1 Wednesday, 11 July 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The witness entered court]
4 [The accused entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.22 p.m.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, could you please
7 call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon to
9 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor
10 versus Prlic et al. Thank you.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Registrar. This
12 is Wednesday, July 11, 2007, and I would like to welcome everyone here. I
13 welcome the witness, the Prosecution, the counsel for Defence and the
14 accused. The cross-examination is now about to start. And 4D is going to
15 start. Thank you.
16 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
17 WITNESS: ANTOON VAN DER GRINTEN [Resumed]
18 Cross-examination by Ms. Alaburic:
19 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon to you. Witness, my name is Vesna
20 Alaburic. I am a lawyer from Zagreb and in this case, together with
21 Nicholas Stewart of the British Bar, who's not here today, I am Defence
22 counsel for General Petkovic. I should like to start off our discussion
23 by clarifying some of your answers to the questions you were asked
24 yesterday. And to do that, let me remind you of the first document shown
25 you by the Prosecutor, which was a three-page note about the plan of
1 arrest of all Muslim males from a settlement up at the front line. The
2 document was dated the 28th of May 1993. Tell me, please, do you remember
3 that document or do we have to produce it and take a look at it together?
5 A. I prefer the last one.
6 Q. Very well. It is in the Prosecution binder, and it is 2550,
7 document 2550. P 02550.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Stringer?
9 MR. STRINGER: I apologise for the interruption. I actually
10 thought that counsel was going to refer to Exhibit 3181, which was the
11 exhibit that related to -- well, I thought she was going to refer to
12 P 3181 but while I'm on my feet let me just say this now. This was the
13 exhibit from yesterday that, about which there was disagreement as to the
14 translation and I can inform everyone in the room that since last night,
15 we resubmitted it to the translation unit and obtained a revised final
16 translation. I don't know that the revision will shed any light on some
17 of the interpretation issues that were raised yesterday but I know that
18 the one change has been made in respect of the word "Muslim" and "balija",
19 and that revised corrected translation now has been distributed to
20 everyone in the room so you all have it.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't want to deal
23 with the document Mr. Stringer has just mentioned. The document I would
24 like to look at is P 02550 and I can see that there is an error in my
25 question. It is not a three-page document as was recorded on page 1, line
1 24, but a document that has six lines. And I think -- hope the witness
2 has found the document in the meantime.
3 Q. Let me ask you now, Mr. Van der Grinten, do you know that that
4 alleged plan was ever realised and that in May 1993, all Muslim males were
5 arrested in the settlements up at the front line in Mostar?
6 A. As I explained yesterday, this was a message from team M3. So it
7 came from the southern region and to answer your question, that is for me
8 negative. I don't know if it happened.
9 Q. Thank you. Now, the second explanation that I'd like to hear: If
10 we remind ourselves of what you said yesterday about the vehicle, your
11 missions vehicle, which in passing from West to East Mostar was hit and
12 that you assumed that it was hit from a location which was under HVO
13 control. Now in that connection I would like to ask you the following:
14 Did it ever happen that members of the BH army used vehicles of your
15 mission to hide behind the vehicle and cross over from the west to the
16 east bank? Did that ever happen? From the east to the west bank?
17 A. That's correct. We were confronted with such a situation several
19 Q. Tell me, please, did you ever caution the BH army and said that
20 that kind of behaviour was unacceptable and that they were placing your
21 vehicles in jeopardy by doing that?
22 A. We did. We complained at the headquarters that they should
23 prevent these kind of situations.
24 Q. And my third question, the third question I'd like to clear up, it
25 refers to patients and you told us, and it was yesterday -- in yesterday's
1 transcript, pages 61 and 62, you said that patients in the hospital on the
2 east bank, you won't have the transcript but it is the transcript of your
3 testimony yesterday, you don't have to look for it, what you said was that
4 the patients were not ready to go to the hospital on the west bank because
5 of the general fear that something would happen to them on the west bank,
6 and now I would like to ask you in that connection whether the HVO
7 expressed its readiness to take in and treat all the wounded persons and
8 everybody else from the east bank of Mostar?
9 A. It was only a proposal, but we were never confronted with, let's
10 say, actions in that direction. So it was only a discussion.
11 Q. Very well. Can we agree, then, that the proposal and that the
12 readiness on the part of the HVO was recorded in your reports, for example
13 the report that we looked at yesterday that was shown to us by the
14 Prosecutor and it was P2789, dated the 15th of June, your report of the
15 15th of June, can you just confirm whether you did indicate this readiness
16 on the part of the HVO in your reports? If you can tell me, relying on
17 your memory because that is certainly what it says in your report.
18 A. Can we go to the document, please?
19 Q. Very well. The document is 2782 -- no, I apologise, I misspoke,
21 A. All right.
22 Q. 2782?
23 A. And you are referring to which part of the text?
24 Q. Point 3, the end of the first section where it says that the
25 medical service of the HVO once again offered to take care of all the
1 wounded, both Muslims and Croats, including people from the east side.
2 Can we then agree that you, in your reports, recorded this readiness on
3 the parts of the HVO to treat all persons needing treatment from
4 East Mostar?
5 A. That is correct but I need to clarify that it was a proposal.
6 Q. Yes, yes. It was a proposal. Now, let's take a look together and
7 see whether the proposal was adopted and if not why not. Tell me, now,
8 the fact that wounded persons and people living in East Mostar, to be
9 treated in the hospital in West Mostar, would that have had a positive
10 impact, positive publicity in the media, for example, both among the
11 international and local public? Would a gesture on the part of the HVO be
13 A. I think that that is correct, yeah.
14 Q. Very well. Now, tell me, do you know of a single act on the part
15 of the BH army which would allow something to happen which could lead to
16 the HVO being given positive publicity in the national or international
17 media, a single event that you can quote?
18 A. Well, we transported by my knowledge, when I recall it correct,
19 three times medicines from the west to the east, and that, of course, was
20 with approval of the HVO management in the west -- in the west bank
22 Q. Apart from that, apart from the medicine situation, do you know of
23 anything else which the HVO offered to do which would lead to positive
24 publicity for the HVO which the BH army agreed to? I'm asking you that
25 because in some of the documents that or one of the documents that we saw
1 in this courtroom, it was noted that the BH army did not allow people to
2 go to the west bank to undergo treatment because that would have had a
3 positive impact, positive publicity for the HVO, or rather negative for
4 the BH army. So that's why I'm asking you in that context whether that
5 could be correct.
6 A. Not to my knowledge. I know that the only thing what came from
7 the east bank was that they knew -- they needed secured transport talking
8 about this. They were afraid that when UNPROFOR was not involved in this,
9 that bringing the wounded people through the confrontation line was not
10 such a good idea.
11 Q. There was no obstacle for UNPROFOR to take part in the realisation
12 of this HVO proposal. I assume that UNPROFOR did not reject the
13 possibility of cooperating in transporting people who were wounded to the
14 west bank?
15 A. Well, it never came that far.
16 Q. Very well. Now, the fourth point that I'd like to seek
17 clarification about relates to your testimony about the difficult living
18 conditions of the population in East Mostar at the time that you were
19 there. Tell me, please, to the best of your knowledge, was there some
20 sort of control over movement in East Mostar, the comings and goings, who
21 was going in and leaving East Mostar or could you go there freely whenever
22 you wanted to, that everybody could come and go whenever they wanted to on
23 all sides, I'm talking about control from the aspects of the BH army and
24 the Muslim authorities.
25 A. Well, on the east side there were, as there were on the west side,
1 control, check-points, control points, also by the BH army, that's
3 Q. Did you have any knowledge to the effect that the population of
4 East Mostar had to seek permission if they wished to leave Mostar to go to
5 any other place like Jablanica, for instance?
6 A. No, not at that time.
7 Q. In the memoirs of Muslim commanders, it was recorded among other
8 things that a large portion of the population in East Mostar wanted to
9 leave East Mostar but that the BH army prevented them from doing so and
10 that in doing so, they used force against the population. Do you have any
11 knowledge about that?
12 A. No, I don't.
13 Q. Very well. Now, Witness, you talked to us about the Heliodrom and
14 your visit to Heliodrom, to that prison, and if I understood you
15 correctly, it was a visit in June 1993. Is that right?
16 A. Well, I don't remember exactly the date, but I think it was in
17 June, yeah, but it's in one of the reports we saw yesterday.
18 Q. Yes. Now, since Heliodrom in June 1993 was not -- is not the
19 subject of our indictment, what I want to ask you is this: To your
20 knowledge, the number of prisoners --
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic, before you pursue
22 I'd like to come back to the previous question that you asked, that we see
23 at line 8 of page 7. You speak of a document or memoirs of Muslim
24 commanders according to which the Muslim population in East Mostar could
25 not -- Mr. Registrar, there seems to be some translation problem. The
1 registrar now says it's okay. All right. Great.
2 So, Ms. Alaburic, in the previous question to the witness that you
3 see on lines 8 of page 7, you state that there were documents of Muslim
4 commanders stating that the Muslims in East Mostar could not leave
5 East Mostar and, as the case may be, force would be used against the
6 Muslim population, and the witness answered, "No, I have no knowledge of
7 that." When you asked the question, on what document were you basing your
9 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] My question was based on memoirs in
10 particular Mr. Esad Sejtanic's book and I was referring to a passage
11 which, pursuant to the latest ruling of this Trial Chamber in relation to
12 the exhibits that were admitted with Witness Pellnas, I'm not sure if he
13 was a protected witness or not, it was refused by a majority vote of the
14 Trial Chamber, so it was for that reason that I did not introduce the same
15 exhibit. But I thought that I could rely upon memoirs and books. I can
16 back that up with books and even documents which are in e-court but which
17 have not been okayed as exhibits. Now, during my cross-examination, we
18 can look up the number of the document and we can, of course, put it on
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, then. You may
21 pursue, move on to the next question.
22 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. We were discussing Heliodrom in June, and, witness, I mentioned
24 that in -- the Heliodrom in June is not a subject of the indictment. All
25 I wanted to do was to explain that everything that you said about
1 Heliodrom referred exclusively to June 1993; is that right?
2 A. Yeah. I have to see my reports to answer this in a positive way
3 because I don't remember exactly the date you are mentioning now. So when
4 you show me the number, then I can verify if the date is correct.
5 Q. I'm talking about your statement to -- and testimony to the
6 Prosecutor, not a separate document. I don't have to ask about the date
7 of the document because each document is dated. But never mind, if you
8 don't remember, witness, we can move on. I would like us to take a look
9 at the report about a crime, the document written in writing on the 24th
10 of June 1993, given to you. In the document, on that piece of paper, it
11 was recorded that a husband and wife were burnt in a house that had been
12 mined. It was 2835, document 2835.
13 A. I don't have a document 2835, unfortunately.
14 Q. I apologise. I'll just check whether that number is correct. I'm
15 being -- I'm told that it is 2935, the right number, 2935. Thank you for
16 that. And I apologise, witness, for giving you the wrong number. The
17 right number is 2935.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now let's look at 2941, please. 2941, the last passage,
20 Mr. Stringer read out that sentence too, but we didn't dwell on it and I'd
21 like to stay with the sentence today. So in the last portion, in the
22 first sentence there, you mention that -- you caution about the various
23 crimes committed by the HVO and then you specify burning people in their
24 own homes and in the very next sentence, you say, "We cannot confirm any
25 of the crimes." Now my question is: Would it be right to conclude that
1 you cannot confirm that what is stated in this handwritten document
2 actually happened? Is that what you mean?
3 A. No. We were of course not witnessing this crime. The only thing
4 what we could confirm were the names on the papers placed on the trees, as
5 discussed yesterday. By the way, in this report, it says, not confirmed,
6 means that in principle, when we don't mention that specifically, then we
7 had other sources of confirmation.
8 Q. Yes. But your sentence is, "We cannot confirm any of the cases."
9 That's what your sentence says, you cannot confirm from any source.
10 A. Here mentioned not all but you are referring to the previous
11 document, and only thing what I'm saying is after receiving that document
12 we went to the spot as explained yesterday.
13 Q. Yes, yes. You explained that. I'm just trying to show from this
14 other document that your sentence: [In English] "We cannot confirm any
15 case," [Interpretation] refers also to the information mentioned in the
16 previous sentence about burning people in their houses. But may we agree
17 on this?
18 A. What is your question?
19 Q. My question is whether this sentence, "We cannot confirm any
20 case," refers to burning people in their houses and does this refer to the
21 burning of the two persons mentioned in the previous document? Or does it
22 refer to other incidents of burning in other houses?
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic, to enlighten the
24 witness, maybe you should read the end of the sentence to him because
25 after "cannot confirm any case," there is a comma and then there is a
1 sentence after this which you're not mentioning.
2 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness has the
3 document before him. He can see it. And he has probably read these
4 sentences more than once now so I believe he can answer the question. He
5 said that some other things refer to pieces of paper hanging on trees, so
6 that is not in dispute.
7 THE WITNESS: Madam, once again, the principle how we wrote the
8 report is when it were rumours, we mentioned that it were rumours. When
9 it were rumours not confirmed by any possibility by us, then you see that
10 in the text. And that is the same here, I think. Yeah.
11 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation].
12 Q. Well, that's precisely what I wanted us to confirm, that this
13 statement that no cases can be confirmed also refers to the other
14 document. We can now move on.
15 A. No.
16 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, I would like to stick with this
17 document for a moment. It is striking that we have a handwritten document
18 in English and a handwritten document in B/C/S. I seem to understand that
19 they were fixed on trees. Did you yourself see them fixed on a tree or on
20 different trees and taken down?
21 THE WITNESS: These are not the papers from the trees, by the way,
22 Your Honour. That's a misunderstanding. But when we went to the spot, we
23 saw papers on the street and that was checked by our interpreter, as I
24 explained yesterday, because she translated the text on the papers on the
1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: So one of these two and I suppose it's the one in
2 English is a translation written by your translator?
3 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
4 JUDGE TRECHSEL: And how did you get possession of the B/C/S
5 language text? Was it given to you or was it picked up from the street?
6 THE WITNESS: This was given to us. The Croatian text.
7 JUDGE TRECHSEL: By whom?
8 THE WITNESS: I don't recall the name who gave it, unfortunately.
9 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you very much.
10 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] I would like to ask Their
11 Honours, in order to avoid wasting time now that we are dealing with these
12 documents, one can see that these two documents are written on the same
13 kind of paper, from the same pad. So it seems that somebody who provided
14 the document in B/C/S also gave the whole pad and this could be translated
15 later on. You can see the date, it's been torn from the same pad, both
16 what the translator wrote and what some person gave to this person. But
17 this is illogical, it's contradictory so could this be clarified?
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, General Praljak has a
19 very -- scrutinises everything, makes note of the following. I noticed
20 the same thing but I wanted counsel to do the cross-examination but the
21 B/C/S text is written in B/C/S and the first sentence, first words
22 are, "Help me" in English but it's torn from an agenda because we have,
23 you know, hours, like 6.00, 6.30 and so on. That's in B/C/S and it seems
24 your interpreter translated in English what was written in B/C/S and it
25 starts with, "Please" et cetera. So this is the question put to you by
1 General Praljak, rightly so. Why is it that you are handed a text in
2 B/C/S and at the same time the text is translated on a piece of paper that
3 comes exactly from the same agenda or pad? Does it mean that the person
4 who handed you the text in B/C/S had the pad and gave the pad over to the
5 interpreter who immediately translated what was written? Could you tell
6 us exactly what happened?
7 THE WITNESS: That last was the situation. So it was -- it was--
8 it is the agenda paper of our interpreter, that's correct. So she put the
9 text on the agenda and made, on our request, the English translation.
10 JUDGE TRECHSEL: But how did the B/C/S text get on paper of your
12 THE WITNESS: Well, it was not my agenda.
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: It looks exactly the same. Of course, it is
14 possible that it is not yours but it is a bit striking that it seems to be
15 identical. Were they very widespread? Did everyone have a block like
17 THE WITNESS: Well, I don't recall. I don't recall it but it
18 definitely is in different handwriting, as you can see.
19 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I couldn't help noticing. Did you bring this
20 pads from the Netherlands or did you buy it in Mostar or somewhere else in
22 THE WITNESS: Well, it was her notice book, it's not mine.
23 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Ah, it's hers, yes.
24 THE WITNESS: Mine was smaller without the timings in the left
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, there could have been
2 another situation where you and the interpreter could see those pieces of
3 paper on trees and then maybe your interpreter could transcribe in B/C/S
4 what is written on those sheets of paper that are on the trees. And but
5 this is something that cannot work because the handwriting in English is
6 different from the handwriting in B/C/S. So there is a mystery here, we
7 need Sherlock Holmes to solve it.
8 THE WITNESS: Unfortunately, Your Honour, I can't solve this
9 mystery at this moment after 14 years.
10 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the dates do
11 not correspond either. In the B/C/S text, it says June, and in the
12 English text, it says July, I think. June, sorry, sorry.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Well, there is a mystery,
14 and we all note this. Ms. Alaburic, you may resume.
15 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 Q. Witness, yesterday listening to your testimony concerning the 30th
17 of June 1993, and the events which ensued after this important date, I had
18 the impression that it is your opinion that a relatively minor attack by
19 the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina was launched on the HVO and that this was
20 followed by large-scale detentions of Muslim men of military age. First
21 of all, I wish to ask you the following: Would I be correct in concluding
22 that you described the 30th of June as an attack by the army of
23 Bosnia-Herzegovina on the HVO in response to a question by my learned
24 friend Mr. Stringer? Is that what happened on that day?
25 A. That's correct, ma'am.
1 Q. As part of this attack, did something happen which might be
2 considered unusual in an army, something that would make it not just an
3 ordinary attack by one army against another army but something else? Do
4 you have any knowledge of this?
5 A. I don't know what you are talking about. I don't understand what
6 the question is, unfortunately.
7 Q. In that attack, did Muslims who were soldiers of the HVO play any
8 special role?
9 A. Well, I was not there. I was not at the spot. I didn't see the
10 operation so I can't answer this question.
11 Q. And you have no knowledge as to what happened on the 30th of June
12 and whether the Muslims who were in the HVO played an important role such
13 as, for example, treason against the army they had been part of until that
15 A. No. I stick to that what -- what is in our report. According
16 to --
17 Q. Well, sir, let's look at your report, then. Look at document 3025
18 in the Prosecutor's bundle. 3025. A report by your mission for the 30th
19 of June, and look at 5, the fifth paragraph. In that paragraph, it says
20 the following: "This morning between 3 and 4.00, Muslim soldiers in the
21 HVO battalion which was in the area of Bijelo Polje north of Mostar
22 attacked their own Croatian troops and positions in the area, the village
23 of Rastani on the west bank, and the Northern Barracks. These attacks
24 were coordinated in advance and had the support of the 1st Mostar
25 Brigade. The commander of that Brigade Midhad Hujdur was killed in
1 action. Thirty wounded were brought to the HVO hospital, 30 wounded
2 soldiers, two wounded civilians and three dead bodies of HVO soldiers.
3 The doctor stated that there were many more soldiers killed."
4 Witness, did you ever hear before now that what happened on the
5 30th of June was in fact treason by the Muslims in the HVO and the loss of
6 positions by the HVO precisely because of the treason of their own
7 soldiers of Muslim ethnicity?
8 A. Madam, this was the explanation of the operation by the HVO doctor
9 in the west bank hospital and we were -- what we did is we noticed his
10 story and that is what you find here. And probably he was very well
11 informed, so ...
12 Q. Witness, was it like this or not, to the best of your knowledge?
13 You were a European monitor?
14 A. That has nothing to do with my mission, Madam, but let me clarify
15 it again. We went to the west bank hospital and this was the story we
16 heard. We were not at the spot. I didn't observe the operation.
17 Q. Witness, can you tell me, then, what you actually do know? How do
18 you know that on the 30th of June there was actually an attack by the army
19 of Bosnia-Herzegovina on the HVO? How do you know about this?
20 A. Because it was told to us.
21 Q. Who told you that?
22 A. Yeah, that is in the report. The report says, "After visiting we
23 got the next HVO statement by the military doctor in charge." For me it's
24 crystal clear that it came from that doctor. So... I don't got the point,
25 I'm sorry.
1 Q. Very well. In your reports, you report partly what you are told
2 by your collocutors, we agree on that, don't you? And you don't go into
3 it further, investigating whether it's true or not. You just report what
4 you are told and what you consider to be relevant; is that correct?
5 A. That is correct, and that means that we try to verify this later
6 on, of course, yeah.
7 Q. Very well. Did you attempt to verify what happened on the 30th of
9 A. Well, it was very difficult to verify it because access to Mostar
10 was denied from that moment. So this is actually the only statement we
11 had on that particular day. And then, freedom of movement was refused by
12 HVO, so we didn't had actually that many opportunities to confirm this.
13 Q. And up to the end of your stay there, until the end of August, you
14 received no information and you never checked what actually happened on
15 the 30th of June. Is that what you want to tell us?
16 A. We were very willing to check it but there was no access to the
17 officials since then, that moment, unfortunately.
18 Q. Yes. We will look at your other reports, and we will verify this.
19 Now, in this same document, you express some assessments. You say that
20 this attack by the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina was the first step in
21 connecting or linking up the Jablanica area with the Mostar area. That's
22 in the last paragraph of this document. You can see that, Witness. To
23 the best of your knowledge, after this action on the 30th of June, that is
24 in July 1993, was communication between Mostar and Jablanica in fact
25 established, and did the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina gain control over
1 the area north of Mostar on the left bank of the Neretva?
2 A. I don't know. This is an assessment so ...
3 Q. Very well. I assume you had regular meetings with your colleagues
4 from UNPROFOR and you were informed of what they had observed and what
5 their conclusions were; is this correct?
6 A. We discussed this probably several times with the Spanish
7 Battalion, yes.
8 Q. What did they tell you about this event?
9 A. Well, I --
10 Q. You don't remember?
11 A. It's impossible to recall it when it is not in one of my reports.
12 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] How much time do I have left?
13 Because I'll have to leave out some questions.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You had one hour altogether, so,
15 registrar, could you tell us how much time is left?
16 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] 35 minutes?
17 THE REGISTRAR: And you've used so far 32 minutes.
18 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] I have three minutes left?
19 THE REGISTRAR: Correct.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No. Ms. Alaburic, you were
21 granted one hour, one full hour, if I'm right. Let me check.
22 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours --
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You're right, you had 35 minutes
24 so altogether you had 35 minutes you already used 32 minutes and you have
25 three minutes left.
1 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Three minutes. Your Honours, some
2 Defence teams will not be using all the time allotted to them and there is
3 an agreement among us that I will use only my time, but if my colleague,
4 Ms. Nozica doesn't use up all the time left to the other Defence teams, I
5 will make use of the time that's left over.
6 Q. Witness, in my bundle of documents, document number P 03952, 3952,
7 that's a document issued by the European monitors on the 6th of August
8 1993, human rights situation, and I'll draw your attention to one sentence
9 only. Point 2(B), second paragraph. In the first paragraph, because it's
10 not my intention to appear to be skipping over things, it says some five
11 weeks ago the HVO decided on a large-scale operation to arrest all
12 able-bodied Muslims from 16 to -- in order to -- and so on. "This
13 operation followed a rebellion by the Muslim soldiers in the HVO who gave
14 an opportunity to the army of BH to open a corridor for horse transport
15 between Jablanica and Mostar along the River Neretva." So this is dated
16 August 1993. Tell us, Witness, do you have any knowledge or did your
17 monitors gain any information, to establish that it's correct that on the
18 30th of June, there was a rebellion of the Muslims who rebelled against
19 their own army, the HVO?
20 A. That remark of the doctor in the west hospital was a story we
21 heard later on, at various times. So it was not the first time. We heard
22 that later on more.
23 Q. Witness, unfortunately, I have to stop now because I've run out of
25 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, thank you. I hope I
1 will have an opportunity to continue. Thank you.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Now for Mr. Coric,
4 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon,
5 Your Honours, good afternoon to everybody. Good afternoon, sir. I see
6 the document is distributing our documents.
7 Cross-examination by Ms. Tomasegovic Tomic:
8 Q. Sir, in the course of my examination, I'll make use of the
9 documents you have received now but also the ones you have before you from
10 the Prosecutor.
11 I would first like to go back to a topic you were asked about
12 yesterday by His Honour Judge Antonetti, the Presiding Judge, so first --
13 and I think you've answered this question, but it doesn't do any harm to
14 go over it again -- Mr. Nissen was your superior from the time you arrived
15 in Herzegovina until about the end of July; is that correct?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. Mr. Nissen and you, like all the other members of your mission,
18 teams M1 and M2, had the same interpreter; is that correct?
19 A. No. That's not correct.
10 (redacted) Oh, yes, you already said that you don't know that.
11 When you arrived in the mission, the interpreter we talked about yesterday
12 and whom I'm asking you about today was he already employed or were you
13 there when he or she was in the process of getting this job?
14 A. Are you talking about the interpreter of M2, of our team? You
15 mean the female, our female interpreter? No, she was not a member of the
16 pool. As I told yesterday we were able to select her ourselves.
17 Q. Yesterday, in response to a question from the Bench, when you were
18 shown part of your statement, in which you say that you intentionally
19 employed a Muslim interpreter because you were afraid that a Croat could
20 inform their Croat leaders, you said in response to that question that the
21 Croats who were employed in Siroki Brijeg, you didn't use in Mostar
22 precisely for that reason. You also said, in response, that the most
23 important reason for which you had employed that particular Muslim
24 interpreter, lady Muslim interpreter, was that she had studied English and
25 that it was also a point in her favour that she lived in Mostar in a handy
1 place because it was easier for you to pick her up. Now, I assume that
2 the Croats knew English too, the ones that you employed in Siroki Brijeg,
3 otherwise they wouldn't have been employed by you in the first place; is
4 that right?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. Now, I'm not quite clear on this. Why weren't you afraid that a
7 Muslim interpreter could inform his or her own leaders, just as you were
8 afraid that the Croats might inform their leaders, especially when the
9 person lived in Mostar and I'm sure she had a lot of acquaintances, and
10 it's -- among Muslim leaders, that she knew them too because she lived
11 there. So why weren't you afraid of that?
12 A. Well, of course, Madam, you never know in such a situation but, as
13 I said, we were able to select her ourselves. The other ones were
14 already -- sorry, the other ones in Siroki Brijeg were already in the pool
15 and doing that work for some time. So by making our own selection, we
16 were in favourite position to select someone we trust.
17 Q. You told us that you already testified before this Tribunal in the
18 Naletilic trial and I read the transcript because we were produced it by
19 the Prosecutor. You said that you weren't afraid that that person could
20 convoy information to the Muslim side because she lived on the west bank.
21 That's what you said, and it was recorded on page 7428 of the transcript.
22 Do you remember that that was one of the arguments you put forward for
23 your selection?
24 A. I know that it is in the transcript, yeah.
25 Q. Tell me: You don't speak or understand the language spoken by the
1 domicile population in Mostar, do you? That is to say whether we call it
2 Croatian or Croatian-Serbian, Serbo-Croatian, I don't mind at this point
3 in time but what I'm asking you is you don't speak it or understand it, do
5 A. No, that's correct. Then only some courtesy words.
6 Q. When you went to meetings on the east bank, negotiations, you took
7 the lady interpreter with you; is that right?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. And when you arrived on the spot, the interpreter, I assume,
10 talked to the people on the east bank or at least she interpreted. Would
11 that be right?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. I conclude that, since you yourself don't know the language, you
14 couldn't actually know what she was saying in her mother tongue; is that
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. I think that hypothetically speaking, the interpreter could have,
18 in view of the fact that you didn't understand anything, she could have
19 said whatever she wanted to and translated something quite different to
20 you, or kept silent, kept quiet about something that she might have heard.
21 That is possible, isn't it?
22 A. That is always possible, yes.
23 Q. Tell me, please, also in response to a question in the Naletilic
24 Martinovic trial, you said you found the interpreter yourself and asked
25 whether they would work for you. Now technically speaking I'm interested
1 in knowing how you came across her or rather this person in the street.
2 Did you ask her, do you want to interpret for us? Or did you receive a
3 recommendation? How did you come to employ her? How did you come into
4 contact with this individual in the first place?
5 A. I really don't recall exactly how we met her.
6 Q. Tell me, please, did you run any checks on her, take down her
7 particulars and then checked out her CV by services who had better
8 resources for that kind of thing because as far as I understood you
9 yesterday, you didn't have any intelligence service to do this for you?
10 A. That is correct. So that was only done by ourselves.
11 Q. Tell me, please, I'd like to round off this topic by this final
12 question: Had that person perhaps worked for one of the warring parties,
13 you would have no way of knowing, of learning, whether that was the case,
14 because you didn't have that intelligence to check it out, unless you
15 happened to notice something by your own observations or, if you happened
16 to hear about something like that, you would have no other means of
17 checking, right?
18 A. That's correct.
19 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Ms. Tomasegovic Tomic, I'm just wondering, is
20 this -- are you fishing in the dark or is there any foundation for all
21 these questions you are putting? Do you have the slightest point of
22 attachment for these suspicions that you utter?
23 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it was very
24 difficult for me to check out the information because the name of the lady
25 interpreter has been kept secret, confidential, and the previous witness
1 was asked not to mention her name for her own safety but I'm asking these
2 questions because that person is quite obviously the most important source
3 of this person's information. So if it is firsthand information, and he
4 is secondhand information when it comes to information, then as Defence
5 counsel, I have to check out her credibility and perhaps bring into doubt
6 her authenticity and the authenticity of her statements.
7 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President, I apologise for this
8 intervention but I'm -- I've been informed that a revision or redaction to
9 the record is going to be -- need to be made before the 30 minutes passes.
10 Something was said a few minutes ago and if -- I apologise for this but
11 if we could briefly go into private session I could explain it in one
12 minute to the Trial Chamber.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, private session,
15 [Private session]
4 [Open session]
5 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Yes, well, the
7 Trial Chamber would ask the lawyer to be quite sure that we are not losing
8 any time. By these questions, are you trying perhaps to establish whether
9 the witness received information from the interpreter that could have
10 misled him? Is that what you are trying to prove?
11 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I'll come to that part
12 when I come to specific events in my cross-examination, events that the
13 interpreter informed them about. This was an introduction, and it was
14 Your Honour's questions that prompted me, Your Honour's questions
15 yesterday, to go through this introductory part, so that when I get to
16 specific events, such as the events in Mostar and Ilici, then I'll go back
17 to the question of the interpreter and who she was.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [No interpretation]
19 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. The Prosecutor yesterday showed you a diagram, a schematic,
21 compiled by the UN dated the 22nd of July 1993. It is document P10025.
22 You have it in the Prosecution binder. It's the thick binder in front of
23 you, sir, not the thin one. And we can have it on e-court. The first
24 page after the title page, and the title there is, "The Croatian Community
25 of Herceg-Bosna, political personages." And yesterday when you looked at
1 the document you said that you agreed with the schematic and that it
2 corresponded to the information that you had yourself. I'd like us now to
3 take a look at this page together and we'll concentrate on the right side,
4 and it says here, under political personalities that within the HZ HB,
5 there was the Ministry of Police, led by the minister, and then
6 subordinate to him was the chief of police, and underneath the police
7 chief was the chief of military police, Valentin Coric. Do you see that,
8 going down the right side of the diagram?
9 A. I see it, yes.
10 Q. What I've just read out, in view of the fact that you said that
11 that corresponded to your information as well, this would correspond to
12 the information you had and how you understood the situation; is that
13 correct? Because you told us yesterday that you agreed with that diagram.
14 A. No. I didn't say that. I said yesterday that it was a piece of
15 information we got from the Spanish Battalion intel section, and it gave
16 us a possibility to go into the structure and verify also our own
18 Q. I'll find that portion of your testimony. Just give me a moment,
20 MR. STRINGER: Just for the record, Mr. President, the witness was
21 not asked about this page at all during his direct examination. He was
22 directed to a different page and that's the only other page he was asked
23 to comment upon.
24 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. President, I'm not sure I understand what the
25 objection is. Is Mr. Stringer saying that we cannot go into pages of
1 documents that he introduces unless he's directly looked -- referred to
2 those pages? I just want a clarification.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No. He was not -- it was not an
4 objection on his part. He simply said that when he asked questions, they
5 were not addressed to that page but to another page. That's all. It was
6 not an objection. But Defence counsel is entitled to address another
7 page, naturally.
8 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. The Prosecutor asked you the following question and it was
10 recorded on page 80, line 23 of yesterday's transcript. He asks you: Was
11 this document -- did you have access to this document? Did you have the
12 document at the time that you were in Mostar? And your answer was on page
13 81, lines 2 and 3, "Yes, it existed at the time." And that's why I said
14 that it coincided with that date, the 22nd. Now, from this it was logical
15 to me that it was information which you did not challenge and which you
16 considered to be authentic. So if you used the document and if it helped
17 you in your work, as you say, then that would be the case. If I have made
18 the wrong conclusion I apologise, but that seemed logical to me.
19 A. I think that you made the wrong conclusion.
20 Q. So that means that you consider that the information in this
21 document, which was placed by the United Nations at your disposal, that
22 they were incorrect?
23 A. No. I'm sorry, Madam, that's not what I am saying. I only said
24 it was information we used, as we used various sources, to verify our own
1 Q. But if you had your own information, then you could compare your
2 information with the information contained here. Did you have any
3 information of your own at all? And did you, in fact, compare them to the
4 information contained in this document? And once you had compared the
5 two, if you did, did you agree, did they coincide, did they agree, or did
6 you have no position in the matter?
7 A. Depends on the information we needed to verify, of course.
8 Q. Sir, you haven't answered my question. I put a clear question.
9 You have a document in front of you, the document is a UN document, and
10 you say that they are one of your sources of information. Apart from
11 that, that means you had your own information and other information. Now,
12 if you compare all those different, all that different information, and
13 based on your experience there and the knowledge you had, does this
14 document correspond to the truth or not or do you not know? Yes, no, I
15 don't know.
16 A. I think it was a good document what showed the structure of HVO.
17 Q. Thank you. Tell me now, please, you said you had information to
18 the effect that Mr. Berko Pusic was the deputy of the military police --
19 deputy military police chief; is that correct?
20 A. Is this a question?
21 Q. Yes; is that correct?
22 A. Well, that was the way he was introduced to us, yeah, as the
23 deputy of Mr. Coric.
24 Q. Tell me, did you know that until the end of June 1993, in the
25 structure of the military police of the HZ HB, the post of deputy chief of
1 the military police did not in fact exist? There was only the post of
2 assistant military police chief. Did you know about that?
3 A. No. I only know what I just told you.
4 Q. Would you now take a look at the documents in that thin binder of
5 ours? It says, 5D documents. I'd like to show you two documents after
6 which I'll ask my question. So on e-court, please, may we have the
7 following documents? P 02963 is the first one. It's the first document
8 that you have in that binder in front of you. Everybody has the document
9 in the courtroom and in the translation booths. It is a proposal for
10 appointment of officers to the military police administration dated the
11 26th of June 1993. Mr. Coric signed the document. We mentioned him
12 several times. And in the introductory part of the document it says, "I
13 hereby propose," and then point 1, "that Mr. Radoslav Lavric be relieved
14 of his duties as assistant chief of the military police administration and
15 appointed as deputy chief of the military police administration. We'll
16 now look at the second document and then I'll ask you my questions after
17 we've seen that one as well.
18 So document number 2 now, please, which is a document dated the
19 28th of June 1993. It is a decision which says that in the
20 administration -- military police administration, the document number is
21 P 02985, it is a decision where it says that, as deputy chief of the
22 military police, Mr. Radoslav Lavric is appointed. So Mr. Radoslav Lavric
23 is appointed deputy head of the military police, in the military police
25 Now, sir, in these documents we see that the deputy head,
1 previously the assistant, was somebody else, not Mr. Berko Pusic. You've
2 never seen these documents before; is that right?
3 A. No.
4 Q. You mean you haven't seen them or no, that is not right? Which?
5 A. I never saw them.
6 Q. Now that you have seen these documents, do you allow for the
7 possibility that Mr. Berko Pusic or, rather, that his post that you were
8 told that his post was different, the name of the post he occupied was
9 different to what it was?
10 A. I don't know. At that moment maybe. But I repeat, he was
11 introduced as the deputy of Mr. Coric in the HVO MOD building to our team
12 and we spoke to him several times. That were our own observations and the
13 most important ones for the team.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, you said he was
15 introduced to you as the deputy of Mr. Coric but who introduced him to
16 you? Was it Mr. Coric or the floor sweeper? Who told you that Mr. Pusic
17 was the deputy of Mr. Coric?
18 THE WITNESS: I'm very sorry, sir, that I can't answer this
19 question because I don't remember.
20 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. I would just like to point out that this is a Prosecution binder,
22 and we can see in the translation that in the original B/C/S it says 28,
23 06, which means the 28th of June, as the date of the document, and the
24 English text, the wrong date is mentioned. It's the 28th of August. Just
25 to clear that up so we don't have to go back to that question later on.
1 I've just noticed that.
2 MR. STRINGER: That's right, Mr. President, I was going to point
3 that out. The translation, the English translation, has an incorrect
5 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Yesterday, sir, you said that on the 16th of June 1993, you met
7 with Mr. Coric and Mr. Pusic in one of the offices -- in someone's office,
8 you don't know whose office it was, but tell me who attended that meeting,
9 who was there in addition to yourself on -- from your mission, who else
10 was there?
11 A. Well, my team member, Mr. Amatriain, so we were four.
12 Q. Tell me, please, was the meeting scheduled previously? I mean
13 earlier on. Was it scheduled in advance?
14 A. Normally, we ask for a meeting, yeah, so it was probably
15 scheduled. I mean, we normally made an appointment to meet the gentlemen.
16 Q. I'm not interested in what the situation was normally like but
17 whether you remember that specific meeting. Was it scheduled in advance?
18 If you don't remember, it doesn't matter because many years have gone by
19 since then.
20 A. That's true, but we had a lot of questions after the visit of the
21 Heliodrom, so it was an important -- it was from great importance to have
22 answers on these questions as soon as possible, so I suppose that we
23 arranged that as soon as possible. It was an arranged meeting, yeah.
24 Q. Tell me, please, do you happen to remember whether Mr. Coric spoke
1 A. I don't know.
2 Q. Tell me, did you have an interpreter? Do you remember that? Did
3 you take an interpreter to the meeting with you?
4 A. I don't remember, but that was always -- the interpreter in fact
5 was always a member of the team and there for translation.
6 Q. Did Mr. Coric perhaps have an interpreter of his own at the
7 meeting? Do you happen to remember? Or did he use your interpreter, or
8 did he perhaps speak English? You say you don't remember but any way --
9 A. I really don't remember.
10 Q. May we now have a look at a document that was shown to you
11 yesterday by the Prosecutor? It is the document describing the meeting,
12 your report, P 02806 is the document number.
13 It's your own report dated the 16th of June 1993, and we have
14 point 3 where it says, "Meetings," and if we look at the document
15 carefully, underneath the heading which is, meetings, the first thing is
16 says is the following sentence: "We introduced ourselves." Have you
17 found it, sir?
18 A. No, I'm sorry.
19 Q. P 02806 is the document number, and the Prosecutor showed it to
20 you yesterday. It is your own report of the 16th of June. Have you found
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You have it on your screen. And look at point 3, meeting,
24 meetings, and it says, "We introduced ourselves for the first time to
25 Mr. Valentin Coric, chief of the HVO military police." Then there is a
1 gap and it says, "We met," and it says who, and who you talked to. You
2 can see it. I don't have to read it out for you. We discussed, et
3 cetera, now what I'm interested in is why where it says, Mr. Coric, and if
4 you meant with him and Mr. Berko Pusic together why it doesn't say we met
5 Mr. Coric and Mr. Berko Pusic and discussed such and such. But with
6 Mr. Coric, it just says we introduced ourselves for the first time to
7 Mr. Valentin Coric, it doesn't say what you discussed, nor does it say
8 that he was present during your meeting with Mr. Pusic. So why does it
9 say it that way if you talked to both these two men together? I think
10 that if the topics of discussion were that important and you say they
11 were, then Mr. Coric, in your view, was the superior to Mr. Pusic, you
12 should have written it in a different way, if both these men attended the
13 meeting and you discussed the same issues together with them.
14 A. I don't know.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. It's now time to
16 take a 20-minute break.
17 --- Recess taken at 3.45 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 4.07 p.m.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The hearing is resumed.
20 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Sir, yesterday you described your visit to Heliodrom. Tell me,
22 were you assisted by the same interpreter, lady interpreter, we mentioned
23 today when you visited Heliodrom?
24 A. Yes, indeed.
25 Q. Yesterday, you told us that at Heliodrom, you spoke with the
1 warden and in the document showed to you by the Prosecutor, we can all
2 take a look at it, it's P 02721, under point 3, entitled, "Meetings and
3 persons spoken to," it says that you spoke to the deputy warden, and in
4 the statement you gave to the investigators of the OTP you also said that
5 you spoke to the deputy. So can you tell me which is correct? Did you
6 speak to the warden or the deputy warden, as this report suggests?
7 A. When there is an inconsistency in this matter, then I can't recall
8 who of the two it was, unfortunately.
9 Q. Tell me, sir, do you remember the name of this person?
10 A. No.
11 Q. I assume you didn't note down the name because if you had, it
12 would possibly be included in your report, had you known it when you were
13 compiling the report, am I right?
14 A. Normally we do.
15 Q. Yesterday, you told us in your report that only HVO soldiers had
16 mattresses, whereas all others slept on the floor. In this document you
17 have before you, which I've opened, under point 6, entitled, "Assessment,"
18 first passage, last sentence, it says, "Only HVO soldiers and women have
19 beds to sleep in. Everybody else has only mattresses on the floor." And
20 you said the same in your statement. What is in your report is the same
21 thing you said to the investigators. But what is correct? What it says
22 here or what you told us yesterday?
23 A. What is in the statement probably is correct. I have to clarify
24 that because the statements -- the interviews that were made also with the
25 help of my personal notes. I didn't have them here. So the interviews
1 now were without that so --
2 Q. Yes. I understand. We don't have to go into it further. But
3 yesterday you said that when you visited Heliodrom, you used the word that
4 you went to the barracks. What does the word "barracks" mean to you?
5 Sometimes it's interpreted as soldiers' quarters, barracks. So what
6 building does that suggest to you?
7 A. Maybe it was not the right expression but it was a fixed
8 infrastructure with buildings.
9 Q. Were these traditional-type buildings? How many buildings did you
10 visit? Or were they buildings intended for some purpose, such as schools,
11 gyms and so on? Can you recall that?
12 A. Well, the only thing what I can recall that it were normal
13 buildings, but some parts were reconstructed and we visited also the
14 cells. There were also cells we visited.
15 Q. How many prisoners did you speak to? And was your interpreter the
16 one who mediated or did they speak English?
17 A. I don't know exactly the number of prisoners, and I will explain
18 the procedure. In the team, our interpreter only was involved when she
19 was asked to translate. So in the case that the people we asked were able
20 to speak English, she was not involved. When people -- and that is in
21 general the way we worked. When people didn't were able to speak, for
22 instance, in English, or another language we understood, French or German
23 as well, then she was involved in, as interpreter or translator.
24 Q. That's quite clear, and it's quite logical. I was only interested
25 in whether you remembered whether those persons spoke English that you
1 talked to or whether she interpreted. I understand the principle, of
2 course there is no need for interpreting if both sides in a conversation
3 speak the same language.
4 A. Well, I don't recall how many times the people were able to
5 respond in English or the times that she was translating, after 14 years.
6 Maybe you understand that that is hard to remember now.
7 Q. I understand, but I do have to put the question. Now, tell me
8 this: You know that the prisoners -- or you said that the prisoners told
9 you they didn't know why they were there and what they had been accused
10 of. I would like us to be quite precise. Did they only tell you that
11 they didn't know why they were there or did they tell you that no
12 indictment had been issued against them or did they perhaps tell you that
13 no criminal report, no charges, had been brought, or did they tell you
14 that they didn't know whether they were under investigation? So do you
15 recall which of these possibilities they mentioned, or don't you remember?
16 A. Well, I remember very well that all these questions were answered
18 Q. Tell me, sir, do you know the difference between a criminal report
19 or charges and an indictment?
20 A. Well, I'm not a specialist but with common sense I think that I
21 can make the difference.
22 Q. Can you tell me, then, what the difference is, according to common
24 A. I think that an indictment is based on a completed investigation.
25 Q. And a criminal report?
1 A. That could be a part or that could be being used for that
2 indictment, for instance.
3 Q. Who submits a criminal report or who brings charges, and who
4 issues an indictment? Did you know what the law on criminal procedure was
5 that was in force at the time in the area?
6 A. No, I don't.
7 Q. Do you know who submits a request for an investigation, who issues
8 a decision on an investigation, and who issues a decision on remand, on
9 detention on remand? Do you know what the case was according to the valid
10 legislation in Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time?
11 A. I didn't. I don't know.
12 Q. Tell me: Do you know how long an investigation can take, even in
13 peacetime, let alone in wartime, and what that might depend on? And how
14 long it might take?
15 A. Well, as I said, I'm not a specialist. So I have to disappoint
16 you because I don't want to speculate.
17 Q. I have a number of questions I wanted to put, but I won't waste
18 time on this now, regarding detention and so on. But tell me: When you
19 spoke to those people, did you take their personal details, their first
20 and last names, their dates of birth?
21 A. No, unfortunately not.
22 Q. So when you arrived at that meeting to speak with people about the
23 situation in Heliodrom, you were unable to show them a list of persons,
24 nor ask about particular persons, and ask why each one of them was there?
25 You could only put a general question why are these people here, am I
2 A. That's correct. That was our intention.
3 Q. Tell me, please: Mr. Nissen, when he testified here, and this is
4 on page 20508, lines 23 to 25, it's not in these documents here, I'm
5 saying this for the record, for Their Honours and for my learned friend,
6 and on pages 20509, lines 1 to 6, he said that you had instructions from
7 your team in Zagreb not to deal with prisons because that was for the ICRC
8 to deal with, and that for this reason, when you heard or saw something,
9 you would report this to the International Committee of the Red Cross.
10 You said that you purposely did not attempt to enter those premises
11 because that was not your job, not your task, so is it possible that your
12 superiors thought that you, unlike the International Committee of the Red
13 Cross, had neither the necessary expert knowledge nor the training
14 required to deal with these matters and that it was precisely for this
15 reason that that was the job of the ICRC, and not your job? When I say
16 your job, I'm not referring to you personally but to members of your
17 mission in general.
18 A. Well, the visit -- to plan a visit to the Heliodrom was of course
19 discussed within the coordination centre. So there was a reason for us to
20 go there. But I'm very familiar that the Red Cross --
21 Q. But tell me -- no. I only want to know whether you know about
22 this standpoint, do you agree with what Mr. Nissen said or is this the
23 first time you've heard this? That's all I want to know. Did you know
24 about this position and would you agree with it in principle, regardless
25 of Heliodrom now, but in general, as a rule, where prisons are concerned?
1 A. To answer your question, the first part, this is the first time
2 that I heard about that statement of Mr. Nissen but I'm of course, as
3 officer, aware of what you told -- just told us about the Red Cross.
4 Q. I would now like you to look at document P 02824 in the
5 Prosecutor's bundle, and while we are looking for it, I'll begin my
6 question. As it says in your document which we mentioned previously, the
7 prisoners told you that the food in Heliodrom was not good. Tell me: Did
8 you check where and how food for the prisoners in Heliodrom was prepared
9 while you were there? Because you had conflicting information about this.
10 The authorised official you spoke to told you one thing and the
11 prisoners told you another. So did you go and check and see where and how
12 food was prepared?
13 A. No, we didn't.
14 Q. The document I said we should look at, P 02824, is your report of
15 the 17th of June 1993, and in paragraph 5 there is a description of your
16 visit to the prisoners in the headquarters of the army of
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina. It says here, in the sentence before the last, that
18 the prisoners said that the food was very bad, but the same that the ABiH
19 soldiers have, so that's been added. When it says that the soldiers are
20 receiving the same food as the prisoners, and you know that soldiers need
21 to be fed well, this would mean that the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina
22 treated those prisoners, as far as food is concerned, in the best way they
23 were able to at that point in time. Would that be correct?
24 A. For this observation, is that correct?
25 Q. Did you know that in Heliodrom also, food for the prisoners was
1 prepared in the kitchen of the brigade quartered at Heliodrom and that
2 they received the same food that the members of the HVO units at Heliodrom
3 received? Did you know that?
4 A. No, I didn't.
5 Q. I would now like to move on to another topic.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute for counsel. You
7 just said that the detainees got the same food as HVO members. Do you
8 have documents proving this?
9 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I don't have the
10 documents, but witness Josip Praljak told us this in his testimony. I
11 think it was a response to a question I put and he described in great
12 detail how the food was prepared. That's why I asked this. I assumed
13 that if this was the deputy warden, then the gentleman might have received
14 this information because he met those people at the Heliodrom.
15 Q. I would now like to move on to two other topics, two events, that
16 are the most striking in your statement, and you used them to explain your
17 personal conviction about some things, confirming the general thesis about
18 the events in Mostar at the time. So first I would like to deal with the
19 visit to that flat that you photographed when you visited it. Yesterday,
20 you said that it was your interpreter who took you to that flat; is that
22 A. Who gave the information, and then we asked her to bring us there,
23 yeah, that's correct.
24 Q. Yesterday, you said that the door was opened by a neighbour. Was
25 the door locked and you couldn't open it? Why was it the neighbour who
1 opened the door? Or did I misunderstand this?
2 A. No. It is correct, and that's what I said. But I don't know why
3 and the door was locked.
4 Q. Did the Prosecutor tell you who -- or rather, sorry, the
5 neighbour, did the neighbour tell you how he got the keys, who had given
6 him the keys to that flat?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Did you ask him?
9 A. Probably we asked, yeah.
10 Q. And you don't recall what he answered?
11 A. Unfortunately not.
12 Q. To me, it seems important if someone moves somebody out of a flat,
13 then that person probably doesn't hand the keys to the next-door neighbour
14 and ask him to water the plants. If somebody is wanting to move in, they
15 would keep the keys. So it might seem unimportant to you but it's very
16 important to me.
17 A. That could be that the next neighbour had a duplicate key by the
18 previous people who lived in the apartment.
19 MR. STRINGER: Excuse me, Mr. President, I'm going to object to
20 both the question and the answer. I think both the witness and the
21 counsel are speculating at this point.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. This is speculation,
23 counsel, but you may continue.
24 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Did you ask what the name of the family was that had lived in the
1 flat which was now empty? And did you record the name of that family?
2 A. I don't recall the name of the family.
3 Q. Do you know how many members that family had and how long they had
4 lived in that flat before they either left it or were expelled or whatever
6 A. I don't recall.
7 Q. Did you ask the neighbour whether the family were the owners of
8 the flat or tenants or were they using it on some other basis?
9 A. Could be that we asked it but I don't recall.
10 Q. Did you ask the neighbour what his name was? Did you ask the
11 neighbour for identification? Do you remember the neighbour's name?
12 A. No, I don't.
13 Q. I'd now like to move on to the event at Ilici. If I understood
14 the case correctly, a child handed you a message about the event in Ilici.
15 The message said that a Muslim family had been killed and their house
16 burnt down. This was then interpreted to you by your lady interpreter.
17 After that, you went to Ilici, but you did not manage to find that house.
18 Is that correct?
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. Tell me, sir, is it correct that Ilici is a village, a small
21 village, in which all the houses are located along the road used by
22 vehicles, so all the houses are on the right and left-hand side of the
24 A. I don't recall.
25 Q. I'll ask a hypothetical question now. If the village of Ilici
1 looks as I describe it, you drive along the road and all the houses line
2 the road on one and the other side, and if you pass through the village
3 from one end to the other, then certainly you would have to come across a
4 gutted house and see it. Would I be correct in saying that?
5 A. In such a case, that is possible, yeah.
6 Q. I have described the village correctly. Unfortunately I don't
7 have a photograph here now, but I will bring one at the first opportunity.
8 You said that you arrived in the village and you saw HVO soldiers fixing
9 some pieces of paper on pillars, posts, trees, am I right?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. You didn't get out of the car, only your interpreter got out of
12 the car. She came to a post, read what it said there, came back to the
13 car and told you what she had seen; is that correct?
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. Did she tell you what kind of notice this was? Because it's quite
16 unusual for soldiers to be fixing pieces of paper around, so did she tell
17 you what kind of notice it was?
18 A. It was an announcement that people with that name were killed.
19 Q. Killed or died? Because it's quite odd to see soldiers fixing to
20 trees notices saying that someone had been killed. It's a little unusual.
21 A. Yeah, but I want to stick to my -- I don't recall. So I have to
22 stick to the report where we wrote what happened. I don't know the number
23 but ...
24 Q. All I saw in the report is what you have told us so far, but what
25 I'd like to know is why didn't you get out of the car yourself and check
1 this? Because if there is a list of names, you don't need an interpreter
2 or a translator. You could at least have checked whether these were the
3 same names that you had been informed about a day or two previously in
4 Mostar. You didn't need an interpreter for that.
5 A. What is your question?
6 Q. Why didn't you get out of the car and check this?
7 A. And I can't answer.
8 Q. All right. Your interpreter also told you, and she was your main
9 source of information, later on you said you had some others, that from
10 the 30th of June 1993, until the 5th of July 1993, about 5.000 Muslim men
11 had been arrested and 400 people expelled from their flats or houses, and
12 you explained this in your report. Mr. Nissen, when he testified here, on
13 page 20464, he said that there were rumours or indications about this but
14 nothing tangible. Do you see the difference between what you said and
15 what you told us yesterday and the way in which this information was
16 interpreted by Mr. Nissen? Why did he feel that this was something that
17 was not tangible but you think it's tangible or not?
18 MR. STRINGER: Mr. President, I'm not necessarily objecting to the
19 question. However, since counsel asked -- is asking the witness to
20 comment on the testimony of another person, I think that in fairness, the
21 witness ought to be able to look at his report, the one that's being
22 referred to, in which there is the reference to the 5.000 arrests and
23 4.000 -- 400 expulsions so the witness can see what he wrote and then
24 compare it to the testimony that's being put to him that is attributed to
25 a different witness.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Counsel, in order to
2 support your demonstration, first of all it would be a good idea to submit
3 the report to him, then indicate that Mr. Nissen had said such and such
4 and compare that to what he said yesterday. Perhaps you wanted to just
5 gain some time.
6 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm trying to
7 save time. I quoted this precisely as it is in the report, but the
8 Prosecutor can ask this question in redirect. The witness can answer my
9 question as to whether he thought this information was tangible or not.
10 And let's leave Mr. Nissen out of it, then.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Colonel, could you
12 specify the difference between what Mr. Nissen said and what you yourself
13 can say?
14 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, the information probably came from our
15 team, so it is the information what was gathered by the team and it was
16 the interpretation of Mr. Nissen during his testimony, I suppose.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
18 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Let's now take a look at another document shown to you yesterday
20 by the Prosecutor, P 03172. You're looking for it, I'll tell you that
21 this is a daily summary for the 4th of July 1993, and in point 4,
22 "Humanitarian activity", there is a description of the situation in the
23 Cap Anamur refugee camp in Capljina. The Prosecutor put some questions to
24 you about this document. He asked you something about the document saying
25 that every night the refugees were threatened by the military police and
1 you responded that that was correct. In the document, under 4, where this
2 incident is described, in sentence 2, it says, "The refugees are under
3 threat almost every night from the military police, which is searching the
5 Do you observe a difference here? It seems to me -- no, you
6 don't? The document, it doesn't say that the military police threatened
7 the refugees. It says that the military police searched the camp. So
8 they were under threat from the search.
9 MR. STRINGER: Excuse me, Mr. President, it's not correct. The
10 document says, "These refugees are threatened almost every night by
11 military police searching." So the word "threat" or "threatening" is
12 found in the witness's own report.
13 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] The key word here, and I
14 don't see the difference between what I said and what you just said, I
15 read the document in the Croatian language, the key word is "search,"
17 JUDGE TRECHSEL: With due respect I don't see why you pretend
18 this, that the original is English, I think and not Croatian, and there is
19 no way that one could identify any word as a key word here.
20 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I can read it out again in
21 English and then explain why I think that there is an essential
22 difference. I'll need two minutes for that. It says here, "[In English]
23 These refugees are threatened almost every night by MP searching."
24 [Interpretation] If it is a camp in which the refugees are arriving and
25 then, after that, go on to Germany, and that's the logical conclusion,
1 then in a situation if -- where we are dealing with a war, you have the
2 military police, who is able to search the camp, looking for weapons,
3 deserters and so on. That necessarily need not be linked to any threats
4 to individuals, and that kind of search would not do them any harm. So
5 that's why I asked the question. That is the only reason that I asked the
6 question. And my last question is this:
7 Q. Tell me, please, yesterday in your statement --
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a moment. Is it your last,
9 really your last? Because you already used up an hour. Are you going to
10 be given some time by the others or not?
11 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. President, we are prepared to give some of our
12 time to whichever counsel wishes to -- needs a little extra time.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. And how much time
14 out of your time, your very precious time, are you willing to give?
15 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, Your Honour, I did wish to retain 15 minutes.
16 However, in light of the gentleman's testimony and what I'm hearing
17 today and what I heard yesterday, it may not be necessary for me to do any
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Then we understand
20 that you are willing to give your time to the Defence of Mr. Coric.
21 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I just need three more
22 minutes. I just have one more question.
23 Q. Yesterday, you told us in your testimony that you had seen HVO
24 forces in the area -- the HV forces in the area you covered. Now, when
25 Mr. Nissen made his statement, and that was recorded on pages 20486 to
1 20488, and then again on page 20501 and on page 2054 [as interpreted] and
2 20591, he said that there was frustration because the mission was asked to
3 report on the HV and they didn't see anybody. So they even made jokes and
4 said they would look for the Bosnian navy, which didn't exist, of course.
5 Now, I'm interested in the following. Why did Mr. Nissen not know that
6 you had seen members of the HV or, rather, did you inform Mr. Nissen of
7 having seen members of the Croatian army?
8 A. Madam, first, it depends of course, it's very linked to the date
9 of our report where we for the first time were mentioning this, and I
10 can't give you an answer for Mr. Nissen. In principle, our reports were
11 approved, so also read by the head of the coordination centre.
12 Q. Your report was from July 1993. That is to say the time when
13 Mr. Nissen was your superior officer.
14 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
15 I have no further questions.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, counsel. So now let
17 us move on to the next Defence counsel. Mr. Ibrisimovic.
18 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. We
19 probably won't use up all our time and we'll give our time to the Stojic
20 Defence team.
21 Cross-examination by Mr. Ibrisimovic:
22 Q. Witness, I'd like to start off with a few questions about your
23 team, M2. That was the name of your team, wasn't it, the monitoring
24 mission in Mostar, M2, right?
25 A. That's correct, sir.
1 Q. We have seen a number of reports and you on several occasions
2 mentioned Amigo Jesus, who was your colleague from the team; is that
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. Was he with you on the team throughout while were you in Mostar?
6 A. During the complete time frame, yeah.
7 Q. Now, that team, Mr. Jesus Amigo, was he the leader of the team or
8 were you the leader of the team, within the M2 team?
9 A. Well, it didn't work that way but officially he was deployed
10 earlier so he had the responsibility of summarising the daily reports, and
11 in that respect he was the leader of the team.
12 Q. I assume that your colleague from the team had the same
13 information that you had, and that you exchanged information on all the
14 events that you monitored, right, in Mostar and the area in which you were
16 A. We gathered the information together and discussed it together.
17 We did everything with the team.
18 Q. And that's the reason why you signed the reports together, is it?
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. Having heard that, I assume that you had a very high opinion about
21 your team colleague or a positive opinion of him?
22 A. I think that we were a good team, yeah.
23 Q. Thank you. Perhaps we will go back to that topic in due course.
24 But now I have a few questions to ask you on behalf of the Pusic Defence
25 or rather the Coric Defence asked some questions about that, that is to
1 say the position and post held by Mr. Pusic. And for me to do that I'd
2 like us to look at a number of documents. I think Their Honours have the
3 documents but I don't know if everybody in the courtroom does. I'd like
4 us to look at the first document, P 02670 shown to you yesterday by the
5 Prosecutor and if you look at the last page of that document, and I think
6 the paragraph number is 5 -- I apologise, the document wasn't shown to you
7 yesterday. I'm going to show you now, and it is paragraph 1 on page 1.
8 And under (a) it says "Herzegovina". Have you found that portion?
9 A. Can you say it again, please?
10 Q. On page 1, we have paragraph 2 and then (a) is Herzegovina and the
11 second point is titled, the situation over all, et cetera.
12 A. Then I have it wrong.
13 MR. STRINGER: Excuse me, counsel, I think he's looking for an
14 exhibit number.
15 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. 02670 is the number, P 02670.
17 A. It was the wrong document. Yes, I have it here in front of me.
19 Q. It's also a monitoring mission report, the 8th of June 1993 is the
20 date. And if we look at paragraph 2(a), we'll come across the name of a
21 major Berislav Pusic, humanitarian commission and Chief of Staff. That's
22 what it says if you look down the paragraph. And underneath that, it
23 says, an HVO delegation. Have you found that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. I don't want to go into the contents of the document, it deals
1 with an exchange of some kind, but this is a piece of information which
2 the monitoring mission had according to which Mr. Pusic was the Chief of
3 Staff, and that he was a commissioner of the humanitarian commission, and
4 that's what it says in this ECMM document that you have before you.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Now, to go back to another point that Mr. Pusic was introduced to
7 you as the deputy chief of police, so at the same time we have two
8 different pieces of information. One that he was the deputy chief and
9 then from the same establishment we see that he was the Chief of Staff in
10 a document from the same institution. Although to be true, it says, in
11 brackets, TBC. I assume that means to be confirmed?
12 A. That's correct, and by the way, this comes from the regional
13 centre, Belgrade.
14 Q. Yes. But it was sent to the teams on the ground in theatre,
15 right, both to Tuzla, Kiseljak and the teams on the ground?
16 A. Yeah. You can see to who it was sent, correct.
17 Q. In response to a question from the Presiding Judge, you couldn't
18 give us much detail as to where you get the information that Mr. Pusic was
19 the deputy chief of police. Perhaps the Prosecutor can help us out
20 because it provided you with certain documents. Well, let's try and
21 clarify the situation. In front of you, you have a document which the
22 number of which is P 9218, it's a diagram or chart of the structure of the
23 military police, and for the record, we received these documents first on
24 the 21st of December 2005, along with another document from the Prosecutor
25 and then we found it on the 65 ter list. But here we see the structure of
1 the military police in the period from October 1992 to July 1993. And
2 there is no mention of Mr. Pusic's name there. We have the chief, the
3 deputy chief, the chiefs of the different departments, but nowhere do we
4 come across Mr. Pusic here. Right?
5 A. According to this picture, you are right, yeah.
6 Q. We can turn to another document, P 9232 is the number, which
7 encompasses the period from July 1993 to December 1993. And once again,
8 it's a diagram compiled, I assume, by the Prosecution which was on the
9 witness chart for Tomljanovich, I'm saying that for the record. And once
10 again, Mr. Pusic's name isn't on this diagram. All the major posts are
11 mentioned, all the departments and officers at the head of those
12 departments but nowhere do we come across Mr. Pusic's name, do we?
13 A. I can't find him on this page.
14 Q. Thank you. I'd like to go back to a document I started off with,
15 the first document that was shown you yesterday by my learned colleague of
16 the Prosecution. P 2496 is the number. Now, if you take a look at point
17 7, you'll see that it refers to a joint commission and you told us
18 something about that yourself and mention is made of an agreement of some
19 kind to have access to detention centres. 2496 is the document number.
20 Point 7, or section 7.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. The question was about access to prisoners' centres, detention
23 centres, and Mr. Pusic is mentioned and it says that Mr. Pusic does not
24 have authorisation to sign a permit of that kind, and Mr. Pasalic had
25 already signed that, and that's also what it says in the report by the
1 ECMM report. Have you found it?
2 A. Yes, but this is not an a report from our team. This is signed,
3 as you see, by Mr. Milverton. So we were at that moment not in --
4 Q. Yes, I'm not challenging that. I'm not challenging that the man
5 signed the document. But the Prosecution showed you the document
6 yesterday and I know that that was the day you had arrived in Mostar,
7 one -- give or take a day. So that's why I'm showing you the document and
8 the Prosecutor did not focus on this section of the document.
9 We can now go back to what I started off with, and something your
10 colleague, Jesus Amigo, and it seems Mr. Pusic had some contacts and
11 cooperation with him so let's look at that document which is there. For
12 the record it is 6D 00606.
13 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we have the
14 original if anybody would like to take a look at it. I'm at your
15 disposal. Perhaps the witness would like to take a look. There is the
16 signature there.
17 THE WITNESS: Definitely.
18 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. It says: "To Mr. Berko Pusic, with gratitude for all the
20 assistance, with the deepest gratitude for all the help he gave us in the
21 completion of our tasks. Mostar, October 1992." It seems that Mr. Jesus
22 Amigo, a member of your team, had very good experience with his
23 cooperation with Mr. Pusic.
24 A. Maybe I can explain you what is this. Maybe I can explain you
25 what is this. He signs here as HCC, what means head of the coordination
1 centre. This is a courtesy plaque what normally, by that kind of
2 occasions, by saying farewell or whatever was given to the head of the
3 coordination centre. This was probably given by him at the time that he
4 was replacing the head of the coordination centre. This was not given to
5 him as member of the team and not during the time that we were forming M2.
6 Q. If you read it carefully, you'll see that your colleague from the
7 M2 team, Jesus Amigo, you can see the English translation, is thanking
8 Mr. Pusic for his cooperation. It is not given to Mr. Jesus, upon his
9 departure from Mostar. That's why I said that he probably had good
10 experience of his cooperation with Mr. Pusic as a member of your team.
11 A. Yeah. What is the question? I think that's probably right, yeah,
12 that he had a good relationship, but we had as team also a good
13 relationship with Mr. Pusic.
14 Q. Thank you, Mr. President. I have no further questions.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's take a look at this plaque
16 so that we can look at it, at this plate, so the Judges can see what it
18 For the transcript, let me say that this is a plaque, a small
19 plaque, bearing Observation Mission of the European Community, and in red
20 ink on the back, you have the text, which is on 6D 00606. So, Colonel, I
21 have to ask the question: Obviously this is something given by the ECMM.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. I'd like to explain probably that
23 he gave this replacing the head of the coordination mission because it is
24 signed, just above his signature, you'll find HCC, and so I guess that he
25 did that by replacing the chief of the coordination centre and not as
1 member of the M2 team. And by the way, I don't know at what time this was
2 given, what the date was, because that is quite interesting, of course.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] October.
4 THE WITNESS: October, yeah, that was probably at the moment that
5 he left the mission.
6 JUDGE TRECHSEL: To complete the record it may be allowed to
7 mention that there is a Spanish flag on it along with the European one
8 which shows -- it's also written in Spanish, which shows that it is
9 probably something which is attached to Mr. Jesus, your colleague.
10 THE WITNESS: You are fully right, sir, because we didn't had this
11 kind of courtesy plaques within the mission. This comes from the Spanish
12 Battalion and they had this kind of things so probably he got it from the
13 Spanish Battalion to hand it over. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Let's give this back to
15 the counsel, this expression of gratitude back to the counsel, but show it
16 also to the Prosecution, if you please.
17 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Just a brief explanation. It is
18 not a Spanish Battalion document. It says the ECMM, the Spanish flag is
19 at the front because that year Spain presided over the European Union.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's move on to the next
21 counsel, then.
22 MR. KARNAVAS: Good afternoon, Mr. President, good afternoon, Your
23 Honours. I don't believe I will be cross-examining the gentleman because
24 I would be seeking speculative answers in any event, given some of the
25 questions that were raised by the Defence yesterday -- by the Prosecution,
1 that is. Thank you.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very good. Well, we have two
3 counsels left.
4 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, and I'd like
5 to start off first. And I'd like to say at the outset that my colleague,
6 Peter Murphy, will also be conducting part of the cross-examination once I
7 finish with my own. As far as time is concerned, I'd like to inform the
8 Trial Chamber that the Stojic Defence team has its original one hour
9 allotted to it and we have been given the remaining time left over from
10 the other teams which means that we will certainly continue tomorrow. We
11 won't be able to complete the cross-examination today, and if there is any
12 time left over, Mrs. Alaburic said that she would have some additional
13 questions too which she didn't manage to get through today.
14 MR. STRINGER: Excuse me, Mr. President. Just on that before
15 counsel begins I would like to strongly request the Court keep in mind --
16 the Trial Chamber keep in mind tomorrow because it's a short day for us,
17 allowing or saving enough time for sufficient redirect examination.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Mr. Stringer, could you
19 tell us how much time you expect for your redirect?
20 MR. STRINGER: At the moment, based on the cross-examinations that
21 have so far occurred, I think very -- not very much, maybe 15 minutes or
22 so, subject to the cross-examinations to come.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very good. I will ask the legal
24 officer to do the computation and see where we are in terms of time, so
25 that we are not flooded. You may resume.
1 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I'd just
2 like to say that before I begin my cross-examination, that we are very
3 grateful to the other Defence teams for having given us two hours for
4 cross-examination. However, if we have to curtail that time, or if we
5 don't have time to get through the two hours of cross-examination, we
6 would like to reserve the right to ask that the witness -- or rather to be
7 granted additional time for cross-examination as the witness is in this
8 country and it won't be a technical problem to have him called back, and I
9 believe that the Trial Chamber is clear that this witness, for the most
10 part -- well, I'm going to make my request. He testified about Mr. Stojic
11 throughout most of his testimony.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It is enough to ask a lot of
13 questions, you know, and I can demonstrate this if you wish. If you're
14 professional I'm sure you'll be able to scan the entire topic in two
15 hours, with this witness. This witness is a follow-up of another witness
16 who already came and already discussed all these topics.
17 Go ahead.
18 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if I may count on those
19 two hours, I'm convinced that we will manage to complete our
20 cross-examination in time.
21 Cross-examination by Ms. Nozica:
22 Q. Good day, sir. I will be putting questions to you on behalf of
23 the Defence of Mr. Bruno Stojic and my colleague, Mr. Murphy, will
24 continue after I finish. I would now like to focus on that part of your
25 testimony and of your reports that refer to the delivery of medical
1 assistance from the hospital on the west side to the east side. You said
2 that you mediated in the delivery of medical equipment, medicines and so
3 on, on at least three occasions.
4 We have seen your reports from around the 10th of June 1993,
5 referring to requests by the hospital in East Mostar and the goodwill of
6 the hospital in West Mostar to send medicines. I would just like to ask
7 you whether you know that even before the 10th or 11th of June, there were
8 contacts and correspondence between the hospital on the east side and the
9 officials on the west side of Mostar concerning the delivery of medical
10 supplies and medicines to the hospital on the east side.
11 A. Not by my knowledge.
12 Q. Could you please take a look at the pink binder under your left
13 hand right at the bottom, as far as I can see from here? I have provided
14 this to the Prosecutor, the witness. There are three binders for the
15 interpreters. But if the interpreters don't have them, they can get it
16 during the break. Would you look at 2D 00119? You have stickers at the
17 side. Let's take a look at that document. Just tell us when you have
18 found it.
19 A. Yeah, yeah, I have it here in front of me.
20 Q. This is a document dated the 3rd of June 1993. Before the period
21 we talked about. And I'll read it. It says, "Referring to information
22 about the shortage of medicines and the sanitary material in the east part
23 of the town under your control, we are willing to offer the required
24 assistance according to your specification immediately and without any
25 conditions. If you are interested in this humanitarian assistance from
1 the central warehouse of the Main Staff of the HZ HB, please hand us your
2 reply through the commission as soon as possible."
3 And this document was signed for the assistant of the head of the
4 Defence department health sector, HZ HB, Brigadier Ivan Bagaric, who sent
5 this letter to the command of the 4th Corps of the army of
7 Sir, on more than one occasion you said that Mr. Bagaric was the
8 deputy of the director of the hospital in West Mostar. So, please, tell
9 me now whether you know what position he held throughout the time you had
10 contacts with him, that is, that he was the assistant of the head of the
11 Defence department of the sector for health of the HZ HB, in other words,
12 he was the assistant of Mr. Bruno Stojic in charge of health at that time,
13 health care, do you know that?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Now, please look at document in the same bundle, 2D 00120. It's
16 the next document in the bundle.
17 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Ms. Nozica, is that the only question you
18 associate to this document? The witness does not seem to know the
19 document or anything about it. Is that understood?
20 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if you will allow me to
21 go through this series of documents, it will become apparent why I put the
22 documents to the witness and then I will put some questions to the witness
23 about all of them.
24 Q. Have you found 2D 00120?
25 A. Yes, I do.
1 Q. Can we conclude from this that this is the response sent by
2 Mr. Arif Pasalic dated the 5th of June 1993, which he is sending to the
3 chief of the headquarters, Chief of Staff, and it says, "Republic of
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina" and so on and it says that the RBH army hospital,
5 former institution for hygiene Mostar, "needs supplies and medicines and
6 medical material and therefore we ask you to provide us with the
7 acquisition thereof. Enclosed list of medicines and medical material
8 necessary for the operation of the hospital."
9 Are you aware of this document?
10 A. I am.
11 Q. How did you become familiar with it?
12 A. Because we handed it over in -- in the western -- the west bank
13 hospital. We transported this message from the east to the west.
14 Q. Well, you didn't mention it in your reports but I accept your
15 reply. What I'm asking you now is: Is this in fact Mr. Arif Pasalic's
16 reply? Is it logical to conclude that this is his reply to the document
17 we saw previously? It is being sent on the 5th of June, but if you think
18 it's speculation, you needn't answer, although it seems quite
20 A. What I remember, and the effort we took to arrange this, not
21 knowing the first one, signed by Mr. Bagaric, I think that this is the
22 response, yeah, that's correct, because I'm familiar with the list.
23 Q. Thank you. In the Prosecutor's binder, could you please find
24 document P 02703? It's in the Prosecutor's binder, P 02703. And could
25 the usher, if possible, assist the witness and at least remove the
1 documents of those Defence teams that have finished their
2 cross-examination? Because it's a small desk and too many documents.
3 Have you found this document?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. In point 5, in this document, you say the team visited the
6 hospital on the west bank in order to hand a letter from the Commander of
7 the 4th Corps, Arif Pasalic. You say official reply arriving tomorrow,
8 10th of June 1993, and then you list what is required, what is requested,
9 exchange of teams of doctors, delivery of supplies, and ambulances. You
10 recall this? It's dated the 11th of June 1993.
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. In my binder, could you please look at another document, as you
13 have confirmed all this, let's see whether these are documents you
14 remember. It's 2D 00322. It's in the middle of the binder marked by a
15 green sticker. Please tell me when you've found it.
16 A. Yeah. I have it in front of me.
17 Q. We have this letter here from Mr. Arif Pasalic. It speaks for
18 itself. But I would only wish to draw attention to point 2, "Please
19 urgently deliver the medicines and medical supplies on the list." If you
20 remember it's that list that we saw just a little while ago enclosed with
21 that letter from Mr. Arif Pasalic dated the 5th of June. Is that the
22 letter from Mr. Arif Pasalic which you carried to the hospital in
23 West Mostar?
24 A. Well, it needs a little bit investigation to give that answer
25 because it has to do with the date, the dates of the documents, of course.
1 I mean it was not only one list. We got not only one list. It
2 happened, I think, two or three times. So that's why. It's not that easy
3 for me to say, no, this is exactly what belongs to -- this is the
4 attachment that belongs with this letter. That's difficult for me at this
6 Q. Sir, I'm not asking you about the enclosure, let's look at the
7 document itself. Is this a letter from Mr. Arif Pasalic? Is it the
8 letter that you carried that day as you say in your report of the 11th of
9 June 1993? Because you mentioned those three points and explained them so
10 I'm asking you is that the letter?
11 A. Yeah, then it is the letter.
12 Q. All right. Now, please look at your document, P 02721?
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, on the previous document, just not
14 have any hesitations, I wonder whether this is the signature of
15 Mr. Pasalic. It looks different from the one we had on other letters and
16 there is something that I cannot read in the original before left of
17 Gospodin Pasalic and that may be signed for or something like that.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, it must have been someone
19 who signed on his behalf.
20 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
21 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I didn't feel it was
22 very important who signed the document because the witness explained the
23 document and said he received it from the Commander of the 4th Corps.
24 Q. I assume you found your document P 02721?
25 A. I did.
1 Q. You may be able to observe, sir, that I'm following the time
2 sequence and looking at the documents in chronological order. So let's
3 look at the documents accompanying these reports. So the 11th of June
4 1993. In your report, you say -- let's look at the last sentence, in
5 point 5. It says, "With reference to the letter handed over yesterday to
6 the doctors in the HVO hospital, today, they said that there were no
7 doctors who wanted to change places with those on the east side and that
8 they don't have enough ambulances even for their own needs." You say that
9 you gave the list of medicines to the International Committee of the Red
10 Cross which are needed for the town of Mostar. Let's look at the last
11 sentence in your report where it says, "As for the exchange of specialists
12 between the two hospitals, the HVO on the west side and the Armija on the
13 east side, the doctors on the west side are afraid that they might be
14 badly treated or even arrested if they cross over to the other side. We
15 are trying to negotiate a meeting between the two sides to discuss this
16 situation." You remember this, don't you?
17 A. I do.
18 Q. Now, I'll ask you to look at document 2D 00123. It's somewhere in
19 the middle of the binder.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. This is a letter dated the 11th of June, the same day you compiled
22 your report about the doctors and the ambulances, Defence department,
23 chief of the main medical corps, Colonel Gveric [phoen] and he's referring
24 to a document of the 9th of June, addressed to the main medical
25 headquarters of the HVO. I don't want to take up too much of your time.
1 You may of course take a look. But it says that the delivery of the list
2 of medicines requested is being prepared or the medicines on the list are
3 being prepared. Could you look at the document, please, otherwise you
4 might say it doesn't say that there. As for ambulances I have to tell you
5 that during the aggression on the town of Mostar, 19 vehicles were
6 destroyed and six drivers wounded so the HVO is telling the Muslim side
7 that and say we don't have enough for ourselves and as for specialists, it
8 says that there are no volunteers either among the Muslims or the Croats
9 among the personnel.
10 My colleague, Ms. Alaburic, asked you about this but I'll explain
11 later why I have to put this question. This is the 11th of June and it
12 says that as the conditions of looking after the wounded population and
13 the soldiers are far better here than yours are, we propose for the
14 umpteenth time that you send all your wounded to the HVO war hospital
15 where they will be treated in exactly the same way as our own soldiers
16 according to the Hippocratic Oath and medical ethics. And the HVO main
17 medical staff and I personally guarantee that the treatment will be
18 completely identical.
19 So is this the response by the chief of the main medical staff of
20 the HZ HB which you in fact describe in your report, P 02721, and did you
21 see this letter or were you just told orally that you should convey this
22 message to the persons you spoke to in East Mostar?
23 A. I don't remember that I saw this message before. The contents, by
24 the way, was well known. The arguments in this letter were well known, so
25 verbally definitely discussed with us, yeah.
1 Q. Evidently, you conveyed these arguments as can be seen in your
2 report of the 11th of June 1993. And then there was more talk of these
3 doctors so I'll put a few more questions about this, but now let's look at
4 a document in the Prosecution bundle, document P 0 --
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] To save time, we know that there
6 was mail that was exchanged with the two hospitals. We know this topic
7 inside out. So if you spend more time on this, it's not going to add
8 anything. So could you please now ask the essential question, essential
9 to you? I mean it's up to you but please ask the question.
10 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I wish to inform you
11 that all these letters, which are of fundamental importance for the entire
12 Defence, but I don't think I should discuss this before the witness, that
13 I have shown them to witnesses more than once and they were not admitted
14 into evidence because the witnesses knew nothing about them. We have here
15 a witness who knows about these documents, who mentions them, and they are
16 very important. Your Honour stated that in one of your decisions where
17 you said that probably these documents would be admitted through a witness
18 who was familiar with them. So I wish to do that now and this is highly
19 important for the Defence and will not take long. Thank you.
20 Q. Could we look at P 02731? P 02731. This is a report of yours of
21 the 12th of June 1993. Have you found it?
22 A. Yes, that's correct.
23 Q. Okay. I now wish to draw your attention to point 5 of this
24 report, where you say, "Medicines from the HVO hospital on the west side
25 have been delivered to the Bosnian hospital on the east side, and they
1 will hand over to us the medicines they need urgently." So evidently they
2 needed more medicines. And then in the second part, this is M2 and M3,
3 monitored the departure of four UN helicopters from Medjugorje taking
4 wounded Muslims to Turkey via Split, the Turkish airplanes were waiting in
5 Split. So as of the 12th of June, you submitted a report saying that
6 those medicines had been delivered from the west side to the east side.
7 Can we agree on this?
8 A. Definitely.
9 Q. Can you tell me what you know about the departure of wounded
10 Muslims? It just says Muslims here, wounded Muslims, via Medjugorje to
11 Turkey via Split, so Medjugorje, Split, Turkey.
12 A. I don't recall it but it was probably arranged by the UN or the
13 Spanish Battalion, not by ECMM.
14 Q. I said it says here M2 and M3 monitored the departure from
15 Medjugorje. That's why I'm asking you whether you know about this,
16 because it's in the report of the monitoring mission of the European
17 Community. It says M2 and M3 so I'm just asking you if you know something
18 about this, and if you don't I'll move on.
19 A. No.
20 Q. Very well. Thank you. All right. As you say that the medicines
21 were delivered, let's look at 2D 00504.
22 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I assume that there will be a break
23 soon. I would like to know exactly when so that I can organise myself.
24 It's the third letter from the bottom.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have five more minutes
1 before the break.
2 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you.
3 Q. I asked you to look at 2D 00504 in my binder, it's the third
4 document from the end?
5 A. I got it.
6 Q. Here we have an order issued by Mr. Gveric to issue medicines as
7 requested by the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, a list is enclosed, the
8 quantities should be sufficient for seven days.
9 Please look at document 2D 00321. That's the list. It's found
10 somewhere else, not along with this document, but please look at it,
11 2D 00321, and tell me whether you can recall you transported these
12 medicines, is this the shipment, can you recall, according to the
13 specification, and if not, all the better, because it would mean that the
14 HVO sent more shipments than you know about, but in any case, can you tell
15 us whether this might be the list of those medicines which you transported
16 on the 11th and then reported in your report of the 12th as having been
18 A. As I said, we delivered at least two times ourselves and one time
19 it was done by the UNPROFOR Spanish platoon, so this is probably one of
20 the lists, yeah.
21 Q. Thank you, sir. Could we now look at document in the Prosecutor's
22 binder, 2782? I will be referring to point 3 but I just wish to point out
23 what you are able to confirm or what you know. It's your report of the
24 15th of June 1993. So this is after the incident with the Spanish soldier
25 and you continue to insist and try to organise, as you say at one point,
1 you're the only person in Mostar trying to get the required amounts of
2 medicine and medical supplies to East Mostar and the first place you apply
3 is the hospital in West Mostar, and what you don't get there you try to
4 get through the ICRC and other institutions. You applied to them for
5 things that they cannot give you in the hospital in West Mostar; is that
6 correct? You have to say yes or no for the transcript.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. All right. Now, please look at point 3 where you go on to say,
9 "In the hospital on the east side, we received a list of urgently needed
10 medicines. We have arranged on the west side for them to get the
11 medicines and tomorrow morning the medical corps of the -- or the medical
12 service of the HVO have promised that they will obtain part of the
13 material." As for oxygen, they will try, if east side provides the empty
14 bottles and pays for it, they have offered again to take care of all the
15 wounded people, Muslims or Croats, including people from the east side.
16 You say, "We asked SpaBat to provide transport of medicines from the west
17 hospital to the east one, but we have been told that they need, before
18 providing the transport, an agreement signed by both parties."
19 Sir, on the 15th of June 1993, when you contacted the doctors on
20 the west side, and in this document you make an error, Mr. Bagaric here is
21 called the director of the hospital -- the deputy of the hospital
22 director, but that was not his post, as we saw from the previous
23 documents, he is the assistant of the head of the health care department
24 of the HZ HB, so you are trying yet again to assist the hospital in
25 East Mostar and the hospital in West Mostar is continuing to offer help
1 and offering to treat people from the east side. Am I right?
2 A. According to the text, that's right.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think it is time for
5 a break.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, a 20-minute break.
7 --- Recess taken at 5.39 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 6.00 p.m.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Before we resume, judges are
10 working hard during the break and they probably solved the mystery of the
11 document. I will give the floor to my fellow judge and he will explain
12 what happened.
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I do not claim any unmerited applause. An
14 interpreter actually has - and I didn't take down her name, I must
15 confess - has drawn my attention to the witness's statement which we have
16 all read and I had even marked. On pages 15 and 16, one finds the
17 explanation for this mysterious document. The fact, as the witness tells
18 it, is that they found this paper with a B/C/S text on it, and later the
19 interpreter wrote down the English version on the back of the same
20 document. So it's recto verso. That explains why the paper looks the
21 same. And can you confirm this, Mr. Van der Grinten?
22 THE WITNESS: Well, it sounds -- I don't remember it, sir, but it
23 sounds logical -- it's a logical explanation, I think.
24 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
25 MR. MURPHY: Just for the record, Your Honour, the witness's
1 previous testimony was that it came from a notebook that belonged to the
2 interpreter. Just so that's clear on the record.
3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Yes.
4 MR. STRINGER: Mr. President, I was intending to raise this in
5 redirect examination to show the exhibit to the witness but since it's
6 been raised now I think I'll just say this now because during the break
7 we, like the other exhibit, we sent someone into the vault to see if they
8 could find the original exhibit itself and that's what I have here and I
9 will show it to the witness in his redirect examination, just so that it
10 can be made part of the record in that way.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Let's move on.
12 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I join in the
13 discussion? I think I've understood what document this is about, although
14 I didn't listen to the -- I wasn't listening to the interpretation. I
15 don't think it concerns what it says on page 2 of that same document,
16 because if we look at the hours in the left-hand column we will be able to
17 see that that cannot be the case. It is not the reverse side of the same
18 piece of paper.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, if we have time, we'll see
20 this during redirect. So I think Sherlock Holmes worked hard and will
21 continue working. Ms. Nozica, you can resume, please.
22 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I consider
23 this to be a very important question but I'll carry on and say, by way of
24 introduction, something that this witness knows about, the delivery of
25 medicines and the HVO offer to assist. I'll be winding up this topic.
1 Q. Could you look at document P 02923 next, please? It's in the
2 Prosecutor's binder. P 02923.
3 A. Yeah.
4 Q. This is your report of the 24th of June 1993. I would like to
5 focus on point 5 and the Prosecutor touched upon that too. Paragraph 2 of
6 point 5 says that you talked to Mr. Bagaric and this is your conversation
7 with him, that's for the transcript, to make it clear, and he refers to
8 the proposal for the exchange of doctors, and in the third sentence, he
9 gives an alternative proposal that the old Mostar hospital be opened up on
10 the west bank - and you say near the battle front, that's your comment -
11 which would serve as a war hospital for everyone, Muslims, Croats, Serbs,
12 members of the HVO and the BH army alike, civilians, et cetera.
13 Now, first of all, let me ask you this: Did you consider that the
14 idea of opening up this hospital was realistic or not?
15 A. Not realistic.
16 Q. And would you tell me why?
17 A. Because of the location. And also because the difficulty to
18 secure it.
19 Q. Sir, what does because of the location mean? What do you mean by
20 that? We are going to ask other witnesses that too.
21 A. Near the front line.
22 Q. So is it your assessment that the old hospital building, if you
23 know the one I mean, was closer or further from the front line than the
24 hospital on the east bank of Mostar? You know where the front line was.
25 Now if you know where the old hospital was located, can you say whether it
1 was at roughly the same distance, if not even further from the front line,
2 than the hospital in East Mostar that you visited regularly?
3 A. Well, it's hard to say because then I need to see the map again,
4 the sketch.
5 Q. But --
6 A. I don't exactly recall now where it was. What I know that it was
7 very close to the confrontation line, the place he mentioned.
8 Q. Now, in order to make this clear, was the building in West Mostar?
9 A. That's correct. I have to say in the area held by the HVO.
10 Q. Thank you, sir. Now, you say that this part was dangerous because
11 of its proximity to the front line. That's your conclusion. So in a way,
12 you refused this proposal because you thought it was unrealistic for those
13 reasons; would that be right?
14 A. We didn't -- we didn't refuse anything. It was his proposal.
15 Q. But as far as I can see from your reports, you didn't discuss the
16 proposal further with representatives on the east bank or with the
17 authorities, other authorities, both on the east and west banks?
18 A. Well, we did but we found out that it was impossible to realise.
19 Q. Very well. I won't dwell on this, although it is a fairly
20 important question, but Mr. Bagaric, as we can see from this sentence, is
21 making a proposal and he says that in such an unsafe situation that
22 reigned in the hospital, the HVO soldiers and Croats were being treated
23 there too, right along with the Muslims and members of the BH army.
24 That's what would follow from what we see here?
25 A. Yeah but I suppose that is not a guarantee that that is not a
1 dangerous place.
2 Q. Very well, I didn't ask you that either. Now, it goes on to say
3 in the proposal that in the hospital doctors would work together who were
4 Muslims and Croats, members of the international organisations would
5 supervise treatment, and UNPROFOR would provide security for the hospital.
6 Now, Mr. Bagaric finally proposed meeting, to meet the highest level of
7 the BH army in charge of health affairs, not those from the 4th Corps, to
8 discuss the situation under the presidents of the ECMM. Now do you
9 remember whether this meeting ever came about? Did it ever take place?
10 A. It never happened, sorry.
11 Q. Did you try to organise a meeting of that kind?
12 A. Sure. We tried to -- we have made an inventory, if it was
13 feasible, yes or not, but we came very quick to the conclusion that it
15 Q. All I asked you was whether you tried, because I didn't find
16 anything about that in your reports. But take a look at the next document
17 and it is your report of the same date, the 24th of June, but it was
18 written just a few hours later, it is P 02929. Have you found it?
19 A. Yes, yes, sorry.
20 Q. Let's look at point 1. We see here that you're trying to discuss
21 the idea that you had, which was in part supported by the HVO, according
22 to which the doctors should cross over from the west bank to the hospital
23 on the east bank, and then you say that team M2 privately contacted some
24 specialists and found out that the specialist physicians on the west bank
25 were mostly Muslims, 70 per cent, and then you say Muslims and Croats are
1 willing to go to the east bank to help their colleagues and exchange them,
2 but only under the following conditions, and there are three conditions
3 which quite obviously weren't met because it didn't go through, but it
4 says here, "Mr. Bruno Stojic, in principle, agreed to our proposal." Am I
5 right in saying that? Is that what it says?
6 A. Yeah, that is correct.
7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Now, for the record I'd like to say
8 the following. In the Croatian translation of this document and we
9 received it from the Prosecutor it says that Mr. Bruno Stojic, the chief
10 of the HVO medical corps, whereas in the original, it says, Bruno Stojic,
11 in brackets, HVO and MOD, the Ministry of Defence. So the translation is
12 wrong. I'm saying that for the record.
13 Q. Now, sir, take a look at another document relating to the medical
14 corps. It is 2D 00455, and we'll round that off with that document. It
15 is the fourth document from the bottom in my binder. And we see here once
16 again the assistant for the Defence department, the health sector,
17 Ivan Bagaric, on the 16th of September 1993, sends a request to UNPROFOR,
18 to SpaBat, and he once again stresses the former proposal to help the
19 Muslim side to take in civilians, women and children especially, in the
20 Mostar war Croatian hospital as well as other HVO hospitals, "and that we
21 guarantee -- issue guarantees for the treatment of the same as we do for
22 our own. We propose that the control of our work be done by the ICRC, the
23 EC monitors and UNPROFOR and we are doing this for only one reason, a
24 humanitarian reason. We therefore kindly ask you not to attach any
25 political connotations to this matter."
1 Now I know that on the 16th of September you yourself were not in
2 Mostar but I wish to ask you, and we see from this document that the
3 request by the assistant chief of the medical departments, et cetera, is
4 continuing. Did you know that Mr. Bagaric, regardless of the posts you
5 thought he held, he insisted on requests of this kind and attempts of this
6 kind to try and help the sick and wounded, whether they be civilians or
7 members of the BH army on the east bank? So did you know of his efforts
8 and endeavours? You had quite a few contacts with him so did you know he
9 was doing his best to achieve that?
10 A. Well, I know that because it was -- because we came with request
11 and we set it up more or less.
12 Q. You didn't know that he was in the HVO structure and the Defence
13 department and that he was the assistant of the head or rather assistant
14 to Mr. Stojic, you didn't know that at that time, am I right in thinking
16 A. I think that needs some clarification because we were dealing with
17 this subject with several officials, suddenly he showed up with a white
18 coat and a uniform and a weapon under the white coat, and he at that time,
19 when we met him for the first time, showed that he was in charge of the
20 hospital on the west bank. That is my statement. That was the situation.
21 And we didn't know that he had another function because I never saw the
22 letter you showed me before.
23 Q. Sir, so you suddenly drew the conclusion that he was the person
24 who controlled the hospital. Would it be right to conclude that before
25 you reached that conclusion, the hospital showed a maximum level of
1 cooperation in its endeavours to help and supply the hospital on the east
2 bank with anything it needed, is that right?
3 A. No. It's not right. Because that was not my conclusion. He
4 presented him as being in charge, so -- and we were the only ones who had
5 access to him and not to anyone else so we had no choice to consider that
6 he was in charge at that moment.
7 Q. That's not what I asked you, sir. I didn't ask you that at all.
8 You seem to deal with personalities too much. I'm asking you about what
9 happened, events on the ground, but I will ask you about personalities as
10 well. I'm not avoiding that. What I'm asking you is as of the 11th of
11 June, based on the reports that we have seen so far, did you have full
12 cooperation in the hospital on the west bank with respect to delivery of
13 medical equipment and medicines, according to the available capacities of
14 that hospital? That would emerge from your reports but I'd like to ask
15 you now to tell me whether that was so.
16 A. We had cooperation and they provided us with the things that were
17 asked for. Not full but we had a good cooperation.
18 Q. Sir, I'm not going to ask you whether this is unusual but do you
19 consider it to be important, significant, the two armies were at war, one
20 army was helping the wounded civilians and soldiers of the other army,
21 which it was in conflict with. Now, I'll ask you as a layman would that
22 be considerable an honourable gesture?
23 A. I agree.
24 Q. Tell me, please, when you gave your statement, what was your
25 assessment of Mr. Bagaric, that is to say that man who was at the head of
1 the hospital, as you concluded, and the contacts on the basis of the
2 contacts you had with him, I don't know what those contacts were but you
3 concluded that he had control of them. Did you think he was a hawk or
4 dove or a hardliner or somebody with a softer approach? What was your
6 A. We had the opinion that he was a military man.
7 Q. Did you consider him to be a nationalist and let me remind you,
8 and anybody else who wants to look at page 24 of your statement, you said
9 that he was a nationalist. I'm just reminding you. We don't have to
10 waste time looking it up but just say yes, I did say that; no, I didn't; I
11 don't remember, but that is indeed what you said of him and it's on page
13 A. It's correct.
14 Q. I have one question to ask you about your assessments. Did you
15 see Mr. Bruno Stojic ever in uniform?
16 A. No, I did.
17 Q. Sir, I have to ask you this and you can answer any way you like.
18 Let's leave Mr. Stojic to one side for the moment, although Mr. Bagaric
19 and this department was under him with respect to this assistance in the
20 sense of structure in the Defence department but let's leave him to one
21 side. Now, Mr. Bagaric who did what he did, if you -- your assessment of
22 him was that he was a nationalist, tell me, did you say that on the basis
23 of people's characters, how they were dressed, how they talked to you, on
24 the basis of how nervous they are or not, or did you make that assessment
25 on some more serious indicators? I'm talking about your evaluations. I'm
1 not talking about the evaluations given to you by SpaBat, for instance,
2 but your assessment, what was it based on?
3 A. It depends on what you called "serious indications".
4 Q. Unfortunately, I don't have time to expound. I would very much
5 like to but I don't have enough time. Just to deal with this matter, I
6 would need a whole lot more time because I consider it to be very
7 significant in your assessments thereof: But I'm asking you what guided
8 to you to say of Mr. Bagaric, who as you said was at the head of an
9 organisation that behaved decently and honourably - I agree with that
10 because there weren't many examples in the war in Bosnia of acts like this
11 and you're probably aware of that, on the basis of reports from you're
12 mission coming in - so why have you called him a nationalist what guided
13 you, prompted you to call him a nationalist? Whether perhaps he had a
14 pistol or he had a very strong temperament, I know him, yes, he was
15 temperamental. So what led to you conclude that he was a nationalist and
16 that is indeed what you did conclude?
17 A. Performance and statements.
18 Q. Bravo, bravo, excellent. Did he make nationalistic statements,
19 then? Did he make a single nationalistic statement that you can remember?
20 You didn't mention any in your statement but I'm asking you now, can you
21 remember any one?
22 A. Not everything is in the reports, that's correct, but I don't
23 think that I -- that I remember
24 Q. [No interpretation]
25 A. I don't think that I remember that after 14 years, unfortunately.
1 Q. Thank you. Thank you. I'm quite sure that had something been as
2 significant, because you describe things in detail, you would have
3 described this one too, had you heard something like that. Now I'd like
4 to move on to another area and for that I need to look at P 03369. It's
5 your report, where you speak about the hawks and doves but we are not
6 going to deal with that now. P 03369 is the document number I'd like us
7 to look at. Just tell me when you've found it, will you?
8 A. I have it, yeah.
9 Q. I'll focus on point 6 where you have other points, number 6 is
10 "Other points", and you said we visited SpaBat yesterday and we got the
11 following information. "Mr. Boban said", and the Prosecutor showed you
12 this document, but skipped over this part, "Mr. Boban said that UNPROFOR
13 UNMOs and ECMM will not be able to enter Mostar for at least one month."
14 Do you remember that?
15 A. I don't remember it but it's in the report so it was noticed by
17 Q. Did you believe, sir, that the information you received from
18 SpaBat was correct? Because this is SpaBat information, did you believe
20 A. Well, probably they had reason or -- I can't recall how this came
21 to us, by SpaBat of course, but it could be that the commander visited
22 Mr. Boban or the other way around. I don't know. But this was serious
23 information by the Spanish Battalion so we considered this as a serious
25 Q. Yes. I think it is indeed serious information but up until then
1 you said that on several occasions you tried to enter Mostar but -- and
2 you sought permission in different quarters but you weren't able to obtain
3 this and I'm talking about the 10th of July. Now this piece of
4 information where by Mr. Boban said that you wouldn't be able to enter
5 Mostar, did you happen to inform anybody of that? And let me remind you
6 yesterday you were shown a document - we don't have to look at it now, I'm
7 sure you'll remember it - of the 2nd of August 1993, it is P -- for the
8 transcript P 03900. It is the discussion with Mr. Prlic and the document
9 was signed by Mr. Martin Garrod, and he arrived sometime after Mr. Nissen;
10 isn't that right, that is to say after the 24th of July, that's when he
11 reached Mostar. Did you inform him about this, that you had information
12 whereby Mr. Boban, in actual fact, had prohibited or said that the
13 observers wouldn't be able to enter Mostar for at least a month? Did you
14 inform him of that?
15 A. This information, as I explained earlier, was shared by the heads
16 of the coordination centre so they were aware of this remark.
17 Q. Correct. And for the record, I'll say that it is document 2D 0 --
18 no, I beg your pardon, P 03362, P 03362 is the document number. It's the
19 first document in the binder. And it's the same report, is it not, where
20 we have on that first page - and in Croatian, it is the second page -
21 where this was conveyed at least according to the SpaBat representatives,
22 Boban said that UNPROFOR, the UNMOs, and the ECMM will not be able to
23 enter Mostar for at least another month. Now the M2 team, et cetera. Do
24 you remember whether you or somebody from your team, a colleague of yours
25 or perhaps somebody else, tried to reach Mr. Boban to ask permission from
1 him or at least an explanation as to why one couldn't enter Mostar?
2 A. I don't know.
3 Q. You don't know, right. Now I'm going to ask you this. On the
4 22nd of August, as far as I remember, you were still on the territory of
5 Herzegovina, am I right?
6 A. On the 22nd, you said?
7 Q. Yes?
8 A. 22nd of August? Preparing for my leave. I think I left on the
9 23rd, yeah.
10 Q. I'd ask you then to look at P 04430. It's the second document in
11 my binder. And it is dated the 22nd. They are military observers, they
12 wrote this on the 22nd of August. It is page 6 of the English and look at
13 F4, please. F4. When you've found it, let me know.
14 A. Yeah, I found it.
15 Q. Right. It says, "Restrictions of movement". The HVO still denies
16 access to Mostar. It is assumed that Mr. Boban has to be back from
17 Geneva to reverse the order and let the UNMOs in.
18 So this in a way confirms the information you received from
19 SpaBat, does it not, that it was Mr. Boban's decision, right?
20 I'm asking you -- now, tell me sir, do you happen to know that the
21 observers from your organisation were the first, pursuant to Mr. Boban's
22 authorisation -- we didn't have the answer in the transcript. Your answer
23 was yes, I believe.
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. And to round off this topic, do you know, sir, that the observers
1 of your mission were the first to enter Mostar with approval from
2 Mr. Boban on the 24th, two days after you left the mission, the 24th of
3 August 1993, and the humanitarian convoy entered the next day? Did you
4 know this?
5 A. No, because I left.
6 Q. Did you know who Mr. Boban was, what place he held in the
7 political and military structure?
8 A. Yeah, of course.
9 Q. Can you tell me or rather can you tell Their Honours what you know
10 about this?
11 A. He was the president of HVO.
12 Q. Do you know that in the military structure he was the Supreme
13 Commander of the HVO?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now we'll briefly move to the topic of
16 prisons. I'll ask you to look at Prosecution Exhibit P 02721. Today,
17 there has been a lot said about this but I will refer only to the part
18 that refers to Mr. Stojic. P 02721. Have you found it?
19 A. Is it --
20 Q. It's the Prosecution's exhibit.
21 A. Sorry.
22 Q. 2721.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. This is your report dated the 11th of June 1993, and I'm referring
25 to point 3, "Other topics", and let me just remind you of the following.
1 You say that when you visited the Heliodrom, that the deputy warden met
2 you. There are 60 to 70 HVO soldiers, criminals, there. I don't know
3 whether he told you that or whether you wrote it down. Eight civilians
4 from other prisons, 11 Serbs and 431 prisoners from the army of
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina, that there are about 10 women. This breakdown of
6 prisoners, did the deputy warden give you this when you arrived?
7 A. That's correct. That is what we noted from his mouth.
8 Q. As you responded to my colleague, you did not note down the names
9 of any of the prisoners you spoke to or what they told you.
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. Would you please now look at P 02806? 2806.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, I'm referring to point 5 and I'll tell you right away that
14 this is a conversation with Mr. Stojic, the document is dated the 16th of
15 June 1993, and you discussed various topics with him. My colleague
16 Peter Murphy will ask you about some of these but I'm interested in the
17 prisoners now and here you say Mr. Stojic stated that the 504 prisoners in
18 the Heliodrom are until now still not accused but under investigation.
19 Did you ask Mr. Stojic about these 504 prisoners or did he supply this
20 number? Did you suggest the number to him? I'm asking you this because
21 you visited the prison on the 11th of June, whereas you talked to him on
22 the 16th. So even if Mr. Stojic was sitting in the prison, the number
23 would not be the same. Did you tell him, well, we visited the Heliodrom
24 and that's the number that's there? Was that what happened?
25 A. I don't recall where the 504 comes from, but when it is in this
1 report, then we noted that number, and he mentioned that number probably,
2 because it doesn't come from us.
3 Q. Sir, I'm showing you these documents so that we can draw some
4 logical conclusions. I first showed you P 02721, where you visited the
5 prison, and then you said the deputy director said that in the prison,
6 there were 504 prisoners. I'm asking you now did Mr. Stojic tell you
7 there were 504 or was it you who asked him what about those 504 prisoners
8 because it's not logical to conclude that there would be exactly the same
9 number on the 16th as on the 11th, because in prisons people come and go.
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. All right. Well, as you don't remember, it's probably futile to
12 ask you this, but did you ask Mr. Stojic about the breakdown, the
13 structure of the prisoners, as the deputy director described it to you?
14 Is that correct?
15 A. I don't know.
16 Q. Sir, there was mention about investigations being carried out but
17 no indictments being brought. Look at D 200505 [as interpreted], please.
18 It's in my pink binder, the second document from the top. 2D -- 2D 00505.
19 The second from the bottom in my binder.
20 A. Yeah.
21 Q. We'll be very brief because my time is running out. It's a letter
22 from the 3rd Battalion of the Military Police of the Department for Crime
23 Prevention. And the one report is from the 9th of July 1993, to the
24 police -- military police administration and it says that 313 criminal
25 reports were submitted against members of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina
1 and it explains why these reports were submitted and then in the last
2 passage, you say that -- it says that in the course of today,
3 investigations or rather they will be processed and criminal reports will
4 be submitted against 32 of them.
5 Sir, I know you're not familiar with this document, but can you
6 confirm that it's quite logical that in a structure such as the HVO,
7 certain services did their job and Mr. Stojic would have provided
8 information based on the information he received from them? Would you be
9 able to say something about that?
10 MR. STRINGER: Excuse me, Mr. President, I'm going to object to
11 that question on the basis of this document because it doesn't indicate, I
12 don't believe, that any of the prisoners that we have been talking about
13 here, Heliodrom prisoners, are prisoners being referred to in this
14 document. This document relates to some people who were in detention in
15 Ljubuski, and it discusses a number of criminal complaints, but it doesn't
16 link in any way, as far as I can see, to any of the people who are at the
17 Heliodrom at the time.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. I had noticed that.
19 Ms. Nozica, this document does not directly deal with Heliodrom.
20 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honours. On the
21 second page, it says that 600 persons expelled from Ljubuski, from Croatia
22 there but the witness did not note down names of persons. Had the witness
23 noted down the names of persons he spoke to, it would have been relatively
24 easy for us to establish whether criminal reports were filed against these
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please ask the question. He
2 doesn't know the document but please ask the question now.
3 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I wish to show the witness one more
4 document and then I'll ask a question about both. 00506, 2D 00506, the
5 last document in my binder. Last one that's bound.
6 Q. And please tell me when you have found it.
7 A. Yeah.
8 Q. This is a report from the district military prosecutions office,
9 prosecutor's office, in Mostar dated the 9th of July 1993 about the first
10 semester that you discussed with Mr. Stojic. And in this report, it says
11 that in this period, the prosecutor's office received 241 criminal reports
12 against 1.674 individuals. I know that you are not familiar with this
13 document, but I will tell you that in this entire period, 76 persons were
14 indicted, or rather, indictments -- that number of indictments were
15 brought against another number of persons. Are you aware that the
16 judicial organs and the police organs were doing their job at that time?
17 Did you have any contact with the judiciary? Did you know that the
18 judicial organs were carrying out their job in relation to any person in
20 MR. STRINGER: Mr. President, I offer the same objection. There
21 is no connection. The original point is whether there is an investigation
22 or indictment of people who were being held at the Heliodrom, and again
23 there is no connection between that and then what's referred to in this
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Ms. Nozica?
1 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, Your Honours, I was not
2 trying to establish a link, but my -- the two questions are linked much
3 more than the documents shown by the Prosecutor mentioning "balija" or
4 "balije". The Prosecutor showed a completely -- a document completely
5 unfamiliar to the witness. My question was whether the witness had any
6 contacts with the judiciary and whether he knew that there were judicial
7 organs doing their work, doing their job in the HZ HB. That was my
8 question. Nothing more.
9 THE WITNESS: No.
10 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Thank you, sir. Now, please take a look at another document of
12 yours, P 03007.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute. Before we move
14 to this exhibit, there is one thing I'd like to note about this document
15 coming from the military prosecutor. On paragraph 2, it says that the
16 military police for the HVO submitted 1.394 criminal complaints, MUP
17 submitted 267 of these complaints, and the military police of the ABiH
18 would have sent four criminal complaints. Therefore, it seems that the
19 ABiH directly sent to the military prosecutor a number of criminal
20 complaints. This is something I would like to state. Thank you. You can
22 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] With your leave, Your Honour, let me
23 just say that this is a report for the first six months of 1993, and it's
24 quite possible that the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina felt this prosecutor's
25 office to be competent and to submit reports to them.
1 Q. We were looking at document P 03007. Have you found it?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. If we look at this document, the page before the last in English,
4 there is one sentence I'm interested in. It says at 1200 hours
5 Arif Pasalic scheduled a media conference on the eastern side. Some
6 Croatian journalists, TV crews and others were invited. Do you remember
7 this detail? It was the 29th of June 1993. Do you remember this? The
8 page before the last in English?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Do you remember this?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Sir, you said that your information as to what happened on the
13 30th of June was received from a doctor in the hospital and that you had
14 no further information about it. Mr. Nissen testified -- I won't show you
15 the document, I will just remind the Court because I don't want to waste
16 time. It's P 03162, it's a protest written by Mr. Klaus Nissen on the 3rd
17 of July 1993 to Mr. Stojic, don't look at it -- don't look in the folder
18 because it's not there, just listen, and in that protest note, Mr. Nissen
19 says, we know that the BH army attacked on the 30th of June 1993. I
20 didn't prepare the document because I didn't expect this answer from the
21 witness. He told my colleague, Ms. Alaburic today that he didn't know
22 about this and it says that we know that the BH army attacked on the 30th
23 of June 1993 and we wish to hear the position of the HVO government
24 concerning these events.
25 Apart from the information given to you by the doctor, did you
1 have any other information? Did you receive any reports from the military
2 observers? Did you receive any SFOR reports? Did you have any reports
3 showing that the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina attacked on the 30th of
4 June 1993 in the northern part of Mostar, from the barracks onwards, and
5 it was Muslims who were in the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina who
6 attacked, assisted or, rather, HVO -- they were from the HVO, assisted by
7 members of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina? Did you have any knowledge of
8 this? I've just been told yes, you have Mr. Nissen's signature down here.
9 It's on the screen. You can see it. If we can raise the original a
10 little bit, just lift up the English version a little bit, so that the
11 signature is visible, yes, yes. Did you have this information?
12 A. That protest is written by me. It's my handwriting.
13 Q. Excellent. Excellent. Sir, then you knew that the army of Bosnia
14 and Herzegovina had attacked on the 30th of June, had attacked the HVO, it
15 says so in the last paragraph here. And are you confirming this now?
16 A. Yes. That was the information we had.
17 Q. Excellent. Would you now please look at the last document? It's
18 not in the binder. It's the last document, it's outside the binder
19 2D 00448. It's not in the binder. Actually, it's in the pink binder but
20 it's not bound. Yes, that's it.
21 Sir, this is another conference or another speech by
22 Mr. Arif Pasalic after that conference which he scheduled for I don't know
23 what reason on the 29th, but look at the speech he made on the 30th of
24 June at 1100 hours. He said here, "I'm addressing the citizens of Mostar,
25 Muslims, honest Croats, and loyal Serbs, and other peoples and citizens of
1 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and I am informing you of the following. The Ustasha
2 forces early this morning continued their aggression on the army of
3 Bosnia-Herzegovina and the citizens of Mostar, with intense artillery fire
4 and an infantry attack on the positions of the army of Bosnia and
5 Herzegovina 4th Corps units."
6 Sir, it follows from this that Mr. Arif Pasalic is turning this
7 attack upside down, saying that it was the HVO who attacked and he's
8 giving this information to people on both sides because it could be heard
9 on both sides. Did you know about this speech? Did anybody tell you
10 about it? Did you hear that Mr. Pasalic said this?
11 A. No.
12 Q. This is very important for the last document I'll show you, so
13 I'll show this later to other witnesses who heard the speech but please
14 just listen to the speech and I'm telling you it's the -- I'm reminding
15 you it's the 30th of June. We'll skip over one passage and then he says,
16 "The loss of the commander of the glorious 41st Motorised Brigade,
17 Midhad Hujdur Hujka, is an irreparable loss for us." You remember that
18 the doctor in the hospital told you that this commander was killed; is
19 that right?
20 A. I think it's in my report, yeah.
21 Q. "And as of today, Mostar is richer by hundreds and thousands of
22 those who are like Hujka who are going to fight against Ustasha war
23 criminals, who have been spooned again after 1944, 1945 in our homeland."
24 He goes on to say, "Citizens of Mostar, Muslims and other honest citizens,
25 strike at the Ustasha on every step. Can't you see it's a matter of
1 survival? Can't you see they are expelling you and arresting you?"
2 And if we can look at the end, that should be the last page, the
3 last call on the people, it says, "People, citizens of Mostar, please
4 understand that this is doomsday. This is the judgement day. You have to
5 start fighting. I'm inviting every citizen who is capable of bearing a
6 rifle, carrying a stone, to fight the Ustasha, to kill the Ustasha
7 criminals, because there is no life here with Ustasha but only with
8 Muslims, honest Croats and loyal Serbs."
9 Sir, I've shown you this document. I knew you or I assume that
10 you hadn't seen it, although you might have heard it but I would like to
11 link it up with a document shown to you by the Prosecutor and I'll
12 conclude with that. That's document 3181, P -- it's a Prosecution
13 document, P 03181. 03181. You told us you hadn't seen the document
14 before, but I'll ask you to take a look at this page. We have received a
15 new translation today, and it doesn't mention that the word "balija" is
16 always in quotation marks. But it doesn't really matter whether the
17 balija is the name of a unit or whether it's a derogatory term.
18 I'll just ask you to look at the list, the list where it says
19 Zahum community and there is a list there, a list of families, members of
20 the balija units, and please look at point 2. I will read what it says
21 here, "In Matije Gubca Street, at number 109, balijas are hiding in a
22 garage and the shelter next to the supermarket at the sign" - and in
23 handwriting it says "knocking", we don't know if this is original - "raid
24 in the evening."
25 Sir, you don't know much about this document but it seems that
1 some balijas or members of the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, if that's
2 what is referred to here, are hiding in a garage. Is that what is
3 apparent from this document?
4 A. I think so, yeah.
5 Q. And now, let's look at the front page of this document, please,
6 the first page, the cover of the document, in fact. And it's actually a
7 file, and there is a letterhead here which security information service,
8 military police, and there is a registration number and I didn't say this
9 before but it's very important that this document was received in the
10 Defence department, as we can see in the seal, on the 12th of June, and
11 the date it bears is the 5th of June. The Prosecutor asked you whether
12 the document carries the date of your meeting with Mr. Stojic but I'll ask
13 you something else now. It's evidently not the same date because if one
14 can believe this seal, his department received this only on the 12th of
16 But if you can help me, if you can assist me with the following,
17 because you were doing this in Mostar all the time, please assist me, we
18 will put a hypothesis: If it's true that Mr. Arif Pasalic said what he
19 said in that speech, would it be logical that five days later, anyone in
20 West Mostar receives information that enemy soldiers are hiding in
21 garages. And if this happened, would it be logical that that would be
22 supplied to the information service, the regular bodies and organisations
23 of this Croatian community and the military police in order for them to
24 check if this was correct? This was not handed to criminals in the
25 street. And no criminals in the street would go -- were told to go and
1 collect those people. This was given to the proper authorities and we
2 have to view this in the context of what Arif Pasalic said in his speech
3 about what should be done to the Ustasha.
4 So it was you who checked the information you received, and if
5 it's correct that this was given to the military police and the security
6 services, would it not be logical that this kind of information should be
7 given to those services for them to check it?
8 MR. STRINGER: Excuse me, Mr. President, I'm going to object to
9 the statements of counsel characterising the document rather than her just
10 putting more simple questions or a series of questions to the witness
11 about the document. But I think the manner in which this sort of speech
12 has been made and then asking counsel -- or asking the witness whether he'
13 agrees or not with her speeches is not a proper way to question the
14 witness on cross-examination.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Absolutely. We can read
16 the document ourselves. And what's interesting is the answer that the
17 witness gives to very specific questions.
18 JUDGE TRECHSEL: As you have been interrupted, according to the
19 transcript, but also my -- to my memory you spoke of June, dates June, you
20 said 12th June and 5th June. The document says July. Did you say June on
21 purpose? Or is it a slip of the tongue?
22 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I did not intend to say
23 it. If I did say it, it was because I'm tired. It was definitely July.
24 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
25 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I'll put a simple question to the
2 Q. The Prosecutor showed the witness this document and I don't feel
3 comfortable discussing a document with a witness if the witness has no
4 knowledge of the document. But it was the Prosecutor who introduced this
5 document and linked it to the meeting with Mr. Stojic, so it's quite
6 logical that I should ask the witness whether he can confirm that
7 logically such information should be handed to certain institutions such
8 as SIS and the military police for them to check.
9 If the witness can answer, let him answer, and if not, he --
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Colonel, she asked a
11 question. Could you please answer now?
12 THE WITNESS: I don't know.
13 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I am
14 finished. It's 7.00. My colleague will use the rest of our time
15 tomorrow. Thank you.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So for Mr. Stojic's
17 Defence we will start at 2.15 and maybe the Chamber will have a couple of
18 oral decisions to read. It will go to 2.50, so counsel has until 2.50.
19 Then from 2.50 to 3.25, the Defence of Mr. Praljak will have its time.
20 Then from 3.25, they will have -- Mrs. Alaburic will have 20 minutes to
21 finish off her questions. From 3.45 to 4.00 we will have a break. We'll
22 resume at 4.00 p.m. and the Prosecution will have 25 minutes for redirect.
23 And we will adjourn at 4.25 p.m. because we have a plenary at 4.30. This
24 is how time will be allotted tomorrow and I think this should suit
25 everybody's need. We will therefore meet again tomorrow at 2.15. Thank
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.01 p.m.,
3 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 12th day of July,
4 2007, at 2.15 p.m.