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
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
1 Fine. Let's move to closed session.
2 [Closed session]
11 Pages 22857-22868 redacted. Closed session
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.
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
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
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,
8 A. Yes. This is correct. That was an unnecessary redundancy in the
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,
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:
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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]
11 Pages 22897-22900 redacted. Private session
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
14 A. I didn't know. Perhaps I wasn't high enough ranked to know of
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
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)
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
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
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
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,
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.
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
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
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
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
25 We shall adjourn now. It is very nearly 7.00.
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
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.