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

12 accused.

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

7 Honours.

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

3 well?

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

11 analysis.

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

15 opinion.

16 A. Well, let's say that an historian makes his opinions always on the

17 facts.

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

4 comment.

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

16 distinction.

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

24 it?

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

18 treaty.

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

13 answer?

14 A. There was.

15 Q. Okay. And which were -- which initiatives were there, if you

16 recollect?

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

5 possession?

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

18 recognised.

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

24 way.

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

6 partially?

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

8 overlap.

9 MR. KARNAVAS: I apologise. I apologise. I'm trying to save

10 time.

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

12 date?

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

24 information.

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

12 with?

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

23 understanding?

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

18 "no."

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

8 interview.

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

10 not?

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

19 somewhere?

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

23 situation.

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

3 Croats.

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

19 you."

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

22 recall?

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

14 on.

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."

13 Right?

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

16 state."

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

24 Bosnia-Herzegovina?

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

15 power.

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

23 speculate?

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

21 later.

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

20 non-repetitive.

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

9 minutes.

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

1 doing?

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

8 thoughts?

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,

5 ma'am.

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

4 transcript.

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

23 reason."

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

20 Bosnia.

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

1 document.

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.

22 Okay.

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

6 proposals.

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

9 forgot?

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

8 territories.

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;

8 right?

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;

19 right?

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

17 Sarajevo.

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

5 Izetbegovic.

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.

12 "MV...

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

21 negotiations?

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

25 referendum?

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

11 1991.

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

1 one.

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

18 it.

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

4 secret.

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

14 that?

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

22 Finnish?

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

9 solution."

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

21 question.

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

1 already.

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

10 studied.

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

8 witness.

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

25 taken?

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

17 interpreter?

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

5 influence.

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,

10 Witness?

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

7 statement.

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

19 proceedings.

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

7 possible.

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

11 percentages?

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

4 roadblocks.

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

4 Drnis?

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

8 on.

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

22 asking.

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

22 by.

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

17 today.

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

23 this.

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

8 Battalion.

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

15 Zenica.

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

13 that?

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

21 correct?

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

5 armies.

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

24 seriously.

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

2 ultimatum?

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

13 ultimatum?

14 A. No. It's impossible because I didn't know any ultimatum in

15 January.

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

19 occasions.

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

15 this.

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

21 back.

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

3 paragraph.

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 --

14 re-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.

20

21

22

23

24

25