1 Wednesday, 2 May 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [The witness entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.15 p.m.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, please call the

7 case.

8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon,

9 everyone. This is case number IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor versus Prlic et

10 al.

11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. This is

12 Wednesday, the 2nd of May, 2007. I'd like to greet everyone here in the

13 courtroom. I'd like to greet Mr. Scott, who has come back with us.

14 I would like to say good afternoon to Mr. Poryvaev as well, and

15 good afternoon to the Defence counsel and to the accused, as well to

16 everyone present in this courtroom.

17 The cross-examination of the witness will continue with

18 Mr. Karnavas, Mr. Karnavas who has been offered some time by other Defence

19 teams, if I'm not mistaken.

20 Mr. Karnavas, you have the floor.

21 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you, Mr. President. I believe I have in

22 total 30 minutes. I thought it was 40, but in any event it will be 30

23 minutes, 10 for myself and then I believe 20 from Ms. Alaburic, and then

24 that should be enough. Again, good afternoon, Your Honours.

25 WITNESS: ALIJA LIZDE [Resumed]

1 [Witness answered through interpreter]

2 Cross-examination by Mr. Karnavas: [Continued]

3 Q. Good afternoon, sir.

4 A. Good afternoon.

5 Q. Yesterday you talked a little bit about the radio station in

6 Mostar, and I believe you indicated in your testimony yesterday, this

7 would be on page 8, line 3, that it was -- the name was changed to

8 Croatian Radio Station, and again that also can be found in your statement

9 that you gave back in 2002. So is it your testimony, sir, that the name

10 of the station was changed to Croatian Radio Station Mostar or Croatian

11 Radio Mostar? That's your testimony; correct?

12 A. Yes, it did change its name into Croatian Radio Mostar.

13 Q. Okay. Very well. Now, we saw some documents yesterday. I won't

14 go through those documents again, but they -- I leave it for the Trial

15 Chamber to look and see what the title of the station is, but let's look

16 at document 1D 01418.

17 Sir, we're going to have to move rather quickly now. 1D 01418.

18 This is dated December 4, 1992. Again, we can see the names. We

19 have Muslim names. We don't know whether they're actually Muslim or not,

20 but they're Muslim names. But at the top we see that it's the radio of

21 the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna and the title is Radio Station

22 Mostar. Do you see that, sir? Do you see that?

23 A. Would you repeat that?

24 Q. Okay.

25 A. I didn't hear the number or couldn't follow the number.

1 Q. Okay. It's 1418. 1418. It would be 1D 01418.

2 A. Yes, I've found it.

3 Q. Okay. It says at the top Radio Station Mostar. Does it not say

4 that, sir? It's a yes or no.

5 A. That's what it says.

6 Q. Right. And in fact we can also see the salaries and it would

7 appear that everybody's receiving the same amount; correct?

8 A. That's what it says on this piece of paper. There's no doubt that

9 that is what it says.

10 Q. Right. If we could go down to the next -- if we could go to the

11 next document, and this is a -- P 00486. P 00486. Again, this is dealing

12 with the name, and it fits within -- within the theme of this particular

13 cross-examination, which is embellishment. If we look at this, this is a

14 decision, sir, is it not, dated 21 May 1992, and there in this decision we

15 see it's the radio -- the radio of the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna,

16 Radio Station Mostar.

17 A. It says the radio station of the Croatian Defence Council.

18 Q. I understand.

19 A. Unless I'm very much mistaken.

20 Q. But it doesn't say Croatian Radio Station, does it? And --

21 A. The Croatian Defence Council is not the Muslim Defence council.

22 Q. Sir. Sir, sir. I'm going to cut you off here. That's why we

23 went through the names, to point out that there were Muslims working in

24 the radio station. You said that the name of the station was -- just

25 listen to the question. You said that the name of the station was changed

1 to Croatian --

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Okay. And here we see that it's called Radio Station Mostar;

4 correct?

5 A. Sir, I didn't have an insight into official documents. I just

6 know how they addressed themselves, Croatian Radio Station Mostar. That

7 was the official title on the air. But I have a question for you. Do you

8 know how long these people worked there and who is working at that radio

9 station now?

10 Q. Excuse me, sir. We're not on one of your talk shows. Here you

11 listen to questions and you answer them. Okay?

12 A. [In English] Okay. Okay.

13 MR. KARNAVAS: I want to apologise and correct the record. It's

14 16 September, 1992, Your Honours. You'll see that at the end, at the

15 bottom of the page where it says Friday, 16 September 1992. I misspoke.

16 A. What month is rujan, September; right?

17 Q. Now if we could go on to the next topic, again dealing with the

18 radio -- Radio Mostar. If we could look at 1D 01421. 1421. And let me

19 apologise, sir, if I appear rude. I'm just short of time. I wish we

20 could have time to debate.

21 Now, if we could look at this document --

22 A. Yes. I'm sorry. I'm sorry we don't have the time.

23 Q. Okay, if you could look at the document 1421, it's dated December

24 21, 1992, at the top we see Radio Mostar. This is a memo. At the bottom

25 we see that there's a -- it's signed by head imam of the committee Sefko

1 Efendi Tinjak, I believe. Do you recognise this individual?

2 A. Yes, I do. I do.

3 Q. Okay. And here if we -- if we look in -- we don't have much time

4 to spend on this document, but we would see in the second paragraph at the

5 very last line it talks about alongside this, "We think it would be

6 desirable if you would give us two hours a week of air time during which

7 we would introduce Islam to the people." And if we had the time to go

8 through the previous paragraphs, you would see that the imam wishes to air

9 for the Muslims an Islamic programme because of the upcoming fasting

10 period.

11 And that's all I need for this document. And again it's addressed

12 as Radio Mostar, for the Trial Chamber.

13 A. Is that Radio Mostar of Herceg-Bosna or some other Radio Mostar?

14 Because this radio station, Radio Mostar, as such did not exist in this

15 form.

16 Q. Okay.

17 A. So could you tell me?

18 Q. All right. Well, was there another Radio Mostar operating in --

19 in -- in Mostar at the time?

20 A. There was Croatian Radio Mostar and Radio Bosnia-Herzegovina War

21 Studio Mostar. Those two stations existed --

22 Q. Excuse me?

23 A. --- And if you look at the documents --

24 Q. Do you think that the imam would know the difference of the two

25 and would know how to address them? Yes or no?

1 A. Well, I assume he would, but perhaps he didn't know.

2 Q. Okay. Very well.

3 A. I don't know, I can't say.

4 Q. Very well f we could look at 1D 01419. This is from Faruk Cupina.

5 You know this gentleman, don't you? At the end of the -- 1419. Faruk,

6 Faruk Cupina. You know -- you know the gentleman; correct?

7 A. I do.

8 Q. Okay. And here again this is dated December 24, 1992, and it

9 appears, at least from the first paragraph under "Dear sirs," it says, "We

10 would like to use this occasion to inform you that the Executive Committee

11 of the council of Muslims of Herzegovina held a meeting on December 23rd,

12 1992, and concluded among other things the following," and it would appear

13 that this is something that is being presented to Radio Mostar in order

14 for this to be publicised.

15 Would that be correct or am I misreading this document, or maybe

16 you can't answer the question.

17 A. I don't know whether Radio Mostar received this, whether it

18 broadcast it, but I just see that it says Radio Mostar and that's a

19 station I'm -- I don't know about, because that kind of station didn't

20 exist, but I assume Cupina knows what he sent to whom. But a radio

21 station under that name did not exist.

22 Q. Okay. And then we have another document and it's dated 1420

23 [sic]. 1420. Dated December 31st, 1992. And if we look at it, it

24 actually -- it almost -- it almost dovetails the letter that we first saw,

25 which was dated December 21st, because it then goes on to say at the

1 bottom in the text that a meeting was held and that they would agree to

2 air -- to have air time every Thursday during the fourth daily sala

3 [phoen] and on Fridays from 12.00 to 12.45 during the Dzuma namaz.

4 Okay? And so to your knowledge you don't know what radio station

5 they're referring to when it says here Radio Mostar?

6 A. Absolutely not.

7 Q. Okay. All right. Very well. Now, I want to switch to another

8 topic. Yesterday, as I understand it, you indicated that at one point you

9 had worked for a newspaper called Mostar Morning; is that correct?

10 A. Mostarsko Jutro, that's what it was called, Mostarsko Jutro,

11 meaning "Mostar morning."

12 Q. And you worked for that publication?

13 A. Yes, I wrote a few articles for them.

14 Q. And that publication was actually operational during the year

15 1992, was it not? Yes, no, maybe, I don't know?

16 A. Yes, yes, it came out in 1992.

17 Q. And that was a -- that paper was controlled or operated by

18 Muslims, was it not?

19 A. I can't say that. The paper was the paper of the 1st Mostar

20 Brigade, and in the Mostar Brigade you had all nationalities, all ethnic

21 groups.

22 Q. Okay. Okay.

23 A. So I don't know what you mean when you say Muslims.

24 Q. Okay. So was it controlled by the ABiH? Is that what you're

25 telling me? The army of Bosnia-Herzegovina? Sir --

1 A. Well, the publisher was the 1st Mostar Brigade.

2 Q. Okay.

3 A. Now, under whose control that was, I don't know. There was no

4 control. It was -- well, it was -- probably somebody had to provide the

5 money for the publication.

6 Q. And the 1st Mostar Brigade was under the Croatian Community of

7 Herceg-Bosna or was it under --

8 A. As far as I know, no, it wasn't. I was a member of the 1st Mostar

9 Brigade but I was never a member of --

10 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... under. Who was it part of?

11 What -- that was a unit of what? Of the army of BiH?

12 A. Of course the BH army.

13 Q. All right.

14 A. The First Independent Autonomous Mostar Brigade.

15 Q. Okay. All right. And I next only because -- and we're going to

16 go through some of these documents because in your statement in 2004 you

17 said that in 1992 all Croatian papers were available in Mostar, and it

18 would appear at least where I come from that that statement would be less

19 than honest or less than correct?

20 A. Mostarsko Jutro wasn't sold. It was distributed.

21 Q. Okay.

22 A. You could buy --

23 Q. Very well.

24 A. -- those publications that came from Zagreb, for instance.

25 Q. If we -- if we could go to 1D 01422. 1D 01422. This is a -- a

1 copy.

2 MR. KARNAVAS: And we don't have the exact dates, Your Honour.

3 We're going to try to find the original ones, but from the text we can

4 glean that this was -- this would have been published on or about 27

5 August 1992. You could see on the left bottom corner the logo, but the

6 reason I say that this would have been published at or about because this

7 article relates to conclusions based on an agreement at the meeting in

8 Medjugorje.

9 Q. Now, does this look like incidentally, sir, does this look like

10 what the -- this publication was like at the time? Is this -- does this

11 appear to be a copy of Mostar Morning, the publication that you indicated

12 you worked for at one point or contributed to?

13 A. I wrote a few texts for the Mostar Morning, but I wasn't on the

14 editorial board. I don't know if this is the Mostar Morning. It's kind

15 of a customary page that you would find in any newspaper.

16 Q. If you look at the logo, on the left side, bottom page. Do you

17 see it?

18 A. Well, I see something black, but it doesn't resemble a logo to me.

19 Q. Very well.

20 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, I'm short of the time. I don't want

21 to debate with the gentleman, but I do wish -- I do wish for the Trial

22 Chamber to take into consideration the gentleman's demeanour and his

23 willingness or unwillingness to be candid with the Court because the oath

24 says the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And

25 incidentally one other matter, Your Honour, with respect to the particular

1 agreement being referenced here, this has been introduced under P 00339.

2 It's the agreement on friendship and cooperation, so that's what's being

3 referred to in this particular document when they talk about the

4 agreement.

5 Q. If we could look at the next document, 1D 01424. Again, this

6 is -- it would appear that this is from the same publication. I would

7 venture to say that it's on or about November 9 because we could see that

8 both at the top and in the very first sentence. And again, if you look at

9 the left side, bottom of the left side on the original copy, you'll see a

10 stamp. There may not be a logo, but it certainly is a stamp. And we

11 don't have the time to go through this, but do you recall reading this at

12 all? Yes, no, maybe, I don't know.

13 A. The stamp that you said was a stamp, in one place you called it a

14 logo and in the other you say it's a stamp. But it's the same thing. So

15 what do you take me for? It's the same thing. You said it was a logo

16 here and you said that it's a stamp there.

17 Q. Sir.

18 A. I didn't --

19 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...

20 A. -- work on the logo for the Mostar morning, so I really can't say.

21 Q. That's why I don't want to argue with you. Does this appear -- do

22 you know who Mr. Jaganjac, Jasmin Jaganjac was? Do you know him? Do you

23 know him sir, yes or no?

24 A. Yes, I do.

25 Q. Okay. Do you know Arif Pasalic, yes or no?

1 A. [No interpretation]

2 Q. Okay. Do you recall reading anything about --

3 A. Yes, yes.

4 Q. Do you recall reading anything about the events that are outlined

5 in this particular article?

6 A. No.

7 Q. Okay. Very well. 1D 01423.

8 MR. KARNAVAS: Again, we'll discuss this through other witnesses,

9 Your Honour, but this is the vehicle that -- this is the individual who is

10 the vehicle to get these documents in.

11 And again on the left side of the bottom page --

12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Sorry, Mr. Karnavas, I have a question.

13 MR. KARNAVAS: Sure.

14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: How do you know in 10 seconds the witness knows

15 what the contents of an article is?

16 MR. KARNAVAS: Because this was so celebrated of an incident, that

17 is the agreement between the two sides, and all he needs to do is read the

18 headlines. I'm willing to give the gentleman time, but, you see, I'm

19 caught between not having time by the Trial Chamber because of the rush to

20 do things and the gentleman who obviously would need time to read it. And

21 so I'm -- that's the dilemma that I'm in. Under normal circumstances I

22 would spend two or three hours with this gentleman. I don't have that

23 luxury. But the point that I'm trying to establish here, Your Honour, is

24 that these are publications that were published at the time --

25 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mm-hmm.

1 MR. KARNAVAS: -- and to get them in. And then later, you know,

2 the Trial Chamber will have the benefit through other witnesses, perhaps.

3 I don't want to debate what the actual content --

4 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Well, I just have to note that the time for me is

5 too short to know what this is about.

6 MR. KARNAVAS: Okay. All right.

7 Q. Now, if we could go to one last -- one last document. Okay. I'm

8 told I haven't finished with 1D 01423.

9 Again, do you see at the bottom of the left side that it says

10 Mostar Morning in your language? Does it say that? It's a stamp. It's a

11 logo. I don't know what it is but something that's designated on the very

12 first page, on the left side at the bottom. All of them have the same. I

13 just want you to say it for the record, do you see it? Yes or no. If you

14 don't see it, that's fine. Can you read it? You can turn the page a

15 little bit. If you need your reading glasses we'll go get them. Can you

16 read it, sir?

17 MR. KARNAVAS: I'll move on, Your Honour, because I don't have

18 time.

19 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters are having difficulty to

20 following the speed of the proceedings.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's not a logo. You keep

22 mentioning this logo. It doesn't resemble a logo. It says "Mostarsko

23 Jutro," but it could say --

24 MR. KARNAVAS: Very well.

25 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Karnavas and the witness, the interpreters

1 have troubles following you.

2 MR. KARNAVAS: I understand I apologise.

3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: [Microphone not activated]

4 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Judge, please.

5 MR. KARNAVAS: I apologise, Your Honour.

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can I say something, please?

7 MR. KARNAVAS:

8 Q. No, I'm sorry, we don't have the time. If we could go on to P

9 00946.

10 A. You can't insult me.

11 Q. No one is insulting you, sir, but you need to answer questions

12 here. That's what you -- you were brought here. And yesterday you had no

13 problems answering the questions of the Prosecution.

14 Now if we could look at P 00946.

15 MR. KARNAVAS: And I just mention this, Your Honour, because this

16 goes -- this is put into context with the previous documents because they

17 relate to -- you don't have this document in front of you but this is for

18 the Court's benefit that this document would have been already introduced

19 but this goes with this packet of material as well because you will see it

20 relates to a commission that was set up between Mr. Boban and Alija

21 Izetbegovic, where Mr. Boban appoints Zoran Buntic, Anto Valenta, and

22 himself. And then it Mr. Izetbegovic appoints Mr. Trnka, Mrs. Salakovic,

23 and another individual's name to be on the commission. And this again

24 goes to the joint commission that was referenced in the first article that

25 I mentioned 1D 01422.

1 Q. If we could go on to another section now, and if we look at 1D

2 01215. 1D 01215. This is --

3 MR. KARNAVAS: We've seen this document before, Your Honours.

4 That is a decree on carrying out control of information during a state of

5 war.

6 Q. Were you aware of this decree, sir, that came out of the Sarajevo

7 government? 5 September 1992. You were a journalist at the time. I

8 assume you kept a -- you kept abreast of the legislation that controlled

9 your -- your profession. Were you aware of this decree on carrying out

10 control of information during state of war? Yes or no or I don't recall?

11 A. No, I didn't know about that decision, and it was impossible to

12 have any contacts with Sarajevo.

13 Q. Very well.

14 A. We couldn't get anything from Sarajevo.

15 Q. Okay.

16 MR. KARNAVAS: Based on this -- on this decree, Your Honours, you

17 will see that in Article 2 it talks about, "control shall be applied to

18 all types of information, verbal, written," and so on and so forth, issued

19 by the armed forces.

20 I point this out because now I want to go -- I would like to go

21 into private session just to cover one document to perhaps show some

22 linkage.

23 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Karnavas, may I just ask, I presume you will

24 propose to take this to -- to submit this document as evidence.

25 MR. KARNAVAS: Absolutely, Your Honour.

1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: What is the link to the witness who says he's

2 never seen it and doesn't know about it and did not say that, you know,

3 anything about what the ruling was?

4 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you. Before -- we've had a journalist here

5 before, and -- and that journalist who was with the Muslim army or the

6 Muslim fighters at the time indicated how he had to get pre-clearance in

7 showing foreign journalists around because everything was being monitored

8 and censored as it were. Here we have a law that pretty much says so.

9 Now, this gentleman may not be aware of it, but nonetheless it is

10 something that was in existence. Now, I have another document, which I

11 would like to go into private session, which perhaps may assist in the

12 linkage of this. And that's --

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, could we go into

14 private session, please.

15 [Private session]

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 17866-17867 redacted. Private session

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 [Open session]

10 THE REGISTRAR: We are back in open session, Your Honours.

11 MR. KARNAVAS:

12 Q. Just one thing I want to ask you about, your apartment, because we

13 have a document you indicated yesterday that at some point you lost the

14 key -- the keys to your apartment that was on the west side that was 500

15 to a thousand metres from the Vranica building that you were evicted

16 basically. That's what you were -- and that it wasn't until two or three

17 years ago that you got your apartment back. Do you recall saying that?

18 A. I didn't lose them.

19 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Karnavas, the witness did not say he lost

20 them. They were taken away from him.

21 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, yeah.

22 JUDGE TRECHSEL: It's not the same Mr. Karnavas in law. You know

23 quite well.

24 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, it's a figure of speech.

25 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Well, you are yourself very critical of figures

1 of speech on the other side, Mr. Karnavas.

2 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, if you just let me do my cross, you'll see

3 I'm going to get there step-by-step.

4 Q. But with that clarification, you -- you indicated that you lost

5 your apartment back in 1993; correct? And it wasn't until two or three

6 years ago that you got it back. Do you recall saying that yesterday?

7 A. Yes, this is what I stated.

8 Q. All right. Now, we have documents that we've introduced before

9 and they come under a bundle of 3D 00734, and in these -- in this document

10 there are several lists of names that were provided by Arif Pasalic for

11 certain individuals to get certain apartments that would have been made

12 available as a result of the JNA having to leave and these apartments

13 being vacant. And so Arif Pasalic made a request of the HVO that certain

14 individuals who qualified under certain conditions, such as somebody who

15 might have been injured, a soldier who might have been injured, would

16 qualify. And I notice that under number 663.

17 MR. KARNAVAS: This would be at the second to last page, Your

18 Honours. It's number 15. It's the second to last page of the bundle.

19 Q. Under 663 it appears that it has somebody's name there that looks

20 very familiar or similar to yours. Is that your name, sir?

21 A. I can't see that.

22 Q. Okay.

23 A. What page is that?

24 Q. For you -- if you would look at those -- at the top of the page,

25 it's 03270574.

1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Or plain 15.

2 MR. KARNAVAS:

3 Q. Or 15. At the very -- it's at the end. Second to last page.

4 Second to last page of this particular document. You see -- you'll see --

5 yeah, okay. So go down to 663. Do you see 663?

6 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. Usher, could you assist us here? It's so

7 elementary I don't understand what the problem is.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just bear with me for a moment.

9 MR. KARNAVAS:

10 Q. I'm trying. I just don't have the time and you're taking forever.

11 A. I'm sorry you don't have the time. Yes, I've got it.

12 Q. All right. Now, is that your name, sir?

13 A. Yes, this is my name.

14 Q. Okay. Now -- so when we're talking about the apartment, is this

15 an apartment on the west side that you obtained as a result of Mr. Arif

16 Pasalic's request of the HVO or was this an apartment that you had prior

17 to the incident, prior to the events?

18 A. Prior to the events.

19 Q. Okay.

20 A. This has nothing to do with anything whatsoever. This is the

21 first time I see this piece of paper.

22 Q. Okay. Can I ask if you already had an apartment where you and

23 your wife and your children were living in --

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Why -- okay. Okay. If you had that, then why would -- Arif

1 Pasalic would be also making a request --

2 MR. PORYVAEV: Your Honour, I object.

3 MR. KARNAVAS: I'm just asking the question. Maybe he knows.

4 Maybe he doesn't.

5 MR. PORYVAEV: The witness said -- just as stated, that he'd never

6 seen the document. What is the relevance?

7 MR. KARNAVAS: I didn't ask him whether he saw the document

8 because he may have made a request. Maybe he wanted a larger apartment.

9 Maybe Arif Pasalic was just confabulating himself, just putting down names

10 so they could get more and more apartments because that's what they were

11 trying to do, move people into the west side. I don't know. I'm merely

12 asking the gentleman.

13 Q. Sir, you don't have to look at the Prosecutor and motion to him.

14 Okay? So the question is --

15 A. I don't understand your question.

16 Q. My question is: Did you know that Arif Pasalic had put your name

17 down for an apartment?

18 A. I didn't know. I've never seen this before.

19 Q. Okay.

20 A. I didn't know. I've never seen this before.

21 Q. Okay, and -- and, of course, one last question. Based on your

22 testimony, there was no need for you to have an apartment at that because

23 you already had one and therefore if this request is made by Arif Pasalic

24 then obviously it might have been for other reasons?

25 MR. PORYVAEV: That's pure speculation and even insulting the

1 witness.

2 MR. KARNAVAS: It's not insulting but it is speculation. But I

3 mean, it drives the point home. And the point is, what fits into this --

4 into our theory, that there's a whole lot of propaganda going on and

5 there's a whole lot of events happening, including trying to obtain

6 apartments for individuals who already have apartments and don't need

7 apartments. And that's what I was trying to drive at.

8 I have no further questions for the gentleman.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you very much.

10 One follow-up question, sir. You've stated on many occasions that the

11 radio station where you worked was in the Vranica building at the same

12 level or on the same floor as the office of Mr. Pasalic.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. If I may compare

15 things, and I'm sorry if I'm making this comparison, it's a little bit

16 like if in Baghdad the CNN station was situated a few metres away from the

17 headquarters of the American troops, for instance. So an observer from

18 the outside may wonder what is the possible connection between the

19 reporters and the soldiers within the headquarters especially since you

20 yourself mentioned that you were a member of the ABiH. Your radio

21 station, therefore, was it functioning under the ABiH control or did you

22 have a complete freedom, total freedom to -- did you have an editorial

23 freedom?

24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The radio station had complete

25 freedom. The fact that it was located in the area of the command of the

1 1st Mostar Brigade in the 4th Corps did not condition its programmes. It

2 was not dictated by the army or anybody from the army. All those who

3 listened to our programmes can confirm that the army did not edit the

4 radio programmes. I was the link between the radio and the 4th Corps, as

5 I was a member of that corps. At that time no programme ranging from a

6 simple piece of news too reports from the front lines, and when I say

7 reports from the front lines I would say what the situation was like and

8 this was the only thing that was subject to censorship. But this is

9 something that I did within the command. This was information that was

10 available to everybody and boiled down to some ten sentences in any one

11 day. The radio station programmes were intended for all the citizens of

12 Mostar for them to hear things that they could not hear on radio

13 Herceg-Bosna. Today in Mostar there is Radio Mostar, Croatian Radio

14 Mostar. There is also the radio of Herceg-Bosna, but when you look at the

15 context then it might appear the fact. However, if we had broadcast from

16 any other part of the town I don't think that we would have been able to

17 survive because it was very dangerous.

18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] My colleague has a question.

19 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Witness, I would like to ask you a

20 question with regard to the name of the radio station. The Defence

21 counsel asked you some questions and he showed you some documents, and

22 in -- we did not see in any document that the radio station was called the

23 Croatian Radio of Mostar. However, we see Radio Station Mostar in all

24 documents. Even if I must recognise that in the document 1D 01416, the

25 first sentence reads as follows: [In English] [Microphone not activated]

1 We attach the list of employees of the PEICM radio of the Croatian Defence

2 Council, Radio Station Mostar."

3 [Interpretation] So, are you saying that there's absolutely no

4 document on which we can see the official name Croatian Radio Mostar, but

5 it was only the of staff and the authorities of that radio who would call

6 it Radio Mostar. Is that what you're telling us, that no document

7 actually bears that name, radio Croatian -- Croatian Radio of Mostar? Can

8 you confirm that to us?

9 A. [No interpretation]

10 This could not be changed by judicial order. I know that on air

11 we would always say that this was the -- Croatian Radio Mostar. I don't

12 know whether officially it was named just Radio Mostar. I know that this

13 is what was repeated, Radio Mostar in the second part. I never had an

14 opportunity to see whether this was officially Radio Mostar, the Croatian

15 Radio Mostar, the Radio Herceg-Bosna, or the radio of the Croatian Defence

16 Council. In this document I can see that this was the radio of the

17 Croatian Defence Council. That's one radio. In the second document when

18 they received the second salary, then they were called the Radio

19 Herceg-Bosna. Just for comparison there is another -- a radio today in

20 Mostar which is called radio Herceg-Bosna, but this is not an old radio

21 station. It was set up some seven or eight years ago.

22 I did not see any documents, but I know that the announcement on

23 air was always Croatian Radio, Radio Mostar.

24 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] A follow-up question from my

1 colleague. When the Defence counsel showed you these documents we were

2 under the impression that you never -- that you did not know that radio

3 station, whereas these documents show there were at least 15 people out of

4 which three reporters, sound technicians as well, and these people were

5 paid by that radio station. That radio station in question with -- when

6 we talk about the media, we always listen to the competitor's radio

7 station. You never tried yourself to listen to Radio Mostar of

8 Herceg-Bosna just to see what their programme was like?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course I listened to that. I

10 know these people. Under number 3, here, is one of my best friends.

11 However, Your Honours, people, as the counsel has put it rightly, I don't

12 know whether there were Muslims or not. It is not up to me to say whether

13 somebody was Muslim or not. Their name might be Muslim, but an

14 interesting thing is that Asim Manjgo who was one of the founders of the

15 war radio station was an employee of this radio. There are also Serbs who

16 worked for the radio who are not on the list. I knew all of them.

17 As for the Muslim name, these people remained there only for a

18 short while. They were just a facade, and none of them have remained

19 working for the radio. And the programmes that they broadcast reflected

20 exactly what I was talking about. Croatian radio was allergic to the

21 notion of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This was a constant thing on the radio.

22 It couldn't happen that somebody from the leadership of the army or the

23 civilian structure came to the radio as the counsel put it, those who bore

24 Muslim names.

25 Look at the editors at the radio. They wore uniforms, and it says

1 in the documents that it was the radio of the Croatian Defence Council. I

2 was a member of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina and never pledged loyalty

3 to the HVO. When we were offered to do so, all of us who refused to sign

4 that pledge fared the way we did. I listened to the radio. I know very

5 well what their music was like and what they said on the radio.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Next counsel, Ms. Nozica.

7 MR. KARNAVAS: [Previous translation continues] ... may I just --

8 may I just make one statement to the Trial Chamber. He just indicated

9 that he knew the third person on the list, and I just wish to bring that

10 to the Court's attention yesterday he was playing games with the Court as

11 to whether the names were Muslim or not. I just wish to point that out.

12 And also I wish to point out to the Trial Chamber that yesterday he talked

13 about being the editor of the information and propaganda service within

14 the -- and today he said he wasn't. I just thought this is something --

15 it betrays the gentleman earnestness.

16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

17 Who is this third person on the list? It's Veseljko Cerkez. Is

18 that the person you knew?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Veseljko Cerkez. Veseljko Cerkez.

20 My colleague, a journalist. The counsel asked me yesterday whether they

21 are Muslims. I don't know. Only God himself knows whether they believe

22 in him. In the document that I saw before stated that I was the

23 editor-in-chief of the radio but I wasn't. I was the editor of the

24 information programme. I'm just saying this to bring this point home. If

25 the counsel wants to play with words, I'm game.

1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Microphone not activated]

2 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.

3 Cross-examination by Ms. Nozica:

4 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Lizde?

5 A. Good afternoon.

6 Q. I have handed over the binder for the Trial Chamber. I would

7 kindly ask the registrar to provide both the Prosecutor and the witness

8 with their binders. You don't have to consult my binder at the moment.

9 I'm going to ask you a few questions. There are not many documents in

10 that binder anyway, so I believe we will be able to go over them very

11 fast.

12 Mr. Lizde, you have just mentioned some things that have inspired

13 me to put a certain number of questions and we're talking about the

14 negative propaganda that was spread by the media in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

15 I'm sure that you will agree with me when I say that such negative

16 propaganda was present on all three sides and -- am I right in saying

17 that? Having said that, I have in mind the Serbian radio stations, the

18 Croatian radio stations, and the radio stations that existed in the areas

19 under the control of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

20 A. It is very likely that you're right in saying that.

21 Q. I would like to hear your explanation. Yesterday you said that

22 you had worked for Radio Sarajevo, a radio station of Mostar. Was that

23 the official title?

24 A. No, it wasn't.

25 Q. What was it then?

1 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat the question --

2 the answer? Thank you.

3 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]

4 Q. [No interpretation]

5 A. Radio Bosnia and Herzegovina, the War Studio Mostar.

6 Q. Did this war studio continue operating after the 9th of May when

7 the antenna was destroyed? It could not continue operating in the Vranica

8 building.

9 A. It continued operating in another part of the town after the 9th

10 of May conflict. I was no longer there. I know it continued its

11 operation, but I don't know when this happened.

12 Q. You said that you edited the political programmes and everything

13 that had to do with the army and information about the BiH army. Can you

14 remember whether you heard information being published about the situation

15 on the front line and the word used for Croats was Ustasha or some other

16 derogatory words. Maybe not by yourself personally but some guests that

17 arrived at the station.

18 A. I didn't use those words. I don't think that any of my guests

19 used them. I don't think that we resorted to that level because I'm sure

20 that we would have faced problems. We tried and I was the editor of the

21 political programme and I had a lot of guests. We tried to not to add

22 fuel to the fire that already was burning in the town. So I'm very

23 positive that such things did not happen, and I'm talking about the period

24 preceding the 9th of May.

25 Q. The reason that you have just mentioned why you didn't do it, was

1 it because the radio was located at the heart of the western part of

2 Mostar? Was that the reason?

3 A. No, it wasn't the reason, but from this perspective when you look

4 at the things as they were, the political situation, the relationship

5 between the army and the HVO and everything that we heard from Sarajevo,

6 that there had been a military putsch in Sarajevo and the Croatian people

7 did not depend on Sarajevo but on Zagreb, in Mostar an alibi was being

8 prepared all the time for what would happen later on, and I'm sure that

9 any such situation would have been used in their favour. For example,

10 Juka's of -- from Sarajevo was one such situation and various incidents in

11 Mostar.

12 We Bosniaks all -- were always under the impression that an alibi

13 was being sought for something that had already been prepared but the

14 implementation was still questionable. But this is still the situation.

15 Q. Let me interrupt you. You have mentioned Juka's arrival. You

16 say -- you've said that you're sorry that we don't have more time. You've

17 mentioned Juka's arrival. Can you please tell me -- can we confirm that

18 he was one of the prominent members of the BH army in Sarajevo, that he

19 was a general in Sarajevo, that he was one of the people next to Alija

20 Izetbegovic at the beginning of aggression in 1992?

21 A. I don't know what Juka was elsewhere. I know what he was in

22 Mostar.

23 Q. So you don't know.

24 A. No, I don't know. I was not in Sarajevo at that time. I only

25 heard what he was in Sarajevo. I've read about that. I've read a lot of

1 things. But I know what he was in Mostar.

2 Q. Let's now move on to another topic. On page 4, just for the

3 transcript, you don't have to peruse your documents, I'll remind you -- I

4 have not provided you with your statement. On page 4 in the Croatian

5 version of your statement, and in the English version it is page 3 --

6 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Ms. Nozica, page 4 of what, which document?

7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could you please bear

8 with me just for a moment. I will -- all shall be revealed at the end.

9 We're talking about the statement of this witness dated 10 and 12 April

10 and 7 and 12 June 1992. I'm referring to page 4 of that statement in the

11 Croatian version and page 3, paragraph 3 in the English version of the

12 same statement.

13 Q. In that statement you stated, Mr. Lizde, that you had been in

14 Prozor on the 20th of October, 1992. Yesterday, you told us on your

15 direct examination that this was on the 21st. Do you remember?

16 A. It could have been either 20th or 21st. I can't -- I can't be

17 sure. I might have been off by a day. It was on one of the two days but

18 it was in Prozor. I'm sure of that.

19 Q. Mr. Lizde, you've also told us that Mr. Dzidic brought a decision

20 on the ban of the operation of the war radio of Mostar on the 21st or the

21 22nd of October, 1992. Is that correct?

22 A. It was one day after my return from Prozor, in any case.

23 Q. You have left us these two days as possible days for your stay in

24 Mostar, so for example if you were there on the 20th and the decision was

25 made on the 21st or if you were in Prozor on the 21st and the decision was

1 made on the 22nd. Would that be correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Mr. Lizde could you please confirm something that I will

4 paraphrase as what you saw in Prozor? You've told us that you saw torched

5 houses.

6 A. Yes, I saw some houses that were on fire.

7 Q. You said that you did not see any civilians, but you had learnt

8 that they had been taken away to the school in Ruboka [as interpreted].

9 A. The troops that I spoke to told me that the civilians had been

10 taken to Rumboci, which is a place next to Prozor.

11 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Rumboci. That's right for the

12 transcript.

13 Q. Am I right in saying that you were told that by members of the

14 HVO?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. You also said that you saw a white sheet on the fire brigade where

17 it says Ustaski Dom; is that right?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. You said that the HVO soldiers who were standing in front of this

20 Dom building, that there was no longer any Turkish zulum there in Prozor,

21 no Turkish clout.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. When did you leave Mostar?

24 A. We left in the morning, came back in the evening, and we had an

25 hour to talk. That was the permission we were given by the commander who

1 talked to us for some five minutes in front of his HQ.

2 Q. Can we say that you in fact saw the consequence of that HVO

3 military action in Prozor immediately after it happened?

4 A. Yes that would be it.

5 Q. Can you tell me, Mr. Lizde, and I think that -- well, you're a

6 journalist first and foremost so that applies intelligence and all the

7 rest of it. Why Bozo Rajic and Srecko Vucina told you or gave permission

8 to go to Prozor if they knew that the HVO had done such a terrible thing

9 in Mostar -- I'm sorry, I misspoke, in Prozor. Why would they give you

10 that permission? Did they perhaps not know that it had happened, or did

11 they not have anything to hide? What did you think about that?

12 A. Well, I don't believe that they thought that there was anybody as

13 mad as that to go there, but there were a lot of problems, and I'm sorry

14 that you don't have an insight into the press conferences that were held

15 before and after, because they were real arguments. We had real arguments

16 at those press conferences.

17 Q. Would you concentrate on my questions?

18 A. Well, I don't know. They weren't uninformed about what was going

19 on.

20 Q. Mr. Lizde, can we see when these things happened in Prozor and

21 look at document P 00629? It is in the pink binder, my pink binder. 629

22 is the document number. Have you found it?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Can you and I agree that this is the Croatian Community of

25 Herceg-Bosna and that it is a document signed by the head of the brigade,

1 Petar Kolakusic; is that right? And can you see the date of the document?

2 A. The document is dated the 23rd.

3 Q. The 23rd of October. Let's read the first sentence. It says

4 "report." As it was over 24 hours and it says, "around 1500 hours heavy

5 clashes between our forces and the OSBH," that is to say the armed forces

6 of BH. And the pretext, the reason was that the units from Gornji Vakuf

7 at the border of Prozor municipality and Gornji Vakuf and the sabotage

8 unit at elevation 1030 killed two of our soldiers. Two were less

9 seriously wounded. A number of prisoners were taken. The situation is

10 under control. It is controlled by our police forces and army.

11 From this document it would appear that what happened in Prozor

12 occurred on the 23rd of October at around 1500 hours.

13 A. I don't know about this. I don't think we're talking about same

14 document. I know that the conflicts in Prozor lasted for a very long

15 time. Now, this conflict with the BH army that this document talks about,

16 well, I never said that the BH army had a conflict with the HVO. The

17 soldiers told me that they had cleared the area and burnt houses. Now

18 they would have bragged had they taken a lot of the members of the armed

19 forces prisoner. I don't know when the conflicts began in Prozor. I was

20 in Prozor.

21 Q. Now on the basis of this document there were conflicts in Prozor?

22 A. I think these were the initial conflicts.

23 Q. Just a moment. I understand your nervousness.

24 A. I'm not nervous at all.

25 Q. Well, that's your reaction. You either didn't see what you've

1 been describing happen in Prozor because -- I'm just going to tell you

2 this once and won't dwell on it I'm going to say it for the Trial Chamber

3 and refer to the indictment and count 46 of the indictment, or paragraph

4 46 where it says in the afternoon hours of the 23rd of October, 1992, the

5 forces of Herceg-Bosna, the HVO, attacked the Muslims in the town of

6 Prozor. On the 23rd -- between the 23rd -- on the 23rd and 24th of

7 October, 1992, after they had taken control of Prozor town, the

8 Herceg-Bosna forces plundered, burnt, and destroyed homes, et cetera.

9 That's what it says in the indictment. Paragraph 46, sir.

10 So then what you say as being an event of the 20th and possibly

11 the 21st of October, in fact never happened in Prozor. Let's move on to

12 another area, another topic.

13 You said in your statement, and you repeated that today in answer

14 to Mr. Karnavas, and you've just repeated it again in response to Judge

15 Mindua, that you were not within the frameworks -- when you joined the BH

16 army in April that that was not within the frameworks of the HVO, is that

17 right?

18 A. Yes. I did not sign an oath of allegiance in joining the HVO.

19 Q. Can you tell me when you joined the Mostar Battalion? When was

20 that, what month?

21 A. April 1992.

22 Q. Regardless of whether you sign the joining up agreement or not,

23 and you insist you were never in the HVO, I assume that's important to

24 you, but can you tell me if it's true and correct whether the Mostar

25 Battalion was within the municipal headquarters of the HVO of Mostar?

1 When you joined the Mostar Battalion, was it part of that at the time?

2 A. I didn't understand you.

3 Q. Do you know or can I confirm that the Mostar Battalion at the

4 time, and we're talking about April when you joined up -- I see that

5 you're distracted by my documents.

6 A. No, no, I'm not. Go ahead.

7 JUDGE PRANDLER: [Microphone not activated]

8 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

9 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Although Judge Prandler didn't have

10 his microphone on, I understood what he was telling us. So I do apologise

11 and we will slow down, and I'll repeat my question.

12 Q. But wait a moment. I'm speaking as fast as you. So if I'm going

13 to slow down, then you slow down, too, and make pauses between my

14 questions and your answers, because quite obviously everybody has a

15 problem, the Judges, the interpreters, and everybody. So let me repeat my

16 question.

17 When you joined up, when you joined the Mostar Battalion, do you

18 know whether it was in the composition of the Municipal Staff of the HVO

19 Mostar?

20 A. I don't know whether it was within its composition but I do know

21 that there was a number of joint common elements because with the Mostar

22 Battalion and the company that I was with, I went to Goranci, and up there

23 for the first 10 or 15 days we spent there we received food from the HVO,

24 from their logistics, and then a piece of paper arrived for us to join --

25 to sign the piece of paper saying -- pledging our allegiance, and we

1 didn't do that. That's what I know. So you can't actually say that at

2 the beginning the answer would be yes.

3 Q. All right. That's what I wanted to hear. So you know without a

4 doubt that in April the Mostar Battalion was part and parcel of the HVO.

5 Without going into the documents, do you confirm that?

6 A. Okay, okay.

7 Q. Now, I'll take you back for a moment to the -- your arrest of

8 the -- on the 9th of May. When you were in the MUP building you said that

9 an incident took place that somebody -- some of the detainees were

10 mistreated and that this was intensified when a man called Lugonja was

11 killed.

12 A. Yes. I remember that. He was wearing a flak jacket.

13 Q. Was he an HVO member?

14 A. Well, I think that he was well-positioned, a well-positioned

15 policeman.

16 Q. A member of the HVO?

17 A. Yes, yes, the HVO, certainly.

18 Q. Tell me, please, how did he die?

19 A. I think he was hit by a sniper.

20 Q. Did you know, Mr. Lizde -- well, you've talked quite a lot about

21 the snipers from the Croatian side. Did you know at the time that the BH

22 army in Mostar had snipers, sniper shooters, and do you know in what

23 locations?

24 A. I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know. I was in

25 the MUP building when the man was hit. I assume he wasn't hit by a shell,

1 a hand grenade.

2 Q. You said he was hit by a sniper.

3 A. Yes, a sniper hit him underneath flak jacket. Where the sniper

4 came and who shot at him, I don't know.

5 Q. I didn't ask you that.

6 A. You asked me about the army. It was a real army and it had a

7 sniper.

8 Q. Don't take that turn. There's no need for that. Just answer my

9 question. So it had sniper shooters in Mostar. Can we put it that way?

10 A. I didn't say that. You said that.

11 Q. Let's not play around with words.

12 A. Well, you're playing around with words.

13 Q. You yourself said that the BH army had sniper shooters, had

14 snipers, and that was on page 36, line 7, and you said that it was a real

15 army. Is that what you said?

16 A. Yes, absolutely so.

17 Q. Right. Then we can move on. Mr. Lizde, yesterday my colleague

18 Mr. Ibrisimovic showed you a document, and I'd like to show it on e-court

19 for just a moment. It is 6D -- it will come up on your screen. 6D 00349

20 is the document number.

21 Now, I'll remind you while the -- you're waiting for the document.

22 It is the head of the human rights and humanitarian issues department

23 attached to the office of the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna. You'll

24 remember that I'm sure, and you referred to it. I'm going to focus on a

25 paragraph, paragraph 2 or, rather, paragraph 3 in the English version, and

1 yesterday you reacted to that where it says despite the findings of the

2 investigation confirmed by the statements of the persons mentioned which

3 indicate activities contrary to professional work and professional code of

4 conduct of journalists, the authorities of the HZ HB decided to release

5 you, to set you at liberty.

6 Now, Mr. Lizde, did you have any information to the effect that

7 with respect to your activities an investigation was conducted?

8 A. Well, I didn't have that information. There was -- were daily

9 interviews, and I assume they had a purpose.

10 Q. Right. Fine. And did you have information that a criminal report

11 was filed against you?

12 A. No.

13 Q. Can we take a look at the next document and it is a Prosecution

14 document to boot, so in the preparation the Prosecutor could have shown

15 you the document. It is P 08508. It is the last document. It's a rather

16 lengthy one, but we'll start from the beginning.

17 It is a criminal report filed by the crime department of the

18 military police, military post. 1706 is the number on the 21st of

19 December, 1994. Yes, the first page. The criminal report was filed on

20 the 21st of December, 1994.

21 So you can leaf through it and look at point 249. In the Croatian

22 version it is on page 12, and in the English version it is on page 11.

23 Have you found it?

24 A. Yes, I have.

25 Q. Have you found your name there?

1 A. Yes, I have.

2 Q. Right. Fine. So a criminal report was filed against you, too,

3 and I'll just tell you that you'll be able to find this at the end on page

4 20 of the Croatian version and page 18 of the English version. And from

5 this it would emerge that the criminal report was filed against 400 known

6 perpetrators and 12 unknown perpetrators.

7 From this criminal report we can see it was filed, and I say this

8 for the record because there was a well-founded suspicion that the

9 individuals had committed a war crime against the civilian population

10 pursuant to Article 142 of the war crimes against injured persons and

11 six -- sick people. Article 143. And war crimes against prisoners of war

12 pursuant to Article 144. Organised groups for the inciting of war crimes

13 pursuant to Article 145. And in citing an aggressive war pursuant to

14 Article 152, taken over from the Criminal Code of the Socialist Federal

15 Republic of Yugoslavia.

16 So I've just shown you this document for you to see that your

17 interviews and what you said resulted in the filing of this criminal

18 report with the District Military Court in Mostar, and you said that you

19 knew nothing about this.

20 A. No, I didn't know anything about it.

21 Q. All right. Fine.

22 A. Well, they showed some goodwill and released me.

23 Q. That's what it says in the document.

24 A. Yes, yes. I can well believe that. Can you?

25 Q. I'm just showing you the document and showing you what it says

1 there. It's a document that we received from the Prosecution, so it is

2 not something which I'm showing you because I have any ill intentions.

3 A. As far as I can see all the members of the BH army on that list.

4 The whole Mostar Battalion.

5 Q. Very likely. But I'm not going to look at the other members for

6 my purpose. Just wanted to look at your name there but thank you,

7 Mr. Lizde. That completes my cross-examination.

8 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Before we move on

10 we'll have a 20-minute break because the time has come for the break, and

11 we'll resume in 20 minutes.

12 --- Recess taken at 3.33 p.m.

13 --- On resuming at 3.54 p.m.

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacic.

15 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just for your

16 information, I would like to say that General Praljak has 35 minutes, and

17 35 minutes have been given to him by Mr. Pusic, which makes it a total 65

18 minutes. I would like to start, and then Mr. Praljak will finish off at

19 the end of my cross-examination. Thank you very much.

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So who is starting, you or

21 Mr. Praljak, because Mr. Praljak is on his feet.

22 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak will --

23 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the counsel, please.

24 MR. KOVACIC: I'm sorry. My mic was not working. If I have to

25 repeat, Mr. Praljak will start and I will have 10 minutes on the end.

1 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour. I'm going to object with the

2 points the Prosecution has raised over the last few weeks. No showing or

3 proffer has been made as to why it is appropriate for Mr. Praljak to put

4 questions to this witness, how this is an exceptional circumstance based

5 on purely technical military basis. So we object to Mr. Praljak putting

6 any questions to this witness.

7 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I have to respond,

8 although I don't deem this is necessary, I believe that the accused

9 Praljak has the right to defend himself and represent himself. The rules

10 allow that. You have pointed it out on several occasions. His questions

11 do not have to be limited to technical details although he will adhere to

12 that. And third of all, when it comes to the facts, this is not a legal

13 matter, and the accused is perfectly capable of putting questions. The

14 accused is not an object of the proceedings but, rather, a subject of the

15 proceedings, and he is entitled to take an active part in the proceedings

16 irrespective of who the witness may be.

17 MR. SCOTT: We stand by our objection, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I just want to tell the parties --

19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Honourable Judge.

20 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you. This issue has been raised several

21 times. The Chamber has heard the views of both parties and a decision on

22 this matter is in preparation and will be rendered in short time.

23 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Your Honour. I just -- because it's been

24 commented before that I have not preserved objection, I just want to be

25 very careful from now on until there is a clear and firm and fixed ruling

1 on the matter that I will -- I have -- we do object, and we'll have a

2 continuing objection to Mr. Praljak participating without the requisite

3 showing having been made by the outstanding ruling on the record.

4 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, so that Mr. Scott is not under that

5 obligation, I think I raised the point about whether that had been waived.

6 I -- I can absolve Mr. Scott from any further obligation to makes the

7 objection. It's understood that he makes it. My point was not that he's

8 making objections now but that a year had gone by in trial during which

9 time the accused had been permitted to cross-examine in person, and my

10 point was it was now too late to change that. But Mr. Scott shouldn't

11 feel it's necessary to make an objection certainly for my sake every time

12 that it's raised from now on. I'm not going to take that point against

13 him.

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, you've listened to

15 this discussion. Please try to deal with technical issues when putting

16 your questions to the witness, and there might be a number of technical

17 issues to be raised here because we are dealing with a former member of

18 the ABiH, after all.

19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Accused Praljak.

20 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Good afternoon,

21 Your Honours.

22 Cross-examination by the Accused Praljak:

23 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, sir.

24 A. Good afternoon.

25 Q. Mr. Lizde was member of the BiH army. He was wounded. He wore a

1 uniform, and in that sense I don't see why I should not discuss with him

2 some military matters very calmly in order to establish some facts.

3 Mr. Lizde, I have designed my questions in such a way that enables

4 you to answer them either by I know, I don't know, and avoid comments that

5 might distract anybody. You have already talked to the Prosecutor. You

6 have provided your comments, and I'm just going to go through some parts

7 of the time from 1992 onwards, and I'm going to ask you whether you're

8 aware of some facts. If you are, then just say yes. If not, then just

9 say no.

10 Would you agree with me that the Yugoslav People's Army and the

11 reservists already before 1992 but certainly in April 1992 were on Hum and

12 on the other hills around Mostar on the right bank and the left bank of

13 Mostar, Hum, Decici, Slipcici on the right bank; is that correct?

14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, Mr. Praljak. This is something that

15 was not covered by -- in direct examination, which does not exclude it,

16 but you have asked a leading question and you should not do that. That's

17 a rule that has now been accepted here.

18 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if I may present my

19 view. The questions pertaining to this domain are relevant and have to do

20 with the existence of the joint criminal enterprise that could not have

21 emerged in space. It had to emerge within the circumstances that

22 prevailed on the ground specified as the beginning of the events in

23 Bosnia, and this time is specified in the indictment.

24 As for your second remark, I believe that it is a rule in the

25 Rules of Evidence that talks about the cross-examination of witnesses

1 which allows the Defence to present their case to the witness. In other

2 words, that they may ask questions based not only on what was used in the

3 cross, which is the rule in the Anglo-Saxon law, but can also use the

4 witness if the witness has any knowledge about things by presenting their

5 defence case to the witness.

6 Thank you very much.

7 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, Mr. Karnavas. I have not said that

8 this was not a subject on which questions could be put, but I recall that

9 we have had a discussion on this matter before. The rule is specified in

10 the American law, I admit, but it's a good rule. When the Defence in

11 cross-examination wants to go beyond the field that was covered in direct,

12 it is actually using the witness as the Defence's witness. That is

13 possible. But the same rule as for another direct examination must apply.

14 That is to say the question should not be a leading question.

15 We have had this before here, and I remember very well that

16 Mr. Karnavas, after first having protested that there was not -- no such

17 rule, later on expressly accepted that this was the rule. It is a rule

18 that makes a lot of sense.

19 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, I -- I do recall that we had the

20 discussion about Rule 90(H) and the scope of cross-examination. I must

21 confess that I'd forgotten the part about the leading questions.

22 Your Honour, from -- from memory, I think there's something of a

23 division among American jurisdictions. Some -- some do adhere -- adhere

24 to the point that Your Honour makes and others allow the cross-examination

25 simply to cover the ground without distinguishing between leading and

1 non-leading questions. So I think there is that decision.

2 In English law I'm very confident about saying that any question

3 in cross-examination may be put in either leading or non-leading form

4 regardless of whether it -- it flows from direct examination or not. So

5 that's my understanding. I'll be corrected if I'm wrong. That's my

6 understanding about the domestic law.

7 As far as the law of the Tribunal is concerned, which would be

8 controlling, I think Your Honour may have the advantage of me and may have

9 read something that I haven't. I am not aware of a decision that has the

10 effect that Your Honour describes, but if Your Honour would like to

11 point -- to draw it to my attention perhaps I can look at it and give

12 Your Honour more complete assistance on another occasion.

13 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I don't claim to be the ultimate

14 authority --

15 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Just, just.

16 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE TRECHSEL: As I was invoked, I think it is section 711 or

18 611 of the American code of civil procedure, and it's expressly in a code.

19 It's not a matter of dispute or something like that.

20 MR. MURPHY: No, Your Honour is exactly right. It is Rule 611.

21 The point I was making, though, I think Your Honour is probably looking at

22 the federal rules of evidence. Your Honour may know that in the United

23 States there are the federal rules but then there are also state rules of

24 evidence that apply in the state individually. While there is obviously a

25 broad similarity between the rules there is in fact a division of

1 authority between the federal model and other models. So in many

2 jurisdictions Your Honour is absolutely right, but it's not an invariable

3 rule. And in England I'm very confident in saying.

4 But I think the rule point is what's the law in the Tribunal. I'm

5 not aware of any direct authority and I don't think it's covered in any of

6 the rules, but Your Honour may -- knows of a decision that I'm not

7 familiar with on that point.

8 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I -- I was just going to say I don't

9 claim the ultimate authority, but my understanding in English law is

10 exactly the same as --

11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

12 MR. STEWART: I thought my microphone was working. Is it not?

13 Yes. Yes, my understanding of English law is exactly the same as

14 Mr. Murphy's. Your Honour Judge Trechsel gave the American rule as

15 described and said it was a good rule. Your Honours, with respect, that

16 must rather be open to debate. We don't always sail the English system is

17 the best, but the fact that we adopt a different practice does at least

18 raise the possibility that there's room for two arguments on that issue,

19 and simply to assert that it is a good rule may be pre-empting the result

20 of what might need to be a rather fuller argument on the topic.

21 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I have not just asserted, Mr. Stewart, I have

22 given the reason for it. I have given the reason for it. Because it

23 is -- there is no justification for the Defence going into a new terrain

24 on a technique which is not allowed on direct but only on cross. But let

25 me add that at any way, answers to leading questions are of little

1 evidentiary value. So the rule in fact goes in favour of the Defence, but

2 it's a matter of technique. I do not want to insist now. Maybe the

3 Chamber will make a ruling on this and I think we'll let go.

4 Now, I'm a bit disappointed I must say that the Defence now

5 suddenly raises this issue again.

6 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I say, because Your Honour makes

7 the point just -- Your Honour says you don't just assert that you give the

8 reason. After all, I'm not here with a brief of English law but it's

9 unlikely that the practice and the rules have been developed in English

10 law without realising that the reason Your Honour puts forward is one the

11 arguments. It's not -- We're not so unsophisticated that we don't take

12 accounts of those matters, and also, Your Honour, it's a matter for

13 judgement of the cross-examiner. Your Honour is absolutely right, and any

14 skilled cross-examiner, experienced cross-examiner knows that sometimes

15 it's better not to extract answers by absolutely directly leading

16 questions because if you get them another way they can be of more value.

17 But that is conventionally left the judgement of the cross-examiner.

18 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, I don't want to prolong the discussion

19 of course as Your Honour knows I'm always delighted when the Trial Chamber

20 is prepared to adopt rules of evidence. I would -- I would suggest that

21 perhaps the rule that governs here may be sub-rule (F) of Rule 90 which

22 says that the Trial Chamber shall exercise the mode and role of

23 interrogating witnesses so as to make the presentation effective for the

24 presentation of truth and avoid needless consumption of time. I think

25 that's also taken from another American rule with a little variation, and

1 I would suggest that in the absence of a definite rule on this point in

2 Rule 90 it may be that it's up to the Trial Chamber to -- to control the

3 mode of interrogation in the particular case. The only point I'd make on

4 that, if Your Honour is going to allow Mr. Praljak as a layman to

5 cross-examine it may be perhaps more fair to him not to insist too much

6 upon the form of the question.

7 Your Honour, those are the only submissions. If Your Honour would

8 like me to brief it more fully at a later time I would be happy to.

9 MR. KARNAVAS: I just wanted to raise an objection to the record

10 that I don't subscribe to the notion that answers to leading questions are

11 of little evidentiary value. I think that is an incorrect statement of

12 the law, and I think you just have to go on a case-by-case basis but I'm

13 sure that Your Honour didn't actually meant literally what -- what he said

14 but merely that you have to look at the answers to the questions and then

15 decide what if anything you will accept. But I think as an overall rule

16 to say answers from leading questions are of little evidentiary value, if

17 that is the case then I can understand why you don't want to have any

18 cross-examination in court. And if that's the case then I guess we can

19 just sit down and not do anything.

20 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't want to expand

21 this discussion. I would like to go back to the starting point and to the

22 issue of leading questions. I would like to remind you of the question

23 put by General Praljak that the witness did mention that he was wounded at

24 the time in the fights against Serbs, and although Praljak put his

25 question within the context of the joint criminal enterprise and the

1 overall circumstances of the beginning of the trial, I believe that this

2 question had to do both with the direct and has a bearing on the --

3 MR. SCOTT: [Previous translation continues] ... Your Honour, 15

4 seconds to respond to some minutes of the Defence. The fact -- the

5 argument that an accused should be able to put evidence without any rules

6 is a further argument for not allowing it.

7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, you could have

8 easily dodged the issue because of which we've wasted 10 minutes. You

9 could have asked the witness whether there were any military troops on the

10 Hum hill. He would have said yes or no, and if he had said yes, you could

11 have asked him what forces these were and he would have said the Serbs.

12 So we've just wasted 10 minutes for absolutely nothing.

13 Please proceed, Mr. Praljak, and please try to put your questions

14 to the witness in such a way that these questions are not leading

15 questions. I think you should succeed in doing that.

16 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you,

17 Your Honours. I did start my question with "Is this," or "Was it," and

18 the witness could have easily answered me yes or no. I'll repeat my

19 question.

20 Q. Are you aware, sir, that the Yugoslav People's Army in 1992, in

21 April, the fourth month of that year, was on the left bank and on the

22 surrounding hills, that in town were reservists that on Hum, Orlovac,

23 Stepcici [phoen], Slipcici were the positions of the JNA. Are you aware

24 of that?

25 A. Yes I'm aware of that.

1 MR. SCOTT: That is a classic leading question. You couldn't have

2 put a better one than that. That is classic leading.

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed, but if Mr. Praljak

4 is putting the question to the witness in that way it's because he wants

5 to gain time. We all know that the JNA was stationed there.

6 Please proceed, Mr. Praljak.

7 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

8 Q. Do you know that the only road leading out of Mostar towards

9 Western Herzegovina was via Ganovci [phoen].

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Thank you very much. Are you aware of the fact that a large

12 facility in Cule had been destroyed?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Are you aware of the fact that a somewhat smaller transformation

15 station [as interpreted] in Rastani had also been destroyed?

16 A. Yes, I am aware of that.

17 Q. Are you aware of the fact that around the 15th of May, 1993 [as

18 interpreted], the Yugoslav People's Army and the reservists chased the

19 entire population, this was in 1992, from the left bank the Neretva to the

20 right bank of the Neretva?

21 A. Yes, I'm aware of that.

22 Q. Thank you. Do you know --

23 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour. I think there's a mistake in

24 the transcript. I believe there is a mistake in the transcript or a

25 misstatement by Mr. Praljak or one or the other. It says, are you aware

1 of the fact that around the 15th of May, 1993, as opposed to -- I believe

2 it was 1992.

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, you're absolutely right,

4 Mr. Scott.

5 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] I put that right and said

6 1992.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do know about that.

8 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]

9 Q. At the beginning of June 1992, an action to liberate the right

10 bank of the Neretva was undertaken, Orlovac, Hum, et cetera, and further

11 down, the aluminium factory, Sokol, that whole valley. Do you know about

12 that?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Do you also know whether in that operation the 1st Mostar

15 Battalion particular part?

16 A. Can you repeat that question? Do I know what?

17 Q. In that operation did the 1st Mostar Battalion take part?

18 A. I can't confirm that.

19 Q. Thank you. Do you know the name of the commander of that

20 operation?

21 A. I can't remember.

22 Q. Thank you. I'd now like to place the following document on

23 e-court, 3D 00688. 3D 00688.

24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, have these

25 documents been submitted to us or not, or are you just going to show them

1 through e-court?

2 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] 3D 00 --

3 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it's on e-court, and we

4 also provided a folder, a binder, at the end of the break. Judge Trechsel

5 seems to have found it.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

7 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Since we've interrupted, let me say

8 that there's an additional document without a number, but you'll realise

9 that yourselves.

10 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]

11 Q. 3D 00688 is the number of the document I'd like to look at next.

12 And you took part in the operation. It is it the operation to liberate

13 the left bank of the Neretva River. And it says at the top the Croatian

14 Community of Herceg-Bosna, the Croatian Defence Council, et cetera, et

15 cetera. The Main Staff, the Operative Group, South-east Herzegovina. And

16 that is the classical way in way an operation unfolds.

17 Let us take a look. I'll read out some portions, and you can just

18 tell me whether based on what you knew as a participant whether the

19 document corresponds to the truth.

20 A. Just a moment, please.

21 Q. Yes, go ahead.

22 A. In your question a moment ago I didn't understand it that this was

23 the left bank. You mentioned Orlovac and human those or on the right bank

24 whereas this is a move to the left bank that I took part in as did the

25 Mostar Battalion, the 1st Mostar Brigade, in fact, or, rather, the brigade

1 I was in. So that's just a direction. We didn't understand each other.

2 There was the Mostar Battalion there, and the unit that I was in, my

3 company. So by way of clarification I'd like to say that.

4 Q. Witness, I said that it was at the beginning of June 1992, and

5 then we moved on to a new topic, and we're now talking about the move to

6 the left bank and the operation there, and you took part in it.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. So let's go through a few things. Line 3: "Our artillery covered

9 passages of our forces over the Old Bridge on the river Neretva."

10 And then at 0650 hours: "The general ordered the artillery from

11 Planica to constantly fire towards Balushani [phoen]." You know these

12 geographical areas, do you?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. At 0720 hours the fighting took place in street by the cinema and

15 around the opened bridge. At 0745 hours from South Camp there was firing

16 at our forces once again around the Old Bridge. The general ordered

17 Siroki Brijeg to go into operation near the Orthodox church and the detour

18 there, and South and North Camp. At 0747 hours the tank moved along the

19 main road, and that refers to the JNA tank; right, on the main road?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. At 0810 hours, two tanks with infantry were moving from South Camp

22 towards the town. That was the JNA again. Do you agree?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. And at 0812 hours the enemy was firing at the old town and city.

25 At 8.35 fighting allegedly began in Podvelezje but that was not confirmed.

1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. The chronology is

2 very interesting in military terms because we have information about

3 everything that is going on minute by minute. But what do you want to

4 establish? Do you want to establish that 1st Mostar Battalion had the

5 necessary resources? What are you trying to establish?

6 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Please believe me,

7 Mr. President, Your Honour, that I do have a purpose, and it will become

8 clear in just a moment. I have a very clear objective.

9 Q. At 0910 hours it says that the general ordered to the -- ordered

10 the Independent Battalion, which is yours, to leave the bank and move

11 forward. And so on. The general ordered snipers. The general ordered

12 the Independent Battalion, et cetera, et cetera at 0958 hours. And then

13 we'll skip some portions and go to 1100 hours, et cetera.

14 Now, this operation, did it look like this roughly to the best of

15 your recollections?

16 A. Well, I remember this operation vividly, Mr. Praljak. However --

17 Q. That will do. Thank you.

18 A. I was a soldier, an ordinary soldier carrying a rifle, and I don't

19 know about this -- these companies and these orders. I crossed the

20 Neretva River at Goranci.

21 Q. All right. We've dealt with that that that's how it was. That's

22 all I wanted to hear. And now my next question is this --

23 MR. SCOTT: This is now mischaracterising the witness's testimony.

24 Now, if Mr. Praljak is going to be allowed to put questions to the

25 witness, then he should not mischaracterise, number one, the witness's

1 testimony. Number two, he should give the witness a chance to answer.

2 He's just said -- he's just now said the witness has confirmed what I put

3 was right. The witness didn't say that. In fact, the witness said the

4 contrary. I can't address all that. I was a foot soldier. I crossed the

5 river. But Mr. Praljak then makes -- turns it into the answer he wants.

6 That was not the testimony of the witness. Thank you.

7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, the witness stated

8 that he crossed the river. On that point he confirms what you're saying,

9 but he was just a regular soldier and he's just told us that this was not

10 something he was familiar with.

11 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]

12 Q. What I'm asking you is this: To the best of your recollections,

13 is this roughly what it looked like?

14 A. What do you mean by roughly?

15 Q. Well, the document that I've just put to you, can you confirm that

16 that's how it was?

17 A. Well, I can't confirm that. We did cross the Neretva River --

18 JUDGE TRECHSEL: [Previous translation continues] ... the

19 question --

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And there was an operation.

21 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Praljak, the question was put and answered.

22 You're not allowed to put it again.

23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, the witness

24 answered your question. He said that he crossed the river, that an

25 operation took place, but for the rest, whether there were armoured

1 vehicles or if somebody was shooting with artillery, he cannot give you an

2 answer to that. I don't know if this is of particular interest to you,

3 but please ask him the question.

4 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] All right. I completed that

5 part of what I wanted to ask. I'm just going to go on and ask him the

6 following:

7 Q. Do you know that in this operation that went from the south what

8 the ratio of forces was, the HVO and the independent Mostar Battalion.

9 What was the ratio of forces in this operation? How many men took part?

10 How many soldiers did the HVO have, and how many soldiers did the

11 independent Mostar Battalion have?

12 A. The independent Mostar Battalion numbered about 400 men.

13 Q. I see. Thank you. And now my question is this --

14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, Mr. Praljak. The witness has not

15 answered the question. You asked for the relation. That is a comparison.

16 Witness, do you know how many soldiers there were on the other

17 side?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.

19 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.

20 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]

21 Q. Now a question that goes to the heart of the matter in my opinion.

22 Tell me, Witness, who is this general?

23 A. Jasmin Jaganjac. I see his signature there, if that's it.

24 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] So that is, Your Honours,

25 why all this took place. And I have to put that on record. You've heard

1 from other witnesses who testified here how important the operation was.

2 Jasmin Jaganjac at that time was in Zagreb, and this other general, that

3 was me, and that's my first point.

4 Now I'm going to ask the witness.

5 Q. Can you tell us, Witness, of a single printed document, any paper,

6 radio, information from 1992, June 1992, to the present day that at any

7 time in any information media, public information media, in the federation

8 of Bosnia-Herzegovina, whether they published who was in charge of the

9 operation to liberate Mostar on the left and right bank? Was that ever

10 published, anything like that?

11 A. I can't remember it having been, no.

12 Q. Thank you.

13 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] I think that that is what I

14 wanted to get at, Your Honours, what truth is portrayed, what images are

15 conjured up.

16 May we have this next document placed on the ELMO. I have another

17 question for the gentleman.

18 Q. While we're waiting for the document to be put on the overhead

19 projector, let me ask you this, Witness: To the best of your knowledge,

20 the Old Bridge, was it protected in the night between the 15th and 16th of

21 June 1992 with planks and a special construction?

22 A. Yes, it was protected, and we have photographs of it.

23 Q. Right. Now, do you know the name of the man who ordered this to

24 be done?

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can we please -- the

1 interpreters do not hear anything any more.

2 Very well. Go ahead, please. Put your question, Mr. Praljak.

3 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation].

4 Q. Do you know that in the might between the 15th and 16th of June,

5 1992, the Old Bridge was -- had planks placed -- a construction of planks

6 placed over it?

7 A. Yes. And I have a photograph.

8 Q. Do you know how many men were engaged on the job that night?

9 A. I don't know.

10 Q. Do you know the name of the commander who ordered that this be

11 done while the fighting was still going on nearby?

12 A. No, I don't know that.

13 Q. Thank you. Now take a look at the document on the ELMO. Can you

14 recognise the handwriting as being that of Mr. Arif Pasalic? Take a look

15 at the last page. You cooperated with him, so can you recognise that

16 document of his and his signature?

17 A. I don't recognise the document, but the signature corresponds to

18 his signature, although I'm not 100 per cent certain.

19 Q. Thank you. Now turn to page two, please.

20 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Praljak, if might be useful if you were to

21 tell us what kind of a document this is. I don't think you have so far.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, because we don't have

23 the translation of this document on the ELMO, Mr. Praljak.

24 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we went

25 through it rather fast. Well, actually, we didn't manage to have it

1 translated. It is a document which Arif Pasalic sends out, and it

2 says "Commander." That's the title.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it does say "Commander."

4 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]

5 Q. So Mr. Arif Pasalic, at the moment of writing this he is

6 addressing a commander.

7 Now, turn to page 2 and look at item 6. The third line. Read out

8 to what says -- "It is necessary to check tomorrow the complete --" is

9 that what it says there?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. And it says: "Bringing in ammunition." Now let's move on to page

12 3 and look at paragraph 8. He says: "The Chetniks after the mortar

13 fire," et cetera. Is that what it says, "the Chetniks"? Does it start

14 off with "The Chetniks"?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. And then paragraph 9 he says: "I kept the bridge under constant

17 fire of heavy machine-guns. However, it was destroyed in the middle where

18 you couldn't see the explosive, which indicates that the explosive was in

19 the bowel of the bridge," et cetera. And it says that -- what they're

20 talking about is Hasan Brkic bridge.

21 Now, my question is this: Apart from the Old Bridge, to your

22 knowledge, did the Yugoslav People's Army -- did it destroy all the

23 bridges on the Neretva River in the same way?

24 A. Well, I don't know what way, Mr. Praljak, you're referring to, but

25 the Neretva is from Jablanica to Capljina and it lost 13 bridges, 11

1 railway bridges and two road bridges.

2 Q. In that period, is that right?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Now turn to the last page.

5 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, Mr. President, perhaps Mr. Praljak could

6 be kind enough to give us an approximate date for this document. If he

7 said it I didn't hear, but we have no time or background on this document.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, according to your

9 sources was drafted by Mr. Vasilic [as interpreted]. On what date,

10 please?

11 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] In view of the destruction

12 of the Hasan Brkic bridge, Your Honour, and the fact that we're talking

13 about a military bridge, this occurred at the point in time when this

14 operation that I spoke about was in place, the liberation of the left bank

15 of the Neretva. And Mr. Pasalic at that time addressed a commander, and

16 we'll see in due course later on who that commander was who he is

17 addressing, and we're talking about the 15th of June, 1992, when we'd

18 already crossed. There is mention of the airport and the bridge, and we

19 know when this document was compiled and when all this was going on. And

20 on the last page Mr. Pasalic is asking that he be sent a car and that he

21 will receive other orders.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I be allowed to say something?

23 During the time when you're referring to when this document was

24 compiled as you say, I was a foot soldier. I was not near the late

25 Mr. Arif Pasalic, but there were very rare situations later on whereby he

1 would write a document in his own handwriting without a date, without the

2 usual kind of thing that a document has. So maybe this document was

3 compiled under special circumstances. I wasn't in his vicinity. All I

4 can say is that the signature might be Arif's, although I'm not 100 per

5 cent certain of that.

6 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation].

7 Q. Mr. Lizde, you're right. At the moment he was writing this Mr.

8 Arif Pasalic was at the airport. This was an urgent message. He is

9 asking for a car for ammunition and so on and so forth. I am asking you

10 this: In view of the fact that you have already stated before it arises

11 from this that in the month of June Arif Pasalic wrote to somebody

12 addressing him as a commander. In other words, that there was a

13 commander, that he had a commander. At that moment, according to what you

14 know, did Arif Pasalic had a commander who was superior to him in the

15 Independent Battalion in the BiH army?

16 A. As far as I know, the -- Arif Pasalic was the main commander of

17 the 1st Battalion of the BiH army. Now, whether I would be able to tell

18 you whether the word commander refers to the army, to the HVO, to another

19 unit, I wouldn't know that.

20 Q. Very, very well. We'll see that later. I'm just trying to --

21 A. I really don't know.

22 Q. In Mostar there was nobody else but the battalion but after the

23 liberation of Mostar, according to what you know did the book under the

24 title "Audited" become published?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. And was it drafted together by Bosniaks and Croats. The book is

2 Urbicide?

3 A. I don't know. I don't know exactly. It was published, but I

4 don't know who authored it. It was a long time ago and I've forgotten.

5 But, yes, the book Urbicide was published.

6 Q. When you had the book in your hands, would you say that it is an

7 object representation of the devastation of Mostar at the hands of the

8 JNA?

9 A. Irrespective of who the author of the book was, whether it was

10 Bosniaks or Croats or both of them together, no book, including this book

11 Urbicide, could not reflect everything that had happened in Mostar at the

12 time and later on I believe that book is only a partial confirmation of

13 what happened in Mostar in 1992, especially on its left -- on the left

14 bank of the Neretva.

15 Q. Are you saying that the situation was even worse?

16 A. Yes, it was much worse.

17 Q. After that you were wounded at the foot of Mount Velez; is that

18 correct?

19 A. Yes it was on the 30th of June, 1992.

20 Q. Can you tell me where you were hospitalised?

21 A. I was at the Mostar hospital. That's how we call it, the new

22 hospital.

23 Q. All of this time?

24 A. Yes, all this time.

25 Q. Thank you. And now since you were at the foot of the -- of Mount

1 Velez, I would kindly ask you -- please, can this be put on the ELMO

2 please, this document that I have in my hands?

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacic, the document of

4 Mr. Pasalic, is it on e-court? Is there a number for that document?

5 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] No, not yet. We will deal with that

6 tomorrow, if we may.

7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.

8 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak has kept this document

9 as an alternative awaiting the witness's examination-in-chief. He did not

10 know whether he would use it or not but today because of the

11 cross-examination and the questions that were put at the beginning of the

12 cross-examination, he obviously deemed that he should use it and we will

13 ask for its admission.

14 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Can we now have document 3D 00732. Witness, you're familiar with

16 Mostar, as well as I am. Can you use the pen to show us where the

17 fighting took place at the foot of Mount Velez and where the lines of

18 defence were later established between the HVO and the BH army on the one

19 side and the JNA and the Republika Srpska army on the other side?

20 A. Are you referring to this map that you have just shown me?

21 Q. Yes?

22 A. I'm not sure that I'm able to do that on this map. This map is

23 not positioned very well.

24 Q. You can see the airport in the left upper corner. On the left is

25 Mount Velez.

1 A. I can see Blagaj on the right-hand side.

2 Q. Where do you see Blagaj on the right-hand side?

3 A. I can see Blagaj on my screen.

4 Q. I suppose that you're looking at a wrong map. Can you please

5 remove this map from the -- from the ELMO and can we look at document

6 number 00732. 3D 00732 is the document that I'm after. That is that and

7 I don't have it on my screen. I don't have it on e-court. Now you can

8 see Mostar very well. You can see the airport. You can see Blagaj. What

9 about the defence lines between the BiH army and the HVO on the one side

10 and the Republika Srpska army and the JNA on the other side?

11 A. I can only see Blagaj on one side in -- in Podumje [phoen]. I can

12 see Blagaj and Gnojnica.

13 MR. PORYVAEV: [Previous translation continues] ... I have nothing.

14 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, sir, the

15 witness may not see it, you may not see it. Maybe the witness is not able

16 to point at things here.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, I can see Blagaj and

18 Gnojnica as two places and below them I can see the hill, but I was on the

19 left side at the foot of the -- of Mount Velez. I can't draw any lines.

20 I can show you where I was and where the lines were in Podvelezje between

21 upper and lower Bandalej [phoen].

22 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]

23 Q. Witness, sir, I understand that you are not a military person.

24 You don't have military education but you can perfectly see airport here,

25 Gnojnica, and you can see a hill leading up to Velez and you can see

1 Podvelezje here. If you can't see it --

2 A. Very well, maybe I can. I can -- I can try. Okay. I'll draw a

3 line.

4 Q. Try, please. As far as I can remember.

5 A. I can remember that the lines were somewhere in the middle of

6 Podvelezje.

7 Q. Draw a line.

8 A. If the green is Podvelezje, then this would be the line to the

9 very end of Podvelezje, thank you.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Could witness and counsel please slow down.

11 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I think this simply doesn't work. The witness is

12 now speculating. He's trying to be helpful and drawing lines but in fact

13 it has become quite clear that his knowledge of the facts you're aiming at

14 are very limited. He was at that time a soldier, as he'd said. You're

15 asking of operative questions. The witness cannot directly testify on

16 that. I think you should change the subject.

17 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honour Trechsel, you're

18 absolutely right. However, we're faced with a problem here. You're

19 absolutely right but we are faced with a problem. We get witnesses here

20 who speak about the events that we had not discussed with any high officer

21 of the BH army or an expert. We have not clarified any of these issues.

22 So that's why we have to speculate with other witnesses about the Serb

23 artillery, the number of soldiers. A year into the trial we are not aware

24 of even the elementary facts.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, I can tell you where I

1 was wounded. I was wounded on the separation line and this is where I was

2 wounded but my parents got -- friends got killed. But I can't draw it on

3 this map.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott.

5 MR. SCOTT: I just want to whole-heartedly join Judge Trechsel's

6 comment. He doesn't need -- he certainly doesn't need my agreement to be

7 right but in this case I certainly want to underline it. The point is

8 that I'm not going to sit here and allow Mr. Praljak to blame his

9 deficiencies on the witness's -- it's not the witness's fault. The

10 witness comes to give particular evidence selected by the Prosecution to

11 give certain evidence in the case that we believe is relevant to our

12 case. We're not here to call evidence for Mr. Praljak. If Mr. Praljak

13 doesn't think this is the appropriate witness, then he shouldn't put the

14 questions to the witness then Mr. Praljak has just admitted he's wasting

15 everyone's time. Everyone's time.

16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

17 Mr. Praljak, the comment made by Mr. Scott is perfectly founded.

18 We have before us a journalist, a reporter, and he had been arrested. He

19 had been detained in various detention centres, and you are putting

20 questions to him as if he had -- as if he was a general at the time.

21 You're asking him to show us where the troops were and so on.

22 It's the same as if you would ask a general questions on the work

23 of a reporter. The general would tell you I'm a general, I'm not a

24 reporter. So this is the difficulty we're all facing. However, the

25 witness can maybe show us on this map the position where he was injured,

1 because apparently he's able to tell us this.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If the green field is Podvelezje,

3 then my line is okay, and this is where I was wounded on the 30th of

4 June.

5 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Very well. I admitted

6 straight away and I've begin up on any further questions. I could not

7 possibly know what the witness knows or what he doesn't know. So I'm

8 giving up on this map. This is not a good line.

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Would you like to -- us to give

10 an IC number for this map?

11 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] There's no need for that.

12 Q. I don't want to ask any more questions about your departure for

13 Rama or Prozor. I'm moving on to the next topic.

14 Do you know that I had two meetings with Vehbija Karic and Arif

15 Pasalic after these events in Jablanica with the people who had ran away

16 towards Jablanica?

17 A. Please, can you be more precise? When did you have meetings?

18 Q. After the conflicts in Rama on the 28th of September, I had two

19 meetings with Arif Pasalic and Vehbija Karic in Jablanica to deal with

20 that problem. Are you aware of that as a journalist?

21 A. I can't remember. My memory doesn't serve me too well on that. I

22 can't remember any such meetings.

23 Q. Do you know that Mr. Vehbija Karic and Mr. Arif Pasalic were with

24 me in Rama after that conflict? Yes or no?

25 A. No. I can't remember.

1 Q. Do you know that there was a meeting of the two delegations in

2 Konjic?

3 A. I remember meetings, but I can't tell you precisely where they

4 took place and when, but I know that there were meetings. I'm aware of

5 those.

6 Q. The Ustashi hall that you saw as the inscription on one of the

7 buildings in Rama, do you know that that was the headquarters of the HOS?

8 A. This was not on the building. This was on a white piece of cloth.

9 Q. Very well.

10 A. And there were lads in camouflage uniforms and I didn't know who

11 they were, whether they were HOS or HVO. They had red bands on their

12 arms.

13 Q. Do you know that the HOS was recognised by the Presidency of the

14 Bosnia and Herzegovina and by Alija Izetbegovic as the regular army of the

15 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

16 A. Yes, I'm aware of that.

17 Q. Do you know that Blaz Kraljevic and Ante Prkacin, the HOS

18 commanders, were recognised as generals by Alija Izetbegovic?

19 A. Yes. I know something about that, but I would like to add

20 something to that. Three days ago before I arrived here in -- we

21 published a book by our journalist, an editor from Ljubuski, Mladen

22 Bosnjak, and the title is Colonel or deceased person featuring the story

23 of Mr. Kraljevic. So I know quite a lot from reading that book. I know

24 quite a lot about Colonel Kraljevic.

25 Q. Do you know that HOS was the army that advocated the political

1 idea of the Party of Rights which was Croatia all the way to the Drina?

2 A. This is a very well known slogan. This is a notorious slogan.

3 Q. And do you know that within the framework of the ideology of that

4 army, there was also the fact that Bosniaks -- sorry, Muslims were also

5 part of the Croatian people?

6 MR. PORYVAEV: Your Honour, I don't understand what is the

7 relevance of this question to this witness.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Poryvaev, I do see a

9 relevancy. The witness was a reporter, and he told us that he had gone to

10 Prozor. He told us that in Prozor he saw some people dressed in black,

11 and they had red ribbons around their arm. The witness told us that those

12 people belonged to the HOS. So that's the relevancy.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I did not say that

14 the men wore black uniforms in Prozor. They were in camouflage uniforms

15 in Prozor, not black uniforms. And the inscription was Ustasha hall, and

16 they had red bands around their arms.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but what made you conclude

18 that there was members of the HOS?

19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Previous translation continues] ...

20 not say that they were members of the HOS [Realtime transcript read in

21 error "Prosecution"]. I only said that the inscription on the building

22 where they were was the Ustashi hall, and I never said that they were

23 members of the HOS.

24 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Can I ask the next question?

25 Q. Do you know that the HOS continued --

1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] That's then, Mr. Praljak, who is

2 going to ask you the question.

3 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]

4 Q. At the time, did the HOS advocate a large part the ideology of the

5 Ustashi and they styled themselves Ustashi. Do you know that?

6 A. Yes, I do.

7 Q. Thank you very much. Since this was not entered into the

8 transcript, do you know that their ideology, the ideology, the ideology of

9 Ante Pavlovic was Croatia all the way up to the Drina?

10 A. Yes, of course.

11 MR. SCOTT: At page 21 -- excuse me page 68, line 21, the

12 Prosecution has certainly been accused of a lot of things and probably

13 will be in the future but I don't think any of these people were members

14 of the Prosecution. If we could possibly have that corrected, please.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, there is a mistake in fact.

16 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation].

17 Q. The HOS had considerable troops, and according to them the Muslims

18 were part of the Croatian people. Was that part of their ideology?

19 A. I don't know. It's very difficult to say that with certainty.

20 There were individuals who thought that. I'm sure that there must have

21 been.

22 Q. Do you know that the only -- that when the bridges were

23 destroyed that all the pipelines between east and west were so -- were

24 interrupted?

25 A. Yes. Mostar had problem with water. I don't know whether it was

1 as a result of the destruction of bridges I suppose that it was.

2 Q. Do you know that at the time an attempt was made to lay the pipes

3 under the Old Bridge and that this was done very badly. The water leaked.

4 Is that correct?

5 A. I don't know. I am not aware of that.

6 Q. Do you know that at the time the manager of the public company

7 waterworks in Mostar was Mr. Mustafa Zviznica?

8 A. Zvizdic. It is possible but I don't know. I don't know who the

9 manager of the waterworks was.

10 Q. Witness, do you know anything about the document that has already

11 been introduced dated the 3rd of January, 1993, according to which the

12 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Ministry of the Interior, the plan

13 of the physical security of facilities and the area around the Old Bridge,

14 in one place it says as follows: The policemen are the points in the

15 vicinity of the Old Bridge. In addition to the tasks that have been

16 listed already are duty-bound to register all individuals who have crossed

17 the Old Bridge and also to enter their residence. The reasons for which

18 they are crossing to the left bank at the time when they have crossed over

19 and returned from the left bank. In brackets the reference is made to

20 civilians.

21 Since the Old Bridge at the time was the only bridge between the

22 eastern part and the western part, do you know that in January 1993 a

23 complete control started of the civilians entering the left bank. The

24 right bank was free at the time for movement, but whoever wanted to cross

25 to the left bank had to be registered.

1 A. Well, yes, I do know that there were some checks, but you could

2 cross the bridge at the dam as well. There were check-points. Now, who

3 did the checking, I don't know. I think everybody was checked crossing

4 the bridge.

5 Q. May I have 3D 00899 as the next document, please. 3D 00899. It's

6 a statement dated the 13th of May, 1993 given by Mr. Dzemal Hamzic, son of

7 Refik. You know the man?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. He gave this statement to the police station in Mostar, and it

10 relates to the radio station that you were the director of -- of which you

11 were the director of the political and information programme.

12 A. I wasn't the director.

13 Q. Well, editor then.

14 A. Yes, editor.

15 Q. In a radio station under wartime conditions, an editor of the

16 information and political programme is the number one man, the most

17 important man of that radio station.

18 A. Well, he's a fairly important man, yes.

19 Q. All right. Now would you take a look at what it says here? He

20 says -- when he was offered the job of establishing that radio station he

21 said: "I had previously held consultations with Tomo Mazalo and asked

22 instructions from him whether I would have any adverse consequences for my

23 future work within the frameworks of the information station of Mostar,"

24 et cetera, et cetera. "And then I was offered to establish and being an

25 editor of a paper called Mostarsko Jutro which I accepted and I was given

1 a letter of credit from the defence department of the HVO HZ HB." Then he

2 says that he was the editor-in-chief of the War Radio Station Mostar, and

3 then he goes on to say that the War Radio Station Mostar had its programme

4 board which included Dzevad Kolukcija, Izudin Sahovic, Arif Pasalic, and

5 others. There was Father Ivan Sevo representing religious organisations

6 and humanitarian organisations at the end. It says with regard to the

7 establishment of the war studio the main object was that the information

8 put out be true and correct, but it collided -- that collided with Arif

9 Pasalic because the man wanted to influence me with respect to editorial

10 policy. And I clashed with him over that.

11 And then he goes on to say that this gentleman tried to relocate

12 the Mostar studio from those premises because there was a great deal of

13 influence brought to bear on editorial policy, and then he says: "To the

14 best of our ability we made it impossible for Arif Pasalic to disseminate

15 his propaganda on the airwaves," et cetera.

16 Now, Mr. Arif Pasalic, was he able to turn up at any time of day

17 or night and be broadcast over Radio Mostar?

18 A. No, he couldn't come. He came when he was invited by me. He

19 never came otherwise. Well, everybody could do everything like Dzida. As

20 Dzida came Arif could have come too. But he didn't. And this is a

21 notorious lie that Dzemo has set out here. This is the first time that

22 I'm seeing this. He didn't have an occasion to be on good terms or bad

23 terms with Arif Pasalic. Everything that Arif wanted went through me.

24 Dzemo Hamzic wasn't on good terms with me and I don't suppose he was on

25 good terms with Arif Pasalic either.

1 Q. You yourself gave a statement, and you said that you gave

2 Mr. Vidovic a statement and signed it, and it is a document from the

3 Prosecution file, and you say the following on page 2 of your

4 statement --

5 A. What number did you say?

6 Q. It is a Prosecution document. I'm going to read your statement

7 out and then you can testify. "As far as the relationship between the

8 BH army is concerned and the war radio station, I can say that some

9 people from the BH army such as Arif Pasalic, for instance, had the

10 advantage of being able at any time to coming to the radio and state what

11 they wanted."

12 That is what you say on page 2 word or word in your statement.

13 A. Mr. Praljak, I said that that was the only statement that I

14 signed. I gave the statement on one day and they gave me the statement to

15 sign the next day. I didn't read what it said in the statement and that

16 was at the central prison in Heliodrom, and I would like to ask you to

17 understand the circumstances under which I signed it, and I only saw this

18 for the first time the other day. They could have written whatever they

19 wanted. And would you have signed had you been in a camp for two months?

20 You would have signed anything that they handed to you.

21 Q. Mr. Lizde --

22 A. I did not say that. That wasn't the statement I made.

23 Q. I didn't say anything else. I just read it out. You say that you

24 didn't. You say no.

25 A. I told you of the circumstances and how I came to sign that

1 statement. I explained that to you.

2 Q. I just have a couple of other questions. Could this be placed on

3 the ELMO, please, this next document, so that the witness can see it.

4 And I'm going to ask you this in the meantime: Before the

5 conflicts in Mostar, conflicts had happened before that in Konjic. Did

6 you or your journalists -- Mr. Lizde, I'm speaking to you. You or your

7 journalists, a little before the conflict started, did you report -- give

8 out any reports about the events in Konjic?

9 A. Yes, there were reports from Konjic. It -- they were written

10 about and talked about but I don't know what you mean specifically.

11 Q. I don't have time to show you the crimes that were committed in

12 Konjic, but, for instance, did you ever broadcast over the radio the

13 events that occurred in Trusina?

14 A. When did these events occur in Trusina?

15 Q. You don't know when?

16 A. Well, I don't know.

17 Q. Have you ever heard of the events Trusina?

18 A. Yes, I saw that.

19 Q. After the 16th of April, 1993, after that date did you broadcast

20 anything about the 23 men that were killed in Trusina let alone all the

21 rest of it?

22 A. I think so, yes.

23 Q. All right, fine. Now, would you place the next document on the

24 ELMO, please. This is a diagram of -- showing Santic Street, Spanish --

25 the Spanish Square, the Celovina prison and so on. Is this a relatively

1 good sketch of the area?

2 A. Well, let me have a look. Let me take a moment to study it. I

3 don't know if you have time, but I'd like to do so.

4 Q. Yes. Can we zoom down a little. Can we see the whole diagram?

5 Zoom out so we can see the whole of it.

6 A. Yes, roughly that would be it.

7 Q. I lived in Santiceva for two years, and opposite Celovina. It's a

8 broad street five metres wide and there's a pavement two metres wide on

9 each side; is that right?

10 A. Well, that's the usual type of thing.

11 Q. And do you know that the trenches were dug where the concrete was

12 or were the lines here from one street to -- from one house to another?

13 A. It was from one house to another, from one window to another.

14 Q. Now, the building that is circled was the association of drivers

15 and mechanics. Were you there?

16 A. No. I was in the Kragujevac restaurant building.

17 Q. Could you indicate where that building was located?

18 A. Well, can I see the whole diagram?

19 Q. It's hotel Herzegovina.

20 A. Yes, hotel Herzegovina.

21 Q. Would you draw that on the map, please, then? Indicate where it

22 is?

23 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I just want to state, not only did we not receive

24 this document either, we do not know where it comes from. We only see an

25 exter [phoen] where there is no circled house. This is not very helpful,

1 I must say.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's where I was, where I drew the

3 circle. At the corner of hotel Herzegovina, whatever. What does it say

4 here.

5 A. It says ZTU. Yes.

6 Q. Would you put a number 1 there.

7 A. [Marks]

8 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Well, I'm sorry,

9 Judge Trechsel, but I had to draw this overnight because the witness made

10 the statement yesterday. So I can't draw all these maps and diagrams

11 before I hear what the witness says. So I'm asking the witness whether

12 this corresponds to the area and he said yes, so I've done the best I

13 could. I don't know what else I could have done.

14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: You could have told us it was a plan you had

15 drawn last night. That would have been helpful if we had known from the

16 outset where this had come from. Now you have told us. Thank you.

17 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] I apologise. I thought that

18 that was obvious, that it was drawn last night.

19 Q. Can you now tell me whether the HVO was at the top of Santic

20 Street and down the bottom of Santic Street, the BH army?

21 A. Well, yes.

22 Q. Now, can we zoom down, see the bottom half. At the entrance to

23 Santic Street it says, "The MUP of Bosnia-Herzegovina." The bottom line,

24 it says, "MUP RBiH."

25 A. Well, I don't know. That wasn't the MUP. I know that it was a

1 supermarket. It's the Merkur supermarket. If you lived there you knew

2 that the Merkur supermarket was there. I didn't know it was ever the MUP.

3 How could I know that?

4 Q. Mr. Lizde, it's very simple. You don't know that the MUP was

5 there and that solves the problem. Thank you.

6 A. No, I don't know that the MUP was down there, that was the Merkur

7 supermarket.

8 Q. Now when you went to Jablanica you remember saying that you went

9 to Jablanica for some negotiations?

10 A. Yes, to SpaBat headquarters or, rather, UNPROFOR headquarters.

11 Q. Did you take the asphalt road Mostarjit [as interpreted] to

12 Jablanica?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. Any problems along the route?

15 A. We were stopped at the 5th Battalion check-point on a bridge in

16 Aleksin Han, before the Aleksin Han bridge. Well, yes, the road -- there

17 was a check-point on the road.

18 Q. Tell me, you were referred to as Brada, beard, because you wore a

19 beard. Some people referred to me as Brada too. Is it customary that

20 everybody who has a beard tends to be referred to as Brada. How many --

21 what would the percentage of people be?

22 A. Well, I knew another Brada, beard, who was a waiter in Stari Grad.

23 Q. So they called him Brada?

24 A. Yes, they did but that weren't that many people with beards.

25 Q. Well, I assume that's why they referred to them as Brada. Now I'm

1 sorry that I can't go into all this in greater detail but I'm satisfied

2 with what I have so far.

3 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I really think

4 that to clarify technical matters such as these diagrams which afterwards

5 can show us whether a sniper can shoot from such-and-such a building where

6 the lines were, whether they were two metres apart or 20 or 30 metres

7 apart, that this contributes to elucidating the truth that you need to

8 find, just as it contributes to the truth of my question, "Do you know who

9 commanded the operation?" You heard that there was a major operation at

10 the beginning of the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Now, if a journalist

11 doesn't know who that was, then one can draw the conclusion of how much

12 propaganda there was which failed to disseminate information as to who the

13 general was, who was in command of the operation, and I think that this

14 will help throw light on what is important in this case, where the lines

15 were in Podvelezje. If the witness says that the Serb artillery couldn't

16 shoot other than the areas it did, then what can I do? I have to show

17 where the front lines were in Podvelezje and where the Serb artillery was.

18 And afterwards, did they shoot at Mostar with diminished intensity after

19 that? Thank you.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have a question to ask.

21 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] You'll have to ask the

22 Judges whether you can ask your question.

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Opposite where the drivers were,

24 that's where the army was, the BH army, and that was the road that was the

25 separation line.

1 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Well, then put the number 2 there and say the BH army.

3 A. And then you'll see that it was two metres.

4 Q. The BH army and the HVO. Number 1, HVO, and number 2 put the

5 ABiH.

6 A. [Marks]

7 Q. And now we have the following procedure which the Judges always

8 ask for. Write down the date and your signature and ...

9 A. Can I write in Cyrillic?

10 Q. You can write whichever way you like.

11 A. [Marks]

12 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] I don't see what it -- that

13 I'm doing anything bad. I'm not taking up time. I'm seeking the truth.

14 I'm seeking out facts. And please, in that respect I don't think

15 Mr. Scott is right in what he says. I think I am proceeding in a

16 perfectly proper manner. Thank you.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, can you please

18 give us a number for this map?

19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this map will be IC 530.

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'm now going to give the floor

21 to Mr. Kovacic, who needs a few minutes.

22 Mr. Registrar, can you please tell me how much time has been used

23 up by the Defence so far and how much time has been used by Mr. Praljak?

24 I'm looking at the clock right now. We might be able to finish

25 today. It's just a possibility, but we still need to hear Ms. Alaburic.

1 Mrs. Alaburic, how much time will you need?

2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the counsel.

3 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] It will depend on the quantity of

4 information that this witness can offer, but I believe that it will take

5 me between 15 and 20 minutes.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Tomic, how much time would

7 you need?

8 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have my own

9 36 minutes, and if I need extra time, I've been given 10 minutes by my

10 colleague, Nozica.

11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. We might be able to

12 complete the testimony of the witness by 7.00 p.m.

13 Mr. Kovacic, you have the floor now.

14 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I believe

15 that I won't need more than 10 minutes. The witness is cooperative. He

16 wants to assist us.

17 Cross-examination by Mr. Kovacic:

18 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Lizde.

19 A. Good afternoon.

20 Q. I would like to follow up on our discussion that we had yesterday

21 about the alleged sighting of Mr. Praljak at the Heliodrom. Let's start

22 with the claim. Yesterday you told us three times that somebody else had

23 told you that in the group of people, and you thought that it was a

24 delegation of sorts, that there was also Mr. Praljak. For the record.

25 A. Yes, this is what I said.

1 Q. Thank you very much. For the record, these claims were on page

2 55, lines 12 and 13, page 56, lines 17 to 20, and page 57, lines 1 to 3.

3 Mr. Lizde, could you please try and remember who it was who said

4 that to you?

5 A. There were 10.000 people at the Heliodrom together with me, and I

6 really can't remember. Somebody who was with me at the time told me that

7 but I can't remember who it was. I don't know where I ate three days ago,

8 let alone this.

9 Q. Thank you. Could you please try and remember where the -- there

10 was just one person who said that or were there several people who said

11 the same thing?

12 A. I don't know. I don't think that several people were involved. I

13 really don't know.

14 Q. Thank you. Yesterday you also told us that the group of people

15 among whom Praljak allegedly was you saw only briefly, and I am quoting

16 you and even if you -- if I had known Praljak at the time I would not have

17 been able to recognise him. You said this on page 57, line 24, and on

18 page 58, line 4.

19 A. It is possible.

20 Q. I apologise. Let me just put the question to you. First of all,

21 did I quote you correctly? Did I quote exactly what you said yesterday?

22 A. Yes, you did.

23 Q. Very well.

24 A. It is possible. As I sit here today, I believe that the

25 Prosecution asked me a wrong question. The question was whether I saw

1 somebody at the Heliodrom or in the building where I was incarcerated.

2 Heliodrom, as somebody correctly said it, is a large space, a lot of

3 squares metres. I did not see anybody in the building where I was

4 incarcerated. And there were delegations passing by every day, and I saw

5 a lot of delegations passing through Heliodrom and I didn't know who they

6 were.

7 Q. I'll come to that. Mr. Lizde, let's take things a step at a time

8 let's take one answer after the other and we'll come to that let's go back

9 to the beginning of this discussion. You said that the sighting was so

10 fast you would not have recognised Praljak even if you had known him. Is

11 that correct?

12 A. I suppose so.

13 Q. It rises from that, and my question is logical, can you explain

14 how come the person who had told you that they had seen Praljak could

15 recognise Praljak in such a brief moment?

16 A. I suppose that his perception was better.

17 Q. Do you think that person must have had a better view or a better

18 situation from which he was observing?

19 A. I don't know.

20 Q. Further on you said that you don't remember when this was,

21 whether this was during your first stay at the Heliodrom or during your

22 second stay at the Heliodrom. I don't want to quote the transcript pages

23 again. You've told us that you were incarcerated at Heliodrom on two

24 occasions, the first time in July between -- in June between the 15th and

25 the 25th [as interpreted], and then in mid-July until the moment you were

1 released.

2 A. Yes. That's correct.

3 Q. Is that correct?

4 A. Yes, it is correct.

5 Q. You have mentioned bars again today, and you mentioned the same

6 bars yesterday. Let me try and jog your memory.

7 During your first incarceration at the Heliodrom you were

8 incarcerated in the prison building; is that correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. In that building were there bars on the windows?

11 A. Yes, there were.

12 Q. Very well. During your second visit or, rather, incarceration in

13 July and later on --

14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Excuse me, Mr. Kovacic. I note a small

15 inconsistency. Yesterday, the witness has stated that he stayed at

16 Heliodrom until the 30th of June. Now you have put to him until the 25th,

17 and he has said yes, but I don't know whether he wants to change the

18 statement or whether there was maybe a misunderstanding.

19 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I can't see that on my

20 screen, but it must be a mistake in the record. I mentioned the 30th, and

21 the witness confirmed that date.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 30th of June, yes.

23 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I have distinctly heard the 25th, and you read it

24 on line 16, but it's okay now. It's good that it's rectified. Maybe it

25 was a translation error.

1 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

2 Q. During the second period of time when you were incarcerated the

3 add Heliodrom and further on you were at the school building if I'm not

4 mistaken.

5 A. First I was in the hall and then in the school.

6 Q. Very well. Can you remember when you were in the hall and the

7 school there were no bars on the windows?

8 A. No, not the classical prison bars, but there were also bars.

9 There were windows on the third and the fourth floors and on the ground

10 floor the windows were improvised and we did not have a good view from the

11 windows. In the -- in the school I was on the first -- on the ground

12 floor and in the hall there were also classical window bars. And the

13 feeling was the same. I remember that very often I wished to be able to

14 breathe fresh air without the bars in the school and in the hall. I

15 didn't have a good view. This is what I meant when I said bars. They

16 were not classical bars, to be precise, but there were bars.

17 Q. Thank you very much for this lengthy explanation, but I don't want

18 you to go into such great detail. We don't have that much time. I need

19 to finish. Can we then conclude -- excuse me, allow me put the question.

20 Can we then conclude from what you've just told us that the detail about

21 the bars did not help you to jog your memory?

22 A. That's correct.

23 Q. Can I then conclude that you still do not remember not even

24 roughly when you saw that group?

25 A. I can't be certain of that.

1 Q. You have told us spontaneously that the group of people that we

2 are talking about was not passing between the buildings that were used as

3 prison.

4 A. The prison was a system of building -- across the road from the

5 school was the lead brigade of Tigers from Zagreb. The central -- the

6 prison was not encircled. The central building of the prison was some

7 hundred metres from the school and across the road from the school was

8 the -- where the Tigers from Zagreb were billeted and behind them were

9 the Thunders from Split, Osijek, and so on and so forth. There were also

10 buildings that were destroyed. They were not all in use.

11 Q. Don't go into great detail.

12 A. I have to explain. The prison was not like the prison in

13 Santiceva. It was different.

14 Q. Let's summarise. While you were there, you knew exactly which of

15 the buildings that you have just mentioned as having been located at the

16 Heliodrom, and there were many of them, and you knew exactly which

17 buildings were used as prison?

18 A. No, I didn't.

19 Q. You didn't?

20 A. No, I didn't. I only knew about the building where I was.

21 Q. You've -- and you've mentioned those.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. The group that you mentioned, did they come to any of these

24 buildings that were used as prison?

25 A. As far as I know they didn't. I'm sure that they didn't.

1 Q. Very well then. Could you please tell me whether you know the

2 name of the warden of the Heliodrom prison?

3 A. Stanko Bozic.

4 Q. And his deputy?

5 A. I don't know. I did not know before I saw this document. I

6 didn't know at the time who the warden was.

7 Q. When I tell you that his family name was also Praljak, would you

8 know anything about that?

9 A. No, I wouldn't. I don't know anything about that. It doesn't

10 ring any bells.

11 Q. Are you sure that the person who mentioned the name Praljak at the

12 time was not referring to the deputy prison warden Praljak?

13 A. I don't know, but there was an additional sentence, and the

14 sentence was to the effect, how come you don't know him? He's from Mostar

15 as well. I did not know who the deputy warden was I didn't even know who

16 the warden was until I saw the document which said that I was being

17 released from prison and the document was signed by Mr. Stanko Bozic. I

18 don't know that there were many comments about Praljak as being the deputy

19 prison warden. I really don't know.

20 Q. Just one more question about this, Witness. The person who has

21 mentioned Praljak's name as the person being in that group did not provide

22 any description of that Praljak, didn't mention his position, description,

23 or any such thing?

24 A. But since this was a high-ranking delegation and people who were

25 passing by through that complex that there were a lot of soldiers around

1 them, I don't think one could speak about the prison warden or the deputy

2 prison warden being escorted by so many soldiers. We did not comment upon

3 that at all.

4 Q. Just maybe one more question and we will come to the end of this

5 topic. You have provided a total of three official statements after the

6 war. First between the 10 and 12 April, and then in June 2002 [Realtime

7 transcript read in error "1992"] to the investigator of The Hague

8 Tribunal; is that correct?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And then you provided another additional statement on the 16th of

11 January, 2004, again to the investigators of the Prosecutor's office; is

12 that correct?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. In addition to that -- actually, the first statement that you

15 provided was to the military police of the 4th Corps of the BiH army on

16 the 7th of March 1994; is that correct?

17 A. Yes, it is.

18 Q. Will we agree then that nowhere in these statements except in the

19 first one given in 2002, did you mention the story about having seen

20 Praljak at the Heliodrom?

21 A. What was the question? What am I supposed to agree with?

22 Q. That only in the first statement dated 2002 you mentioned that

23 fact.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Will we agree that your memory was better in 1994 when you

1 provided the first statement?

2 A. Not necessarily so.

3 Q. Not necessarily so. But if I remind you that in the 2004

4 statement on page 24 of the Croatian text.

5 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] And for the Judges, on page 15 in

6 the English version.

7 Q. You stated that the event when you saw that delegation took place

8 in the second part of June 1993. Was your memory so much better in 2002

9 that it is today?

10 A. I don't know, but I -- I don't know. I can't be sure even now

11 when this happened.

12 Q. Is it then true that you still adhere by the fact that you still

13 don't know, despite the fact that you've mentioned a certain period of

14 time in one of your statements?

15 A. That's correct.

16 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.

17 I don't have any further questions.

18 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, there are some things in the

19 transcript that are not correct and it's probably a result of this big

20 speed that you have. If you look on page 87, you have -- 86, line 19.

21 Mr. Kovacic asks about the statements, and then you are quoted as saying:

22 "First between 10 and 12 April and then in June 1992." You must have

23 meant or even said 2002.

24 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] You're right, Your Honour. I did

25 say 2002, because I was looking at the date on the statement. This is the

1 statement that was taken over the two days of April and two days of June

2 in 2002, the same one that you have in front of you.

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I add another

4 sentence, please?

5 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I would first make another correction. On page

6 87, line 4 and 5, a statement provided to the military police of the 4th

7 Corps of the BiH army on the 7th of March, 1994? Is that -- is that

8 correct? Is it a statement to the -- to the 4th Corps of the BiH?

9 Because I have here the statement of the 3rd Military Police Battalion of

10 the HVO on 12 June 1993. But you did not want to refer to that one, I

11 think. That would be the first statement.

12 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, according to what I

13 have in my file, the date is 7 March 1994, and the -- in the heading you

14 can see the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the 4th Corps, the battalion of

15 the military police, which means that the statement was provided to the

16 military police of the 4th Corps. And this is a document that I was

17 provided by the Prosecution, and I believe that you must have it because

18 we were provided with the same documents from the Prosecution.

19 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I do have it, Mr. Kovacic, but I have an earlier

20 one. So the first one perhaps would have been an earlier one. But if

21 you did not want to refer to it, you don't want to refer to it. That's

22 okay.

23 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] No. This was enough to me. This is

24 one of the statements that was given very soon after the events when one

25 might expect from the witness to still remember the events very well.

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I say one

2 sentence? I would like to say the following to Mr. Praljak: In my office

3 on my radio at the moment there is a photo of a tank shell hitting the Old

4 Bridge in 1992, which had come from the positions in Podvelezje. This is

5 something that I'd forgotten to say, but I believe I have to say it.

6 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] I would like to object. Yes, this

7 is the --

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a shell that came from

9 Podvelezje in 1992. I have this photo. It sits in my office and it shows

10 how the Old Bridge was damaged on that occasion.

11 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, sir.

12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] As I was saying, it's half past

13 5.00. We'll have a 20-minute break now. We'll resume with Ms. Alaburic

14 and Ms. Tomic, and theoretically we should be able to complete the

15 testimony of the witness today.

16 --- Recess taken at 5.32 p.m.

17 --- On resuming at 5.54 p.m.

18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic, you have the

19 floor.

20 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, colleagues.

21 Cross-examination by Ms. Alaburic:

22 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Lizde, good afternoon. Tell us to start off,

23 Mr. Lizde, when radio Bosnia-Herzegovina, the war station -- war radio

24 station in Mostar, when was it established?

25 A. On the 12th of September, 1992, if I remember directly. In 1992,

1 yes.

2 Q. Before the beginning of broadcasts, were consultations held with

3 other beneficiaries of radio frequencies and whether an agreement was

4 reached of any kind with respect to frequencies, the frequencies you'd be

5 broadcasting on?

6 A. I don't know that.

7 Q. If I understood it correctly, when the radio station was

8 established you were the assistant commander of the 4th Corps of the BH

9 army for information and propaganda; is that right?

10 A. Yes, that's right.

11 Q. I'm now going to ask you a few questions which have to do with

12 your work as assistant commander of the 4th Corps for information and

13 propaganda, and to start off with I'd like to ask you to look at the set

14 of documents you received. There are only two documents. We can look at

15 them together, and I'll be drawing your attention to what will be the

16 important points as far as my questions are concerned.

17 The first document is 4D 00036, and it is a report by Arif

18 Pasalic, dated the 2nd of May, 1993, and I'd like to ask you to look at

19 the bottom of the first page and focus on point 3, and we can look at the

20 second line together where it states: "Our people with -- we have carried

21 out linkage with our people in the HVO."

22 And then on the next page, line 5 from the top it says: "The

23 people from the HVO of Capljina have the task of taking control of the

24 village of Popovcici and the bridge at Capljina with the aim of preventing

25 forces being brought in from Metkovic." And then I'm going to skip over

1 one bullet point and go on to the next, and it says: "Take control of the

2 town of Stolac with our people in the HVO."

3 Tell me now, please, Mr. Lizde, do you have any information

4 whatsoever about the contents of this report by your immediate superior?

5 A. I've never seen this before.

6 Q. All right. Now let's take a look at the next document. But I'd

7 like to give an additional explanation. I understand that you're seeing

8 this document for the first time today, but I'm interested in the contents

9 of the document. So did you ever hear beforehand about certain activities

10 vis-a-vis the Muslims, the HVO soldiers and the fact that shed certain

11 assignments and tasks in order to further the aims of the BH army?

12 A. I've never heard about this. We didn't discuss it, and I assume

13 the commander did this if he did so. But anyway, this is the first time I

14 see this, what you're asking me about.

15 Q. Now, do you know somebody called Bajro Pizovic?

16 A. The name seems familiar, yes.

17 Q. Could you tell me who that was?

18 A. I think he was the commander of the brigade from Stolac, the

19 Bregava Brigade. That's right, the 42nd Mountain Brigade.

20 Q. Now, let's take a look at document 4D 00035. It is an order from

21 Mr. Bajro Pizovic. And would you take a look at page 2 in our own

22 language. It's towards the middle of the page, the large passage, and it

23 states as follows: "The organ for moral guidance, the IPD and IVP, will

24 elaborate a plan for informing the people of the position of the brigades

25 in Mostar, Capljina, and Stolac, and Muslim soldiers located in HVO units

1 of the municipalities mentioned."

2 And then it goes on to speak about the elaboration of that plan,

3 and we can see that that is something that the organ for moral guidance,

4 information, and propaganda will deal with this. That is to say, the

5 organ that you were the head of at the level of the corps?

6 A. No, that's a mistake. There was the IPD of the 4th Corps and the

7 IPS of the 4th Corps, the information and propaganda activities, IPD, and

8 information and propaganda service, the IPS, which I was the head of.

9 Q. All right. Now, tell us what the relationship was between the IPD

10 and the IPS.

11 A. I don't understand your question.

12 Q. Was there a commander for the IPD?

13 A. Yes, there was a commander of the IPD of the 4th Corps.

14 Q. And what was the distribution of tasks between you as the

15 commander for IPS and the assistant commander of the 4th Corps for IPD?

16 What did one man do? What did the other man do?

17 A. I don't know what he did. I know what I did. We were together

18 for the briefing session that our commander organised every morning. We

19 didn't do the same kind of job. I did journalist -- a journalist's job.

20 I wrote reports and articles for the daily, and IPD dealt with matters

21 linked to the combatants, the wounded, the care and attention of the

22 wounded, and so on. So I can't really say what the IPD did and the IPS

23 did. I know what I did. The assistant commander for IPD was Asim Peco

24 of the 4th Corps.

25 Q. Mr. Asim Peco, at those morning briefings, did he ever speak about

1 the -- mention these plans, the plans we've seen set out in the order?

2 A. No, never. I never heard about that, and this is the first time

3 that I see this document.

4 Q. All right. Then we can move on to another topic.

5 JUDGE PRANDLER: Please slow down.

6 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] I will apologise. I'll speak

7 slower.

8 Q. Let's move on to the next topic. I am interested in some very --

9 I have some very brief questions related to Mostar and the conflict on the

10 9th of May 1993. Tell us, please, before that conflict in Mostar, was

11 there separation line between the BH army and the HVO?

12 A. No, there wasn't a separation line.

13 Q. Tell us, was there an area which was under the control of the BH

14 army up until the 9th of May, 1993?

15 A. I don't know what you mean by that. The BH army --

16 Q. Well, who controlled the edge of the right bank of the Neretva

17 River in Mostar?

18 A. Well, if I said there was no separation line, then nobody could

19 have controlled anything. I controlled the area I was in, where I was. I

20 was at Mostarka where I live. I was a member of the BH army until the 9th

21 of May. You can only speak about who controlled what. All you can speak

22 about is where the military formations were.

23 Q. Tell me, along that very edge of the right bank in Mostar, was

24 there any HVO unit? Donja Mahala, for example, that area?

25 A. As far as I know, no, there wasn't.

1 Q. Can you tell us on the right bank of the Neretva, that area, which

2 area would you say was without the -- without HVO units? So could you

3 tell us what areas that were -- that was?

4 A. You mean where there were no HVO units?

5 Q. Yes, where there were no HVO units but where there were BH army

6 units.

7 A. Well, the BH army units were in Konak, in the army hall or centre,

8 at Majdan. The HVO was in North Camp. That's on the left bank.

9 Q. I'm just asking you about the centre of Mostar.

10 A. Well, as far as I know, the BH army up until the 16th of April,

11 there was a brigade of the BH army --

12 JUDGE PRANDLER: Please wait for a moment. Mr. Lizde, we have

13 already asked you for many times, please be so kind as to wait until

14 Ms. Alaburic will finish her question and when you are sure that it has

15 also been translated, then kindly answer to that question. Thank you.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise. I do apologise.

17 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. Let's be more specific, otherwise we'll take up too much time. In

19 your testimony so far you mentioned Santiceva Street as being a street on

20 one side of which you had the BH army and on the other side the HVO.

21 Could you tell it us when Santiceva Street became the separation line

22 between the two armies?

23 A. Well, I can't say but I assume it was on the 9th of May. Now,

24 from the 9th of May onwards, when there was intensive fighting the line

25 moved a hundred metres one way a hundred metres another way. But I assume

1 it was thereabouts after the 9th of May.

2 Q. Mr. Lizde, it's very important for us to define very precisely

3 whether you assume something, whether you're taking a guess, or whether

4 you know for sure?

5 A. Well, I don't know for sure I was already incarcerated at that

6 time.

7 Q. All right. Do you have any knowledge to the effect that on the

8 9th of May or after that period the separation lines were moved at all

9 between the BH army and the HVO?

10 A. I don't know, I can't say.

11 Q. All right. Fine. Now, in your statement of the BH army on the

12 7th of March, 1994, which was mentioned today, you said that the HVO --

13 the conflict between the HVO and the BH army on the 9th of May found you

14 in your flat, and then you define the conflict as an attack by the HVO

15 answer the 4th Corps command and the command of the 41st Motorised

16 Brigade.

17 Would you characterise and describe that conflict the same way

18 today as you said in your statement?

19 A. Yes. I'm sorry, I can't recount now, but I do know and I did have

20 in my possession a letter which over radio Herceg-Bosna, or, as it was

21 called, the radio of the Croatian Defence Council, was read out by

22 colleague Zlata Brbor in which that's precisely what it said. Will you

23 allow me to finish?

24 Q. Mr. Lizde, it's fine that you said you stand by what you said.

25 It's not important for me, but we don't have too much time. If we

1 continue with your testimony tomorrow, then we'll have more time and we

2 can go on with the questioning, but another thing you said when giving

3 your statement to the Tribunal, dated back to 2002, you said that the

4 shooting and shelling in Mostar lasted until the 13th of May, 1993. Would

5 you say that today?

6 A. Shooting at the command, at the headquarters?

7 Q. I'm quoting: "Shelling and shooting lasted until the 13th of May,

8 1993."

9 To your knowledge, did the intensive conflict last for several

10 days and then there was a lull?

11 A. Well, as far as I was concerned, yes, because that's when I was

12 moved from Mostar.

13 Q. All right. Fine. Now, if you still have the Prosecution

14 documents, you can look at them. If not, may we have a Prosecution

15 document on e-court. P 08894 is the number, and it is a confirmation from

16 the International Red Cross, Lizde -- Mr. Lizde, that you gave to this

17 Court from which we can see the certificate which shows that you were

18 registered on the 11th of June, 1993, and that the first visit later on

19 was on the 11th of October, 1993.

20 Is that how it was as it says in this certificate?

21 A. Yes, that's how it was.

22 Q. Does that mean that when in mid-July 1993 you arrived that in fact

23 not a single representative of the International Red Cross saw you

24 throughout August, September, up until this date, the 11th of October,

25 1993.

1 A. They did come but they didn't register us. They would bring

2 messages from the Red Cross. I saw them.

3 Q. All right, Mr. Lizde. Now, if you compare your sojourn, if I can

4 use that word, your stay at Heliodrom, I apologise for the word but it

5 seems appropriate, in June and then in mid-July onwards, could you tell me

6 whether in June all those who were incarcerated there, were they put up in

7 the prison building itself, the central prison building?

8 A. I don't know whether there were people in other facilities. I

9 just know the people who were brought in from Ljubuski, including myself,

10 that we were put up in the central prison building.

11 Q. Then let me ask you, do you have any knowledge at that time, that

12 is to say in June, in some other building of Heliodrom there were other

13 people incarcerated?

14 A. No, except that 30th of June, when I was taken to Dretelj, I saw

15 many people taken to Heliodrom.

16 Q. That's what I'm asking you. I'm asking you that precisely because

17 on the 30th of June and then the 1st of July that that is a crucial period

18 in the turning point in the conflict between the BH army and the HVO, but

19 as you were incarcerated I'm not going to ask you about that. Now if you

20 try to compare the arrival of the many delegations to Heliodrom, would you

21 agree with me when I say that in June 1993 that many delegations did come

22 but that the situation was radically different from what it was in July or

23 after July to the autumn or late summer?

24 A. Well, I don't know how to confirm this or not. I don't know why

25 delegations would have come before and why afterwards.

1 Q. Well, do you just remember them coming?

2 A. I don't remember that there could have been any difference,

3 absolutely not.

4 Q. All right. I'll just remind you because I see that my time is

5 already up. In your statement to the investigators of this Tribunal in

6 2002, in relation to the alleged arrival of General Praljak, my client

7 General Petkovic to Heliodrom, you said the following: "During my second

8 stay at Heliodrom I did not see either Praljak or Petkovic," and that was

9 recorded on page 36 of the B/C/S version, on page 22 of the English

10 version.

11 Do you allow for the possibility, Mr. Lizde, that you told the

12 investigators of The Hague Tribunal the truth?

13 A. I told them the truth, but I am not quite sure. I can't confirm

14 today whether that was before or after. I really can't say. That's what

15 I'm thinking now.

16 Q. I'm sorry we don't have any more time, but thank you for answering

17 my questions.

18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Tomic.

19 Cross-examination by Ms. Tomasegovic Tomic:

20 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, sir.

21 A. Good afternoon.

22 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please come closer to the

23 microphone.

24 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. I'm going to give you a practical advice --

1 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please adjust her microphone.

2 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]

3 Q. Good afternoon, sir. In order to avoid problems with the

4 interpretation, let me give you a piece of practical advice. In front

5 you, you have a screen with the transcript, and when you see that --

6 A. There is a mistake.

7 Q. You can adjust it.

8 A. Now I have it.

9 Q. Follow the monitor and when you see that my question has been

10 entered, then you can start giving your answer.

11 A. You don't have to put it in writing, do you?

12 Q. No, I don't.

13 A. You're in a rush, aren't you?

14 Q. No, I'm not, but the Trial Chamber is. In your statement but

15 before that I'm going to try and ask you yes and no questions, so I expect

16 from you to provide answers to the effect of yes or no or I don't

17 remember.

18 In your statement to The Hague Tribunal, dated 2002, you have

19 stated that you went to Prozor on the 20th of October, 1992, after the end

20 of the conflict and Prozor was already under the control of the HVO. On

21 your direct yesterday, you told us that this was on the 21st of October,

22 1992. I really don't care at the moment whether this was on the 20th or

23 the 21st. I'm just going to ask you if you remember what you stated

24 yesterday and that this is what it was recorded.

25 A. Yes, I do.

1 Q. Then you told us that on the following day you wanted to broadcast

2 something about what you had seen in Prozor. The following day would have

3 been either the 21st or the 22nd of October. Would that be correct?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. On the day when you wanted to broadcast your report from Prozor,

6 Zeljko Dzidic came to your studio and handed you the decision on the ban

7 on you work; is that correct?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. The reason mentioned in the decision was to further the work of

10 your radio interfered with military frequencies because you used the same

11 frequencies. This is what you've told us?

12 A. Yes, something to that effect.

13 Q. Can we now call document P 00489? Can we have that on e-court,

14 please?

15 This is the decision on the ban of the work of Radio Sarajevo,

16 Radio Mostar. This decision was issued on the 21st of October, 1992. Can

17 you take a glance at this decision and see whether this was the decision

18 that had been brought to you by Zeljko Dzidic?

19 A. No. No chance. This is not the same decision.

20 Q. It is not? Where is the difference?

21 A. I read that decision out on air. It took me about 15 seconds to

22 read it. You see how fast I speak. It was a very short decision, and it

23 could not have referred to Radio Sarajevo. I've never seen this decision

24 before and this is certainly not the decision that I had in my hands on

25 that day. I could not have read this out in 15 seconds. No way.

1 Q. If you were only reading items 1 or 2, you could?

2 A. No. I read everything that was on the paper that Mr. Dzidic had

3 brought to me.

4 Q. Could you please read item 1 of the decision and tell us whether

5 this was what was told to you on that day. I don't want to go through the

6 entire decision?

7 A. I read everything that Mr. Dzidic had brought to me. If he had

8 brought this to me, I probably would have been reading it for 20 minutes.

9 But it is ridiculous. It says here Radio Sarajevo, but we were not Radio

10 Sarajevo. Our official title was the Radio Bosnia-Herzegovina, the War

11 Studio of Mostar. I really don't know who this decision is about. We

12 were not a station at all. This was not our official title.

13 Q. But you were a war studio, weren't you?

14 A. Yes, we were the war studio of Bosnia-Herzegovina. But here I

15 don't see anywhere reference to any war studio. It says Radio Sarajevo.

16 Q. We've already heard that you had problems with the titles of your

17 institution. Let's not discuss that. But in any case, the date is 21

18 October, and the contents go to the interference of the frequencies. This

19 is what I asked you. And according to you, on the 21st of October, or the

20 22nd of October at the latest, Zeljko Dzidic came to your office. This is

21 what I wanted to know, the chronology of the events.

22 A. Yes, you're right.

23 Q. Sometime in November 1992, the war studio of Mostar was reopened;

24 is that correct?

25 A. Yes. It was a month or so later.

1 Q. Yesterday you told us that the war studio was reopened after the

2 negotiations at the highest level, the level higher than you yourself.

3 You don't know how all this transpired but an agreement was reached at

4 high level that you had nothing to do that. Do you remember that? Do you

5 remember that this was the case?

6 A. Yes, it was.

7 Q. You've also told us that you assumed and you could concluded that

8 the reason for the closing down of the war studio of Mostar was the HVO

9 desire to prevent you from broadcasting your report in Prozor; is that

10 correct?

11 A. Yes, that was one of the reasons. This was just the last straw

12 confirming their desire. They didn't want us to work, in other words.

13 Q. You said that the decision on the closing down of the studio was

14 handed to you on the 20th or the 21st of October, 1992, and the decision

15 that you have in front of you is not that decision, is it?

16 A. No, absolutely not.

17 Q. But the date is also the 21st of October, 1992, and today we've

18 heard from my colleague Nozica, who cross-examined you before me, and

19 we've also heard it before from other witnesses in these proceedings, and

20 we also saw that in various documents that have been shown in these

21 proceedings that the conflict in Prozor started on the 23rd of October,

22 1993. And this is also what is stated in the indictment that we've heard

23 today. Say if you don't know?

24 A. I don't know what I'm supposed to say.

25 Q. You don't have to say anything.

1 A. You didn't ask me anything. You just stated some facts.

2 Q. In your statement, your written statement and on your direct, you

3 said that Zeljko Dzidic came to your studio armed?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Your studio was in the same building, the building of Vranica,

6 where the command of the 4th Corps was.

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And you were surprised to see that Zeljko Dzidic could have passed

9 through the control the BH army armed. At one point you even thought that

10 he probably killed everybody. This is what it -- you stated?

11 A. Yes, that's -- that's true.

12 Q. We know, although you didn't say, that Zeljko Dzidic did not kill

13 anybody, which means that he was let through by the BiH army soldiers.

14 A. Yes, he was let through. I know it now, but I told the

15 investigators what I was thinking at the time. He went through all the

16 controls. Nobody checked him.

17 Q. Later on at the negotiations at a higher level that you didn't

18 know much about, it was agreed that the war studio of Mostar would be

19 reopened. In light of the situation with the dates concerning Prozor,

20 would you allow that the decision on the closing down was also issued

21 with -- without any protestations by the BH army?

22 A. Of course that was the case. Nobody ever consulted the army. We

23 could have switched on everything, everything that had been closed down.

24 We could have done that.

25 Q. Just one more thing very briefly. You've told us that Zeljko

1 Dzidic, together with the decision on the ban of your work, also provided

2 you with the decision on the curfew.

3 A. No, it wasn't Zeljko Dzidic. We had that information in the

4 course of the day.

5 Q. On the same day?

6 A. Yes, but in the morning, because we broadcast that on the radio.

7 On that same day we broadcast the information that the curfew was at

8 8.00.

9 Q. And that was on the 20th or the 21st?

10 A. It was on the same day when Zeljko Dzidic brought his decision.

11 If you don't care about the dates.

12 Q. Yes I do. Can you please look at the same document, P 00489. Can

13 we scroll up to the bottom of the page. Here you see the decision on the

14 can your due bearing the same date underneath the decision on the ban of

15 your work. Unfortunately, I am being told that there is no translation

16 into English. I did not think that I would have to translate into

17 English, but let me just ask you whether this is the same decision

18 providing for the curfew between 8.00 and 6.00 in the morning.

19 A. Please, the information that the curfew was in place was not

20 brought to me by Zeljko Dzidic. We had already aired it in the morning.

21 I don't know how we received that information, but when I read the

22 decision that was brought to me by Zeljko Dzidic, I informed the

23 listeners, my listeners whom my programme meant something, that the curfew

24 was to start at 1800 hours and that I would continue my broadcast very

25 soon. I took the opportunity to repeat the information that I had already

1 aired that morning.

2 Q. We already heard that. What I'm interested in is whether the

3 curfew was established as something that would be in place between 1800

4 hours and 6.00 in the morning?

5 A. Yes, that's correct. Previously it started at 2000 hours.

6 Q. Okay. This is what I was interested. I would like to move on to

7 the 7th of May, 1993.

8 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel and witness please slow down.

9 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]

10 Q. Now, you were captured on the 7th of May, 1993. You said you were

11 held for several hours, detained for several hours, and that you were

12 supposed to be exchanged for other prisoners. And if I understood you

13 correctly, the BH army -- prisoners which the BH army held in the Vranica

14 building which is close to the university. Do you remember telling us

15 that?

16 A. That's not what I said.

17 Q. What did you say?

18 A. That we were supposed to be exchanged for prisoners that had been

19 captured by the BH army somewhere.

20 Q. Then you said that you -- or, rather, I was in Mostar, and I

21 talked to some contemporaries of the events in 1992 and 1993, and they

22 told me that during that time in Mostar it was customary for one side to

23 take some people prisoners, then the other side would hear about it, and

24 then they would capture the same number of people in order to secure an

25 exchange, and that in fact on both sides it was these operations on the

1 both sides to have the same number of prisoners, and it was at their own

2 initiative, and that's how I understood your statement, that you happened

3 to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. You remember saying that. So

4 am I right? Is that what you remember happening during that period of

5 time?

6 A. Well, I don't think you're right, but I did say I was in the wrong

7 place at the wrong time, but I was taken to the police building, the

8 mechanical engineering faculty, and the military police had its -- or,

9 rather, the young guy who took me off was from the anti-terrorist group,

10 the so-called ATG. So they weren't people on the street. It was the

11 police. They had their uniforms, their belts. They lined us up.

12 Mr. Pusic came. Then they lined us up, took us out, and so on. So it

13 wasn't the way that you said, that it was customary, the way things were

14 done in Mostar.

15 Q. Yes, you've told us all that.

16 A. Well, I don't know who captured who.

17 Q. Well, it seemed to me that it lasted just for a few hours and it

18 wasn't anything serious, that one side would capture people and the other

19 side would do the same. But when you reached Ljubuski, you said in your

20 statement to The Hague investigators, the 2002 statement, that you were

21 greet -- met there by soldiers in black uniforms.

22 A. Correct.

23 Q. Tell me, please, did you notice any insignia on them?

24 A. I can't remember.

25 Q. In Ljubuski, you were transported by a van belonging to the

1 civilian police; is that correct?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. While you were in Ljubuski you were taken to the MUP building for

4 interrogation. That's also what you say in your statement.

5 A. The MUP building is the building they brought us to. That's the

6 MUP building. The present MUP building and -- well, it was the prison in

7 the MUP building. The whole compound belonged to the Ministry of the

8 Interior or the MUP.

9 Q. You told us in your statement that the people who interrogated you

10 could not see that you had been beaten, because you didn't have any

11 bruises on your head, and you didn't complain of having been beaten either

12 because you didn't see any sense in doing that because you were afraid.

13 Is that true?

14 A. Yes. One of the gentlemen who beat me fractured my ribs.

15 Q. Yes, I sympathise with you. You've already told us that. You

16 told us yesterday that in Ljubuski you didn't see any representatives of

17 the Red Cross; is that correct?

18 A. Correct.

19 Q. Tell us, please, do you know that the International Red Cross

20 Committee, whether they would have been given permission to visit

21 Ljubuski?

22 A. What do you say.

23 Q. What the International Red Cross received permission to visit

24 Ljubuski.

25 A. How would I know that? I don't know.

1 Q. Tell me you were in Ljubuski from the 13th of May until the 30th

2 of May, 1993?

3 A. Yes. I didn't know what the date was at Ljubuski or what day it

4 was, so how could I know whether the Red Cross was given permission to

5 come? All I knew was when it was daytime and when it was night-time.

6 Can you understand that? I wouldn't know whether anybody had permission

7 or permits for anything. I didn't know what the day was, what the date

8 was.

9 Q. I asked you that the way in which your statement was compiled and

10 during your testimony here I gained the impression that the International

11 Red Cross wasn't allowed to visit you, wasn't given permission.

12 A. Well I assume they weren't because they didn't come but I don't

13 know the background to it I don't know why they didn't come. I thought

14 naively that I would be back home the very next day.

15 THE INTERPRETER: Would the speakers kindly slow down. Thank

16 you.

17 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I apologise to the

18 interpreters once again, but I'm trying to strike a balance. I asked the

19 witness to wait for the end of the questioning. I don't have enough time,

20 and I'll try and speak more slowly.

21 Q. May we have on e-court document 1001, 5D 01001. It's dated the

22 22nd of May, 1993. That's the document. 5D 01001.

23 A. Yes, I see that.

24 Q. I was just checking the transcript. I don't want to read through

25 the whole document, but we can see that it is a permit or permission

1 granted to the International Red Cross to visit prisons, and under point 2

2 it says "Ljubuski," and the date is the 22nd of May, that is to say the

3 period when you yourself were in Ljubuski.

4 From this I conclude that your assumption is incorrect, that the

5 Red Cross didn't visit you because it didn't have permission to do so.

6 A. It didn't visit us, but whether they had permission or not, I

7 don't know. I didn't see them.

8 Q. But you can see this permit, this approval.

9 A. Yes, all those many years later.

10 Q. And had you knew that -- known that then, would you have been of

11 the same opinion and told us the same thing?

12 A. Well, probably not.

13 Q. I'd just like to ask you something that the Prosecutor didn't ask

14 you about yesterday but which I read in your statement, where on page 17

15 of the English version -- it is page 11 of the English version, actually,

16 paragraph 4. You stated that members of the military police in Ljubuski

17 on several occasions in fact saved your life because they prevented the

18 soldiers who were passing by the prison and who were shooting and going --

19 running amok and throwing hand grenades and wishing to attack the

20 prisoners into the prison and an achieve their end by attacking the

21 prisoners; is that true?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. And that would conclude my questions about Ljubuski.

24 On e-court, the next document, 5D 02036. And it is a list of

25 members of the brigade platoon of the military police of Ljubuski. Could

1 you just glance through the list and tell us whether any of the names are

2 familiar, or I'll read out the names of people whom I think you mentioned

3 in your statement. 5D 02036 is the document number?

4 A. I can see the date is 1993.

5 Q. I don't think you're looking at the right document. 5D 02036 is

6 the document, and the date at the top is --

7 A. Yes, I've found it. Ante Prlic. Yes, I know that.

8 Q. That's enough. Is that the Ante Prlic that you talked to us

9 about?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Yesterday in your statement -- or in your testimony and in your

12 written statement, you mentioned the name Goran Cipra, and from your

13 statement I gathered that on the 30th of June you didn't know which unit

14 Goran Cipra belonged to and what his post or position was, nor did he --

15 nor did you know what function he performed. You placed him in a context

16 when you were released and went back to the mechanical engineering

17 faculty?

18 A. Yes, he was in uniform and I didn't know what -- where he

19 belonged, but I saw he was the main person.

20 Q. Yes, I know that you saw that but that you didn't know which unit

21 he belonged to.

22 A. No, all I know is that he was wearing a uniform.

23 Q. I'd like now to touch upon the subject of Heliodrom. From your

24 written statement, as well as from your testimony in court so far, it

25 would emerge that the criminal -- crime department of the military police

1 interrogated you at Heliodrom and that the interrogation was conducted by

2 Zvonimir Vidovic?

3 A. Yes, nicknamed Ijeza [phoen].

4 Q. And in your written statement you said that Zvonimir Vidovic was

5 the only honest person and the only person to whom you gave a written

6 statement; is that correct?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Today Mr. Praljak read out part of your statement, the statement

9 that you gave to Mr. Vidovic. It is dated the 12th of June, 1993. I'm

10 saying that to help the Judges find their way. In the English version it

11 is on page 2, towards the middle of the page, and it's also on page 2 in

12 the Croatian version. I don't know whether you have a copy of that

13 statement.

14 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Could the usher help us

15 out? Could the usher come up and collect the document from us.

16 Q. I think that when Mr. Praljak read out the statement you gained

17 the wrong impression because he read out wrongly or, rather, presented it

18 wrongly, and this statement is no different from what you've told us over

19 the past two days. So could you just glance through it, because I see no

20 points that can be contested and nothing that goes against what you've

21 said orally.

22 A. I saw this statement for the first time when the Prosecutor showed

23 it to me, and I said that Vidovic was the only honest person. First of

24 all, during the interrogation he did not mistreat me. That's the first

25 point. And secondly, the statement that I signed was this one. And

1 everything else that's written here did not correspond to what I said at

2 the time. I spoke from that angle, that that was honest. All the other

3 ones who interrogated me insulted me, mistreated me, except Mr. Vidovic.

4 And I don't know who the other man with him was. I can see that now. It

5 says here the recording clerk. Some man called Ramljak.

6 Q. You're a journalist. You can read quickly. So read on. Read the

7 statement to yourself and tell me which part does not correspond to the

8 testimony you gave us here over the past two days?

9 A. I can't see anything. Do you want me to read it now.

10 Q. Yes you can read it out. I know you're a journalist so you can

11 read through it quickly.

12 A. But you keep saying that I have to go slowly.

13 Q. Well, read it to yourself, and then you can just tell me what does

14 not correspond to the truth.

15 A. Do you want me to underline anything?

16 Q. What is wrong?

17 A. Line 1, Dzemo Hamzic.

18 Q. What about Dzemal Hamzic?

19 A. Very often -- this sentence was censored.

20 Q. What sentence?

21 A. It says that I am aware of two types of censorships, one by the

22 author and the other by the editor.

23 Q. What was added?

24 A. What was added was that the journalists were dissatisfied with his

25 interventions.

1 Q. So this is -- this refers to Dzemal Hamzic. Go on. Go on

2 reading.

3 A. On page 2 up to the paragraph I claim for myself that I was not

4 Arif's man. This does not correspond to the truth, and when it says, "I

5 don't know the sources of financing of the radio," up to that sentence.

6 THE INTERPRETER: May it be noted that the interpreters do not

7 have the document.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've not seen this before; I've not

9 said it.

10 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. Did you say anything about your work in the IPS, because you've

12 lost me.

13 A. Yes. I claim for myself I'm not Arif's man," this is true all the

14 way up to the sentence, "I don't know the sources of financing of the

15 radio."

16 Q. And what about the -- the people who founded the war studio?

17 A. Yes, that's true. All the way up to where I say that I wasn't

18 Arif's man, up to Omer Batric in conclusion.

19 Q. But in my view the -- generally speaking the statement corresponds

20 to what you said.

21 A. No, it doesn't, because there are lots of things that are

22 prejudicial. If we were to take out some 20 sentences, that would be

23 that, but I did not read it when Jozo brought it to me.

24 Q. But now you've not read 20 sentences but three sentences?

25 A. But then you didn't understand me. In the second part the entire

1 second part, the top part up to the, "I claim for myself that I'm not

2 Arif's man," up to Omer Batric in the end does not correspond to what I

3 was talking about, Mr. Zvono Vidovic. Mr. Vidovic spoke about many things

4 with me.

5 Q. Let me interrupt you, sir. I'm going to ask you just one more

6 question about the part that -- for which you say that it is not correct.

7 Are you saying that it is not correct that you stated that there was no

8 direct censorships and ordering what had to be brought?

9 A. That's right I did not say that.

10 Q. You said that there was no censorship?

11 A. I said there was no censorship.

12 Q. This is what it says here.

13 A. Yes, within the context. But when you read everything, then it --

14 nobody censored me, but Arif could not come and tell me what could be

15 [indiscernible] this is not what it says here.

16 Q. It cost?

17 A. It does not.

18 Q. You are reading incorrectly.

19 A. Arif Pasalic had the courage to come to the radio every day. This

20 is not true. This is not correct. This was not the case. I never stated

21 that. Whatever Mr. -- Arif could do at the radio he did through me, so

22 there was no need for him to come.

23 Q. I don't doubt it for a second, sir. Let's move on to Dretelj?

24 A. I didn't understand what you wanted from me.

25 Q. It doesn't matter.

1 A. It does to me.

2 Q. It doesn't matter to me. I only have 10 minutes I have -- I want

3 to finish today.

4 Can you tell me another thing about your stay at the Heliodrom.

5 If I understood you well, during the first stage while you were

6 accommodated in the prison building you were not taken for labour. It was

7 only from the school that you were taken for labour; is that correct?

8 A. Yes, it is.

9 Q. And now let me move on to another topic which is Dretelj.

10 Yesterday, you told us that the military police took you from Heliodrom to

11 Dretelj and that in every bus there were two armed policemen; is that

12 correct?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. In your statement to the investigators provided in 2003 you

15 provided this description: First you were taken in a minivan from the

16 prison to the Blaz Kraljevic monument. There you were awaited by three or

17 four buses and a lot of HVO soldiers. Then you were loaded onto the buses

18 and two or three soldiers in camouflage uniforms got on the buses together

19 with you. Is that correct? Did you meant that?

20 A. I remember that, but the difference between a policeman and a

21 soldier is something that remains in dispute.

22 Q. This is exactly what I wanted to ask you. Were those military

23 policemen or regular soldiers?

24 A. Can I explain?

25 Q. No. I'm asking you a very simple question.

1 A. You can't do this to me. You can't do this.

2 JUDGE PRANDLER: [Microphone not activated]

3 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I'm kindly asking the

4 witness to answer yes or no. My question is simple: Is he sure that

5 those were military policemen or that those are regular soldiers. If he

6 doesn't know the difference, he can say that. I don't want him to

7 speculate.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were both military policemen

9 and some soldiers. The military policemen took us out from the

10 Heliodrom. A military policeman with a white belt came and read out my --

11 our names, took -- they put us on the minivan and they took us to the

12 monument of -- to Blaz Kraljevic. Other people were waiting for us. They

13 may have been soldiers that accompanied us to Dretelj, or maybe I wasn't

14 even in Dretelj, according to you.

15 Q. I'm not saying that you were not in Dretelj, and I find it

16 terrible And I find it terrible what happened to you.

17 Then we can conclude that those who got on the big buses by the

18 Blaz Kraljevic monument with you, you can't us whether they were military

19 policemen or whether they were soldiers?

20 A. Since the military policemen accompanied us from the building of

21 the central prison, they read out the names on the list -- the names of

22 those who were supposed to leave, I could not see whether those by the

23 Blaz Kraljevic monument had belts or not. There were a lot of them.

24 Q. So you don't know?

25 A. The military policemen put us on the minivans.

1 Q. I'm not asking you that. I'm asking you from the monument further

2 on. This is what I want to know.

3 Tell me, please, you told us that in Dretelj the guards were

4 military policemen. Do you know how many of them there were. How many of

5 these military policemen were there, if you can tell us.

6 A. I don't know exactly.

7 Q. We have had witnesses with whom we discussed Dretelj, and they

8 said that some of the Domobrani or home guards were the guards as well,

9 and that would emerge from some of the documents we've seen too. Are you

10 certain that the guards were just military policemen?

11 A. I don't know what you mean by Domobrani or home guards.

12 Q. Well, I'd like to know what you mean by military policemen in

13 Dretelj. How did you know?

14 A. Well, they had the white belt and they were soldiers.

15 Q. And those were the only guards you saw?

16 A. Well, sometimes they had their white belts on. Other times they

17 didn't because it was very hot. They didn't respect discipline when it

18 came to wearing uniforms.

19 Q. I'm not asking about your assumptions. I just want to know

20 whether all of them had white belts or not.

21 A. No, they did not.

22 Q. If I have understood you correctly, in Dretelj you were

23 interrogated only once by two individuals that a you described to us

24 yesterday.

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. All right. Fine. Now, tell us, the hangar you were in was it the

2 first hangar on the left?

3 A. No.

4 Q. Right. Now, tell me, when you arrived in Dretelj did you enter

5 through the gate that is in front of the military police building, or

6 don't you remember?

7 A. Well, we entered through the gate. Now, how many gates there are,

8 I don't know. I saw what it said on the building.

9 Q. Did you notice how many railings Dretelj has?

10 A. Well, I was never in Dretelj.

11 Q. In your statement to The Hague investigators you said that you

12 managed to smuggle in a transistor radio, into Dretelj, and you could

13 listen to news over the BH radio and then you would inform the other

14 inmates about the news that you had listened to.

15 A. Yes, that's interesting.

16 Q. And then you destroyed the radio, the transistor later on.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. So that -- can I conclude that at least in your hangar and the

19 prisoners who were near you that they could have been informed about the

20 events in Dretelj until the 13th of July?

21 A. Yes. It was risky business though. In my hangar, the information

22 was confidential, maybe only 10 per cent of the people knew about it.

23 When I listened to the news at midnight, I would listen for about five

24 minutes and then I would tell these people this 10 per cent.

25 Q. Now, I'd like to go back to something we discussed yesterday.

1 When Mr. Karnavas asked you about the arrival of Zeljko Dzidic, when he

2 arrived at the radio station, on page 92 of the transcript, line 24 and

3 25, you said -- and also on page 93, line 1, you expressly stated the

4 following: "I said that he entered with that pistol, but I never said

5 that he placed the pistol to my head."

6 Now, you didn't describe that situation in the

7 examination-in-chief either. After that, Mr. Karnavas showed you your

8 statement a few minutes later, your 2002 statement, and at that point you

9 drastically changed your testimony and said on page 96, lines 1 and 2, the

10 following: "He passed by the security building at Vranica. He took out a

11 pistol and put it to my head."

12 Do you see the difference? I have a problem because you changed

13 your testimony in one day.

14 A. You have quite a lot of problems as far as I can see. I think

15 you've got it wrong, what I said when the Prosecutor asked me. I said

16 that Dzidic came armed. And when counsel asked me, you have to know what

17 the radio station looks like and the studio looks like and the place where

18 the programmes are broadcast from, he didn't take out his pistol in front

19 of everyone, for everybody to see it because they were all my friends.

20 That's not what I said. Just a moment. I said he came into the

21 studio, placed the pistol to my head and made me read what I had to read

22 out.

23 Q. I keep having a problem with you. I showed you what you said.

24 Within the space of five minutes you said three different things, so I

25 don't know what statement I'm to go by because I've heard three different

1 things and the same thing happened today when Mr. Karnavas read a document

2 out to you. It was a statement given to the crime department, the crime

3 police, in which somebody speaks about you and mentions you as being an

4 editor of the information programme on the radio, and you shouted at

5 Mr. Karnavas just the same way that you're shouting at me and said that

6 you were never an editor, and five minutes later you said that you were

7 indeed an editor. So in one statement you were an editor, and that's

8 where I have a problem.

9 A. Well, yes, that's a big problem. You're facing a big problem.

10 Q. I have no further questions. Thank you.

11 A. The editor of an information programme is one thing, and the

12 editor of the radio is another. Your conduct is highly improper, let me

13 say.

14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] [Previous translation

15 continues] ... additional questions?

16 MR. PORYVAEV: I have no re-examination. Thank you very much.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

18 Sir, in my name and in the name of my colleagues, I would like to

19 thank you for coming to The Hague at the request of the Prosecution. I

20 would like to wish you a safe trip on my behalf and on behalf of my

21 colleagues, and I wish you good luck with your radio station, which is

22 using the frequency of 101.7. So thank you very much. And I would like

23 to ask the usher to escort you outside of the courtroom.

24 [The witness withdrew]

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Scott, for next

1 week, do you have a witness? You have a witness for four days, I believe.

2 I think that there won't be a problem. The witness will be there?

3 MR. SCOTT: No, Your Honour, everything seems to be in order. We

4 had the witness coming scheduled for the week, and I don't see any

5 problems at this moment.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So this being said,

7 it is 7.00 p.m. I thank everybody inside and outside of this courtroom

8 assisting us, and I would like to -- in fact, we will meet next week on

9 Monday at 2.15, and for Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, we will sit in

10 the morning. Thank you very much.

11 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.59 p.m.,

12 to be reconvened on Monday, the 7th day

13 of May, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25