness, you've just told the Chamber that you spent June and July
24 of 1995 in the Zepa Hospital. Did I understand you correctly?
25 A. Yes. I spent a significant amount of time in the hospital.
1 Q. My second question was a clarification of exactly that, or along
2 those lines. Did you at any stage during that period, prior to leaving
3 Zepa, leave the hospital? And if so, where did you go?
4 A. Just before the offensive I left the hospital and I went to my
5 home to stay with my parents, where I had been living throughout that
6 entire period of time.
7 Q. How many nights before you left did you leave the hospital?
8 A. I don't understand your question.
9 Q. Because it wasn't a clear question, I apologise. How many nights
10 before you left the enclave for good did you leave the hospital? In other
11 words, how many nights did you spend at your parents' before you left the
13 A. I think I spent about 15 days there in total.
14 Q. So for most of July you were not in the hospital?
15 A. At the beginning of July, perhaps for the first 10 days I was in
16 the hospital.
17 Q. When the fighting was going on in and around Zepa, you were not in
18 the hospital; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. The first topic I want to ask you about is that very fighting, if
21 I may. There was quite fierce fighting in and around Zepa in the second,
22 third weeks of July of 1995, weren't there?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Bearing in mind the limited number of weapons that you say the
25 Muslim defenders had, how were they able to defend the enclave so stoutly?
1 A. They had to, because it was a matter of survival. They were
2 fighting for their lives. The soldiers were fighting for their lives and
3 for the lives of their families.
4 Q. Yes, Witness, but I thought you told us that very few of the
5 Muslim inhabitants were armed. My question is, without arms how did they
6 defend themselves against the VRS attack?
7 A. Well, during the first few days of the attack there were no
8 infantry attacks. There was shelling and attacks launched from a certain
10 Q. When I asked you a moment ago, "There was quite fierce fighting in
11 and around Zepa," what did you think I meant?
12 A. You probably wanted to say that there was ongoing fighting.
13 Q. And "fighting" means fighting between both sides, doesn't it?
14 A. Yes. But when the infantry attacks followed, it lasted for two or
15 three days and then all the lines fell, and that's how Zepa fell.
16 Q. At this point, I'm not going to go into the detail with you,
17 Witness, but it's right, isn't it, that the Muslim defenders defended the
18 enclave in a strong and stout way?
19 A. Yes, but they couldn't continue to mount resistance. They
20 defended the town to the extent that it was possible for them.
21 Q. Well, I'm not going to ask the question again, but that wasn't my
22 question, and you knew it. You're deliberately not answering my question,
23 aren't you, witness?
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Elderkin.
25 MR. ELDERKIN: I think it's getting argumentative with the
2 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, my submission, it's a question and it's a
3 perfectly proper question. It may be a strong question, but it's a
5 JUDGE AGIUS: I think it's a strong question. Perhaps you may
6 rephrase it.
7 MR. JOSSE: I'll move on. I'm going to return to this subject
8 later, if I may.
9 Q. Are you saying, Witness, that the only arms that the inhabitants
10 of Zepa had prior to UNPROFOR giving arms back were the few that you've
11 already described?
12 A. That's not what I am saying and you will find this in my previous
13 statement. Some of the weapons were brought by helicopters. I don't know
14 how many.
15 Q. And that was in breach of the agreement to demilitarise the
16 enclave, wasn't it?
17 A. Yes, but I had nothing to do with all that.
18 Q. Well, I dare say, but you were in the police force. Why didn't
19 you do something to stop these weapons being delivered in breach of the
21 A. The army and the civilian police had nothing in common at that
22 point in time.
23 Q. Well, I'm going develop this in the next few moments, but perhaps
24 before I do that, prior to your entering hospital, were you still active
25 in the police force?
1 A. No, I was never an active policeman. I was always merely a
2 reserve policeman.
3 Q. Were you involved in any -- I'll rephrase the question.
4 When was the last time you were involved in any policing activity
5 in Zepa prior to your departure?
6 A. I believe that this was in early June, 1995.
7 Q. And what did you do for the police in early June of 1995?
8 A. I performed the regular duties as an operative in the
9 crime-detection police department.
10 Q. If I may help to this extent: Paragraph 3 of your witness
11 statement, and for this purpose I don't think you need to be shown it. It
12 says, "In October 1994 I transferred to the criminal investigation
13 department where I remained until the fall of Zepa." Is that sentence
15 A. No, not fully. It shouldn't say I transferred, but I was
16 transferred by others.
17 Q. Well, you don't need to worry about that. I'm not going to pick a
18 dispute with you in relation to that and I accept what you've just said.
19 Am I right to understand that sentence to mean that you were
20 working in October 1994 full time in the criminal investigation
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. When did you cease working full time in the criminal investigation
25 A. In June when I had to be hospitalised, and that was the end of my
1 work down there, in practical terms.
2 Q. Now, it may be -- okay. Let me rephrase that question.
3 Do you regard working full time in the criminal investigation
4 department as being part of the police force?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Then I don't understand the answer you gave me a few moments ago
7 where you said you weren't working full time in the police. Could you
8 explain, please?
9 A. I didn't say that I had not worked full time. I said that I was
10 not an active police officer, but a reserve policeman, which means that I
11 had never been certified to perform the policing duties.
12 Q. And what practical difference did that make? Perhaps you can
13 enlighten us.
14 A. The difference lies in the fact that in order to be an active
15 policeman, you had to be certified. You will have completed the police
16 academy before you can join the police as an active policeman.
17 Q. Let me perhaps approach this a different way. What functions did
18 you perform on a day-to-day basis when you were in the criminal
19 investigation department from October 1994 to June of 1995? Tell us in
20 some detail, if you need to.
21 A. I helped, I assisted my colleagues who were active policemen.
22 Q. Come on, Witness, you can do better than that, can't you? What
23 did these investigations that you were involved in consist of?
24 A. I never participated in any investigations. There was no need to
25 carry out any investigations. There were no investigations at all. There
1 were no crimes of that gravity that would require investigations to be
2 carried out.
3 Q. Look, Witness, all I want to know is what you did at your place of
4 work during that period. If it was sitting around drinking coffee, tell
5 us. If it was some other function, tell the Chamber. That's all. Some
6 detail, please.
7 A. There was no coffee at the time, so we could not be sitting and
8 drinking coffee. There was a lack of coffee. For the most part I worked
9 with a team involved in humanitarian aid. Let me explain. All convoys
10 that were bringing food, that food would be stolen, so some of the goods
11 would be missing. It was my duty to make a list of the goods that were
12 stolen and I would submit that list to my superiors. As I've already told
13 you, I assisted my colleagues who were active policemen when they were
14 taking statements from people and similar things.
15 Q. Okay. Let's get back to the helicopter drops and the such like.
16 Are you saying that that had -- that did not fall within the
17 responsibility of the police, to detect these illegal arms drops?
18 A. This might have been within the purview of the military police but
19 not of the civilian police. The civilian police at the time did not get
20 involved in that. It was not within their purview.
21 Q. And it might help at this stage, the civilian police were the SJB,
22 and the military police was the SVB. Am I right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Were you aware that arms were being illegally smuggled into the
25 enclave? Were you personally aware? In February, March of 1995, shall we
2 A. Everybody knew about those deliveries, including myself. But I
3 did not know anything about the quantity of the weapons or the type of the
4 weapons that were being dropped.
5 Q. At some time in early 1995 were you promoted within the Zepa SJB?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Did you receive any sort of decoration or award for your services
8 to the Zepa SJB?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Approximately how many people, in 1995, would you say were
11 employed by the Zepa SJB? In other words, how many police officers were
13 A. The number was never fixed. It was never the same; there was a
14 lot of fluctuation. However, the number ranged between 25 and 35
15 throughout all this time.
16 MR. JOSSE: Could we have a look, please, at 6D71? This document
17 should not be broadcast.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you for that, Mr. Josse.
19 MR. JOSSE:
20 Q. Witness, this is a list of various police officers. The first
21 list, for example, is of police officers who broke through along the
22 Zepa-Kuti-Rubinici-Nevacka-Rudzicija [phoen]-Sokalina
23 [phoen]-Ravne-Kladanj access. I'm not going to go through all the other
24 documents. Perhaps we can go to the last page -- I mean all the other
25 lists, but perhaps we can go to the last page where we see that the list
1 at the bottom was compiled by Hurim Sahic. He was the Chief of Police,
2 wasn't he?
3 A. He was.
4 Q. You are welcome to look at this, but he describes in this
5 document, which is undated but which, from its contents we can assume
6 post-dates the events you are describing, what happened to various people
7 who he describes as police officers and who presumably were under his
8 command. Perhaps the Court would scroll through the document quite
9 quickly for the witness. He simply needs to read, going from the top,
10 what each list consists of, so he has some idea what I'm referring to. If
11 we go back to page 1, please. He's seen the top of the page. Bottom of
12 the page, please.
13 You see the second list there, Witness, with four names.
14 Top of page 2, please.
15 Third -- on the second list says of police officers who
16 disappeared in the break-through. Scrolling down we then have a list of
17 police officers who were taken from a convoy transporting severely wounded
18 and were taken to a camp in Rogatica. There's a name we're very familiar
19 with at number 1, that's correct, isn't it, Witness? That is your name,
20 it's not being broadcast. Correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And then I --
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Then I think you've looked at the top of page 3 already.
25 There are approximately 60 names on this list, Witness. Can you
1 explain that?
2 A. Yes. These lists also contain the names of the members of the
3 reserve police stations in Luka and Krusev Dol in the territory of the
4 municipality of Srebrenica. However, they were cut off from their own
5 municipality and they joined Zepa.
6 In other words, not all of these names belonged to the reserve
7 police in Zepa, but also partly to Luka and Krusev Dol. That is why the
8 list contains, or these lists contain so many names.
9 Q. Which enclave was Luka in, please?
10 A. Zepa.
11 Q. Which enclave was Krusev Dol in, please?
12 A. Also those are two neighbouring villages, but Krusev Dol is
13 somewhat closer to Zepa than Luka.
14 Q. In Zepa itself, Zepa town, I'm talking about, where was the police
16 A. In the very centre of Zepa.
17 Q. What was the building called?
18 A. The building of the agricultural cooperative.
19 Q. Which other body or bodies was based in the building? Perhaps I
20 can help you. The municipality was based there, wasn't it? The civil
21 municipal authorities, I'm talking about.
22 A. Yes. And also the premises of the Red Cross, the municipal
23 authorities, and there were also one or two offices that were occupied by
24 the army. Those offices were in the attic of that building.
25 Q. Was Colonel Palic's office in that building?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And he was the commander of the 1st Zepa Light Infantry Brigade,
3 wasn't he?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You have already made passing reference to the fact that the SJB
6 and the Zepa Light Infantry Brigade did not get on terribly well. That's
7 fair, isn't it?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. What did you understand was the source of the dispute between
10 Hurim Sahic and Avdo Palic?
11 A. I really never gave it any thought. I was never interested in
12 those things, to put it simply.
13 Q. And you weren't interested because it was none of your business or
14 because you thought the dispute was stupid? Why weren't you interested in
15 it, bearing in mind that you were in the police force?
16 A. For a simple reason: Those were probably their own private issues
17 which then reflected on their respective services.
18 Q. Who were the civic municipal leaders based in the -- in that farm
19 cooperative building?
20 A. The president of the municipality was Mehmed Hajric. The
21 president of the Executive Board of the municipal assembly was Hamdija
22 Torlak. Edhem Omanovic and Abdulah Piric represented the court, and I
23 believe that's it.
24 Q. Have you any idea where Mr. Torlak stood in relation to this
25 dispute between the army and the police? In other words, whose side, if
1 any, did he take, as far as you could understand?
2 A. I didn't know. I never discussed the matter with him.
3 Q. It might help and it might simply shorten this cross-examination,
4 were I to ask you, did you hold any rank whatsoever in the police? Were
5 you quite a junior officer? Where did you stand in the police structure,
6 in other words?
7 Can I stop you, if you want to answer that in private session,
8 I've got no difficulty.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: I was thinking -- precisely thinking of that. Let's
10 go into private session.
11 [Private session]
17 [Open session]
18 MR. JOSSE:
19 Q. Who controlled entry and exit to and from the enclave? The
20 police, the army, UNPROFOR, some other body?
21 A. In spring 1995, I don't know in which month, I believe that it was
22 either in February or in March, the only check-point was established in
23 the Brezova Ravan sector. This is where both persons and goods were
24 controlled, and in practical terms this was the only place where controls
25 were carried out.
1 Q. I'm not going to dispute that. Who controlled it?
2 A. The civilian police.
3 Q. Why did the power in relation to that lie with the SJB rather than
4 the army?
5 A. I suppose that this must have been decided at a higher level of
7 Q. Were you involved in any of the border control issues?
8 Crossing-point control issues, perhaps I should say.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. In what way, please?
11 A. There were six groups of policemen who took turns up there. One
12 shift lasted for four days. That's how long a group would stay up there.
13 Which means that every 24th day I would go to that check-point with my
14 group. That's when my turn would come.
15 Q. I would like to ask you about one specific incident, and that's
16 perhaps easiest done by looking at 6D51. I see no reason why this
17 document can't be broadcast, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: I haven't seen it as yet.
19 MR. JOSSE: It's a report by a assistant commander for security,
20 Senior Captain Hasanovic from the 25 -- 285th East Bosnian Light Brigade
21 to the 28th Division command in Srebrenica. If we go to the bottom of it
22 for one moment, you'll see who it's from, as I've just said. Let's go to
23 the top of it, if we may, for a moment.
24 Q. You will see it's dated 31st of May, 1995, from Zepa. And I would
25 like to go basically to the second half of the document, please, if we
1 scroll down.
2 I do have an English translation, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. No, no. Everyone else had except me, so
4 there was something wrong in the system. So I've got it now, thanks to
5 Judge Kwon.
6 MR. JOSSE: I will read this, if I may, in English. And I'm
7 pretty sure we've got the right place.
8 Q. "After this incident, the military observers," and it's clearly
9 referring there to the UNPROFOR military observers, "halted their
10 activities. They left the compound only twice, justifying their
11 inactivity by a lack of fuel for their vehicles and the like. As far as
12 we know in the meantime, the military observers have asked their superior
13 command several times to be rotated. They were promised the whole team
14 would be rotated, but this has not happened because the aggressor has not
15 given them permission to cross over. Several times during regular
16 briefings with the local authorities they asked the SJB to be allowed to
17 leave, claiming that a new team of observers would come to Zepa the same
18 day when they left. On 22nd May, 1995, the chief of the Zepa SJB, Sahic,
19 gave the military observers permission to leave Zepa via Brezova Ravan
20 check-point which is held and guarded by the Zepa SJB, and they used it to
21 get out on the 23rd of May of 1995."
22 I'm just letting the B/C/S interpreters catch up with my rather
23 rapid speed, Your Honour.
24 Witness, do you have any first-hand knowledge of this?
25 A. No, I haven't. And believe me, this is the first time I've heard
1 about this.
2 Q. Were you aware that your chief had the power to control whether
3 UNPROFOR military observers should and should not leave the enclave?
4 A. I don't know, but I don't think he had such power.
5 Q. This document seems to suggest that he did have that power,
6 doesn't it?
7 A. That's what it says, but I think that when it comes to facts, the
8 facts were quite different.
9 Q. Can you explain that, please?
10 A. I have no explanation.
11 Q. At the very end of the same document, the last paragraph, I beg
12 your pardon, the last sentence, in fact, follows a passage which describes
13 the animosity between the SJB chief and the 285th Light Infantry Brigade
14 commander and then it says, "However, cooperation between the SVB and the
15 SJB has recently begun to change thoroughly and radically for the better,
16 even though cooperation is still disrupted by the autocratic behaviour of
17 the chief of the Zepa SJB, because it was realised that cooperation was
18 indeed necessary."
19 Do you agree that in late May of 1995 cooperation between the SJB
20 and the SVB improved?
21 A. Even if there was such cooperation, it wasn't obvious.
22 Q. You were in the police. Do you accept Mr. Hasanovic's description
23 of the chief of the Zepa SJB as "autocratic" -- I beg your pardon, his
24 behaviour as being autocratic? Do you accept that as an accurate
1 A. I don't agree with that, and this is really very funny.
2 Q. Why is it funny, please?
3 A. Well, given that he found such a term, given that he expressed
4 himself by using such a term.
5 Q. Move on to another related topic. The authorities in -- within
6 the enclave were not keen on people leaving the enclave in the first part
7 of 1995, were they?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Why was that?
10 A. Are you referring to the military observers and to their
12 Q. I wasn't, but let's deal with them first of all. Why were the
13 authorities not keen for the military observers to depart?
14 A. Well, while they were present there was a form of security and we
15 felt that there would be no new attacks and the like.
16 Q. All right. Now, my question, and my apologies for not making it
17 clear in the first place, was directed to efforts by the authorities,
18 civic, military and police, to prevent the civilian inhabitants from
19 leaving the enclave during the first part of 1995. Would you agree with
20 the proposition that efforts were made to stop people leaving?
21 A. No one even tried to prevent anyone from doing so. There was an
22 agreement, this was the result of negotiations, on the civilian population
23 leaving the enclave.
24 Q. Were efforts made to stop members of the police force from leaving
25 the enclave?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Were efforts made to stop members of the 1st Zepa Light Infantry
3 Brigade from leaving the enclave, in other words deserters?
4 A. I don't think so.
5 Q. Well, I want to have a look at a few documents with you, if I
6 may. First of all, 6D97. This is another army document. It's from
7 Assistant Security Commander Nedzad Bektic from the Srebrenica 8th
8 Operation Group. It's headed, "Prevention of illegal abandonment of the
9 Srebrenica 8th Operation Group."
10 If I could read a little bit of it out, "There has recently
11 been an increase in the --" it's translated as "number of people illegally
12 leaving the zone of responsibility of the 28th Division of the Srebrenica
13 8th Operation Group going in the direction of Luka-Slap and further
14 towards Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia. Since the crossings are taking
15 place in the area of responsibility of the 285th Brigade and judging by
16 the manner in which they are carried out, there are grounds to suspect the
17 crossings are organised and carried out in cooperation with the enemy."
18 And then it deals with the measures that need to be taken to stop this.
19 Your reading of the document, Witness, does this refer to
20 soldiers, civilians, or both?
21 A. Probably to both.
22 Q. So I repeat what I asked you a moment ago. Were you aware at the
23 time that this was an issue?
24 A. Officially nothing had been discovered, nothing had been seen, but
25 there were rumours.
1 Q. Rumours to what effect? What were those rumours?
2 A. Rumours to the effect that the events mentioned had happened, but
3 officially nothing had been discovered, nothing had come to light with
4 regard to whether there was really cooperation with the enemy with regard
5 to those who were involved in planning, organisation and who perhaps moved
6 over to the other side.
7 Q. Why were the army keen to prevent civilians leaving the enclave?
8 A. You should ask someone from the army, someone who has information
9 about that.
10 Q. Well, sadly, I don't think I'm going to have the opportunity to in
11 this particular case. That's why I'm asking you, but if you don't know
12 the answer, that's fair enough.
13 A. I don't know, believe me.
14 Q. It's right, isn't it, that towards the bottom of the document we
15 see it says, "The brigade commander and assistant commander for security
16 shall be responsible for carrying out these tasks and the Zepa public
17 security station shall also be involved." That's what the document says.
18 No dispute about that, I'm sure.
19 Were the Zepa public security station, of which you were part,
20 involved in stopping this so-called illegal activity?
21 A. Not as far as I am aware. I don't know whether they were at all
22 informed of this.
23 Q. Let's have a look at the next document, please, which is 6D47.
24 And take it from me that this is clearly a reply by Captain Hasanovic to
25 the last document, because the reference number matches that on the
1 document I have just shown you. This is dated the 5th of February, 1995;
2 six days later, in other words. And I'll read a little bit. It says, "I
3 immediately took certain steps and measures to find and identify persons
4 who leave the territory without authorisation, as well as the organisers
5 of these activities. In this work I have also engaged the Zepa SJB and
6 the Luka police station."
7 But you've got no recollection or knowledge of that happening. Is
8 that your evidence?
9 A. I can't remember.
10 Q. At the very bottom of the document it talks about temporary
11 permits being issued to those who come here for food so that they can
12 leave the territory of Srebrenica with some kind of official document.
13 Any knowledge of that happening; permits being issued to people who were
14 after food or the such like?
15 A. Yes, such permits were issued, but only for those who had come
16 from Srebrenica to Zepa.
17 Q. One other document in this regard that I'd like to show you.
18 6D39, please.
19 We are now going up rather higher in the chain of command, and
20 here we have an instruction sent from Brigadier General Hadzihasanovic to
21 Colonel Palic personally. We're also getting far nearer the time that
22 we're particularly interested in, 26th of May, 1995, so far as this
23 document is concerned. It says, "In order to prevent certain civilians
24 and any members of the BH Army from leaving the territory of Zepa without
25 permission and illegally, it will be necessary to exercise the following
1 measures: In cooperation with the SJB, create a plan to prevent the
2 townspeople of Zepa from leaving for other territories." And then there
3 is other measures which, so far as you're concerned, we don't need to go
5 You are still saying you had no knowledge of orders coming from
6 the very highest ranks of the establishment of the ABiH to prevent both
7 soldiers and civilians from leaving your enclave?
8 A. No, I had no knowledge of that.
9 Q. Last question on this. Can you think of any reason why Brigadier
10 General Hadzihasanovic would want to stop civilians leaving the enclave of
11 their own free will?
12 A. I can't even start guessing.
13 Q. I would like to ask you a little bit about the trade the other
14 way, so to speak. Things that were being smuggled into the enclave. And
15 I don't mean by that weapons, because you have accepted that weapons were
16 being smuggled in.
17 Were you aware of fuel being smuggled in to the enclave?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. How was that done, please? To the best of your knowledge.
20 A. At all UNPROFOR check-points fuel would be sold. They would sell
22 Q. Illegally; is that what you're saying? UNPROFOR would create a
23 black market in fuel?
24 A. Yes. They sold it illegally.
25 Q. And what services, goods, or other things did the inhabitants of
1 Zepa pay the UNPROFOR troops with?
2 A. They paid in cash and alcohol.
3 Q. Cash being Deutsch marks?
4 A. Yes, and dollars, if anyone had them.
5 Q. I want to ask you one -- or to direct you to one specific document
6 in relation to the smuggling of fuel. Could we have a look at 6D72,
8 This is a -- as it's being brought up, I can perhaps introduce
9 it -- a Serb-generated document. It's from a Colonel Andric, commander of
10 the 1st Birac Infantry Brigade, dated the 12th of May, 1994 -- 5, I beg
11 your pardon. Order to prevent smuggling of fuel by UNPROFOR, UNHCR, and
12 other organisations. "We have received information that members of
13 UNPROFOR, UNHCR, and other international organisations have been
14 transporting fuel illegally to Muslims in the enclaves of Sarajevo,
15 Gorazde, Zepa and Srebrenica. They smuggled fuel in double or large tanks
16 on combat and non-combat vehicles which they empty in the enclaves,
17 leaving just the quantity needed for their return journeys from the
18 enclaves to the territory of the FRY or the RS."
19 Any knowledge of that specific activity, the activity described in
20 this document?
21 A. Well, look, UNPROFOR received the amount that they requested or
22 that they needed. I'm referring to their own needs. And they sold a
23 certain amount of it.
24 Q. This document, I would suggest, relates specifically to the
25 smuggling of fuel in double tanks. If we look at item number 5, perhaps
1 you could scroll down, it actually says, "Treat the fuel from double tanks
2 and other secret storage areas as smuggled, confiscate it and enter it in
3 the books of your battalion."
4 My question is, were you aware of smuggling with the use of double
5 tanks and other secret storage areas on or within a vehicle?
6 A. [No interpretation].
7 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat that answer?
8 MR. JOSSE:
9 Q. Yes, Witness, the interpreters have asked if you could repeat what
10 you have just said, please.
11 A. I can't provide a concrete answer here.
12 Q. Did you have any knowledge of smuggling by use of double tanks or
13 other secret storage areas within vehicles?
14 A. Well, no one even checked those vehicles then.
15 Q. I would like to go back, as I said that I would, to the fighting
16 within the enclave. You have told us that for the -- excuse me, I can't
17 remember -- I think you said 10 days before your departure you were at
18 your parents' home. You've also told us that you were aware of the
19 fighting going on around you. Correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Do you have any idea where the communication centre, used by the
22 defenders of the enclave, was situated?
23 A. It was in the Zepa mountain area, but I don't know where the exact
24 location was.
25 Q. When was it -- at what point in time was it first situated in the
1 Zepa mountain area?
2 A. I don't know exactly where it was located when it was moved from
3 the centre of Zepa to the mountain. Well, I don't know the exact
5 Q. Perhaps you misunderstood me but, in fact, there are two questions
6 I now want to ask in relation to this. The first is, do you know when it
7 was moved from the centre of Zepa to the mountains? Approximately?
8 A. Either when the attack had already started or immediately prior to
9 the attack, but I'm not sure.
10 Q. Prior to the communication centre being moved to the mountains,
11 immediately prior, I'm talking about, where in the centre of Zepa was it
13 A. I think it was in the building in which Palic had his office.
14 Q. Which was the farm cooperative building; is that what you mean?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. So your understanding is it was moved from the farm cooperative
17 building to the mountains and was never situated anywhere else within the
18 town itself at the material time?
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. Well, let's see if I can jog your memory. Let's have a look at
21 6D81. We see that this is a document from the 285th East Bosnian Light
22 Brigade to the 28th Division. Could we go to the bottom of the document
23 for a moment, please, and see who the author is? Second page. We see
24 that the author is chief of communications, Alija Gusic. Was that someone
25 you knew at the time?
1 A. I met him during the war.
2 Q. Could we go to item number 5 of this report dated the 2nd of July,
3 1995, time 1830. If you would be so kind, Witness, I think I'll ask you
4 to read this. Read it aloud.
5 THE INTERPRETER: May it be noted that the English interpreters do
6 not have the English text.
7 MR. JOSSE:
8 Q. Witness, I'm sorry. I have just received a message from the
9 English interpreters that they don't have the English text. It will be
10 easier if I read it in English, because the B/C/S translators will be able
11 to see what you can see, so I'll read it.
12 "There were no immediate problems in work. The minor problem is
13 the fact that we had to move the CV to the hospital basement because of
14 enemy shelling and quality of transmission is now poor."
15 What do you understand by the initials "CV"?
16 A. I suppose this is the communications centre.
17 Q. Yes, I would agree with that, Witness. It was moved to the place
18 that you were residing, wasn't it?
19 A. Not to that place, but to the same building. He was in the
20 basement, and I was one floor above.
21 Q. How many patients were there in the hospital at the beginning of
22 July of 1995?
23 A. Not more than three to four.
24 Q. Were any of the other patients police officers?
25 A. No.
1 Q. And is your evidence to this Trial Chamber that you didn't know
2 that the communications centre of the Zepa Brigade had been moved to the
3 very place that you were residing?
4 A. I didn't know.
5 Q. You didn't see Mr. Gusic coming in and out of the building?
6 A. He may have done, but we didn't -- did not use the same entrance.
7 Q. And so I suppose it will be futile for me to ask you why it was
8 the army chose to place the communications centre in the hospital. You
9 wouldn't know, would you?
10 A. I wouldn't.
11 MR. JOSSE: Perhaps that would be a convenient moment, Your
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Certainly. We'll have a 25-minute break starting
14 from now.
15 --- Recess taken at 5.42 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 6.11 p.m.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Witness, and thank you, Mr. Josse. Let's
18 proceed. Please allow something like five, seven minutes towards the end
19 for us, because we need to hand down an oral decision and also give you
20 some information. Thank you.
21 MR. JOSSE: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. Witness, having had the break to reflect, I'm going to go back in
23 time, if I may, in relation to one document. Let's go straight to it.
24 It's 6D49. And this, in fact, is a long series of documents, headed,"The
25 public security station in Zepa" dated the 5th of February, 1995, to the
1 ministry of the interior of the RBH and the introduction basically says
2 that there follows a collection of documents in relation to a particular
4 The first of this collection of documents, we can just see the top
5 of on the screen at the moment. It's dated the 30th of October, 1994.
6 And take it from me, Witness, the bottom of that document, it's signed by
7 the chief of the Zepa SJB, Hurim Sahic. And there are two or three parts
8 of this document that I would like to ask you about. Much of it, to
9 summarise, is a complaint by the Chief of the Police about the behaviour
10 of Colonel Palic, and you've already alluded to the fact that you knew of
11 it but didn't know what it was about.
12 At the very bottom of that first page it says, "The soldiers from
13 what is known as Avdo's delegation, are spreading all --" and please turn
14 the page in the B/C/S, or scroll down -- "All kinds of information, some
15 of which was voiced at a meeting of the local brigade staff here when they
16 gave a briefing on their visit to Sarajevo. It was said that the military
17 had the main role in Zepa and the civilian organs and the president of the
18 municipality were there only for show for the UN and UNPROFOR, that
19 everything was subordinated to Commander Avdo Palic, that he made all the
20 decisions, that the Zepa SJB should be abolished and its role taken over
21 by the military police and the sabotage units."
22 So, to remind you, this was the 30th of October of 1994. Can you
23 comment on what your chief is saying there?
24 A. I have no comment. Such things happened, but who did them, who
25 issued orders, I don't know.
1 Q. Well, is what Mr. Sahic is saying true?
2 A. Yes, it is.
3 Q. Little further down the page, yes, that's fine, it's there. It
4 says, "The various forms of disinformation spread by the people from
5 Avdo's delegation have had repercussions on the situation in the Zepa SJB,
6 particularly information on the disbanding of the Zepa SJB, as well as
7 information that so far, the 1st Zepa Light Brigade has received around
8 4.000 Deutsche marks and that this money is for the exclusive use of the
9 brigade --" 400.000, I'm sorry. Thank you. "And that this money is for
10 the exclusive use of the brigade and its members while other organisations
11 in Zepa have no resources at their disposal."
12 Firstly, are you aware that Colonel Palic wanted to disband the
13 Zepa SJB?
14 A. Not only did he want to do that, he actually insisted on this
15 being done.
16 Q. And why was that?
17 A. I really can't go into the reasons because I don't know what the
18 reasons for that were. I'm sure he would be able to tell you why.
19 Q. Did he succeed in disbanding the Zepa SJB?
20 A. No, he didn't. It remained in place because it provided services
21 for the civilian population. That's why it had been established in the
22 first place.
23 Q. You have no idea what Colonel Palic's complaint was with the body
24 you worked for. Is that what you're saying?
25 A. No.
1 Q. What about the 400.000 Deutsche marks? Is it true that he
2 received -- the brigade received that money?
3 A. I can't be a hundred per cent sure. I know that some money came,
4 but I don't know how much, how that money was used, on what, I really
5 can't tell you that because I don't know.
6 Q. If we go to the third page of the document we see there numeral 1,
7 it says, "In October, 1993, on his way back from Sarajevo, as a member of
8 the Zepa delegation, the commander of the aforementioned brigade stole
9 5.000 Deutsche marks from the money which he was bringing to the Zepa War
11 Is that true?
12 A. An investigation was carried out by the security officers from the
13 brigade. I don't know what they found. This information never left the
14 army circles.
15 Q. Well, that's all very well you're saying that. But this is an SJB
16 document, isn't it?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. So your chief knew about it, didn't he?
19 A. Yes.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: So let's do it even better. I suggest that we
2 redact also your question, then.
3 MR. JOSSE: Absolutely, Your Honour. I've got no difficulty with
5 JUDGE AGIUS: So we will redact the question from line 15 to line
6 19 -- to line 20. And we go to private session now. In private session
8 [Private session]
15 [Open session]
16 JUDGE AGIUS: We are in open session.
17 MR. JOSSE:
18 Q. There's one other part of this document I'd like to ask you
19 about. And we need to go to the bottom of the second page in the B/C/S.
20 The middle of the third page in the English. It says, and I'll read it
21 slowly so that you can find the place. "The only developments that
22 excited the population were a conflict between the commander of the local
23 brigade and the command of the operations group about the way the Luka
24 Company operated." You've got to scroll -- stop there, because it's not
25 on the screen, the B/C/S speakers in our team are telling me. It's there
1 now. I'll go on. "And the negotiations carried out by the commander of
2 the local brigade at Boksanica, without the knowledge of the Presidency of
3 the Zepa municipality during which the autonomy of Zepa in the so-called
4 Republika Srpska was discussed."
5 Do you have any knowledge at all of these negotiations or
6 discussions about the autonomy of Zepa within the Republic of Srpska?
7 A. No, I don't have any knowledge about that.
8 Q. Complete news to you, you've never heard that suggestion before;
9 is that what you're saying?
10 A. I did hear about the proposal, but I don't know anything about the
11 negotiations, what the course of the negotiations was, who was involved in
12 the negotiations. That's what I don't know.
13 Q. That's quite fair enough, and you've answered my previous question
14 quite properly. What did you hear about the proposals?
15 A. Believe me, there was nothing official. I only know what I heard
16 in the form of rumours. There were no official, formal proposals to speak
18 MR. JOSSE: Excuse me a moment.
19 [Defence counsel confer]
20 MR. JOSSE:
21 Q. What were the rumours that you heard?
22 A. In practical terms, it was cessation from Srebrenica, all
23 cooperation would have stopped, independent bodies of authorities should
24 have been established, or something to that effect.
25 Q. And the idea that the Zepa municipality would work in conjunction
1 with the authorities in the Republika Srpska; is that right?
2 A. I really don't know anything about that proposal.
3 Q. All right. I would like now to invite you to have a look, please,
4 at 6D73. This is a document from Brigadier Delic, 2nd Corps commander, to
5 various military groups, and it's -- follows a document from Brigadier
6 General Hadzihasanovic. It says in the middle, "On the 16th of February
7 the aggressor put a request before UNPROFOR to declare Zepa a
8 non-demilitarised zone with the following explanation: Helicopter
9 fly-overs transporting AR BiH weapons and ammunition have been
11 Stopping there, Witness, you've already told us you accept that
12 that was happening, correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Secondly, AR BiH movements have been observed in the Zepa area."
15 That was happening as well, wasn't it?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Third, "UkrBat members are accused of concealing the activities
18 and measures of AR BiH, which is why they are no longer guaranteed
19 safety." Well, I accept you can't comment on that, can you, you don't
20 know what the Ukrainian Battalion were doing?
21 A. That's true.
22 Q. And it says, "Specifically our helicopter fly-overs have been
23 observed in the night between 15th and 16th February and they came under
24 infantry fire." I take it that specifically you can't say whether there
25 were fly-overs on those particular nights, but as you have already told
1 us, there were fly-overs, correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Scrolling down, we then get Brigadier Delic's order and he
4 says, "1, put OG 8 units in full combat readiness, ensuring full readiness
5 for successfully countering a potential enemy attack. 2, OG 8 units
6 deployed to Srebrenica are to be in a state of readiness for a coordinated
7 action with the 1st Zepa Light Brigade. 3, put the forces in full combat
8 readiness and take all other measures with the utmost secrecy in order to
9 avoid the aggressor's argument regarding the violation of the agreement
10 and the demilitarised zones. 4, the commands of OG 4 and 6, the 210th
11 VOBR will continue work on the preparation of units for offensive combat
12 operations in line with," and it gives an order number. And then what the
13 commander and his deputy are issued with concrete tasks.
14 Firstly, any specific knowledge of this order from Brigadier
15 Delic? Did you know of its existence at the time?
16 A. I didn't know anything about this.
17 Q. Secondly, any awareness from living and working in the enclave of
18 the fact that the 1st Zepa Light Brigade were to be put on full readiness
19 for countering a potential enemy attack?
20 A. I didn't know.
21 Q. Any knowledge at all that at that time brigade defences were
22 strengthening, lest an attack begin?
23 A. Even if there had been activities, they were going on on the
24 outskirts at the points of contact.
25 Q. Well, that's the next issue that I want to turn to, which are
1 attacks from within the enclave to the outside, or to outside of the
2 enclave, that is. Sabotage-type attacks. Were you aware that the brigade
3 were carrying out such manoeuvres?
4 A. I knew only later, once they had been carried out.
5 Q. When you say "later," do you mean the next day?
6 A. Sometimes on the same day, sometimes on the following day. In any
7 case, immediately after the event.
8 Q. And how did you learn that these attacks had taken place?
9 A. Usually when those people came back, they would tell us what they
10 had done. They would talk, and that's how we all learned.
11 Q. Can you be specific as to the type of activities that you were
12 told about?
13 A. Nothing special. Usually they would say there was shooting, they
14 would come back, nobody would be aware of where they had gone to.
15 Q. And did you say to anyone or indeed think to yourself, well,
16 there's going to be trouble about this, we're living in a supposed
17 demilitarised zone, and far from being demilitarised, soldiers from within
18 our zone are leaving the zone and are attacking the aggressor, the Serbs?
19 Did that ever occur to you?
20 A. Well, one could assume that there would be certain problems, which
21 as a matter of fact, did happen at the end.
22 Q. I think -- sorry, I'm overlapping. I think we can agree on that,
23 Witness. But these various attacks did cause problems, didn't they?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Were you aware of a dispute in June of 1995 between Ramiz
1 Becirevic and Avdo Palic as to who should claim the glory for particular
2 attacks on Bosnian Serbs?
3 A. No, I wasn't aware of that.
4 Q. Let's have a look, please, at 6D77. This is a report signed,
5 since you can't see it there I'll read it out word for word, stand-in for
6 the commander, chief of staff, Major Ramiz Becirevic, from the 28th
7 Division in Srebrenica to the command of 2nd Corps in Tuzla and also to
8 the 285th Light Brigade.
9 And in the third paragraph, if we could scroll the document
10 slightly. Thank you. It says, "Namely, these sabotage operations were
11 conducted against aggressor targets on the order of," and then I think
12 it's not clear to the translator, "of the commander of the 28th KOV
13 division, strictly confidential number," and then it gives the number of
14 the order "20th of June, 1995. And they're aimed at distracting the
15 Chetniks from the Sarajevo front and tying down a part of their forces to
16 the zone of responsibility of the 28th KOV Division. In order to ensure
17 that sabotage operations are planned as well as possible and successfully
18 conducted, I sent the PK for intelligence, the 28th Division and the
19 command of the 280th, 281st, IBLR to the command of the 285th IBL
20 Brigade. The same order specified the composition of our forces, DIG,"
21 which stands for sabotage and reconnaissance group, and it included the
22 entire reconnaissance and sabotage platoons and it says who took part.
23 Firstly stopping there, if I may, were you aware that these
24 attacks on the Bosnian Serbs was designed to distract them from the
25 Sarajevo front and designed to tie down their forces?
1 A. I was not aware of that. Nobody was aware of any of them before
2 they were actually carried out.
3 Q. All right. I'll move on. The document goes on, "The truth is
4 that from the 285th Light Brigade, a group of soldiers of the strength of
5 one LPC participated in these operations. Small DIGs were formed from the
6 members of these tactical units and sent in a number of directions into
7 PZT, which apparently means temporarily occupied territory, to carry out
8 surprise attacks against aggressor targets, and you are familiar with the
9 results of these information."
10 So it appears that what Mr. Becirevic is saying that the
11 involvement of the Zepa Light Infantry Brigade was somewhat limited.
12 Would you agree with that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And briefly, perhaps we could look at Colonel Palic's reply to
15 this at 6D78.
16 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, I'm afraid that the one document I think
17 I'm going to use today that hasn't been translated.
18 Q. This is a document from Commander Palic dated the 4th of July of
19 1995. It makes reference to the reference number of the last document.
20 And, Witness, there's only one small part of it that I'm going to ask you
21 to read out, and that is at the beginning, about 10 lines down, with the
22 word "Ovakav." Could you read out that sentence, please, slowly, so it
23 can be translated into English.
24 A. "I've written this report and I've signed it, because most of
25 the sabotage actions were carried out in the area of responsibility of the
1 285th East Bosnian Light Infantry Brigade. I believe that the commander
2 of the 28th Division would write a longer report based on my report and
3 forward it to the 2nd Corps. The reason why I have forwarded my report to
4 the 2nd Corps is the fact that I -- we cannot communicate with you. At
5 the end I believe that --"
6 Q. Thank you. So in short, it looked like Colonel Palic is saying
7 that Mr. Becirevic is wrong and that it was Zepa troops who were primarily
8 responsible for this particular sabotage operation, doesn't it?
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. McCloskey.
10 MR. McCLOSKEY: My microphone is not working. Perhaps that's a
12 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. McCloskey.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I will switch off mine. It's working now.
14 MR. McCLOSKEY: Just to remind counsel, these issues are not in
15 contest. We've gone over this issue of the policy of the Bosnian army for
16 a long time, and these have been part of this Prosecution's case for a
17 long time. So this witness is answering his questions but we could go on
18 forever on this issue which is really not in contest.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Josse.
20 MR. JOSSE: I'm going to move on.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.
22 MR. JOSSE:
23 Q. Witness, I want to now ask you, as I promised I was going to some
24 time ago now, about the actual fighting that took place in Zepa. And
25 perhaps the easiest way of dealing with this is to look at 6D82. This is
1 a document from Lieutenant-Colonel Kosovic, who was chief of the
2 department for OB, which the translators think was intelligence and
3 security tasks of the Drina Corps. It's dated the 24th of July, it's sent
4 to various bodies, including the Main Staff of the VRS. And it's
5 headed, "Intelligence information on the enemy in the Zepa and Gorazde
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: Excuse me, I'm going to object at this point. I
8 don't think we should be using what the interpreters think the designation
9 of intelligence and security --
10 MR. JOSSE: I -- I'll --
11 MR. McCLOSKEY: -- is an important designation --
12 MR. JOSSE: I'll accept that, I'll accept that totally.
13 MR. McCLOSKEY: This is an intelligence situation.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you both.
15 MR. JOSSE: I will accept that.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Go ahead.
17 MR. JOSSE:
18 Q. Witness, could you tell us what OB stands for? Do you know?
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. All right. It's not material to the questions I'm going to ask.
21 I'm sure someone from the VRS will be around to give evidence shortly who
22 will be able to enlighten us.
23 Second paragraph down says as follows: "The protected telephone
24 line between Zepa and Sarajevo has begun functioning again during the past
25 few days, evidently according to the priority principle." Were you aware
1 of that happening?
2 A. No. I didn't even know it had been interrupted.
3 Q. "Forces of the Zepa Brigade are continuing with their persistent
4 defence and are setting up barriers daily on the forward line of defence
5 along the axis of attack of our forces and on all roads leading from our
6 territory towards the enclaves. They have set up massive barriers using
7 logs and stones." Were you aware of that happening?
8 A. That was a form of defence.
9 Q. I -- if I would be permitted to comment, I don't doubt that for
10 one moment. I'm asking you whether you knew that that is what had
11 happened. In other words, that the army, the 1st Light Infantry Brigade
12 had placed these barriers in the way, as a defence.
13 A. Well, I don't know. I don't know about that.
14 Q. Well, perhaps I should clarify where you were. Did you ever leave
15 your parents' home at this point in time? Were you permanently inside?
16 A. I was at home all the time, and perhaps three to four kilometres
17 away from the closest line.
18 Q. You never went out at all; is that right?
19 A. I didn't go to any of the lines.
20 Q. Did you leave your parents' home at all at this period of time?
21 A. Well, we were in the street around the house and in the house all
22 the time.
23 Q. Did you hear shelling?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. The shelling was from both sides, wasn't it?
1 A. What do you mean from both sides?
2 Q. There was shelling from the VRS attacker and there was shelling
3 from the ABiH defender, wasn't there?
4 A. There was no shelling from our side, because we didn't have the
5 means to shell. Zepa only used light infantry weapons to defend itself.
6 Q. I suggest to you that within the enclave the defenders had mortars
7 and an array of light artillery weapons, didn't they?
8 A. Even if there were two or three mortars, they didn't have a
9 sufficient number mortar shells for them.
10 Q. Why did it take the VRS so long to gain control of the enclave, if
11 what you're saying is right?
12 A. I don't know.
13 Q. It's because you're not right, isn't it? It's because the enclave
14 was stoutly defended with real and proper weaponry.
15 A. I'm not aware of them possessing such weapons.
16 MR. JOSSE: Your Honour, I'm going to, if I may, stop there for
17 two reasons. One, because Your Honour had asked me to stop at about this
18 point in time. But the Chamber might recall that earlier on in my
19 cross-examination I had said that I thought I would be able to cut the
20 cross-examination short by reason of earlier answers from the witness in
21 relation to this particular topic.
22 We have a large number of documents dealing with this issue,
23 and --
24 MR. McCLOSKEY: Your Honour, I'm going to object to this speaking
25 in front of the witness like this. I don't think it's productive.
1 MR. JOSSE: I've got no problem at all, but perhaps it's something
2 we can resolve in his absence in a moment. If my learned friend things
3 I'm going to give the game away to the witness, then I'm grateful for his
5 MR. McCLOSKEY: I think he's threatening the witness is what I
6 think, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's stop it here. Witness, we have to stop here
8 today because we have to hand down a decision on matters that have got
9 nothing to do with you.
10 You will return tomorrow afternoon at 2.15 and we will continue
11 and hopefully try to finish with your testimony. Before you leave this
12 courtroom, I need to give you an advisory. Between today and tomorrow you
13 are not, and I repeat, not, in the most emphatical way, to discuss the
14 subject matter of your testimony with anyone.
15 THE WITNESS: Okay.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Irrespective of who it could be, irrespective of
17 whether you are sitting at table having breakfast, you are not to allow
18 anyone to discuss these matters with you or ask you what you are
19 testifying about or ask you about protective measures or whatever. Is
20 that clear?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So you can be -- Madam Usher is going to
23 escort you.
24 [The witness stands down]
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Two things before we wind up for the day. One is
1 tomorrow we'll come back to you in a more formal manner, announcing our
2 decision on the issue raised and discussed yesterday and the day before
3 relating to the time-schedule and the modality with which we will be
4 proceeding in the matter of the intercept -- of intercepts. In the
5 meantime, we wanted to give you an advance notice that in any way we will
6 be extending the time limit you originally were given, Mr. McCloskey, for
7 the filing of your submissions. I will tell you exactly tomorrow up to
8 which time there will be an extension and the rest of the modalities.
9 We are addressing now a motion, and this is again an oral
10 decision, a motion which the Prosecution filed confidentially on the 22nd
11 of March. It's called the Prosecution motion for leave to amend 65 ter
12 exhibit list with three exhibits pertaining to Witness number 49
13 requesting the addition of three exhibits, one being a videotape reference
14 V0001355, second videotape reference V0003142, and third a two-page
15 document reference ERN R0015577 to 5578.
16 You will recall that on the 26th of March, two days ago, the
17 Defence for General Miletic filed a response, a confidential response in
18 French, in which counsel for Miletic submits that the two-page document,
19 the one with ERN number 5577 to 5578, is already admitted as an exhibit
20 for General Gvero. This is -- as being Exhibit 6D00030 and objects to the
21 inclusion of the two videotapes, stating that should the -- also stating
22 that should the Trial Chamber allow the inclusion of these two videotapes,
23 then counsel for General Miletic would require a 30-day delay hearing the
24 witness, since investigations would be required. That's for the purpose
25 of cross-examining that witness.
1 You will also recall that yesterday, during -- we had a short
2 discussion, short debate on this, and I asked the Prosecution also to
3 respond to Madam Fauveau's reponse, and succinctly, counsel for Gvero
4 stated that there is a point of general principle involved and also drew
5 the -- our attention to the pending motion from the Defence requesting
6 certification to appeal.
7 On its part, the Prosecution agreed that the two-page exhibit,
8 ERN 5577 to 5578 was previously admitted as Defence Exhibit 6D00030, and
9 to that effect their request was basically moot.
10 So this is now our decision in relation to the remaining two
11 documents, the two videotapes I referred to earlier. Regarding these two
12 videotapes the Trial Chamber grants the Prosecution's motion, request to
13 add them to the 65 ter list, and considers that the cross-examination of
14 Witness 49 should proceed as planned. However, should counsel for General
15 Miletic, following the investigations hinted at, need to pose further
16 questions, the Chamber will recall Witness number 49 as required.
17 So that disposes of this issue. We will reconvene tomorrow.
18 Yes, Mr. Josse. Briefly, please.
19 MR. JOSSE: Very briefly, Your Honour. I will discuss it with my
20 learned friend, Mr. Elderkin, but basically there are 18 documents in
21 relation to that last issue, which we would like introduced into the
22 evidence. Of course, I could go through them with the witness one by one,
23 but I suspect the Chamber would find that rather tiresome. I will
24 endeavour to come to some sort of agreement overnight as to how we should
25 proceed in relation to that particular matter.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I would appreciate that. In the meantime,
2 I'm sure that tomorrow at 2.15 we will be much fresher than we are now at
3 three minutes past 7.00. Thank you. And have a nice evening.
4 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.01 p.m.,
5 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 29th day of
6 March, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.