1 Tuesday, 28 August 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The Accused Coric not present]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is IT-04-74-T,
8 Prlic et al., the Prosecutor versus Prlic et al.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We -- we are the 28th of August.
10 I'd like to greet all the people present in the courtroom, the
11 representatives from the Prosecution, Defence counsel, as well as the
13 The cross-examination is about it to begin, and I shall ask the
14 usher to go and fetch the witness. As far as time allocation is
15 concerned, the Prosecution had just about three hours yesterday. The
16 Defence teams will have is about three hours today, and it's for you to
17 share out the time between you.
18 I believe that Mr. Karnavas is going to start cross-examination
19 because he has the lectern before him. Is that right, Mr. Karnavas?
20 Mr. Ibrisimovic.
21 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Just
22 for the record, in light of your proposal regarding the allocation of
23 time, we will not be asking any questions and we will give our time to
24 Mr. Prlic's Defence.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
1 [The witness entered court]
2 WITNESS: MARITA VIHERVUORI [Resumed]
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Good morning, Witness. We want
4 to make sure that everything is unfolding properly, and I shall now give
5 the floor to Mr. Karnavas.
6 MR. KARNAVAS: Good morning, Mr. President. Good morning, Your
8 Cross-examination by Mr. Karnavas:
9 Q. Good morning, madam. Yesterday, you told us a little bit about
10 your educational background. You had indicated that you had studied
11 history, I believe; is that correct?
12 A. Yes, that's correct.
13 Q. Now, did you also studied journalism? Say yes or no.
14 A. Yes. I -- was one of my topics in the university was so-called
15 communication science.
16 Q. Okay. Now, was that like a subject that you took, or was that
17 part of a series of courses that you took?
18 A. No. I have even a university degree. I had six aims --
19 Q. Stick with me on communications?
20 A. Yeah. Communications was one of them.
21 Q. Okay. All right. So you took more than just one course?
22 A. If you know university degrees, I have in my papers a degree from
23 communication science.
24 Q. Okay. And when you studied in Austria, was that communications or
25 was that history?
1 A. That was history.
2 Q. All right. Now, yesterday you told us you were an historian as
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And you consider yourself an historian?
6 A. Yes, I can, but if I would have made my larger study, it would
7 have been women in national socialist, in ideology and practice. So it
8 has nothing to do with Balkans.
9 Q. Okay. All right. Very well. Now, and also you indicated that at
10 one point that as part of your journalistic trait, you -- you do your own
12 A. Yes, because I have been studying history, politics, and economy,
13 so I think that I can a little bit analyse.
14 Q. But you do know the difference between fact and, say, editorial
16 A. Well, let's say that an historian makes his opinions always on the
18 Q. Okay. But let me go back to my original question. You know the
19 difference between fact: This happened today. We are in courtroom today,
20 versus --
21 A. Mm-hmm.
22 Q. -- your opinion as to your analysis of the events?
23 A. Yes, yes.
24 Q. You know the difference?
25 A. I know the difference.
1 Q. And, in fact, if you were to open up any credible paper, you have
2 articles that are supposedly -- they're supposed to be factual, and then
3 there's usually a portion of the paper that's devoted to editorial
5 A. Mm-hmm.
6 Q. That's a yes, right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Okay.
9 A. That's right.
10 Q. So you know the difference?
11 A. I know the difference. And if I were to make an editorial
12 comment, I could write for instance: On base of these facts, it could be
13 like that. But, of course, there is other possibilities.
14 Q. Right. And, of course, when you are voicing your own opinion,
15 it's necessary, it's appropriate to make sure that you make that
17 A. Yes, I know it.
18 Q. Okay. Very well. In fact, that was the reason why I objected
19 yesterday, as you might recall, because at one point it appeared that you
20 were attributing certain comments, when in fact those were your own
21 thoughts, your own opinions; correct?
22 A. Mm-hmm, but based on certain facts, of course.
23 Q. When you say "Mm-hmm," does that mean yes?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. We have to make a record. Okay? So now I want to go back to this
1 interview. But before I go there, you had indicated that you had -- you
2 were familiar about the Balkans, and in particular Yugoslavia; correct?
3 A. Yes. I was pretty familiar with the Balkans.
4 Q. All right. And I take it -- and you been to Bosnia and
5 Herzegovina, I believe, in 1992?
6 A. Well, first time, I was 1968.
7 Q. All right. But I'm not asking about the first time. I'm talking
8 about 1992. My questions are rather precise.
9 A. Okay, okay. I was 1992.
10 Q. I take it you followed the Vance-Owen peace initiatives? It is a
11 "yes" or "no."
12 A. Yes. I followed them.
13 Q. Okay. Now, does that mean -- we're going to go step-by-step.
14 I'll lead you through it. Does that mean that you were in Geneva covering
15 them, or does that mean that you were reading the press?
16 A. I was reading only the press, but the leader of Bosnia-Herzegovina
17 group was the Finn Martti Ahtisarri.
18 Q. Okay. So what does that?
19 A. It means that it had, of course, a little bit more interesting
20 Finland than when it had been somebody else.
21 Q. Okay. Now, was he one of the prime negotiators with Vance, with
22 Mr. Vance?
23 A. He was the senior [indiscernible] peaceable group, or how you call
25 Q. Mm-hmm.
1 A. It was six different sections, and Ahtisarri was the president of
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina group.
3 Q. Okay. Now, are you suggesting, though, that it was he, along with
4 Mr. Vance and Mr. Owen, that were meeting with the various parties to try
5 and to piece together a peace agreement?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Okay. Did you interview him personally regarding --
8 A. Ahtisarri, no.
9 Q. Did you interview Mr. Vance?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did you interview Mr. Owen?
12 A. No.
13 Q. And you -- you were not in Geneva at the time?
14 A. No.
15 Q. And what you know about the Vance-Owen is about what you read in
16 the press?
17 A. I have the treaty somewhere because the press could get also the
19 Q. Okay. We're going to get there. Now, did you -- do you recall
20 reading the treaty at the time? And it was a peace initiative; it wasn't
21 a treaty.
22 A. Okay. It was an initiative.
23 Q. Did you read it?
24 A. I read did but -- but not by heart.
25 Q. Okay. Now, when -- not by heart. Okay. Now, before we get
1 there, I got to step back a little bit. Now, prior to the Vance-Owen
2 peace initiatives, were there any other initiatives? You being an
3 historian covering the events, being a journalist, were there any other
4 initiatives that you recall, yes or no?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Okay. Which one were those?
7 A. Vance-Stoltenberg.
8 Q. Okay. Let me clue you in. That happened afterwards.
9 A. That was afterwards, but it was the correction from Vance-Owen.
10 Q. Okay. But I'm talking about before Vance-Owen. Do you know, do
11 you know, okay? I don't want you to speculate. Do you know for a fact,
12 yes, there were, or maybe at the time I might have known. What is your
14 A. There was.
15 Q. Okay. And which were -- which initiatives were there, if you
17 A. I don't remember but I know that there was other negotiations and
18 other initiatives.
19 Q. Okay. Now, was that again based on reading the press?
20 A. Not only.
21 Q. Okay. Does that mean that you actually read those initiatives?
22 A. Well, you know, I reading the press or visit the --
23 Q. Did you read the initiatives, ma'am?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Okay.
1 A. Not totally.
2 Q. Well what do you mean "not totally"? Did you read them partially?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. That means you had a hold of them. You had them in your
6 A. No, no. But you can also -- I visit so-called press bureaus.
7 Q. Okay. So, again, you were reading the press?
8 A. If I read papers in some press bureau, it's not reading the press.
9 Q. Okay. So what were you actually reading at the press bureau and
10 which press bureaus were you reading at and which initiatives were you
11 reading at these press bureaus, if you recollect?
12 A. Well, after 15 years to remember in -- in which bureaus you have
13 once visited, it's not that easy.
14 Q. Which initiatives and who are the protagonists? Who were like,
15 for instance, the negotiators? Which countries? Names?
16 A. Well, the country, it was also a little bit problematic because --
17 because Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, and so on, they were not all the time
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. So, if I tell you something about, for instance, beginning of
21 1992, so there was 15th of January, Slovenia and Croatia was recognised
22 but Bosnia, first, after the war had started in April. So -- there's a
23 pretty big difference, but I know that there was one very important
24 initiative before Vance-Owen, I know it.
25 Q. Okay. Now, you know it. Do you know the specifics, and by that I
1 mean: Can you give us a comparison? Can you compare and contrast the
2 difference between the initiative prior to Vance-Owen and what ultimately
3 emerged from Vance-Owen? And I mention this particularly because,
4 yesterday, you mentioned -- you gave your own interpretation as to the
5 Vance-Owen Plan and what it attempted to accomplish or what it was.
6 A. Well, you know, that there was also --
7 Q. If you could answer my question.
8 A. -- a big peace conference in London. It was August 1992, and
9 there was also some initiatives. But I would say that Vance-Owen was the
10 first one which was very official and which the whole international
11 community was backing.
12 Q. Okay. Now, Mr. Vance, as you well know, was with the United
13 Nations at the time; is that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And Mr. Owen was the representative for the European Union or the
16 European Community, I think it was at the time it.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. All right. Now -- and yesterday you indicated that that -- you
19 said something about -- maybe it's because of your English --
20 A. It's not very good any more.
21 Q. Well, I mean it's not bad. Better than my Finnish. But I wasn't
22 quite -- I didn't quite get the drift of what you were trying to tell us
23 when you said that you compared it to, you said, the 1938 --
24 A. Well, I was correcting the 1939 --
25 Q. Right. To the Sporazum. And I am trying to figure out what you
1 were trying to tell us about that. Could you expand a little bit? How is
2 it --
3 A. Only, only --.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Would the speakers please not overlap.
5 MR. KARNAVAS:
6 Q. You need to wait until I completely entire question because part
7 of the question is: How is it that you now are attributing Mr. Vance and
8 Mr. Owen of trying to create something similar to the 1939 Sporazum?
9 A. Well, Mr. -- The Vance and Owen plan had a map.
10 Q. Mm-hmm.
11 A. And this map, if you take this had -- well, that what was promised
12 for Croatians or the mixed cantons or how they were called. The boundary
13 line was very equal to this from Sporazum 1939.
14 Q. Okay.
15 A. Only that the population was not any more exactly that what it was
16 been 1939. It has changed. It was more Bosniaks. There were 1939, I
17 think, with Croat majority, but not any more 1992. And that was what I
18 was criticising because there was some kind of similarity. But -- and as
19 I told you also that it was told to me, for instance from Lagumdzija, that
20 it was not meant ethnical, but it was interpreted ethnical, and maybe
21 exactly because of these similarities of Sporazum.
22 Q. Okay. But, fair to say, you actually did not look at the
23 Vance-Owen peace initiatives, and there was more than just one by the
25 A. Oh, yes. There were more.
1 Q. Yeah. And we'll get to that. But you did not study them to see
2 and compare what exactly was in the text and what exactly was on the maps;
3 is that correct? It's just a yes or a no.
4 A. Not totally.
5 Q. Well, when you say "not totally," did you -- did you study them
7 A. Of course. I wouldn't speak about Vance-Owen Plan --
8 Q. Excuse me --
9 A. -- if I never saw it.
10 Q. So, today, you're saying, under oath, that you read the Vance-Owen
11 Plan from A to Z, whichever plan might have been, and you looked at the
12 maps as well?
13 A. Especially the maps --
14 Q. Go ahead.
15 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, if I may, just for the purpose of the
16 record, if we look at line -- at page 11, line 7, there's stands: "I
17 never saw it." And I think because of the overlapping speakers, I recall
18 the witness said: "I wouldn't speak about the Vance-Owen Plan if I never
19 saw it." It does make a difference. Thank you, Your Honour.
20 MR. KARNAVAS: That's fine. We're going to get to this. We're
21 going to unpeel this onion.
22 Q. Okay. Now, I want to know concretely: Did you read the
23 Vance-Owen peace initiatives?
24 A. Yes, but I don't remember them.
25 Q. From the beginning to the end, you read them?
1 A. Like journalists read.
2 Q. I don't know how -- I haven't --
3 A. I didn't read them in that meaning like I'm --
4 Q. Like an analyst or an historian.
5 A. -- you are comparing me to do something. I just read them,
6 because I never commented them in that way.
7 JUDGE PRANDLER: May I interrupt you. Both of you please do not
9 MR. KARNAVAS: I apologise. I apologise. I'm trying to save
11 Q. Here is where I am a little troubled. Yesterday, you told us that
12 you were an analyst, that you were in an historian. In fact, you were
13 kind of insistent, and I kept getting these guarded looks for you. I felt
14 rather hurt, actually, when I was objecting, and you were looking at me
15 sort of like as if I was challenging your integrity.
16 And now, today, you're telling us, as a journalist -- albeit you
17 were asking questions regarding the Vance-Owen Peace Plan, and you were
18 commenting yesterday about the Vance-Owen Peace Plan and what the Croats
19 had in mind. Today you're telling us that you read it like a journalist,
20 whatever that means. But then you go on to say that you really didn't
21 read them carefully to prepare yourself for interviews.
22 So could you clarify this? Help me out here.
23 A. Well, prepare yourself for interviews. How I prepare me -- me to
24 interview, when I have about five minutes time even to know whom I'm going
25 to interview, if you ask somewhere where is happening very much, you have
1 to make interviews spontaneously. You cannot prepare weeks. If I know
2 that I have next week the interview of president of Croatia, Stipe Mesic,
3 I should prepare me. But if I know that I meet Stipe Mesic, after five
4 minutes there, I just think what I'm going to ask him, but I cannot
5 prepare with reading treaties or something like that.
6 Q. Okay. Very well. Fair enough. Before we get to this interview,
7 you were the one that went to Mostar; right? You weren't summoned?
8 A. I was in Mostar.
9 Q. But you went there on your own initiative?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. You picked the date? You picked the day, the month, the year, the
13 A. April.
14 Q. Yeah. But you picked the day?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You picked that location?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You went there on your own initiative searching for a story?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Okay. You had heard some things prior to going to the -- to
21 Mostar; right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And because of what you had heard, you wanted to get more
25 A. I wanted to see what has happened.
1 Q. Okay. You weren't interested in information, you just wanted to
2 see, take a look, was that it?
3 A. Well, both. You have to see and you have to ask --
4 Q. Okay.
5 A. -- because --
6 Q. One step at a time. The first thing that you do is you go to the
7 press officer; right?
8 A. Yes -- no, no. That was not the first time. It was the second.
9 I told you that we were first driving around and looking.
10 Q. Okay. You drove around, you look, and then you went to the press
11 office, hoping, hoping that there would be somebody that you could speak
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Okay. And then you -- you got an interview.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. One would assume, one would assume, that since you chose to go to
17 Mostar on that particular day, at that particular location, that you would
18 have some thoughts in mind as to what exactly you were going to ask about.
19 Is it a "yes," "no," "it doesn't work that way"?
20 A. Well, it doesn't work that way.
21 Q. Okay. All right. I'm not a journalist. Help me out here. How
22 does it work?
23 A. Well, it works that way because when I went, when I started the
24 trip in Mostar, I was not informed what had happened in Central Bosnia. I
25 was not informed because I was not there. There was coming very specially
1 anything, and maybe there was some knowledge of what had happened in -- in
2 Bosnia. Maybe there was. But I was in Croatia and Croatian media didn't
3 tell about these things, and I was listening BBC. But in BBC, there was
4 also nothing to hear. It means that I didn't know. I was much wiser
5 first in the evening of that day.
6 Q. Okay. But, nonetheless, before you got there, you knew about the
7 Vance-Owen Peace Plan?
8 A. Oh, yes, I knew.
9 Q. Okay. At least, with respect to that, you were prepared to ask
10 some questions?
11 A. Not necessarily.
12 Q. Okay. Well, yesterday, there was a whole exchange, ad nauseam
13 actually, over and over, because we went back and forth about this
14 ultimatum. Do you recall that?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And the ultimatum, at least the way they try weave it in - "they"
17 being the Prosecution - was based on the Vance-Owen Peace Plan; right?
18 A. Yes. It based because it was some cantons which was demanded that
19 Muslim forces retreat, yes.
20 Q. Right. And it's your understanding that these -- that these
21 cantons, if you look at the map and you look at the cantons that were in
22 dispute, we would see a map similar to the 1939 Sporazum; is that your
24 A. Yes, yes.
25 Q. Okay. All right. Let's get to the interview very quickly,
1 because we have to move along.
2 At some -- you asked the press officer to meet someone, and you
3 learned that you were going to be meeting with Jadranko Prlic?
4 A. Mm-hmm.
5 Q. That's a yes, right?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Okay. Now, before meeting Mr. Prlic, I take it you had, since
8 this is 1993 now, you had been in country in 1992. You had been following
9 the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I take it that you had a clear
10 understanding and appreciation of how Herceg-Bosna was structured and how
11 the HVO, the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, was structured,
12 politically and militarily?
13 A. I didn't know about political structure. I knew the military.
14 Q. Okay. Did you ask anybody, prior to being to Mostar, what the
15 political structure was? "Yes," "no," "I don't know."
16 A. No.
17 Q. Did you ask anybody when you got to Mostar about it? Say "yes" or
19 A. No.
20 Q. Okay. The reason I'm asking is because, yesterday, you indicated
21 that Mr. Prlic was the head of the military.
22 A. Political head of military.
23 Q. Political head of the military. Okay. And did you ask him to
24 explain his position?
25 A. Well --
1 Q. No, no. Just say "yes" or "no."
2 A. I can read.
3 Q. Pardon?
4 A. I can read.
5 Q. You can read what?
6 A. His card.
7 Q. Okay. So, based on his card, you made certain assumptions.
8 A. Well, "president" is a political leader, normally.
9 Q. Okay. And it was your -- and it was your assumption that "HVO"
10 meant the military.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Okay. All right. Fair enough. But you never asked him: What
13 exactly does your title entail? What are your functions?
14 A. The leader of HVO.
15 Q. All right. Okay. And then, yesterday, you sort of likened him to
16 into a defence minister.
17 A. Well, I would compare him to a defence minister.
18 Q. So, in your mind, in your mind, when you were speaking with
19 Jadranko Prlic, you were, for all intents and purposes, speaking with a
20 defence minister?
21 A. Well, something similar to defence minister. You know, in former
22 Yugoslavia, minister is used to be committees and so on. You can title it
23 very many different ways.
24 Q. Right. Okay. All right. And, in your statement, you say at some
25 point you go to a presidential villa, and it's in quotes, "presidential
1 villa." Do you recall saying that in your statement?
2 A. Yes, I have --
3 Q. You've said it?
4 A. I have said it.
5 Q. Okay. Now, when you said "presidential villa" in the quotes, does
6 that mean that you saw a sign saying "Presidential Villa"?
7 A. No. That's why it is --
8 Q. In quotes?
9 A. Mm-hmm.
10 Q. I see. Usually, when people quote, it's because that's what
11 somebody actually said?
12 A. Well, it's -- it is another way. You use this in two meanings.
13 In that, when you are saying something uncertain, which is not directly or
14 then accurate quotation, but that was not quotation. It was so-called.
15 Q. Okay.
16 A. So meaning so-called.
17 Q. All right. All right. And you say, in your statement, that you
18 suspect that the HVO was very eager to -- to tell the story to the
19 international press at this time.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. You say that on page 5 of your -- now, I take it you were the one
22 that went there; right? He didn't summon you.
23 A. Well, let's say that a press officer organised it very quickly,
24 and it looked like -- because normally it was not that easy to become an
25 interview. And I would --
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. -- Tell you something. I'm not an important person. I'm from
3 Finland. It's a very remote country. It has no political meaning to
4 Herceg-Bosna, but I was working also for Austria press agency, which is
5 much more important. And I was with Erich Rathfelder who was working for
6 Germany and Swiss. So we were only two persons but we had very much press
7 behind us, and that's why I think we were so, well, invited to this
9 Q. All right. But you drew a conclusion, I suspect, that had
10 Mr. Prlic refused to meet with you or anybody else, then you probably
11 would have said in your statement that they were not eager to tell their
12 story. You would draw the opposite conclusion; right? So they're sort of
13 dammed if they do and they are dammed if they don't. If they speak with
14 you, then obviously they're eager to get their message out. If they do
15 not speak with you, they're not eager. Would that be correct?
16 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, if I may object to this question. The
17 witness never said that she asked to see Mr. Prlic. So now to suppose
18 that if Mr. Prlic had refused to see her is an improper question.
19 MR. KARNAVAS: If the gentleman to read the rest of the question,
20 the rest of the question, or anybody else, that the press officer refused.
21 Q. If you had been denied access to anybody on that occasion, as you
22 indicated that you sat many times outside the door of Mate Boban but it
23 never opened, would you have written that they were probably not very
24 eager to tell their story?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. I wouldn't have written it because it would have been a normal --
3 a normal case.
4 Q. Okay. Now, on page 1 of the transcript of the interview --
5 A. Well, I don't have it here.
6 Q. Okay. We're going to get you a copy.
7 MR. KARNAVAS: And, Your Honours, I'm going to be referring to
8 1D 01655 for the record. Yesterday, last night, we listened to the tape.
9 We listened to it about three times, and we found that there was some
10 discrepancies, some omissions. For instance, on side B, we couldn't hear
11 anything, even though there is some -- some things attributed to as to
12 what might have been said during the interview; and on side A, there seem
13 to be some omissions.
14 And, obviously, I think, because of the poor quality of the tape,
15 you have to sort of listen to it over and over again. But we would be
16 asking at some point -- we don't want to take up the Court's time to play
17 it here. But we tried our best, and at some time we will probably need to
18 send this out and maybe get a cleaner and even a more official version.
19 So just so you know, Your Honours, and everyone else in the court,
20 the portions where we believe the words or sentences were missing, we have
21 put in in bold and we've underlined. That way you can easily track. And
22 because we have to insert text, the pagination is slightly different from
23 the original version that was presented by the Prosecution. The number is
24 1D 01655. Okay.
25 Q. Do you have it ma'am?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Okay.
3 MR. KARNAVAS: And, again, you know, we have the tape and that
4 could be checked.
5 Q. Now, in the very first -- after he welcomes you, I think it's the
6 second paragraph, Mr. Prlic says: "You will hear it at the conference at
7 1100 hours," or 11 hours.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Okay. Mr. Prlic was holding a press conference that day, was he
11 A. I don't know --
12 Q. Well --
13 A. -- because I was not in that press conference. We started
14 immediately after interview to go to Central Bosnia because we were
15 thinking that in the press conference, there is not much more what we have
16 been talking with him. I was not in this press conference.
17 Q. Okay. But you were made aware that there was a press conference
18 on that particular day?
19 A. Well, according to Mr. Prlic, there was. I don't know because we
20 didn't attend it.
21 Q. Okay. Well, did you find out later on what he might have said at
22 that press conference?
23 A. No. I was in Central Bosnia.
24 Q. Okay. Okay. Now, during the interview, you asked him several --
25 you asked him at one point -- you asked him about the ultimatum. Do you
1 recall that?
2 A. Yes --
3 Q. Okay.
4 A. -- I ask him about it. I remember it.
5 Q. All right. And, if we go on the second page of your interview,
6 you ask him, at the very top of the page, first -- first question by you:
7 "Why then talk about a common command and Mr. Izetbegovic" and so on and
8 so forth.
9 Now, what was your understanding of "a common command"?
10 A. My understanding about "common command" was that Bosnian army and
11 HVO would have common command.
12 Q. That was part of the Vance-Owen Peace Plan, was it not? Part of
13 the initiative?
14 A. Well --
15 Q. Was it part of the initiative, ma'am? "Yes," "no," "I don't
16 know." Which of those?
17 A. I don't know, but it was very much talked at that time.
18 Q. Because you asked the question, so you must have heard it
20 A. Oh, yes.
21 Q. And, in fact, prior to this interview, you had met with
22 Mr. Hadzihasanovic, the general?
23 A. Yes, I met with Hadzihasanovic.
24 Q. And had he talked about the initiative as far as a common command?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Okay. Do you know whether a common command was signed, agreed
2 upon, a joint command?
3 A. It was maybe signed but it was not realised.
4 Q. Do you know when it was signed?
5 A. I don't remember.
6 Q. Do you recall the reasons for wanting a joint command?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And what were the reasons, ma'am?
9 A. To defend Bosnia.
10 Q. Exactly. Now, also does not Mr. Prlic say that -- that: "There
11 is no possibilities to be successful in war if you have two armies in the
12 same region." He says that, does he not?
13 A. Yes. And that's exactly the reason for common command.
14 Q. Right. And he's trying to explain to you the reasons why in some
15 places the HVO wanted the ABiH to be subordinated to the HVO and vice
16 versa. In other areas, the HVO would be subordinated to the ABiH. Isn't
17 that correct?
18 A. Yes, but that story.
19 Q. That's what he's telling you, is he not?
20 A. Mm-hmm. That's what he's telling.
21 Q. Okay. Now, and, in fact, the Joint Command, that is one the
22 reasons for having a Joint Command; right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Okay. Were you aware that on -- on 25th of April, 1993, that
25 would be one day after this interview, in fact, President Izetbegovic and
1 Mate Boban signed a joint statement ordering a cease-fire between the ABiH
2 and HVO units and setting up a Joint Command? Were you aware of that?
3 A. Yes, later, but not in Central Bosnia, because I was, at that
4 time, in Central Bosnia.
5 Q. Okay. But you were aware that, in fact, that did happen. In
6 fact, I'm reading from page 631 of the -- of the final judgement, trial
7 judgement in Hadzihasanovic. So you were aware of that? So exactly what
8 Mr. Prlic is telling you is in fact what's happening.
9 A. Yes, but you have to make some difference between theory and
10 practice. In practice, there was a war.
11 Q. I understand that there was a war, and both sides were -- were
12 fighting against each other; right?
13 A. Mm-hmm.
14 Q. "Mm-hmm," does that mean yes?
15 A. Well, there were many wars at that time. There was the first war
16 against Serbs, and that was the so-called second Bosnian war. It was the
17 Bosniaks and Croats.
18 Q. Okay.
19 A. And there was also a third kind of situation in Tuzla, in Gradac.
20 That's where I was interviewing somebody from MHVO, Muslim HVO, in the
21 same when the Muslims were kicked out. In Herceg-Bosna, they were
22 fighting together in -- in Posavina. It was not that simple, that
24 Q. Okay. Well, they were fighting together also in Sarajevo, were
25 they not? Was not an HVO --
1 A. In Sarajevo, they were also fighting together, but there was the
2 Muslim part much stronger. But in Posavina, there were also very many
4 Q. Well, in Sarajevo, in fact, the HVO was subordinated to the ABiH.
5 A. At what time?
6 Q. At this time.
7 A. Maybe. I was not at this time in Sarajevo.
8 Q. Okay. Very well. Now, if we go on to the interview - because I'm
9 just going to take your interview first, and then we'll go through some of
10 your statements - you say, in the middle of page 2 --
11 MR. KARNAVAS: This is something that was injected, Your Honour,
12 by us last night, and we see -- you will see that we have the timing as
13 far as where it's on the tape itself.
14 Q. "When I remember right, in January 24, Mr. Rajic ordered or was it
15 you ordered to take over Gornji Vakuf?"
16 And then you go on: "To control Gornji Vakuf by HVO in our
17 information are that you moved artillery from Tomislavgrad area into this
18 area at Gornji Vakuf. This was in January. So first strike was sent by
20 So this is your statement to Mr. Prlic. Now, where did you get
21 this information that it was the HVO that had the first strike, if you
23 A. BritBat.
24 Q. Okay. Now, he goes on to say: "No. You know, any truth is just
25 one truth. You have information only from one side."
1 And then he talks about fortification, and then he lists several
2 places where he's saying: "There are no possibilities to achieve Novi
3 Travnik, Travnik, Busovaca, and any other place in middle Bosnia and in
4 Northern Bosnia," and he goes on and on.
5 Were you aware of any of these events, concretely?
6 A. These events which occurred in Central Bosnia, I was aware of them
7 after this interview.
8 Q. Okay. So you were -- after this I view, you became aware that
9 Muslims were attacking Croats in Central Bosnia?
10 A. No, no. I didn't became aware of that. I became aware that
11 Croats were attacking Muslims in central Croatia. I went in the same day
12 to Ahmici, and I saw the burning villages.
13 Q. Let me ask you --
14 A. So that's why I'm telling that this is not quite truth.
15 Q. Okay. Now, madam, when you went to Central Bosnia, at that
16 particular time, did you at any point learn that Muslims had also been
17 attacking Croatian villages? "Yes" or "no."
18 A. That time -- well, there came -- when we were waiting to get to
19 Ahmici, there came two women to our car for the British --
20 Q. No, ma'am. Ma'am --
21 A. -- press conference, and they were claiming that their village was
22 attacked, but I personally saw only burning Muslim villages.
23 Q. So when these two women told you about that, did you go to verify
24 as a good journalist, historian, analyst?
25 A. No, I go to Ahmici.
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. I was waiting to go there.
3 Q. All right. So you didn't verify any of that?
4 A. No. I didn't go after the story of these two women.
5 Q. Okay. Well, did you learn, at that point, that the Muslims had
6 also been attacking Croat villages?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Okay.
9 A. I learned it and it was really true, but, first, much later in
10 Kraljevska Sutjeska area. But it was much, much later. Yes. I saw
11 destroyed villages there, but it was one year later.
12 Q. Okay. You saw them one year later.
13 A. But not these villages. They were other ones: Vares area and so
15 Q. All right. I'm going to move ahead a little bit, just to make a
16 point here. You indicated, at one point, that you had met -- I believe
17 it's in your statement that you had met - if I can find it here real
18 quickly - Mr. Mehmed Alagic; correct?
19 A. Yes, I met him.
20 Q. Okay. You met him in Central Bosnia in 1993?
21 A. Yes, I met Alagic -- Mehmed Alagic, and also Zuskic.
22 Q. Okay.
23 A. And they were the commandants of Travnik.
24 Q. We're going to go step-by-step. Now, according to your
25 statement --
1 MR. KARNAVAS: It's page 7, last paragraph, Your Honours.
2 Q. And I'm referring to exhibit -- it's your statement. I don't have
3 the exhibit number handy, but I will get it for you in a second. But it's
4 on page 7.
5 You say: "While in Central Bosnia, in April 1993, I also met with
6 Bosnian Muslim leaders," and then you go on: "Mehmed Alagic gave me a
7 declaration of observance of standards in the conduct of war, which he
8 told me all his soldiers were to sign," and then you gave that copy to the
9 ICTY. Do you recall that?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And then you claimed -- then you go on to say: "Moreover, Alagic
12 claimed that all sides in the war only the ABiH soldiers were behaving."
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Now, first of all, this would have been in April, so that would
16 have been before you met with Mr. Prlic or after?
17 A. No, it was after.
18 Q. I'm just asking. One step at a time. Okay. Now, did you by any
19 chance read that declaration? Did you read the declaration, ma'am, the
20 one that you handed to the ICTY, the one that Mr. Alagic gave you with
21 respect to the standards that his soldiers were to -- to abide by? It's a
22 "yes"" or "no."
23 A. I can read it, but I don't understand that well this language.
24 Q. Okay. Now, let me ask you this: Yesterday, you indicated that
25 you could read Croatian, and I understand that we have -- we call it here
1 B/C/S. And that's a whole big dispute about the languages?
2 A. I know.
3 Q. Serbian, Croatian. Was this -- was this language any different
4 than the one that you were reading in the press that you claimed that you
5 were able to follow the story line in the press?
6 A. Well, I can follow the story line because press language is little
7 bit easier, but official documents I'm not able to -- to read that well.
8 And when I'm reading press, I used also dictionary to know. Press
9 language is easier.
10 Q. Okay. Fair enough. Now, when you met with Mr. Alagic, did you
11 have an interpreter, a translator, with you?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. A language assistant?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. I suspect that language assistant would have been able to have --
16 to read this document.
17 A. I suppose so.
18 Q. Well, the answer is: Yes, they would have been able to; right?
19 A. Yes, he would have been able to.
20 Q. Okay. There you go. Now, did you ask your language assistant to
21 read you the document to see what exactly he had handed you?
22 A. No, because I didn't think it very important at that moment.
23 Which newspaper would have been publishing for me that kind of document?
24 Q. I'm not saying whether it was, you know, necessary to publish it
25 but just to read it since you're testifying here today.
1 MR. KARNAVAS: And, Your Honours, for the record, this document
2 is -- is 1D 01653. We're just going to look at that time very quickly.
3 Q. If you look at the very top of, it says: "Republic of Bosnia and
4 Herzegovina, Code of fighters for Bosanska Krajina." Do you see that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Okay. Do you know where Bosanska Krajina is, ma'am?
7 A. I know. But I know also that the --
8 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers please not overlap.
9 THE WITNESS: -- that the troop of Alagic was so-called Krajina
10 Brigade, because it was consisted from the refugees from Bosanska Krajina.
11 It means from Northern Bosnia. That's why it was using this name.
12 MR. KARNAVAS:
13 Q. Very well. I -- I know, but it wasn't a tricky question.
14 If we go down -- if we go to the first bullet, it says: "Bosnian
15 Herzegovina is an independent, sovereign, integral, and indivisible
17 Do you know what they mean by that?
18 A. Yes. I suppose that -- that they are thinking Bosanska Krajina,
19 because they were refugees with this.
20 Q. All right.
21 A. Because it was under Serbian control.
22 Q. Could they also be thinking unitary, that this is a way of
23 promoting the concept of a unitary form of government in
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Okay. And by "unitary," do you know what -- what we mean by that?
2 A. I mean that all three nations are sharing part in the government
3 and not making their own small states.
4 Q. Okay. Well "unitary," ma'am, at the time, was meant that it would
5 be one person, one vote. And so if you were -- had, say, as the Muslims
6 did at the time, you had the largest percentage of population, if it would
7 be one person one vote and that's how the power sharing would be, then
8 other national constituent nations would have less power.
9 Did you know that?
10 A. No, and I never learned that kind of things.
11 Q. Okay. Very well.
12 A. Because --
13 Q. Very well.
14 A. -- because you don't have to have the same person to have share of
16 Q. All right. Okay. Very well. We go on. On bullet 3, it
17 says: "Personnel and joint weapons, as well as other material and
18 technical resource," and then it says: "Armed combat is a holy thing and
19 a final victory and a free Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina."
20 Now, what do they mean by "combat is a holy thing"? Keeping in
21 mind that we're talking about a -- fighters that are Muslim.
22 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Karnavas, aren't you asking the witness to
24 MR. KARNAVAS: I'm asking whether she knows. She can certainly
25 say: "I don't know." And there is a purpose for this, Your Honour, and
1 the purpose is --
2 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I don't doubt that. I don't doubt that there is
3 a purpose to your questions.
4 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes. But she can say: "I don't know."
5 Q. Do you know?
6 A. No what?
7 Q. What they mean by this: "Armed combat is a holy thing"?
8 A. I don't think they mean just nothing. It's such a beautiful
9 sentence in --
10 Q. Okay. And, of course, had you had it translated at the time, you
11 might have been able to get Mr. Alagic to explain exactly what he meant,
12 since he had told you that he was insisting on all his soldiers signing
13 this document. Part of the point I'm trying to make. You never ask him
14 though --
15 A. No.
16 Q. -- to explain this? Okay.
17 Now, if we go further down, it says at one point: "I shall treat
18 the prisoners and civilian in the spirit of orders and in line with the
19 Geneva Convention." You see that? It's one, two, three, four, five, six
20 seven. It's the seventh bullet point, after it, it says: "before, during,
21 and after combat operations."
22 A. Where?
23 Q. On the same document that we are --
24 A. In this -- this Bosnian document?
25 Q. Yes. You see that?
1 A. No.
2 Q. All right. Well, it's there. It's on the seventh bullet point.
3 But, in any event, after meeting with Mr. Alagic, you were left with the
4 impression that they were abiding or his people, his soldiers were abiding
5 by the standards and conduct of war; correct?
6 A. Yes. And I was also talking about this thing with the BritBat,
7 because, you know, in Vitez there was a BritBat. And the British press
8 officer told me that it was a very disciplined, elite troop.
9 Q. Okay. All right. Now, if we could look at just very briefly --
10 if we could look at 1D 01654. This is the indictment from the Office of
11 the Prosecution. It's an amended indictment. It's dated 11th January
12 2002, so it comes from them. I didn't draft it; they did.
13 And you will see that Mr. Mehmed Alagic, who is no longer with us,
14 was indicted at the time. Do you see that? It's the very top of the
15 page. The Prosecution --
16 A. The first page.
17 Q. Yes. You see that?
18 Now, if we go to the fourth page, four page of 16, you will see
19 it. We have numbered paragraphs, and it says on 19, for instance:
20 "Non-Bosnian citizens. In August 1st, 1992, a law on service of ABiH was
21 introduced via presidential decree. Under the law, non-Bosnian citizens
22 were allowed to join the ABiH and be promoted during times of war." Do
23 you see that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Were you aware, at the time, that Mr. Alagic had in his -- under
1 him, foreign fighters.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Okay. Those were the Mujahedin, were they not?
4 A. Not only.
5 Q. Not only. But he had Mujahedin under him, "yes" or "no"?
6 A. I was driving these villages which were told there are Mujahedin,
7 and I saw 12. The Brits were telling there were about 150.
8 Q. Now, you learned this when? In April 1993 or later?
9 A. Later.
10 Q. Later.
11 A. It was also later.
12 Q. Well, this was signed in 1992. Did Mr. Alagic, by an chance,
13 share with you that information that he had foreign fighters, including
14 fighters who had been rather seasoned as a result of their combat
15 experience in fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan?
16 A. Well, I want to correct myself. I found that there are foreign
17 Mujahedins, first, one year or two years later, because I met a Finnish
18 one who was fighting under Alagic.
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. I didn't know at that stage, but I am aware because I learned it
22 Q. Okay. Now, if we go down, it says later on, on page -- I'm going
23 to skip --
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, my attention is
25 being drawn to time. Mr. Ibrisimovic was saying that he gave you the time
1 that he had at his disposal, but that means that your time plus his is
2 still running out at this time. I think that some of the other Defence
3 counsels may have given you their time, possibly Mr. Coric's counsel who
4 just rose, is that right, and Mr. Murphy as well? Yes. Well, that's
5 fine. All their time. This means that after you only Mr. Praljak will be
6 left; is that right? So, for the cross-examination, there will only be
7 Mr. Praljak after you, and the Defence of Petkovic, unless Petkovic
8 Defence has also given you their time?
9 Ms. Alaburic?
10 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we intend to
11 cross-examine this witness. However, if Mr. Karnavas needs some time,
12 we'll come to some arrangement in the meantime.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. And for Praljak, the
14 position is?
15 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak could perhaps give five
16 or ten minutes of his time. He was thinking along those lines, but he
17 hasn't decided yet.
18 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Sorry, Mr. Karnavas.
20 MR. KARNAVAS: For the record, we do have tomorrow that's vacant.
21 Q. But if we could go on to this indictment --
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No.
23 MR. KARNAVAS: I understand, I understand --
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Not tomorrow. Not tomorrow.
25 Mr. Karnavas, tomorrow there is no hearing. You're say tomorrow.
1 MR. KARNAVAS: I understand. Your Honour, the record I'm trying
2 to make is that we are restricting the Defence from putting on their case
3 with vital and important witnesses, even when there's free days available
4 to the parties. That's all I'm trying to say, Your Honour. It can be
5 interpreted however one wishes to interpret that.
6 Q. On paragraph --
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, I can't allow
8 that. I told you last week that administration has placed us before the
9 fact of having cancelled Wednesday's hearing, and I explained to you that
10 there was seven trials underway requiring three courtrooms. The
11 administration has decided to cancel some days of certain trials. That's
12 what happened. That is the reason why we do not have a hearing tomorrow.
13 MR. KARNAVAS: I misunderstood. I thought that perhaps the
14 Prosecution ran out of witnesses and that's why.
15 MR. STRINGER: Just for the record, Mr. President, the Prosecution
16 did to the run out of witnesses, and it was our understanding that we were
17 not having court tomorrow because of scheduling of other cases.
18 MR. KARNAVAS: All I know is this: We've been in a race. We've
19 been in a race with a stopwatch approach, and all I know is that my client
20 is looking at many, many years in prison. And I've said it before, I'll
21 it, and I'll keep saying it: In my opinion, when we have important
22 witnesses, such as this witness, having a strict compliance to some
23 arbitrary time constraint is not a way to properly afford these gentlemen,
24 particularly my client, his due process. But be that, as it may, I would
25 just like to continue --
1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, Mr. Karnavas. I would like you to
2 correct and control your language.
3 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, Your Honour --
4 JUDGE TRECHSEL: You speak of arbitrary time restraints. There is
5 no reason why you speak of arbitrary time restraints. You have know that
6 there have been several complaints. The Appeals Chamber has always upheld
7 this Trial Chamber's restrictions on time. You know what you complained
8 about regarding tomorrow was a clear mistake, which you could have avoided
9 if you had been attentive, because the President has drawn attention to
10 this. So do not accuse anybody of arbitrariness if you have no foundation
11 for it.
12 MR. KARNAVAS: The foundation, Your Honour, is - and this has been
13 a constant complaint - those of us who have practised law in courtrooms,
14 those of us who are seasoned lawyers know that you don't simply add one
15 and one and come up with two when it comes to trial. You don't say: The
16 Prosecution took three hours, therefore, six accused will divide three
17 hours among themselves. That is not a way to run an efficient trial.
18 That's not a way to protect the rights of the accused. The world over,
19 there are two basic concepts: One, is it relevant, and two, is it
21 In this instance, we have a very vital witness. Now, we had
22 Mr. Okun here, an ambassador who spent two years with two thousand pages
23 of documents. I was not allowed to get the documents in; I ran out of
24 time. Now, that is -- if that is not arbitrary, if that's not capricious,
25 I don't know what is. That's my interpretation. Now, the Appeals Chamber
1 can say what it wishes with respect to the Trial Chamber imposing these
2 sorts of restrictions; but if we look at witness per witness, there are
3 times when we need to go beyond the three-hour limit or the five-hour
4 limit, however the Prosecution's time is.
5 It's simply impossible for the Defence to cover everything. I sat
6 here yesterday, and this witness spoke almost exclusively about Mr. Prlic.
7 There are six other accused. They're all entitled to their time. If
8 another accused wanted to use up their time, I would have been left for 30
10 If you're telling me that that's fair allocation and that's
11 justice, I must say, Your Honour, that is not true, that's not correct,
12 and I would protest to that.
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: You always have ample time for complaining,
14 Mr. Karnavas. You could spare some of that.
15 MR. KARNAVAS: I'm merely making my record, Your Honour.
16 Q. If we go to paragraph 22 of the indictment, you will see there
17 that they talk about that in November 9, 1992, the ABiH chief of the
18 General Staff issued an order, specific types of units of the ABiH corps,
19 3rd Corps, allowing for various TO units and headquarters to merge. You
20 see that?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Okay. And, of course, if we go -- if we go further up to
23 paragraph 20, we see that there is the establishment of the ABiH corps.
24 You see that?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Now, at the time that you gave your -- you had your interview with
2 Mr. Prlic, you had indicated at one point that it was your understanding
3 that the ABiH was merely a Territorial Defence?
4 A. It based on the Territorial Defence.
5 Q. Well, you were claiming that that's what it was, that it was a
6 Territorial Defence, and he had -- he corrected you and said that, you
7 know, they have corps. And you cannot have a Territorial Defence based on
8 a corps, or you can't have is corps based on Territorial Defence; correct?
9 A. Well, we have -- we have maybe a language problem. I mean that
10 Bosnian army was builded on the basic of Territorial Defence, because JNA,
11 you know, it was the Yugoslavian army, and so on.
12 Q. Very well. If we can skip on because I'm running out of time
13 here. Paragraph 23, we see there's a reference to the 7th Mountain
14 Brigade. But on paragraph 24, we see -- and I'll just read it for the
15 record: "The ABiH 3rd Corps 7th Mountain -- Muslim Mountain Brigade was
16 an all-Muslim unit. Soldiers within this unit were required to strictly
17 adhere to Islamic beliefs. Recruits had to swear an oath, which included
18 that they would follow the example of a prophet -- of a proper Muslim
19 soldiers as set out in the booklet titled: Instructions to the Muslim
20 Fighter. The Instructions on the Muslim Fighter was initially published
21 in 1993."
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas.
23 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, the Prosecution.
25 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour. I'm sorry to interrupt. But
1 Your Honour, especially in light of the time constraints of Mr. Karnavas,
2 I have difficulty in seeing the relevance of the question -- of this line
3 of questioning. I have to object to it.
4 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, I'm glad that he objected to this unrelevance
5 The relevance is this: It goes to bias. She meets with Mr. Alagic in
6 1993 in April. She claimed yesterday, she's claiming today that nothing
7 was happening to the Croats because part of the interview, if you keep in
8 mind, this is now 24th of April. The events in Ahmici happened on the
9 16th. The Prosecution would want everybody to believe that as a result of
10 this ultimatum, the passage of time then unleashed all of these events in
11 Central Bosnia and, therefore, that is part of the joint criminal
12 enterprise and something that we need to defend against. Okay. That's
13 their theory. Fine. They're entitled to it. She wants to back it up.
14 And if we keep going, because I'm not through with this, we will
15 see, at least on -- when we get to the counts, the charges, for instance,
16 on paragraph 40, we talk -- they talk about certain events that happened,
17 lo and behold, in April 1993. But before we get there, because this
18 gentlewoman seems to think that Mr. Alagic with his altruistic
19 expressions, that only the ABiH soldiers were complying and hands out, and
20 hands out this little pamphlet, it turns out that even the Prosecution
21 admit that, in fact, they were handing out the instructions of the Muslim
22 fighters, which we saw through Witness Smajkic. And if you see in the
23 indictment, they talk about what to do with war prisoners, including
24 exterminating them.
25 And the question is: If this is not on -- why wasn't Mr. Alagic
1 questioned about this? Was she aware of this? Then, when we go to
2 paragraph 40, and I quote: "Between January 1993 and January 1994, the
3 ABiH was engaged in combat activities with the HVO in Central Bosnia. In
4 particular, in April 1993 and in early summer 1993, ABiH 3rd Corps units
5 launched a series of heavy attacks against the HVO including, but not
6 limited, to the areas of the municipalities of Bugojno, Busovaca, Kakanj,
7 Maglaj," and so on and so forth.
8 Some of these areas, Your Honours, were the topic of the
9 conversations that this woman was having -- this witness was having with
10 Mr. Prlic during the interview.
11 So I'm -- she's supposed to be a journalist. She said she was an
12 historian. One would expect, especially, Mr. President, based on your
13 question to her, that she would have done some preparation prior to,
14 because she's forming an opinion and writing an article thereafter,
15 basically saying the Croats are lying. The Croats are sugar coating. And
16 it is only the Croats who are committing these atrocities with the Muslims
17 being the victims, and that the Croats are playing it vice versa.
18 And what I'm trying to show is that this interview is incomplete.
19 It doesn't tell the entire story. It's not in perspective, and this
20 woman -- this witness is not credible. Not that she's necessarily biased,
21 but she doesn't have all the facts at the time. That's the whole purpose,
22 and I hope it answers the gentleman's question.
23 Q. Now, madam, were you aware that the ABiH was handing out these
24 instructions, called Instructions for Muslim Fighter, where it was talking
25 about jihad and talking about what to do with prisoners, war booty, and so
1 on, just as -- and this is 1D 00505, for the record. Were you aware of
2 that? And this was coming out of Zenica, by the way. Were you aware of
3 that, "yes" or "no"?
4 A. At that moment, no.
5 Q. At which moment did you become aware of it --
6 A. I --
7 Q. -- and where is it in your statement?
8 A. Well, it has nothing to do with this, but, let's say, it is very
9 much propaganda about Mujahedin and so on. But there were not that many.
10 As the Brits thought, there were about 150. And about --
11 Q. Excuse me, ma'am --
12 A. -- about these sections, I heard from a Finnish man who was
13 fighting in Muslim Corps, and he was telling that there were some
14 radicals, but the most of them were laughing at it. And I must tell you
15 that the Finnish man was certainly no Muslim, but it was first after, when
16 I met him.
17 Q. Okay. All right. Well, there have been figures as much as high
18 as 7.000 --
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. -- of foreign fighters?
21 A. It has been. But, anyway, these Brits were counting villages
22 behind Travnik, and they found 150. I found 12.
23 Q. So, in other words, the Prosecution, in drafting this indictment,
24 after what it did, you know, in preparing the indictment, investigating,
25 what have you, were actually hoodwinked. They didn't know what they were
2 A. I didn't say that. I told only what I heard from BritBat and what
3 I saw myself, because I cannot witness things which I never saw.
4 Q. Well, you said it was propaganda, ma'am. That's what prompted me
5 to ask --
6 A. Yes. This Muslim propaganda was very actual at -- in many times.
7 Q. Very well. Mr. Alagic didn't share with you any of those
9 A. No.
10 Q. Okay.
11 A. And Mr. Alagic was not very -- not very, let's say,
12 fundamentalistic, because we were drinking slivovitz with him.
13 Q. Okay. All right. Very well. Okay. We go on. I'm going to skip
14 through some of this to save some time. If we go to the next page of --
15 of the transcript of the interview, and this would be on page 3 and I'm
16 referring to 1D 01655. So we're back to your particular interview.
17 We noticed, yesterday, there was some attention brought to this
18 particular paragraph. It's the third paragraph on the top of the page,
19 where it starts with Mr. Bartolomio visited Mostar, and it says here -- he
20 goes on in the second sentence: "You know very well that the Croat side
21 signed the document, the VO plan. We want to stop the war, and VO plan is
22 probably the only solution of the existing Bosnia and Herzegovina.
23 Without VO plan here are no Bosnia and Herzegovina. The war will last
24 many years, and this fighting between Croats and Muslims is only in favour
25 of Serbs or Chetniks."
1 And then he goes on to say: "You know very well, tomorrow will be
2 held council of two Serbian regions, Republika Srpska and Srpska Krajina."
3 Do you know what Mr. Prlic is referring to at this point? It's on
4 page -- it's on page 3 of the document with the number 1D 01655. That's
5 the transcript of the tape.
6 Do you know what's talking about that the conflict between the
7 Croats and the Muslims only favour the Serbs or Chetniks, and then talks
8 about the Serbian two regions, Republika Srpska and Srpska Krajina,
9 signing some sort of a -- or meeting to --
10 A. Yes. They wanted to make one state, I know.
11 Q. Okay. Was Mr. Prlic correct in saying that it made no sense for
12 the Croats and the Muslims to be fighting each other?
13 A. Well, he had correct, but he didn't change the thing that they
14 were fighting each other.
15 Q. Okay. Now, if we go on, there's a portion -- there's something
16 that we inserted last night based on listening to the tape. It says: "I
17 have to still insist on doubting your innocence. You control all those
18 routes of middle Bosnia. Maybe they control also some, but you control
19 the road. There is no sense for the Bosnian army not to control by you."
20 So also: "They are rumoured that you control them -- you control,
21 take them, 5 per cent of the weaponry that you smuggled in Bosnia, and cut
22 telephone lines in January."
23 Where did you get this information, ma'am?
24 A. Where you have it?
25 Q. It's on page 3 of the document. It's underlined and in bold?
1 A. Oh, it's another document.
2 Q. I'm showing you a document, 1D 01555 [sic].
3 A. Mm-hmm.
4 Q. Where did you get this information? 1655. It's the transcript,
6 A. Mm-hmm. Okay. I never had that kind of information. Are you
7 sure that it's my voice or not from Erich Rathfelder?
8 Q. Well, to be honest, listening to both of you, assuming that he did
9 any speaking, the voices are rather clear -- I mean, are rather similar,
10 so it's pretty difficult.
11 A. So --
12 Q. So, does this --
13 A. May I tell you something?
14 Q. Go ahead.
15 A. Even I was very much in Bosnia, but I was living in Vienna. Erich
16 Rathfelder was all the time living in Croatian coast. So he was actually,
17 from us two, the better informed from this kind of details, and this is
18 not the language I use.
19 Q. Okay. All right. Fair enough. Was his English about as good as
20 your English or better?
21 A. Better.
22 Q. Okay. All right. Because there was no distinction.
23 A. He has been married with American woman.
24 Q. Doesn't say much. Anyway. Okay. Now, yesterday, you indicated,
25 by the way, that -- that Mr. Prlic said that the Croatians had built this
1 road, a particular road.
2 A. Yes, he told it.
3 Q. Okay. Now, I looked for it, and it's not anywhere here on this
5 A. But --
6 Q. Okay.
7 A. It was something off the record, and I wouldn't blame him from
8 building this road. It was very important.
9 Q. All right. Very well. I'm just -- because if we go further down,
10 in the next paragraph, I just want to point this out: There is some --
11 there is some conversation going on with respect to weapons or trucks and
12 humanitarian aid. And in the very last paragraph, at the last part of the
13 paragraph, they said -- Mr. Prlic is saying: "I'm not sure about the
14 number, for instance, 15 trucks. They said that it's for Srebrenica. And
15 five of them went out. Our evidence and Mr. Halilovic said it to us later
16 that these arms were only driven to Visoko, and they were used during this
17 war. What do you do in this ...? To give -- to give the arms to somebody
18 who kill you? I think that we must have global sightseeing about the
19 situation, but it isn't a problem."
20 And then he goes on: "It is a problem only, according to my
21 information, ... but for which arms Muslims fight during this war? All
22 arms come through this territory, you know, it's very well. It isn't the
24 Now, obviously, Mr. Prlic is having difficulty expressing himself.
25 Would you not say that? I mean, they're not complete sentences. I mean,
1 we can get the gist, but, obviously, he's not as fluent as one would make
2 him out to be. That was a question, ma'am.
3 A. Mm-hmm. And what are you asking?
4 Q. All right. I'll move to the next question. Did you verify this
5 information? Did you look into it to see whether Mr. Halilovic had indeed
6 said that five of those trucks went to Visoko?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Now, Mr. Prlic is telling you that some of the arms that is coming
9 through Croatia to the ABiH is used again the Croats; correct?
10 A. Well, he's --
11 Q. He's saying that?
12 A. -- he's saying that.
13 Q. Right. Now, if we looked at this indictment that the Prosecution
14 drafted and it talks about, because on paragraph 40, it says: "In
15 particular," they highlight, "in particular April 1993." So by this
16 point, he's telling you also that some of the weapons that is coming
17 through Croatia into -- to the ABiH is being turned against the Croats.
18 Is he not telling you that, "yes" or "no"?
19 A. Yes, he's telling that.
20 Q. Now, based on that, you interpreted that he was in favour of
21 imposing some sort of embargo; right?
22 A. Well, there was an embargo.
23 Q. I understand there was an embargo, but I don't quite see that when
24 I read article. Your are attributing that Mr. Prlic, and then later on at
25 some point you even mention. Tudjman at some point, that they were
1 insisting on putting an embargo on the Muslims.
2 A. Well, let's say it another way round. At that time, there was an
3 embargo. It was the whole former Yugoslavia. And at that time, there was
4 the discussion to finish with this UN embargo --
5 Q. Ma'am, the embargo --
6 A. -- and that was the point.
7 Q. The point, ma'am -- the point is this: You assert that Mr. Prlic
8 is trying to keep weapons from going to Muslim fighters, and you are
9 saying that he is in favour of an embargo. When, in fact, an embargo was
10 already in place, and one would then -- could conclude - I don't want to
11 speculate - but they could conclude, if they're coming through Croatia
12 voluntarily and reaching the hands of the Muslim fighters that, in spite
13 of the embargo, Croatia and the Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina are allowing
14 arms to go to the Muslim fighters because the common enemy was primarily,
15 you know, the Serbs; right?
16 A. It was the common enemy.
17 Q. Right.
18 A. But it is another question. So long this embargo was, the Croats,
19 the Herceg-Bosna was controlling everything what was going to Central
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. And they were earning very much money with it. It's a -- war is
23 also a business.
24 Q. Okay. Well -- very well. Now, there's this -- this is the only
25 reference that I have for Srebrenica here, which is on page 3 of this
2 A. Mm-hmm.
3 Q. And the reason I only mention this is because if you look at
4 your -- your interview, Genocide in Central Bosnia -- this was P 02094.
5 It just caught my attention. If you look on page 1, it's a Prosecution
6 document. It's a Prosecution document.
7 MR. KARNAVAS: Perhaps, Mr. Usher, you could assist in providing
8 our witness with P 02094. In fact, it might be useful to have all the
9 documents, Prosecution documents, to this witness.
10 Q. But in the very first paragraph, you say: "The president of the
11 HVO, army of the -- of Bosnia-Herzegovina Croats, Jadranko Prlic is a --
12 is as sweet as sugar. He denies any violations of human rights by Croats
13 against Muslims in Central Bosnia and repeats the official propaganda
14 according to which the Croats are the victims." And I mention this
15 because that's why I asked you whether you attended the press conference
16 because it would have been useful for you to have heard what he had said
17 during the press conference. But then you go on to say: "The Muslims are
18 using the wave of sympathy from Srebrenica as a screen for their
19 attacks -- for their attack."
20 Now, where in the interview does Mr. Prlic say anything about
21 Muslims using a wave of sympathy of Srebrenica as a screen for their
22 attack. Where does he say that or is this part of your analysis, part of
23 your spin?
24 A. No.
25 Q. What is it? Are these your words or are these words that
1 Mr. Prlic said again probably off the record which is why --
2 A. No, I don't think so.
3 Q. Okay. Trust me, they're not in there. You can take your time
4 during the break to look at the tape, but it's not there.
5 Are you not taking some liberties with the facts or maybe putting
6 your own spin, as we saw yesterday, with the power plant and the energy?
7 Could that be the case?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Okay. Could it be that you're confabulating then?
10 A. What's confabulating?
11 Q. Making it up.
12 A. No.
13 Q. Okay.
14 A. No.
15 Q. Or could it be that this is just your interpretation? You have no
16 actual -- it's not on the tape. We don't have your notes. You never said
17 anything about this being on your notes. So it's not on the transcript.
18 So how did you get this, attributing this to Mr. Prlic, because after all
19 you're trying to suggest that he's denying everything about the Croats.
20 All right. We'll move on and I tell you -- during the break you
21 can have that document and you can look it over. But let me move on.
23 And if we look at 1D 01652, this is the -- the text of what
24 Mr. Prlic said in Mostar on April 24th, 1993, the very same day that you
25 had interviewed him. I'm not going to go through the entire text because
1 we can all read it, but towards the end at least, if we see the -- I'll
2 read the first paragraph from the top, Your Honours.
3 "The peace plan for BiH has repeatedly been refused by the Serbian
4 side, while the Muslim side obstructs that plan and when the Muslim forces
5 that not so long ago were allies in defence against the Serbian aggressor
6 attacks us and when we have to defend ourselves against them we are being
7 criticised. Each move of the Croatian side falls under biased scrutiny.
8 We get the impression that our evil, if perpetrated by our men, is
9 multiple times greater than the same evil by the others. Why? Is it not
10 because our wishes for freedom is not a part of the old schemes?"
11 Now, when he talks about "our evil," is he not saying through this
12 sentence because there are other parts of this interview, but he's talking
13 about "our evil." Is he not recognising that the Croats are also
14 responsible for acts, that it's not just blaming the one side, but he is
15 making a recognition. Is he not saying that?
16 A. Where is it?
17 Q. It's on page 4, the top paragraph. I just read it, ma'am.
18 A. Yes, I can see it in the --
19 Q. Okay.
20 A. -- in the screen.
21 Q. We'll move on. And let me move on -- I think we have 10 more
22 minutes before the break.
23 If I can move on to the next -- next page, page 4 of that document
24 that we were looking at, what is the transcript of your interview,
25 1D 01655, page 4. There's another insert you will see, Your Honours.
1 It's at the very top of the page. It's at 00.30.17 into the tape where
2 you say -- if we look above it actually. Let's look at the above answer.
3 Our proposal it's much easier -- much earlier than VO plan. Our proposal
4 is much earlier than VO plan. VO means Vance-Owen Plan. Hence my
5 questioning to you when I started whether you were aware of any earlier
7 Do you know what the earlier proposals of the Croats in
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina were prior to the Vance-Owen Plan? Yes, no, maybe, I
10 A. I forgot.
11 Q. Okay. Do you know whether they were somewhat similar to the
12 Vance-Owen peace initiatives?
13 A. I don't remember.
14 Q. All right. All right.
15 A. It's 15 years ago.
16 Q. Well, exactly. Now, it says here -- it says here that -- is the
17 function of region with national majority will be with all human and
18 natural -- national rights and at the same time as percentage of
19 inhabitants. For instance, in Mostar 50 to 50, Travnik 50 to 50. There
20 is a problem. There are no problems on mixed territories. I said to you
21 before that more Muslims live in this region than before the war.
22 Now -- and then you -- then your next question is: "You will not
23 propose ethnic cleansing in mixed areas?" And he says, "No. Why? You
24 know we are ready to investigate -- to investigate all of these examples.
25 I said to you before, there are no HVO now in Travnik, Jablanica, Konjic,
1 Gornji Vakuf."
2 Now, do you know what exactly he was talking about when he was
3 saying it is a function of the -- of region with national majority? Do
4 you know what he was talking about that?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And what was he talking about?
7 A. He was talking anyway from common administration in mixed
9 Q. Okay. And do you recall exactly what the -- the Vance-Owen Peace
10 Plan called for?
11 A. Yes, I know what the peace plan called for.
12 Q. Okay.
13 A. But the problem was the interpretation.
14 Q. Okay. Well, how was he interpreting it to you on that particular
15 day if we look at this particular statement?
16 A. He was of course interpreting it like it should be interpreted.
17 Q. Okay.
18 A. But something already happened.
19 Q. I understand something happened. Something already was happening
20 all over the country. But this particular individual, the one that you
21 were meeting with, he was publicly talking to you, a journalist who was
22 going to be publishing an article, and he was giving you his
23 interpretation of what the VOPP, the Vance-Owen Peace Plan, was calling
24 for; correct?
25 A. In the moment when Security Council was coming and the whole world
1 was looking at Central Bosnia and also Herceg-Bosna. Of course he was
2 trying to make the problems a little bit less.
3 Q. That's your interpretation now.
4 A. That's my interpretation.
5 Q. Okay.
6 A. And it's quite normal.
7 Q. Okay. It's quite normal. But your making these assumptions;
9 A. What do you mean?
10 Q. Well, if you go on -- if you look at the entire interview in the
11 context, you were the one conducting this interview; right?
12 A. No, I was not the one conducting this interview. I was -- I was
13 there. I made some questions, but you are putting very much in my mouth
14 things which came from Mr. Rathfelder's mouth.
15 Q. All right. Very well. All right. You go on further down when
16 you say, and this is the part that wasn't in the initial
17 transcript: "Yes, I have my opinion. Establish Bosnia but there is to
18 solution in ethnic cleansing." And the answer is: "Yes, I agree with you
19 but I don't support establish Bosnia. I want to establish Bosnia and
20 Herzegovina. I'm not Bosnian, I'm Herzegovinian. I'm not a Bosnian
21 Croat, I'm a Croat."
22 Now he's telling you this; right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So he's asking for -- what he's looking for is a Bosnia in
25 Herzegovina; right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Those two together?
3 A. Well, let's say some kind of autonomy for Herzegovina.
4 Q. Well, does he say anywhere ma'am, does he say anywhere -- where
5 does he say it that he wants autonomy for Herzegovina?
6 A. He don't have to say it because Herceg-Bosna was already founded
7 at that time.
8 Q. Ma'am, where does he say it?
9 A. That Herceg-Bosna was founded -- I knew it.
10 Q. No, no, where does it say that he wanted autonomy. We're talking
11 about a peace plan?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Later on. Let's skip forward. Does he not later on say --
14 suggest that he wanted that Bosnia-Herzegovina should probably be under
15 international supervision?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Okay. And the international community was saying all along that
18 Bosnia and Herzegovina should not break up the way Yugoslavia broke up;
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So here he is calling for international assistance to stop the
22 war, to keep Bosnia and Herzegovina together and to supervise it and
23 you're insisting that somehow you're interpreting that that he meant that
24 he wanted autonomy. How do you get there? Do the math for me.
25 A. Well, let's say so. About end of '33 it started --
1 Q. Ma'am.
2 A. It had --
3 Q. No. Excuse me. You had an interview with Mr. Prlic. You've
4 judged Mr. Prlic. In fact, I dare say and I put to you that you judged
5 him before you went there?
6 A. No, because I didn't know.
7 Q. And you wrote a story based on what you wanted to write. And I'm
8 asking you, based on what he was saying, how do you get to autonomy?
9 You're asking questions or Erich but both of you were there, two peas in a
10 pod, you're asking questions he's giving you answers. How do you get
11 there? Based on what? Show it to me concretely based on this document,
12 based on your tape. Show it to me.
13 A. Based on the things which were happening on ground.
14 Q. Okay. Very well.
15 A. Based on the fact that there was a Herceg-Bosna. And later based
16 on the fact that it was not -- it didn't last to exist even in
17 international treaties. It should have lasted -- should have last. It
18 was already a long-living state in that meaning.
19 Q. What was a long-living state in that meaning? Herceg-Bosna?
20 A. Yes. It --
21 Q. Can you point to me one particular document on one particular day
22 anywhere where Herceg-Bosna, any leader of Herceg-Bosna, wherever that may
23 be, asked for international recognition, international recognition as
24 Herceg-Bosna as a state and I'm not suggesting legally speaking that that
25 is the ultimate in creating a state, but that is one of the steps that is
1 normally looked upon. Is there anywhere, ma'am?
2 A. They never got that far.
3 Q. They never got that far.
4 A. But you know that it was -- you know that they were with their own
5 plates driving around Europe. You know that there was some --
6 Q. Ma'am, was a central government functioning in Sarajevo? How much
7 time did you spend in Sarajevo during the war?
8 A. I was a couple of times in Sarajevo, but it was --
9 Q. How many times?
10 A. -- pretty difficult to get there.
11 Q. Okay. And how -- was Sarajevo not under siege?
12 A. Yes, it was.
13 Q. And wasn't it a fact that Sarajevo for -- the government of
14 Sarajevo for all intents of purposes the best it could do was manage a
15 portion of Sarajevo and nothing more beyond it? Isn't that a fact?
16 A. Well, it's not the fact. There was also administration outside
18 Q. Okay. Like in Tuzla?
19 A. Like -- like in Zenica, like in Tuzla, like in Mostar.
20 Q. Okay.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We shall stop now because of the
22 break and we shall resume in 20 minutes' time, around 11.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 10.39 a.m.
24 --- On resuming at 11.01 a.m.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We have resumed our hearing.
1 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you, Mr. President, Your Honours.
2 Q. Madam, if -- we're going to stick with this document a little bit
3 longer. This is 1D 01655. That's the transcript of your -- of your
4 interview, and we're going to sort of pick up where we left off so we can
5 complete that point.
6 At the -- we're looking at page 5 now, and Mr. Prlic at the top of
7 the page says: You know, he talked against this plan; and after that, he
8 signed it." And we're referring to Mr. Izetbegovic above that. We can
9 see that a couple lines above. You go on to say: "He did not talk
10 against the plan. He only said that it was meant," like you say, "for all
11 the people in the area. It was not meant ethnical, but it was interpreted
12 ethnical. And that what he says, nothing else. And this was what I meant
13 before, that normal people wanted like this. Okay. This is now ours and
14 the other side."
15 And Mr. Prlic answers: "I say all the time, the provinces with
16 Croat majority, provinces with Muslim majority. I did not say in any
17 moment Croat provinces, Muslim's provinces."
18 Do you see that?
19 A. Yes, I'm not blind.
20 Q. Okay. I never said that you were, madam.
21 Now, that's how he's interpreting the Vance-Owen Peace Plan to
22 you, is he not? And he's concurring with you, with respect to what
23 Izetbegovic supposedly is saying; correct?
24 A. Well --
25 Q. He says -- does he not say, ma'am --
1 A. Just one small correction.
2 Q. Okay. Correct me.
3 A. I was discussing with Lagumdzija, not with Izetbegovic. And that
4 discussion is -- is refer from my interview with Lagumdzija, not with
6 Q. He says here: "Why he signed," top of the page, "Why he signed.
7 "MV: No, Lagumdzija.
8 "JP: Mr. Izetbegovic signed it.
9 "MV: But, if we are talking Lagumdzija. Izetbegovic signed it...
10 "JP: I know it very well. Muslim side have done everything
11 against this plan after signing this plan.
13 "JP: You know, he talked against this plan, and after that he
14 signed it."
15 Who signed it? Izetbegovic signed the plan; correct?
16 A. Izetbegovic signed the plan.
17 Q. Okay.
18 A. But because there is these points, it's not totally there.
19 Q. What I'm asking, ma'am, is: Mr. Prlic is concretely here telling
20 you that he doesn't see -- the way he sees these provinces, not as Croat
21 provinces or Muslim provinces, as others may be attributing how the
22 Vance-Owen Peace Plan should be interpreted, but, rather, he's saying that
23 these are provinces where there are Croat majorities or Muslim majorities
24 or Serb majorities. That's what he's saying, is he not?
25 A. Yes, that's what he's saying.
1 Q. Okay. And based on your knowledge, based on your interpretation
2 of the Vance-Owen Peace Plan, that would be the correct interpretation,
3 would it not?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Okay.
6 A. But it doesn't change what did happen.
7 Q. Ma'am, I'm just asking you about the interview. Okay?
8 Now, we go on. He says: "This was official statement of HV."
9 This is your question: "Yes, it is official statement." So now he's
10 telling you what the official statement is, then you go on: "Tomorrow
11 there will be decision. What will you demand?" Okay?
12 Now, you're asking him what he's demanding, and he says: "Our
13 proposal will be the same as in the beginning of the war. We did not
14 change our position, and we try to be serious partner. If we sign
15 documents, we should do everything according to the plan, nothing more,
16 nothing less, concretely."
17 Question: Do you know what their proposal was at the beginning
18 of the war?
19 A. I knew it at that moment, but I don't know if any more. It's 15
20 years -- or 14 years ago, but, of course, I knew it in that discussion.
21 Q. Okay. Well, he's saying that their position, that is, the Croat
22 position in Bosnia-Herzegovina, was the same position essentially as that
23 which he's articulating earlier on, which is his interpretation of the
24 Vance-Owen Peace Plan. So is he lying? Is he confabulating? Is he
25 making something up? Is he misinterpreting? What exactly did you take
1 his answer to be, ma'am?
2 A. Well, first question: What is the beginning of war? What do you
3 mean beginning of war?
4 Q. Okay. Prior to the -- the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
5 were there any negotiations at the international level that you're aware
6 of --
7 A. Okay.
8 Q. -- concerning the break-up of Yugoslavia and the establishment of
9 various countries as a result of the break-up of Yugoslavia and the
10 various republics contained therein. Were there any negotiations,
11 international negotiations? "Yes," "no," "maybe," "I don't know"?
12 A. My question was because --
13 Q. No. I asked --
14 A. -- there was two wars in Bosnia.
15 Q. Ma'am. Ma'am, please answer my question. You're the journalist,
16 you're the historian, you're the analyst. I'm not. Now, I understand, in
17 1991, you were in Iraq covering the war over there. However, you're back
18 in country now, in the region, and I'm asking you: As Yugoslavia is about
19 to unravel itself, do you know concretely - "yes," "no,""maybe," "I don't
20 know," "I can't remember" - whether there were any international
22 A. Oh, yes. For instance, here in this town.
23 Q. All right. Now, do you know, as Bosnia-Herzegovina is trying to
24 find a solution for itself - okay? - do you know whether there was a
1 A. Yes, there was referendum.
2 Q. What was the purpose for the referendum?
3 A. Let's say, there was also referendum in Croatia --
4 Q. I'm not asking you about Croatia?
5 A. -- and there was, of course --
6 Q. I am just --
7 A. -- referendum in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
8 Q. What was the purpose of it?
9 A. The purpose was to know what Bosnian people wants, and this
10 referendum was ordered in this town, in this peace negotiations September
12 Q. All right. Now, what was the -- what were the proposals at or
13 about that time that were being made by the -- by the Croats with respect
14 to what should happen in Bosnia-Herzegovina?
15 A. The --
16 Q. Did you recall --
17 A. The referendum, I know even the result. The referendum was that
18 the Croats and the Muslims were for independent Bosnia; Serbs not.
19 Q. Okay. All right. Now, thereafter, were there any negotiations,
20 ma'am, concerning how to keep Bosnia and Herzegovina together?
21 A. Of course, there was --
22 Q. Okay.
23 A. -- because international community didn't want it to break.
24 Q. Now, could you tell me please at that point in time what the Croat
25 position was with respect to Bosnia-Herzegovina? What were they asking
1 for? What were their concerns? What were their aspirations?
2 A. They wanted that Bosnia-Herzegovina exist.
3 Q. That's what the Croats wanted.
4 A. Well, that's what the Croats wanted. That's what the --
5 Q. Concretely, ma'am?
6 A. -- Muslims wanted, and Serbia wanted something else --
7 Q. Okay. Now --
8 A. -- at that moment.
9 Q. Okay. At that moment. Did you ever review, analyse, or have
10 analysed for you, the constitution of BiH, of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the then
11 existing constitution? It's a yes or no.
12 A. I read the constitution before the elections of 1990, but it was
13 not independent Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was a Yugoslavian state.
14 Q. All right. Okay. Very well. In -- in Bosnia-Herzegovina - let's
15 try to keep it simple - how were the Serbs, the Croats, and the Muslims
16 characterised at the time? As what?
17 A. They were nations.
18 Q. Okay. Constituent nations.
19 A. Yes. Narod.
20 Q. Okay. Narod. Very good. Now, would that be different than,
21 say, a national minority?
22 A. It's very different.
23 Q. What is the difference?
24 A. The difference is very big. A constitutional nationality, or
25 narod, let's say, have exactly the same rights as the, let's say, bigger
2 Q. Right.
3 A. And it's not -- and that's what I have been trying to tell you
4 many times. It's not depending of how many persons. We have in Finland
5 five, five persons Swedish speaking, but it's the other nations. So I
6 know these things very well.
7 Q. Well, I'm glad that we've finally -- there's a meeting of the
8 mind, so far, on this one. Okay?
9 Now, if we go down the page, because this came up yesterday, and
10 you seem to interpret it in a particular way. All right. Mr. Prlic, in
11 the very last paragraph, he's saying that -- he says: "You know, I want
12 to say something for Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Yugoslavia is
13 better than unitary Bosnia and Herzegovina. Why? Because Croatia was in
14 that Yugoslavia. Now there is border to Croats. You know, Yugoslavia was
15 complex country. Now, in BiH, it is not a complex country. It would be
16 unitary country. There are none country in the world who has more than
17 two constituent nations," and then we don't have the rest of the sentence
19 But going back to what I asked earlier: When he's saying unitary
20 is better than a unitary Bosnia, were you aware, madam, that that term,
21 the way it was used in context, in situ, what it meant was: One person,
22 one vote. And as a result of that, there would not necessarily be
23 protection to a -- a nationality. Were you aware that that's how the term
24 "unitary" or "unitary government" was being interpreted?
25 A. Unitarian government don't have to be interpreted like that.
1 Q. I'm not saying -- well, okay. Let's just say it doesn't have to
2 be interpreted that way, but were you aware -- were you aware of that term
3 and how it was being used? Okay. A rose by any other name is a rose.
4 And what I'm saying is: Were you aware of how the connotation,
5 what they meant when they said unitary Bosnia and Herzegovina, because I
6 dare say, and I put to you, that in order to understand what Mr. Prlic is
7 saying, and in order to understand the aspirations of the Croats in
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina, you have to understand what they meant by unitary
9 Bosnia and Herzegovina. So do you know how that term was being used at
10 the time. You being a journalist, and then thereafter, after interviews,
11 forming an opinions and writing about it?
12 A. Well, everybody interprets them how they want. But unitary
13 country means -- means one country with one government, but it doesn't
14 exclude that every nation is in that government.
15 Q. Okay. But what I'm asking you is: At that point in time -- I
16 must insist on an answer, ma'am. I don't mean to be disputatious, and
17 it's okay if you don't know. It's all right. But I'm asking you: Did
18 you know, in what fashion and what context, how they were interpreting the
19 term "unitary"?
20 A. They were interpreting it with many different terms, because
21 everybody is interpreting it in his way. I know that there were these
22 which were interpreting it like this one voice, one man, or even woman.
23 But not all people were interpreting it like that.
24 Q. Okay. All right. Let's switch gears then. Can you - you
25 covering the war, being a journalist, historian, analyst - can you provide
1 us with one single proposal made by Izetbegovic where he concretely
2 spelled out, where he - okay - the head of his party and the head of the
3 Muslim nation - where he concretely spelled out how he envisaged the
4 government and how he envisaged the protection of all three national --
5 nationalities in Bosnia-Herzegovina? Can you point that to me?
6 A. I don't --
7 Q. So is at least the Croats could say, "Well, now I see how I'm
8 being protected." That what Izetbegovic doesn't mean is: One person, one
9 vote. He has the majority, and therefore we have elections. They get the
10 top positions. Show me one proposal?
11 A. I don't know any proposals, any official proposals.
12 Q. Okay. Do you know of any unofficial proposals?
13 A. No, because I was not in the negotiations there.
14 Q. Exactly. Exactly. That's my whole point. During negotiations,
15 wasn't that the critical aspect between all three nations. They want to
16 know how they're going to protect their vital national interest. Wasn't
17 that the point?
18 A. Maybe it's the point, but I don't see that the protect national
19 interest is to kill the other nationality.
20 Q. Well, nobody said anything about that. We're talking about
21 negotiations. I understand you're here trying to promote your story.
22 Now, let's talk about the negotiations.
23 A. That person is no story.
24 Q. Okay. Let's talk about the negotiations. You indicated that you
25 were never there, right, in Geneva?
1 A. I didn't say Geneva. I said that I never been in negotiations.
2 They were hold behind closed doors.
3 Q. Okay. Well, they were being held in Geneva. I mean, it's no big
5 A. No, but even I --
6 Q. It's no big secret.
7 A. -- even if I had been in Geneva, I wouldn't have been attending
8 the negotiations, because I am representative of no Yugoslavia nation.
9 Q. Well, you could have gone to the hotel, for instance, where they
10 were staying.
11 A. And drinking beer.
12 Q. Well, maybe rakija. You could have brought some home brew from
13 Mr. Alagic, and you might even have asked for an interview. You didn't do
15 A. No, and I was not in Geneva.
16 Q. Now, would it surprise you, ma'am, that every so often, one of two
17 weeks, Mr. Karadzic; Mr. Boban; occasionally, Mr. Izetbegovic; sometimes
18 others, would be there; and when they were there, they were in the same
19 hotel where the negotiations were going on?
20 MR. KARNAVAS: And there's a point to this, Your Honours.
21 Q. Were you aware of that? "Yes," "no," "I don't know."
22 A. I was aware, but Geneva is not my area. It's somebody else who is
23 covering it.
24 Q. I'm not asking whether it's your area, but here's my point -- and
25 maybe before we get to the point, let me ask you: How did you get to
1 Pale, because you claim, you are claiming, based on something that we
2 don't have, that Mr. Prlic said that Boban is travelling to Pale, secretly
3 to meet with Karadzic. And the point I'm making is: Every two weeks, he
4 gets to see him in Geneva. He can talk to him in his room. He can talk
5 to him in the lobby. He can talk to him anywhere.
6 A. How would I know?
7 Q. Well, how do you get to Pale during the war at that period in
8 time, because I dare say, and I submit to you, that it would have been
9 virtually impossible for Mr. Boban to have gone to Pale, as you suggested
10 that Mr. Prlic is telling you.
11 A. Well, it was not impossible.
12 Q. And he would have to -- he would travel through Pale in the middle
13 of the war, when he could just as easily see him and meet him in Geneva.
14 That's what you're suggesting.
15 A. I'm not suggesting. I just --
16 Q. Okay.
17 A. -- I'm quoting, nothing else.
18 Q. Okay. You're quoting. We don't have your notes. Your notes were
19 written in Finnish; right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Your article that you sent off, was that in German or was that in
23 A. In Finnish.
24 Q. And from Finnish, it was translated into English?
25 A. No, it was not translated in English.
1 Q. I do -- what I have over here -- that's exhibit --
2 A. They are no articles, if you mean this --
3 Q. The interview.
4 A. -- if you mean this what you have.
5 Q. Right.
6 A. Okay. They are my material for Austrian press agency.
7 Q. Okay.
8 A. And it's not that what was published in Austrian press agency.
9 But if you want to know what was published in Austrian press agency, I
10 have it with me.
11 Q. I'm not interested in what they ended up publishing. I'm
12 interested in what you did. You -- you had a conversation with Mr. Prlic
13 in English; right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. You claim that after this interview that was tape recorded, he
16 said that Boban is travelling to Pale secretly to have negotiations.
17 That's what you're saying.
18 A. Yes, had already been.
19 Q. Had already been to Pale. We don't have a tape recorder there?
20 A. No, but --
21 Q. Hold on.
22 A. -- but we have two witnesses: Rathfelder and Kesavaara.
23 Q. I got you right now. Now, you wrote this in your notes; right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Okay. Could you tell me exactly: What was the question that you
1 posed, and word for word the answer that he gave you, because I know you
2 said that you took shorthand. But do you recall the exact question?
3 A. Well, it was -- I don't recall the exact question but I can --
4 because I have pretty good memory, but I don't recall exact question which
5 is behind 14 years. I suppose nobody can do it.
6 Q. I --
7 A. But the topic was: The just solution for Bosnia-Herzegovina, and
8 he was telling: "Of course, we have to contact Serbs to find a just
10 Q. Okay. All right.
11 A. But it also -- it is in this document.
12 Q. Right. Right. I agree with you. Well, isn't that a fair
13 assessment? That, I mean, if you got three warring parties: You got the
14 Croats, you got the Muslims, you got the Serbs - they're all constituent
15 nations - don't you have to talk to all three parties?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Wasn't that what the negotiators were actually encouraging the
18 parties to do?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Isn't that exactly what the parties were doing when they were
21 going to Geneva?
22 A. Yes, but it was not question from Geneva at that moment.
23 Q. Hold on. Hold on, ma'am.
24 The Vance-Owen Peace Plan was in January; right? That was one of
25 the last proposals; correct?
1 A. 2nd of January.
2 Q. 2nd of January. We're talking now in April right?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Okay. But this was an ongoing process, was it not? Was it not an
5 ongoing process?
6 A. Well, Serbs hadn't signed it.
7 Q. Were the negotiations, ma'am, an ongoing process? It calls for a
8 "yes" or "no." And the answer is yes, and you know it. Just say yes.
9 A. Okay. Well, I didn't understand the negotiation. I was thinking
10 about the treaty. It was not yet in power. It was not valid.
11 Q. Were not negotiators trying to encourage the parties among
12 themselves, all three together, in different variations, shapes, and
13 forms, to try to resolve their differences? Were they not?
14 A. Yes, but it's not -- that's not the question.
15 Q. All right. So when Mr. Prlic is saying to you that we need to
16 talk to the Serbs and find a solution, or we have talked to the Serbs,
17 would it not be illogic -- would it be illogical to conclude that those
18 talks had been occurring in Geneva?
19 A. Yes, but I suppose the topic was not that.
20 Q. All right. And if they're staying in the same hotel, why wouldn't
21 Mr. Boban have to drive through either Republika Srpska all the way
22 around, if you know the map, or go through Sarajevo, which is under siege,
23 and then go on the other side in order to get to Pale? Why would he have
24 to do all of that when he could just knock on the door of Mr. Boban's room
25 or Mr. Karadzic's room in Geneva and talk to him, and do exactly what he
1 was being encouraged to do? Why would he need to have all these -- this
2 cloak and dagger stuff that you claim Mr. Prlic has indicated?
3 A. Because it was the question of this ultimatum and on that what
4 happened 16th of May -- of April, because it was not the question of peace
5 negotiation. It was a question of forced solution.
6 Q. Could it be --
7 A. -- in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
8 Q. Ma'am, couldn't it be that simply, you asked a leading question:
9 "Is Mr. Boban having secret negotiations with Karadzic in Pale," and
10 Mr. Prlic responds by saying, "We need to talk to the Serbs"? Could that
11 be the context of -- of the answer that Mr. Prlic gave; and then because
12 of the question the way you had phrased it, leading it -- leading the way
13 it was, you --
14 A. No.
15 Q. -- interpreted it to mean --
16 A. No. I make no leading questions, but I suppose you very much.
17 Q. You make no leading questions. Okay. Let me just go back. If I
18 could go back to one of the questions which I thought was -- at least it's
19 somewhat leading to me. On page 4 where you say, for instance: "You will
20 not propose ethnic cleansing in mixed areas?" Now, that's a leading
22 A. Yes, but it's not made from me.
23 Q. Okay. So that -- all leading questions are attributed to somebody
24 else, not you?
25 A. No, but I know my style. I have lived with me very many decades
2 Q. Okay. All right. I don't doubt that. Now, if we look at -- the
3 reason I'd asked earlier about the notes that were ultimately typed up or
4 sent that are part of Prosecution Exhibit P 02094 is we know, first of
5 all, that you took notes in Finnish in sort of a shorthand, and then this
6 is going to someone with a rather large name that appears to be sort of a
7 Germanic origin?
8 A. Where? Which one?
9 Q. This is on page P 02094: Genocide in Central Bosnia. That's one.
10 I can't pronounce it, but -- well, I could, but -- and I think this is the
11 one that goes to the Austrian press?
12 A. Yes, with -- it was not in that form.
13 Q. All right. Now, I take it, since it's going to the Austrian
14 press, these notes are in German.
15 A. No.
16 Q. Are they in Finnish?
17 A. When I'm making --
18 Q. It's P 02094. It's a Prosecution document. Do you see it, ma'am?
19 A. No, I don't find it.
20 Q. Okay.
21 MR. KARNAVAS: Could we have some assistance, please.
22 Q. This was a document that, apparently, you generated that was sent
23 out on April 25th, 1993.
24 A. Mm-hmm.
25 Q. Okay?
1 A. Okay.
2 Q. Now -- now, we do have the original.
3 MR. KARNAVAS: And the original, if I could put it on the ELMO,
4 and it has an ERN 0212-2152. We can just put it -- and there are many
5 polyglots in the courtroom, and I'm sure they can help us out here.
6 Q. But it seems to me, at least, that it looks like it is German.
7 A. Well, it's some kind of German made from me.
8 Q. Okay. So this is sort of your version of the German language?
9 A. It's my version of the German language, which I never have
11 Q. Okay. All right. And is your German, may I ask, is it as good as
12 your English or better?
13 A. Well, I have studied more English. But living so long time in
14 German area, I maybe speak better in German, but write better in English,
15 because I don't know the German articles.
16 Q. All right. Okay. The reason I ask this is because on page 2, for
17 instance, you have on the second paragraph: "Prlic does not deny that
18 Boban would have met secretly with Radovan -- Radovan Karadzic," and you
19 then go on to say: "According to his statement, it is necessary to talk
20 to the Serbs in order to find a solution in Bosnia-Herzegovina."
21 And the reason I ask that is because it's so -- it's an
22 interesting way of putting it, that Boban "would have met secretly."
23 A. That --
24 Q. "Would have met" --
25 A. Yes, that's.
1 Q. -- as opposed to: He met him. I think it's the perfect tense
2 versus the past tense.
3 A. Okay. I was writing this for Austrian press agency, and news
4 agencies have a certain style. They never go so directly, because they
5 are always securing their back when somebody is maybe objecting.
6 Q. I see. Okay. So you were hedging your bets?
7 A. No, not mine. That's the Serbian material. And if I give you -
8 but you don't want them - the ones which were published in Austrian press
9 agency, they are not even my initials. And this one, which we published
10 even in my name, the name was false, because they were afraid because for
11 my security.
12 Q. All right.
13 A. So I don't have to secure my -- my back in that meaning. I was
14 just writing it how I was used to do for Austrian press agency.
15 Q. Okay. But those articles, ultimately, were edited by somebody?
16 A. They were then edited by somebody, and it was totally under
17 because -- and this form like this, no news agency article ever comes. It
18 was material for them, and that's why I took the results with me this
19 time. I have them. And the title is not "genocide." It is "from a
20 destruction of a village," or something like that.
21 Q. But you chose the word "genocide" when you --
22 A. Yes. I chose the word "genocide" because that's what the
23 Venezuelan UN representatives told.
24 Q. You said that they were representatives. Could they be
25 investigators and not representatives that were sent by --
1 A. Security --
2 Q. -- Mr. Mazowiecki, the Polish gentleman who was in --
3 A. Well, anyway, they told us that they were representatives of the
4 UN Security Council.
5 Q. Very well. Well, ma'am, I want to thank you for answering all my
6 questions, albeit unsatisfactory at times, but thank you very much.
7 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honours, I have no further questions for this
9 Questioned by the Court:
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I personally have a
11 follow-up question to put to you, to follow up on a question put to you by
12 Mr. Karnavas. I would like you to go back to the document of the
13 interview, on page 4 in English.
14 In the third paragraph, because this is a long paragraph - because
15 this is Mr. Prlic's answer - it starts with: "I think that it depends..."
16 In the main body of the text here, in what it says, he is demonstrating
17 something, and he says this. And he is addressing himself to you and to
18 your colleague the German journalist. And he says -- and this is his
19 point of view, and this is why I'm drawing your attention to this, because
20 I would like to see what you have to say about it.
21 And he says, as follows, he says: "We had 17.5 per cent of Croats
22 before the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina," and he says: "Today, not more than
23 12 per cent."
24 The two figures he quotes clearly indicate that 5 per cent Croats
25 would have left, and he then puts a question to you, and he says: "In
1 that case, this is ethnic cleansing against ourselves." And he argues
2 that there are Croats in the government. There are Croats in the
3 Presidency and in the embassies and consulates, and then he tells you that
4 there are 36 representatives of Bosnia-Herzegovina around the world, and
5 there is no Croatian representative amongst them. Not a single Croat
6 there or Muslims.
7 And he concludes by saying: "It is a Muslim state," and he then
8 says turning to the three of you, because a photographer was with you, he
9 then says to you and asks you: "Do you agree with this Muslim state? Do
10 you support it." He has made a lengthy discussion and then he puts a
11 question to you, and we don't quite understand what your answer was
12 because there is an empty space after that. And he then adds - and this
13 is what Mr. Karnavas highlighted a while ago - he will add that he wishes
14 to establish Bosnia-Herzegovina, and he adds, "I am not Bosnian; I am
15 Herzegovinian. I am not a Bosnian Croat; I am a Croat."
16 And then he asks you all these questions, and we don't have your
17 answers. Did either you or your colleague answer his questions? This was
18 the question I wanted to put to you.
19 A. I suppose we answered, but I don't remember in which -- which
20 exactly in which form. I think that we were -- anyway, I was pretty
21 astonished of this statement of Mr. Prlic, because you can interpret it
22 with very nationalistic way.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In other words, you don't
24 remember what you might have said or what your colleague might have said?
25 A. I might have said that -- that: What you want then? What? Do
1 you want some kind of federal state or something like that?
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This interview you had with him
3 took place in April. Seemingly, one could imagine that this took place
4 before the 24th of April. Do you confirm this or not? Could this have
5 taken place on the 22nd or the 23rd of April?
6 A. Well, in principle, yes, but I know that it was the same day when
7 this Security Council came -- came to Central Bosnia. I didn't know that
8 a Security Council is coming, but we didn't attend the press conference
9 because they wanted to go as quick as possible to Central Bosnia, and --
10 and afterwards thinking it was the right decision.
11 And all the stories, which are published from that, the first one
12 is the first, 26th of April, in Finnish press, this interview. This means
13 this would have been 22nd. I would have been sleeping very long time.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, when you had this
15 interview with Mr. Prlic, Mr. Prlic knows that this interview he's giving
16 you is going to be published, doesn't he? Does he know it or doesn't he
17 knew it, or was this an interview --
18 A. Oh, yes, he knows very well.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So he knows. He knew it. Now,
20 the reason I'm asking this question is because you told us that the
21 photographer was with you, Mirja Kesavaara. That's what she was called.
22 Did the photographer take a picture of Mr. Prlic? Because when you have
23 an interview of a high-ranking personality and when the photographer is
24 present, the photographer usually takes a picture. Why were no pictures
1 A. There were several reasons. It's very possible that she took a
2 picture from Mr. Prlic; but because it was wartime and 1993 had different
3 techniques as today, it was no possibility to send the picture to -- to
4 the press. And so an interview picture, when you are going to publish the
5 interview, it cannot have a -- your pictures, but you have to ask only
6 from international agencies if they have in -- in their archives.
7 Today, the situation would be totally different because there's
8 the digital technique, and you take pictures everywhere and you can make
9 them with computer. But at that time you didn't have anything. You
10 hardly had telephone. In all of Bosnia, there was one telephone, and it
11 was in BritBat press office in Vitez.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Your photographer, I assume, was
13 also your interpreter, because you didn't speak B/C/S. So the
14 photographer acted as interpreter, even if Mr. Prlic spoke English. But
15 when you met Muslim, Serbian, or Croatian high-ranking officials, I assume
16 you needed an interpreter, and I assume your photographer acted as an
18 A. No, my photographer is an Finn, Finnish woman, and she knows her
19 Balkan languages still less than I. She was just helping me in many
20 practical things and taking the photos, but not interpreting. The
21 interpreter we got from press offices or --
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] When you had an interpreter,
23 this interpreter was provided by the press agency, and it was provided by
24 the HVO, if you were on the HVO side, or provided by the ABiH press
25 office, if you were on the ABiH side?
1 A. Normally, yes. But when we were, for instance, interviewing
2 Hadzihasanovic, with us was a Croatian woman, Bosiljka Sedli [phoen], who
3 was the chief of south-west European cultural organisation in Berlin. She
4 was travelling with us, so she was totally outside of any political
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I have two more questions. Now,
7 this is my last but one. The cassette stops at a certain point. After
8 the tape stops, there's a discussion with Mr. Prlic, including, as you
9 told us, talk about the so-called secret interview between Mr. Boban in
10 Pale -- with Mr. Boban in Pale. Does that part of the interview count as,
11 what they call in journalist terms, "off the record"?
12 A. No. It was never told that we shouldn't -- should not publish
13 anything, because if somebody is telling that I tell this you, that it's
14 off the record, don't publish it, so it won't be published. It was
15 just -- we had finished, and then after finishing you still exchange some
16 words, and this time they were important words.
17 I know it from my notes because -- because they were there, and
18 that's why they are also in that protocol I give 2001.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This morning Defence counsel
20 showed you -- let me quote the number. 1D 01652. This exhibit is a
21 letter that Mr. Prlic was about to send to the president of the peace
22 conference on former Yugoslavia. If you still have this document on the
23 table, I'd like you to take a look at it now.
24 In this document it appears that the main reason for writing this
25 letter is the way the media are treating Herceg-Bosna. Right from the
1 first paragraph of this letter this comes up. This document expresses on
2 the part of Mr. Prlic that he's unhappy about the media. According to
3 him, and as this document states, the media are not fairly telling what's
4 going on. The media are biased. They persistently present the HVO from a
5 certain angle and the Muslims from another more positive angle. This is
6 what Mr. Prlic appears to be saying in that letter.
7 Now, this is an important letter. It's nearly three pages long,
8 and it covers several issues. I'm not going to treat all these issues
9 now. But on the very next day after meeting you, Mr. Prlic tells at a
10 high level -- he tells people that the media are not being objective about
11 what's going on.
12 Now, when you met him, did he also tell you this, complain about
13 this to you? Did he ask you to be more neutral, to be more objective?
14 Did he ask you to give fair treatment to his point of view and not merely
15 voice a biased or otherwise untruthful point of view? When you were
16 interviewing him, were you trying to take into account the fact that
17 Mr. Prlic might have worries about your objectivity?
18 A. No, but in this point I have to give Mr. Prlic some right, because
19 English media was very much against Herceg-Bosna from the beginning on,
20 and -- but it was not only Herceg-Bosna problem. It was also a big
21 problem already in -- in Croatian war. Some media was just thinking the
22 times of Ante Pavelic, and -- and that's why he had his concern. But we
23 were representing Finnish, German, and Austrian medias, which were
24 actually not blamed in that way.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] To conclude then, yesterday we
1 also looked at your article as you sent it to the Austrian press agency.
2 This article is based on the interview that you had with Mr. Prlic, and on
3 the third page of this document, which is P 2094, you raise the subject of
4 Ahmici entitled in this document, "The Ahmici Genocide," and you told us,
5 you told Mr. Karnavas that that was the responsibility of the press
6 agency, that they meddle with the titles.
7 You gave us many details about that. But in this document you
8 explain more or less what had happened in Ahmici and, as I recall, you
9 told us that you had seen the village with your own eyes. You saw the
10 smoking ruins. That's what you told us earlier today. But, Witness, when
11 you wrote this paper, did you ever wonder whether there were other
12 villages that had been treated similarly, particularly Muslim villages, or
13 Croat villages? Did it occur to you that perhaps there were also Croat
14 villages that had been subjected to this type of treatment?
15 Upon reading these paragraphs, there's no reference to the
16 possibility of Croat villages having suffered in the same way?
17 A. I was aware of other villages, very aware. If you read this
18 material which I gave Austrian press agency, the fourth capital it is
19 telling about the refugees in the house where we were living. There were
20 refugees from many, many villages, and also from the other side of the
21 road, from Vitez and Old Vitez was under siege.
22 Yes, I knew of dozens of Muslim villages which were burning. From
23 Croat villages which may have been burning, I didn't know anything. I
24 just met these two Croat women which were claiming that their village
25 would have been burnt, but -- but I don't know if it was -- if it was
1 true. Anyway, it was Muslim villages which were burning at that time. I
2 don't know how many of them, but very many.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. But one of the
4 accused as it happens, General Praljak, has shown us evidence. He drew a
5 general picture, a map on which he showed us certain villages, Croat
6 villages, that were subjected to the same treatment as Ahmici. Violence,
7 destruction, plunder, that sort of thing. And out of this document there
8 is a village called Trusina, T-r-u-s-i-n-a, which just a few days prior to
9 these events were -- was attacked similarly. Had you heard about this,
11 A. No. I have seen burnt Croat villages, but it was later. It was
12 first in the winter of 1994 when I just took the old road to Tuzla. They
13 were trying to prevent me, but they were young soldiers and I was not
14 listening. And then I realised why. There were from Muslims destroyed
15 Croat villages. I don't know when they were destroyed, but there were at
16 least three of them. Somebody told that it was an advance from the place
17 called Stupni Do, which was near Vitez where Croats had made something
18 like in Ahmici.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But if you have heard, say
20 before April 25th, that some Muslim -- excuse me, some Croat villages had
21 been -- had suffered in the same way as Ahmici, would you in fact have
22 told this in your article dated April 25th?
23 A. No. I would have told when I would have had little bit better
24 information about it, but two women which were to me not very reliable for
25 the British press office was not enough, and I couldn't drive in
1 surroundings to find these villages because it was extremely unhealthy.
2 You could have blood poisoning.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. It's nearly 12.00.
4 We are going to take a 20-minute break, following which the hearing will
5 resume, and I think that Mr. Petkovic's Defence counsel and then the
6 Praljak Defence counsel will be asking you questions, and there may be
7 re-examination by Mr. Kruger.
8 See you again in 20 minutes.
9 --- Recess taken at 11.58 a.m.
10 --- On resuming at 12.22 p.m.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let us resume. Mr. Praljak's
12 Defence. Mr. Kovacic or Mr. Praljak, who is asking the questions?
13 Mr. Kovacic.
14 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, General Praljak will be
15 asking the questions in the cross-examination. There are several portions
16 which directly or indirectly refer to certain events which he has direct
17 connection to.
18 THE INTERPRETER: Can you hear the interpretation? Can you hear
19 the English?
20 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] As I was saying, I don't know
21 whether you want me to repeat everything that I said, but I think that
22 there are grounds - yes, thank you - there are grounds in conformity with
23 your ruling and decision in view of the topics raised by the witness,
24 certain topics especially, which directly or indirectly have an effect on
25 the events that General Praljak knew about or was involved in.
1 Thank you.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. As the Bench is just
3 telling me, Mr. Kovacic, you know that the Chamber has made a decision on
4 such situations. We have given a decision which has been confirm. We
5 authorise the accused to ask his own questions on technical subjects on
6 which he has knowledge or when he is personally concerned by the witness's
8 Now, from what you're saying, I understand that he is going to ask
9 questions on technical subjects that he has particular knowledge of. Is
10 that right, Mr. Kovacic?
11 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] That's right. You're quite right,
12 Your Honour, Mr. President. I'd just like to add that bearing in mind, of
13 course, the decision of the Appeals Chamber and the ruling of this Trial
14 Chamber, I would say that they are identical because they confirm at the
15 second instance what you have already ruled at first instance. So the
16 practice today -- and we have seen that the question comes with the
17 interpretation of your ruling, but we are satisfied with that practice
18 because it is in conformity with the rights of the accused in these
20 So it was in keeping with your decision that I put forward the
21 reasons and that it was based on those grounds.
22 Thank you.
23 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.
25 MR. KRUGER: Sorry. I apologise to interrupt at this stage. The
1 Prosecution would, at this stage, just wish to lodge its objection, in
2 general, to Mr. Praljak proceeding with cross-examination. With
3 reference, Your Honour, to the Appeals Chamber's decision on Praljak's
4 appeal on the Trial Chamber's 10 May 2007 decision on the mode of
5 interrogating witnesses, which was rendered on the 24th of August, Your
6 Honour, the Trial Chamber -- or the Appeals Chamber referred, with
7 affirmation, basically, to various aspects of the Trial Chamber's decision
8 of 10 May 2007.
9 And if I may very briefly refer to three aspects: In paragraph 9
10 of the Appeals Chamber decision, it says: "In the light of the above
11 reasoning, the Appeals Chamber is satisfied that there was good reason for
12 the Trial Chamber to determine that a stricter application of Guideline C
13 was justified in order to protect the rights of the appellant's co-accused
14 to a fair and expeditious trial as well as the rights of the appellant,"
15 which is Mr. Praljak.
16 And then if we look at paragraph 11 of the Appeals Chamber, second
17 sentence: "Rather, the impugned decision held that in the interests of a
18 fair and expeditious trial for the appellant and his co-accused, the right
19 of the appellant to participate directly would be subject to the
20 restrictions identified to avoid the appellant wasting Court time.
21 And, finally, paragraph 13, second sentence: "The Trial Chamber
22 made quite clear that the appellant's lack of legal experience meant that
23 his interventions were of little or no value to his defence." And on the
24 following page: "On the basis of the foregoing, the Appeals Chamber
25 dismiss the appeal."
1 Your Honour, in light of this, the Prosecution position is that
2 the guideline provides, specifically Guideline C, that only under
3 exceptional circumstances will the accused be able to cross-examine. And
4 in this instance, we're talking about a journalist, not a military expert.
5 She's not testifying about military matters. And under those
6 circumstances, the Prosecution has difficulty to see what the exceptional
7 circumstances would be justifying Mr. Praljak cross-examining.
8 Thank you, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. The Chamber has
10 given a decision on May 10, 2007, and that decision was confirmed by the
11 Appeals Chamber. In paragraph 12, the Chamber said that exceptional
12 circumstances may be particularly connected with the examination of events
13 to which an accused has participated personally or the examination of
14 questions, subjects on which the accused has specific competencies. An
15 accused who wishes to take the floor will explain to the Bench the reasons
16 why such circumstances -- exceptional circumstances prevail.
17 Now, we have just been told that there were exceptional
18 circumstances; and if Mr. Praljak chooses to ask questions, he is going to
19 ask the witness to touch upon subjects on which he was -- in which he was
20 personally involved or technical issues.
21 Now, Mr. Praljak, there may be very deep disagreements here at the
22 Bench. My position, which I have expressed on several occasions, is that
23 a witness may be cross-examined by an accused, but the other members of
24 the Bench do not necessarily agree with me.
25 Now, Mr. Praljak, what then are the exceptional circumstances?
1 What then are the specific competencies or the specific events that
2 justify that you should put your own questions in the cross-examination?
3 Let the Bench deliberate on that.
4 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your
5 Honours. Good afternoon, Witness.
6 Here are the subjects: The lady, quite obviously, is a war
7 correspondent and was present in the war, and she spoke about the
8 situation in Mostar in June 1992, and which mosques were destroyed and by
9 whom and which were damaged, and so on. She spoke about the Turbe or the
10 defence of Travnik, the route of salvation. And as I was there at the
11 time, I think I can address the issue.
12 She also spoke about Drnis, Ivan Drnis, who was an HVO
13 representative, and I can ask her whether she had ever seen him.
14 The lady also spoke about the electric power plants in Jablanica
15 and their importance; and as an electric technical engineer, I know the
16 area, so I can question her on that.
17 The lady also went on to speak about the siege of Mostar, so I can
18 ask her how she knows that it was a siege, where the lines were, whether
19 she went there.
20 Then she said that she had seen the Croats of Vitez shelling
21 Zenica and that anti-aircraft artillery was targeting a Muslim village.
22 It was in the statement. Anti-aircraft artillery was mentioned, belonging
23 to the HVO, targeting a village where there were only civilians. She
24 mentioned that, too.
25 Then she mentioned the H-O-S, HOS, and what its role was, and
1 which units belonged to HOS, and who was in command of the HOS units, and
2 so on and so forth.
3 All these are facts mentioned by the witness here in court, and I
4 know enough about the facts to cross-examine her, to ask her what she
5 knows about all these things, exactly what her knowledge of these matters
6 is. And I think that is sufficient grounds for me to be able to
7 cross-examine this witness.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Right. Based on the list of
10 questions that you have just presented to us, the Bench considers that a
11 number of these subjects could have been dealt with. The questions could
12 have been asked by your counsel, but the Bench also notes that there are a
13 few technical issues that may be relevant to your specific competencies.
14 That includes the question of electricity and that of the HOS since you
15 were present in Mostar. I want you to ask your technical questions only.
16 The remaining questions may be asked by Mr. Kovacic.
17 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I consider that
18 I know the areas very well. I took part in events in them, but I will
19 abide by the Trial Chamber's ruling, of course. I'd just like to mention,
20 in this regard, that I deserve justice. I don't have to plead for
21 justice. And in order to arrive at justice and the truth, you yourself,
22 Judge Antonetti, said we must find the truth with a capital "T".
23 Now, I, once again, claim that certain details mentioned by the
24 lady, nobody knows about them better than I do. So nobody is better
25 placed to ask the lady about what facts she had at her disposal, what
1 insight and access she had to various material from a second source, and
2 so on.
3 So I'd like to go ahead. Thank you.
4 Cross-examination by the Accused Praljak:
5 Q. Madam, in June -- and in the interests of time, madam, I'll ask
6 you simple questions and please give me simple questions wherever
8 You were in Mostar in June 1992, were you not?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Thank you. Do you know how many Muslims there were in the HVO in
12 A. No, but there was pretty many.
13 Q. Thank you. Now tell me, please, how many mosques were there in
14 Mostar before the Serbs shelled the city? Do you know that?
15 MR. KRUGER: Objection, Your Honour. This is not within the scope
16 that was mandated by the Bench.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacic.
18 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Might I say something? I think that
19 it is a technical question when somebody speaks about the number of
20 certain types of facilities, in this case mosques, especially because the
21 accused spent a large portion of his life in Mostar as a young man, before
22 the war and also during the war.
23 So as to the number of mosques, this is something that he knows
24 about, facts on the ground. And that is a technical question, and he is
25 best placed to know these matters. The Accused Praljak is best placed to
1 know that. Who can know this better than him, if she says, "I know this
2 mosque. I don't know that mosque." So it's only the Accused Praljak,
3 with all due respect to other people from Mostar, he can say, "No, that
4 mosque wasn't there. It was here." So these are technical questions.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You may go ahead, Mr. Praljak,
6 on the mosques, because the witness did raise the subject of a mosque.
7 So, Mr. Praljak, go ahead.
8 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 Q. Madam, do you know how many mosques there were in Mostar before
10 the Serbs attacked it?
11 A. No, not -- I don't know exact number.
12 Q. Can you tell me which mosques you visited when you were there in
13 June 1992, and how -- what was the damage done to those mosques? So how
14 many mosques did you visit?
15 A. I didn't visit any mosque. I am a woman and Christian. It's not
16 very possible. Damages were obviously from shelling or also from
17 small-weapons fire. I could see these damages outside, or broken
18 minarets, and so on.
19 Q. Thank you. Thank you. Now, do you know that of the 14 mosques
20 which existed, 12 were partially or completely destroyed by Serb shelling?
21 A. Yes, I know that it was destroyed by Serb shelling.
22 Q. Thank you, madam. Now, you said that, in the autumn of 1992, you
23 went from Tomislavgrad to Prozor and Rama, taking the road, the Route of
24 Salvation. Do you know that the HVO made this road, Route of Salvation,
25 so that the refugees which -- who had been expelled from the Serbs would
1 be allowed to go that way and that they wanted to establish communication?
2 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, the Prosecution has to object.
3 Mr. Praljak is ignoring the order of the Chamber that he's allowed to
4 speak on the HOS, electricity, and on mosques.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacic. If the Prosecution
6 objects every time, we're going to waste a lot of time. This demonstrates
7 the absurdity of this system.
8 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, you've just said what
9 I have going to say. If the Prosecution makes their objection -- well,
10 we've heard the objection. But if they keep repeating this objection,
11 then I must take this to be tactics to take up more time and fanning the
12 flames here in this discussion. I think that an objection in principle
13 was in order.
14 The Trial Chamber is not sleeping. The Trial Chamber is vigilant.
15 It is listening, and it set the guidelines for Praljak, and we have the
16 practice established in this courtroom over the past year. And I'm quite
17 sure that the Trial Chamber is qualified to be able to assess the
18 situation without interference from the Prosecution, and the Trial Chamber
19 is very well able to state that this goes outside the guidelines or it is
20 within the guidelines set.
21 So it is my proposal that the Prosecution refrain from taking the
22 floor all the time. You have set the standards, and you are there to
23 control those standards, to see that they are put into practice.
24 Thank you.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] On the technical questions of
1 road blockings, since Mr. Praljak had command responsibility, he was at
2 that time in the position to order checkpoints to be set up or removed.
3 He does have technical competence and may, therefore, speak of these
5 Now, Mr. Praljak, you may proceed. Ask your question but try to
6 stick to simple questions, technical ones.
7 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, very simple.
8 Does the lady know that Slobodan Praljak was the initiator and partially
9 the organiser to make this route possible and to save the refugees from
10 being persecuted by the Serbs? I'm just asking the witness whether she
11 knows about that or not.
12 THE WITNESS: I know about that.
13 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Thank you. Now, when you were in the Mostar in June and saw that
15 Mostar had been liberated, do you know who the commander of the operation
16 to liberate Mostar was?
17 A. I think it was Jasmin Jaganjac.
18 Q. Thank you. You mentioned Turbe and Travnik and its importance for
19 the defence of Travnik, because otherwise the Serbs could reach Sarajevo
20 through the Lasva River Valley. Now my question is this: Did you know
21 the organisation -- that I took over the organisation of the defence of
22 Travnik and set up the HVO and -- and was the first of among equals, if I
23 can say that? Do you know anything about that?
24 A. At that time, when I -- when this critical point was, I mean in
25 autumn 1992, I was already testifying that the cooperation with the
1 Croats, with the HVO and Muslim army was very well. And I was myself
2 living in HVO headquarters, so I knew that they were defending Turbe.
3 Q. Thank you. Tell me, please, did you ever personally see Ivan
5 A. No. I thought to see --
6 Q. Yes. Thank you. I apologise for having to interrupt, but there
7 are time constraints. So just say, "No, I never saw him," and I'll move
9 Now, to ask you about the electric power plants. Tell me this,
10 madam, do you know how many electric power plants there are from Rama,
11 Prozor, to Mostar? How many power plants are there?
12 A. I don't know surely, but I think at least five.
13 Q. Thank you. Is Jablanica the largest electric power plant or not?
14 A. I don't know.
15 Q. You say you talked to Hadzihasanovic, and then you say later on he
16 became Chief of Staff of the BH army. Did you know that Hadzihasanovic
17 never became the chief of the Main Staff of the BH army?
18 A. And so it was told me. I met him once more in Sarajevo.
19 Q. Thank you. You said that you saw some sort of refugee camp in
20 Posusje. Do you know that, at the end of the summer and beginning of the
21 autumn 1992, the HZ HB received, in Posusje, 25.000 refugees, Muslim
22 refugees, and that they weren't camps. They were just places where people
23 had been taken in, and they were helped in various ways? Are you aware of
24 those figures and that fact?
25 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, Mr. Praljak, I must intervene. The
1 President has given a ruling. He has told you on which subjects you may
2 ask questions, because according to the rules, you can exceptionally ask
3 questions on specific points. What you are doing is that you totally
4 disregard what the is President has told you and simply ask any questions
5 that you think you would like to ask, questions that are not technical at
6 all, technical questions of the type that all counsel for the other
7 accused asked themselves.
8 And it is not to be seen why in this case your excellent counsel
9 could not ask all these questions. You are simply disregarding the rules
10 of the game, and I would ask you to comply with them. And if questions
11 that you would like to have asked are not such exceptional questions, then
12 I'm sure Mr. Kovacic will do this.
13 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, are you
14 forcing me not to ask these questions? Let's clarify the situation to the
15 end. Judge Trechsel, I worked on this -- these things. I was there. I
16 know what the problems are with the tents and everything else. The lady
17 said that these were camps. So I do have the right, in my quest for the
18 truth, to ask these very precise questions without taking up anybody
19 else's time, because I have every right to justice. I don't have to
20 entreat you for justice. It is my right to be accorded justice, and it
21 will help us arrive at the truth.
22 So if you prohibit me to ask these questions, then I will make
23 some other decisions. I'm asking precise figures. I'm not delving into
24 other matters because she talks about the 1939 or other years, who the
25 Hungarians were, who -- what belonged to whom. So I'm no third-rate
1 scholar. I have the right to defend myself. I cooperate with and
2 collaborate with Mr. Kovacic.
3 But as to the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, what the situation was there,
4 what the Territorial Defence, what the banovinas were, who Sreta [phoen]
5 was, who Marcek was, who Stradinovic [phoen] was. This is the field that
6 I have been devoting my work to for the past 40 years. So please allow me
7 to conclude my discussion here with the witness.
8 JUDGE TRECHSEL: No, Mr. Praljak. These are not the rules of this
9 game. It is not for you to say definitely what your rights are and what
10 you need, but it's for the Trial Chamber; and if someone does not agree
11 there's a possibility of an appeal, and that has been done here. And I
12 invite you, perhaps with the assistance of your counsel, to carefully
13 study the decision which was recently handed out by the Chamber of Appeal,
14 and you will see that the Chamber of Appeal entirely supports this Trial
15 Chamber's ruling that you are not allowed to do your own cross-examination
16 and ask any questions that you think it is useful to ask.
17 And the issue is not whether you are able to ask such questions,
18 but it's, rather, the other way around. The right for the accused to put
19 questions themselves is reserved for cases where counsel would not be
20 able, exceptionally, to effectively conduct the cross-examination. Now, I
21 cannot see how Mr. Kovacic would not be able to ask the questions you are
23 The Chamber had decided that you could ask questions on
24 electricity - and I think you have done that. Perhaps you have more of
25 them - and on the HOS. And it is simply disobedience if you do not comply
1 with this.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak, I share my
3 colleague's opinion. The problem which you do not seem to understand is
4 that the Chamber has come to a decision which has been confirmed by the
5 Appeals Chamber. That decision is that the rights of an accused to ask
6 his own questions is limited. Because if the lawyer is in a position to
7 ask the questions, then the accused must only ask the remaining questions,
8 those that go beyond the competence of the lawyer.
9 What you should have done is, before the hearing, you should have
10 shared subjects out with your counsel. The counsel could have asked all
11 general questions, and you could have stuck to the ultra-technical
12 matters. We would not be in this situation if you had.
13 Obviously, in matters of electricity, for example, you're more
14 competent than Mr. Kovacic, and it may also be so when it comes to the
15 HOS. But when it comes to humanitarian convoys or other such matters,
16 your counsel could have been asking those questions as well of you.
17 The difficult thing now is to distinguish between what is really
18 technical and what your counsel could be asking. As far as I'm concerned,
19 and as you know, I have never prohibited you from asking a few questions,
20 but I am a member of a Bench. I am not alone, and there is majority of
21 Judges here that have a very specific position to which I have to stand
23 Now, if you insist on defending your service, you have another
24 possibility, which is to say that you don't want to have a counsel for the
25 Defence, and that you want to defend yourself, but this is something that
1 might be disadvantageous to you.
2 Now, there is one technical matter still to be dealt with: The
3 HOS. And the Bench allows you to ask questions about the HOS. Once that
4 is done, Mr. Kovacic will have the floor to ask those questions which you
5 had remaining on your list.
6 Mr. Karnavas.
7 MR. KARNAVAS: If I may be of some assistance, Your Honour. Since
8 this is the very first day that we're enforcing this decision, and given
9 that I -- I just want to try to find a solution because we have limited
10 time. Perhaps, today, we could make some allowances; but from henceforth
11 now, there is a clear warning from the Bench as far as how Mr. Praljak and
12 Mr. Kovacic are to work this out among themselves.
13 So I think it might be good since -- otherwise, I don't believe
14 Mr. Kovacic would be able to do the sort of job that Mr. Praljak has
15 prepared himself, and only himself, to do. So I think that, in all
16 fairness, since it is a new ruling, perhaps we can make an exception
18 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I may, just one
19 small point, and I am grateful to my colleague for his proposal, but there
20 is another aspect that needs to be mentioned here, because actually my
21 colleagues from the Prosecution and Judge Trechsel have mentioned this
22 several times.
23 The recent Appeals Chamber decision, dated the 10th of May,
24 changed nothing in relation to your previous decision dating from April.
25 It fully upheld your decision. And in your decision in which you modified
1 to a certain extent the Guideline C --
2 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Kovacic, I was referring to an Appeals
3 Chamber decision of, I think, 24th of August. August, not May, not 10th
4 of May.
5 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. I do apologise, Your
6 Honour. It is my mistake, but also partially a mistake in translation.
7 That's the decision that we received last week.
8 So I maintain that this decision of the Appeals Chamber does not
9 change the previous decision of this Trial Chamber. It upholds your
10 previous decision, and your latest decision that we appealed was just a
11 revision of your previous decision, the Guideline C decision from last
12 year. So I see no reason why we should actually change our practice.
13 You did allow General Praljak to cross-examine on certain matters.
14 We have the parameters in place in this courtroom. We have the practice
15 in this courtroom. And since your last decision was slightly more
16 restrictive than the previous one, but the practice remained in practice,
17 the examination could proceed on rather broad principles.
18 I see no reason why we should actually change the practice,
19 because the Appeals Chamber decision upheld your decision. And I believe
20 that what General Praljak wanted to ask is well within the sphere of what
21 is allowed, bearing in mind the decisions of other Trial Chambers that are
22 referred to by the Appeals Chamber, and bearing in mine the practice
23 before this Tribunal and the general principle that the accused is not an
24 object but a subject of proceedings.
25 You of course always prevent him from asking questions, prohibit
1 him from asking questions, but this would mark a 180-degree turn in
2 relation to the practice.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Prosecution, quickly.
4 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President. In first hearing the
5 questions from the accused that came after the Trial Chamber issued its
6 ruling, and now listening to the comments of Mr. Praljak's counsel, it's
7 abundantly clear, in our view, that Mr. Praljak and his Defence intend to
8 just continue on in exactly the same way that they have in all prior
9 cross-examinations. That ignores the fact that we now have a decision of
10 this Trial Chamber, which has been affirmed by the Appeals Chamber.
11 The Prosecution has been less than forceful in pressing or asking
12 the Trial Chamber to enforce its earlier decision. Now that we have the
13 Appeal decision, however, Mr. President, we are going to continue to
14 object when, in our view, the decision of this Trial Chamber and the
15 Appeals Chamber is not being respected, because, ultimately, this is a
16 matter of an accused respecting decision of the Trial Chamber and the
17 Appeals Chamber.
18 What's being proposed here is that those decisions being
19 disregarded, and we're going to continue to object. We cannot enforce the
20 Court's rulings, only the Trial Chamber can do that, but we're going to
21 continue to object, and more frequently than we have in the past, now that
22 the Appeals Chamber has clearly approved the Trial Chamber's procedures on
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Now, the suggestion from
25 Mr. Karnavas is that the Chamber could choose to be flexible, given that
1 the decision of the Chamber's appeal is recent and that the Defence has
2 not had time to adapt to it and that we ought to be flexible. Under these
3 conditions, the Bench, having duly considered, and exceptionally for this
4 day only, are going to allow Mr. Praljak to ask his questions.
5 In the future, Mr. Praljak and his counsel are going to have to
6 share out the jobs in conformity with the decision respectively of this
7 Chamber and the Chamber of Appeal, because, otherwise, we're going to
8 waste a tremendous amount of time.
9 Mr. Praljak, you have the floor again. Please be quick. The
10 Chamber, recognising that this is the first time that the decision of the
11 Appeals Chamber is being enforced, and you have not been in a position to
12 conduct with your counsel, we are giving you the floor again, and you may
13 ask your questions.
14 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your
15 Honour. I will go through my questions very quickly.
16 Q. Madam, was the HOS a party formation of the HSP, the Croatian
17 Party of Rights?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. According to what you knew, were there more Muslims in the HOS
20 ranks than Croats?
21 A. I don't know.
22 Q. Thank you very much. According to your knowledge, was the HOS
23 recognised by President Alija Izetbegovic as the regular formation of the
24 BH army?
25 A. No. It was paramilitary troop.
1 Q. Do you know that all the -- all HOS units became part of the BH
2 army afterwards?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Thank you very much. You said that Mostar was under siege. Did
5 you know the lines of the HVO, the Republika Srpska army, and the BH army
6 at that time when you claim Mostar was under siege?
7 A. No. I was not there because it was not possible, but anyway --
8 Q. Thank you very much. I don't have enough time, so please no
9 explanations, just tell me: "I was there." "I was not there."
10 But could you please tell me the following: Do you know, madam,
11 the Mostar municipality, after the Croat-Muslim conflict, was -- did the
12 BH army control more of the Mostar municipality than the HVO or not?
13 A. They were controlling it together.
14 Q. That's true. But did the BH army control more of the Mostar
15 municipality than the HVO or not? Do you know?
16 A. Western part was controlled from HVO; eastern part from the
17 Bosnian army.
18 Q. Madam, greater or lesser part of the municipality, who held which,
19 in territorial terms?
20 A. I don't know the boundaries of the municipality.
21 Q. Fine. Thank you very much. You said that while you were in Vitez
22 that you saw some kind of a howitzer or a cannon firing at Zenica. Do you
23 know anything about artillery?
24 A. No, but I know what it was. It was howitzer from 155 millimetre,
25 and its name was "Nora," and it was brought before to the UNPROFOR
1 headquarters. Everybody could see it. But at that time, when I was
2 there, it was in a stone mine about three kilometres behind us.
3 Q. Were you at the quarry or stone mine?
4 A. No, but I have all reasons to believe that from the BritBat.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 I'm asking you whether you were at the quarry or stone mine, so
7 please don't talk to me about the trust that you had in the British
9 But when you said -- when you saw the charge or the elevation of
10 the barrel, were you able to determine what this Nora 155-millimetre was
11 actually targeting? Were you able to determine the target that this
12 howitzer was firing on, on the basis of the elevation, charge, and other
13 elements? Are you able to conclude that or not?
14 A. I'm not an artillery officer, but it was still the shelling to
16 Q. Did you see the shelling of Zenica?
17 A. I heard it.
18 Q. Further, you said that the anti-aircraft artillery fired on a
19 Muslim village where there were civilians. What's the name of that
20 village where there were civilians? Did you visit the village? Did you
21 know what the village was called?
22 A. I visited the village, but I don't remember all these names any
23 more, but it was in the area of Novi Travnik.
24 Q. Thank you very much. You said also that a mercenary had told you
25 he had been arrested because he had a beard and Croats thought he was a
1 Chetnik, and that that was the reason why he had been arrested. Do you
2 know that at the time, when he was arrested, I was the chief of the HVO
3 Main Staff? Do you know that?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Do you know that I had a beard at that time?
6 A. Of course, but not that kind of beard.
7 Q. Do you know that I was actually arrested because I had a beard,
8 and it was possible that I was a Chetnik?
9 A. No, I don't know that you were arrested.
10 Q. Do you know how many troops the BH army had in the spring of 1993?
11 A. Where?
12 Q. How many troops the BH army had in the spring of 1993; do you know
14 A. In which region you mean?
15 Q. In Bosnia and Herzegovina.
16 A. I don't know the strength of the -- the manpower of the army.
17 Q. Do you know how many troops the HVO had in Bosnia and Herzegovina
18 at that time?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Do you know that the -- that Sefer Halilovic, the chief of the
21 Main Staff of the BH army stated in Geneva that it had 250.000 troops?
22 A. Yes.
23 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I am
24 convinced that I always asked quite specific technical questions that
25 clarified the situation and that discussed the issues that I know of, and
1 my questions regarding the refugees stem from the fact that I tried my
2 best to help those people, and I know more about that than any counsel. I
3 can of course allow my counsel to ask some more questions, but I don't see
4 what would happen, how that might improve the situation.
5 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have just one
6 question that stems from a question asked by my colleague. I don't want
7 to take up my learned colleague's time. It has to do with the date of the
8 interview with Mr. Prlic.
9 Cross-examination by Mr. Kovacic:
10 Q. [Interpretation] Madam, you said you were in Vitez and that
11 BritBat briefed you on the situation in Ahmici. You said that there were
12 two representatives of the UN Security Council; is that correct?
13 A. Four.
14 Q. Four. You can't give us the exact date, but you said that it had
15 to be sometime between the 22nd and the 24th of April; is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And depending on when this event took place, we could deduce the
18 date if we were able to discover when these people were there, because you
19 said, "I cannot pinpoint the time, but that was on the day when the
20 representatives of the UN Security Council were there in Ahmici"; is that
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Let me then ask you this, and we can use other documents to
24 pinpoint this: Do you remember any of the names of the UN Security
25 Council representatives that might help us later on to determine this?
1 A. Just a moment.
2 Q. Fine.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic, how much time are
4 you going to need?
5 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation].
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please, one minute.
7 Ms. Alaburic.
8 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] I wanted to use my half hour, but
9 if my colleague needs some time to conclude this issue I will let him.
10 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] I didn't know that the witness would
11 be consulting her documents. I am happy that she did so, but I have to
12 ask her what those documents are.
13 Q. Could you please tell us, madam, which documents did you just
14 refer to?
15 A. This document is my article about Ahmici, and here is the picture
16 of some agency, and here is the picture of Venezuelan representative, and
17 here is told that his name was Diego Arria. It is from 26th of fourth,
18 1993. So it's something I have been writing but the picture is not from
19 me because it was not possible to send pictures from Bosnia at that time.
20 Q. Just one question in this regard, then. The gentleman you just
21 mentioned, do you know that he was an investigator with Mazowiecki's
22 commission, not a representative of the Security Council?
23 A. Here it was told that he was the UN ambassador of Venezuela.
24 Q. But do you know who presented him in this way? Did he introduce
25 himself in this manner or did somebody else do that?
1 A. I told you already that he was represented to us as a
2 representative of UN Security Council from Bob Stewart, the BritBat
3 commandant, but now this title which I have here, it is from some
4 international news agency because the picture is not mine.
5 Q. Fine. Thank you. So you're just saying that you link this date
6 with this event. You are sure about the date because of this event; is
7 that correct?
8 A. Yes. I'm sure that it was all in the same day.
9 Q. Thank you very much.
10 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] I cannot explore this matter any
11 further. Only we did not receive this article from the Prosecution. The
12 Prosecution may have gotten it, but we would appreciate if we could get a
13 copy at the end of the testimony perhaps. Thank you.
14 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.
15 Cross-examination by Ms. Alaburic:
16 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness. We have precious little
17 time, and I will start asking you questions right away.
18 If I understand you correctly, you did not have any knowledge
19 about the events in Ahmici prior to your interview with Mr. Prlic and
20 during this interview. Did I understand you correctly?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Your first question to Mr. Prlic, as we can see from the text of
23 the interview, pertains to armed conflicts between the HVO and the BH
24 army. Could you please tell us which conflicts did you have in mind when
25 you asked this question?
1 A. Well, I was already yesterday explaining that we knew that there
2 is a conflict. We knew it from a Bosnian journalist and from Ed Vulliamy,
3 but I didn't know any exact happenings -- happenings, and the name Ahmici
4 was not familiar to me. I knew that there were tensions between these two
6 Q. Could you please tell me what fighting were you asking him about?
7 What fighting did you mean?
8 A. There was since January some fightings within -- I meant fightings
9 between HVO and the Muslims.
10 Q. I do apologise for interrupting you. Let's forget about January
11 now. We're in April 1993 now. So you did not refer to the events in
12 January. You were asking questions about the current situation. So in
13 your first question you ask about the fighting going on at that time, and
14 you are asking about the actual current situation, the situation as of the
15 day when the interview was taking place. So what fighting were you asking
16 Mr. Prlic about?
17 A. For instance, the fighting in Mostar. I was told the day before
18 that there was fighting, and I was collecting casualties everywhere there.
19 I could see that there had been very much shooting.
20 Q. Fine. Except the fighting in Mostar, you were talking about
21 fighting in plural. So what other fighting did you mean when you were
22 asking this question of Mr. Prlic? Can we agree that you actually didn't
23 know that at the time when you were talking to Mr. Prlic there was any
24 fighting between the HVO and the BH army? Would I be correct if I were to
25 conclude that?
1 A. Well, I didn't take these questions from the air, but the
2 situation I knew -- exact situation I knew first afterwards, I had
3 second-hand knowledge from Ed Vulliamy and the Bosnian journalist that
4 there had been fightings.
5 Q. Madam, this is precisely what I'm talking about, what you knew at
6 the time of the interview and what you learned afterwards. I would like
7 to clear up those details.
8 Can we agree that at the time when you were interviewing Mr. Prlic
9 you didn't know any details about military conflicts, armed conflicts,
10 between the BH army and the HVO? Is that so?
11 A. That's so, because I was just on the way to --
12 Q. Fine. Fine. At the time when you were doing the interview, you
13 had knowledge of the alleged ultimatum that was issued to Alija
14 Izetbegovic. Could you please tell us, where were you at the beginning of
15 April 1993?
16 A. In Vienna.
17 Q. And you learned about this alleged ultimatum from the Austrian
18 press which published a Reuters report; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You had no other knowledge about the contents of the alleged
21 ultimatum, is that correct, apart from this source?
22 A. I was discussing about this ultimatum with the leader of the 3rd
23 Corps of the Bosnian army, Hadzihasanovic, but he didn't take it
25 Q. Did he give you any other significant information additional to
1 what was reported by the Reuters about the contents of the alleged
3 A. No.
4 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now, madam, in one of your texts which the
5 Prosecutor showed us, 2094, Exhibit 2094, in your analysis there, you
6 said, on page 5 of the English text, that everything began with Boban's
7 ultimatum of the 15th of April, and that the Muslims did not hand over
8 their arms.
9 Can we agree that that is what you said, that that is the contents
10 of your report?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now, if we take a look at the Reuters
13 report, document P 1804, no mention is made there any where that the
14 contents of that alleged ultimatum was the surrender of arms by the BH
15 army to the HVO. But since we don't have enough time for you to read the
16 Reuters report, try and do your best to remember.
17 Where did you get this information from that anybody in April 1993
18 asked somebody else to surrender their arms to them? Where did you get
19 that information from?
20 A. The word "surrender" was mentioned in nowhere. It was only
21 mentioned that two possibilities: To hand up the arms or to be under HVO
22 command. It means that, in certain areas, the Muslim troops should be
23 under HVO command. And I have already told many times that these two
24 options were there. Which was true? I don't know. Because that is now
25 the question of interpretation, how the ultimatum was interpreted: That
1 the Muslims were under HVO or that they give their weapons.
2 Q. Well, we're not interpreting anything. We're trying to establish
3 the facts: What the contents of the Reuters report was and what you
4 wrote. Now, we'll all be able to establish for ourselves what was
5 actually said, but would you try and think about this.
6 Are you perhaps mixing up the contents of something that was also
7 referred to as an ultimatum in January 1993 with what was also called an
8 ultimatum in April 1993? Could you perhaps have mixed the two up? Just
9 give me a simple answer, please.
10 A. No.
11 Q. You're not mixing these things up: The difference between the
12 contents of one alleged ultimatum and the contents of the other alleged
14 A. No. It's impossible because I didn't know any ultimatum in
16 Q. Very well. In your article, and you spoke about this yesterday,
17 you said that, on the 16th of April, after the ultimatum had expired, the
18 deadline had expired, that everything began after that, that there were a
19 series of HVO attacks against the BH army units, and that all this was
20 synchronised in such a way that the only logical conclusion was that there
21 was an order for attack from the top. And this was recorded in
22 yesterday's transcript on page 89.
23 Did I understand you correctly? Did you say that?
24 A. Yes, I said that.
25 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now tell us this, please, Witness: If
1 you, at a time when you're conducting an interview with Mr. Prlic, don't
2 know about any fighting between the BH army and the HVO, how then can you
3 conclude that, on the 16th of April, a series of synchronised attacks
4 began or tell us, or rather, tell was what were these attacks?
5 A. It's very simple. I was writing these articles after interview
6 with Mr. Prlic. And the one who was telling that this was synchronised
7 attacks everywhere, his name is Bob Stewart, the colonel the BritBat, and
8 he was telling that all publicly in Ahmici.
9 Q. Witness, you told us a moment ago, with respect to Mr. Prlic's
10 letter complaining about the bias in the media, you said that the British
11 media were indeed biased to a certain extent, and that from the very
12 outset that they were a little antagonistic towards Herceg-Bosna. Isn't
13 that right? That's what you said, isn't it?
14 A. Well, that was my impression.
15 Q. All right. Thank you. It's also interesting to note that of the
16 journalists that testified of in this courtroom, they were all British
17 journalists, with the exception of yourself and another man from the
18 former Yugoslavia. Now, tell me, is it just by chance that it -- that it
19 was the British media who were biased, or was there a system involved in
20 this, some sort of system, in your opinion?
21 A. There was a certain system, and I can tell you what this system
22 was. It was all the same which all UNPROFOR troop where was, but the
23 pressman was always British, especially, because in Vitez there was a
24 British Battalion, there were plenty of British journalists. So when I
25 was visiting Ahmici, it was maybe 20 British journalists, and I, and
1 Erich, and one Spanish one.
2 Q. Thank you. So you received information from the British press
3 service in the battalion, right, in BritBat?
4 A. I received information from BritBat. I didn't believe
5 everything. But -- but military matters, yes, they know about it.
6 Q. Very well. I think we've dealt with that.
7 Now, you asked Mr. Prlic a question about the fighting between the
8 BH army and the HVO, and he answered and mentioned the fighting in Konjic.
9 From the other question about Konjic, I make the conclusion that you did
10 not know that at that time there was some fighting going on in Konjic.
11 Would I be right in making that conclusion?
12 A. Yes, you're right, and that's why I was asking him Konjic.
13 Q. I'd like now to show you a document so that you can see when the
14 fighting in Konjic actually started, and this may perhaps refresh your
15 memory and show you some new aspects. So look at document 4D 438. It's
16 in my binder. It's a very short report by the commander of a brigade of
17 the BH army. The brigade's name was the Suad Alic Brigade from Konjic,
18 and the Trial Chamber has already seen this report on a number of
20 But anyway, a commander of the Muslim army is informing the 4th
21 Corps, that is to say, his superiors, about the situation in Konjic and
22 says the following: "150 members of the HVO captured, the town blocked,
23 life in the town paralysed. We continue with the arrests." And the
24 report was received in the 4th Corps on the 24th of March, 1993?
25 Tell us, please, Witness, did you have any knowledge, to the
1 effect that at the end of March, offensive actions by the BH army started
2 against the HVO in the Konjic area?
3 A. I was not in Konjic area, and I was no knowledge about this kind
4 of things.
5 Q. Tell us, please, Witness, and -- or rather, do you feel you know
6 something only if you were personally in the area where this was
7 happening, or do you think that you know about something if you learnt it
8 from someone else or from the media?
9 A. The best is always to see yourself. Of course, I can believe also
10 something what I learned from somebody else, but then I need several
11 sources, not only one. Never trust one source.
12 Q. Very well. Now, from any source, following the Croatian press, as
13 you said, did you gain any knowledge about offensive actions by the BH
14 army on the territory of Konjic already at the end of March 1993?
15 A. I was not in March 1993 in Croatia. I was in Vienna. So I was
16 not following -- I was not all the time in the area. I was just coming
17 and going.
18 Q. Very well. Now, do you have any knowledge to the effect that,
19 with respect to the fighting in and around Konjic, that certain HVO forces
20 were involved from the territory of the operative zone, if you know what
21 that means, of South-east Herzegovina and North-west Herzegovina -- or,
22 rather, units from the surrounding areas? Do you have any knowledge or
23 awareness about that?
24 A. I don't have knowledge from Konjic. That's why I was also asking
25 Mr. Prlic that question.
1 Q. Tell me, please, did you have any knowledge to the effect that
2 some time before mid-April 1993, the BH army in Zenica captured a large
3 number of soldiers belonging to the HVO? About 600 HVO soldiers, in fact.
4 Did you have any information about that?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Very well. We have very little time left, so I'm going to have to
7 move on to another area, and that is the subject of Prozor. You told us
8 that, in November 1992, you passed through Prozor; and in the statement
9 that you gave to the investigators of The Hague Tribunal, you said that
10 you arrived in Prozor after, and I'll quote, "the attack by the HVO
11 against local Muslims."
12 A. No. November 1992, there was no hostilities between HVO and
13 Bosnian army. They were together defending -- defending Turbe, but there
14 was some problem. But it was in Jajce area, and it has nothing to do with
16 Q. Very well. So may we then conclude that, in the Prozor area,
17 there was no -- or rather, there was not any kind of armed conflict
18 between the HVO and the BH army. Is that right?
19 A. Anyway, I didn't see any. It was quite normal in -- in November,
20 and I was passing Prozor twice and going to Central Bosnia and coming
22 Q. Very well. In January 1993, were you in Bosnia-Herzegovina then?
23 A. Yes, I was, but my mission was little bit longer. As I told
24 yesterday, I started in Banja Luka and Jajce. I was visiting when the
25 Serbs captured Jajce and Banja Luka, and -- and then I have to go back to
1 Zagreb and go around the coast to get then to Central Bosnia. I was very
2 near Central Bosnia; but from Jajce, there was no possibility to go
3 through, you know. There was the Serbian front line.
4 Q. You told us, madam, if I understood you correctly, that in January
5 1993, the fighting started between the HVO and the BH army after the
6 proclamation of the Vance-Owen Peace Plan.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And you also said that the fighting began in Gornji Vakuf and
9 Busovaca; right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Do you know of any other area in which there were armed -- there
12 was armed fighting between the HVO and the BH army?
13 A. Well, these were the two ones which I -- which I saw still at that
14 time when I went in February to Central Bosnia, and there was armistice.
15 It was told it was armistice. It was calmed down, but it didn't look like
16 that in Gornji Vakuf. In Busovaca, it was peaceful.
17 Q. You mentioned the conflict in Busovaca. Do you know who launched
18 the offensive in Busovaca and why?
19 A. Well, I suppose, it's the same story as other where, because
20 taking over these areas which were promised us.
21 Q. Witness, you told us that the following month, that is to say, in
22 February 1993, you talked to Dario Kordic.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And, in your statement, you said that he tried to explain to you
25 that the attack against Busovaca was provoked by the BH army, but that you
1 did not believe him because that, quite simply, was not logical. And that
2 is to be found in your statement in the English text page 3, last
4 Now, in this connection, I'd like to ask you the following: Do
5 you know exactly -- do you know what the meaning of Busovaca was in
6 Central Bosnia?
7 A. Well, it was also on the road.
8 Q. I mean, in the communicational sense, as a communications line.
9 A. I think it was no traffic.
10 Q. Take a look at another document, please.
11 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, I truly apologise to Ms. Alaburic. I
12 would just like to inform the Court that the Prosecution would have only
13 about three or four minutes that we would require that for examination --
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] That was the question I was
16 about to put to you.
17 Ms. Alaburic, you have two come to a close now.
18 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Madam, I'm going to withdraw that question because the maps will
20 be able to rule on the importance of Busovaca by comparing the maps. But
21 what I want to ask you is this: The representatives of the Herzegovinians
22 in the parliament of the Republic of Croatia. Now, you referred to this
23 yesterday, and you said from that one can see the pretensions that the
24 Republic of Croatia had vis-a-vis the area of Herzegovina. Did I
25 understand you correctly?
1 A. Not only from that. There was also very many Herzegovinians in
2 government: Vladimir Seks, Gojko Susak, the defence minister, and so on.
3 There was a very clear connection.
4 Q. Madam, Vladimir Seks is from the heart of Slavonia, from Osijek,
5 but that's not important at this point.
6 I assume that you did not read the electoral laws of the Republic
7 of Croatia. You haven't read those, have you?
8 A. Oh, yes. I read it always for election, and it was election for
9 1995. And the Herzegovinians were for the first time to be allowed to
10 vote and be in parliament.
11 Q. Excellent. Do you know that the Croatian constitution, just like
12 the constitutions of any other country, stipulates that all adults have
13 the right to vote, all inhabitants of age, which means that they have the
14 right to elect and to be elected? Is that something you know about?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now, if a Croatian citizen finds
17 themselves in Holland, France, or Bosnia-Hercegovina, for instance, then
18 that citizen also has the right to vote or to elect and be elected? Isn't
19 that right?
20 A. When a citizen is in Holland, he has moved to Holland and, as I
21 understand, still has Croatian documents. But the citizens of Western
22 Herzegovina have been there hundreds of years. It was just that I know
23 that they had so-called double citizenship.
24 Q. Madam, all I want to ask you is this: Is it a rule that the
25 citizen of one country enjoys all the rights that he would have in that
1 country, and that nobody has the right to curtail his civic rights,
2 regardless of where that person might be at any given point in time?
3 That's a physical matter, where he's going to vote. But if he is a
4 national of a country, the citizen of a country, then he enjoys full
5 electoral rights in that country. Isn't that right?
6 A. Yes, but that's not correct for a neighbouring country where
7 they're given these citizen rights.
8 Q. If there is the possibility of somebody having dual citizenship,
9 then from the aspects of citizenship in one country, in this case the
10 Republic of Croatia, then he is the citizen of that country with
11 absolutely full rights. So dual citizenship affords this citizen the same
12 rights as a citizen who has just won citizenship. Isn't that right? Can
13 we agree there on that point?
14 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Excuse me, Ms. Alaburic.
15 [French or English channel]
16 JUDGE TRECHSEL: ... constitution law. That's surely legal
17 questions of comparative law and they're not obvious.
18 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that is very logical
19 question. And for a witness such as this one who is educated in history,
20 in politics and who was a journalist and who has testified here about the
21 Herzegovinians in the Croatian parliament and endeavoured to link up
22 Zagreb and Herzegovina in that respect, then the question is a very
23 logical one. I won't insist further because I respect the time.
24 Q. But I'd just like to say that yesterday you told us, madam --
25 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] May I be just allowed one more
1 question, please, just one more question. One final question.
2 Q. Witness, you spoke about the Croatian media yesterday and what
3 media were independent. You told us that the Nedeljna Dalmacija newspaper
4 was an independent paper that you could rely on, if I understood you
5 correctly. Now, my question is: Are you -- are you certain is that it
6 was Nedeljna Dalmacija that you were referring to and not the Herald
7 Tribune perhaps?
8 THE INTERPRETER: Feral Tribune.
9 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. It is a political weekly?
11 A. No, I have never seen that kind of paper.
12 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kruger, very quickly.
14 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour. Only one issue to raise with
15 the assistance of the usher -- with the registry if we could call up on
16 the e-court Exhibit P 01155. P 01155. This was a document admitted on 12
17 June 2007, if we may just have the English version as well.
18 Re-examination by Mr. Kruger:
19 Q. Madam, this was a decision that was signed by Mr. Jadranko Prlic
20 on 15 January 1993.
21 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, I'm going to object at this point.
22 It's beyond the scope of the direct examination, as well as the
23 cross-examination. Now, if the gentleman wish -- she indicated, first of
24 all, that she knew nothing about any ultimatum in January. That is first
25 and foremost.
1 Secondly, now he's trying to go into another area. If he's
2 allowed, then I should be allowed to do recross-examination.
3 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, I have a very --
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. One question as part
5 of redirect should be in line with questions put during the
6 cross-examination. So please remind us of the question put by the
7 Defence, and then you can show us your document.
8 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour. This is in a direct response
9 to a question posed by Ms. Alaburic during her cross-examination,
10 regarding an ultimatum in January 1993 and whether there was any confusion
11 about this.
12 Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. Witness, this decision, I only want to direct your attention to
14 item 1 which states: "All units of the ..."
15 [Technical Difficulties]
16 [The witness withdrew]
17 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m.,
18 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 30th day of
19 August, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.