1 Tuesday, 5 May 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, Mr. Registrar. Could you call the
7 case, please.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honour. Good morning, Your
9 Honours. Good morning to everyone in and around the courtroom. This is
10 case IT-05-88-T, The Prosecutor versus Vujadin Popovic et al. Thank you.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. All accused are here. Prosecution,
12 same as yesterday. Defence, I notice the absence of Ms. Tapuskovic,
13 Ms. Nikolic, Mr. Krgovic. That's it.
14 Good morning, Mr. Janc.
15 THE WITNESS: Good morning.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Lazarevic will continue and finish his
17 cross-examination, and then we'll see who goes next.
18 Thank you. Good morning to you, Mr. Lazarevic.
19 MR. LAZAREVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning,
21 WITNESS: DUSAN JANC [Resumed]
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Lazarevic: [Continued]
23 Q. [Interpretation] And especially good morning to you, Mr. Janc. I
24 hope you had an opportunity to rest, and I assure you that we are going
25 to finish today pursuant to the instruction given to the Presiding Judge,
1 His Honour Judge Agius.
2 We are going to pick up where we left off yesterday, but I
3 indicated that we are going to move on to a new topic, so let's proceed.
4 As an OTP investigator, you are, of course, aware that after the
5 13th, and we all know that that's when the Kravica incident happened,
6 there were pockets of Muslims in Srebrenica, Bratunac, and Milici who
7 failed to break through with the column towards Tuzla; is that correct?
8 A. Yes, that's correct.
9 Q. I also assume that you are aware that after the 13th of July on
10 several occasions, the ground was scoured in order to neutralise the
11 Muslims groups that remained behind. I suppose that you are also aware
12 of that as well.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now, let us just go briefly through documents that relate to this
15 topic. I have reduced the number of the documents that I originally
16 intended to show you to only a small number, but the ones that I'm going
17 to show you are characteristic of the period.
18 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] First of all, let's look at
19 document 4D5251. That's the order of the Bratunac Brigade commander for
20 the search of the terrain. The Exhibit is 4DP251. As I said, that's the
21 order issued by the Bratunac Brigade commander to search the terrain of
22 14th July, 1995
23 Q. Items 1 and 2 and 3 clearly show that on the 14th of July, the
24 infantry battalion of the brigade received an order to search the terrain
25 and that they were given precise access along which they were supposed to
1 do that. I think that this document clearly shows this.
2 A. Yes.
3 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now move to next document.
4 That's P4372.
5 Q. While we're waiting for the document to appear in e-court, that's
6 a document sent by Colonel Ignjat Milatovic from the Drina Corps sent on
7 the 15th of July. In the first passage, you can see in the letter in
8 front of you is in the process of searching the area that had been
9 ordered, and in the bottom part of the document you see where it says
10 proposal, item 1 reads that the commander -- or it has been suggested
11 that the commander of the Bratunac Brigade be authorised appointed
12 commander of all forces engaged in the search of the terrain and the
13 assignation of the battle-field east of the road and within the road
14 between Kasaba and the Drinjaca. I will just make it clear that this is
15 the Milici-Konjevic Polje-Bratunac road that he is talking about here; is
16 that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Let us now look at the next
19 document, and that's 4DP255. Can we please just find the time and date,
20 and in the bottom right-hand corner you can see that this document is
21 dated 16th July, 1995
22 Q. This is a regular combat report issued by the Bratunac Brigade on
23 the 16th of July, 1995. What we can see from it under item 2, it is
24 clearer in English because this handwriting is not very legible. It says
25 there the forces of the Bratunac Brigade are still engaged in scouring
1 the terrain in the zone that had been ordered.
2 And if we can just look down, scroll down so that we can see
3 better, we see that the Bratunac Brigade commander -- and if we can zoom
4 in the bottom part in B/C/S, please. It says that the Bratunac Brigade
5 command during that day - therefore, we are speaking about the
6 16th of July - reviewed all the units blocking the pullout of the enemy,
7 and he mentioned the Milici Brigade, a unit of the
8 65th Protective Motorised Regiment, and some other units, and he gave
9 more detailed tasks and organised a coordinated action and communication.
10 This is what we can see from this document; is that right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Obviously, we can conclude from this document that on the
13 16th of July, the searching of terrain and the blocking of the Muslim
14 forces trying to pull through towards Tuzla is still in progress. That
15 is what this document shows.
16 A. Yes, that's what it says.
17 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] The next document that I would
18 like you to look at is P257. If we can just turn this side around
19 because it's upside-down, the one in B/C/S.
20 Q. On this first page, we see that the document was delivered -
21 that's what it says - on the 18th of July, 1995, at 0040 hours.
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] And if we can now move to the
23 next page in B/C/S.
24 Q. Now, the first sentence in this document indicates that the
25 Bratunac Brigade among its prisoners has two underage children.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Four underage
3 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Can you just confirm that this is what this document reads?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And the prisoners mentioned in this document and in the previous
7 document were the outcome of the search of the ground; is that correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Let us now move to the next
10 document, which is P1185. While we're waiting for this document to come
11 up, I will tell you that this is an intercept of 17th July, 1995.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: We are being informed that it's not yet in e-court.
13 MR. LAZAREVIC: According to my information, this should already
14 be admitted into evidence.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: P1185, if the number is correct.
16 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: The number is correct, so it should be in e-court
18 because it's a Prosecution document.
19 MS. SOLJAN: Your Honours, it is, but there are letters that
20 follow these intercept numbers, so he should refer whether he is saying
21 A, B, C, most likely.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I see, I see. Okay. Thank you. And that means
23 the --
24 MR. LAZAREVIC: Maybe we should add A to this number, and B.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. B. Found it? Yes. Being is the
1 English version. A, English.
2 Yes, go ahead.
3 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. In order to identify, we see in the middle of the page
5 number 653. The date is the 17th of July, 1995, and I'm talking about
6 the middle portion of this intercept, which is marked 653. The
7 participants in this conversation have not been identified, and you see
8 that the first portion of the sentence is missing, but there is mention
9 of Kravica, though, but from the content of this intercept one can see
10 that one of the speakers talks about an order from the Superior Command
11 to carry out the sanitation and hygiene measures and that not a shred of
12 cloth should remain behind. I think that you can see that from this
13 document; is that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Of course, we are talking about the 17th. Do you know, or did
16 you find any information that this assignation of the terrain was indeed
17 conducted on the 17th of July? If you can help us with that, and with
18 further documents and further discussions we are going to go into more
19 detail, but for now, tell me, do you know whether this assignation was
20 conducted on the 17th?
21 A. Yes. From what we can see here, that's the case.
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] All right. If we can now look at
23 the following document. It's 4DP263. And if we can go immediately to
24 page 3 in B/C/S and page 1 in English, it is a regular combat report of
25 the Bratunac Brigade for the 19th of July, 1995.
1 Q. In paragraph 2 of this report it says, as you can see, that units
2 of the Bratunac Brigade are persistently pursuing and destroying the
3 remaining enemy groups and that the second infantry Battalion is engaged
4 in scouring the ground around Gornji Potocari, Bljeceva, Cizmici -- let
5 me just repeat: Gornji Potocari, Bljeceva, Cizmici, Leovici, and Bacuta;
6 is that right?
7 A. Yes, that's what it says here, yes.
8 Q. It is obvious that on the 19th of July, the search of the ground
9 is still going on precisely in the area that we had discussed; this is
10 Bljeceva, Gornji Potocari, et cetera.
11 A. Yes. Yes.
12 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] In order to make this examination
13 short, and I'm not going to go with you through all the documents
14 relating to the search of the ground, but only for the record, I would
15 like the number of exhibits to be recorded, and I'm going to read this
16 for transcript. This is Exhibit 4D596, P527 [as interpreted], 4DP262,
17 4DP263, 4D529, 4DP265, and 5266 [as interpreted]. All these documents
18 have already been admitted into evidence in this case.
19 Q. Let us keep a period of time and move immediately to document
20 4D755. This is another document issued by the Bratunac Brigade commander
21 ordering the troops to search the area of the former Zepa enclave, and
22 the date is the 13th of August, 1995.
23 This document apparently shows that units of the Bratunac Brigade
24 were obviously engaged in August 1995 in the search of terrain around the
25 Zepa enclave, and what this document indicates is something that gives us
1 a different time-line. Can you confirm that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Now, let us summarise what we have seen from all these documents.
4 Based on these documents, can we conclude that the search of the ground
5 was an ongoing activity conducted in the period from 14th of July
6 onwards, as well as in August 1995, which we have seen in the documents
7 just now?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And, of course, there are numerous testimonies about this, and
10 there is evidence that members of the BH were actually killed in the
11 course of this operation. I think you have come across documents showing
12 that men were killed in the process.
13 A. Yes, indeed.
14 Q. We had occasion through some of these documents that we were just
15 discussing to see or come across the term "asanacija." Since I am a
16 layperson and I'm not very versed in military terminology, do we
17 understand and perceive this term in the same way, and that is bury the
18 human remains and carcasses in order to prevent any widespread of
19 contagious diseases? Is that how you understand this term "asanacija"?
20 A. Yes, I understand it like that. That's what I have learned here
21 during the trial. But I think we have seen this term to be used only
22 once as proposal in these documents you have shown me.
23 Q. Yes, but I just wanted to establish that we understand this term
24 "asanacija," sanitisation, in the same way.
25 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] The next document I would like to
1 look at is P220. It's the diary of the duty officer of the military
2 police of the Bratunac Brigade, and can we look the a page 21 in B/C/S;
3 that is page 18 in English.
4 Q. All right. Perhaps to put this in a time context -- and we don't
5 see the date on this page. I think -- yes. All right. We have what we
6 need. But we don't see the date on the page itself, so perhaps it would
7 be good to look at the previous page in B/C/S to find out at what time
8 this was happening.
9 On the previous page, we see an entry for the 18th, and this is
10 the following page, so we think it's the 19th. Now we see the previous
11 page. The entry is dated 18 July, and logically, therefore, the
12 following page should be the 19th. In the page I originally asked for in
13 B/C/S, we can see that the patrols of the military police of the
14 Bratunac Brigade, obviously, went to provide security for utility
15 companies personnel in Glogova.
16 Does this entry tell you that on the 19th, employees of the
17 public utility service carried out burials in Glogova and that this unit
18 of the military police of the Bratunac Brigade went to that location to
19 be their security detail?
20 A. No. From these documents you can see that something was going on
21 there but not exactly what, so we can just assume that there were still
22 reburials or some work related to this issue was going on, but what
23 exactly, we can't see from this document.
24 Q. Of course it's not explicitly written in the document that these
25 utility workers were digging graves in Glogova, but I suppose your
1 proposition is very reasonable as to what this could be referring to.
2 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] The next document I'd like to
3 look at is P3016.
4 Q. It's an order from the Drina Corps of the 20th July, 1995, sent
5 to all subordinated units concerning the sanitisation of the battle-field
6 in the zone of responsibility of individual units. In the introductory
7 part, we see which units there are, and then let's look at items 1, 2,
8 and 3 of the order.
9 Did you manage to look through?
10 A. Yes, roughly.
11 Q. Can we conclude on the basis of this document that even after the
12 19th, the date we saw on the previous document, the order obligating all
13 units of the Drina Corps to carry out sanitisation of the terrain in
14 their respective areas of responsibility was still in effect.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And, of course, it says that in cooperation with the civilian
17 protection health centres and hospitals, these units have to carry out
18 sanitisation in their areas of responsibility, focusing on Srebrenica and
19 Zepa areas and axis roads leading to these areas from Bosnia. That is a
20 wider area; correct?
21 A. Yes, correct.
22 Q. It also says that work crews are being formed with the necessary
23 amount of personnel and materiel, trucks, tractors with trailers,
24 et cetera, and that locations for graves should be immediately designated
25 on the ground to ensure the necessary protective measures. We can read
1 all that here; correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. My question is, do you know where the bodies of people killed
4 were buried, those people who were found in the area of responsibility of
5 the Bratunac or the Milici Brigade, for instance?
6 A. No.
7 Q. So what we don't know in this respect is the number of people
8 killed in the course of search of terrain, the number of bodies collected
9 during sanitisation, or where those bodies were buried. You have no
10 knowledge about that, do you?
11 A. No, we don't have any knowledge about how many of them have been
12 collected, how many of them killed. We just have knowledge how many of
13 them stayed on the ground, how many of them have been picked up during
14 these years in this area.
15 Q. All right. And, of course, we can reasonably assume that the
16 bodies that were found in that area were buried in the graves in Glogova;
18 A. No, I can't conclude that. That would be speculation. I know
19 for some of the bodies -- or for some of the people who are found during
20 this search of the terrain, that the bodies were found in Cerska grave.
21 So from the document you showed me from the 17th when you were -- which
22 is talking about the underage children, we have a statement from, I
23 think, two of those kids, and one of them has named four individuals
24 which were captured in area of Bornica [phoen] around 17 of July, and
25 then their bodies showed up in Cerska grave. So some of them -- for some
1 of them which were captured during these days during the search of
2 terrain, we know where did they end up but not for all of them.
3 Q. Yes. We are also aware of that fact, and I know very well what
4 you are talking about. You are talking about individuals who are
5 captured, and those four bodies were found in Cerska, so the total number
6 is four. What I'm asking you, however, is can you rule out the
7 possibility that the bodies of people who were killed during the
8 sanitisation operation were buried among other places in Glogova?
9 A. No, you cannot rule out this possibility. But as I have told you
10 yesterday, you know, early media shows that most of the work with Glogova
11 was ended by 17 of July, so what was going on between 17 and 27, we have
12 just two new small graves, smaller graves, so with 12 and 6 individuals
13 in it, so that's what I was talking about.
14 Q. Yes, of course, but we'll be using two things. First of all, the
15 aerial images you mentioned do not exist for every single day, do they?
16 A. No, they do not. Yes, you are right.
17 Q. And also, if those bodies had been buried in some existing,
18 pre-existing graves, that would not have been observed or noticed;
20 A. Yeah, I think it wouldn't be that easy to observe from the aerial
21 images itself.
22 Q. Right. Thank you.
23 I'd now like to move on to the next subject. In your
24 corrigendum, you stated that there exist reports and documents that in
25 the Glogova graves ten victims exist, bodies of people who were brought
1 back from Serbia
2 the documents based on which you gained this knowledge. I won't repeat
3 these documents. We are all aware of them.
4 What I want to ask you is this: You cannot claim, of course,
5 that this is the total number of people who were returned from Serbia
6 Republika Srpska. You can only say that there are documents from the
7 board of police and from the Bratunac Brigade concerning a certain number
8 of people. There is documentation for this number of people, but we
9 cannot infer that this is the total number of people brought back from
11 A. Yes, I can agree with you that we know just about the cases for
12 which we possess the documents from the authorities. So for the others,
13 we don't know anything, yes.
14 Q. All right. That was my point. I'd like to move to the last but
15 one subject of my cross-examination. Let me take you briefly to
16 something that you discussed with Ms. Tapuskovic in her
18 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Can we look again at 1D1368, and
19 please don't broadcast this document.
20 Q. This is a comparative overview of persons that are documented by
21 the BH as having perished before July 1995 with the location of their
22 remains. There is also the number of ICMP protocol under which they are
24 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Can we also look at page 2,
25 please, because this is an extract prepared by the Defence.
1 Q. We see a rubric called ICMP grave-site, and among others we see
2 Ravnice grave, Glogova, Zeleni Jadar.
4 Here we see, among others, Kravica, Bljeceva, and other graves;
6 A. Yes, correct.
7 Q. You see, we in the Borovcanin Defence compared information from
8 this list - and this list includes ICMP protocols - with the confidential
9 Annex D from your summary, and we found that all these persons for whom
10 there is an indication of the ICMP protocol are also found in your
11 confidential Annex D. Can you confirm this? I suppose that would
12 require quite a lot of effort and time at this moment, but let us proceed
13 from the assumption that what I said is correct, and I suppose the
14 Prosecution can check this very easily.
15 We took this document and compared the persons from this list,
16 the persons without indication of ICMP protocol - you see that the ICMP
17 protocol is missing for certain individuals on the list - and we compared
18 that with the ICMP missing persons list that was used in the preparation
19 of your report because it was in the form of an Excel sheet which is
20 searchable, and we found 16 persons who do not feature on this list and
21 who from the day when this document was made until the drafting of the
22 ICMP list have been identified.
23 I suppose you cannot tell me this without checking your database,
24 but I'd like to know, did you make such a comparative analysis as we did?
25 A. No, I did not, but I agree with you that there might be some
1 individuals which were identified before the ICMP started their work, so
2 that's why perhaps you found some additional individuals.
3 Q. And when we compared these two lists focusing on the persons who
4 were found and identified in the meantime, we looked at the graves
5 relevant for the Borovcanin Defence, and we found as follows: For
6 Glogova 1, seven cases; Glogova 2, six cases; Ravnice 1 and 2, six cases;
7 Kravica - we're talking about surface remains here, right - five cases;
8 Zeleni Jadar 5, six cases. Zeleni Jadar, six. Let me repeat.
9 Zeleni Jadar 5, six cases. Perhaps if I say this differently. The
10 grave-site is called Zeleni Jadar 5. Then the record will be clear. In
11 this grave, six cases were found. In Zeleni Jadar number 6, there is one
12 case; in Zeleni Jadar number 4, there is one case; in Bljeceva 2, there
13 is one case; and in Bljeceva 3, there are three cases. In total, that
14 gives us the number of 36 persons named in document 1D1368, persons who
15 were identified in these graves.
16 You told me that you did not make this kind of comparative
17 analysis using the document containing information on persons listed by
18 the BH Army as having perished before July 1995; correct?
19 A. Correct.
20 Q. Nevertheless, all these persons feature in Annex D of your
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Soljan.
23 MS. SOLJAN: Your Honours, before Mr. Janc answers, I think a few
24 clarifications are necessary. Comparison of these two lists, it's not
25 clear which comparison of which two lists is being dealt with. The cases
1 that are being mentioned are these connections; and third of all, who are
2 these persons in the questions that was just asked by Mr. Lazarevic?
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, thank you. I think a very pertinent comment,
4 particularly the first part of it because I was thinking precisely of the
5 same issue.
6 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Perhaps if I take you again
7 through the procedure that we followed when making this analysis, maybe
8 that would be of assistance.
9 As a basic document, we took the document we have before us,
10 1D1368. After that, all the persons that are listed here with an ID
11 protocol of the ICMP with the date July 1995 [as interpreted] were
12 compared with Annex D.
13 Here in the record, it says July 1995. I meant July 2008.
14 And we found that all these persons who have an ID protocol in
15 this document are also in the confidential Annex D attached to the
16 summary of Mr. Janc. That was our first step.
17 The next step, as we can see from this document 1D1368, was to
18 see that there is a certain number of persons who have the blank box of
19 ID protocol of the ICMP and the blank box for grave-site. The names and
20 other information of these persons we compared with the ICMP missing
21 persons list, which was used as a basis for the creation of your Annex D.
22 And in this way, we derived information for another 16 persons who
23 appeared in the meantime on the ICMP missing persons list.
24 I did not mean to use this document. We used it for our internal
25 purposes to derive information for persons who have no personal
1 information indicated in the ICMP document, but this was in the form of
2 an Excel spreadsheet that was searchable. And perhaps we could
3 distribute the hard copies of what we obtained by this search. We have
4 copies for the Trial Chamber and for the Prosecution.
5 [In English] I don't know whether this explanation clarifies
6 things. I would just like to hear it from my colleagues from the
7 Prosecution. I can see Mr. Janc nodding now. It seems that he
8 understands this.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
10 Incidentally, for the record we are sitting pursuant to
11 Rule 15 bis again today. Thank you.
12 Do you wish to comment, Ms. Soljan, or not?
13 MS. SOLJAN: Not at this time, no, Your Honour. Thank you.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
15 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] All right. What this whole
16 line of cross-examination boils down to is this: For all these persons,
17 there exists information that they died prior to July 1995, but they are
18 still on the ICMP missing persons list related to Srebrenica events of
19 July 1995, and they are also in the confidential Annex D of your report.
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] All right. I'm done with this
22 document. I'd like to look at the next document now without broadcasting
23 it. It's P3159A.
24 Q. Let's see the cover page just to see the nature of the document.
25 It's "Srebrenica Missing." The date is 11th July, 1995, and you have had
1 occasion, of course, to see this document before; correct?
2 A. Yes, correct.
3 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now move to page 5. I
4 think this will be of assistance. What matters to me are the headings of
6 Q. We see several rubrics concerning information about missing
7 persons, and in column 4 we see date and place of disappearance; correct?
8 A. Yes, correct.
9 Q. We won't go into each particular entry, but we see that the dates
10 go from 11 July 1995
11 different places of disappearance. We also note that Potocari, Buljim,
12 Konjevic Polje, Baljkovica, and various other locations are mentioned in
13 column 4.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And this is, of course, information provided by family and
16 friends of the missing persons to the ICMP based on their knowledge when
17 they saw the person alive last, et cetera.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Soljan.
19 MS. SOLJAN: Your Honours, this is incorrect. ICMP did not
20 provide this. This is not found on the ICMP. It's ICRC.
21 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] My apologies. These things
23 Q. Anyway, anyway, these are the data provided to the ICRC by the
24 relatives and friends of the missing persons about what they knew; is
25 that correct?
1 A. Yes, that's correct.
2 Q. And these data have been entered into this document, which was
3 basically produced by the ICMP.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
5 MS. SOLJAN: Objection, Your Honour. This document was not
6 produced by the ICMP.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: She is correct there, as well, I suppose.
8 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation].
9 Q. Can you then tell me who drafted this document?
10 MS. SOLJAN: Indeed. This was the product of the --
11 MR. LAZAREVIC: No, no, please. It was a question for the
13 JUDGE AGIUS: For the witness, not --
14 MS. SOLJAN: My apologies.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Janc, are you in a position to answer Mr.
16 Lazarevic's question?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, I am. This is the product of the
18 OTP. It was created by the demographic unit.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: You can challenge their own product, Mr. Lazarevic.
20 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Of course it is possible, and I
21 even found the response very useful, but by looking at page 1 of this
22 document, it is called "Progress Report on the DNA Based of the ICMP."
23 That was perhaps the reason for my putting the question as I did. So
24 this is a document produced by the OTP.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's see page 1 out of curiosity. I would like to
1 see it, or the cover. All right. Let's proceed. Thank you.
2 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. [Interpretation] So from your answer, I deduce that the OTP had
4 had information, since it made it possible for them to produce this
5 document containing the date and place of disappearance for certain
6 missing persons; is that correct?
7 A. Yes, that's correct.
8 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] In order for us to make a
9 comparison, can we now look at document 53517D. The number should be
10 3517D. If we can zoom in on this document, please. I'd like to see the
11 right-hand side of the document. That's the document of the ICMP of July
12 -- oh, I'm sorry, this document should not be broadcast because it
13 contains persons' names.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Got that, Registrar? Thank you.
15 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. If we can look at the right-hand side of the document, it has a
17 total of 11 columns, and let us focus on columns 10 and 11. So column 10
18 has the heading "Date of Disappearance," and column 11, it has the
19 heading "Place of Disappearance." This is an excerpt from this document.
20 I have went through this whole document. What we see here is that the
21 place of disappearance are only two locations mentioned as such, and that
22 is Suma forest and Potocari. Can you confirm that?
23 A. Yes, I can confirm that, yes.
24 Q. As for the date of disappearance, it is the 11th of July, 1995
25 for all the people listed here; is that correct?
1 A. Yes, correct.
2 Q. Let me ask you this: So the OTP had the information from both
3 the ICRC and the ICMP. Of course, it is impossible for all the missing
4 persons to have gone missing on the 11th of July in 1995 either in the
5 forest or in Potocari. Tell me now, this fact that the ICRC information
6 was more complete as to when these persons were last seen alive, did you
7 take this fact into consideration when you were preparing your report?
8 A. Yes. ICRC information or data is more complete, yes, than the
9 ICMP one regarding to date of disappearance because you will find on this
10 -- this is extract from the ICMP list, and you will see that's why the
11 date of disappearance is 11th of July because I think they are putting
12 11th of July as a fixed date. But on the ICRC list you will find
13 different dates, probably for these same individuals.
14 Q. And, of course, we are talking both about the place and the date
15 of disappearance or, rather, when they were last seen. Right.
16 I'm sorry, I started my next question before waiting for your
17 answer. We are talking about both the place and the date of
18 disappearance; is that right?
19 A. Yes, correct.
20 Q. I read very thoroughly your confidential Annex D, and I noticed
21 that the dates and places of disappearance of missing persons do not
22 feature in it at all. Can you clarify that, please?
23 A. Yes, correct.
24 Q. At the very beginning of this cross-examinations, you described
25 the methods and what instructions were given and how it came about for
1 you to compile this summary and how you entered the data. Did you
2 yourself make a decision that the information about the place and the
3 date of disappearance of a certain individual should be omitted from your
4 confidential Annex D?
5 A. Yes, indeed, that was my decision, and I apologise for it, but it
6 was simply because of the better resolution when you print out on the
7 screen. If you print out, you know, less columns, then you have better
8 resolution; you can see this data better. So that was the only reason
9 why I did not use that part of it. And as I explained it, date of
10 disappearance within this ICMP list is not that, you know, useful one
11 because I think for most or all of them you will find 11 of July as the
12 date of disappearance.
13 Q. I agree with you that it wouldn't have been very helpful.
14 However, when you made this decision, did you consult anyone from the
15 OTP? Did you tell them this resolution is not good, should I leave this
16 out, or did you do it without consulting anyone at all?
17 A. No. That was purely my decision.
18 Q. And nobody from the OTP objected by saying, Look, perhaps we
19 should have this in the report because it provides more information that
20 could be relevant for this case?
21 A. No, I do not remember anyone telling me anything.
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Very well. Let us now look at
23 document 4D535 without broadcasting because it contains names.
24 Q. Did you have an opportunity during your briefing sessions or in
25 some other situation to come across this document? Have you been shown
1 this document by anyone from the OTP?
2 A. No, I don't think so.
3 Q. All right. Then it would be good to -- for me to explain to you
4 what this is. This document has been used on several occasions, and this
5 is a document prepared by Mr. Borovcanin's Defence based on the
6 document 5 -- 3519A, and it refers to the individuals identified in the
7 Glogova graves.
8 We just singled out the individuals where the burial site was
9 Glogova. Now, let us focus on the column that bears the heading "Date
10 and Place of Disappearance."
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. I'll try to avoid going into private session, and for that
13 purpose let us refrain from mentioning any names. We'll just mention the
14 dates and the places of disappearance. Under number 1, we have the date
15 11th of July, 1995, and the place is Udrc-Zvornik. You know that Udrc
16 near Zvornik, but they are pretty far away from Kravica itself; is that
18 A. Yes --
19 Q. In geographical terms, for someone who would like to walk from
20 one place to another, it's a long walk.
21 A. Yes, correct.
22 Q. Then under 8, it says 18th July, 1995, Kamenica-Bratunac. And
23 the 18th came five days after the 13th; is that correct?
24 A. Yeah, that's correct.
25 Q. And we also have an entry under item 3 where it says 00/07/1995,
1 Kravica-Bratunac, which makes it totally impossible to establish the date
2 in July 1995 when this person was last seen alive. You would agree with
3 me on that?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now, if we look at all this information and we take them into
6 account, for these persons, either to an uncertain date of their being
7 last seen alive due to the geographical distance from Kravica or the date
8 when they were last seen alive, these persons could not have been the
9 Kravica victims of the incident that took place in July 1995; is that
11 A. Yes. In case these -- these data are accurate, then that's the
12 case. But I've seen many of problems so far regarding the exact date and
13 place of disappearance, so that's what we have -- that's why we have,
14 perhaps, a problem. You can't necessarily always rely on this data.
15 Q. Yes. You see, I fully understand what you are saying, so we are
16 starting from the document containing this information that we received
17 from the OTP, and you said this was done by the OTP. Now you are saying
18 that we cannot be sure about this information. My question is, what did
19 the OTP do in order to check any disputable information? Are you aware
20 of anyone from the OTP going out and trying to find out who reported the
21 last sightings of these persons alive, and where were they seen? On what
22 basis do they claim that before that date that person was alive? On the
23 basis of what do they claim that this person on the particular date was
24 in that particular place? Can you tell me this?
25 A. This document is based -- this OTP document is based on the ICRC
1 list, and all this work was done by the ICRC. I don't think that OTP has
2 ever checked all of the individuals or any of the individuals regarding
3 this particular issue on why they were reported and how they were
4 reported and by whom they were reported to be last seen.
5 Q. Therefore, these data were not a basis for the OTP for an
6 investigation that would dispel any dilemmas about what we were just
8 A. No, because you can find a lot of discrepancies in this data.
9 Q. I agree. Maybe it won't be necessary for me to go with you
10 through all the documents that I had planned to put to you.
11 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] At the end, I would just like to
12 ask you to look at one document more, and that's 4D754, and I kindly ask
13 this document not to be broadcast.
14 Q. This is a similar type of document that we saw a minute ago, the
15 only difference being that this is an excerpt from the Srebrenica missing
16 document updated by Annex D to your report dated 13th March, 2009. That
17 is the persons contained in Bljeceva in your annex have been compared to
18 the Srebrenica missing, and some entries have been added, as you can see
19 here. Therefore, the same dilemma emerges that we had vis-a-vis the
20 previous documents if we take into consideration your Annex D.
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, I might have maybe a couple of more
23 questions and that would be it, but if we can take a break now, I believe
24 I should consult with my client during the break, and it will not take
25 more than five minutes then.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: That won't entail asking for more time, this
2 consultation, because we have gone well beyond what you have anticipated,
3 so let's try and finish, please, because there are others too.
4 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll have a 25-minute break now. We'll start at
6 quarter to 11.00.
7 --- Recess taken at 10.21 a.m.
8 --- On resuming at 10.50 a.m.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's hear the good news, Mr. Lazarevic.
10 MR. LAZAREVIC: Well, I can assure the Trial Chamber that I can
11 finish in five minutes, literally.
12 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Janc --
13 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Can we look again at document
14 4D754 that we already seen, page 1, without it being broadcast, please.
15 Q. Of course without mentioning any names, let us clarify a few
16 issues here. Let's look at item 2 where it says 00/07/1995,
17 Kravica-Bratunac. The date is not clear. Actually, we only know the
18 month in which this person was last seen alive, and I can tell you in
19 advance that this kind of information neither confirms nor excludes the
20 possibility that this was a Kravica victim; is that correct?
21 A. Yes, that's correct.
22 Q. Let's look at the next entry where it says 18th July, 1995,
23 Konjevic-Polje-Bratunac, and this person was found in Bljeceva-Bratunac.
24 Now, if this entry were correct, it means that this person can be
25 excluded as the Kravica victim due to the date, if we assume that this
1 entry is correct, that is.
2 A. Yes, you are right.
3 Q. However, there is one more thing that we might deduce from this.
4 Since this person was discovered in Bljeceva and is unrelated to the
5 Kravica incident, this might mean that Bljeceva was for one part a
6 primary grave. It is possible to arrive at that conclusion, as well,
7 again provided this information is correct.
8 Sorry, you were about to give me an answer. If the whole body
9 had been found in the Bljeceva graves and we have information that he
10 wasn't a Kravica victim, that would mean that Bljeceva was partly a
11 primary grave; is that correct?
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Soljan.
13 MS. SOLJAN: Objection, Your Honour. The counsel should indicate
14 which Bljeceva grave he is talking about.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Which Bljeceva grave are you talking about?
16 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] I don't have this piece of
17 information here. Based on this entry 3, I cannot be more specific
18 whether it was Bljeceva 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, and I accept the suggestion put
19 by my learned friend Ms. Soljan.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Janc.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes. If you have in this case the whole body
22 there, this cannot be excluded, but before any conclusions to be made, I
23 would like to -- to see the entire case about it, about this particular
24 individual, meaning the exhumation reports and the autopsy reports and
25 everything. But, yeah, that would be my response.
1 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. All right. I fully accept your reply. This would, of course,
3 require additional investigation and checking up of information, and you
4 already told us that this hasn't been done by the OTP.
5 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] And my last question refers to
6 document 4D338, and could we please have it in e-court.
7 Q. Mr. Janc, have you ever seen this document before?
8 A. No, I don't remember it.
9 Q. You haven't. Well, this is a letter sent of the forensic team
10 Tom Grange who signed the letter, and it relates to a loss of an
11 artifact. If you can just go quickly through the letter and see what it
12 is about, and I will tell you that in September 2001 the OTP
13 investigators checked 25 artifacts located in Zeleni Jadar 6 and took
14 them for comparison with the samples or, rather, took them to the
15 warehouse in Kravica in order to establish whether they can be related to
16 the Kravica warehouse. And it says here that artifact ZJ06/120A had a
17 piece of -- was piece of concrete, and after checking it was established
18 that it did not match any -- anything that was possible to be found in
19 the area, around the warehouse, but after that a storm took place and
20 this artifact had gone missing and cannot be located again.
21 So my question for you is, did you ever hear about this from the
22 OTP? Did any of your colleagues or your predecessors hear about the loss
23 of an artifact discovered in Zeleni Jadar 6 and which was compared with
24 the samples from the Kravica warehouse, and it was -- it turned out that
25 no match could be made, and that subsequently this artifact was
1 misplaced? Have you heard about that?
2 A. No, this is the first time I hear of this story from you.
3 Q. The fact that a piece of concrete with colour white existed in
4 Zeleni Jadar and that no match could be found in Kravica --
5 A. Yes, most probably.
6 Q. -- means that it could be related to other locations? And, of
7 course, had this artifact been preserved, we could have conducted
8 additional investigation in order to find whether there are any other
9 locations where bodies from Zeleni Jadar had been buried.
10 A. Yes, I agree with you.
11 MR. LAZAREVIC: [Interpretation] Let me just correct the
12 transcript. This was definitely my last question, but in transcript on
13 page 29, line 6, it says [In English] The locations from where bodies
14 from -- [Interpretation] Let me just repeat: Some other locations from
15 which the bodies buried in Zeleni Jadar could have originated. And after
16 this, I would like to say that I have no further questions for this
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
19 Yes, Mr. Janc, did you wish to comment any further on Mr.
20 Lazarevic's question?
21 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. I just wanted to add that, yes,
22 that's the case, most probably, as explained, and we established here
23 that in Glogova there were also bodies from the other locations than
24 Kravica, so meaning around -- from Bratunac and the places we have been
25 discussing here, so that's the case. That can be the case.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
2 Ms. Fauveau.
3 Cross-examination by Ms. Fauveau:
4 Q. [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Good day. My name is Natacha Fauveau-Ivanovic, and I represent
6 my client, and I have a few questions concerning Potocari. This is the
7 grave which was found in a field in Potocari which you have noted in
8 annex A of the report, and for the minute this is a document P4490, page
9 34 in English, and 51, B/C/S.
10 Can we agree that the six persons -- well, if you find -- if you
11 look on hard copy, page 29 of the annex, annex A. Do you agree that the
12 six persons whose remains were found in that grave had been accurately
14 A. Yes, I can agree with that.
15 Q. I would like now to show you Evidence P514, page 8. P4514.
16 Page 8.
17 MS. FAVEAU: [Interpretation] And I would like to ask that this
18 page not be broadcast since it contains names. I need the person listed
19 under 6. It's a little bit lower down on the page.
20 Q. Can you agree with me that the person listed at point 6 is one of
21 the persons whose remains were found in the Potocari grave?
22 A. Yes, I can.
23 Q. This document is a document that was supplied to the Office of
24 the Prosecutor by ICMP.
25 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] Can we show the top of the document
1 for a second.
2 THE WITNESS: No. This document was provided to the OTP by the
3 BiH authorities by the Tuzla Prosecutor's Office, I guess, or Tuzla
4 cantonal court, so and this document was provided to them by the ICMP.
5 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Well, thank you for this added detail. Can we go back now to
7 number 6. Well, you see the manuscript mentioned, the handwritten
8 mentioned next to number 6, which is circled.
9 A. Yes, I see that.
10 Q. Can you tell me what this mention means, which in B/C/S means
12 A. I have no idea.
13 Q. Is it possible, therefore, that this mention could mean that this
14 identification is not confirmed or not confirmed with certainty?
15 A. I can't say anything about it what does it mean because it's --
16 no, I don't know the answer for this question.
17 Q. Is it a fact that you have no knowledge about the cause of death
18 of persons found in Potocari?
19 A. We did receive autopsies reports where I think there were no
20 cause of death listed on these reports, yes.
21 MS. FAVEAU: [Interpretation] And to confirm what you've just
22 said, can we show the witness document P3488. Sorry, 3485. My mistake.
23 That will be page 1 in English, 12 in B/C/S. And I would like you to
24 avoid broadcasting this document.
25 Q. Well, this is a report you are talking about, in fact, and we can
1 indeed say that cause of death is not ascertained; correct?
2 A. Yes, correct. This is as I call them autopsy report.
3 Q. And one doesn't know, either, when the person was killed; is that
5 A. Yes, you can't say from these documents anything.
6 JUDGE KWON: Madam Fauveau [Microphone not activated] ... Did you
7 say they were killed?
8 MS. FAUVEAU: [Interpretation] No. When these persons met their
9 death. Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Q. And can we agree to say that we don't know the location where
11 these persons died either?
12 A. Yes.
13 MS. FAVEAU: [Interpretation] I would now like to show you a
14 document P3159A. This is also a document which should not be broadcast
15 publicly. Can we go to page 188.
16 Q. This is the second part of the document you saw earlier. I
17 assume that you also saw this part of the document; is that correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And is it correct that the list which follows on succeeding pages
20 -- subsequent pages, rather, contains the names of persons who were
21 identified but were not to be found in the list of persons disappeared or
22 killed after the Srebrenica events of July 1995?
23 A. Yes, I think that's the case. Yes.
24 MS. FAVEAU: [Interpretation] I would now like to go to the next
25 page, and could we go to private session, please?
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's go into private session for a short
2 time, please.
3 [Private session]
9 [Open session]
10 JUDGE AGIUS: We are in open session, yes. Mr. Josse.
11 MR. JOSSE: Yes. I can confirm what I just said, we have no
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
14 Mr. Haynes.
15 MR. HAYNES: Just a few minutes.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
17 Cross-examination by Mr. Haynes:
18 Q. Good morning, Mr. Janc. I really am not going to be very long
19 with you, and I'd like, really, to take you back to Ljubljana and call
20 upon your expertise as a Slovenian police officer that you were telling
21 us about the other day in terms of crowd assessment.
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You intrigued me and caused me to embark upon a little research.
24 If the average man sits cross-legged on the floor, he occupies about a
25 square metre of floor space, doesn't he?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And, in fact, and we know this from -- if we imagine an assembly
3 of school children standing up, a human being doesn't occupy much less
4 floor space if he stands up because the width of the body is determined
5 by the shoulders. Do you agree with that?
6 A. Yes, I agree with that.
7 Q. So if we have an area of about 10 metres by 10 metres, and people
8 are seated in there wall to wall, you would expect to fit in there about
9 100 people.
10 A. Yes, perhaps. I don't know.
11 Q. Thank you. Now, one of the things that hasn't changed very much
12 between 1995 and today is the size and capacity of buses used for public
13 transport. Would you agree with that?
14 A. Yes, that's correct.
15 Q. And the sort of buses with which you would have been familiar
16 with the former Yugoslavia
17 passenger capacity of about 50 people.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And you'd agree that if you put on a bus a driver and some guards
20 to keep people apart in the aisles, you are not going to be able to
21 exceed that capacity by very much, are you?
22 A. Some of them can now sustain.
23 Q. But not very many.
24 A. I think you have 50 seats or thereabouts, and then you can fit --
25 I don't know how many people, but you can fit a quite amount of them.
1 Q. Right. But if you wanted to move 5.000 people, you'd need
2 something like 100 buses, wouldn't you, if you were going to do it in one
4 A. Yes. Probably you calculated this number, yes. That's then the
6 Q. And if you only had 50 buses, in one convoy you would probably
7 only move 2 to 2
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Have you been to the detention sites in the Zvornik area? That's
10 Orahovac, Petkovci, Rocevic, Pilica, and the Pilica Dom.
11 A. Yes, I have visited most of them -- or all of them but Rocevic.
12 Q. Well, I'm going to ask you, then, to look at a selection of
13 plans, and it's 7D929, and we'll go from the back forward. So we'll
14 start at the last page, which is page 6 in the B/C/S and page 7 in the
15 English. I better inquire, do you read Cyrillic, or would you prefer to
16 look at the English, Mr. Janc?
17 A. No, I'm not that good in Cyrillic. I would rather in English.
18 Q. Me neither. Thank you. Well, we'll go forwards, then. If we
19 start with page 1. Do you recognise this as being a floor plan of the
20 ground floor of the Petkovci school?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And you've been there?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And do the measurements on that plan setting out the size of the
25 ten rooms on the ground floor approximately accord with your recollection
1 of that building?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Were those -- were the plans of that building ever obtained by
4 the Office of the Prosecutor, or was that building ever measured by that
6 A. I don't know. I'm not aware of this particular building.
7 Q. But anyway, we can see that there are ten rooms on the ground
8 floor according to the plan with a square metreage of 491.58. And that
9 would be about right, wouldn't it?
10 A. Yes.
11 MR. HAYNES: Can we go to page 2, please.
12 Q. And again, Mr. Janc, you remember how at the Petkovci school you
13 go up the stairs, and the classrooms are all on the front of the
14 building. Does that accord with your recollection of that building on
15 the first floor?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And the nine rooms there, albeit it some of them small cupboards
18 and things, have a total square metreage of 362 and a little bit. Would
19 that about right, the area of the first floor of that building?
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. HAYNES: Let's go to page 3, please.
22 Q. This is the one place you haven't been to. This is Rocevic.
23 Have you seen photographs of it?
24 A. Yes, I know where that school is and how it looks like from
1 Q. And you would agree, would you, that the -- what we in English
2 would call the gym or the sports hall is about 12 metres by 23.75 metres
3 as is set out there?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And that that added together to a little storeroom on the side
6 gives that building an area of 310 metres and a little bit.
7 A. Yes.
8 MR. HAYNES: Can we go to page 4, please.
9 Q. Now, this is the Pilica Dom or Pilica Cultural Centre. You've
10 been there, have you?
11 A. Yes, yes.
12 Q. And you'll confirm that it's a room that really is in two parts,
13 a flat area and then a stage.
14 A. Yes, correct.
15 Q. And that would appear to you to be correctly measured there,
16 including the stage area at about 223 square metres.
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. HAYNES: We'll go on to page 5, please.
19 Q. You've been to Grbavci or Orahovac, the school there, have you?
20 A. Yes, I've been there.
21 Q. And you've seen the, as I say again in English, what we'd call
22 the gym or the sports hall.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And not dissimilar to the other gym we were looking at, together
25 with a little storeroom on the side, that has an area of 308 metres odd.
1 That would be about right from what you saw?
2 A. Yes, correct.
3 MR. HAYNES: And last but not least, page 6 in the B/C/S, page 7
4 in the English.
5 Q. This really was the purpose of my first question about people
6 sitting cross-legged on the floor. This is the Pilica school. I can't
7 remember; did you say whether you had been there or not?
8 JUDGE AGIUS: He said he hadn't been to Rocevic only, so --
9 MR. HAYNES: Thank you. That's really helpful. I'd forgot that.
10 Q. This is the smallest of the areas, about 180 square metres. Do
11 you recall that being a smaller place than the others?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, I hope you'll take my summary of this. We've looked at 26
14 separate rooms there with a total area of 1.875 square metres. By all
15 means, you know, I'll run back through them, but I've added them up.
16 Would you accept that?
17 A. Yes, I can accept that.
18 Q. And would you also accept that if there were only something like
19 50 buses available and they only made one journey and prisoners were
20 housed in these detention sites we've looked at, it's unlikely that much
21 more than 2.000 people were moved from Bratunac to Zvornik?
22 A. No, I don't think so. I can provide you with the number. I can
23 agree that it's only 2.000 of them, 50 buses.
24 MR. HAYNES: I have no further questions, Mr. Janc.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
1 Ms. Soljan, is there re-examination?
2 MS. SOLJAN: Yes, Your Honours. I think about 15 minutes. That
3 should be it.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Go ahead.
5 Re-examination by Ms. Soljan:
6 Q. Good morning, Mr. Janc.
7 A. Good morning.
8 MS. SOLJAN: Could we please have Exhibit 4531 on e-court,
9 page 4.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Bourgon.
11 MR. BOURGON: Sorry to interrupt, Mr. President. Before my
12 colleague begins her re-examination, I've been reading the last answer
13 from the witness to my colleague's, Mr. Haynes, cross-examination, and
14 I'm not sure I understand the answer as it stands. Does he agree with
15 the proposition that no more than 2.000 were taken to there, or is he
16 saying the opposite? I think he does agree that no more than 2.000, but
17 I'd like that to be clear on the record, Mr. President, before my
18 colleague begins her re-exam.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Fair enough. I think that is a very good point to
20 make, Mr. Bourgon.
21 Mr. Janc, do you still have the transcript in front of you, page
23 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, I have. I see that.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. You've heard Mr. Bourgon. What is your
1 THE WITNESS: My comment is opposite as it says, as it is written
2 here, so that I cannot agree, because basic calculation if there is 50
3 buses and then 50 people on each bus, then it's I think 2.500 at least,
4 so but as I explained in one bus there can be fitted more than only 50
5 people. I think it's 50 seats on each bus, but you can fit more in one
6 bus, so I don't agree with this figure.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.
8 Yes, thank you, Mr. Bourgon.
9 Ms. Soljan.
10 JUDGE KWON: How about the capacity of the rooms of the schools?
11 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, that will be a little bit more
12 difficult question for me. I'm not able to assess how many people can
13 fit in each of these facilities.
14 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Let's proceed, Ms. Soljan. Probably you
15 didn't hear me because you are not wearing the headphone. Let's proceed.
16 MS. SOLJAN: [Microphone not activated] Yes, Your Honour. I was
17 just waiting for the photo to appear. Page 4, please.
18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
19 MS. SOLJAN:
20 Q. Mr. Janc, this is a depiction of a square metre and three people
21 sitting cross-legged in that amount of space. Does this image fit with
22 your understanding of the events or the situation of the victims in
23 Kravica warehouse?
24 MR. HAYNES: It's a leading question.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Do you believe it isn't a leading question?
1 MS. SOLJAN: I don't believe that it's a leading question. I'm
2 simply asking him whether he think that this --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Just ask him for his comment.
4 MS. SOLJAN:
5 Q. Can you comment on this picture knowing that it represents
6 1 square metre?
7 A. Yes, I can see it from here, it is -- yeah. I believe that it is
8 1 square metre, and, yeah, that's how I understand the situation was on
9 the ground at that time.
10 Q. In other words, that it is possible for up to three people to fit
11 in --
12 JUDGE AGIUS: That's -- again, I mean, this is what the kind of
13 question you shouldn't put. You are giving the -- let's move to your
14 next question.
15 MS. SOLJAN: Okay. I'm sorry.
16 Q. Mr. Janc, have you been to Kravica warehouse?
17 A. Can you repeat the question?
18 Q. Have you ever been --
19 MR. LAZAREVIC: Your Honours, I have to object at this point.
20 This has nothing to do with the cross-examination that I have in relation
21 to Kravica warehouse about number of people that were there.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Not yours, but maybe it's a follow-up to what
23 Mr. Haynes, the line of questions that Mr. Haynes -- let's proceed. Yes,
24 go ahead, if you could answer the question.
25 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes. Anyway, in such a situation maybe my
1 colleague could ask general questions, not particularly related to
2 Kravica warehouse.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's proceed.
4 Can you answer the question, please.
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, I was there several times.
6 MS. SOLJAN:
7 Q. And are you aware of any other members of the investigation team
8 having been at the Kravica warehouse as well?
9 A. Yes, I'm aware of many of my colleagues have been there already.
10 Q. Do you know if Mr. Tomasz Blaszczyk was at that Kravica
12 A. Yes, I'm quite sure he was there several times.
13 Q. And are you aware of the fact that he has measured the Kravica
14 warehouse and has drawn up a sketch of those dimensions?
15 A. Yes, I am aware of that, that he measured it, but he was not the
16 only one who measured the Kravica warehouse.
17 MS. SOLJAN: Thank you. Your Honours, this exhibit is not in
18 e-court, so I would ask that it be placed on ELMO.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
20 Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.
21 MR. LAZAREVIC: And again -- I would also like to state again
22 that this is beyond the scope of the cross-examination.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: But you know the particular rule that does not
24 necessarily limit, and jurisprudence. I mean, it's within our
25 discretion. And you weren't the only one who cross-examined this
2 Yes, let's have it on the ELMO, please.
3 MS. SOLJAN: [Microphone not activated].
4 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Zivanovic.
6 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Sorry, but I cannot see any indication that this
7 these three gentleman sit inside 1 square metre.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but that's a visual perception that we can all
9 make. Okay? I mean, one could also not sit in that particular position.
10 MR. ZIVANOVIC: I cannot see that.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but again, it's a question for us to look at
12 the picture and draw our own conclusions, and you can do the same. No
13 further comments on this picture.
14 MS. SOLJAN: What I can say is there are additional photos within
15 that exhibit where we can also show it from a slightly different
16 perspective if need be.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: That's your problem or your decisions. We are not
18 going to ask for any further photos unless you feel the need to provide
19 us with more.
20 MS. SOLJAN: Okay. Could we go back to Exhibit 4931 for a
21 moment, please. 4531, I apologise. The previous page, page 3, please.
22 Q. Mr. Janc, can you comment on what you see in this photo, please?
23 A. Yes. Two men sitting inside that square, which it seems to be
24 1 square metre, so two men sitting in ...
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MS. SOLJAN: Now, if we can go back to Exhibit 4529, which is on
2 ELMO, please.
3 Q. Can you tell by looking at this document what this document is?
4 A. It's the declaration of my colleague Tomasz Blaszczyk.
5 Q. Okay. And if you look at paragraph 3, can you please read it
7 A. "On March 30, 2007
8 the inside and outside of the warehouse sections which were accessible to
9 me. I made a rough sketch at the time with my measurements in metres."
10 Q. And the next paragraph, please.
11 A. "On May 4, 2009
12 measurements and sketch from March 30, 2007."
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Bourgon.
14 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to object to
15 this line of questioning. Is Mr. Blaszczyk testifying through this
16 witness? If they want information through a witness, Mr. Blaszczyk, he
17 should be here to talk about this, but not this witness to enter the
18 information of the testimony of another investigator. Thank you,
19 Mr. President.
20 MR. LAZAREVIC: And one more issue, maybe, that I would also like
21 to raise. Here we can see that it was prepared on May 4, 2009, which
22 means yesterday, and my learned colleague couldn't have known what topic
23 would Mr. Haynes raise in his cross-examination, so it was prepared in
24 advance without me raising any issue regarding the measurements and
25 number of people that can fit in some space.
1 MS. SOLJAN: Your Honours --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: But the issue has arisen, so let's continue.
3 MS. SOLJAN: In addition, I can respond to the fact that the very
4 issue of how many people were inside the Kravica warehouse and how many
5 people then may have ended up from Kravica warehouse in any of the
6 Glogova or other secondary graves was raised by the Borovcanin Defence,
7 with all due respect, for hours.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.
9 MR. LAZAREVIC: I would really like to make a very clear
10 distinction. Not at any moment did I ask any question about how many
11 people were actually at Kravica warehouse. We were discussing the issue
12 of grave.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but as I said, you are not the only one who
14 cross-examined the witness. So what we have now is a re-examination by
15 the Prosecution presumably addressing points raised by any one of you,
16 any one of the Defence teams that cross-examined, and Mr. Haynes did ask
17 a specific question, how many people can fit in 1 square metre, or how
18 much space does one person occupy within 1 square metre.
19 Yes, let's proceed.
20 MS. SOLJAN: Can we go to the next --
21 MR. HAYNES: I don't want to cause trouble, but can we just have
22 some providence for the photographs. Were they likewise taken yesterday,
23 and if so, can we see the people in them?
24 MS. SOLJAN: Excuse me? What --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Providence
1 MR. HAYNES: Yeah, who took the photographs --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Who took these photos, when and where.
3 MR. HAYNES: -- when and where, and who were the people in them?
4 MS. SOLJAN: Average-size men are the people who are inside it,
5 and --
6 MR. HAYNES: I think I can test that, but just tell us when it
7 was taken and by whom.
8 MS. SOLJAN: It was taken -- it was indeed taken --
9 MR. McCLOSKEY: Your Honour, can we please have him address the
10 Court instead of being rude to my young colleague. I hate to stand up
11 like this, but this has got to stop.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Manners haven't been lacking in this courtroom, so
13 let's not make a mountain out of a molehill or raise a storm in a
14 tea-cup. Let's proceed. These are ultimately matters that we will use
15 our own discretion. I mean, I look at these two guys. One has got his
16 knees more or less together, the other one his legs wide open, and they
17 are sitting next to one another. They could have an arm around the other
18 guy's shoulder. I mean, there are many things, factors that one can take
19 into consideration.
20 So let's proceed.
21 MS. SOLJAN: Thank you, Your Honours. Can we go to the next page
22 of this exhibit, please.
23 Q. Mr. Janc, can you tell us what this exhibit depicts or what this
24 picture depicts?
25 A. This is the measurement of Kravica warehouse, inside of it, what
1 was written by Tomasz Blaszczyk.
2 Q. And can you please read out for the Court what the amount of
3 square metres in the room on the right side in the direction of
4 Konjevic Polje is?
5 A. Yes. Section 1, I can see it's 280.13 square metres. Then below
6 that, you have another number, 262.5 square metres.
7 Q. And on the left side in the room in the direction of Bratunac,
8 can you tell us -- can you read out for the Court how many square metres
9 that room contains?
10 A. It's 327 square metres.
11 Q. And does this roughly correspond to the dimensions that you have
12 seen in the course of visiting the Kravica warehouse?
13 A. Yes, it would be -- I did not measure it, but it could
14 correspond, yes.
15 Q. Okay. And --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Just one moment, Ms. Soljan.
17 Mr. Bourgon?
18 MR. BOURGON: Thank you, Mr. President. The witness has just
19 confirmed that he did not make these measurements, that these
20 measurements simply could correspond it to what he saw. And,
21 Mr. President, I would like you to rule, please, on my earlier objection
22 that this witness is testifying on the basis of information obtained by
23 another investigator, and we feel that this is inappropriate. Thank you,
24 Mr. President.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] Yes, do you wish to
1 comment --
2 MS. SOLJAN: Your Honours --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: -- Mr. Bourgon? Do you wish to comment on that?
4 MS. SOLJAN: Simply to say that hearsay evidence is admissible in
5 this court.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: This is not hearsay evidence. Anyway, let me
7 consult with my colleagues because I think it's an issue that can easily
8 be resolved.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Again, as I anticipated, consultations with my
11 colleagues confirmed what I thought in the first place, that this is
12 nothing out of the ordinary or unusual. We've been doing this all the
13 time. Reference has been made, for example, to the cadastre by one of
14 the Defence teams to measurements, other measurements of other places by
15 another Defence team, and at the end of the day it's a question of how
16 much weight we are going to give to the statements of the witness based,
17 insofar as they are based on conclusions drawn or measurements drawn or
18 facts stated by others.
19 So let's proceed. There's nothing unusual in the way we are
21 MS. SOLJAN: Thank you, Your Honours. Can we please go to
22 Exhibit 4491, page 251, not to be broadcast, please. This would be page
23 R0657797, pages 251, please, in e-court. And could we please close it in
24 some more so we see the centre of the page with the case ID KA01-110BP,
25 please. Thank you.
1 Q. Mr. Janc, as you recall, we were discussing in the last few days
2 -- you were testifying in the last few days about a tooth found at the
3 Kravica warehouse and re-associations in the Zeleni Jadar 2 secondary
4 mass grave. If you look at the case ID connected to the KA01-110BP case
5 ID, the tooth found at the Kravica warehouse. The case ID immediately
6 below it states ZJA04 SRE
7 LF means left femur?
8 A. No, I did not know that, but I was assuming that that's the case,
10 Q. Okay. And if we go one line down or one row down to ZJA --
11 case ID ZJA04 SRE
13 A. Yes, I assume so.
14 Q. Thank you. Now, Mr. Janc, in the last few days, there's also
15 been talk about --
16 MR. LAZAREVIC: One second, please. Those two questions, I've
17 let them do it, but those were two leading questions were not appropriate
18 at --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: All right, but --
20 MR. LAZAREVIC: But I would just like to tell my colleague that I
21 will object very next time when she puts these kind of questions to
22 Mr. Janc.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay, but you appreciate we didn't hear any
24 objection at the time. So let's proceed.
25 But you are forewarned now. I mean, you've given advance notice
1 of new objections. So you need to formulate your question somewhat
2 differently now if you are proceeding along the same line of questioning.
3 MS. SOLJAN: Thank you, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: You are welcome.
5 MS. SOLJAN:
6 Q. Now, in the last few days, Mr. Janc, you have looked at
7 exhibits 1D1362, 1D1363, 1D1364, and these were certificates that had
8 been sent to the OTP by the BiH Ministry of Defence correcting the dates
9 initially appearing in the Bosnian list of missing or dead. Let's
10 briefly take a look at an additional related certificate, and that's
11 Exhibit 1D1365, please. I don't believe this is the correct document.
12 Could we try again. 1D1365. It should be ERN 0360-4920. 4921, I
13 apologise. That's correct.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: No broadcast, I assume?
15 MS. SOLJAN: No broadcast, please.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
17 MS. SOLJAN:
18 Q. And, Mr. Janc, I'd just like you to note the name of the
19 individual for yourself, and can you tell out loud for the record what
20 date he is said to have disappeared?
21 A. Disappeared on 11 of July, 1995.
22 MS. SOLJAN: Thank you. Could we please have Exhibit 4528, and
23 it should not be broadcast, please.
24 Q. And Mr. Janc, this is a table that includes the names of those
25 four individuals which we've just listed in the above 1D exhibits, and it
1 summarises the most recent ICRC and ICMP data. Can you tell us looking
2 at the date of disappearance, according to the ICRC list, when are these
3 individuals reported as missing by the ICRC?
4 A. Yes. First one is 13th of July; the third one is 11th of July;
5 the fourth one is 13th of July; and the last one is 11th of July.
6 Q. And according to the ICMP data available on this spreadsheet, can
7 you tell us what graves these individuals are found in?
8 A. Yes. For the first one, I can say this one is coming out from
9 other section, so I did not find out where this particular individual was
10 found, so it is within other section in my report.
11 Q. Okay.
12 A. So we don't have the exact place of the grave-site. So the
13 second and the third ones, they were found in Bljeceva secondary grave
14 number 2. The fourth one was found in Kamenica 10; that means
15 Cancari number 10, Cancari Road number 10, secondary mass grave. And the
16 last one, that one was found in Cancari Road number 3.
17 Q. Okay. And can you recall for us, individuals coming out of
18 graves such as Cancari 10 and Cancari 3, what execution site or primary
19 grave are these individuals coming from?
20 A. For Cancari 10, the execution site would be Branjevo or Pilica.
21 Then for Cancari number 3, this one is related to Kozluk.
22 Q. And, Mr. Janc, for your analysis, for purposes of your report,
23 what is more reliable, an ABiH list of dates of disappearance or even
24 ICRC list or --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Zivanovic.
1 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Sorry, I object to this question. It is fact
2 witness, and he is not authorised to give his assessment of reliability
3 of any evidence here. Thank you.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, do you wish to comment on that?
5 MS. SOLJAN: Your Honours, I'm asking him specifically for the
6 purposes of the analysis that was done for his report.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. That's fair enough. But restrict your
8 question to that and your answer to that.
9 MR. ZIVANOVIC: I don't believe that it was included in his
11 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know. He will tell us. He is best place
12 to answer the question, Mr. Zivanovic.
13 Mr. Janc.
14 MS. SOLJAN: I actually have not finished my question, Your
15 Honours, so if I could just finish it.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, I see. Okay. Then finish your question.
17 MS. SOLJAN: Thank you.
18 Q. So I will just reread what I said and then continue. For
19 purposes of your report, Mr. Janc, which is more reliable, an ABiH list
20 of dates of disappearance or even ICRC dates of disappearance or the
21 graves out of which a person is coming?
22 A. I would say the ICRC list is the most reliable for the purposes
23 of my report, then also the list of ICMP, and also the graves. These are
24 three sources most reliable, but I would like to say that ICRC list was
25 made up in 1995, so where -- when the evidence were fresh, but the list
1 from the ABiH, as we can see from these certificates, they were made up
2 in 2004, so it is -- which is ten years later, so that's why I say that
3 this data, this ICRC data are more reliable for my report.
4 Q. And a final question, Mr. Janc. As a final matter, I'd like to
5 clarify your testimony from yesterday with respect to one particular
6 question. You were asked at transcript 33636, line 17 to 22:
7 "It's without a doubt, isn't it, that the path report does not
8 exclude or rule out any of the possibilities that I'm suggesting that the
9 numbers that you are giving us are indeed inflated and include
10 individuals who died as a result of sustaining injuries from land-mines,
11 self-inflicted wounds, and/or injuries from legitimate combat
13 And your answer was at line 23:
14 "Yes, you are right."
15 Now, Mr. Janc, I'd just like to clarify for the record what your
16 answer entailed because it's answering to a compound question, so I'll
17 just break it out into two. Isn't it without a doubt that the report
18 does not exclude or rule out any of the possibilities that I'm suggesting
19 that the numbers that you've given us are indeed inflated? In other
20 words, does your report contain inflated numbers?
21 A. No.
22 Q. And the second question, the report does not exclude or rule out
23 any of the possibilities that I'm suggesting, that the numbers you've
24 given us include individuals who died as a result of sustaining injuries
25 from land-mines, self-inflicted wounds, and/or injuries from legitimate
1 combat engagements. What is your answer to that, Mr. Janc?
2 A. Yeah, that can be the case also, yes, that the report includes
3 those cases, yes, also.
4 MS. SOLJAN: Thank you very much.
5 I have no more questions, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
7 Judge Kwon.
8 JUDGE KWON: Just one question, simple question.
9 Mr. Janc, your report is the first one that the analysis of DNA
10 connection; that's correct?
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, that's correct.
12 JUDGE KWON: So I'm wondering whether you can off the top of your
13 head give me the number of the individuals that were found in the graves
14 that have a DNA
15 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, I can. The total number of those
16 individuals is 472 or -- around 470 individuals have different
18 JUDGE KWON: That number is referred to the individual that have
19 the -- whose DNA
20 graves, so if you have at least found a connection that two graves can be
21 said to have some DNA
22 THE WITNESS: Yes.
23 JUDGE KWON: So if you add the numbers of individuals that were
24 found in those graves.
25 THE WITNESS: So I don't understand, Your Honour, what -- if you
1 can give me example.
2 JUDGE KWON: Can we see the last page of his report, maybe chart.
3 That's P4490. Yes. Let's see the first left, lower, in the bottom,
4 Cancari road and mass graves.
5 THE WITNESS: Yes.
6 JUDGE KWON: For example, Cancari Road 1, Cancari Road 4,
7 Cancari Road 8 does not have any connection with any other grave.
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, indeed, Your Honour, not yet.
9 JUDGE KWON: So my question was whether you can give the number
10 off the top of your head if we exclude all those graves which that do not
11 have any connection with another grave? We can do the mathematics
12 ourselves, can we?
13 A. Yes, you can, Your Honour. But I can give you the exact number
14 from the top of my head now.
15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Judge Stole?
17 Mr. Janc, that brings us to the end of your testimony. I thank
18 you very much for having given us your testimony and your time. I hope
19 we won't need you any further.
20 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
22 [The witness withdrew]
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Documents? Prosecution?
24 MS. SOLJAN: Your Honours, we are submitting the documents that
25 have been circulated to you, including these last four documents that I
1 tendered in redirect.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. All right. I was going to ask you that. Any
3 objections? Mr. Gosnell.
4 MR. GOSNELL: Your Honours, with your indulgence, I'll be
5 articulating our objection to P4529.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: P -- one moment because I was looking at the wrong
7 one. We don't have the Prosecution list. What you gave us is the
8 Defence list. Did you hear me? I don't have the Prosecution list.
9 MS. SOLJAN: We have circulated it, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I will try to find it amongst -- yes, okay.
11 We may have received one earlier from our staff, obviously, but I don't
12 see it either. Thanks.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So we have -- sorry for the confusion.
15 We have five pages, and you are making submissions, Mr. Gosnell, relation
16 to which one, which document?
17 MR. GOSNELL: P4529.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Let me follow from the transcript. P4529. Yes.
19 Okay. It's the second of the four documents used in redirect. Sketch
20 with measurements of Kravica warehouse is what you are referring to.
21 Yes, let's hear the objection.
22 MR. GOSNELL: Yes, Mr. President. There are several grounds of
23 objection. The first ground and one of the main reasons why I'm standing
24 to address you instead of my colleague relates to the scope of the
25 re-opening that you granted. Paragraph 49 of the Prosecution motion
1 concerning Investigator Janc's testimony stated as follows:
2 "The Prosecution seeks to call OTP Investigator Dusan Janc to
3 introduce updated information relating to Dean Manning's November 2007
4 report. The proposed evidence comprises a report prepared by Janc, the
5 documents, reports and data upon which it is based, and his viva voce
7 That was the scope of the re-opening that you granted, and my
8 colleague Mr. Lazarevic did not in any way go beyond the four corners of
9 what you had granted re-opening for. So we would suggest to you,
10 Mr. President, that we do not object to the photo, P4531, because as you
11 rightly pointed out, that may have been raised or put in issue by one of
12 the other Defence teams, and nor would we object if the Prosecution had
13 sought to contest some of the sketches used by my colleague.
14 But what we have here is something very different. The
15 Prosecution is trying to get a sketch in about a site that was not
16 mentioned by any of the other Defence teams and that directly concerns my
17 client and that was not raised by our Defence team on cross-examination.
18 Indeed, it was not raised by any Defence team on cross-examination. So
19 what we have, I would suggest to you, Mr. President, is the Prosecution
20 going far beyond the scope of cross when you really look at what was
21 being contested in cross-examination in conjunction with what was granted
22 on re-opening.
23 And the second point that I would just beg your indulgence to
24 make before you, Mr. President, is that although it's true that hearsay
25 is not inherently inadmissible, I believe that there is case law on
1 precisely this type of document being brought into evidence. I don't
2 have that case law with me, but I believe that this type of hearsay is --
3 has been ruled inadmissible by other Trial Chambers, and I can't tell you
4 right now whether that's true, but I believe it to be the case.
5 And I would suggest to you, Mr. President, that this is just a
6 question of simple fairness. What we have is a document being put in
7 that describes the dimensions of the Kravica warehouse during
8 re-examination of a witness who was supposed to be testifying about
9 forensic evidence when that issue was not raised by our Defence team.
10 Very simply, Mr. President, we have no opportunity to challenge this
11 evidence, to show that it might be incorrect, or even for that matter to
12 ask questions to the witness.
13 So on those grounds, Mr. President, we strongly object to this
14 document coming into evidence.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you wish to comment, Ms. Soljan?
16 MS. SOLJAN: Yes, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, go ahead. Shortly, briefly, please.
18 MS. SOLJAN: Very briefly. This is redirect, and not just one
19 but multiple teams have brought up the issue of numbers. Mr. Haynes
20 brought specifically the issue of square metreage inside a building, but
21 the Borovcanin team I find is very incorrect in saying that they did not
22 raise the issue of numbers. In fact, the entire cross-examination of
23 Mr. Janc consisted of calculating out numbers in the Glogova grave and
24 any of the graves that are said to be related to Kravica and thereby
25 related directly to how many people were in the Kravica warehouse. So
1 that is my argument. Thank you, Your Honours.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Let me see if I need to consult with my
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Again, as I anticipated, I barely needed to consult
6 my colleagues on this. You seem to have forgotten completely, at the end
7 of the day, because the bottom line is we went there. We went on site,
8 and we had the area measured. So at the end of the day, you have nothing
9 new here. So as I said earlier on, it's still a storm in a tea cup.
10 With regard to your other point raised, it's faulty reasoning,
11 it's bad reasoning to refer to the limited scope for which we admitted
12 the production of this witness when in actual fact in the course of the
13 testimony, particularly during some of the cross-examinations, the window
14 was -- or the door was widened and the range extended to include other
15 matters that were not originally within the limited scope of the purpose
16 for which we admitted this witness. But I'm not blaming you, but I think
17 each one should consider whether it's a case of self-inflicted.
18 So objection is overruled. The document is -- unless we hear
19 further objections to the admission of the lists, Prosecution list of
20 documents? We hear none. So those are admitted.
21 MR. HAYNES: Yes, sorry.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Haynes. I'm sorry.
23 MR. HAYNES: Sorry. I object to 4531, the photos.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. On what ground?
25 MR. HAYNES: Well, they are described in the list that's just
1 been circulated as four photos showing numbers of average-sized people
2 fitting inside the space of 1 square metre. Firstly, only two were used
3 in evidence; secondly, the commentary in the description is completely
4 unproven. There's no evidence that they are average sized or, indeed,
5 that they were sitting within a metre, and we invited providence to be
6 shown during the course of the testimony, and although Mr. McCloskey got
7 upset with me, they never did. So therefore, the objection is that they
8 are unproven. There is no evidence as to the facts asserted in the
9 description. They are of minimal probative value in any event because
10 you will recall the evidence of how people said they were seated in
11 various detention sites, and you'll recall the evidence of Mr. Janc
12 himself that the average man takes up 1 square metre.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, and I could also add that there is no evidence
14 that what is alleged to be 1 square metre is indeed 1 square metre.
15 MR. HAYNES: I did say that.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, okay. We don't need any comments on this. At
17 the end of the day, we will use our judgement. I mean, we may or may not
18 need photos, but at the end of the day it's not the photo which is going
19 to the determine the amount of persons that can fit in a particular gym
20 or room or garage or store or classroom.
21 So your objection is of insignificant value or merit, has
22 insignificant merit in our opinion, Mr. Haynes, and the photographs will
23 remain there, and we will use our own discretion at the end of the day.
24 Yes. Popovic list of documents has been circulated. We have 5,
25 10, 15, I think. Any objections? Some of them will remain under seal,
1 Mr. Registrar, please, almost all of them, actually.
2 Yes, Ms. Soljan.
3 MS. SOLJAN: We have no objections, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you. No objections from the other
5 Defence teams. They are admitted.
6 Beara list, four documents. Any objections from the Prosecution?
7 My only question to you, Mr. Ostojic, is that in the first three of these
8 four documents it just says statement of, statement of, statement of, and
9 you mention three individuals. Are you proposing to admit the entire
10 statement for evidence of its content or not? Because at the end of the
11 day, you read out from these statements to the witness. What you read
12 out is in the transcript, and to be honest with you, I have a question as
13 to whether we need to have them in the first place.
14 MR. OSTOJIC: We'd like them into evidence, Your Honour. That's
15 why we put them on the exhibit list, and given the Court's ruling on the
16 Prosecution's evidence or documents, we believe that the same rules
17 should apply and those documents should be admitted.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but the understanding is that they are not
19 being tendered for proof of the evidence.
20 MR. OSTOJIC: Well, I think in conjunction with the witness's
21 testimony, they actually are, but we can look at that and evaluate that
22 at a later time.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I'll give you the floor shortly, Ms. Soljan.
24 Mr. Gosnell.
25 MR. GOSNELL: Just for the Court's information, 2D667 apparently
1 has already been admitted as a 92 bis statement, P2203.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Okay. Thank you for that. It seems to be
3 the case.
4 Ms. Soljan.
5 MS. SOLJAN: That is indeed the case, but we nevertheless object
6 to the other two statements --
7 JUDGE AGIUS: On which ground?
8 MS. SOLJAN: -- because they have already been read into the
9 record, and there is -- it has been practice so far not to admit such
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Any further comments from the other
12 Defence teams? None. I need to consult with my colleagues here.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Our decision is to admit these other two documents,
15 669, 702, but along the lines of our previous decisions, in other words,
16 don't expect us to allow in a procedure by which unsworn testimony is
17 admitted in this -- of third parties is admitted in this way. So we know
18 exactly for which purpose they are being admitted.
19 Next, the Borovcanin Defence -- Nikolic had no documents.
20 Borovcanin Defence team, there are four documents that I have in front of
21 me here.
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: Yes, Your Honours. These are the four documents
23 that we would like to offer to be tendered into evidence, with one
24 remark: 4D754 should be under seal.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Thank you, and there was one which was
1 not translated at yet, no, or is it not here? It isn't here.
2 MR. LAZAREVIC: No, not that one.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: It's not here. Any objection?
4 MS. SOLJAN: No objections, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: No objections from the other Defence teams? None.
6 They are so admitted.
7 Last list I have is from Ms. -- you had no -- okay, Ms. Fauveau
8 had no documents to tender, and the Pandurevic team has only got one
9 document which they wish to tender, which is --
10 MR. HAYNES: It's the plans.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, 7929. Any objection?
12 MS. SOLJAN: No objections, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. That concludes -- one moment. I need
14 to consult on something.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE AGIUS: For the time being, we do not have anything on the
17 basis of which we can plan our scheduling ahead as far as testimony is
18 concerned. There are two things pending in the pipeline. One depends on
19 Mr. Zivanovic giving -- updating information on the evidence the
20 Popovic Defence team plans details thereof so that we'll know whether we
21 need any sittings for that. And the other will depend on a decision
22 which we are in the process of finalising and which will be communicated
23 to you shortly.
24 But let's start with Mr. Zivanovic. We are talking of the Bisina
25 and evidence you would like to bring forward, and Dusan -- what was it,
1 Dunjac --
2 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Dunjic.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: -- and Stojkovic.
4 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Dusan -- yeah. Your Honour, so we submitted
5 three Rule 92 bis witness statements, and the Prosecution agreed not to
6 call these witnesses for cross-examination.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Which ones? Bisina?
8 MR. ZIVANOVIC: The Bisina witnesses. Our motion to call
9 Mr. Kosoric and our expert Ms. Evuga [phoen] is pending.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, that is another one pending.
11 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Our deadline to submit our Rule 92 bis witness
12 statements for Professor Dunjic and Professor Stojkovic expires I believe
13 next week, next week, on this day next week.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.
15 MR. ZIVANOVIC: And the preparation of expert report for
16 Mr. Rodic is underway. I believe that it will be done next week as well.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Of course we haven't handed down the decision as
20 yet, but in -- as regards bringing back Mr. Kosoric here.
21 MR. ZIVANOVIC: We sought to bring him here to refute the
22 testimony of --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, yes, I know.
24 MR. ZIVANOVIC: -- previous witness.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: We are fully aware of why you would like
1 Mr. Kosoric back here. We are just sort of giving you an advance, some
2 kind of formal advance notice by suggesting that you inquire about his
3 availability so that we will have an indication as to when to hear his
5 But the decision will be forthcoming shortly. It will be
6 officialised or formalised in a proper decision, but you are being given
7 advance notice to expect a positive outcome as far as that witness is
8 concerned. We need to know when he is available because we also need to
9 plan the sittings, and as you know, we have to plan sittings with other
10 Trial Chambers, and there are logistic problems that have to be
11 addressed. All right.
12 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Yes, I'll do it very soon. Thank you.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Actually when I say recalled, it's the wrong
15 description of the facts, but we will be calling him.
16 Anything else before we rise? Well, expect a few decisions
17 shortly. There are several small matters pending in addition to the
18 major ones, and we will dispose of them in the course of the week. Thank
20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.25 p.m.