1 Monday, 01 October 2007

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 2.16 p.m.

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

6 case.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case number

8 IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor versus Prlic et al. Thank you, Your Honours.

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

10 Mr. Registrar. My greetings to all the people in the courtroom, the

11 Prosecution representatives, the Defence counsel, the accused, as well as

12 all the people assisting us in carrying out our mission.

13 We have a witness who has been granted protective measures.

14 Before we move to closed session because I know that Mr. Kovacic would

15 like to say something, I'm going to give the floor to the registrar for

16 some IC numbers.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honours. Several parties have

18 submitted lists of documents to be tendered through Witness Nicholas J.

19 Miller. The list submitted by the OTP shall be given Exhibit number

20 IC 670 and the list submitted by 3D shall be given Exhibit number IC 671.

21 Thank you, Your Honours.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. The French channel

23 is on which number? I'd like to ask the interpreters because usually it

24 is on French and on five I have another language now, so could they help

25 me?

1 Fine. Let's move to closed session.

2 [Closed session]

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 22857-22868 redacted. Closed session

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 [Open session]

2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I shall now give the floor to

4 the Prosecution.

5 MR. PORYVAEV: Summary of the witness, thank you very much.

6 Summary of the witness statement. The witness was a member of Canary

7 Island Tactical Task Force Spabat Canarias or Spanish Battalion, UNPROFOR,

8 in Mostar area as from April through October 9, 1993. The Spanish

9 Battalion UNPROFOR, Canarias arrived in the area of responsibility in

10 April as hostilities broke out between Croats and Muslims. From the very

11 beginning, the HVO command was against permanently deploying the SpaBat

12 company in Mostar. It was deployed in Mostar on the 12th, 1993, after an

13 armed conflict between HVO and ABiH had broken out on the 9th of May 1993.

14

15 The main and primary mission of the SpaBat was to provide escorts

16 for UNHCR, ICRC, and other officially recognised humanitarian

17 organisations. They mainly protected and --

18 THE INTERPRETER: Can counsel please slow down? Thank you.

19 MR. PORYVAEV: -- UNHCR and the ICRC in their activities.

20 Although SpaBat was not officially in charge of the change of prisoners,

21 they provided some support to the ICRC operations when visiting prisoners

22 or refugees camps. Then later the mission --

23 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Poryvaev, you are still a bit too fast. It

24 is difficult for the interpreters to follow.

25 MR. PORYVAEV: Thank you very much. I'm happy to hear that I'm

1 very fast in English.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed.

3 MR. PORYVAEV: Yes.

4 SpaBat and other international organisations had serious problems

5 while fulfilling their functions because of the limited access to East

6 Mostar, Caplina, Stolac and other areas. UNPROFOR members and

7 humanitarian convoys were on many occasions targeted by HVO snipers and

8 other troops.

9 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters do not have the text and

10 Mr. Poryvaev is reading. Thank you.

11 MR. PORYVAEV: On the 11th of May, Spanish Battalion UNPROFOR

12 Lieutenant Munoz Castellanos was killed by a grenade shot in a United

13 Nations convoy delivering blood plasma and medicines to the Muslim war

14 hospital in East Mostar. On the 11th of June, 1993, Spanish Battalion,

15 UNPROFOR Lieutenant Jesus Aguilar Fernandez was killed by sniper in the

16 area of the Hit building. The witness participated in the investigation

17 of these facts. On the 9th and 10th of May 1993, Spanish Battalion

18 UNPROFOR officers witnessed and filmed movement of about 400 Muslim

19 civilians from Mostar towards the Heliodrom. This information was

20 provided to the UNPROFOR headquarters in Kiseljak. Witness visited

21 Heliodrom together with General Morillon in Prado after the top meeting

22 between Franjo Tudjman, Mate Boban, and Alija Izetbegovic in Medjugorje on

23 the 18th of May 1993.

24 The humanitarian situation in East Mostar, which was in fact

25 isolated from other areas of Herceg-Bosna was extremely hard. The

1 population did not have essential amount of food, water and medical

2 assistance. For a long period of time, humanitarian convoys were

3 pretended [sic] by HVO from delivering to East Mostar humanitarian aid.

4 East Mostar was permanently shelled by HVO. Witness organised and

5 participated in a number of meetings at high level between HVO and ABiH

6 commanders.

7 The witness saw General Slobodan Praljak on two occasions. In the

8 witness's view, Slobodan Praljak symbolised courageous support to HVO.

9 Witness met with HVO Defence Minister Bruno Stojic on a dozen of

10 occasions. On the 17th of June, Witness negotiated with Bruno Stojic, the

11 release of four Muslim United Nations interpreters who had been taken

12 hostage. Later on, 17th of July, 1993, he had an unformal meeting with

13 Bruno Stojic where the latter said that they, HVO, were able to solve the

14 situation and that the loss of territory in certain areas was part of

15 preconceived plan. The plan basically consisted of putting maximum

16 pressure from the south of the town of Mostar. He also expressed his

17 concern for the Muslim civilians living under the control of BiH army in

18 East Mostar. He suggested and offered organising the evacuation of the

19 largest possible number of those civilians. According to Stojic's

20 calculations, the end of the story with two factions in Mostar, was a

21 matter of 20 days to be solved.

22 Witness also had contacts with other military commanders through

23 HVO. Berislav Pusic was the head of HVO office for the exchange of

24 displaced persons, prisoners, and bodies. His office was based in

25 Mostar. SpaBat records have him registered as a civilian because he

1 usually worked in plain clothes although he sometimes appeared in uniform.

2 He was a the first SpaBat contact when there were requests for an exchange

3 of prisoners.

4 SpaBat received a lot of information about the expulsion of the

5 Muslim population from various parts of Herceg-Bosna and transferring them

6 to Muslim-populated areas or some third countries. SpaBat also received

7 information about the conditions and numbers of detainees and the

8 detention centres through numerous international organisations,

9 non-government organisations, and passed it on to both HVO and ABiH and

10 also to other relevant international agencies. Thank you very much.

11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Proceed.

12 MR. PORYVAEV: Your Honour, I would like with the assistance of

13 the usher [Spanish translation coming over English channel] Your Honour,

14 you have three binders and two separate -- one bundle of documents. I

15 will explain why a little bit later. I think that we should not place the

16 witness statements on the ELMO because we have a protected witness. He

17 will work with hard copies, I suggest.

18 Examination by Mr. Poryvaev:

19 Q. Witness, my question is, is it correct that you were interviewed

20 by OTP investigators twice?

21 A. Yes, yes, that's true.

22 Q. The first time you were interviewed on the 27th, 28th of November

23 and 2nd, 3rd and 4th and 5th of December 1997, and this is Exhibit P10270.

24 A. That's correct.

25 Q. The second interview was conducted on the 2nd, 3rd, and 6th of

1 July 2007, and this is our Exhibit P10217.

2 A. That is correct.

3 Q. Just -- I would like witness to take first Exhibit 1027870, and

4 this is a statement given in 1997.

5 JUDGE TRECHSEL: [Microphone not activated]

6 MR. PORYVAEV: It's binder 3.

7 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Yes, yes.

8 MR. PORYVAEV: Yes, you're right. Both in number -- yes. That's

9 in error on the transcript. It's line -- page 18, line 1, actually,

10 Exhibit number is 10270.

11 Q. Witness, take a look at this statement, first of all. My question

12 is at the time you provided your witness statement, did you answer the

13 questions of the investigator truthfully?

14 A. Yes, that's correct.

15 Q. Did you answer the questions freely, without any coercion?

16 A. Affirmative.

17 Q. And now on -- I would like to you take a look at the last page of

18 the statement. Do you see the last page?

19 A. Do you mean page 11?

20 Q. Yes, exactly. Just --

21 A. Yes, that's correct.

22 Q. Is that your signature on your statement above the date, 7th of

23 December?

24 A. That is my signature, but the date was the 5th of December.

25 Q. Sorry, that's my error. Now I would like to take Exhibit 10217

1 and the same questions. Were your answers to the investigator truthful?

2 A. Yes, always.

3 Q. Did you answer questions freely, without any coercion?

4 A. I answered freely.

5 Q. And I address you now to page 27, it's last page. Was this

6 witness statement signed by yourself?

7 A. Affirmative.

8 Q. Did you sign both these statements, you believe that they were

9 just recorded to be true and accurate?

10 A. They reflect what I experienced, yes.

11 Q. Did you have an opportunity of going through the statements when

12 you had a meeting with myself?

13 A. Affirmative.

14 Q. Witness, we have already informed the Defence and the Trial

15 Chamber that you made just some corrections in both statements. If you go

16 now to our Exhibit 102717, this is statement given in July 2007, in

17 paragraph 97, the last phrase, sentence, should be read as follows: "Two

18 days after his death and with authorisation from the Croats, Vice Minister

19 Bozic and my Colonel Morales, I went to the Bulevar area on the front line

20 with my Lieutenant Hidalgo as an escort," and "two HVO military men"

21 should be read instead of "Croatian military men," that was your

22 correction, correct?

23 A. Yes, affirmative. I used the word "Croatian" wrongly. It should

24 have been HVO.

25 Q. And now I will address to you page 22 of the same statement. This

1 is paragraph 171. Is it correct -- have you found it? Is it correct that

2 today, that today, during the meeting with myself, you noticed one mistake

3 and this is, let's say, third line, "In that moment it was -- it was with

4 the HV," should be removed because it's repeated twice. It has nothing to

5 do with the check-points. It has something to do with Mr. Praljak, but

6 it's clear from further continuation of the statement. Is it correct,

7 Witness?

8 A. Yes. This is correct. That was an unnecessary redundancy in the

9 text.

10 Q. And now let's go back to your statement given in December 1997.

11 On page 5 of the statement, you also noticed two mistakes today, and I

12 want to inform about it the Chamber and the Defence. "The Grey Wolves" --

13 have you found it, page 5?

14 A. I have just found the page.

15 Q. The third passage from the bottom.

16 A. Yes. The paragraph --

17 Q. "The Grey Wolves, we have here were a Croatian snipers group."

18 You explained that it should be "HVO group," and further and the last

19 sentence says -- the last sentence, again, instead of "The two Croatian

20 military men," you should have "HVO military men." Is it correct,

21 Witness?

22 A. That's correct.

23 Q. Do you have any other corrections to be made now?

24 A. No.

25 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Poryvaev?

1 MR. PORYVAEV: Yes, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I wonder whether, in the first line of this

3 paragraph, the last word, "Croatian military men" should not also be

4 changed to "HVO."

5 MR. PORYVAEV: Yes, Your Honour, just told that. Your Honours, I

6 would like this exhibits -- these exhibits to be taken into evidence, I

7 mean exhibit, I repeat the numbers, P10217, P10270.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber has noted your

9 request. Please proceed.

10 MR. PORYVAEV:

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 Q. I'm sorry, we should redact this? Witness, I want you to be very

18 careful about your positions.

19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, kindly order the

20 redaction of line 1 to 3, and page 19: 19, 20, 21, 22.

21 Mr. Kovacic?

22 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] [Microphone not activated]

23 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, counsel. The microphone is not on.

24 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise. I'm a

25 little late in getting to my feet, but I think it would be a good idea to

1 correct the transcript straight away. On page 20, lines 11 to 18, with

2 reference to paragraph 171 of Exhibit 10217, I think that what my learned

3 friend asked the witness or that is what was recorded on the transcript,

4 that where the HV is mentioned first, which is the third line, that that

5 be omitted because it's superfluous mentioning it twice because it's

6 mentioned again with the description of General Praljak.

7 Now, that's not true because according to the transcript, in the

8 first sentence, which ends in line 3, it would appear just at that moment

9 it was HVO, so the situation and the discussion was with the HVO, which

10 means that the check-point was also HVO and not the HV as was erroneously

11 stated, and the witness put that right but that should remain. So not the

12 HV but the HVO. And then in the next sentence, the witness says, [In

13 English] "From the Croatian army," [Interpretation] "General Praljak from

14 the Croatian army," and then in brackets, "HV appeared at that moment."

15 So that should stay because that's his statement. Whereas the

16 Prosecutor said that the first HV should be -- was omitted and not that

17 the HV was turned into the HVO. So it should have been HVO in view of all

18 the other documents because the check-point was indeed a HVO check-point.

19 MR. PORYVAEV: Your Honour, perhaps the witness would explain.

20 That's I just exposed his proposal as I was told.

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] (redacted), could you tell us how

22 we should read paragraph 171, please?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, of course, Your Honour. I

24 commented on the fact that it seemed that by saying it at that particular

25 time General Praljak from the Croatian army and, in parentheses, "HV,"

1 reflected what was for me the position of General Praljak but it was

2 redundant and wasn't needed. But the check-point was controlled by the

3 HVO, not by the HV, obviously.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So as far as you're

5 concerned General Praljak was part of the HVO and the check-point was an

6 HVO check-point; is that right?

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the check-point was

8 HVO, and I never saw it as anything else and when I'm talking about this,

9 I'm talking about the 11th of May, with a general who I understood to be

10 HV at that particular time and I've mentioned that several times

11 throughout my written statement because I understood that he was a general

12 and I had met him two weeks prior, from the Croatian army.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So it's more

14 complicated than it seems to be at first sight. In the English version,

15 it is stated and it gives the impression from what you say that General

16 Praljak is an HV general, HV. This is something you maintain.

17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Affirmative at that time General

18 Praljak when I first met him was a general of the HV, Croatian army, and

19 that's what came out in the press at the time. Later if that was changed,

20 I don't know.

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Please continue.

22 MR. PORYVAEV: Thank you very much, Your Honour. I would like

23 just the Judges and the witness take just separate bundle without just

24 carton binder, and it contains two exhibits, P10269 and P02108.

25 A. I have them.

1 Q. Just very shortly, what is the difference between these two

2 documents? What is document 10269 stands for?

3 A. The document 269 is a copy, a literal copy, of my sworn statement

4 from officials of the Spanish army. This is completed at the end of every

5 year. It reflects what the army has in its records concerning my activity

6 from my first day in the mission until the day I left the mission.

7 Obviously, the Spanish army didn't think it was appropriate to provide the

8 Court with documents concerning my activities prior to the period in

9 question. It summarises the most important elements listed in my personal

10 diary concerning my observations, comments and this was going to assist me

11 in drafting in January of the following year my annual report. This

12 was -- this was based on my personal observations. Thank you.

13 Q. Witness, could I conditionally, let's say, call it your personal

14 diary, for practical purposes?

15 A. Affirmative. It is my personal diary, but we have to bear in mind

16 that as of the early the following year I had lost control over the copy

17 that was made. This is the copy that the Spanish army made.

18 Q. And then let's go back to Exhibit P02108.

19 A. This document is a document drafted in Spanish by our task force

20 and by my section. It reflects a summary on a daily basis of the

21 summary -- the summary of the main events that occurred during that time.

22 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, could I just call it again

23 conditionally official diary?

24 A. Affirmative. I think, yes, it would be good to call it a logbook.

25 Q. Okay. Logbook. Then logbook. Your Honour I'm doing that for

1 just practical purposes because we'll go back to these exhibits on many

2 occasions, and I don't think that it's appropriate to call each time the

3 number of exhibit. It will take just a while. Just for the -- if you

4 agree with me, then for the record, for the records, Exhibit P02108,

5 logbook. Exhibit P10269, personal diary.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Just one minor

7 remark. This Exhibit 10269 of 11th of May, in which you mentioned General

8 Praljak, in Spanish, [Spanish spoken] This is not to be found in the

9 Exhibit 2108 because there is no mention at all of the 11th of May. So is

10 there a reason for that?

11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the logbook, there were many

12 people whose names were listed. They had attended meetings but not

13 everybody's name was listed. I reflected that he was the [Spanish spoken]

14 because that's what I had read in the press, and from the beginning our

15 task force considered him as the [Spanish spoken].

16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.

17 MR. PORYVAEV:

18 Q. Okay. Witness, let's begin with one item which is called, let's

19 say, deployment or -- of the SpaBat company in Mostar. Please take your

20 statement for 2007 and go on back to paragraph 32. Have you found it?

21 A. Yes. I found paragraph 32.

22 Q. In this paragraph, you stated that there were two rounds of

23 meetings with HVO leadership and in particular with Slobodan Bozic about

24 the deployment of your company on a permanent basis in Mostar, and you

25 also stated here that HVO was against the decision of deploying company.

1 My first question: Why did you want your company to be deployed in Mostar

2 on a permanent basis?

3 A. It was a practical problem. Our mission in supporting the UNHCR

4 missions would have benefited if we had had deployment in Mostar, which is

5 halfway between [indiscernible] and Jablanica. And it would have avoided

6 a lot of unnecessary vehicular movement along the road. That was the main

7 reason for -- that was the main reason prior to the conflict. As to your

8 second question, why did the HVO oppose this, we wanted -- I think they

9 found excuses such as we wanted to be in areas controlled by them, et

10 cetera.

11 Q. I would like the witness to take just your logbook, and this is an

12 entry of the 26th of April 1993, in both binders, in all versions, page 1.

13 A. What date, please?

14 Q. 26th of -- I'm sorry, 26th, 26th of April.

15 A. In my personal diary, I don't have the 26th of April.

16 Q. I'm talking about logbook.

17 A. Excuse me, sorry.

18 Q. 02108.

19 A. Yes. I made a mistake. 26th of April, page 1.

20 Q. Yes. On page 2, for the 4th of May, you also have some entry

21 about discussion with Mr. Slobodan Bozic about deployment of company.

22 Witness, do these two entries reflect what really happened and which is

23 described in paragraph 32 of your statement?

24 A. Affirmative. We were putting a lot of pressure on because we

25 needed to be situated, we needed to use some headquarters or some

1 facilities to base our operations.

2 Q. In paragraph 44, 45, 46 of the same statement dated 2007 --

3 A. Yes. I have it.

4 Q. You claim that the company was deployed finally after the 20th --

5 12th of May 1993, after the interference of the international community;

6 is that correct?

7 A. Yes, that's correct.

8 Q. Let's go back to your logbook and to the entry for the 12th of May

9 1993, page 5 in English, page 4 in Spanish, and I suggest page 5 also in

10 B/C/S.

11 A. 12th of May.

12 Q. Does it correspond that this meeting really took place, and the

13 people from international organisations were involved in it?

14 A. Yes, that's correct.

15 Q. Next, I would just turn you to Exhibit P02366. This is binder 2.

16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] General Petkovic wanted to say

17 something. Yes, please, General.

18 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I just need to

19 intervene in view of a technical matter. It wasn't deployment in Mostar

20 due to pressure by the international community but no, it was due to the

21 signatures of General Morillon and Mr. Thebault. That is why UNPROFOR was

22 deployed in Mostar between the 12th and the 13th. It was not due to

23 pressure exerted by the international community. That's it. There was a

24 document that says that. So I just -- well, does the witness know that or

25 does he not know that?

1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] (redacted), I suppose you've heard

2 what General Petkovic has just said. What do you think of it?

3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the information that I have,

4 there was obviously a lot of pressure on all levels, and it's true that

5 there was this meeting with Ambassador Thebault at the end of which SpaBat

6 got permission to set up base in Mostar. That's correct.

7 MR. PORYVAEV: [Microphone not activated]

8 Q. I turn you to Exhibit P02366, binder 2. That's item Mostar, page

9 4, 5 English, page 2 Spanish, page 4 B/C/S.

10 A. Before continuing, could I please ask for an extra table to -- or

11 a chair, perhaps, to hold some of these documents?

12 Yes. 2366.

13 Q. Yes.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Page 2 in Spanish, 4/5 in English.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. The witness, do you recognise this document you have?

18 A. Affirmative.

19 Q. Just leaf down the information you have, leaf through the

20 information you have. Does it correspond that you just explained the

21 Trial Chamber about the circumstances in which the company was deployed?

22 A. Yes, affirmative. This reflects a time period in which the

23 transfer was completed. In other words, we were originally in -- on both

24 sides of the confrontation line and later we were able to be deployed

25 halfway between the two.

1 MR. PORYVAEV: Now, Your Honour, I think that I will finish with

2 this topic for the moment and pass on to another one, if you allow me to

3 do that.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Go ahead.

5 MR. PORYVAEV: I will skip now just relevant to Heliodrom because

6 I think we dwelt quite much on this.

7 Q. But only question, one only question, Witness, is it correct that

8 there were three visits to Heliodrom in May by representatives of

9 international organisations, not one?

10 A. That is correct, yes, that's correct.

11 Q. And you participated in one of these, just, visits?

12 A. Affirmative. I took part in what I think is the third of the

13 three visits that I know of, which was on the 20th with a general, Prado.

14 Q. And in paragraph 130, you claim that detention camps were not just

15 issues of your responsibility, they were the matter which is for

16 intelligence service and so on and so forth. I mean your statement.

17 A. In the -- this is true for the mission that I took part in. It

18 was an inspection of the facilities. In this case, I went taking

19 advantage of General Prado's visit to -- getting information, that is

20 true, that was not my responsibility.

21 Q. And let's go now to Exhibit P -- okay, that's let's say personal

22 diary, personal diary, entry for the 11th of June 1993.

23 A. Yes, that's correct. On page 6 of the Spanish version, 11th of

24 June. What would you like me to read?

25 Q. Yes. "I attended a meeting with HVO officials, who were informed

1 of the concern of the international community regarding the imprisonment

2 of a large number of Muslims from West Mostar at the Croatian-held

3 Heliodrom to the south of the town." Is this entry correct? Does it

4 reflect the situation that there were detainees in Heliodrom in June 1993?

5 A. It is correct.

6 MR. PORYVAEV: Your Honour, my next topic will be just freedom of

7 movement of the population within the Mostar town.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, if it takes you five

9 minutes, we can do it now. If it takes more time, we would rather -- we

10 had better have the break now. It's up to you.

11 MR. PORYVAEV: Your Honour, it will take a little bit more. More

12 than five minutes. Then maybe after the break.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Let's break now.

14 20-minute break.

15 --- Recess taken at 3.36 p.m.

16 --- On resuming at 3.57 p.m.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The hearing is resumed. You

18 have the floor, Mr. Prosecutor.

19 MR. PORYVAEV:

20 Q. So we are talking about the freedom of movement for the population

21 of Mostar. Witness, I would like you to take a look at paragraph 79 of

22 your last witness statement. Have you found it?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. This paragraph deals with problems with the movement of the

25 population from West Mostar to East Mostar and vice versa and it's stated

1 here that Muslims, the people, Muslims were allowed to leave freely West

2 Mostar for East Mostar, but were not allowed on many occasions to move

3 from East Mostar to West Mostar and therefore SpaBat raised a protest in

4 view of the situation and they explained also that you elevated these

5 problems to Joko [phoen] Mountain, Kiseljak, and tried to solve the

6 problem at this level. Is this correct?

7 A. Yes, that's correct.

8 Q. I would like to you take binder 2 and take a look at Exhibit

9 P02583.

10 A. Yes, I have it.

11 Q. This is INTREP 188 dated the 31st of May. It's English page 8,

12 Spanish page 3, and B/C/S page 6, I think. Witness, do you recognise this

13 document?

14 A. Yes, of course.

15 Q. Is it authentic?

16 A. Yes. It reflects around the 31st of May, in the morning, the

17 information that we handed to the authorities.

18 Q. Okay. In this document you also stated that Croatian authorities

19 were contacted by SpaBat. Bozo Raguz said that the joint commission and

20 its decisions were history, and consequently all travel from one side of

21 the river to the other was cancelled, is it correct?

22 A. Yes, that is correct. In fact, it's mentioned that that's the

23 person included.

24 Q. Yes. Now, I address you to paragraph 8 -- 81 of your statement,

25 and it was established -- you say here -- that the passage of civilians

1 from one bank of the Neretva River to the other by bus was hindered by

2 HVO. The HVO had been picking the Muslim persons who should cross, and

3 again you say here about the letter of protest.

4 A. It's true.

5 Q. What I would like to clear up now, what do you mean or did you

6 mean by saying that they were picking the Muslim persons who were allowed

7 to cross or not to cross? What was the criteria?

8 A. There were two situations. Certain age groups were not allowed to

9 move if they were Muslim to the west -- from the west to the east. These

10 were in particular men of fighting age. That was the first criteria, and

11 this goes against the terms of the agreement that was reached. And then

12 we had the elderly, children, these people were not allowed to cross back

13 by the HVO. So SpaBat wrote a letter protesting to the authorities about

14 this.

15 Q. I would like to take a look at Exhibit P02507 [sic], it's also

16 binder 2. And page 3/4 English, page 3/4 in English, page 1 in Spain.

17 This is SITREP now 188, 31st of May 1993. Witness, do you recognise this

18 document?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Does it reflect the situation with the Muslim population you just

21 explained to the Trial Chamber?

22 A. Yes.

23 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, I don't know whether you said it this

24 way. In the record it says 2507, but I think you are actually using 2570.

25 MR. PORYVAEV: Yes, Your Honour, yes, Your Honour, I'm sure

1 it's --

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I'm looking at 2570.

3 MR. PORYVAEV: Okay.

4 Q. Then in paragraph 86 you stated, "The situation was so serious

5 that UNPROFOR Kiseljak sent to Zagreb the following report in which they

6 raised this issue very seriously before the superior UNPROFOR." And now I

7 ask you to take a look at Exhibit P02582, binder 2, as well.

8 A. Yes. I have it before me.

9 Q. Witness, do you recognise this document?

10 A. Yes. This is a document goes from Kiseljak to Zagreb with the

11 Spanish Battalion in copy.

12 Q. And here they say, "Complaint to HVO headquarters was sent by

13 SpaBat, HVO is not entitled to do any selections because of the cease-fire

14 agreement established free pass to all personnel," is it correct?

15 A. This is correct, and it reflects the actions that SpaBat was

16 taking.

17 MR. PORYVAEV: So Your Honour, I accomplished one of my additional

18 questions that was not sufficiently clear to the Prosecution. Thank you

19 very much.

20 Q. Now I would like to move further to situation with the freedom of

21 movement for humanitarian and UNPROFOR convoys. In paragraph 91 of the

22 statement you claim on the 30th of May 1993, section received information

23 from section 2 that three Irish drivers working for humanitarian

24 organisations had been arrested by HVO police. You dealt with HVO

25 authorities for more than six hours and finally achieved to release them.

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. Witness, were you also involved in this situation personally?

3 A. I would have to check my diary. I think we were calling, but I

4 would like to check that in my diary.

5 Q. Just take -- I would like you to take a look at your personal

6 diary, and that should be entry for the 30th of May as well.

7 A. Yes. Affirmative. In my diary, I say that I was taking part in

8 this -- in these negotiations with them. Thank you.

9 Q. Now, I would like you to turn you to Exhibit 02583, binder 2.

10 A. Yes. The same that we are dealing with right now?

11 Q. Yes. This -- yes, INTREP, yes, 188, 30th of May?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Yes.

14 A. 188.

15 Q. Yes. And here among other information, page 8, 9 in English,

16 Spanish page 3, B/C/S page 6, I suggest they describe the situation why

17 the people, Irish people, drivers, were arrested, and what was just

18 presented as a gift to them. Have you found it?

19 A. Yes, yes. I found it. I don't understand the idea of the gift.

20 Q. Well, yes. Do you recognise this document?

21 A. Yes. Yes. I recognise the document. I don't know if there was a

22 translation problem. I recognise the problem. It reflects everything

23 that was done to try to get the three drivers released with the problems

24 that we had had at the check-point and finally, yes, this was resolved

25 thank you, that's correct.

1 Q. Now I would like you to take a look at Exhibit 03371. This is

2 binder 1 now. Page 8 in English, Spanish page 2, second passage from the

3 bottom.

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And is the situation described correctly in this document?

6 A. Affirmative. It says that they -- all UNPROFOR vehicles heading

7 to Mostar are stopped, permission will not be given to enter the city for

8 one month. By the end of July this should be lifted. This was dated the

9 9th of July.

10 Q. And next just miscellaneouses, if you go back to page 10 of

11 English version and Spanish version?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Item 5.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Are you dealing with the situation described here when one convoy

16 was attacked?

17 A. Yes. This was quite a regular problem with check-points. Our

18 convoys were often held up. This is no -- by no means an exceptional

19 case. It's just one of that many occurred.

20 Q. Then, witness, do you authenticate this SpaBat INTREP 228 dated on

21 the 10th of July, I mean this document?

22 A. Yes, that's correct. I authenticated this document, 288. Signed

23 on the 9th of July 1993. It does accurately reflect the information put

24 forward on that day.

25 Q. Then I will address to you Exhibit 03311. This is binder 1 again.

1 English --

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. -- pages 7 and 8, from 7 to 8, Spanish page 4, bottom page --

4 bottom passage, B/C/S page 8. This item Mostar. And in this document,

5 they also deal with the situation with humanitarian and mediation missions

6 between the factions and every day Spanish patrols were being stopped at

7 the check-point to the south of Mostar and held for several hours, is it

8 correct?

9 A. That's correct. This is a summary from the 14th of June to the

10 5th of July. It explains that attacks were frequent during those weeks

11 while humanitarian missions were being conducted. Every day, patrols were

12 detained at the check-points and then certain problems were outlined more

13 concretely to do with the Muslim neighbourhoods. Thank you, that's

14 correct.

15 Q. Then, witness in paragraph 95 on your statement --

16 A. Yes, I have it before me.

17 Q. You deal with the situation when after the incident involving an

18 Irish lorry, the HVO ordered its snipers to open fire on all civilian or

19 military vehicles except for UNPROFOR vehicles and so on and so forth. Is

20 it correct?

21 A. This is correct. It reflects what was brought forward to the

22 authorities' attention on the 31st of May.

23 Q. I would like witness to take a look at Exhibit P02593. This is

24 binder 2, topic, areas of information, English page 8, Spanish page 3,

25 page 8, I think B/C/S.

1 A. I haven't found it. One moment, please.

2 Q. Yes. 02593. In Spanish this is page --

3 A. Yes, yes.

4 Q. Do you recognise this document?

5 A. Yes, affirmative.

6 Q. This is a SpaBat INTREP 189 for the 31st of May?

7 A. No, 189, 189, of 31st of May, correct.

8 Q. Yes, thanks. Witness, now let's go back to your personal diary.

9 The entry for the 15th of June 1993, page 6, bottom passage, page 6 in the

10 English, page 7 in Spanish. It may be -- if I'm not mistaken, paragraph

11 4.

12 A. You're not talking about the 15th of June, then?

13 Q. 13th of June.

14 A. 13th of June, yes, okay.

15 Q. Of course, witness, this information concerns personally you. Is

16 it correct that you received some kind of threats from the commander of

17 the team of Croatian snipers?

18 A. Just as it is written here in my diary, our military intelligence

19 service were aware of the problem concerning these snipers, and the

20 colonel relayed the information to me that way because I had taken part

21 officially in the verifications to see whether our Lieutenant had been

22 killed by such fire. For a few days I was not allowed to leave our

23 barracks. That is totally correct.

24 Q. Thank you. Now, we'll go further to our next topic, which

25 concerns Mr. Bruno Stojic.

1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Perhaps before we go on, one reads in the

2 transcript that -- I quote more or less page 37, line 4, that the HVO

3 after the incident with the Irish lorries ordered the snipers to shoot at

4 SpaBat representatives. How do you know this? Have you seen such an

5 order or what explains this statement? What is it based upon?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It does not say that they fired

7 against us but that they fired against any vehicle, including us. In

8 theory, we never thought that this was --

9 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Except for UNPROFOR

10 vehicles, I apologise.

11 JUDGE TRECHSEL: And you just assumed that there has been such an

12 order because you observed the shooting, or did you have some sort of

13 inside information?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The information giving open slather

15 to the snipers to open fire on vehicles came via the military intelligence

16 service, and this is reflected in the INTREP that you mentioned.

17 MR. PORYVAEV: May I go on?

18 Q. Witness, let's go to paragraph 113 of the statement.

19 A. Yes, I have it.

20 Q. Here you mention that you just had seen Mr. Bruno Stojic some 10

21 or 12 times, and on the 17th of June you had contact with Mr. Stojic

22 during six hours of negotiations in which I had to pressure him to free

23 four Muslim interpreters working with UNH military observers. Could you

24 explain why did it take too long to solve this problem?

25 A. It is correct. I can explain this, and this is reflected in the

1 exhibits. Essentially the problem was that they were four interpreters

2 that had been detained by HVO elements in the Konjic pocket in the

3 isolated remote northern part. It would appear that they had -- that

4 there was no power over them. There were many attempts, vis-a-vis

5 General -- I think the General Keza Zarko was one of the people involved

6 in the letter to our minister so he could try to resolve the situation but

7 it was a very delicate situation.

8 We were not aware of this issue until we were told about it, and

9 finally, Minister Stojic gave us, was given -- satellite communications

10 means which meant that he could relay the order to the relevant

11 authorities to order their release, so this took a lot of time and that's

12 how the release was finally obtained.

13 Q. Did he act just with desire to solve this problem?

14 A. I am convinced that, yes, that he had all the goodwill necessary

15 to get the problem resolved. But it was not easy for him to get this

16 order across because there was a different calendar of events that Colonel

17 Ganic had.

18 Q. I would like to you take a look at SITREP 205, Exhibit P02794.

19 This is binder 3. Binder 3, page 5/6 English, page 3 Spanish, B/C/S 4/5,

20 topic Jablanica.

21 A. One moment. Yes.

22 Q. Do you recognise this document?

23 A. Yes, naturally. It's a SITREP 216. I can't read my copy very

24 well, but I think it's the 15th of June, the end of June.

25 Q. Is the situation reflected correctly in this document?

1 A. Yes, it's correct. Our officials there informed us that on that

2 day, the date of the document, there were representatives of organisations

3 who had gone into that enclave, they had only gone with interpreters and

4 not with UNPROFOR protection, and they went there and so the beginning of

5 the problem was outlined there. At that time, we --

6 Q. That's enough. That's enough. Now let's move to next exhibit,

7 this is 205 SITREP -- yes, 205 bis. 17th of June 1993, exhibit P02804,

8 binder 3.

9 A. Yes. I have it in front of me.

10 Q. Is the situation reflected correctly in this document?

11 A. Yes, that's correct.

12 Q. Do you authenticate this document?

13 A. Affirmative.

14 Q. And finally, now let's move to Exhibit P02808, binder 3, SITREP

15 206, dated 17th of June.

16 A. Correct. I have it here before me.

17 Q. Do you recognise this document?

18 A. Yes, naturally.

19 Q. Is the development of events reflected in the document correctly?

20 A. Yes, this reflects what happens.

21 MR. PORYVAEV: Now, Your Honour, I would like to go to some other

22 topic relevant to Mr. Stojic and this is paragraph 122 of the statement.

23 But, Your Honour, I would like maybe to move into private session because

24 otherwise, we can reveal the names of people concerned.

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Private session, please.

1 [Private session]

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (redacted)

11 (redacted)

12 (redacted)

13 (redacted)

14 (redacted)

15 (redacted)

16 (redacted)

17 (redacted)

18 (redacted)

19 (redacted)

20 (redacted)

21 (redacted)

22 (redacted)

23 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 Pages 22897-22900 redacted. Private session

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 [Open session]

6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are in open session.

7 MR. PORYVAEV:

8 Q. Witness, I invite you to take a look at paragraph 129 of your

9 statement.

10 A. Yes, I have it before me.

11 Q. And in this paragraph, you stated that I didn't know about any

12 specific relations between Bruno Stojic and special units, but we had

13 information from section 2 coming from SpaBat INTREP 270 and 70, that he

14 had passed a special confidence in some HVO units as Ludvig Pavlovic,

15 Bruno Stojic, and units under Tuta's command. Sorry, take a look at

16 Exhibit P04401. And this is binder 3.

17 A. Yes. I have the document in front of which I confirm is from the

18 [indiscernible] from the 21st of August, and it states that according to

19 the superior authorities and HVO that there are units in which they had a

20 lot of trust and these were Bruno Stojic, Ludvig Pavlovic --

21 Q. Yes. Thank you very much. Our next topic is relevant to

22 Mr. Slobodan Praljak. In paragraph 167 --

23 A. Yes, I have it before me.

24 Q. You say that in your previous statements and your current

25 statement, you stated that you considered Mr. Slobodan Praljak as HVO

1 military who represented the interests of President Tudjman in

2 Herceg-Bosna, and I said it with respect to my first meeting with him on

3 the 29th of April when he was dressed in HVO -- HV, sorry, military

4 uniform. Is it correct?

5 A. Yes. The first time I met this person whom I later learned was

6 General Praljak, he was dressed in the Croat uniform and according to the

7 local press, and because photos had been taken of him, he was at that time

8 an important person in the Croat chiefs of staffs. Then I had occasion to

9 meet him twice later and I managed to speak to him via interpreters, but

10 my first encounter with him was when he was dressed in HV fatigues. Thank

11 you.

12 Q. Now, let's move to Exhibit 02 -- sorry?

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment. Witness, you said

14 that he wore the HV uniform. Now, how do you make the difference between

15 the HVO uniform and the HV uniform or whether it's the US army uniform or

16 the Russian army uniform? On what do you base yourself to make the

17 difference?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Before a mission the Spanish army

19 trains its people, its personnel. Over seven weeks we were under training

20 and we were taught how to identify the different uniforms. First of all,

21 obviously, furthermore, he was not dressed in combat uniform. He was not

22 in fact dressed in fatigues. He was dressed in the uniform, in the street

23 uniform, if you will have, and he was furthermore identified by the press.

24 By no means was it reason for surprise to find him there. He was in fact

25 known as the person President Tudjman trusted in the area. That was the

1 situation at the time, and of course at the time we knew who was who in

2 the different uniforms.

3 However, however, president -- and I agree with you, the

4 uniformity in combat was indeed great, and there were people dressed with

5 uniforms with flags that had nothing to do with anything, or people

6 dressed in mixed uniforms. However, when it comes to General Praljak, the

7 first time I saw him in Medjugorje, he was dressed in the Croat uniform,

8 in what we would call the presentation uniform. He was easily

9 identifiable, thank you.

10 MR. PORYVAEV:

11 Q. Now, witness I invite to you take a look at Exhibit P02419. This

12 is binder 2.

13 A. Yes, I can see it.

14 Q. Could you identify this document? What this document is?

15 A. Yes. This is a version in Spanish. It's my statement on the 16th

16 of May about the event that took place on the 11th of May. It's a

17 document I drafted in the area before Spanish military Judge accompanied

18 by a court usher, and in Spanish, there is questioning within the official

19 procedures following the death in combat of Lieutenant Munoz Castellanos.

20 Basically to sum up, I am asked about the mission as to why I was in

21 Mostar. I explained that in the 11th of May we had been ordered to take

22 plasma and drugs to the Armija hospital in Mostar, and we had an

23 authorisation from the minister, from Stojic, a written permit, a written

24 authorisation, in order to enter the city, and in this written document,

25 agreed upon by two factions we would be able to visit the HVO prisoners

1 detained by the Armija, and we would in fact, return to Croats -- to the

2 Croat area a catholic priest whose name I give.

3 For reasons that escape me we were only allowed to enter with the

4 two APCs, and therefore we were very few, apart from the doctor whose name

5 is here, from the International Red Cross, who was responsible for the

6 mission. So this is an International Red Cross mission which is being

7 served by UNPROFOR and of which I was responsible. I'm accompanied by a

8 third commander who is interested in learning what the situation is like

9 in Mostar, from the operational side. As a single escort we had

10 Lieutenant Munoz Castellanos. The others were in fact crew of the

11 armoured personnel carrier. The judge requests me, where were you? What

12 happened? And basically the aim was to take plasma to the hospital as

13 agreed upon. Second, we were to visit the prisoners. I personally got a

14 list of the names of the prisoners that would later be given over to UNHCR

15 and the Red Cross via the official channel so as to assert that these

16 people are alive. We give over these lists, and when we are about to pick

17 up the Catholic priest, we were accompanied by a general, a brigadier

18 general of the Armija, General Humo -- there were two brothers, but the

19 other one apparently died a few days later.

20 At that time, we were travelling towards the area where this

21 priest was detained so that he could be handed over. The armoured

22 personnel carrier cannot come with us because we are talking about very

23 narrow streets and lanes, as you are well aware in Muslim Mostar. And at

24 some stage, a number of shots are heard, two in fact, mortar shots are

25 heard. Some rests or the impact was very close. There was tremendous

1 smoke. We picked up the priest. We told him to pick up his belongings as

2 soon as possible. We run with him and as we are returning to our armoured

3 personnel carriers, I noticed a group of people around a soldier whom I

4 thought at the time was an Armija soldier who perhaps had fainted, and we

5 were then informed that it is one of our lot and referring to our

6 Lieutenant who was lagging somewhat behind from us.

7 We realised then and then that he had been wounded, terribly

8 wounded, because the shrapnel in fact -- he's riddled with shrapnel. We

9 picked him up and take him to the very hospital where we had delivered the

10 plasma before.

11 At that time, the very Armija doctors explained to us that the

12 person was seriously wounded and had to be evacuated to hospital. The

13 Lieutenant at that time could speak. We were all -- couldn't speak,

14 rather. We were all tremendously afraid. It was the first time that such

15 an incident in which one of ours had been wounded so seriously. It was

16 then that the commander coming with me stayed back with interpreter so the

17 interpreter could in fact do her job, and I together with a driver and one

18 armoured personnel vehicle, I leave the city in order to try and see

19 whether we could get the ambulance that we had come with through but had

20 been detained at the check-point. So when I -- sorry.

21 Q. Sorry -- back where were you detained -- deployed?

22 A. They were detained by the HVO that controlled that access to the

23 city of Mostar from Medjugorje. I had no interpreter by then, but the

24 Lieutenant's section interpreter was there. I in fact get them aboard the

25 ambulance together with medical, Spanish medical officer, and I tried to

1 access the city to pick up the lieutenant, the wounded lieutenant.

2 Tremendous tension erupted at the first check-point. I said quite

3 unequivocally that either they let me through, or I would run them over.

4 I was allowed through.

5 Q. Slower a little bit.

6 A. I'm sorry, I'm getting carried away because I'm in fact recalling

7 what the situation was like. I apologise.

8 Q. On what occasion did you see Mr. Praljak? Let's go straight to

9 the point.

10 A. We were arriving at that point where there was a first

11 check-point. We were in fact stopped but finally we just got through by

12 just putting the vehicle in front, and there was a second check-point some

13 100 metres down. Some 20 militiamen with anti-tank or anti-personnel

14 carrier weaponry waited for us. I don't understand what was going on, so

15 I said please could I have the person in charge here?

16 Q. Please, slow, please.

17 A. I apologise to the courtroom once again. So I request that some

18 representative of the authority come. I even showed the authorisation

19 from Minister Stojic, but nobody paid heed to my words. Remember that we

20 have two vehicles. We have an ambulance clearly marked as such, and it

21 was then that General Slobodan Praljak, whom I met three weeks before,

22 comes. I explain through the interpreter what the situation is, and he

23 solved the problem saying, "Let them through." And we went through, we

24 went through.

25 Q. Witness, just one question. In your statement, you just firmly

1 stressed that his presence -- I mean General Praljak -- demonstrated the

2 direct involvement of the Croat republic in the conflict. Why did you

3 draw that conclusion?

4 A. Well, remember, this report I drafted in Medjugorje four or five

5 days after the death of our Lieutenant in action, and I attach photos of

6 General Praljak that had appeared in the local press. I also informed my

7 own military authorities, I also let them know what my personal opinion

8 was; to wit, that if three weeks ago he was in HV uniform and today he is

9 the authority that allows a check-point to let us through, he is obviously

10 very easily identifiable. But it was up to that point my own personal

11 opinion.

12 During those days there were very many interrogation marks in the

13 world of military intelligence as to what type of support there may be

14 from the HV for HVO. To me, those dilemmas were dispelled in my mind the

15 moment I realised that it was General Praljak who solved the problem. And

16 I'll always be thankful to him that he solved this problem; on his

17 personal authority the militiamen allowed me to go through with the

18 ambulance. I stated this before the Judge.

19 Q. Thank you very much. And now I would like the witness to move to

20 Exhibit P02464. This is binder 2. Witness, could you identify this

21 document?

22 A. Yes. This is my own statement signed on the 20th of May with the

23 explanation of the narration of the events. It's an official document

24 which requests -- which is request by UNPROFOR from all the people

25 involved in an incident or event in which a member of UNPROFOR dies. I

1 had to sign it because of the Red Cross convoy incident, and I explained

2 who were part of the convoy and what events took place.

3 Q. Do you confirm your just information about General Praljak given

4 in this statement?

5 A. Yes. It's my statement, my signature, 20th of May, and I say

6 quite clearly that General Praljak appeared and following a brief

7 conversation with me, he officially gave orders for us to be let through.

8 Q. Thank you very much. Another question: Witness, did you ever

9 have information of Mr. Praljak being in command of any military operation

10 on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Herceg-Bosna?

11 A. You are referring to that particular moment? I have not quite

12 understood your question. Could you repeat it, please?

13 Q. Yes. My question was: Did you ever have any information of

14 Mr. Praljak, Slobodan Praljak, General Slobodan Praljak, being in command

15 of any particular military operation on the territory of Herceg-Bosna?

16 A. Yes, of course. From that moment onward, General Praljak was the

17 most visible person for SpaBat, and some important events such as the

18 check-point convoy stoppage in which he showed the power, having his

19 capacity, I don't know exactly what his mission was in all this. That I

20 don't know.

21 Q. And do you remember him being in command of operation, I asked

22 you, military operation?

23 A. Well, right now, I cannot recall. If you are referring to

24 specific action I remember that in certain reports from our unit, from the

25 Spanish unit, it was stated that on the orders of General Praljak, certain

1 actions took place. To me, he was at a given point the military

2 authority. I don't know what his exact relation or his position was in

3 the minister General Petkovic structure or line of command. I don't know

4 whether this is what you're getting at. Are you asking whether he was

5 involved in some infantry attack? I mean obviously, I don't know. I

6 don't know whether you're referring to an exhibit or --

7 Q. Yes. I would like to you take a look at Exhibit P02902. Binder

8 1.

9 A. Yes. I have it here in front of me, this document. INTREP 211,

10 22nd of June.

11 Q. What is it about?

12 A. It's a daily summary, talking about the area of Mostar, where it

13 describes actions taken and the Jablanica area. I understand that the

14 Prosecution is referring to the fact that in the Konjic, Jablanica

15 document, at point 1 it talks about Vosjovika [phoen] conflicts and HVO

16 troops were under the command of General Praljak. Obviously this is a

17 document stemming from the SpaBat, and if they wrote this down it's

18 because they had information. But my personal relations with General

19 Praljak did not enable me to identify his exact military role.

20 Q. Do you see that in this document, it's the second paragraph, they

21 say that in the area HVO troops of Jusuf Prazina and Mladen Naletilic,

22 known as Tuta?

23 A. Yes. I see the second part, the second affirmation in this

24 report, and the HVO troops of Jusuf, they entered -- Naletilic known as

25 Tuta and point 3 according to BiH sources they were troops transported.

1 There was a joint commission in which 25 soldiers were involved. Yes. I

2 remember this report. This was a report sent by our second section. I

3 confirm this document, of course.

4 Q. Thank you very much.

5 MR. PORYVAEV: Your Honour, I covered one additional question that

6 I wanted to ask this witness.

7 Q. Now let's move to Mr. Berislav Pusic. In paragraph 88 of your

8 statement --

9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute, please. This

10 question concerns Mr. Pusic. I have a follow-up question to put to the

11 witness. After the death of the Lieutenant, you told us that you made a

12 statement. This is Exhibit number 2419. I listened very carefully to

13 what you said. We also have the statement in Spanish, and it seems as if

14 a Spanish judge took the declaration in the presence of a secretary

15 because I believe there are three signatures on this document, your

16 signature, the signature of the secretary, and the signature of the judge.

17 Are you quite sure that we are talking about a judge?

18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when a Spanish company

19 of more than 500 men, and in our case, around 2.000 men, is always

20 accompanied by one legal adviser. This is a member of the military's

21 legal service, which is there in order to offer legal advice support, and

22 they offer -- they have national legal authority, because it is understood

23 that it is often very difficult to bring a judge from Spain to open a

24 case. In our case this was our legal adviser, I won't say the number -- I

25 won't say the name but the name is listed in the documents. And the legal

1 adviser was here in order -- maybe the legal adviser we have here in the

2 courtroom will be able to give us more information on that.

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Which means that the statement

4 which you made and gave to this legal adviser was to be part of an

5 investigation that was conducted by a military prosecutor or investigating

6 judge. I don't know who the person might have been.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. That person is part of

8 the Spanish company and is there to open a case if ever there is a fatal

9 casualty among the Spanish [indiscernible]. He performs legal functions.

10 He has all the weight of our legal structures, and he may undertake

11 functions as a prosecution, yes.

12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So an investigation was

13 conducted. What were the findings of this investigation, if you know?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, of course, I didn't

15 take part in the investigation; although, I was one person involved in the

16 occurrence. I supported, as best I could, those who were conducting the

17 investigation to identify photographs taken in Mostar, to offer assistance

18 where I could. When the investigation concluded, I did take the time to

19 read the entire file. It was the Lieutenant who escorted me, and one of

20 the most difficult areas of our mission is to explain to the widow or to

21 the surviving family members of the deceased how the person, their son,

22 their husband, was killed. I had to do that. I had to honour my duty as

23 a Spanish military staff member. I had to say how and where the death

24 occurred. I don't know if you would like to provide me more information

25 or whether that is -- would you like me to tell you where the fire came

1 from or --

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I will go to the heart of the

3 matter straight away. According to the investigation, which seemingly was

4 undertaken, who shot this Lieutenant?

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We always had some doubt initially

6 because what is sure is that -- if it were mortar fire or a grenade, then

7 it's very clear -- it's not clear where it would come from. Grenades and

8 mortar fire leaves a trace. It enables you to identify the area from

9 where it came. But if, even after a few days, even if there has been

10 rain, there will be rust to tell you where the grenade came from.

11 The grenade that we felt was the one that caused the impact has

12 been identified, and the Spanish person conducting the investigation

13 identified the angle of impact. We had no doubt that the impact was not

14 from the Serbian area because initially we wondered if the Serbs were

15 taking advantage of the confusion, but we ruled that out. It was not a

16 Serbian attack. The cone of access corresponding to this grenade, in

17 particular the grenade that killed lieutenant, was Mount Hum and this was

18 under the control of the HVO troops. I don't know if you would like more

19 information, but initially that's what I can say. That's where we

20 determined it was from.

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed.

22 MR. PORYVAEV: Thank you, Your Honour.

23 Q. Let's go back to Mr. Berislav Pusic. Did you know a person whose

24 name is Berislav Pusic?

25 A. Yes, indeed.

1 Q. In paragraph 88 and 89 of your statement, you just describe what

2 his position was and functions. Is it correct?

3 A. Yes. He was always identified to me as the person in charge of

4 the office for the exchange of displaced persons, prisoners, and bodies.

5 Q. Did you ever see him -- did you ever see him --

6 A. Yes, yes, of course, I had met with him.

7 Q. I would like you to take a look at Exhibit 04870. This is binder

8 3. English page 4, Spanish page 5. The meeting concerning the exchange

9 of prisoners. Have you found --

10 A. I think I'm getting there. You said 4870, page 5; is that right?

11 Q. Yes. Exactly.

12 A. I see under other information, item 3, yes.

13 Q. Yes.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Meeting concerning the exchange of prisoners. This is the last

16 passage in the whole of the document, last page.

17 A. Yes, I have it, I have it, I have it. Yes, it's under other

18 information, page 5, information concerning the exchange of prisoners

19 which was supposed to happen in Medjugorje, under SpaBat supervision and

20 HVO and BiH. Yes, the BiH authorities affirmed that they would not

21 deliver the prisoners until Mr. Pusic of the HVO had given his word by

22 telephone, et cetera, is that right? Yes, I identify this as a paragraph

23 of a report sent by SpaBat.

24 Q. Now let's move to your personal diary.

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Page 9, 8th August. Page 9 if I may suggest --

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Do you remember about this meeting?

4 A. Yes. Of course. Because firstly it was one of the first times

5 that I was allowed out of the area, and I took part as a member of

6 UNPROFOR in a meeting with Granic, and I -- and we had Mr. Pusic from HVO,

7 and there were international humanitarian agencies present as well.

8 Q. And in paragraph 90 of the statement, there is one allegation that

9 I would like you to explain the Judges.

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. "In my previous statement I mentioned on page 7 that Mr. Pusic was

12 a sort of mafiosi." Where did you get this information from?

13 A. Perhaps -- perhaps it's not really my place to say this to this

14 Trial Chamber, but what I was stating was that the comment that I heard

15 from two interpreters, apart from all of the Bosnians, Muslims, Serbs, and

16 Croats that I had under my command, they called him something along these

17 lines, like a mafia member, and that's why in my head I had this image or

18 this expression describing him, mafia man.

19 Q. Thank you very much. Now we can move to our new topic if you will

20 allow me?

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute. Before you move

22 on to another topic, just one small point of clarification, witness. A

23 while ago we saw a document in which it is mentioned that the exchange of

24 prisoners was supervised in Spanish under -- was supervised by, what does

25 it mean?

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it's not and never was

2 a responsibility of UNPROFOR forces to take part in any prisoner exchange.

3 This was a responsibility of the International Red Cross, as an

4 international organisation, our job as UNPROFOR was to support the Red

5 Cross, but not always could the International Red Cross Medjugorje and

6 Mostar, not always could they be available. So with the two parties in

7 conflict -- actually you had three groups in conflict, because at times

8 you could include Serbia, theoretically although it never occurred, and so

9 there was the expectation that the presence of UNPROFOR was going to make

10 sure that everything was done fairly.

11 As we, as UNPROFOR, never took part in the exchange of prisoners,

12 this was an issue that perhaps might have used the services of one of our

13 patrols to ensure the safety of the exchange in certain areas. We were

14 there to support. As has been reflected, there was one and there is --

15 this is also reflected in the documents. Our -- the headquarters in

16 Medjugorje commands or units sent from the Spanish Battalion were able to

17 provide support personnel.

18 Very often the agreements between the two sides were not actually

19 respected, and our role was only to ensure the safety with the

20 International Red Cross in theory being the international organisation to

21 ensure prisoner exchange. Our role was to support the Red Cross. We were

22 supposed to ensure that they didn't kill each other, but we never took

23 part directly in prisoner exchange.

24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] While you were talking, I was

25 reviewing the document which the Prosecutor showed you a while ago, number

1 4870. I was reading it in Spanish. I wasn't reading it in English. And

2 in Spanish, one really has the feeling that the meeting on the exchange of

3 prisoners, which was supposed to be held manana on the next day, in

4 Medjugorje, you wrote here, that this was to be supervised by SpaBat, and

5 supervision by SpaBat, this means something. That is what I'm concerned

6 about.

7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Under the supervision of the

8 SpaBat is talking about the meeting, not the exchange. This is the

9 meeting to do with the exchange. It's not actually the exchange itself.

10 Why? Because our general headquarters were there to supervise and to

11 ensure that no one killed anyone else, and it was about this meeting, not

12 about the exchange. Perhaps it's not been drafted in a way that reflects

13 that, but what I'm saying is to do with the meeting, and I can say that as

14 a head of the union. So SpaBat was there because both groups wanted

15 SpaBat to be there present so that there would be no cheating on the terms

16 of the agreement.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed.

18 MR. PORYVAEV: Your Honour, I'm about to move to our -- my new

19 topic, but maybe it makes sense to make a break now.

20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I think that we have

21 just about reached the two hour mark. Could you please check this? We

22 shall now have a 20-minute break, and we shall resume in 20 minutes' time.

23 --- Recess taken at 5.21 p.m.

24 --- On resuming at 5.41 p.m.

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Prosecution according to our

1 calculation has ten minutes and not a minute more.

2 MR. PORYVAEV: Ten minutes?

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, ten minutes.

4 MR. PORYVAEV: Shall I start? Okay.

5 Q. Witness, now we should cover the very important issue but very

6 fast. Forceful transferring of the population. I will address you to

7 your logbook. 16th of May. Attention -- have you found it?

8 A. Yes, yes, I found it.

9 Q. Protection of 54 Muslim refugees in [indiscernible] who were

10 expelled by police after their lorries had been stolen. Do you confirm

11 this entry in your logbook?

12 A. Yes. Yes. I was waiting for the end of the translation, yes, I

13 confirm that.

14 Q. 20 of June arrival of 104 refugees from Posusje. Do you confirm

15 this entry?

16 A. Yes, yes.

17 Q. 21st of June, contacts with Isabella, organisation to continue --

18 A. Yes, I also confirm that.

19 Q. Yes. And then 15th of August, this same document.

20 A. 15th of August?

21 Q. Yes. Contact with UNHCR to discover problem of or expulsion 150

22 Muslims from the area of Ljubuski?

23 A. Yes, that's right, yes.

24 Q. 24th of August, here, information?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. 800 Muslims, refugees, mainly women, children and elderly who had

2 been taken by the HVO to the Vrci zone in buses and forced to come forward

3 to Dreznica. Do you confirm this information?

4 A. Yes, yes.

5 Q. Yes. Then same exhibit, 8th of September, SpaBat negotiated in

6 the evacuation of 300 displaced persons who had been expelled from

7 Croatian area of Radjan [phoen], is it correct?

8 A. Yes, yes, correct.

9 Q. And now I would like you to take a look at Exhibit P04505, binder

10 3. This is page 6 English, page 3 Spanish, INTREP 274, 25th of August,

11 that's about 800 Muslims again to confirm this document --

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. -- information?

14 A. Yes, yes, document -- office document --

15 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers kindly slow down, please and

16 pause between question and answer? Thank you.

17 MR. PORYVAEV: Thank you very much.

18 Q. Exhibit P03587, binder 3. Yes, page 9 English. This is SpaBat

19 INTREP 238?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... "The UNHCR has informed of a

22 plan drawn up by the HVO whereby it intend to send out 10.000 Muslims to

23 Croatia. The idea was the Muslims to find temporary residence after

24 receiving transit visas with the help of the Croatian authorities. They

25 asked UNHCR for assistance. However, the UNHCR refused to participate in

1 the operation which would have amounted to ethnic cleansing because it did

2 not include the possibility of the return of people who were living

3 [indiscernible] for their property. Do you confirm this information?

4 A. Yes, I confirm it.

5 Q. Since a lot of time has run away, maybe, Your Honour, I will

6 conclude my examination-in-chief. Thank you very much for your attention

7 and patience.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Now, I'm turning to

9 the Defence, who is going to start? Ms. Alaburic?

10 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, witness --

11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Each witness will have half an

12 hour. Of course, you can share the time between you if you so wish.

13 Cross-examination by Ms. Alaburic:

14 Q. Your Honour, witness, good afternoon and good afternoon to

15 everyone in the courtroom.

16 Witness, I am the Defence counsel for General Milivoj Petkovic in

17 these proceedings, and you're just receiving the documents that I've

18 prepared for my cross-examination. I would like to explain to the Trial

19 Chamber that the orange binder contains the documents that are already

20 exhibits.

21 Witness, in your statements, and in the documents that were

22 attached to the statement, you talked to us about the 9th of May 1993 and

23 the conflicts that started at the time so I'm not going to deal with that

24 at present, but I am going to deal with the attempts made to stop the

25 conflict.

1 So I'd like to start off by asking you to look at my set of

2 documents and particularly documents 4D 00456 and 4D 00457. They are

3 statements by Mr. Mate Boban and Alija Izetbegovic dated the 10th of May

4 1993, in which they each to their own army issue orders for a cease-fire

5 and authorise the commanders of the armies, Sefer Halilovic and for the

6 HVO Milivoj Petkovic, to meet and try to reach an agreement for a peaceful

7 settlement of the conflict between the two armies and two authorities.

8 Tell me, please, were you aware of these orders? Did you know about them

9 on the 10th of May 1993?

10 A. This is the first time I've seen this document.

11 Q. Yes, I believe you when you say that. But did you know that the

12 presidents, Izetbegovic and Boban, issued orders of that kind or those

13 orders?

14 A. I didn't know. Perhaps I wasn't high enough ranked to know of

15 this.

16 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now, let us take a look at the following

17 document: P02344, which is an agreement between Halilovic and Petkovic

18 dated the 12th of May 1993, and it is a document which you mention, and

19 which was dealt with by your organisation. Are you familiar with the

20 agreement? If so, we can discuss it.

21 And to start off, in view of your statement on the deployment of a

22 unit of SpaBat in Mostar, and my client intervened, General Petkovic, on

23 that issue, I'd like to ask you the following: Have you ever heard or,

24 rather, did you ever hear of a Spanish Battalion unit which was in Mostar

25 otherwise, on the 9th of May, in the morning, when the attack that we are

1 going to discuss happened, was not in Mostar? Did you ever hear of that?

2 A. The information concerning the 9th of May were very confusing.

3 Our patrol and our units in Mostar were told to leave. Obviously, we left

4 some kind of informer or some kind of -- so that we could get some kind of

5 information concerning the occurrences there, but on the 9th of May we did

6 not have a unit in Mostar.

7 Q. I'm interested in the unit you just mentioned as having been in

8 Mostar. Might it have been a unit which was deployed in Mostar since the

9 20th of April 1993, on the basis of another agreement that was reached in

10 Mostar at the time, which we won't be discussing now?

11 A. In Mostar, at that time, given our deployment in Mostar, we did

12 not have a unit at that particular time in Mostar. There was a unit

13 previously which was there to protect the convoys passing through. Those

14 convoys were not able to go through on the 9th of May, and we had to leave

15 the area under fire. I do not know which unit you are referring to.

16 Q. Very well, Witness. We're not going to deal with that now. We'll

17 be going into those facts with other witnesses. But take a look at

18 Article 2 of this particular agreement between Halilovic and Petkovic on

19 the 12th of May 1993. And in that Article 2, they have agreed that a

20 company of the Spanish Battalion will be deployed and accommodated in

21 Mostar at the airport until more suitable accommodation can be found, and

22 then they say that the deployment will be on both sides and will begin

23 on -- at 1800 hours on the 12th of May 1993.

24 So was that the deployment of the company you mentioned on the

25 basis of this agreement? Can you confirm that?

1 A. This was the objective, but it wasn't actually carried out within

2 the time frame that was envisaged. There was a deployment in the airport.

3 Q. Tell us, please, in the night between the 12th and 13th, a SpaBat

4 unit did enter the Mostar area; that's right, isn't it?

5 A. Just one moment. I wasn't in -- I didn't have the logbook here

6 with me. If I remember right, at the end of the day of the 12th, maybe,

7 but I'm not sure -- yes, yes, given the information I have it was on the

8 12th itself that there was a deployment of our patrols towards the

9 confrontation line. Yes. And they had contact with the HVO to make sure

10 that -- because it was the HVO who had all the check-points concerning the

11 entry and exit of the city.

12 Q. Let's move on to the next article, Witness. I know about the

13 situation in Mostar and it will become even clearer to us during the rest

14 of today and tomorrow, but take a look at the last two sentences in

15 Article 3. This is what it says in that part of the article. In the area

16 of Kostajnica and Konjic, HVO units will be deployed in a few villages in

17 the area marked on the attached map. The BH army will withdraw out of

18 this area to their own villages.

19 Now, I'd like you to explain to us what was going on in the area

20 of Kostajnica and Konjic that was so important for it to be recorded in

21 this agreement and to be treated in exactly the same way as Mostar and the

22 events in Mostar?

23 A. I repeat that in my area of responsibility, for our task force, I

24 didn't have in detail knowledge of the comments, but I do know that in

25 Kostajnica these are two enclaves, Kostajnica and the Konjic pocket, they

1 were controlled by the HVO, who slightly expanded its area of influence.

2 I recognise this document because at our level we didn't have detailed

3 documentation as to the agreement between these two generals. I don't

4 know much more about this, but I remember that the Konjic enclave was of

5 great concern to the Spanish Battalion, and I remember that the importance

6 of this supply route towards this area.

7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mrs. Alaburic, just a small

8 question I would like to ask you. We've seen this document 20 or 30 times

9 over. I notice that in Article 3, a map is mentioned. I don't know

10 whether we've seen this map already. Do you have any idea about this?

11 Because it seems that Kostajnica and Konjic are mentioned on this map.

12 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] An attached map was -- is mentioned

13 but the map wasn't attached to this Prosecution document, but I think that

14 my client, General Petkovic, would like to say something in connection

15 with this, so perhaps we should hear what he has to say first.

16 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, once again a

17 technical matter. The witness must know about the document.

18 Witness, on the 12th of May, were you in Medjugorje when there was

19 a meeting between Petkovic and Malvic and General Morillon and

20 Mr. Thebault?

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course, I was present, General,

22 but the document, as a head of section, was never shown to me. This is a

23 document which remained at the level of the people who signed it and with

24 the authority that had it drafted. I never had a copy of the reports. I

25 confirm that this is the first time I have seen this document. I don't

1 know if I have answered your question.

2 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.

3 Let's move slowly through this. The agreement signed by UNPROFOR, the

4 UNPROFOR commander, and you were his subordinate, says that a company of

5 the battalion will be deployed in Mostar. Is that what it says in Article

6 2? A company of yours? And actually you confirmed to my counsel that

7 that is correct, right?

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes. This is the text, and in

9 this text it says that there will be a company deployed on the 12th, and I

10 remember that at the end of the 12th of May, there was a Spanish company,

11 but I repeat this is the first time I've seen this text.

12 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your unit in Jablanica was

13 a component part of your battalion; is that right?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was part of a task force. I

15 wasn't part of -- I was a member of the staff. The staff of the task

16 force and my responsibility had nothing to do with the deployment of the

17 unit in question but, rather, with the UNPROFOR mission dealing with --

18 with humanitarian aid and working between the warring parties. The

19 deployment of a SpaBat unit, I did know about, but obviously there were

20 many other elements of the staff involved. I wasn't focused on those

21 issues. It was not my responsibility.

22 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Then you don't know that

23 your company from Jablanica was given the assignment of patrolling the

24 Jablanica-Tarcin stretch, Jablanica-Kostajnica as well, that area, and

25 between Ostoza [phoen], Trusina, Seonica and Vrci.

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. No. I didn't actually say that

2 I didn't know about that. Obviously our unit in Jablanica had

3 responsibilities ensuring the coverage of roads leading to and from

4 Jablanica and one of the areas involved was the Konjic pocket, but my

5 responsibility was not -- was not such that I knew which unit was deployed

6 where, whether -- where the lines were, et cetera. That wasn't my

7 responsibility.

8 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Then I don't know what your

9 duty was, what your task was. You were a high UNPROFOR official as far as

10 I'm concerned located in Medjugorje, and you attended all the meetings.

11 Furthermore your command received this document because it was signed by

12 your commander, General Morillon. It must have received it because were

13 you duty-bound to enter Mostar and to patrol Konjic and Jablanica. Is

14 that right?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Obviously, between the commander,

16 who was writing, and General Morillon, there was other units, and I can't

17 name them all. In the documents, since UNPROFOR had the order to enter

18 into Mostar, I remember -- I remind you, this order did not reach me as a

19 commander of the task force.

20 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] I'd like you to look at the

21 signatory of this document finally, read the names.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. It seems to me that first I

23 can see an error here. (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Witness, I'd like to remind

10 you of paragraph 44 of your statement where you say on the 12th of May,

11 the Spanish Battalion debated how to deploy a company which would control

12 Mostar from Dracevo in the area around the conflict. That's what you say

13 in your statement. So you know what your battalion was doing. So I'm

14 surprised that such a high-ranking officer doesn't know about the

15 implementation of a document like this.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The actions of the task force are

17 under orders from the operational sections. We do not get involved in

18 civic or military issues. Obviously the battalion did as ordered, and it

19 was told to go to Mostar. But I'm not the person who gives the order to

20 the battalion. Nor am I the person who receives the agreements such as

21 the one you're talking about. From General Morillon to myself there is a

22 whole chain of command involving more than ten people.

23 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Just one more question

24 about the Spanish Battalion. On the 20th of April when General Pellnas

25 asked for your forces in Mostar, did your government agree that those

1 forces should be in Mostar?

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The deployment in April was done to

3 patrol the city of Mostar, and the Spanish government obviously authorised

4 this mission. This mission was not conducted at UNPROFOR's initiative.

5 We must remember that UNPROFOR, as its name suggests, is a protective

6 force of the United Nations.

7 This order turned UNPROFOR into a buffer zone between two warring

8 factions. Officially, they were supposedly allied against a third

9 element. The Spanish government naturally authorised our extended mission

10 or the extension of our mission, or otherwise we would not have had units

11 in Mostar trying to separate these formerly allied groups. That's clear.

12 THE ACCUSED PETKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I'll now let my

13 Defence counsel carry on.

14 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]

15 Q. Witness, I have a question to ask you with respect to Jablanica

16 and Kostajnica. In one of the documents prepared by the Prosecution for

17 your testimony, and that is P02461, you needn't look for it because it

18 doesn't matter, you needn't look at it now, but if Their Honours would

19 like to have a look, then on page 13 of the English text is where they can

20 find it, anyway, the Spanish Battalion recorded that it still does not

21 have access to Kostajnica and then goes on to stay that the Muslim

22 offensive in the area of Jablanica is being continued in the area of

23 Kostajnica and Klis.

24 Now, tell me, please, do you have any knowledge at all about the

25 Muslim offensive in the area of Kostajnica in mid-May 1993?

1 A. The Spanish task force and UNPROFOR knew of all of the information

2 that was provided to us, no more, no less, and they were being informed.

3 You are reading a page from a SITREP, if I'm not mistaken. I hope you

4 will correct me if I'm wrong, but if you're reading from the SITREP, the

5 information that came which it did not come from me, but I knew of this

6 information, I as a member of staff, read the internal staff

7 documentation. But this does not mean that I had to know all details of

8 what was going on in Konjic or Kostajnica. Remember, I knew what was

9 going on Kostajnica. I knew there was a problem when I heard of the four

10 interpreters that were held there.

11 Q. I'm not asking you about the details. What we're interested in is

12 whether you knew at the time about the Muslim offensive which is mentioned

13 in this report. I don't want to ask you the details of it, but from your

14 answer I can conclude that did you know about it, but you didn't know

15 about the details of the offensive. So can you just give me a short

16 answer, just say yes or no, am I right or not?

17 A. Could you please ask me a question that enables me to answer yes

18 or no? You want to know yes or no that I was aware of what, exactly?

19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic.

20 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]

21 Q. Did you know --

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'm listening very carefully to

23 what you say. You're mentioning a Muslim offensive. Where is it

24 mentioned in document 2461? Which is the sentence stating this?

25 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] On page 13 of the English text,

1 Your Honours. I can't find it now, but I'll do my best to find it

2 together with you. Here it is. Page 13, I've found the text. And this

3 is what it says, Muslim offensive in the Jablanica region [In English]

4 continues to the HVO pockets in the area of Kostajnica, Klis,

5 [Interpretation] Et cetera. So that is the penultimate paragraph on page

6 13 of the English text, and my question referred to that report by SpaBat.

7 Q. And the question refers to the obligation taken upon -- that the

8 Spanish Battalion took upon itself to go into Kostajnica in order to

9 protect the Croatian population and that that obligation was not

10 fulfilled. So that is interesting for us in the context of the problem of

11 the implementation of this agreement. So that is the essence of my

12 questions. I've spent quite a lot of time on this. It wasn't my

13 intention to do so, and I hope that the Trial Chamber will give us a

14 little more time to continue discussing the topics we planned to discuss.

15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You can't have more time.

16 Please continue with your questions, with your main questions.

17 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. Tell us, Witness, do you know that after that 12th of May,

19 Generals Petkovic and Halilovic met on the 13th of May also at the Spanish

20 Battalion headquarters and on the 14th of May in the same place along with

21 the presence of the representatives of international humanitarian

22 organisations and UN observers, and then the following day, on the 15th of

23 May, in the same location, this was a meeting which began late at night

24 and finished in the early hours of the following morning, and on the 18th

25 of May, as well, in Medjugorje, when the meeting between Tudjman,

1 Izetbegovic, and Boban took place and then on the 19th of May as well,

2 also in Medjugorje in the presence of Mr. Morillon and Mr. Prado and on

3 the 20th of May a new meeting, once again with the Spanish Battalion, and

4 then on the 21st of May in Kostajnica, et cetera?

5 Now, do you know that in May, Generals Halilovic and Petkovic

6 spent this much time during that month together trying to find a peaceful

7 solution to the conflict between the HVO and the BH army?

8 A. Of course we knew that they were meeting. Every time they met, in

9 our headquarters, and it was my responsibility to follow. We knew where

10 they had the rooms, where they had telephones they might need to use.

11 Body guards, et cetera. It was part of our mission. So yes, we knew. Of

12 course I met -- Generals Petkovic and Halilovic talking together. And

13 sometimes they were talking very heatedly between themselves.

14 And I don't know, obviously, what they were talking about between

15 them, but I can confirm the dates. Some of these dates at least that you

16 have mentioned in Medjugorje. I knew of those ones because I was there at

17 that time. That is correct.

18 Q. Yes. All the dates I mentioned are only based on Spanish

19 Battalion reports.

20 Now I would like to talk about the Heliodrom. You told us,

21 Witness, that there were three visits paid by international organisations

22 to the Heliodrom and that you were at the Heliodrom on the 20th of May.

23 That is to say, on that third visit. Is that right? Did I properly

24 convey your own words?

25 A. Yes, that's correct.

1 Q. On that day, the 20th of May, in the logbook of your unit, what is

2 noted is that General Prado personally visited the refugee camp at the

3 Heliodrom in order to see for himself that prisoners were being released.

4 Tell me, this had to do with Mr. Prado's visit to Heliodrom -- to the

5 Heliodrom and you were in attendance, right?

6 A. It reflects the visit of General Prado's visit, who was the head

7 of the Spanish contingent, to oversee the release of those detained.

8 Personally I was there because I was interested in seeing what it was like

9 because I was very interested in seeing for myself, and we had our

10 discussions with him and with interpreters to -- and I think all of that

11 is reflected in the report.

12 Q. Witness, could you kindly give shorter answers because I have very

13 little time available. So can we agree that General Prado went to

14 Heliodrom in order to oversee the release of prisoners? Right?

15 A. Some of the prisoners had already been released. He went to check

16 that that had been done because I had never been in the Heliodrom.

17 Q. Please have a look at document 4D 00614. In my set of documents,

18 it is underneath the binder, witness, just look at them, on the desk that

19 is in front of you, underneath the binder. This is a document of the

20 Security Services Centre of the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic

21 of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the signatory is Mr. Ramo Maslesa. The date is the

22 29th of May 1993. In the first sentence, it says, "On the 19th of May,

23 all detained civilians were released from the Heliodrom prison."

24 Witness, can you confirm for us whether this is correct, what I

25 just read out to you?

1 A. This is the first time I've seen this document. I think it goes

2 from the Ministry of the Interior to the International Red Cross. You're

3 talking about this paper here?

4 Q. Witness, now I'm not asking you about who sent this document to

5 who. I'm asking you whether, according to your information, the first

6 sentence is correct, namely that on the 19th of May, 1993, all detained

7 civilians were released from the Heliodrom prison. Does that correspond

8 to your own knowledge?

9 A. When I was there in the Heliodrom, on the 20th, accompanying

10 General Prado, there were some people, men and women, there in the region,

11 and they -- we were told that these were joint prisoners and they -- there

12 were some cases pending still. The Red Cross was there with us. I'm not

13 saying that on the 20th no one was there. There were people there in the

14 Heliodrom. We saw them. And General Prado had the chance to talk to

15 them.

16 Q. Witness, do you make a distinction between civilians who were

17 detained at the Heliodrom and persons who may have been members of the

18 army of Bosnia-Herzegovina or had some other kind of detainee status?

19 Just very briefly, do you make a distinction or not?

20 A. Of course, I can't certify the difference, but I'm saying that a

21 person who is 60 years old is more likely to be a civilian and a person of

22 military age is more likely to be a soldier. They were dressed in mufti,

23 in just civilian clothes, so I couldn't distinguish. We were shown how

24 there were -- they were introduced to us as shared prisoners or joint

25 prisoners.

1 Q. Witness, in view of the fact that we have the documents of the

2 Spanish Battalion on the release of civilians and --

3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I'm sorry, excuse me, an observation on the

4 transcript. On line 25, we read that they were introduced to us as shared

5 prisoners or joint prisoners. But the prisoners said [Spanish spoken]

6 which means common, normal, and I think it refers to detention on remand

7 but that is a question I could call -- ask.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree with you. I hadn't read the

9 translation, and I thank you for that, yes.

10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, how much time

11 does Ms. Alaburic still have?

12 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour in view of the fact

13 that tomorrow we are going to be working extended hours, and as far as I

14 know we only have this witness envisaged, I suggest that you grant the

15 Defence more time to hear this witness because indeed if we are dealing

16 with a witness statement consisting of 250 paragraphs, half an hour is

17 really nothing.

18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We do have another witness who

19 is scheduled. We have two witnesses. So today and tomorrow we'll have

20 this one and then comes another one the day after tomorrow. This is the

21 reason why I have to be very strict as to the time you use. You have used

22 so far 24 minutes. You still have another six minutes.

23 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] But, Your Honour, as far as I know

24 we are going to be working four days this week and --

25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. He's not the only one. We

1 have another witness.

2 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, four days, two witnesses.

3 This is the first day of our week, and that means that tomorrow we can be

4 dealing with this witness only. I really do not see why the Defence's

5 cross-examination is being so constrained and perhaps yet again we are

6 going to have a situation where the Prosecutor is going to have more time

7 for his redirect than we will have for our cross-examination. I would

8 like to ask for additional time. As far as I can see things, I haven't

9 even started cross-examining this witness.

10 [Trial Chamber confers]

11 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation]

12 Q. Witness, in conclusion, I would just like to refer to all the

13 topics on which I did not manage to cross-examine this witness and then

14 I'll use the rest of my time as best I can. Witness, on the 11th of June

15 1993 -- well, the Prosecutor showed you this today. In your personal

16 diary you refer to something about detentions of a large number of

17 Muslims, and also you say that you expressed your concern about that to

18 officials of the HVO. Could you please tell us briefly, concisely, and

19 clearly, what kind of detentions were you referring to in June 1993 in

20 this part of your diary?

21 A. There was information, information was received, about the fact

22 that there was a large number of Muslims. We didn't know where they were

23 from at that time, but we knew that they were being held in the Heliodrom

24 area. A colonel told me to express the international -- the UNPROFOR's

25 international concern on this issue.

1 Q. Witness, can you please tell us in which document of the Spanish

2 Battalion from June 1993 such a detention of Muslims in the Heliodrom is

3 recorded? Can you tell us where this is exactly, in what report? If not,

4 let's move on.

5 A. The information about this mass detention in the Heliodrom, if you

6 want to know -- does the Defence counsel wish to know about that? I don't

7 question the orders I receive. When I received orders from the colonel to

8 go to the HVO authorities and with the information that SpaBat had

9 received to say that this was not acceptable, the international community

10 was not going to accept this mass detention, I don't know where this

11 document is.

12 Q. Witness, please, please, I am asking you about a document. If

13 you're not aware of a document where such a mass arrival of Muslims in the

14 Heliodrom was recorded, then let's move on. Obviously you cannot either

15 remember now or you do not even know that such a document exists, right?

16 A. I don't know -- I don't know -- I have some feedback problems. I

17 don't know which document you are referring to. I can confirm, however,

18 that I attended a meeting for the head of the task force and every time --

19 Q. Witness, could you please listen to me? If you do not know about

20 a document that contains a report on something like that, say that you

21 don't know about it, that you received orders to convey such an objection,

22 as a good soldier that you did that, but that you have no idea what the

23 substance of this kind of objection was. I am satisfied with that kind of

24 answer. Is that what actually happened?

25 A. Of course, I don't know about the existence of a document. What I

1 do know is that when there is an entry in the diary it's because there was

2 some action carried out under orders.

3 Q. All right. That's your personal diary. Let's move on. I'm

4 interested in humanitarian aid to Mostar. Tell me, please, is it correct

5 that until the end of June 1993, there were no problems in terms of

6 delivering humanitarian aid either to the east or west part of Mostar?

7 A. Until the end of June? Absolutely not. This is not --

8 Q. Thank you.

9 A. I would like to -- I would like to remind you that in my diary on

10 the 9th of June, I headed a meeting in Medjugorje with the humanitarian

11 aid organisations in which we expounded numerous problems. The civilian

12 problems in Jamahala [phoen] neighbourhood were -- there were serious

13 problems with the organised force supplying -- we were not provided with

14 the assistance required. On the 9th of June, there was no humanitarian

15 aid in Mostar. You're talking about the end of June.

16 Q. Witness, I'm going to tell you exactly what it was that I referred

17 to now. I referred to part of your operations logbook on the 26th of

18 June. That's the date, the 26th of June, where it says that the Spanish

19 Battalion negotiated with the UNHCR about a convoy of humanitarian aid.

20 Also I would like to refer you to document P3371 that we saw a few minutes

21 ago, where it says that on the 10th of July, the Spanish Battalion was

22 waiting for UNHCR convoy at one of the locations within their area of

23 responsibility. That was my question related to humanitarian aid that was

24 delivered without any problems whatsoever until the end of June 1993 in

25 the entire area of Mostar regardless of what bank of the Neretva River one

1 took into consideration.

2 Can you agree with that? Just say yes or no, please, just say yes

3 or a no?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Very well. Now I'm going to read out to you what a witness from

6 the UNHCR said when giving evidence in this courtroom. For the Trial

7 Chamber and for the transcript, the transcript reference is 17219, 17285,

8 and the witness before her on page 7239. Witness, please look at me.

9 You're not going to find this anywhere in your papers.

10 The representatives of the UNHCR said the following: That the

11 UNHCR regularly provided aid to East and West Mostar up until the attack

12 of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina at HVO barracks on the 29th or the 30th

13 of June. Tell me, these lady witnesses from the UNHCR, were they telling

14 the truth or not?

15 A. I'd like to know which UNHCR people were in Mostar at the time.

16 Q. Do you know, Witness, that the first convoy that did not arrive in

17 Mostar was from the second half of July 1993? Just say whether you know

18 or you do not know? You're not going to find anything in your papers.

19 You're not going to find all answers to the questions put to you in your

20 diaries. Witness --

21 A. Could tell me the date again, please? The date? Could you repeat

22 the date? Up to when, do you say?

23 Q. Witness, but I don't have time for you to read your diaries now

24 and to go through all of these dates. Just tell me to the best of your

25 recollection, do you remember that the first convoy that set out to Mostar

1 that was supposed to go to Mostar and that did not arrive in Mostar was a

2 convoy from the second half of July 1993? Just tell me whether you

3 remember or not. Or do you remember that that was not the case, that it

4 was different?

5 A. No. I was trying to be accurate. No, I do not remember.

6 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Could the interpreters please leave the switch or

7 change the switch when the witness speaks.

8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mrs. Alaburic, you have no time

9 left. If we have more time tomorrow, you can have the floor again, but we

10 need to keep up the pace. Otherwise we will overstep the allotted time.

11 So you can continue tomorrow if we have some extra time and you can ask

12 those questions which you were unable to put today, but now we have to

13 move on to the next Defence counsel.

14 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask if I could give

15 an explanation. Do we only have this witness all day tomorrow? Then I

16 will know how much time I could --

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We only have this witness

18 tomorrow. That's correct.

19 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Can we know what time has been

20 given to the Prosecution for redirect? Since the entire Defence has three

21 hours?

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I don't know. This will depend

23 on your questions largely. I don't know. So we will see that tomorrow.

24 Next Defence counsel.

25 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have no

1 questions for this witness, thank you.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Ibrisimovic. You have

3 the floor.

4 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President,

5 actually we have just a few questions for the witness here today.

6 Cross-examination by Mr. Ibrisimovic:

7 Q. Could you please look at your statement again, the one that you

8 looked at a few moments ago? I'm referring to paragraphs 88, 89 and 90.

9 Mr. Pusic is referred to there. Have you found the paragraphs? You

10 have, haven't you?

11 A. Yes, yes.

12 Q. In this statement, I see that you stated that you never saw

13 Mr. Pusic in military uniform.

14 A. Yes, that's right. I don't think I ever saw that.

15 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: I don't think I ever

16 saw him.

17 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. And that you contacted him in relation to prisoner exchanges,

19 right?

20 A. With Berislav Pusic, do you mean, or when we are dealing with

21 people who worked with, yes, we were in contact with him, yes, of course.

22 Q. You said today that the exchange of prisoners was not part of your

23 mandate, that you were there to provide services or assistance to the

24 International Red Cross, right?

25 A. Yes. UNPROFOR protected the Red Cross when there was an exchange

1 of prisoners.

2 Q. I looked at your statement from November and December 1997, so I

3 would like to quote from page 10 in the English version. You said then,

4 "Pusic did not have the last say. He only acted in the field." No, it's

5 not that statement. It's the witness from 1997. And you repeated

6 something along those lines in paragraph 89 in your current statement.

7 A. M'hm. Yes. Yes, that is correct. In paragraph 89, in my

8 opinion, it seemed that he always had to consult someone else. Obviously,

9 for me, well, that's my interpretation. It could be a strategy to gain

10 time, of course, but it seemed to me that he always acted as though he had

11 to ask someone else first. He never took quick decisions saying, right,

12 okay, this afternoon it will be done. No, there were always delays.

13 Q. Can we please have a look at this document? I think you've

14 actually seen it already with the Prosecutor. It's document P04870. I

15 think there is something that remained unclear in the transcript. For the

16 transcript, in English, it is page 8 and in Spanish it's page 5.

17 Miscellaneous.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. It says here that the BH commission, the one that probably dealt

20 with exchanges, confirmed that they would not go to the location concerned

21 until a list is received on the basis of which one could act. Is that

22 right? Through Mr. Pusic?

23 A. Yes, that is exactly what is reflected.

24 Q. And then it says Mr. Pusic sent them a list with which they agreed

25 by telephone, right?

1 A. No. What it says in the document is that one side, BiH, said that

2 until it received the document that Mr. Pusic had promised them, they

3 would not go to Jablanica. That's what it says. I hope that the English

4 version says the same thing. This means that UNPROFOR did not have access

5 to those lists. These were lists exchanged between the two sides. On one

6 side had to go to Jablanica, but they said they would not go until

7 Mr. Pusic had handed in the list, and this is reflected in miscellaneous.

8 Q. But then, it says here, Mr. Pusic sent them a list of detainees

9 with which they agreed over the telephone.

10 A. It says that the two sides had reached an agreement by telephone

11 to exchange two lists, and that the list from HVO was never reached the

12 Armija side, and therefore the Armija used that as an argument for not

13 going to the meeting.

14 Q. Very well. Let's go back to one matter relating to your

15 interpreter. You made a correction to the statement that when you

16 mentioned Mr. Pusic earlier on in the context of some mafia, that you

17 heard the interpreters speaking. That's what you said.

18 A. That is correct.

19 Q. And I understood it that that was not your interpretation or your

20 opinion?

21 A. What I wrote in my report, in my statement, was the feeling

22 expressed by my interpreters. I think it's quite rough, calling someone a

23 mafia member. I don't think it's my place to say that, and I would like

24 to make that clear before this Trial Chamber.

25 Q. Thank you. I have no further questions, witness.

1 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, you had interpreters

3 from both sides, from the Croatian side and the Muslim side, did you? And

4 both interpreters were saying that or was it one pitched against the

5 other?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Spanish army, when

7 it has interpreters, it always has interpreters from the three sides,

8 Serbs, Croatians and Bosnians. And when we go to certain meetings, we had

9 two nationalities always so that we could also always check any clash in

10 interpretation. This was the general feeling that my interpreters had and

11 that's why I used the expression in question. I'm not saying that they

12 were necessarily Muslim interpreters who had that feeling.

13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But after that, was this

14 confirmed, the fact that Mr. Pusic was a mafiosi or was this not confirmed

15 in any way?

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was surprising for me, Your

17 Honour, that when we tried to do something, we always found a lot of delay

18 in terms of his actions. I interpreted that that he had to check the

19 procedures or perhaps with other authorities. My interpreters weren't

20 giving a clear -- weren't that generous.

21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] As we have a few minutes left

22 and there is no point in giving the floor to any Defence counsel, this can

23 be done tomorrow, I would just like to ask you a question which is related

24 to a question that was asked a while ago. But perhaps Mr. Ibrisimovic

25 would like to add something. Would you like to ask a question?

1 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] [Microphone not activated] No,

2 Mr. President, I didn't wish to ask anything after your questions. I just

3 want to say that the time left for me I cede to Mr. Praljak.

4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

5 (redacted), could you please look at document 2108, which is a SpaBat

6 diary on the 20th of May? Could you look at the Spanish version, please?

7 This addresses the visit of Mr. Prado to the Heliodrom. Mrs. Alaburic had

8 put you the question, and I wanted to ask you this question: When I read

9 what you wrote down here in Spanish, you mentioned this, General Prado

10 personally visited the refugee camps. He doesn't talk about prisoners.

11 He talks about refugee camps at the Heliodrom, to obtain the release of

12 all the people present there.

13 Why was this camp coined refugee camp?

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Reading this, this was written

15 in the evening of 20th of May, as was usually the case for the official

16 diaries of the battalion, and maybe that's rather a pity. It's talking

17 about the Heliodrom and what you said, you mentioned the specific mission

18 which was Prado's visit to the Heliodrom to ensure the release of

19 prisoners in accordance with the agreements. But for us, it was not a

20 refugee camp. It was a prisoner camp. You are exactly right in pointing

21 that out.

22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. In this document,

23 which is dated, was -- is it generally speaking a duty officer who writes

24 all this down according to the telephone calls or to the information he

25 has, writes everything down and all the information that reaches him in

1 real time? Is that how it happens.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right. It is written

3 when the mission is over, someone comes back from the mission and writes

4 down a very brief summary of what had happened on that mission, and then

5 there were other documents afterwards.

6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And when you draft your report,

7 this is document 10269, did you draft this report on the basis of this

8 document, 2108, or is it that everything you talk about comes from another

9 source?

10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in my personal summary,

11 I wrote down things that I thought were most important and relevant.

12 Those items weren't always reflected in the logbook. In the logbook there

13 are many more elements than in my personal diary because they reflect the

14 activities of an official nature in our section.

15 In this respect, perhaps I should clarify that initially we didn't

16 have this -- the fifth section logbook, and so I thought it was very

17 important to have this small summary because the documents of this

18 section, the written documents which are sometimes very long and lengthy

19 to work through, so I thought it would be useful to write down when, with

20 whom, and how we had meetings. But in reality, this is part of the task

21 force's history and this is reflected in many other documents, as you

22 already mentioned.

23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you for this

24 clarification.

25 We shall adjourn now. It is very nearly 7.00.

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted). Witness, as I

4 have told you, you must not discuss any of this with anyone. We shall

5 reconvene tomorrow at 2.15, and if I count the time that's left, there is

6 still Mr. Prlic, Mr. Praljak, and Mr. Stojic who is going to be asking

7 questions. Mrs. Alaburic might take the floor again if we have some time

8 left. Hopefully we will.

9 So much by way of a conclusion. And I'm just waiting for the

10 registrar to give me this order.

11 Mrs. Nozica?

12 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do apologise for

13 taking the floor after you, but I'm not quite clear whether we are here in

14 the courtroom at 2.15 tomorrow or 9.00 tomorrow morning because we were

15 informed that we would be starting at 9.00, so I'd like us to have that

16 cleared up.

17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. I thought we were perhaps

18 sitting in the afternoon but if the courtroom is free, then we will start

19 at 9.00. The legal officer has just told me that we are starting at 9.00.

20 We shall therefore be sitting from 9.00 to 12.30 --

21 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, but we work until 5.00

22 in the afternoon tomorrow, and the day after with a lunch break of about

23 two hours between 12.30 and 2.30.

24 [Trial Chamber confers]

25 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Let me repeat. I wasn't properly

1 interpreted. From 9 in the morning until 5 in the afternoon with a lunch

2 break of two hours.

3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Very well, that's quite

4 right.

5 Witness, you will therefore come back at 9.00 tomorrow morning and

6 not at 4.15 [sic] As I had said because everybody would be waiting for you

7 which would be a real disaster. So please come back tomorrow morning at

8 9.00 and we will be able to sit in this courtroom again tomorrow morning.

9 So see you at 9.00 tomorrow morning.

10 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.56 p.m.,

11 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 2nd day of

12 October, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25