Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 32379

 1                           Tuesday, 3 March 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  So good afternoon to you, Registrar.  Could you

 6     call the case, please.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honours.  Good afternoon to

 8     everyone in and around the courtroom much.

 9             This is case number IT-05-88-T, the Prosecutor versus

10     Vujadin Popovic et al.

11             Thank you, Your Honours.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, sir.

13             For the record, Mr. Popovic is not present today.  We are in

14     possession of his waiver.  Representation:  Prosecution, Mr. McCloskey,

15     Mr. Mitchell; absent from amongst the Defence teams -- I have problems

16     already with this - absent I notice Mr. -- Mr. Nikolic is here.

17     Mr. Bourgon, Mr. Josse.  Is Mr. Petrusic here or not?

18             MR. NIKOLIC:  No.

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  And Mr. Petrusic.

20             Where is Mr. Bourgon?  He hadn't finished yesterday.

21             MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Bourgon suddenly had to leave.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Nothing serious, I hope.

23             MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] No, it isn't.  Thank you for your

24     consideration, Your Honours.

25             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.

Page 32380

 1             Now, before we start, we are sitting again today, unfortunately,

 2     pursuant to Rule 15 bis.  Mr. Justice Stole is still unwell.

 3             Mr. Ostojic, it was my understanding yesterday that you wished to

 4     address the Trial Chamber.  Since Mr. Bourgon is not here, maybe you

 5     wish, if you still have a mind to address us.  Proceed.

 6             MR. OSTOJIC:  Good afternoon to Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  Good afternoon to you.

 8             MR. OSTOJIC:  My apologies to Judge Kwon, I can't see him, but I

 9     know he's there.

10             Your Honour, I certainly echo the objection raised by my learned

11     friend Mr. Bourgon yesterday and the decisional and authoritative cites

12     that he relied on, and I was glad to hear that the Prosecution found them

13     also to be reliable, as did Mr. Haynes for the Pandurevic Defence.  We,

14     however, also have two specific and two general objections with respect

15     to this line of questioning.

16             First, as a general matter, we believe that it's an improper use

17     of documents which the Pandurevic Defence team is using in their

18     redirect, which could have been used in their direct examination, and we

19     refer the Court specifically to its earlier decision on the 14th of July,

20     2006, specifically under Roman numeral II, subsections E and F.

21             The Defence of Mr. Pandurevic, in its direct examination, covered

22     many documents which it tried to use and elicit corroborative evidence to

23     support the position of Mr. Pandurevic.  Now they claim and admit that

24     they have carefully -- actually, they say "very carefully" orchestrated

25     this redirect, which would purportedly, "point to features of the

Page 32381

 1     evidence where he, Mr. Pandurevic, could not possibly have known about

 2     which go to support the accuracy of his account."  We submit that this is

 3     not proper redirect, and it should have been done on direct examination,

 4     and therefore ask the Court to sustain our objection.

 5             Specifically --

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  One moment before you continue.

 7             I don't know whether you were precisely going to deal with this,

 8     but you mentioned the use of certain documents very generically.  Could

 9     you be more specific and indicate which documents, in particular, you're

10     referring to?

11             MR. OSTOJIC:  Sure.

12             For example, Mr. Pandurevic, during his direct examination,

13     utilised P377 and P378.  He also used the tactical log-book to support

14     some of his -- or to corroborate some of his testimony about his

15     whereabouts and movements during that time, among other orders, but those

16     come to mind specifically with that reference point.

17             Presently on redirect, we've had approximately 33 new documents

18     that have not been on their list that they're trying to utilise for the

19     same purpose, which they should have done on direct examination, we

20     submit, based on their own admission.

21             Furthermore, if I may, Your Honour, specifically with respect to

22     the use of 7D423, which is the statement of facts of Momir Nikolic,

23     there's a -- we object to that -- use of that document, and that's where,

24     I think, we ended yesterday.

25             There's a specific order that this Trial Chamber rendered on

Page 32382

 1     February 6th, 2008, and if we look at paragraph 22 of that order, it

 2     clearly states and quite plainly that the sole purpose and use of that

 3     document is to be utilised against the Prosecution witnesses, which were

 4     used by two Defence counsel in their cross-examination, namely, of

 5     Mr. Boering at that time.  So we suggest that the use and the manner that

 6     the Pandurevic team is suggesting is improper and highly prejudicial.

 7             Our next objection as a general matter is that we've never

 8     received a proofing note even before the testimony of Mr. Pandurevic or

 9     during his redirect, which is a general matter that violates the rules

10     and the practice in this Chamber.

11             And, fourthly, the attempt to rehabilitate this witness cannot be

12     done in the manner proposed by the Defence of Mr. Pandurevic.  It would

13     be proper, in our view, if Mr. Haynes would inquire of Mr. Pandurevic

14     specifics and even notes that were taken from his meetings with the

15     Krstic Defence team, with his meetings with Mr. Obrenovic and others, as

16     well as his meetings with Mr. Zivanovic, but to utilise something like

17     evidence in 2003 and to claim that somehow that corroborates his

18     testimony is highly improper.  So we ask that the Court sustain our

19     objection.

20             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, Mr. Ostojic.

21             Do you wish to comment at all, Mr. McCloskey?

22             MR. McCLOSKEY:  No, Mr. President.

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  I just wanted to make sure.

24             And does any other Defence team, with the exception of

25     Mr. Haynes, wish to comment?

Page 32383

 1             Right.  Mr. Haynes, if you could address, briefly, the points

 2     raised yesterday by Mr. Bourgon and today by Mr. Ostojic.

 3             MR. HAYNES:  The one legal authority which I looked at concerning

 4     re-examination or redirect examination in this Tribunal stated that

 5     nothing much needs to be said about it, and I agree with that.  Nothing

 6     much needs to be said about re-examination.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let me stop you.

 8             I had, after discussing with my colleagues, every intention to

 9     make it clear that we don't need any lectures on what the state of the

10     law is, especially since we have in the past pronounced ourselves, in one

11     Chamber or another, on these issues already, and you should understand

12     that we are fully aware what the state of the law is.

13             MR. HAYNES:  I didn't -- I didn't propose to.

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

15             MR. HAYNES:  But it is a reactive form of examination, and it is

16     triggered by cross-examination.

17             We spent a little time yesterday evening and this morning

18     compiling hundreds of references in the cross-examination conducted by

19     Mr. Bourgon and Mr. Pandurevic to augment the headings that I set out in

20     my re-examination of him yesterday, but perhaps the best summary of the

21     way in which Mr. Pandurevic was cross-examined was the commencement of

22     the cross-examination by Mr. Ostojic, which is on the 19th of February at

23     page 31773, lines 17 and following, and it ran like this:

24             "I do not believe, with all due respect, you on several issues.

25     I think what you've testified to is a post facto construct in order to

Page 32384

 1     create a defence, a failed defence, which was used by the Krstic Defence

 2     team as well as the Blagojevic-Jokic Defence team, and you're not

 3     surprised at all by our position, would I be correct?"

 4             And you may recall he then asked Mr. Ostojic to lower his voice.

 5     Mr. Ostojic said:

 6             "Mr. Pandurevic, I will try and keep my voice down," then moved

 7     the mike a little lower.  "I don't mean to yell at you, but we are close

 8     to one another here."

 9             And he goes on:

10             "Sir, I also want to tell you that I don't agree on a number of

11     issues.  So there's no surprises, I'm going to highlight some of them,

12     and we'll have a discussion about them in the next few days.

13             "For example, these are not an exclusive list, but, for example,

14     I do not agree with your position or your theory of absence of commander

15     and this senior officer issue that you raised.  I don't agree with you on

16     your zone of defence versus zone of responsibility.  I don't agree with

17     you with the issue of POWs and whether they're my POWs or Main Staff

18     POWs.  I don't agree with you about the contents of the purported

19     conversations you had with Mr. Obrenovic."

20             THE INTERPRETER:  Could Counsel please slow down when reading.

21             MR. HAYNES:  I'm very sorry:

22             " ... and the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th of July, 1995.  Further,

23     I don't agree with you for the reasons you gave us as to the opening of

24     the corridor.  And also on smaller issues, I don't agree with you on the

25     issue that you raised with respect to brotherhood and unity --"

Page 32385

 1             JUDGE AGIUS:  You are running even faster now.  Please slow down,

 2     thank you.

 3             MR. HAYNES:  "As well as your tenure in Slovenia."

 4             And over the page, and when I rediscovered this last night, it

 5     was with some incredulity.  Mr. Ostojic went on to say:

 6             "I suggest to you, sir, that your Defence team didn't know about

 7     the conversations you purportedly had with Mr. Obrenovic on the 16th and

 8     17th."

 9             I pause.  It was, I imagine, having forgotten that, that

10     Mr. Ostojic rose to object to my asking my client about what he had told

11     me in re-examination earlier on in the case, and it didn't include, and

12     it was merely as I said in my opening introduction, it was construct by

13     you, and you looked at me at some of the evidence, and you fit this

14     neatly in a package in order to prepare your defence; wouldn't I be right

15     about that?"

16             Now, each of those accusations and allegations were put

17     skillfully, repetitively, and forcefully throughout the course of,

18     I think, something like seven days of cross-examination by Mr. Bourgon

19     and Mr. Ostojic, and it is my right now to repair those suggestions.  It

20     is not in any way intended as a counter-attack against those who made

21     them, but it is intended to clarify and rebut the suggestion of a

22     constructed case, of telling lies, of putting his head together with

23     Dragan Obrenovic, for a start.

24             Now, the second and perhaps equally important issue is:  The very

25     heart of this case is the question of command responsibility, and you

Page 32386

 1     know it is my client's case, that though he had the title of commander of

 2     the Zvornik Brigade, the operations that were being carried on in the

 3     Zvornik area between the 15th and the 18th of July, approximately, were

 4     not under his command.  And it was put to him again forcefully,

 5     repetitively, and skillfully that they were.  And we're now going to turn

 6     to rebut that suggestion by showing the growing -- by showing the

 7     developing events, from Bratunac on the 13th of July, through tot he

 8     events in Zvornik on the 14th and 15th of July, which show, as it were,

 9     an alternative command structure in place, and all that arises directly

10     from the questions he was asked in cross-examination.  I don't really

11     want to say anymore.

12             Cross-examination is a skillful art, and it's one which has to be

13     conducted responsibly and carefully, because if you get careless, you

14     open the door to re-examination.  And I submit that every door which I

15     now -- will now seek to walk through has been opened by Mr. Bourgon and

16     Mr. Ostojic principally.

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. Ostojic.

18             MR. OSTOJIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Briefly in reply --

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  Briefly, please.

20             MR. OSTOJIC:  Yes.  Two points.

21             One, he ignores the fact that his position, when he put this

22     witness on the stand, has never changed.  His claim that command

23     responsibility is something that they want to rebut now, they've

24     contradicted that in their direct examination.  To go back to it

25     certainly is not proper redirect examination.

Page 32387

 1             Secondly, for him to claim that we've opened the door because

 2     we've challenged his evidence, that's exactly what cross-examination is.

 3     He should have, and I'm sure he did, based on the level of preparation

 4     that they had and the request for leave to prepare with this witness and

 5     with documents throughout his testimony is really unfair to the Defence

 6     and unfair to my client specifically.  They had an opportunity to

 7     prepare; they know what our respective decisions are.  And for him to say

 8     that he's somewhat surprised by our questions on cross-examination is a

 9     bit, with all due respect, disingenuous when we had no idea, under any of

10     the documents or evidence that's been brought forth, that Mr. Pandurevic

11     now claims at the 12th hour that he had these purported conversations

12     that never have been provided to any of the Defence formally or

13     informally.  So for him now to go on and do another direct examination,

14     we believe is improper.  And that's all he's doing.

15             Momir Nikolic and his --- specifically this exhibit that we're

16     talking about, I mean, 7D423, he doesn't even address that, so I assume

17     he either concedes it or realises that that should not have been utilized

18     in this redirect and only could have been opened if he wanted to on his

19     direct examination.

20             Thank you.

21             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Do you wish to comment, Mr. McCloskey?

22             MR. McCLOSKEY:  No, Mr. President.

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

24             Mr. Haynes, I do notice, actually, that there were some issues

25     raised by Mr. Ostojic which you did not address.  One, in particular,

Page 32388

 1     relates to the allegation that you did not make available, the proofing

 2     notes.

 3             MR. HAYNES:  Well, I hope I don't need to dwell on that for very

 4     long -- [Overlapping speakers]

 5             If Mr. Ostojic was standing in my shoes and somebody suggested to

 6     him that his clients should provide details of their conversations with

 7     their lawyers to anybody, I imagine he would faint, frankly.  He's not an

 8     ordinary witness, he's an accused person, and those sorts of exchanges

 9     are never disclosable, in my view.

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  And about the allegation that you've made use of

11     new documents that you could have made use of during your direct?

12             MR. HAYNES:  I don't -- I don't think that's right.  In fact, I'm

13     sure it's not right.  Had I put Momir Nikolic's plea agreement on the

14     screen and read it out to my client in direct examination, people would

15     have been horrified.  That's why I say this is a reactive form of

16     examination.  It's a reaction to the way in which he's been

17     cross-examined.  And I think I dealt with it, as it were, the reasons why

18     briefly yesterday, my words quoted back at me yet again, that I'm

19     entitled now, given the manner of the attack on my client, the suggestion

20     that he got his head together with Obrenovic in 1999, that he composed

21     his account piecing together the evidence ex post facto, that he didn't

22     tell his lawyers about things he gave evidence about, to deal with all

23     those things, by reference, as it were, reference points that were not

24     obvious or available to me in direct examination.  And the use of

25     documents that I propose to make is entirely consistent with the use of

Page 32389

 1     documents throughout the whole history of this trial, most particularly,

 2     I'd have thought, in re-examination.  And there was some spectacular

 3     examples during the course of the Prosecution's case of this sort of

 4     thing.

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right, thank you.

 6             Yes, Ms. Nikolic.

 7             MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.  Good

 8     afternoon to everyone.

 9             Just a few sentences I would like to join into in what my learned

10     friend Ostojic already said.

11             Concerning the statement of Mr. Nikolic, Momir Nikolic, this

12     Trial Chamber has already admitted 4D16 into evidence.  As concerned in

13     examination in chief and in, specifically, cross-examination of

14     Mr. Pandurevic, not a single event mentioned in the statement of

15     Mr. Nikolic was subject to his examination.  Mr. Pandurevic did not take

16     part in the events that constitute an integral part or a part of this

17     statement of fact of Mr. Nikolic, at least according to what he said.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

19                           [Trial Chamber confers]

20             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  We are unanimous in what I'm going to

21     communicate to you.

22             Overall, we are satisfied that the line of questions that

23     Mr. Haynes so far has put to the witness on redirect, and I say

24     "generally and overall," do constitute a reaction to the various

25     questions put on cross-examination by both the Prosecution and Defence --

Page 32390

 1     and other Defence teams.  However, we also wish to make it clear that

 2     since we still have an ongoing redirect, should at any moment you feel

 3     that questions are put that do not fall within the parameters of what the

 4     law is about redirect examination, you should stand up, draw our

 5     attention, and we will decide these issues on a case-by-case basis.

 6             As regards the allegation made by you, Mr. Bourgon --

 7     Mr. Ostojic, sorry, regarding the use of new documents, and in particular

 8     the Momir Nikolic statement of facts, it's in our judgement Mr. Haynes

 9     has not been seeking the introduction of that statement into evidence,

10     but has only been making use of parts of that statement of facts which he

11     is putting as a supposition to the witness for his reaction.  As such,

12     there is nothing irregular in this practice, with the understanding, as I

13     said, that it's not being sought to tender that document as evidence of

14     its contents, as evidence of its contents.

15             So we can proceed now.

16             Incidentally, before you continue, because I'm sure we will come

17     to this in due course, and this may be the last sitting this week:  We

18     haven't seen yet, although we know that it has been filed, your notice

19     for rebuttal.  We have it now?  Okay, but I haven't seen it, anyway.  It

20     must have arrived now since we started the sitting.  Okay.

21             And I am informed that you are preparing to have two of your

22     three witnesses already granted for reopening in line.  I would like you

23     to keep in mind, in your scheduling process, that we do not intend to sit

24     next week on Friday, the 13th, so we are not sitting on that day not

25     because of superstition, but because we need to meet and discuss urgent

Page 32391

 1     business that we have to decide.

 2             Yes.

 3             MR. HAYNES:  While we're on that, my witness coordinator, I'm

 4     just reminded, did ask me to say that the position with our potential

 5     witnesses next week is that there's one ready for Monday; one, possibly

 6     two, for Tuesday.  I wouldn't have thought the witness for Monday would

 7     fill a whole court day.

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right, thank you.

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Mr. President, if we think that the Pandurevic

10     case will be over by the end of Tuesday still, and if no one objects,

11     then we will try, and I'll, you know, formally request we get those two

12     witnesses here.  They should be ready, but that's different than saying,

13     yes, bring them here.  So if there is no objection, we're ready to bring

14     those two people here.

15             MR. HAYNES:  We are talking about this anyway.  I think you

16     should know that.

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Okay.  Thank you.

18             So, Mr. Haynes.

19             MR. HAYNES:  Sorry for the interruption.  Let's --

20             MR. HAYNES:  [Overlapping speakers] ... it's absolutely right

21     that these things should be dealt with properly.

22             I thank Ms. Nikolic for her intervention, and in the light of

23     that I will not call up 7D423.  I'll call up 4D16, which is in evidence,

24     please.

25                           WITNESS:  VINKO PANDUREVIC [Resumed]

Page 32392

 1                           [The witness answered through interpreter]

 2             MR. HAYNES:  And I think we need to go to paragraph 10, which is

 3     certainly at page 6 of the English, and the B/C/S as well.

 4                           Re-examination by Mr. Haynes:  [Continued]

 5        Q.   Now, I'm not going to read all this out, Mr. Pandurevic, so when

 6     it comes up in your language, will you read down through paragraph 10

 7     yourself, please, as far as you wish to, and let us know when you're

 8     finished.

 9        A.   I've read it.

10        Q.   You may have told us this yesterday.  I simply can't remember.

11     When was the first time you were aware of the contents of this document?

12        A.   That was when I saw it here at the Detention Unit.

13        Q.   And it probably goes without saying, then, you didn't know what

14     this document said when you spoke to Eileen Gilleece in October of 2001;

15     is that right?

16             MR. OSTOJIC:  I object to the form of the question,

17     Mr. President, because this document was created in 2003.  So I think

18     it's improper.

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Thank you, Mr. Ostojic.

20             Yes, Mr. Haynes.

21             MR. HAYNES:  Yes.

22        Q.   Did you know what this document said when you spoke to

23     Eileen Gilleece?

24        A.   No, I had no idea at all what knowledge Mr. Momir Nikolic had.

25        Q.   And when you first learnt of the contents of this document, what

Page 32393

 1     was your reaction?

 2        A.   I was simply surprised to learn about all the activities that

 3     took place, if what is said in this statement of facts is true.  This was

 4     totally new to me.

 5        Q.   And if it is true, could you comment, please, on the sort of

 6     command relationships that are in operation in this paragraph of this

 7     statement of fact?

 8        A.   During this trial, we heard about several kinds of relationships

 9     in the -- or communications line in the VRS.  One of it was by courier.

10     It was normally used at the level of platoons or in companies.  We hear

11     here that Momir Nikolic was acting as the courier.  He left Bratunac and

12     went to visit Drago Nikolic and to impart to him certain information or

13     orders from Colonel Beara.  This is not a standard chain of a command

14     which is in compliance with command and control.  For that to be correct,

15     it was necessary for the commander of the Zvornik Brigade, or the person

16     standing in for him, to receive an order from the corps command, either

17     this one or some other one, and then comply with it.

18             This was one of the methods in which a number of officers are

19     involved or a group of officers are engaged to carry out a task, and it

20     is known who among them is the most senior and the most responsible for

21     the execution of the task.

22             Most probably, as I understand it, this task was not designed by

23     this person, himself, but rather from someone who has the right to

24     control and command in the VRS, and in this case I think it was his

25     immediate superior:

Page 32394

 1             MR. HAYNES:  Thank you.  Can we have a look now, please, at

 2     2D642.  This is an untranslated Croatian intercept.

 3        Q.   You may have to read it out for us slowly, Mr. Pandurevic, when

 4     it comes onto the screen.  Nice and slowly for the interpreters, please,

 5     Mr. Pandurevic.

 6        A.   I think I already read this intercept.  It reads:

 7             "13th July 1995, 1125.  924.  Colonel Ljubo Beara (GS VRS) is

 8     sending four buses, two trucks, and one trailer-truck to Kasaba for

 9     transportation of the captured Muslims.  These men will be transferred to

10     the camp in the village of Batkovici, where 'selection' between war

11     criminals and ordinary soldiers will be carried out."

12        Q.   Yes.  You were asked by Mr. Ostojic and, I think, the President

13     to interpret the word "selection."  How does this fit in with what we now

14     know was going on in Bratunac with Deronjic and Momir Nikolic and others?

15        A.   In response to the question of Their Honours, I tried to say that

16     this conversation was not conveyed in its integral form, it was kind of

17     shortened.  The word "selection" was used in its literal meaning.  That's

18     why inverted commas.  In light of the entire context of these events and

19     the facts pertaining to them, I understand that this was necessary and

20     that a decision was made on the 13th of July to separate the prisoners

21     into those who were considered to have committed war crimes and to those

22     who are not to have committed those crimes.

23        Q.   Very well.  Now, you were asked by Mr. Bourgon a number of

24     questions about Drago Nikolic's motor car.  Do you recall that?

25        A.   Yes, I do.

Page 32395

 1        Q.   And in July of 1995, what was the position in relation to

 2     Drago Nikolic's motor car?

 3        A.   My previous decision was altered at the time.  By this decision,

 4     I banned Drago Nikolic from using the official car for his purposes, but

 5     rather to use it as the rest of the Command or members of the Command

 6     were doing.  In July, he already had a vehicle that he used at his own

 7     discretion, meaning without my permission and without my consent.

 8        Q.   And do you know what sort of motor car that was?

 9        A.   I remember how it looked like.  I think that it was an Opel

10     station wagon, painted olive-drab green, if I remember correctly.

11        Q.   And do you remember who his drivers were?

12        A.   I didn't know the names of the drivers or other people who used

13     to drive him.  I saw these names here, in the work logs that were

14     presented here during the trial.

15        Q.   Well, can we have a look, please, at P903.  Sorry, I think I'm

16     wrong here.  P904 is what I wanted to look at.

17             Is that the car you were talking about?

18        A.   Yes, it is.

19        Q.   And within the Zvornik Brigade, do you recall what function

20     Milorad Bircakovic, Mirko Ristic, had?

21        A.   I think that they were all members of the a military police

22     company.  I saw Mr. Bircakovic in person when he was here, and I remember

23     this face, and Arapovic, Misko.  However, I don't remember a Mirko Ristic

24     at all.

25        Q.   Okay.  Can we go to page 2 of this document.  And as far as is

Page 32396

 1     possible for Mr. Pandurevic, unless you find it easier to read the

 2     English, can we blow up the bottom entries for the 13th of July.  Now,

 3     can we leave that document to one side for a moment and just deal with

 4     some matters of procedure.

 5             You've told us, or at least if you haven't, other people have,

 6     that in addition to the duty officer at the Command of the

 7     Zvornik Brigade, there was a duty officer at the Forward Command Post; is

 8     that right?

 9        A.   Yes, that's how it was at the time.

10        Q.   And we've heard a plethora of evidence that at the Command, there

11     was also a deputy duty officer who, as it were, was on night duty.  Is

12     that right?

13        A.   Yes, and he was called assistant duty officer.

14        Q.   Thank you for the correction.  Was that the same position at the

15     Forward Command Post?

16        A.   No.  At the Forward Command Post, there was just one man.

17        Q.   And what, principally, should a duty officer do at the Forward

18     Command Post?

19        A.   In principal, at the Forward Command Post, was used, and some

20     critical situations, and when I say "critical," I'm referring to the

21     seriousness of the situation at the front-line i the combat sense, when

22     attacks or activities of the hostile side are expected.  And the officer

23     who is present at the Forward Command Post, he is in direct combat

24     contact, if I may say so.  He has a direct ability to observe and follow

25     what's happening at the front, and he can feel what's going on in a

Page 32397

 1     battle.  At the same time, he's receiving information from duty officers

 2     and subordinate units, and from time to time he informs the duty officer

 3     in the barracks about the situation in the area of the defence of the

 4     brigade.

 5        Q.   What about leaving the Command Post; should he do that?

 6        A.   According to the regulations, he's not allowed to leave the

 7     Forward Command Post without there being a substitute for him, or he

 8     needs to receive, from his superior officer, a permit to leave the

 9     Forward Command Post, and in the meantime another officer needs to be

10     sent to take over those duties.

11        Q.   Well, can we have a look at the two sets of entries for the 13th

12     of July, please, in relation to this motor vehicle you're telling us

13     about.  What's the first entry we see for the 13th of July?

14        A.   We can see that this vehicle went, on the 13th of July, from

15     Standard in the barracks to the Forward Command Post.  Then it returned

16     back to Zvornik and was used locally, was driven locally, meaning either

17     in Zvornik or in the immediate vicinity of Zvornik.

18        Q.   And the second set of entries?

19        A.   Also on the 13th, this vehicle made several trips.  I don't know

20     what order they used to record it, but my conclusion would be that the

21     first trip was Standard-Bratunac-Zvornik, and then

22     Orahovac-Zvornik-Orahovac, or perhaps vice versa.  Perhaps it is more

23     likely that it was vice versa.

24        Q.   And what sort of distance did that vehicle apparently travel,

25     completing those journeys?

Page 32398

 1        A.   Well, this is some 200 kilometres of distance that was covered,

 2     if the entries in this document are accurate.

 3        Q.   Would your Forward Command Post duty officer be doing his duty by

 4     travelling 200 kilometres during the course of the day?

 5        A.   No.  While he's on duty, he had to be on IKM.  He could go on

 6     foot to the observation post, to the neighbouring battalions and their

 7     commands, but it wasn't his duty to tour units.  So while on duty, he

 8     would not have been able to travel this distance.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Now, Mr. Ostojic and you briefly discussed a man

10     called Zoran Zekic.  Can you remind us who he was in July of 1995?

11             MR. OSTOJIC:  Can I have a page reference, please .

12             MR. HAYNES:  19th of February, 2008, page 31810.

13             MR. OSTOJIC:  Thank you.

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  Do you need time, Mr. Ostojic, or can we proceed?

15             MR. OSTOJIC:  He can proceed, yes.

16             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

17             MR. HAYNES:

18        Q.   Who was Zoran Zekic in July of 1995?

19        A.   He was president of the Executive Board of the Zvornik Municipal

20     Assembly.

21        Q.   And what sort of relationship did you have with him?

22        A.   It was a business kind of a relationship, an official

23     relationship with a person who was performing certain duties.  They had

24     to do with the matters of the brigade that could have been resolved by

25     the municipal government and had to do with members of the brigade who

Page 32399

 1     were from that municipality.

 2        Q.   He gave evidence before us on the 28th of February, 2007.

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11                           [Private session]

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 32400

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20                           [Open session]

21             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  We're in open session.

22             MR. HAYNES:  I think I actually said that Mr. Pandurevic and

23     Mr. Ostojic discussed Zoran Zekic.

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  Alright.  Let's proceed.

25             MR. HAYNES:  We're in open session.  Can we have a look at 7D236,

Page 32401

 1     please, pages 32 and 33 in the English and 28 to 30 in the B/C/S.

 2             Because it's a multi-page document, I'm going to give

 3     Mr. Pandurevic a hard copy to read through.  It's been highlighted, if

 4     anybody objects, but I'm going to ask him to -- sorry.

 5             We're looking for 7D236.

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11             JUDGE AGIUS:  Well, yes.  I don't know what you just said,

12     whether we need actually to redact once more.  I think we --

13             MR. HAYNES:  Can we go into private session, and I will try and

14     give comfort to everybody.

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  And we also need to redact --

16             MR. HAYNES:  We do.

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  -- Mr. McCloskey's intervention as well.

18             MR. HAYNES:  Yes.

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  As well as the previous one, which I'm still

20     waiting for to sign.

21                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

22                           [Private session]

23     (redacted)

24     (redacted)

25     (redacted)

Page 32402











11 Page 32402 redacted. Private session.















Page 32403

 1     (redacted)

 2     (redacted)

 3     (redacted)

 4                           [Open Session]

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  For the record, we've been in public session now.

 6             Yes, Mr. McCloskey.

 7             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I'm sorry about this.  Could we go into private

 8     briefly?

 9             THE COURT:  Let's go into private session, please.

10                           [Private session]

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 32404











11 Pages 32404-32406 redacted. Private session.















Page 32407

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22                           [Open session]

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  We are back in open session.

24             Mr. Haynes.

25             MR. HAYNES:

Page 32408

 1        Q.   Now, you were asked a number of questions by Mr. Ostojic about a

 2     man called Marko Milosevic, and by Mr. Bourgon a number of questions

 3     about a man called Ostoja Stanisic.  Can you remind us respectively who

 4     those two people were?

 5        A.   Ostoja Stanisic was captain first class, at the time commander of

 6     the 6th [realtime transcript read in error "1st"] Battalion.  Marko

 7     Milosevic, nicknamed Majo, was his deputy.

 8        Q.   And what working relationship, if any, had Milosevic had with

 9     Drago Nikolic earlier in the war?

10        A.   I apologise.  It says in the transcript that he was commander of

11     the 1st Battalion, whereas he was the commander of the 6th Battalion.

12             As for the reply to your question, I didn't know what

13     relationship existed between Mr. Milosevic and Drago Nikolic.

14        Q.   Thank you.  Now, Marko Milosevic gave evidence before us on the

15     26th of June, 2007.  Do you remember his evidence?

16        A.   I do.

17        Q.   He told us that the 6th Battalion received a call in the morning

18     of the 14th of July between 10.00 and 12.00, to tell them that prisoners

19     were coming to the school at Petkovci, and at about 4.00 or 5.00 in the

20     afternoon of the 14th of July, he was sent to Petkovci to pass a message

21     to Colonel Beara.  He said he went to the school, where he saw

22     Drago Nikolic, who pointed out Beara to him, and he passed the message to

23     Beara.  He said the school was surrounded by security which was not from

24     the Zvornik Brigade, and later that evening he heard gun-fire coming from

25     the school.

Page 32409

 1             Now, in fairness, Mr. Ostojic put to us -- both Marko Milosevic

 2     and Ostoja Stanisic that they made all this up, the fact that they'd seen

 3     Colonel Beara.  I'd like you, please, to -- I've not done it again, have

 4     I?

 5             MR. McCLOSKEY:  No.  It's misleading, but I won't object as long

 6     as we get the fact correct that the call came from the office of the

 7     Zvornik Brigade.

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, Mr. McCloskey.

 9             Mr. Haynes -- Ostojic.

10             MR. OSTOJIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

11             It is leading.  I do object that it's leading, but I also don't

12     see that this is proper redirect.  If we're looking at the conduct of

13     Mr. Pandurevic and we challenged him on both his command and what he

14     claims that he's had certain conversations, to go over all the evidence

15     that the Prosecution may have called, unless all their entire defence is,

16     which I believe now it is more clearly than before, that all it is, is

17     adopting the Krstic and the Blagojevic Defence, but I don't think it's

18     proper in this context, and again I reiterate my objection that this is

19     improper redirect examination.

20             JUDGE AGIUS:  He's referring precisely to questions, specific

21     questions put by you to the witness during your cross-examination.  How

22     can it fall outside the parameters of redirect?

23             MR. OSTOJIC:  With all due respect, Your Honour, he's not, and he

24     doesn't even cite a page or a line, because it's not what I asked him

25     about Marko Milosevic.  The witness invited and only told us about

Page 32410

 1     Marko Milosevic and Ostoja Stanisic, that they were pretty iter-related

 2     or integrated with Dragomir Vasic, which was supposed to be the 6th

 3     Battalion commander for Moral and Guidance and Religion.  That was the

 4     extent of the questioning for him, but I invite him to give me that

 5     specific page cite where I question their credibility or not.

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  Fair enough.

 7             Yes, Mr. Haynes.

 8             Thank you, Mr. Ostojic.

 9             MR. HAYNES:  Yes, it's 1331 to -- 13331 to 13332.

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  While it's right in front of you, why don't you

11     read up Mr. Ostojic's question to the witness so that we are in --

12             MR. HAYNES:  I'm not sure what we're -- I'm being asked to do.

13     I've just given two pages that refer to his cross-examination of

14     Marko Milosevic, and I'm not going to read all of that out.

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  But your question, as I have it in the

16     transcript, and therefore subject to the transcript being faithfully

17     reflecting the questions, says:

18             "Now, in fairness, Mr. Ostojic put to us that both

19     Marko Milosevic and Ostoja Stanisic, that they made all this up, the fact

20     that they had seen Colonel Beara ..."

21             Mr. Ostojic, as I understand him, is denying having ever put

22     these questions.

23             MR. OSTOJIC:  No, I think, if I may interrupt, and I apologise,

24     I think you misunderstood me, with all due respect, and it's --

25     Mr. Haynes prefaced his questions to try to open a door to discuss

Page 32411

 1     Marko Milosevic, to reiterate evidence as he may see it.  We never asked

 2     or inquired of this witness that.  And proper, in our view, in proper

 3     redirect examination if I had opened or cited Marko Milosevic or Ostoja

 4     Stanisic's testimony, then he could go into it; we didn't.  And I'm

 5     advising the Court if he could give me the page number where I inquired

 6     of this witness specifically where we inquired of -- but he's citing

 7     page 13331 and 13312, which is testimony a year or two ago of those two

 8     individuals, which is not what I'm objecting to.  That testimony is in

 9     evidence.  I'm objecting, saying it's an improper scope of examination.

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay, I read you better now.  Thank you.

11             Yes, Mr. Haynes.

12             MR. HAYNES:  No, I'm not suggesting he -- he questioned the

13     credibility of Ostoja Stanisic or Marko Milosevic during his

14     cross-examination of Mr. Pandurevic.  He did question their credibility

15     when he cross-examined them as witnesses.  But what he did in this case

16     was question the credibility of my client, and in particular say that he

17     didn't agree with his position on his theory of the absence of commander

18     and the senior officer issue that you raised, and this is the very heart

19     of that very issue.  This is where there are prisoners at a school being

20     guarded by members of a unit that are not part of the Zvornik Brigade,

21     Drago Nikolic, and the chief of security of the Main Staff.  And I want

22     my client to, as it were, explain what command relationship is going on

23     there.

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. McCloskey.

25             MR. McCLOSKEY:  That may be a submission, that they were not

Page 32412

 1     being guarded by members of the Zvornik Brigade, but -- and that's what,

 2     I think, Stanisic said.  However, that is not an established fact in this

 3     case.

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  It's going to be a ping-pong game.

 5             MR. OSTOJIC:  No, it's not.  Just very briefly, if I may.  Thank

 6     you, Mr. President.

 7             And in fact he can just look to the admission by his deputy or

 8     Chief of Staff, Obrenovic, where he says the 6th Battalion was involved,

 9     and all those other things.  So it's only a submission on their part, but

10     I think it's still improper redirect examination, and we object on those

11     grounds.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Your final word, Mr. Haynes, and we'll

13     decide.

14             MR. HAYNES:  I don't want one.  I think I've said all I need to

15     say, and it's nearly the break, isn't it?

16             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Let's have the break, then.  Thank you.

17             Twenty-five minutes.

18                           --- Recess taken at 3.34 p.m.

19                           --- On resuming at 4.05 p.m.

20             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Where were we?

21             Mr. Haynes.

22             MR. HAYNES:  We were at Petkovci on the 14th of July, I think.

23        Q.   You were asked some questions by Mr. Ostojic by reference to a

24     document that was an interview of his client's former driver, a man

25     called Milos Tomovic, and it's 2D639, and can we have that put into

Page 32413

 1     e-court, please, quickly.  It's not translated, this document, into

 2     B/C/S, so far as I'm aware.  We need to look at page 3.

 3             The principal purpose of Mr. Ostojic's cross-examination of you

 4     was to establish whether you knew that somebody else knew that his client

 5     had an alibi, but I'd like to look at line 16.  I'll read them out:

 6             "Okay.  Before we get ahead of us both, can I just stop by saying

 7     in July of 95, when you drove Beara to these places, what kind of vehicle

 8     did you have?

 9             "It was Puch, military vehicle, and a Golf 3.  Those two vehicles

10     I was assigned, I was given, and I drove them.

11             "And in which of these two vehicles did you drive Colonel Beara

12     down to Bratunac?

13             "Golf.

14             "And what colour was this Golf?

15             "Blue."

16             I'll give everyone else a transcript reference.  It's 13305.

17             Do you remember the evidence of Marko Milosevic as to what sort

18     of vehicle he saw in the vicinity at Petkovci on the 14th of July?

19        A.   Unfortunately, I don't.

20        Q.   Very well.  Now, before we broke, we had a little discussion, and

21     I'll cut straight to the chase.  What command situation do you see in

22     operation at Petkovci, according to the evidence of Marko Milosevic and

23     Ostoja Stanisic, as you understand it to be?

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, hold it.

25             Yes, Mr. Ostojic.

Page 32414

 1             MR. OSTOJIC:  It calls for speculation and expert testimony that

 2     this witness is not qualified to give, Mr. President, and so we object on

 3     those grounds.

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  Do you wish to comment, Mr. Haynes?

 5             MR. HAYNES:  No.  I think he can answer it.  He's a general.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  We believe it's a question that is related to his

 8     office and that he can answer it.  So, please, Mr. Pandurevic, could you

 9     proceed with your answer.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will most certainly

11     do so, but I would kindly ask you for some patience because this is a

12     crucial thing, and I would like to explain it in more details, and I will

13     focus myself on the area of Petkovci.

14             In the period between the 10th and the 20th of July, the Army of

15     Republika Srpska was engaged in carrying out a variety of tasks.

16     Sometimes, these tasks were carried out by units as a whole, and

17     sometimes they were carried out by elements from different units combined

18     as temporary formations and under separate command.

19             If we look at the Drina Corps specifically, the Zvornik Brigade,

20     as a whole, was tasked with defending the defence zone and engaged in

21     combat with the 28th Division.  The Sekovici Brigade was tasked with

22     defending its own defence zone, and so on and so forth.  At the same

23     time, parts of these brigades, as well as parts of other brigades, were

24     in the Krajina as part of a temporary formation and were engaged in

25     carrying out tasks under separate command that had been established as a

Page 32415

 1     provisional command for that specific task.

 2             In addition to this, also carried out were tasks relating to the

 3     events that are subject of this trial.  For that purpose, in my judgement

 4     and according to my conclusions, the commander of the Main Staff issued

 5     tasks to a specific individual, gave him a number of men and assets, and

 6     told him to carry out the task with them.

 7             Specifically, I think that Mr. Beara, not before -- because he

 8     was the head of the Security Administration but because he was given a

 9     task by Mr. Mladic to deal with the prisoners of war, and based on all

10     the documents that we've seen here, whether through General Krstic or

11     directly through Mr. Furtula, he was also given a unit, buses, and other

12     assets required for the execution of this task.  Also involved in this

13     task were a number of men who were working for the Security Service.

14             Now, in what way did this person in charge act?  He acted as a

15     commanding officer and carried out a specific task.  He had received his

16     orders from his superior.  He was given powers and authority to put it

17     into practice.  And all the men that were involved in the execution of

18     this task were under the direct command of the most senior individual

19     directing the mission.  In other words, this was no parallel chain of

20     command or any chain of command within the security organ.  This was, in

21     fact, the command structure established for the execution of a specific

22     task.

23             Mr. Beara had an opportunity and the possibility to command all

24     the men engaged in this task for three reasons.  The first and the most

25     important one was because he was appointed to do that by the commander of

Page 32416

 1     the Staff.  He didn't do it of his own accord and not because he was in

 2     the Security Service.  Secondly, as a member and chief of the Security

 3     Service, he could engage any VRS security officer.  And, thirdly, because

 4     he was the most senior officer on the ground at the time.

 5             Therefore, in Petkovci, all the men engaged around the school

 6     building and in dealing with the prisoners of war were directly

 7     subordinated to Mr. Beara.  Regardless of the fact that for formerly

 8     there were members of the Bratunac brigade, Zvornik Brigade, MUP, the

 9     10th Sabotage Platoon, et cetera.  But within the system of command in

10     this specific circumstances, they were subordinate to Mr. Beara, and he

11     had command responsibility over them.

12             I apologise for this lengthy answer.

13             MR. HAYNES:

14        Q.   Thank you.  Now, as I asked you a few moments ago, it was

15     suggested by Mr. Ostojic, of course, that Mr. Beara was in Belgrade at

16     the relevant times, and I would just like to have a look at a couple of

17     documents with you.

18             MR. HAYNES:  Could we look at P377, page 751 for you and page 133

19     for the rest of us?

20             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. Ostojic.

21             MR. OSTOJIC:  This may be my last objection if the Court just

22     gives me a clear indication that they are going to deny all these

23     objections, but this is clearly outside the scope of cross-examination.

24     I didn't challenge this to the witness, nor, with all do respect to him,

25     do I care what his thoughts are about witnesses or his evidence.  I

Page 32417

 1     didn't ask him what he thought about our witnesses or about Mr. Beara

 2     being in Belgrade.  What I did try to do with this witness is to show,

 3     which apparently somewhat successfully, because all we're doing is

 4     reiterating some of these questions, his conduct and his responsibility

 5     and his credibility and veracity.  I didn't address the issue of

 6     Mr. Beara being in Belgrade, although it was undisputed, when the

 7     witnesses were brought forth by the Prosecution, in my opinion, but most

 8     certainly by the Pandurevic Defence, since they raised no questions at

 9     that time.

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right, but we haven't heard the question, as

11     yet.  This is it.  I mean, I need to hear the question first before I can

12     properly ask my colleagues to assess with me your objection.

13             So let's hear the question --

14             MR. OSTOJIC:  I apologise then, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let's hear the question first, because I don't

16     know -- or even before the question, your remarks, if you have any,

17     Mr. Haynes, and then we'll decide on the objection.

18             MR. HAYNES:  No, I can take the questions very quickly.  It was

19     probably my fault, but I thought it was a courtesy to introduce the

20     purpose of the questions, but the questions, themselves, are quite

21     straightforward.

22        Q.   If we have a look at page 751 in P377.  That's 133 in e-court.

23     There's an entry about halfway down that page.  Can you help us,

24     General Pandurevic, as to the date and time of that entry, approximately,

25     by reference to the other pages in the book?

Page 32418

 1        A.   This is the date when Mr. Jokic was on duty.  He began on the

 2     14th.  Let me just check whether we are still on the 14th.  Yes, the

 3     14th.  And this entry:  "155, Beara to call," was entered after the last

 4     one, which was at 2000 hours.  So that would be after 2000 hours on the

 5     evening of the 14th.

 6        Q.   And do you know what "155" is?

 7        A.   I think that's an extension number.  That's what I knew at the

 8     time.  That was an extension number at the Main Staff, panorama.

 9     Obviously, the duty officer had received a message to tell Beara to call

10     this extension number.

11        Q.   Now can we go over the page, please, to 752 for you, 134 for the

12     rest of us.  It's probably obvious from the fact we've gone forward in

13     the book, but how close is that entry made to the end of the day on the

14     14th of July?  In particular, I'm referring to:  "0900, Beara is coming."

15        A.   I think it says:  "900 hours, Beara is coming."  I think what it

16     means is that he would be there at 9.00 the following day, because if it

17     had been in the unit, it would have been written "2100 hours," because

18     that's how the duty operations officer used to record times.

19        Q.   Thank you very much.  Now can we go to P1177.

20             JUDGE AGIUS:  And, Mr. Ostojic, do you still maintain your

21     objection, having heard the question and the answer?

22             MR. OSTOJIC:  I do, Mr. President, on this whole line.  I think

23     it's way outside the scope of cross-examination.  And if their point is

24     to prove the involvement of Beara, they should have gave us some notice

25     of that being their tactic.  It's certainly not on any of the material

Page 32419

 1     that we received from them, so we're also raising that.

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Let's continue and keep your objection in

 3     mind for digestion in due course.  Thank you.

 4             Yes, Mr. Haynes.

 5             MR. HAYNES:

 6        Q.   You've seen this before, I think, in cross-examination by

 7     Mr. McCloskey.

 8        A.   Yes, I did.

 9        Q.   Do you recall the evidence of Richard Butler as to who could be

10     found on extension 139 at the Zvornik Brigade?

11        A.   I think that Mr. McCloskey also mentioned this extension, and

12     I think that this extension number belonged to Drago Nikolic, if I

13     remember correctly.

14        Q.   Now, just a piece of geographical information.  What time would

15     you have to leave Belgrade in the morning to be at the Command of the

16     Zvornik Brigade for about 10.00?

17        A.   Well, there are various things that have to be taken into

18     consideration, but if you drive very fast, you would need one and a half

19     hours or one hour and forty-five minutes.  Therefore, one should set off

20     at 8.00, at the latest.

21             MR. HAYNES:  I'd like to call P1179 into e-court now, please.

22     The B/C/S is under seal.  I'm wrong about that.  It's not under seal.

23        Q.   Now, this is a fairly famous document in this case, but please

24     take your time to read it through, and I want to put a few questions to

25     you about it.

Page 32420

 1        A.   Could I please have a look at the next page.  Thank you.  Can you

 2     please scroll down a bit.

 3             I've read these two pages.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Now, you've told us that at about this time, at 10.00

 5     in the morning on the 15th of July, you were pulling your units out at

 6     the front, Zepa.  Were you still in radio contact with the Forward

 7     Command Post?

 8        A.   Yes, I was, with the former command post of the Drina Corps.

 9        Q.   And would it have been possible for General Krstic to call you

10     and ask you to give 20 or 30 men to Colonel Beara when you got back to

11     Zvornik?

12        A.   Yes, it would have been possible.

13        Q.   Did he do that?

14        A.   No.

15        Q.   Can you imagine why not?

16             MR. OSTOJIC:  Calls for speculation.

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  We don't want you to speculate.  You either

18     know or not, or Mr. Haynes moves to his next question.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wouldn't like to speculate,

20     Your Honours.

21             JUDGE AGIUS:  Your next question, Mr. Haynes.

22             MR. HAYNES:

23        Q.   How many men did you return to Zvornik with?

24        A.   I returned with the whole TG-1; not all at once, but the total

25     was about 400 men.  They came in groups.

Page 32421

 1        Q.   How many names are mentioned in this conversation, so far as you

 2     can see?

 3        A.   In addition to the participants, Krstic and Beara, also mentioned

 4     are Nastic and Blagojevic.  And there was a misspelled name, Tasic and

 5     Sladojevic, referring to the latter two ones.  And I also see the name

 6     Idjic [phoen] or Indjic.

 7        Q.   Would it have been possible for General Krstic to say during this

 8     conversation, Don't worry, Ljubo, Vinko will be back in a little while,

 9     and he's got 400 men with him?

10             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Objection.  Anything is possible, and that's

11     really speculation.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Let's move on to your next, please,

13     Mr. Haynes.  Objection sustained.

14             MR. HAYNES:  Can we look back at P377, page 756 for you and 138

15     in e-court.

16        Q.   The entry at the very bottom of the page, Mr. Pandurevic, what

17     does that refer to, "Badem dispatched reinforcements"?

18        A.   This entry made at 0921 hours:  "Obrenovic ordered an urgent

19     request for reinforcements from the corps, reported Badem dispatched

20     reinforcements," therefore this was a request by Dragan Obrenovic for the

21     corps to find additional men to reinforce the Zvornik Brigade.

22        Q.   Any reference there or on the following page that Colonel Beara

23     should be informed of that?

24        A.   No, I don't seen one.  I haven't seen anything like that.

25        Q.   Let's move on.

Page 32422

 1             Now, Mr. Bourgon cross-examined you about the role of

 2     Drago Nikolic and the screening of volunteers to join the

 3     Zvornik Brigade, and in particular about a group of men who came from

 4     Serbia.  Why was that a particular cause of concern?

 5        A.   I think that I tried to explain this during cross-examination as

 6     well.  Especially at the beginning of war, there was a large number of

 7     volunteers who came there with various motives in mind, so therefore it

 8     was always necessary to check their true motives and their human

 9     qualities.  Later on during the war, their numbers dwindled, but the

10     screening procedure remained the same in order to verify whether they had

11     honourable intentions or they had some other intentions, such as trying

12     to clear their past records or to acquire some personal gains and things

13     like that.

14        Q.   In relation to the group you told us about, who I think came from

15     Uzicka Pozega, what were your concerns?

16        A.   Well, in that particular instance, as far as I remember, a larger

17     group came of some 30 men, and it was dangerous to keep them as one unit,

18     as one whole unit, because there would be a tendency to do various bad

19     things.  And they were housed in a Serbian village, and they created

20     trouble there.  And, as such, they were returned back.  Other volunteers

21     that were sent individually to various units and the Zvornik Brigade were

22     known to their superiors and also to security organs.  They knew of their

23     qualities, and they were in our units in that capacity throughout the

24     war.

25        Q.   This may be difficult to answer, but during the period of time

Page 32423

 1     that you were in command of the Zvornik Brigade, about how many

 2     volunteers were there to join the brigade?

 3        A.   Well, they would join the brigade and then leave.  Some of them

 4     stayed for a longer period of time, some for shorter.  There were some

 5     who stayed longer.  I wouldn't be able to give you the exact number, but

 6     there were other kinds of volunteers, soldiers from the Zvornik Brigade

 7     itself.  For example, if a unit had to be sent out for a special mission,

 8     or a certain group of soldiers had to be sent to another unit temporarily

 9     to accomplish a task there, then officers from battalions and companies

10     would ask for volunteers who wanted to do that voluntarily, and if nobody

11     volunteered to do that, then they would designate the people who would be

12     sent on these special missions.

13        Q.   What was the screening procedure, as far as you know?

14        A.   If volunteers came from other areas outside of Republika Srpska,

15     sometimes security organs of higher commands would do the screening and

16     simply inform the subordinate commands that everything was all right with

17     these people, that they had been screened, or that the security organ of

18     the unit they were joining should conduct the screening.  Their

19     biographical data was screened, their past, whether they had any

20     convictions, whether some of them that escaped from prison and so on.

21     Those kinds of things were checked.

22        Q.   Were records kept?

23        A.   I really don't know what kind of records were kept by security

24     organs regarding that.  There probably were some records.  And later on,

25     they were kept on the record of the units where they served.

Page 32424

 1        Q.   So if somebody was looking for a gang of dangerous people, who

 2     would be the best person in any army unit to ask?

 3        A.   Well, it's a difficult question, who would be --

 4             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I'm going to object.  It's --

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.

 6             MR. McCLOSKEY:  You know, what is the question, what's the

 7     relevance, where are we going with this?

 8             MR. HAYNES:  I'll move on.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, Mr. McCloskey.

10             MR. HAYNES:  Let's for the last time, I think, in this case have

11     a look at P2741, and I'm going to provide you with a hard copy,

12     General Pandurevic.

13        Q.   I'm sure you're very familiar with this document, but would you

14     just read through it for a couple of minutes, and I've only got a couple

15     of questions about it for you at this stage.

16        A.   Yes, I am familiar with this document, more or less.

17        Q.   Just to clear up something you were -- that was put to you by

18     Mr. Bourgon:  Does that instruction prevent the deployment of a security

19     officer as duty officer at the Brigade Command?

20        A.   I think that it doesn't say anything about that explicitly.

21     There is no ban on that.  But in order for me to be 100 per cent sure, I

22     would need to read the entire document.  However, my recollections

23     indicate what I have just told you.

24        Q.   I'll move on, because I'm anxious that we should finish today.

25             What was the practical effect of a determination that

Page 32425

 1     intelligence -- sorry, I'll start again.

 2             What was the practical effect of a determination that a certain

 3     task fell under the heading "Intelligence and Counter-Intelligence"?

 4        A.   Well, these instructions define, per se, the method of work of

 5     security organs.  As I have said earlier, this is entitled somewhat

 6     different than in the book on formations.  In the book, it is simply

 7     framed -- phrased differently, because the security organs are mentioned

 8     first here, and then the intelligence organs.  However, what is important

 9     for me, from these instructions, is item 5, paragraph 2, where it says

10     Sector for Security and Intelligence organs of the Main Staff of VRS

11     decides on transferring and sending, on special missions, members of the

12     security and intelligence organs within their scope of work, which is to

13     say that they could be assigned special tasks by the assistant Chief of

14     Staff of the Main Staff.  And also there are provisions about special

15     measures, awards and so on.

16        Q.   What would you know about what a security officer was doing if he

17     determined what he was doing was intelligence or counter-intelligence?

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. McCloskey.

19             MR. McCLOSKEY:  You know, that sounds speculative to me, and

20     we're also -- the general nature of this document has been discussed over

21     and over again, and unless we have something very specific we're

22     responding to Mr. Bourgon on, I think this is going beyond the scope.  As

23     to the last answer, I don't know where that's coming from or what it's

24     responding to.

25             JUDGE AGIUS:  Do you wish to comment, Mr. Haynes?

Page 32426

 1             MR. HAYNES:  I'll go straight to the point.  Never mind an

 2     invitation to go straight to the point, and as Mr. McCloskey knows, I'm

 3     never afraid to go straight to the point.

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Refrain from --

 5             MR. HAYNES:  No, no, that's --

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let's refrain from unnecessary comments.  Just go

 7     to the point.

 8             MR. HAYNES:

 9        Q.   You had a prolonged debate with Mr. Bourgon about what tasks

10     might or might not amount to counter-intelligence.  A simple question:

11     Did Drago Nikolic ever report to you what he was doing with Colonel Beara

12     at Petkovski on the 14th of July?

13        A.   No, never.

14        Q.   Did he ever submit any report to you about events at Orahovac?

15        A.   No, never.

16        Q.   Or Rocevic?

17        A.   No.

18        Q.   Now, I'm going to move away from that.

19             People touched briefly, in their cross-examination of you, upon

20     various items of literature that you'd written.  How many books have you

21     written?

22        A.   I think four or five.

23        Q.   And what post-graduate qualifications do you have?

24        A.   In Ljubljana, in Slovenia, I completed post-graduate studies in

25     Sociology, and I -- my minor was Social Ecology.  My PhD studies were in

Page 32427

 1     the field of Sociology of the Military, as a separate and distinct field

 2     of Sociology.

 3        Q.   Now, Mr. Bourgon cross-examined you on the basis that your

 4     evidence contradicted certain other opinions expressed in this case, and

 5     I'm going to ask you your views on some of those people.

 6             Can we start with Remy Landry.  How would you compare your

 7     knowledge of the relevant facts in this case to his?

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. McCloskey.

 9             MR. McCLOSKEY:  This seems to just be getting into argumentative.

10     Your Honours can make the judgements about, you know, personal

11     qualifications.  You know, "I'm better than he is," what's the point to

12     that, or, "He's better than I am"?  The form of the question is improper.

13             JUDGE AGIUS:  What are you trying to --

14             MR. HAYNES:  Well, Mr. Bourgon put to him this question:  "So

15     you're right and three military experts are wrong?"  He's brought into

16     question their expertise.  That puts that ball squarely in play.  It was

17     a stupid question, if I may say so, but I'm going to deal with it.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  And if he says -- makes a statement now

19     that tries to nullify the effects of the Bourgon question, where do we go

20     from there?  Ultimately, as Mr. McCloskey said, it's us who are going to

21     make an assessment.

22             MR. McCLOSKEY:  I have no objection to taking an opinion or a

23     statement of Landry and asking the general to comment on his view of it,

24     but the way that was phrased was not getting us anywhere.

25             MR. HAYNES:  I'll let you make a decision on that while I sit

Page 32428

 1     down.

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  Ms. Nikolic.

 3             MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can we please be

 4     given a reference to the page that Mr. Haynes is referring to when

 5     speaking of the question put by Mr. Bourgon?

 6             MR. HAYNES:  17th of February, 2009, page 31648, line 19, and

 7     page 31650, line 20.

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

 9             Mr. Ostojic, sorry.

10             MR. OSTOJIC:  I'm sorry to make this point, but I just -- it

11     leaves a bad taste when a colleague, even on the opposing side, would say

12     that a question is stupid.  I know yesterday there were some references,

13     and we do do that from time to time, but I would just ask the Court, as

14     it did just moments ago, just to refrain from making those comments.  He

15     could have objected at that point when Mr. Bourgon asked the question, I

16     don't know that it a basis to say a question is stupid, but I find it

17     actually distasteful.  I just want it on the record.

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Haynes.

19             MR. HAYNES:  I'll try to keep my temper.  That's a man who

20     invited me to go onto the witness box yesterday, but I won't say anything

21     like that again.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

23             MR. OSTOJIC:  Only because they raised the issue.

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  Stop it, please.  We've travelled a long way in a

25     very smooth -- on a very smooth journey, and let's not spoil it at the

Page 32429

 1     end.

 2                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 3             JUDGE AGIUS:  In anticipation of what the witness's answer could

 4     be, especially following your question, Mr. Haynes, I don't think we need

 5     it.  We are in a position later on to make an assessment.  We've heard

 6     him testify; we've heard Landry testify; we've heard Butler testify;

 7     we've heard others testify.

 8             MR. HAYNES:  Thank you.  Then I will move on and we'll get --

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  And I can assure you that until now, we haven't

10     made up our minds as to who is more qualified than who and who gave a

11     better expert opinion, so let's leave it and move to your next question.

12             MR. HAYNES:  Thank you.

13             I want to just sweep up a few minor points.  Can we have a look,

14     please, at P30.  And again this is quite a long document, so I'll see if

15     I can provide you with a hard copy to read through.

16        Q.   Now, this is the order amending directive number 4.  What's the

17     effect of an amending order?

18        A.   As far as I remember from my previous readings of this document,

19     this is an amendment to the directive number 4, shortening the dead-lines

20     for executing certain tasks.  At that time, they suppose that it is

21     possible to bring the war to an end by way of negotiations.  These

22     amendments to directives, or to orders, or any other combat documents,

23     can amend it in the way of supplementing it or changing the place of

24     execution, engagement of forces, and so on.  These are the kinds of

25     details that can be amended.

Page 32430

 1        Q.   And does that order amending directive 4 make any reference to

 2     civilians?

 3        A.   No, I don't see that.  No such mention.

 4        Q.   Did you receive any order, in the combat actions you've described

 5     for us in the early part of 1993, to remove civilian populations from

 6     their homes?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   And was that ever your objective in carrying out combat

 9     operations in that period of time?

10        A.   No.

11        Q.   I just want to give you the opportunity of looking at P409,

12     please, page 25 in both languages.

13             And the document will need to go to the left a little bit so that

14     Mr. Pandurevic can see paragraphs 52, 53, and 54.

15             In answering questions to Mr. McCloskey, you had in mind,

16     I think, some legal provisions.  Are these what you were referring to?

17        A.   Yes.  These are the regulations on the application of the -- of

18     the International Laws of War within the armed forces of the SFRY.  I was

19     referring to the regulations which deal with civilian population and how

20     they need to be protected, and also exceptions to the rule on general

21     protection and item 53, which is where it is specified in what

22     circumstances the commander will not have such responsibility or when

23     combat operations cause or inflict -- inflict casualties amongst

24     civilians.  Then we have three cases that represent exceptions.  I spoke

25     about the category of civilian population which is with an armed unit,

Page 32431

 1     when I spoke about the reports shown to me by Mr. McCloskey.

 2        Q.   One last thing on, as it were, 1993.  You pointed out, on a map

 3     that came from General Zivanovic, I think, 146 burnt Serbian villages,

 4     and we saw much earlier in the trial, I think, with PW-168, some

 5     underlying, as it were, video footage of the way in which people were

 6     murdered in those places.

 7             Did you see things like that, yourself, during that period of

 8     time?

 9        A.   During the war, I did see exhumed bodies from the area of

10     Glodjansko Brdo, from the area of Kravica, and I also saw mutilated

11     bodies in the area of Visegrad, near a village called Jelasci.

12        Q.   Were the people you were fighting combat with farmers defending

13     their homesteads, as was suggested to you?

14        A.   Those were members of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  As for

15     their basic occupation previously, whether some of them were farmers or

16     workers, that's something I don't know.

17        Q.   Now, in answer to a question from Mr. McCloskey about how you

18     interpreted Directive 7, you made reference to some NATO generals.

19             And I'd like now, please, if we could put 7D1126 into e-court.

20     And we need to go to the very last page of this document.

21             I'll read it for you slowly so that it's translated:

22             "General Short noted that he is stepping up attacks on Serbian

23     troops in Kosovo.

24             "'General Clark has set for me as my number 1 priority the

25     killing of that army in Kosovo,' he said, 'And I think I am going to be

Page 32432

 1     able to do that.  Not tomorrow or the next day, but we have flown our

 2     first day-time B-52 air-strikes in Kosovo, dropping Mark-82s.  And if I'm

 3     a young Serb soldier, eating my lunch at 2.00 in the afternoon, and out

 4     of the grey skies over my head comes a hundred-plus Mark-82s, that ought

 5     to be a signal that we're entering a new phase of the air campaign and

 6     we're taking the gloves off a little more.'

 7             "These days, striking directly at the Milosevic government is

 8     very much on his mind.  While NATO says it is not fighting against the

 9     Serbian people, General Short also hopes that the distress of the

10     Yugoslav public will undermine support for the authorities in Belgrade.

11             "'I think no power to your refrigerator, no gas to your stove,

12     you can't get to work because the bridge is down - the bridge on which

13     you held your rock concerts - and you all stood with targets on your

14     heads.  That needs to disappear at 3.00 in the morning.'"

15             Was this what you had in mind, as it were, when you talked about

16     the bombing of Belgrade?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And what combat activity is General Short describing in this

19     document?

20        A.   He described activities which could directly affect the morale

21     and the mood of the population and the enemy forces.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Now, just moving on very quickly:  How long after the

23     conversation with Brano Grujic on the 15th of July, at the IKM, was your

24     conversation with Ljubo Bojanovic?

25        A.   Well, as far as I remember, I said an hour, hour and a half.  I'm

Page 32433

 1     not sure.  Not a long time went by.

 2        Q.   And the information that you received from Brano Grujic,

 3     Ljubo Bojanovic, and Dragan Obrenovic, did it suggest that the prisoners

 4     had arrived in one large group at roughly at the same time or that they

 5     were arriving over a protracted period?

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. McCloskey.

 7             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Leading.

 8             MR. HAYNES:  It's not.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Haynes.

10             MR. HAYNES:  No, it's not.  There were two alternatives there.

11             MR. McCLOSKEY:  He can ask, "What does this suggest to you?"

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  That would be simpler, but it's true that there are

13     two alternatives, and that, in my mind, could make it a leading question,

14     because you're only offering two when there could be even more.

15             MR. HAYNES:

16        Q.   How did you understand the prisoners to have arrived in Zvornik?

17        A.   Well, given that I did not receive information at the same time

18     from all of these three men, my impression was that they were arriving in

19     convoys, but I had no idea whether they had all arrived in one day or

20     over two days.

21        Q.   And what about their presence in schools?  Similarly deal with

22     that.

23        A.   I knew about their presence in school based on what I had been

24     told by Mr. Grujic, and I understood this to be a temporary place for

25     them, especially when Ljubo Bojanovic provided additional information,

Page 32434

 1     saying that he knew that buses passed by the barracks but that the

 2     Zvornik Brigade had not been given any task relating to them.

 3        Q.   When Obrenovic told you that the prisoners had been executed at

 4     Orahovac, when did you understand that that had occurred?

 5        A.   I understood it the way he told me.  He explained that that took

 6     place on the evening of the 14th.

 7        Q.   And what did you think then was the likely fate of all the

 8     prisoners?

 9        A.   Since he later mentioned Petkovci, and what Mr. Ostojic had told

10     me, my conclusion was that all these unfortunate men had their fate

11     sealed.

12        Q.   And what impact on your views did your journey pass to Orahovac

13     on the evening of the 17th have?

14        A.   On the evening of the 17th, I passed by Orahovac.  I saw the

15     disturbed earth there, and I understood that what Obrenovic had told me

16     was actually true.

17             MR. HAYNES:  Now, can we just look quickly at 7D686 [realtime

18     transcript read in error "7D866"], please.  It appears as "866" in the

19     transcript.  What I wanted was 686, and this is the right document that's

20     in e-court.  Thank you.

21        Q.   Now, you were asked some questions by Mr. Ostojic in relation to

22     this document about capturing prisoners.  Can you just remind us,

23     according to your understanding, what the situation of the prisoners in

24     the schools was at the time General Krstic wrote this order.

25        A.   They had already been taken prisoner, and there was no need for

Page 32435

 1     them to be captured again.  This order referred to the forces of the

 2     28th Division that were trying to make a breakthrough towards Tuzla.

 3        Q.   Were any prisoners captured by your forces -- I'm sorry, I'll ask

 4     it in an open way.

 5             What happened to the prisoners captured by your forces between

 6     the 15th and the 26th of July?

 7        A.   These prisoners were taken to the military remand prison at the

 8     Standard Barracks.  At my intervention, the Drina Corps decided to

 9     transfer them to Batkovic, and that is what happened.

10        Q.   Were any prisoners captured by your forces taken to any of the

11     schools in the indictment?

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   I just want to revisit a document shown to you by Mr. McCloskey,

14     P295, at page 227 in B/C/S and 228 in English.

15             Can we take the document in B/C/S to the right a little bit, and

16     blow it up a little bit.

17             Now, when you looked at this with Mr. McCloskey, it was quite

18     hard to read.  Can you read the entries for the 16th and 17th of July as

19     to where that vehicle went?

20             MR. McCLOSKEY:  The record should reflect he had the original

21     when he did this.  I'm told it's upstairs at the moment.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.

23             MR. HAYNES:  The photocopy is not bad.  I'll try -- I'll see if

24     it's any better.

25             MR. McCLOSKEY:  This particular document had some white-outs on

Page 32436

 1     it, as the general will remember, so it's a bit of a strange document.

 2     We can get it, if you like.

 3             MR. HAYNES:  Well, no, I'll see if he recalls it from the other

 4     day.

 5        Q.   On the 16th and 17th of July, on this document, what was the

 6     finishing point of the journey made, so far as you could work out?

 7        A.   On the 17th of July, from 18 to 15, it says "All Staro Selo," and

 8     I remember that there were two lines for correcting typos with

 9     typewriters.  Therefore, this does not correspond to the original.

10        Q.   Very well.  I think we can see, in relation to the 17th of July,

11     quite clearly what the last destination written in there is.  Can you

12     confirm that for us, please.

13        A.   I said that the final destination on the 17th was Papraca.

14        Q.   And where is that?

15        A.   Papraca is situated on the Memici-Sekovici road, and it was in

16     the zone of defence of the Sekovici Brigade.

17        Q.   Thank you.  Can we have a look at P336, please.

18             Again, something about which you were asked questions by

19     Mr. McCloskey, the 13 eliminated Muslim soldiers.  Do you recall the

20     evidence of Zoran Jovanovic on this point?

21        A.   I remember his testimony.  Particularly about this issue, I am

22     not sure.

23        Q.   How would this information find its way into a regular combat

24     report?  Who would tell who what?

25        A.   For the duty operations officer to be able to compile a regular

Page 32437

 1     combat report, he first has to receive reports from subordinate units,

 2     i.e., battalions and independent companies.  Since here we had separate

 3     units formed to scour the ground outside of their defence zones, and

 4     these units are mentioned here, these units reported directly to the duty

 5     operations officer about how many soldiers they had captured or how many

 6     they had killed during the search of the ground or during fighting.

 7        Q.   Very well.  Now, Mr. McCloskey also summarised for you some of

 8     the evidence of a man called Ahmo Hasic.  Do you recall that in your

 9     cross-examination?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   I'm going to summarise some of his other evidence for you, and we

12     need to go into private session just for a second or two.

13             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Let's go into private session for a while,

14     please.  One moment.

15                           [Private session]

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 32438











11 Page 32438 redacted. Private session.















Page 32439

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4                           [Open session]

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  We are in open session.

 6             MR. HAYNES:

 7        Q.   In relation to the duty operations officer's log-book, who kept

 8     that record, and what was or should have been recorded in it?

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. McCloskey.

10             MR. McCLOSKEY:  We've gone over this.  I don't think it was a

11     contested issue in my cross, anyway.

12             MR. HAYNES:  Yes.  Well, it may not arise from your cross.

13             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let's proceed anyway, and let's see.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're referring to 5377 and 5379,

15     the duty operations log-books.

16             MR. HAYNES:  Yes.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The entries were made by duty

18     operations officer on the day of their respective duty, or by their

19     assistants, or while they were resting; whether that happened during the

20     night or he had to go to the lavatory or he left the office for a coffee

21     break.  However, we don't have two important documents here that didn't

22     appear anywhere, which is the rota of the duty operations officer, and we

23     don't have also the book of observations by the duty operations officer.

24     This was a separate book that contained observations made by each duty

25     operations officer during his shift, and it was handed over during the

Page 32440

 1     change-over of duty, but -- to me or to the Chief of Staff, and I don't

 2     see this book anywhere.

 3        Q.   From where does the obligation arise to keep a log-book, as duty

 4     officer?

 5             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Your Honour, continuing objection.  I can't

 6     respond to any of this, and so he's going off into areas that I'm not

 7     going to be able to respond to and areas that could have been brought up

 8     that I don't see that are contested.

 9             MR. HAYNES:  I don't want to say too much, because it will be

10     said that I'm leading the witness, but this doesn't arise from

11     Mr. McCloskey's cross-examination.  It arises from criticism of another

12     document, and I want to draw the comparison between P377 and P379 and the

13     other document, which is P378.

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. McCloskey.

15             MR. McCLOSKEY:  If the witness will stick to answering specific

16     questions, we won't get into the problem.  If there's something he has in

17     specific -- but what we're seeing is we're going into the history of what

18     is not available to us, and that is a very long history which I don't

19     think we want to get into.  So if it's specific and it's responsive to

20     something Mr. Bourgon or someone else, no problem, but right now we're

21     going into histories of what we don't have in the Zvornik Brigade, and

22     that is an area that we didn't get into in our --

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, but --

24             MR. McCLOSKEY:  God knows how many days.

25             JUDGE AGIUS:  I know as much as you do, Mr. McCloskey, so you

Page 32441

 1     want to know exactly how far Mr. Haynes intends to go.

 2             MR. HAYNES:  Let me see if I can --

 3        Q.   What's the difference between the diary kept by the duty officer

 4     and the log-book kept by the duty officer?

 5        A.   These terms are somewhat complicated.  I understand what I have

 6     in front of me, 5377, which is a working work log of duty operations

 7     officer, as an ancillary document in which the duty officer records

 8     information, messages, orders, conveyed communications, et cetera.  Then

 9     based on this book and the entries contained there in, keeps an

10     operations diary or log-book.  Therefore, the entries in this book and

11     the operations log-book are almost identical.  A lot can be also found of

12     an identical nature in regular combat reports.  Therefore, there is a

13     direct link between these three sources, which is a working log-book of

14     the duty operations officer, duty operations diary, and regular combat

15     reports.

16        Q.   Did every brigade have a log-book or should every brigade have

17     had a log-book?

18        A.   I cannot remember exactly what the instructions on operations

19     duty provide, whether this was a mandatory book or an auxiliary book.  We

20     had one, and I think it was a good idea to have it, and I think that each

21     brigade should have had one.

22        Q.   And I'll try this one more time.  What about the diary?

23        A.   The operations diary is something different.  It's a mandatory

24     instrument that has to be kept by each brigade.

25        Q.   The three books are all about the same size, and we've seen them

Page 32442

 1     in your hands.  What was your view as to the preservation of those

 2     records?

 3        A.   These documents were kept in the safe with the operations duty

 4     officer.  It's a metal cabinet which was locked and which was under the

 5     control of the operations duty officer.

 6        Q.   And where were they when you left your term of office as

 7     commander of the Zvornik Brigade?

 8             MR. McCLOSKEY:  This has been asked and answered, as has most of

 9     the other explanations that the generals have.  If we can get to a point,

10     I really do not want to make the request to be able -- allowed to

11     re-cross.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Can we move ahead, Mr. Haynes?

13             MR. HAYNES:  We can, and --

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Let's do that.

15             MR. HAYNES:  I want to look at another record, please.  It's

16     P354, and I'm going to hand you a hard copy of that.

17        Q.   Help us as to what this is, firstly, General Pandurevic.

18        A.   This is another auxiliary document which represents the survey of

19     the engagement of unit -- of men from a specific unit, and here we have a

20     military police unit in July 1995.  We heard here why these documents

21     were established, and I kept a similar record in the JNA, referring to

22     the presence and absence of members of the company, although the original

23     idea and the original format of the document is not as we see it here.

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. Haynes, it's break time.

25             MR. HAYNES:  Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realise.  I get lost in

Page 32443

 1     these 80-minute --

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  We'll have a 25-minute break now.  Thank you.

 3                           --- Recess taken at 5.25 p.m.

 4                           --- On resuming at 5.53 p.m.

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Haynes.

 6             MR. HAYNES:

 7        Q.   Mr. Pandurevic, just -- just before the break, you were looking

 8     at P354 with me, and I've not got many questions on this.  But according

 9     to that document, how many military policemen were there in the

10     Zvornik Brigade in July 1995?

11        A.   We can see that in the beginning of the month, and then all the

12     way up until the 14th, there were 89 soldiers, according to the list, and

13     at the end of the month there were 80 of them.  So there was this

14     strength.

15        Q.   Now, could we go to page 3 in this document, please.  Thank you.

16     Now, just remind us how many military policemen you believed had been

17     deployed to guard prisoners from the Zvornik Brigade.

18        A.   Well, I have said what I knew, and what I was told by

19     Dragan Obrenovic is that on the 13th, five or six were given to Nikolic.

20        Q.   Now, have you -- are you familiar with what Richard Butler says

21     about this particular page of that record?

22        A.   I really don't remember.

23        Q.   Okay.  I'll ask it another way.  Did your belief, that there were

24     five men deployed, ever change from anything you learnt during the

25     following 14 years?

Page 32444

 1             JUDGE AGIUS:  One moment, one moment.

 2             Yes, Ms. Nikolic.

 3             MS. NIKOLIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think this involves

 4     speculation, and the witness is asked to speculate about the opinion he

 5     had today or 14 years ago, about the events that had taken place in 1995.

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  The witness has been here for a good two and a half

 7     years.  He knows that if answering the question means speculating, he

 8     shouldn't answer it.  But if he can answer it, then let's proceed and get

 9     his answer.

10             Can you answer this question without speculating, Mr. Pandurevic?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours.  I have seen

12     here a large number of soldiers who testified, and who testified about

13     where they were and where they saw other soldiers, so based on that, my

14     information about people present in various locations changed during this

15     trial.

16             MR. HAYNES:

17        Q.   And do you still think only five military policemen were deployed

18     in relation to the guarding of prisoners?

19        A.   I don't think that any longer.  Perhaps the same people changed

20     locations, but we heard here that there were members of military police

21     in various locations, and most likely it was at least that number.  As

22     for the total number, I don't know what it was.

23        Q.   Now, who would have kept this document?  Where would it have been

24     kept, and who by?

25        A.   This document was in the Military Police Company, and I think we

Page 32445

 1     have heard here, from a man who testified here, about the list and how he

 2     kept this list.  He was a clerk in the company, as far as I can remember,

 3     a records clerk.

 4        Q.   According to your evidence, was Obrenovic's consent required for

 5     the deployment of military policemen?

 6        A.   No.  Had those people been available immediately, they would have

 7     been taken without previous consent of Dragan Obrenovic.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  I just -- we're very near the end now.  I just want

 9     to move on to the question of Semso Muminovic very, very briefly.  Remind

10     us when you first learned that Muminovic was trying to get in touch with

11     you and what he wanted.

12        A.   I have said that according to my recollection, this was conveyed

13     to me by Jevdjevic at the Krivace IKM that Semso was looking for me.  I

14     didn't know the details about what he wanted form me and I received that

15     information again when I came to the IKM at the Delici village.

16        Q.   When you spoke to him, was the conversation being recorded at

17     your end?

18        A.   No, not on my end.

19        Q.   When you spoke to him, did you know it was being recorded by

20     anybody?

21        A.   I didn't know that anybody was recording it, but I assumed that

22     all of those who had a Motorola and who had that frequency could have

23     listened to that, and they did listen.

24        Q.   When you spoke to Semso Muminovic in 2001, did you know then that

25     there were tape-recordings of your any of your conversations with him on

Page 32446

 1     July the 15th and 16th?

 2        A.   I didn't know.

 3        Q.   And did he say anything during that meeting that indicated that

 4     he knew about it?

 5        A.   I am not sure that he gave me any sort of a signal, that he

 6     indicated in any way that he had a recording of that conversation of

 7     ours.

 8        Q.   When did you first learn about the recording?

 9        A.   Well, I heard -- I saw some of his statements here, where he

10     mentioned cameramen and journalists who were present on the day of the

11     conversation, and most likely the cameraman recorded that.  And I also

12     saw in the statement of Sabic, Veiz, who said that he was aware of this

13     recorded conversation on the 15th, the conversation between me and Semso.

14        Q.   And when did you first hear the recording?

15        A.   I heard it here, when I received it on a CD.  You handed it to

16     me, and most likely you, yourself, had received it from the Prosecution,

17     because it bears their number.

18        Q.   Just to clear something up, so far you're aware, does he -- does

19     he remain a witness on your list of witnesses?

20        A.   Yes.  He gave a statement under 92 bis, and I don't know what

21     became of it, what your final decision will be.  As far as I know, he is

22     still on our witness list.

23        Q.   Thank you.  Now, just a few questions about the -- about

24     Mr. Popovic.

25             Can we look again, please, at P291.

Page 32447

 1             You've answered, really, rather too many questions about this

 2     transaction already, so I'm not going to exasperate you further, but how

 3     could this have been done differently, by which I mean accounted?  What

 4     documents could have been used to indicate the movement of fuel to

 5     Mr. Popovic from the Zvornik Brigade dump?

 6        A.   Given that the fuel was leaving the Zvornik Brigade and was going

 7     to another unit or to another financial organ, in this particular case

 8     the Command of the Drina Corps, this sort of a list had to be drawn up

 9     for this to be sent over.  I don't know -- I'm not aware of any other way

10     in which this could have been given over.  This could have been given

11     over as a loan.  But this is a document that is sent to the bookkeeping,

12     and in the bookkeeping records it is said that the Zvornik Brigade is

13     divested of this amount of fuel, as indicated here.

14        Q.   What other documentation can be used to show the dispensing of

15     fuel?

16        A.   There is a so-called LIP, the list of the fuel issued and

17     received.  We saw it in relation to the 13th and 14th, when TG-1 received

18     fuel in Vlasenica.  That's one method.  And these records are kept at the

19     gas station or in the location where the fuel is given.  Such a

20     possibility also existed in the Zvornik Brigade.

21        Q.   And what would have been required to do it in that way?

22        A.   In order for the fuel to be issued for the use of own units via

23     the so-called LIP, there needs to be an order and an approval for the

24     fuel to be issued or given, and there need to be justified reasons for

25     that, or, rather, this needs to be given for the tasks to be

Page 32448

 1     accomplished.

 2        Q.   Any other way?

 3        A.   There are no other regular ways.  If somebody comes directly with

 4     a vehicle to a gas station, and if Mr. Pantic, who took care about the

 5     usage of fuel, and if he issued a receipt saying that such and such

 6     amount of fuel is approved for that person, then such a person could have

 7     gone to a gas station with such a receipt, and whoever was operating the

 8     gas station would have issued to him the amount of fuel indicated in the

 9     receipt.

10        Q.   Okay, thank you.  And I now want to just look at, I think for the

11     last time, P377, page 770 in the hard copy that you have, and in e-court

12     page 152.

13        A.   Yes, I have the page.

14        Q.   It's the entry at 2125.  Can we just back up in history a little

15     bit, and you can remind us about when it was the self-propelled guns were

16     taken and what happened to them after that, as precisely in time as you

17     can, please.

18        A.   I think that these self-propelled guns were taken sometime in the

19     morning.  I wouldn't be able to say exactly what time it was on the 16th.

20     I know that they were taken out of action soon thereafter, in terms of

21     firing at us, and that throughout the day they remained in the same

22     positions where they were, because they could not be moved.  They were

23     dug in, and they were facing the enemy positions in the area of Nezuk.

24     Whether it was 9.00, 10.00, I'm not sure.  It could have been earlier.

25        Q.   And so that it's clear on the transcript, are we talking about

Page 32449

 1     9.00 or 10.00 in the morning or evening?

 2        A.   In the morning.

 3        Q.   Now, when was the last combat action on the 16th of July?

 4        A.   I think at around 11.00.  Or after 11.00 there was an

 5     interruption in combat, and there were perhaps occasional exchanges of

 6     gun-fire, sporadic ones, because not all of the units on the ground had

 7     perhaps received the information that negotiations were in progress and

 8     that people were working on a truce.

 9        Q.   And by 9.00 in the evening, what was going on at Baljkovica?

10        A.   Well, at the time it was already getting dark.  It was the time

11     when the passage of the column on the 28th Division was halted.  It was

12     then that Semso and I, with his superior command, Malkic, agreed on what

13     the situation should be overnight so that in the morning we could

14     continue letting through the columns of the 28th Division.

15        Q.   And how long had the self-propelled guns been back in your

16     possession by then?

17        A.   Well, at least as early as 12.00, the crew was around them, and

18     then further on as well.

19        Q.   I'm just shifting slight.  How -- remind us how it was you

20     composed the interim combat report of the 16th of July and how it got to

21     be sent from the Zvornik Brigade Command.

22        A.   Well, I dictated the report to Captain Milisav Petrovic, and it

23     could have been sent to the corps only from the Zvornik Brigade via a

24     coded teleprinter, because they did not have that kind of encoding at the

25     IKM.

Page 32450

 1        Q.   And I'm not sure whether you've told us this or not, frankly, but

 2     did Milisav Petrovic take it to the Zvornik Brigade or ring it through,

 3     as it were?

 4        A.   No, somebody had to take it.  A vehicle had to go, or a courier,

 5     or Milisav Petrovic himself, but a vehicle had to go there and take the

 6     paper to the Command of the Zvornik Brigade.

 7        Q.   Let's come back to this entry at 2125.  Who's this an inquiry

 8     from, and about what?

 9        A.   On the same page?

10        Q.   Yes.

11        A.   Well, from Zlatar.  Mostly likely, duty operations officer from

12     the Drina Corps asked the duty operations officer at Palma, that is to

13     say, in the Zvornik Brigade, whether self-propelled guns had remained in

14     our hands.

15        Q.   And had that been an important issue at any time earlier in the

16     day?

17        A.   I don't know in what sense and for whom it could have been

18     important.  Whether it was important for the corps command and what they

19     knew about that, I'm not sure about that.  It was important for me to put

20     them out of action as soon as possible so that they wouldn't fire on my

21     forces.

22        Q.   It's just that you were looking the other day at an intercepted

23     communication involving Mr. Popovic at about 9.16 on the evening of the

24     16th of July, and you might recall Mr. McCloskey suggesting that in that

25     conversation, he was defending you.  Do you remember the conversation?

Page 32451

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Had anybody come to the Forward Command Post on the 16th and

 3     asked you what the situation was in relation to these self-propelled

 4     guns?

 5        A.   No, nobody from the superior command came to see me on the 16th,

 6     the evening, at the IKM, nor did they ask me in relation to these, to

 7     these self-propelled guns.

 8        Q.   And at 9.00 or quarter past 9.00 on the evening of the 16th of

 9     July, would you have described the situation at horrible?

10        A.   No, not at that time, not at all.  The situation was completely

11     calm.

12             MR. HAYNES:  Right.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Haynes, if you could ask your witness to read

14     the entry at 2125 again so that I can hear the translation.

15             MR. HAYNES:  Yes, certainly.

16        Q.   Can you -- you heard Judge Kwon's question?

17        A.   Yes.  Your Honour, it says, from Zlatar, they require information

18     as to whether the self-propelled guns remained in our hands at 2125.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

20             MR. HAYNES:

21        Q.   The final strait, Mr. Pandurevic.  I want quickly, in response

22     really to the totality of what's been put to you, to run you through the

23     events of the 4th to the 20th of July, or there -- and thereabouts.

24     Which brigade was responsible for the conduct of combat operations in the

25     Zeleni Jadar area?

Page 32452

 1        A.   If you're referring to Krivaja 95, the direction of the axis of

 2     the operation was Zeleni Jadar.  Rajne Bojna was the axis of Tactical

 3     Group 1, which was under my command.

 4        Q.   I wasn't.  I was referring to the situation generally.

 5        A.   The positions facing the 28th Division in the area of

 6     Zeleni Jadar were held by Tactical Group Pribicevac, which comprised an

 7     independent battalion from Skelani and parts of the Bratunac Brigade.  In

 8     the area of Zeleni Jadar, there were units of the Independent Battalion

 9     from Skelani.

10        Q.   Who was responsible for the conduct of troops carrying out the

11     combat operations under Krivaja 95?

12        A.   The forces which participated in the Krivaja 95 operation -- or,

13     rather, the forces that carried out active combat operations were under

14     the command of General Krstic.

15        Q.   And was he at that time a commander in his own right?

16        A.   No.  At the time, he was Chief of Staff and deputy corps

17     commander, but in that particular situation he was appointed to command

18     those forces in that particular task, and he at the time held the

19     position of the commander, or, rather, he was the officer in command.

20        Q.   Generally, who was responsible for the conduct of combat

21     operations in Orahovac, Petkovci, Rocevic, Kula, Pilica, Kozluk and

22     Branjevo?

23        A.   The person who was given the task to transport the prisoners and

24     to put them into the facilities that you mentioned.

25             JUDGE AGIUS:  Did you speak in the -- I just want to make sure

Page 32453

 1     that the transcript is correct.  Did you speak in the singular or in the

 2     plural?  In the transcript, we have "the person," one person.  Is that

 3     what you said?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours, one person was

 5     in command of all of those forces, and he had people who were

 6     subordinated to him.

 7             MR. HAYNES:

 8        Q.   I better clear that up, because I was, in fact, asking you about

 9     the situation outside the period with which we're concerned.  Let's take

10     the month of June 1995.  Who was responsible for the conduct of combat

11     operations in those places then?

12        A.   If you are referring to the facilities and the schools in the

13     villages that you have just mentioned -- is that what you're referring

14     to?

15        Q.   I'm referring to the responsibility to conduct combat operations

16     in those villages.

17        A.   Should armed forces of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina

18     appeared in those locations at any point in time, it would have been the

19     Zvornik Brigade who would have been responsible for engaging them and

20     waging combat against them.

21        Q.   But perhaps we can come now to the question you may already have

22     answered.  Who was responsible for carrying out the illegal operation to

23     kill prisoners of war in those areas?

24        A.   Well, the person who was given the order to transport them, to

25     put them up in these facilities, and to organise the execution.  And it

Page 32454

 1     certainly wasn't an officer from the Zvornik Brigade.

 2        Q.   What authority did you have to give orders to military policemen

 3     from Bratunac?

 4        A.   None.

 5        Q.   What authority did you have orders -- sorry.  What authority did

 6     you have to give orders to members of the 65th Protection Regiment?

 7        A.   None.

 8        Q.   You now know that certain members of the Zvornik Brigade carried

 9     out guard duties, digging work, burial work, transportation, et cetera.

10     Did any of them act on your orders?

11        A.   No.

12        Q.   Under whose command were those people at the time?

13        A.   They were under the command of the person who was in charge of

14     all of those tasks.

15             MR. HAYNES:  General Pandurevic, thank you very much indeed.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. Ostojic.

18             MR. OSTOJIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

19             Your Honours, in the interests of justice and in the spirit of

20     fairness, I would respectfully request that the Court use their

21     discretion and allow me 30 minutes to conduct a re-cross-examination.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  We have to follow the usual practice.  First we

23     want to know what questions you wish to ask, and then we decide if to

24     allow any or all of them.

25             MR. OSTOJIC:  I don't -- the areas that I would -- I don't

Page 32455

 1     typically read out my questions, but the areas that I would like to

 2     question him is related to a document P196 --

 3             JUDGE AGIUS:  What's that?

 4             MR. OSTOJIC:  Which references -- it is in evidence, and it's an

 5     order from the Drina Corps, excuse me, dated the 15th of April, 1995,

 6     which in paragraph 2, the instructions, states:

 7             "All commands - from battalion level upwards, are to determine

 8     places behind the front-line at which captured members of the enemy army

 9     are to be collected."

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  And what's your question?

11             MR. OSTOJIC:  Whether or not this specific order that was

12     received purportedly, although it says 1st Zvornik infantry Brigade, so

13     when it was received by the 1st Zvornik Infantry Brigade, was it ever

14     modified, amended, or altered.

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. Haynes, because after all you also have a

16     voice.

17             MR. HAYNES:  Well, it's a document dated the 15th of April, 1995,

18     sent to intelligence and security organ heads.  I can't see the relevance

19     of that.  I can't see why he couldn't have been asked that the first time

20     'round.  Mr. Ostojic had about four days with him.

21             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let's stick to the essentials.

22             What's your next question, Mr. Ostojic.

23             MR. OSTOJIC:  It similarly relates to P107, which was a document

24     that was sent -- as we see who should be in charge of the detainees, and

25     it was changed in the Bratunac Brigade, and also we would use 7D382,

Page 32456

 1     which in English shows on page -- I apologise, it's not paginated, but

 2     under section 10, subsection B, certain changes with mark-outs of the

 3     security organ, and then handwritten sections as to who should be

 4     utilising those --

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  And what do you want to prove?  What do you seek to

 6     prove with both questions?

 7             MR. OSTOJIC:  Specifically, to rebut Mr. Pandurevic's testimony

 8     in connection with this command-and-control issue with respect to the

 9     detainees.

10             And also, just to respond briefly to Mr. Haynes' comment, this

11     wasn't sent -- the first one which we're discussing, P196, was actually

12     sent to the Command of the 1st Zvornik Brigade, not to the sections that

13     Mr. Haynes references.  It's on the face of the document.

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  That should appear on the face of the document.  I

15     was going to precisely say that.  So why don't you tell us which other

16     questions you have in mind.

17             MR. OSTOJIC:  In addition, in light of the fact that Mr. Haynes

18     and the witness -- or the witness is actually now shifting the failure to

19     include parts of his testimony on the 65 ter list, we would like to

20     revisit the 65 ter list with his interview on the 2nd of October, 2001,

21     which is 7D1154.  And I would ask to inquire also with respect to whether

22     it was his attorney's omission, the issue of Ljubo Bojanovic as well,

23     because today on page 53, lines 15 through 19, he mentions him, and to

24     have -- to know from this witness whether it was counsel's decision not

25     to object to the admission of Mr. Bojanovic's statement, where it's

Page 32457

 1     completely inconsistent with what this witness said, or was that

 2     Mr. Pandurevic's decision.

 3             JUDGE AGIUS:  One moment.  Do you wish to comment on that,

 4     Mr. Haynes?

 5             MR. HAYNES:  Asked and answered, I think.

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, I think so.

 7             Yes, Mr. McCloskey.

 8             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Mr. President, since we have one accused so

 9     pointedly accusing another accused of actually being in command, and I

10     don't recall that being part of the direct examination, that we have a

11     chief of security actually exercising now command, clearly over and over

12     again it's mentioned, I think five or ten minutes for Mr. Beara to get

13     into that, I wouldn't object to.  I don't wish to get involved in it.

14             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. Haynes.

15             MR. HAYNES:  Well, I do.  We have procedures here, and we've

16     adhered to them for two and a half years.  All of this could have been

17     dealt with in cross-examination.  Half an hour, he wants.  He just wants

18     to have another bluff and bluster and make a few loud speeches, and the

19     witness is very, very tired.

20             JUDGE AGIUS:  Please refrain from passing certain comments which

21     don't do anyone any good.

22             MR. HAYNES:  I will, but if you're talking about fairness,

23     there's a very, very tired man sitting here who's had enough now.

24             MR. OSTOJIC:  I'm actually not tired.

25                           [Trial Chamber confers]

Page 32458

 1             JUDGE AGIUS:  What other questions do you have?  We are reserving

 2     our decision on this command structure issue that you have referred to.

 3     We want to hear what other questions you have.

 4             MR. OSTOJIC:  Yes, thank you.

 5             The next issue I'd like to visit with the witness, with your

 6     leave, is Exhibit 2D642, which is the exculpatory Croat intercept, where

 7     today, on pages 15, lines 24 and 25, and then page 16, lines 1 through 9,

 8     Mr. Pandurevic gave some testimony on that, and it's not clear, so I'd

 9     like to clarify it.  Given the plain text of the --

10             JUDGE AGIUS:  What do you want to clarify?

11             MR. OSTOJIC:  Specifically, when he testified on those pages, it

12     was implied that there was going to be a selection and then a transfer to

13     Batkovici, but if we look at the Croat intercept, specifically the word

14     "gdje" or "where," and the selection, it would first put them in

15     Batkovici and then a selection to be made.

16             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  That's clear from the document, itself,

17     I think.

18             MR. OSTOJIC:  I'll withdraw that one.

19             The next issue, if permitted, is the issue of Momir Nikolic's

20     plea.  I would like to ask him concretely, on page 2 of this statement of

21     facts, at paragraph 6, where Mr. Nikolic includes the Drina Wolves of the

22     Zvornik Brigade, to hear his comments about that, because Mr. Nikolic

23     says they were involved in the -- some of the criminal activities, and he

24     was there at the time or close to it.

25             JUDGE AGIUS:  Do you wish to comment on that, Mr. Haynes?

Page 32459

 1             MR. HAYNES:  No, I think we've established who had command of the

 2     Drina Wolves when they're outside the zone of the Zvornik Brigade, and

 3     I think it's a rather contradictory attitude to the Momir Nikolic plea

 4     agreement.

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  Which is your next question?

 6             MR. OSTOJIC:  And further with sticking with Mr. Nikolic,

 7     although Mr. Pandurevic claims that he only saw the statement of facts in

 8     2005, upon his arrival to the UNDU, the plea was public for two years, or

 9     possibly even more, two and a half years, I would like to ask him, since

10     he was following the proceedings, if he had learned from other sources,

11     not the statement itself, but from other sources, what was contained

12     within that statement.

13             JUDGE AGIUS:  It can be the subject of a submission later on by

14     anyone who is interested in it.

15             Your next question would be what?

16             MR. OSTOJIC:  My next area would be to learn from this witness

17     whether it was his decision or his Defence team not to challenge or

18     otherwise --

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  Forget that.  Move to the next one.

20             MR. OSTOJIC:  If I could just put it on the record,

21     Mr. President, so I have --

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, of course.

23             MR. OSTOJIC:  Thank you, and I apologise.  Or otherwise refuse to

24     cross-examine any witnesses such as Svetlana Gavrilovic, Mira Cekic, or

25     Milan Kerkez.

Page 32460

 1             JUDGE AGIUS:  Next question.

 2             MR. OSTOJIC:  Finally, I would like to -- although I find it

 3     surprising they would use the Milos Tomanovic interview, we have three

 4     documents in our initial submission with respect to our line of

 5     questioning before the Court sustained an objection from my learned

 6     friend of the Pandurevic Defence team, even though they challenged us to

 7     put our case to him, and those two exhibits relate to a statement that I

 8     personally received from the witness, and also what the Prosecution has

 9     said from their investigator, specifically when they asked Mr. Tomovic

10     that they had information that Mr. Beara was in Belgrade in July of 1995.

11     If the Court remembers, I was limited in asking that question, but now --

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Of course I remember.

13             Do you wish to comment on that, Mr. Haynes?

14             MR. HAYNES:  I don't understand what the question is or could be,

15     but --

16             JUDGE AGIUS:  Anyway, let's proceed with your next question.

17             MR. OSTOJIC:  [Indiscernible] that I would like, although there's

18     more questions in each of those areas, just so the Court knows.

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  Of course, we could stay here even the entire

20     of next week.  Let me consult with my colleagues, please, and we'll come

21     back to you shortly.

22                           [Trial Chamber confers]

23             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Mr. Ostojic, as briefly as possible, you are

24     allowed to put some questions to the witness on the matter of the command

25     structure.  That's about it.  We'd like you to restrict it to ten

Page 32461

 1     minutes.

 2             MR. OSTOJIC:  Just so I'm clear, is that it, or is that about it?

 3     Can I ask you to reconsider --

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  No, that's it.  When I say it, forgive my English,

 5     it's not my native language.

 6             MR. OSTOJIC:  I apologise.  Thank you, Mr. President, and

 7     Your Honours.

 8             Can we have P196, please, on e-court.

 9                           Further cross-examination by Mr. Ostojic:

10        Q.   Mr. Pandurevic, this is a Drina Corps command order, and although

11     your counsel says it's only to intelligence and security organs, can you

12     tell me, at the top portion of it, to whom this was sent to, in addition

13     to intelligence and security organ heads?  Read it out loud, please.

14        A.   You see, the Drina Corps units are enumerated here, and it says

15     specifically heads of the organs for intelligence.  In order for everyone

16     to know which organ, they had to specify the units where these organs

17     are.  Therefore, this document refers exclusively to security organs,

18     because in the title, we have security organ, and security organ cannot

19     send an order to me.  This is just an instruction issued by the

20     Drina Corps or, rather, its security organ, instructing the security

21     organs of subordinate units how to conduct this business of arresting and

22     treating the prisoners of war and other prisoners.

23        Q.   So you never received this, although it says on the top, first

24     line:  "To Command of ...," and then the second one is the 1st Zvornik

25     Infantry Brigade; is that what your testimony is?

Page 32462

 1        A.   Yes.  If he put, as an addressee, the chief of Security, it

 2     wouldn't be clear to whom it was addressed.  You see that this is sent by

 3     the security organ of the Drina Corps, not by Zivanovic.

 4        Q.   So if it says:  "To Command of 1st Zvornik Infantry Brigade,"

 5     that's not you, even though it's the fourth month, the 15th day, and the

 6     1995, the year; correct?

 7        A.   If it says only the Command of the 1st Bratunac, the 1st Zvornik,

 8     et cetera, et cetera, without specifying to the chief of security and

 9     intelligence, then this document would come directly to me.  As the case

10     is, it went to the chief of security.  If he deemed necessary, he would

11     have informed me about it, and maybe he did so.

12        Q.   And then let's look at page 2 of this document in B/C/S -- in

13     English and in B/C/S.  It's under the word "Instruction," and it's

14     identified as paragraph number 2 numerically.  It says as follows, and

15     I think you've heard this already:

16             "All commands - from battalion level upwards, are to determined

17     places behind the front-line at which captured members of the enemy are

18     to be collected."

19             It obviously has more.  You're welcome to read the rest.  This

20     also refers to not you but someone else, correct, even though it plainly

21     says:  "All commands - from battalion level upwards"?

22        A.   I can agree with you in that respect, but it will then turn out

23     that the security organ of the Drina Corps is issuing orders to brigade

24     commanders from battalion upwards.  These locations should have been

25     decided by the security organs of the battalions.  If I accept that this

Page 32463

 1     should be done from the battalion commands upwards, then it explicitly

 2     states that the chief of security from of the Drina Corps is directly

 3     issuing orders to me.

 4        Q.   Help me with this:  Are you familiar with the second amended

 5     consolidated indictment, which I'm sure you are, in this case wherein the

 6     Prosecution from the outset has never charged Mr. Beara with any command

 7     responsibility?  You're aware of that, aren't you?

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. Haynes.

 9             MR. HAYNES:  What's that got to do with the price of fish,

10     really?

11             MR. OSTOJIC:  Well, depending on how he answers, though, I'm sure

12     I know the answer, I would have a follow-up question on that, and then we

13     can --

14             MR. HAYNES:  None of this arises from any of the re-examination.

15     This is all the same theme that was developed in cross-examination a week

16     or so ago.

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, Mr. McCloskey.

18             MR. McCLOSKEY:  That's precisely the issue that I had in mind.

19     Because they made a big emphasis on commander, as Krstic was a combat

20     commander, and this was really the redirect, where they really have

21     rammed that home, and so I think five or ten minutes on that topic is not

22     unfair.

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24             JUDGE AGIUS:  Proceed with your next question, because actually

25     whether he's aware of that or not is irrelevant at this stage.

Page 32464

 1             MR. OSTOJIC:

 2        Q.   And isn't it true -- and isn't it true, Mr. Pandurevic, that you

 3     knew that, and in light of that, you decided to create your defence to

 4     shift the responsibility on Mr. Beara specifically as it relates to

 5     command because you full well know he's not charged with any command

 6     responsibility?

 7        A.   You see, I don't remember what is stated in the amended

 8     indictment regarding the charges against Mr. Beara.  He doesn't have

 9     command responsibility, but he has personal responsibility.

10             You have to understand one thing, and I've already said that:

11     Mr. Beara didn't find himself where he did in those days because he was

12     the chief of Security Administration and he didn't have the right to

13     command.  He was given a specific task, and he was appointed a person in

14     charge of command during that task.  So all the people assigned to him

15     were under his command, and he commanded them temporarily.

16             For example, my assistant for morale, Ljubo Bojanovic, was a

17     temporary battalion commander.  The chief of artillery -- anti-aircraft

18     units, Milenko Kajtaz, was temporarily commanding a battalion in Krajina.

19     And operations officer Petrovic was also temporarily commanding a

20     battalion.  Therefore, each and every officer, regardless of his position

21     per establishment, can be appointed as a temporary commander over a

22     certain unit or to conduct the execution of a certain task, and that

23     includes a security organ.  And he is not responsible, in terms of

24     command, because he is a commander, but because he commanded those men in

25     those days.  And we saw from the document who issued these illegal

Page 32465

 1     orders.  He is responsible under 7(1) personally.

 2        Q.   Thank you for your legal opinion on that, although I respectfully

 3     disagree.  Did you see at any time one specific document or one witness

 4     that said under oath here that Mr. Beara was given this specific task

 5     from Mladic?

 6        A.   No, I didn't see any document --

 7        Q.   So --

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Let him finish the answer.

 9             MR. OSTOJIC:  Sorry, there was a pause, and I thought he was

10     done.  I wasn't looking at him.  Sorry.

11             JUDGE AGIUS:  Finish your answer, please, Mr. Pandurevic.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

13             Similarly, somebody organised the transportation of POWs and bus

14     convoys.  They didn't organise themselves by themselves.  And this wasn't

15     organised either by Blagojevic, as the brigade commander, nor the

16     Zvornik Brigade.

17             MR. OSTOJIC:

18        Q.   Mr. Pandurevic, and we've heard that, and the Prosecution talked

19     about that in the Krstic and Blagojevic case.  With respect to Mr. Beara

20     specifically, and Mr. Mladic, do you know where Mr. Mladic was on the

21     14th of July, 1995?

22        A.   I don't know where he was.  Even worse, if Ljubo Beara decided on

23     his own to do something like that without anyone's order, which I think

24     is highly unlikely.

25        Q.   You don't have any evidence, you've heard from no witnesses,

Page 32466

 1     you've reviewed no documents, that there was this purported order from

 2     Mladic to Beara; that's correct, right?

 3        A.   I've seen and heard what appeared in this case here in the form

 4     of witness statements, intercepts, duty operations officer work log of

 5     the Zvornik Brigade, et cetera.  This is what gives me a right to draw a

 6     conclusion that this operation was commanded by your client.

 7        Q.   Now, you've also not seen --

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. Ostojic, your last question --

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

10             MR. OSTOJIC:

11        Q.   Mr. Pandurevic, you have not seen one piece of evidence, other

12     than to know that Mr. Mladic was in Belgrade, meeting with Milosevic, and

13     Ambassador Bildt, I think, on the 14th of July.  We've seen the Croat

14     intercept.  Why don't you, sir, as the commander you claim to be, admit

15     that this is a complete construct and this is only being presented by you

16     in order to give a defence?  Be the gentleman we think you are.

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  This could be an argument that you can bring later

18     on, if you want to discredit this witness.  It's not a question that you

19     put to him now, knowing what the answer is going to be in any case.

20             Do you wish to answer this question, Mr. Pandurevic?  Then go

21     ahead, answer.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours.

23             If Mr. Mladic, on the 14th, was in Belgrade, you have an

24     abundance of evidence that Mr. Beara was in Bratunac on the 13th, and

25     Mladic was not in Belgrade on that day.

Page 32467

 1             And the second part of your question, you mentioned the intercept

 2     of the 13th.  How come that your client was distributing and allocating

 3     buses for the transportation of POWs if he had no powers and no authority

 4     to do that?

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, that's it.  I thank you, Mr. --

 6             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  I thank you, Mr. Ostojic.

 8             Judge Kwon, do you have any questions?  Judge Prost?

 9             MR. HAYNES:  I thought I might ask a couple of questions arising

10     from that.

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone for Mr. Haynes.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Mr. Haynes, it's -- Judge Prost.

13             JUDGE PROST:  Mr. Pandurevic, I just have one point I want to

14     raise with you, and it relates to the famous P329, if we could pull that

15     up, the interim combat report, 15th of July.  I want to be sure that I

16     understand perfectly what your evidence is on this point.

17                           Questioned by the Court:

18             JUDGE PROST:  As I take it, and I'm looking at the evidence you

19     gave on direct on the 2nd of February, a month ago, and it's at

20     page 30983 and following in the transcript from that date, particularly

21     lines 16 to 21, my understanding is that when you wrote or dictated this

22     interim combat report, the information that you had on prisoners in the

23     schools came from Brano Grujic.  Is that correct?

24        A.   Yes, Your Honour, that's correct.

25             JUDGE PROST:  And while you had discussions with Ljubo Bojanovic,

Page 32468

 1     he didn't have any additional information about the schools; he simply

 2     related some information about buses with prisoners that had gone in the

 3     direction of Bijeljina?

 4        A.   Yes, Your Honour.

 5             JUDGE PROST:  And I know that you were paraphrasing the

 6     conversation, obviously, after all this time, that you had with

 7     Mr. Grujic.  What you stated was that:  "He told me," you said, and I'll

 8     just read it to you:

 9             "He didn't stay long.  He simply arrived and asked me how come

10     there were prisoners in some schools on the territory of Zvornik

11     municipality.  I think he mentioned the school in Petkovci and the one in

12     Pilica."

13             Now, that's the way in which you described the information that

14     you had received; correct?

15        A.   Yes.

16             JUDGE PROST:  Then my issue is, Mr. Pandurevic:  When I look then

17     at P329 and the information that you related there, you said:

18             "An additional burden for us is the large number of prisoners

19     distributed throughout schools in the brigade area."

20             And for me, there's quite a difference there between the

21     information that you received and the information that you relate.  I

22     read the report as being much broader and a much stronger statement than

23     the information that you'd received from Mr. Grujic, and I'm wondering if

24     you can explain to me how that information got translated into the report

25     in that manner.

Page 32469

 1        A.   Your Honours, if I can look at the next page, because I would

 2     like to check the translation, whether I said throughout schools or a

 3     number of schools or a few schools, I really need to look at the next

 4     page.  It says here we have additional burden imposed on us by a large

 5     number of prisoners housed in the schools in the area of the brigade.  I

 6     didn't quote or cite the names of the schools.  And this is the

 7     information that I received, and I passed on the identical information in

 8     my report to the corps command.

 9             JUDGE PROST:  So the phrase that you used was "in the schools"?

10        A.   Yes, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE PROST:  Thank you.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, Judge Prost.

13             That brings us to the end of your testimony.  I thank you,

14     Mr. Pandurevic.

15             The understanding is that we stand adjourned until Monday -- no,

16     we can't do all the documents in five minutes.

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yeah, I imagine there's not going to be any

19     opposition.  Let's start with the Haynes -- or the Pandurevic documents.

20     This is the one; no?

21             Yeah, there is a set of documents totalling 91; is that correct,

22     Mr. Haynes?

23             MR. HAYNES:  I'm sure it is.  These things happened largely

24     without reference to me, while I'm here, but I know a very careful eye

25     has been kept on documents that have gone into evidence during the course

Page 32470

 1     of the examination and the re-examination, and that's, I'm assured, is an

 2     accurate one, and I would ask for them to be admitted.

 3             JUDGE AGIUS:  Are there any objections?

 4             Mr. McCloskey.

 5             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Yes.  Mr. President, I'm told that there is -- at

 6     just a brief glance, there's documents in this list that were never used

 7     in the -- in the testimony, and I think at this point it may be a good

 8     idea to try to get our act together on that.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Then I was right.  Let's wait until

10     Monday.  In the meantime, you will have an opportunity to go through them

11     more carefully, Mr. Josse included.  He usually asks for time.

12             All right.  Monday, you will come back to us with further

13     evidence, Mr. Haynes?

14             MR. HAYNES:  Yes.

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay, thank you.

16             MR. McCLOSKEY:  Mr. President, the Witness Section is saying they

17     have visa issues and things, so I will get back to everyone on our

18     ability to provide witnesses on the following Wednesday.

19             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right, okay.  Thank you.

20             In the meantime, there may be developments.  We'll keep you

21     informed.  Thank you.

22                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.56 p.m.,

23                           to be reconvened on Monday, the 9th day of March,

24                           2009, at 9.00 a.m.