1 Wednesday, 10 October 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, kindly call the case,
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning,
9 everyone in the court. This is case number IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor
10 versus Prlic et al.
11 Thank you, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Registrar.
13 Today we are Wednesday. I'd like to greet Mr. Scott, Defence
14 counsel, the accused, as well as all the people present in the courtroom.
15 We shall resume the cross-examination of the witness.
16 Prior to that, I will give the floor to the registrar who has a
17 few IC numbers to give us.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 The OTP has submitted its response to Exhibits tendered by accused
20 Praljak for Witness DW. This list submitted by OTP shall be given Exhibit
21 number IC 689.
22 Thank you, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. As far as time
24 allocation is concerned, for Defence counsel, Mr. Prlic has an hour with
25 an additional 30 minutes which was given to him by Mr. Pusic, which
1 amounts to 1 hour and 30 minutes. So far 47 minutes have already been
2 taken up, unless somebody has given him more time. But for the time
3 being, it is an hour and a half. Is that correct, Mr. Karnavas?
4 MR. KARNAVAS: No, it is not, Mr. President. I believe the Pusic
5 time has been given to Ms. Senka Nozica. I have, as I indicated to the
6 registrar, I have a half an hour from the Petkovic team, a half an hour
7 from the Praljak team, and I understand approximately 15 minutes from the
8 Coric team. So I anticipate spending the rest of the first session on my
9 feet doing cross-examination of this witness.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you. You may
12 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you. Good morning, everyone in and around
13 the court.
14 WITNESS: MIROSLAV RUPCIC [Resumed]
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 Cross-examination by Mr. Karnavas: [Continued]
17 Q. Good morning, sir.
18 A. Good morning.
19 Q. Let's pick up where we left off yesterday; and I believe, at the
20 end of the day, we were talking about non-residential accounts. You had
21 confirmed to us that there was nothing illegal or nefarious about having
22 such accounts, and so I want to just go through a couple more documents to
23 close this chapter. We'll see perhaps how these residential accounts were
24 used in some ways, these non-residential accounts. If we can look at 1D
25 01763, 1763. It should be in your packet, and this is dated November 9,
2 We see that it's a letter from the public company for production,
3 transmission, and distribution of electric power, Elektroprivreda. Have
4 you found it, sir?
5 MR. KARNAVAS: May we have some assistance.
6 Q. You're going to have to work with me, sir, because I have a
7 limited amount of time?
8 A. [In English] Okay. Okay.
9 Q. All right. So let's get with it. Now, if we look at this
10 document - please look at it for a second - you'll see that it was
11 generated from Sarajevo from the director general of the Elektroprivreda
12 company. And in the subject, it says, "Provision of means in foreign
13 currency." Do you see that, sir?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. All right. If we just -- and I'm just going to walk you through
16 parts of it. I just want you to confirm this. You may not have personal
17 knowledge, but this is part of the process.
18 On the very first sentence, it starts with: "As you already know,
19 a certain time ago the business premises of Elektroprivreda BiH public
20 company was completely burned down as a consequence of wartime activities
21 of the aggressors."
22 I take it when they're speaking of the aggressors at this point in
23 time, in 1992, November 9, in Sarajevo, they must be speaking about what
24 was commonly referred to back then - not that I subscribe to the term -
25 but what some people call the Chetniks or the Serb forces or the former
1 JNA. Is that what we're talking about when we say "aggressors" here?
2 A. Yes, precisely, all of them.
3 Q. Okay. Now, if we go to the second paragraph, it talks and says:
4 "With the aim of regaining control over electro-energetic system and
5 creating of better performance conditions, Elektroprivreda BiH decided to
6 procure four satellite telephones," and then later on you'll see, in the
7 same paragraph, that they're going to be procured from a company called
8 Hetring, and the amount is approximately $239.000 US.
9 Do you see that, sir?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And then if we go into the next paragraph, it talks about: "Since
12 the electric power is delivered abroad by Elektroprivreda ... only to
13 Croatia, we do not possess convertible currency."
14 Now, I take it one of the reasons there is no convertible currency
15 is because at this point in time, as you had indicated yesterday, the
16 central bank was not functioning and the banking system was not
17 functioning in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Is that correct?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. And then it goes on to say, in the next paragraph: "With the aim
20 of solving this problem," that is, the procurement of foreign currency for
21 satellite telephones," we propose that these means from the foreign
22 currency account of the Armed Forces of the Republic of BiH are paid to
23 our account, and that Elektroprivreda of BiH for that purpose puts at
24 disposal of the Armed Forces of BiH its claim from the Republic of Croatia
25 in Croatian dinars at the official exchange rate."
1 Let's park here a little bit. They're talking about a foreign
2 currency account of the armed forces of BiH. So, obviously, it would
3 appear, at least, whoever is generating this document, which happens to be
4 the general director -- the director general of Elektroprivreda, he's
5 aware of a foreign currency account of the forces of BiH.
6 Where would that be? Would you know? Would that be in Sarajevo
7 or would that be outside in some other -- in some non-residential account,
8 if you know?
9 A. This account or one of the accounts that the BH army had was, for
10 instance, opened in Austria, but probably it had another in Croatia.
11 Q. All right. So, in other words, what you're telling us is that
12 the -- the government of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina or its
13 armed forces had -- had accounts outside the country, non-residential
14 accounts as well?
15 A. Correct. Now I have to go back, with your permission, to my case
16 where we were accused of illegally spending resources from the Republic of
17 Croatia. As you saw in the balance sheet, final balance sheet, every kuna
18 which came from the Republic of Croatia has its written trace, where it
19 was spent; whereas, with the BH army, and we provided this to the
20 Prosecution, Mr. McNair, a list of documents where Mr. Alija Izetbegovic
21 on a piece of paper would write, for instance, give Haris Silajdzic, Hasan
22 Cengic, and others a million dollars, for instance.
23 And with that piece of paper, handwritten, he goes to Vienna and
24 picks up a million dollars without any trace of where he spent it or they
25 spent it.
1 Q. All right. Thank you. Well, I believe that there is some
2 documentation that was provided to the Office of the Prosecution, with
3 respect to those secret bank accounts that Mr. Silajdzic and others had
4 access to, though they chose not to indict those individuals, but that's
5 another story.
6 Let's focus on this. If we look at the next document, 1D 01767,
7 1767, here we see -- if we can find it real quickly. While you're looking
8 for it, it was generated January 26, 1993. It's signed by a Zlatko
9 Lagumdzija. Do you know of this individual? Do you know of him?
10 A. I don't know him personally, but I do know that he was president
11 of the SDP of BH.
12 Q. And here he signed this document as vice-president of the
13 government of RBiH, January 26, 1993, and here we have a decision on
14 opening of non-residential dinar and foreign currency account in the
15 Republic of Croatia. Do you see that, sir?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Okay. And, again, this document would confirm, would it not, that
18 non-residential accounts are being opened by the government of BiH?
19 A. Correct.
20 Q. And if we look at III, it says: "The accounts that are not opened
21 in the Republic of Croatia, in line with the provisions of this Decision,
22 shall not be considered to be the accounts of the Republic of Bosnia and
24 Now, I don't know how it's -- how you read it, but correct me if
25 I'm wrong or assist us. Would this imply, if I read it correctly, that
1 through this decision, they're designating a non-residential account for
2 the Republic of BiH, but they're not excluding the opening of
3 non-residential accounts for others; but simply that, unless the account
4 is opened pursuant to this particular decision, it cannot be considered,
5 one, to be that of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina? Am I correct
6 in reading it?
7 A. Partially, but it means that they had opened accounts beforehand,
8 previously, and they were forced to align those accounts with the decision
9 to make them valid.
10 Q. All right. Now, one last document, and this is P 00985. This is
11 a Prosecution document. I think you might have it. You should have it in
12 your bundle. No, you don't.
13 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, I need the assistance of the usher.
14 Q. I'm going to give it to you right now.
15 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honours, this document, incidentally, for the
16 record, came from the Prosecution motion for admission of documentary
17 evidence, dated 20 September 2007, to which the Defence has been granted
18 leave to file its response, I believe it's 18 November 2007 -- October,
19 I'm sorry, 18 October 2007. So that's where this document came.
20 It hasn't been translated by the Prosecution. We translated the
21 first -- the first page, and it might be of some assistance.
22 Q. If you could just look at that, it's dated 1 October 2003. It's
23 from the Privredna Bank Zagreb.
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. And I just want to read part of this and it's been highlighted for
1 you, the section that I want to look at it. I want to go on the record,
2 read it, and maybe you can help had us out here.
3 It says here: "Subject: Response to the decision, operational
4 number XXXKIR 3077/03.
5 "Having inspected and analysed the contents of decisions, taking
6 into consideration the legal regulations, we respond as follows: From the
7 request, one can conclude that the interest is directed to persons related
8 to activities of Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, which we were given
9 non-residential accounts in the Republic of Croatia, in the banks
10 authorised for affairs with foreign countries, in their field offices most
11 suitable and closest to BiH borders.
12 "The basis for opening those accounts was the agreement of
13 payments between the Republic of Croatia and the Republic of Bosnia and
14 Herzegovina signed on 19th of March, 1992, as well as the instruction of
15 MFRH," that must be Ministry of Finance Republic of Croatia, "dated 5th of
16 May, 1992, that explained to the banks the way of running business with
17 BiH, and that requested immediate activities in order to reduce the
18 consequences of payment circulation, suspension, and other communications
19 caused by war in this area."
20 MR. KARNAVAS: I'm told that what is on the e-court right now is
21 not the one that's been translated.
22 Q. Now, having looked at this, can you comment at all? What exactly
23 are we learning from this particular document dated 2003?
24 A. From this, we can conclude that the investigating judge
25 established that everything had been done contrary [as interpreted] to the
1 law, referring to agreements between the Republic of Croatia and
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina, dated the 19th of March, 1992, and the guidelines from
3 the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Croatia.
4 Q. Okay. Now, in the translation, it says "contrary to the law."
5 That would mean against the law, or is it in accordance with the law?
6 A. A crime.
7 Q. Okay. All right. Now, let me go back and look at this document
8 again. According to the transcript, it says here that what you're saying
9 is that this was a crime. A crime was being -- this document shows that a
10 crime was being committed. My reading of it is that everything is done
11 consistent with agreements between the Republic of Croatia and
13 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour. Excuse me, Your Honour.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
15 MR. SCOTT: I apologise for interrupting.
16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone Mr. Scott, please.
17 MR. SCOTT: I realise that counsel has indicated that this --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone Mr. Scott, please.
19 MR. SCOTT: Sorry, I thought it was on. My apologise. Your
20 Honour. I understand that Mr. Karnavas says this document has come from
21 the Prosecution, and it's not fully translated. Be that as it may, we're
22 at a complete loss to be able to follow this testimony and be able to look
23 at the document. We have nothing in front of us which allows us to follow
24 this testimony or to study the document, and it's impossible.
25 And given the dispute that's going on with the which is now, it's
1 impossible for us to know what's happening.
2 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise to my
3 colleague Mr. Karnavas. But as we can follow better whether the
4 interpretation was correct, I'd like to say that in line 8 -- line 17,
5 "contrary" is not the proper interpretation of what the witness said. He
6 said it was "in keeping with" and not "contrary."
7 So it's "in keeping with," and that Mr. Karnavas' attempt to put
8 that right was fully in order. He thought he was being asked about crime.
9 Anyway, there was may have understanding between Mr. Karnavas and the
11 Thank you.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's what I was trying to say,
13 that there was a misinterpretation. So it is confirmation that everything
14 is done in keeping with the agreement and with the guidelines issued by
15 the Ministry of Finance. So there was absolutely nothing wrong there.
16 Had there been any other acts contrary to anything like this, then that
17 would probably be a criminal act.
18 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter notes, she apologises, but she
19 heard "suprotno" and not "sukladno," and that's where the mistake came
20 from. Thank you.
21 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour. I appreciate the
22 clarification from Ms. Alaburic, but our point remains the same. We just
23 simply have no ability to follow this testimony without having the
24 translation of the document. I don't know the entire context of what's
25 been said. I can't follow the testimony, and it would be helpful if we
1 would have that.
2 MR. KARNAVAS: If I could be of assistance, that's all I needed to
3 get out of the document. Secondly, Mr. President, we expect that this
4 entire document will be translated. We also expect that we will be
5 answering to this document when we make our submissions on 18 October
6 2007, because, as I noted, this came from the Prosecution motion for
7 admission of documentary evidence, which also begs the question that
8 should be asked perhaps by the Trial Chamber to the Prosecution, how dare
9 they submit documents of which they don't even know what's inside and
10 attempt to get them in before the Trial Chamber for this Court's
12 One would assume, with the thousands and thousands and thousands
13 of documents that we have, they would at least do some screening and know
14 which of those documents are necessary and relevant to the case. So,
15 therefore, I must say, with all due respect to my colleague who I know is
16 overburdened, just as I am, that he ought to know what's in his documents
17 and should not leave it up to me, another foreigner, to try to figure out
18 through my staff.
19 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour, that's not -- that's not a
20 fair comment, but, as usual, it's the sort of thing that the Prosecution
21 comes to expect from Mr. Karnavas.
22 Of course, we don't contest the document apparently came from a
23 Prosecution bundle. The Chamber well knows the limitations on this
24 institution in terms of translation resources that we all suffer from.
25 The Prosecution had done a partial translation, to date, so far of the
1 parts that we were tendering into evidence. Now, whether the entire
2 document will ultimately translated or not is a separate matter.
3 But that is -- whether that needs to be done is a separate
4 question from when we come into the courtroom with the witness where the
5 exhibit is going to be used in court with the witness, that everyone in
6 the courtroom needs to be able to follow the testimony. It's impossible
7 for the Prosecution to have -- know what's being said without having the
8 document in front of them.
9 MR. STEWART: Excuse me, Your Honour, may I raise a point, because
10 Your Honour knows the way we work on the Defence side and we are now faced
11 with the response to this motion involving 539 documents. I'm the very
12 lucky person who has the carriage of the particular drafting of this
13 response. We share up the work.
14 As I go through, if it's being dealt with in this way on the
15 Prosecution's side, with partial translations not identified in the list
16 of 539 documents, what am I supposed to do? Am I supposed to go to the
17 Croatian version of the document, a language that I frankly don't
18 understand, I can see the scale of the document, and be double-checking
19 all the time to see whether the Prosecution have or haven't arranged a
20 complete translation before they've whacked another 500 plus documents on
21 us, in addition to the thousands we already have.
22 It's just a practical matter, Your Honour. The whole thing is
23 getting completely out of hand. May we know how they propose to deal with
24 that aspect of the matter. I'm sorry for interrupting here, but it's
25 linked to what Mr. Karnavas has been saying and it's linked to the
1 particular practical problem which has arisen at this moment.
2 MR. KARNAVAS: And I should add, Mr. President, in all fairness to
3 the Defence, and perhaps Mr. Scott is unaware of this, we did make a
4 request to the Prosecution to have this document translated. This was
5 done a few days ago, so we did attempt. First of all, they were on notice
6 that this was a document that we intended to use with this witness, or
7 they should have known that.
8 They knew that there was a request by us. They failed to -- to
9 translate it. So now to stand up and to cry a river over how, once again,
10 they're being attacked by this -- this particular Defence attorney, I find
11 it rather charming.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, this document --
13 this document is not contained in the bundle. The document you've just
14 used is seemingly not part of the bundle.
15 When Defence counsel gives us a document or gives us a bundle of
16 documents before the cross-examination, I leaf through all the exhibits to
17 see how you intend to deal with your cross-examination; and if I realise
18 that a translation is missing, then I step in and say that a translation
19 is missing.
20 But in this case, the document you've just used is not a document
21 which I have in my possession. So I could not be aware of the fact that
22 the translation was missing.
23 Now, when there is a translation issue, the Trial Chamber feels
24 the best way of dealing with this is to ask the attorney or Defence
25 counsel to read the text in his or her own native language, and then the
1 interpreters will translate it so that everybody can understand what's
2 being read out.
3 MR. KARNAVAS: Very well, Mr. President. I should note, and I
4 stand -- you know, I totally accept your comments. As I indicated, we had
5 made the request. The translation wasn't done. We had anticipated the
6 Prosecution to perhaps be able to translate this document on short notice.
7 They were not; hence, my improvisation. But in event, we'll move on. But
8 we will get it translated for everyone's convenience.
9 Q. Now, sir, I'm going to move on to another topic, and this topic
10 deals with municipalities. Okay. It's a general topic, but I'm going to
11 go through various documents from various municipalities. It's only a
12 sampling of various issues, but it's a sampling for the Trial Chamber to
13 understand part of your testimony. Because as I heard you correctly, you
14 indicated that a lot of things were happening at the municipal level and
15 that, in fact, you witnessed folks coming in from the various
17 Presidents of the municipalities were coming in and having private
18 conversations with Mr. Mate Boban of which, of course, you were not a
19 participant, but merely you saw them coming, and then they would make some
20 decisions were apparently made. We'll leave it up to the Trial Chamber
21 what to make of that, but --
22 A. I apologise. What you do mean by private conversations?
23 Q. Well, what I mean was that Mr. Boban was having conversations to
24 these individuals; private, in the sense, that you weren't present at the
25 time. These were conversations that he was holding, official
1 conversations; private, in the sense, you were not a participant of.
2 A. Yes, that's the essential point.
3 Q. Okay.
4 A. They were official conversations but I wasn't present.
5 Q. Right. Okay.
6 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, just so the record is clear then, the
7 entire -- the entire content of the witness's evidence on that is he saw
8 people entering and leaving the building, and that's the -- he wasn't in
9 the meetings. He can't say what happened in the meetings. So what the
10 witness has just told us is he saw people coming into the building and
11 going out of the building. That's the only evidence that he's given us.
12 MR. KARNAVAS: Again, you know, I don't want to turn this into a
13 debating society. The gentleman, yesterday, indicated that presidents of
14 municipalities would come and meet with Mate Boban, and then afterwards
15 orders were issued with respect to the distribution of monies. That's
16 what the gentleman indicated.
17 This whole context came when the Prosecutor was trying to impeach
18 the very same witness that he had, even though there were no grounds for
19 it, but he made allegations that the witness was confabulating.
20 Now, this was my -- that little introduction was just a segue into
21 this particular chapter, because I'm dealing with various issues with
22 respect to municipalities, so I was just cuing everybody in.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are quite right,
24 Mr. Karnavas. Put your question.
25 MR. KARNAVAS:
1 Q. Now, if we look at document 1D 01772, this is a decision from the
2 municipality of Tomislavgrad. 1772. All you've got to do is look at the
3 yellow tab, sir.
4 A. Yes, yes.
5 Q. Okay. You're going to have to work with me quicker. I don't mean
6 to pressure you, but we have limited time here.
7 This is August 20, 1992, and here it says, this is a decision: "I
8 am financing the needs of national defence." And in Article 1, it says:
9 "With the aim of financing the defence in the territory of Tomislavgrad
10 municipality, the contribution for defence shall be introduced."
11 And then, in Article 2, we see that at that talks about citizens
12 who have a salary, a domestic salary; and then, further down, you see that
13 there is a breakdown: Citizens employed abroad have to pay 400 DM per
14 passport. That's for men. Women have to pay a hundred, and then you have
15 citizens employed in Austria. They pay a different amount.
16 You see all of that?
17 A. I see that.
18 Q. Okay. So when you were talking about the municipalities
19 self-financing their -- their defence, this is -- this is a document that
20 assesses to that, is it not?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. And if we look at -- if we look at the preamble, we see that it
23 sets out that this is something that is being -- a decision that is being
24 taken by the municipality of Tomislavgrad in accordance with their
25 particular Statute; correct?
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. Okay. Now, we'll go on to the next document, and this is
3 1D 01771. 1771. This is May 2, 1992. And if we go to the preamble, we
4 see that it is from the municipality of, or even at the very top, it says
5 "Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Assembly of Posusje." My apologies for
6 the pronunciation.
7 We see here this is a decision on obligatory financing of defence;
8 again, another municipality. Article 1, it says: "The obligatory
9 financing of municipality defence is introduced for all citizens from,"
10 and I underscore that word, "from the territory..."
11 And then if you look at II, it talks about citizens "from the
12 territory who are permanently employed abroad."
13 So it seems that citizens from this municipality, as we have seen
14 from Tomislavgrad, who are living abroad still have to make contributions
15 to the war effort; correct?
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. Okay. All right. Now, if we go to the next document, 1D 01757,
18 1757, that is different kind of a document. We're going to deal with two
19 documents from this particular municipality. This is from Orasje
20 municipality, dated April 21, 1992.
21 Here, in this decision, it says: This is from the War Presidency
22 of this particular municipality, and it's a decision on conversion of, I
23 guess, Yugoslav dinars from the treasury of domestic payment office from
24 Orasje into Croatian dinars.
25 Now, I take it -- and if we look at Article I, it says: "Hereby,
1 the obligation of conversion of Yugoslav dinars from the Treasury of
2 Domestic Payment Agency Office in Orasje into Croatian dinars is
4 I take it that this was a necessary -- this was necessary in light
5 of what was happening in Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time, vis-a-vis the
6 former Yugoslavia.
7 A. Correct.
8 Q. Okay.
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. All right. Now let's look at the next document, 1758.
11 MR. KARNAVAS: Again, this is just to give the Court a sampling of
12 what's happening at the municipal level because of the concept of
13 self-management, as it will become obvious throughout the course of this
15 Q. This is a document dated September 19, 1992. It's a decision on
16 establishing the right to financial compensation for families of fallen or
17 missing soldiers of 106th HVO Brigade Bosanska Posavina.
18 Now, yesterday, if I heard you correctly, you had indicated that
19 payments about going to families of fallen soldiers. Correct? That was
20 one of the obligations?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. Okay. And here is a good example, at least at the municipal
23 level, where the municipality is trying to take care of the families of
24 those who are protecting the homeland, based on the Territorial Defence
25 that existed, at least at that point in time, and this is September 1992;
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. All right. That's -- we'll go on to the next document, and now
4 we're going to talk about Mostar. Two documents. The first one will be
5 1D 01760. 1760.
6 If we look at this, it starts with "Republic of Bosnia and
7 Herzegovina, Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, Croatian Defence Council,
8 Mostar municipality," dated 25 -- July 25, 1992. This is a decision on
9 "amendment to the decision on introduction of the Croatian dinar as the
10 means of cash payment."
11 MR. KARNAVAS: Again, I just want to give the Trial Chamber an
12 opportunity to see what's happening in various municipalities.
13 Q. Here we see in Article 1 that there is an amendment, and you will
14 awe see the quotation parted, which says: "All participants in cash
15 transactions are obliged to form the prices and state them in Croatian or
16 Yugoslav dinars."
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. So, here, they're given an opportunity -- they're saying that you
19 have to designate two different currencies, one of either; that is,
20 Croatian or Yugoslav dinars.
21 Again, is this the kind of decision that would have been necessary
22 in light of the financial situation - the monetary situation, I should
23 say - in Bosnia and Herzegovina at the time?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. All right. So was it -- perhaps you may not be able to answer
1 this question, but this is not an attempt to sort of Croatise - this is
2 the kind of word we've heard bandied about - to Croatise the Mostar
3 municipality by introduced a decision like this, but, rather, this would
4 be a decision necessary, given that you need a currency that's viable in
5 order to do certain transactions on a day-to-day basis?
6 A. There were two reasons for this kind of a decision. The first
7 basic reason was the fact that all trade - well, not all trade, but most
8 of the trade - involved companies from the Republic of Croatia because
9 payments were easier.
10 The second reason is that, in the treasury of Yugoslavia, an
11 enormous amount of Yugoslav dinars stayed behind, and they were brought
12 into the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, which is to say that the
13 property of Bosnia-Herzegovina was purchased, devalued, and everything
15 Q. All right. Okay. Now, if we look at the next document, 1D 1759,
16 1759, again, this is from the -- this is a decision: "Republic of Bosnia
17 and Herzegovina, Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, Croatian Defence
18 Council, Mostar Municipality," and it's a decision on "war tax for workers
19 for Mostar municipality territory working abroad, and retired persons who
20 went into retirement after working abroad."
21 And here we see, again, this would seem somewhat similar to the
22 other documents from the other municipalities. At least, in Article 2, we
23 see there is a tax, a war tax of 300 DEM. What does "DEM" mean, per
25 A. It means 300 German deutschemark.
1 Q. Thank you. I just need it for the record.
2 And then we go into article 4, for instance, and it says: "The
3 war tax shall be paid through transfer accounts," and we see Splitska
4 Banka is one, "or in cash on the counter of the Office for Finances of
5 HVO- Mostar municipality."
6 So, here, it would appear that as of this date, September 16th,
7 they're saying, Here is an account a non-residential account in Splitska
8 Banka, and you can deposit it over there. Correct?
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. That's it for Mostar. If we go on to the next set of documents,
11 the next municipality is going to be Livno, and it's a motley group of
12 decisions that I'm going to go through.
13 We're going to start off with 1D 01761. 1D 01761. Again, it says
14 here, "Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatian Community of
15 Herceg-Bosna, Livno municipality HVO," 26 March 1993: "Decision on
16 financing of Livno HVO-sanctioning military conscripts."
17 And if we look at that, we see that, at the very beginning, in
18 Article I, it says: "Military conscripts who are temporarily working
19 abroad with visas obtained before October 1991, and who upon their return
20 to the municipality, their permanent residence, "did not report within
21 eight days to the Livno OHVO Defence office to be mobilised to the Livno
22 HVO units, shall finance the OHVO" the defence of Livno, "by paying 900
23 German marks a month from the moment they failed..."
24 In other words, they are being punished, to some extent, for
25 failing to report to duty. Do you see that?
1 A. I see that.
2 Q. All right. And that's all we need for this document. We'll just
3 move on.
4 MR. KARNAVAS: I just want to give the Court again an indication
5 what's happening at the municipal level.
6 Q. The next document is 1D 0308, 308. This is a decision of 2 April
7 1993, and, again, we can see it's the "Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
8 Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, Livno municipality, Croatian Defence
9 Council." This is a decision on financing of Livno OHVO sanctioning
10 military conscripts.
11 It's somewhat similar to the previous one, and we can -- would you
12 agree, if you just look at Article I, that this is something similar to
13 the first one that we just looked at, the difference being the date and
14 there's some minor differences on who this was forwarded to?
15 A. Correct.
16 Q. Okay. All right. Now, if we go on to the next document, 3 --
17 1D 00307, 307. This is dated 16 April 1993. This is a decision on
18 assignment of financial aid to the Bruno Busic HVO Regiment.
19 And if we look at Article I, it says that "the Bruno Busic HVO
20 Regiment is hereby assigned financial aid in the amount of 1.500.000
21 Croatian dinars."
22 And it says here, in Article II: "The finances office of the
23 municipal HVO shall withdraw cash from the Livno municipal HVO cashier.""
24 Now, from this document, can we conclude that Livno is financing,
25 through this decision, this professional -- this brigade or this regiment?
1 A. Helping.
2 Q. Okay. And this had a professional brigade?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Okay. All right.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I would like to take
6 the floor because this document is quite disturbing. It proves that this
7 Bruno Busic Battalion was funded under municipality decisions, because a
8 certain amount is earmarked for this battalion. We're on the 5th of
9 April, 1993. As far as you know -- I'm not sure you will be able to
10 answer. You might not be the appropriate witness to answer that
11 question. But since you have been in charge of such duties, you may be
12 privy to that.
13 Budget-wise, the funding of a regiment, is it not the role of the
14 Minister of Defence, could you explain that to me, and not the
15 municipality. Could you explain that to me, please?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I corrected the
17 attorney. It is not financing. This is just a one-off thing, assistance.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So you are saying that it is
19 assistance. It is support. We're not talking about funding, because as a
20 rule in regiments the salaries have to be approved by the Ministry of
21 Defence and go through the Ministry of Defence.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct, but there were other
23 expenses involved as well.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Right. So your answer to my
25 question seems to be that, in this case, we're talking about some type of
1 support. Yes, I can see "support" in English. Very well.
2 Mr. Karnavas, you may proceed.
3 MR. KARNAVAS:
4 Q. And just to -- so the amount, again, seems rather -- let's see,
5 it's 1.500.000 Croatian dinars. How much is that are we talking in
7 A. Say between 2 and 3.000 German marks; around 2.000 deutschemark.
8 Q. Okay. That's what it would have been at the time?
9 A. At the time, yes.
10 Q. All right. Now, if we go on to the next document, this is
11 1D 01762, 1762. This is September 24, 1993. This is -- here, we see it's
12 "the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatian Republic of
13 Herceg-Bosna, Municipal HVO Livno." So, here, at this point in time,
14 we're dealing with the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna within the
15 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. This is a decision on
16 "professionalisation of the army within the HVO Brigade, Petar Kresimir
17 IV, and defining of adequate salaries." Do you see that?
18 A. I see that.
19 Q. Okay. And if we look at Article II, it says: "The special salary
20 adequate to TIP for members of the professional units of the brigade Petar
21 Kresimir IV HVO Livno is defined, as of September 1, 1993." Can you
22 comment on this? Why was it necessary to have a decision of this nature
23 passed by the Livno municipality on the 24th of September, 1993?
24 A. Well, it's hard now to remember why exactly. Well, quite simply,
25 probably, this had become quite a burden for the municipality, this
1 financing. That could have been one of the reasons. And another reason
2 was that by then the HVO was slowly being established as an army, which, I
3 mean, well, should have as many professional soldiers as possible, and
4 that the Home Guard's part should be reduced.
5 Q. Okay. Now, when you say the "Home Guard," are we talking about
6 based on the Territorial Defence, the concept of All People's Defence and
7 then the Territorial Defence? Is that what you're talking about when you
8 say "Home Guard"?
9 A. In the territory of Herceg-Bosna, we no longer had a Territorial
10 Defence. We had the Domobrani Home Guard. That is a Croatian expression
11 for the same form of unit. Well, I cannot say form of unit but I cannot
12 say people, but same formation.
13 Q. All right. I take it those formations were drawn from the
14 particular municipalities, for the municipalities, by the municipalities?
15 A. Precisely. Like in the former Yugoslavia, there was the
16 Territorial Defence. It was municipal. So the Domobrani regiments, or
17 rather, the Domobrani, the Home Guards were people from the local
18 territory of municipalities.
19 Q. Thank you. If we look at the next document, that's 1D 00297 and
20 this is the last document for Livno. This is October 9 1993. This is the
21 decision on the "amount of compensation, daily allowance for private sent
22 on assignment pursuant to an order issued by the HR HB HVO Main Staff."
23 Here, it says a decision was passed for compensation of 17 deutschemarks
24 per day payable. Do you see that sir?
25 A. I see that.
1 Q. It seems this has to do with the Petar Kresimir IV HVO Brigade.
3 A. Home Guard unit.
4 Q. Okay. All right. Okay. So now we know what was happening in
5 Livno a little bit.
6 Now I want to focus on a set of documents and -- for the Tuzla
7 municipality for comparison purposes. Obviously, you know what Tuzla is.
8 MR. KARNAVAS: For those of us who may not be aware, Tuzla at that
9 point in time was a Muslim municipality in a sense, multi-ethnic.
10 Q. It was governed --
11 A. With a predominantly Bosniak population.
12 Q. Exactly. That's where the army of BiH was located, and you also
13 had HVO working along with them; correct?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. Okay. And, in fact, as I understand it, the 2nd Corps of the army
16 of BiH was located there, a rather large force, if you know? If you
17 don't know, that's fine. Okay.
18 A. I don't know.
19 Q. All right.
20 A. I just don't know. I know there was something. But what, which
21 corps, I don't know.
22 Q. All right. Again, this is for comparative purposes. If we look
23 at 1D 00854, 854, this is dated 10 July 1992. We're just going to take
24 them in chronological order. Here, this is on mandatory payment of
25 foreign currency, and Article 1 states: "All workers employed abroad and
1 with permanent residence in Tuzla municipality shall make a payment of
2 1.000 deutschemarks for the needs of the defence of Tuzla ..."
3 And if we look further down, we see that it's in the Privredna
4 Banka Zagreb, and also there's another bank in Germany. Do you see that,
6 A. I see that.
7 Q. We see that at the bottom that this is signed by the president of
8 the Presidency, a Mr. Selim Beslagic.
9 A. Beslagic.
10 Q. Beslagic. Thank you very much. It would appear that, here,
11 they're doing the same thing as in the other municipalities: Number one,
12 sort of taxes their residence; and number two, using a non-resident
13 account, bank account, outside of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Correct?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. Okay. All right.
16 We go on to the next document, 1D 00858, 858. Again, it's dealing
17 with Tuzla, and same gentleman has signed it. This is 30 July 1992. This
18 is an order to pay out members of the Reconnaissance and Sabotage Platoon,
19 and it says in the very first, Article I: "It is hereby ordered to pay
20 out double salaries to members of the Reconnaissance and Sabotage Platoon
21 at the recommendation of the commander of their unit."
22 So, here, it seems that the municipality of Tuzla is also
23 financing; and at least with this particular platoon, perhaps because of
24 the activities they're involved in, they get to have a double salary.
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. All right. We go on to the next document, 1D 00866. 866. This
3 is dated 27 of August 1992, same gentleman, same municipality. "Decision
4 on mandatory foreign currency payments by persons working abroad." Again,
5 it's for comparison purposes.
6 Now, if we look at this, we look at Article 1 and it says: "All
7 citizens, residents of the municipality of Tuzla working abroad on a
8 temporary basis, shall pay an amount of 2.000 deutschemarks ..."
9 And if we look at Article 2, we see that there's a bank in Zagreb,
10 and there's another bank that appears to be the German bank that we saw
11 earlier, "...or with authorised agents or representatives of the
12 municipality of Tuzla."
13 So, again, if we look at this particular document, this decision
14 dated 27th of August, 1992 in the municipality of Tuzla, we see, one, that
15 they're taxing their citizens abroad -- who are working abroad; and, two,
16 they're asking them to deposit that amount in non-residential accounts.
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. All right. Now, if we look at the next document, 1D 00868, 868,
20 this is 16 September 1992. This is an order to impose special tax. If we
21 look at the second page, we see it's the same gentleman, the president of
22 the Presidency of Tuzla.
23 This is a special war tax, and it says in Article II: "All legal,
24 civil-legal entities, and natural entities involved in the sale of goods
25 and services and the manufacture of consume products for end users in the
1 territory of Tuzla municipality shall be liable to pay a special war tax."
2 We see that, at least for cigarettes and alcohol, cigarettes is 30
3 per cent, alcohol -- cigarettes and alcohol is 30 per cent, 10 per cent on
4 other products.
5 So, here, we have the municipality taxing its citizens and also
6 other entities with a special war tax, and I assume that this is all in
7 order to finance the ABiH and other -- and for other municipal services;
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. All right. Now, let me just stop before I go on to the next
11 couple documents.
12 Do these documents seem to be -- the activities in the documents
13 from Tuzla, do they seem rather similar to what was happening in the
14 various municipalities that we touched on earlier, those that were
15 included in Herceg-Bosna?
16 A. Absolutely, and in the whole area, as far as I know. I'm
17 referring to the federal part, the area controlled by the BH army and
18 controlled by the HVO. Everything was done according to the same
20 Q. Okay. Now, if we go on to the next document, 1D 01756, 1756,
21 this is dated March 5, 1993. This is a decision. Again, if we look at
22 the last page, again, the president of the Presidency, the same gentleman
23 that signed the previous decisions. This one is a decision on "obligatory
24 foreign currency payments for persons temporarily employed abroad for the
25 year of 1993."
1 And, if we look at Article 1, we see that there are various
2 amounts: 2.000 deutschemarks, 1.000 deutschemarks, 500 deutschemarks.
3 And, if we look at Article 3, if we go to Article 3, we see, again, that
4 the payments are to be made at various non-residential -- non-residential
5 accounts. We see, actually, in the first one, we see the Tuzla bank. So
6 at this point, at least in Tuzla, there is a bank that's functioning.
8 A. Obviously, it was done during that period. It certainly wasn't in
10 Q. Right. So it would appear, at least in 1993, it was possible in
11 some places within Bosnia-Herzegovina to have banks functioning.
12 A. What do you mean by "functioning"?
13 Q. Well, operating.
14 A. If you mean --
15 Q. Well, we saw there was a bank in Mostar that was operating based
16 on a feasibility study and a request that was made. Do you remember that
17 yesterday we saw that and discussed that. They got permission from the
18 central bank, the national bank of Bosnia to open up a bank account -- to
19 open up a bank.
20 A. Yes. I agree with that, but the functioning of a bank or
21 operating of a bank is one of its -- one of its duties is payments with
22 other countries. How do you imagine that the man in Tuzla or somebody in
23 Tuzla could have payments with foreign countries, unless -- or rather, if
24 the money -- when you send in an order, that order has to be backed up by
1 So when you pay in a 100.000 marks, for example, in Germany, the
2 person from Tuzla from the bank has to take that money physically to
4 Q. Okay. So, in other words, what you're telling us is that they had
5 the same challenges in Tuzla that they had in Mostar.
6 A. Far greater. Because in Mostar, well, the road was open to
7 Croatia so you could pass by that way; whereas, Tuzla was surrounded, so
8 they couldn't take the money out of Tuzla.
9 Q. All right. And then we see other banks such as the one in Zagreb.
10 We see the other bank that we talked about, the commercial bank of Mulheim
11 Ruhr, however you pronounce it. We see another bank in Frankfurt. And
12 you can also pay in cash at the -- at the cash desk at the Assembly of the
13 of municipality of Tuzla.
14 So, again, this decision is very similar to what we've seen with
15 respect to other municipalities taxing their foreign citizens or their
16 citizens working abroad and having them place that money in various
17 accounts, including accounts that are outside Bosnia-Herzegovina.
19 A. Correct.
20 Q. Okay. Now, with the last set of documents for this chapter, I
21 want to go to another municipality, and this is the municipality of
23 So this is the first document, 1D 00218, and this was published in
24 the -- it says: "Pursuant to Article 42 of the decree law of defence
25 Official Gazette of the republic of BH." It's signed by the president of
1 the Executive Committee of the Maglaj municipality, an Ivan Grlic, and it
2 says here: "The Natron DD joint stock company Maglaj is hereby ordered to
3 pay travel expenses of 1.058 German marks to Ante Marincic, the commander
4 of the HVO staff in Maglaj, incurred during the purchase of MTS material,"
5 and so on and so forth.
6 Can you tell us anything about this gentleman or this activity or
7 anything? Tell us, what does this order tell you at least?
8 A. So this order means that -- that the technical equipment and
9 materiel, well, you can have anything under that title. It can range from
10 weapons, bullets, spare parts for combat, spare parts for vehicles.
11 Q. Okay. Now, if it's being paid to the commander of the HVO --
12 incidentally, is Maglaj municipality within the Croatian Community of
13 Herceg-Bosna or the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna?
14 A. As far as I know, no.
15 Q. Okay. Now, if we look at the next document, 1D 00213, this is a
16 decision. Again, the same gentleman signs it. Yes?
17 A. Could you repeat the number, please?
18 Q. 213.
19 A. [In English] Mm-hmm. Okay.
20 Q. 213. This is a decision, again based on the degree law on defence
21 published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Bosnia and
22 Herzegovina, Maglaj municipality. It says here under Article I: "The
23 Maglaj Municipal Secretariat for Finance is hereby ordered to make a
24 withdrawal from the foreign currency bank account from the Maglaj
25 Municipality Executive Council and pay 15.000 deutschemarks to the Armed
1 Forces of Maglaj Municipality for the special procurement ..." and it goes
3 And then, in Article II, it says: "The Maglaj Municipality, BH
4 army, and HVO are obliged to present proof of the procured MTS-ammunition
5 to the Maglaj Municipal Executive Council."
6 Help me out here, sir. It seems that this particular
7 municipality, which at least to your understanding is not within
8 Herceg-Bosna, is asking for the payment or for the -- in this decision, is
9 making a decision for a withdrawal from the foreign currency bank account.
10 Does that mean that they have a bank account that's outside of
11 Bosnia and Herzegovina? Is that what they're referring to when they say
12 foreign currency bank account, if you know?
13 A. I don't know, but they couldn't withdraw it anywhere else but from
14 some non-residential account, outside.
15 Q. Okay. Thank you.
16 MR. KARNAVAS: I should say I'm -- it's pointed out to me that
17 actually it's May 1993, Your Honours, as opposed to January 1993. At the
18 preamble, it should read "May."
19 Q. Okay. Thank you for that. Now I just have -- I just want to go
20 into one last area, and so we're going to switch gears a little bit.
21 We talked a little bit about the assistance that was coming in
22 from the diaspora. Do you recall that there were some questions, and you
23 even --
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Okay. You were even questioned by the Prosecutor, when you gave
1 your statement, about that; correct?
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. Now, when we're talking about money coming in from the diaspora,
4 we saw some documents where municipalities are asking its citizens who are
5 working abroad to make contributions. They're being taxed for the war
6 effort. Is it fair to say -- but there were also others who were living
7 abroad under -- that we can call the diaspora who were also donating money
8 to the war efforts for Croatia and for Bosnia-Herzegovina?
9 A. Of course.
10 Q. All right. That's not a taxation. They're not being taxed. This
11 is on a voluntary basis. They're volunteering their -- their savings to
12 assist Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina; correct?
13 A. Correct.
14 Q. All right.
15 A. Do you need an example?
16 Q. Well, we're going to get there just slowly. I want to make sure I
17 have it right.
18 And, if I understand you correctly, some money that was being
19 donated or being channeled to Croatia was actually earmarked for Bosnia
20 and Herzegovina?
21 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, Your Honour. I've been sitting quietly but
22 I'm going to object to this, unless the witness has a personal knowledge
23 of this. The witness was very careful in his answers to the Prosecution
24 to only talk about things that he saw and he heard, and there were a
25 number of times that he would not answer the Prosecution's questions
1 because he said he did not have personal knowledge.
2 So I'd like to have foundation for how this witness can talk
3 about, address these matters as to whether someone somewhere in the world
4 made a donation earmarked for Herceg-Bosna.
5 MR. KARNAVAS: All right. We're going to go step-by-step. I have
6 no -- I have no problems with that. But just for the record, Your Honour,
7 when the gentleman yesterday was saying that he did not have personal
8 knowledge, I want -- I want to make sure that we're fair to the gentleman,
9 because an allegation has been made that the gentleman was less than
10 candid and less than truthful with the Prosecution, and that's incorrect.
11 What the Prosecutor was attempting to do is to try to get this
12 gentleman to commit to conversations that might have occurred where he
13 wasn't present, and he could not state to any degree of certainty what was
14 being said. He was very correct when he spoke to the Prosecutor in his
15 statement, very correct when he testified under oath on direct, and he's
16 being very correct when he's testifying here on cross. So I'll lay the
18 Q. Sir, do you know whether money that was being donated to the war
19 effort, going to Croatia, do you know whether any of that was actually
20 being earmarked, where the donors in a sense were saying, "We wish this
21 money to go to Bosnia-Herzegovina, or a certain percentage of it"? Do you
22 know? "Yes, no," that will do.
23 A. I can't give you a yes or no answer. Yesterday, and when I talked
24 to the Prosecution, I said that the Croats from Bosnia-Herzegovina paid in
25 a large sum of money and that very little was returned to
2 Q. Okay. Now, I want to look at -- I want to look at one document,
3 1D 01755, and at least -- this is from Mate Boban.
4 MR. KARNAVAS: And to make sure that we're fair to everyone, we
5 realise that this particular document -- we see Mate Boban's name, but we
6 do not see a date and we do not see a signature or a seal.
7 Q. But if we look at it, and if we look at it closely, we talk -- in
8 the second paragraph, it says: "All of your assistance for Bosnia and
9 Herzegovina goes through Zagreb and our fund for the support of Croatia in
10 Villach, Austria, which has been opened for a long period of time and is
11 under the control of the government of the Republic of Croatia and to
12 which you have already made your payments. You can underline on the
13 payment slips that your contribution is intended for Bosnia and
15 I'm pausing to make sure the Prosecution reads this part.
16 MR. SCOTT: It doesn't say that anyone ever did it.
17 MR. KARNAVAS:
18 Q. "A defence is not something of personal character, and it does not
19 have to do only with a village or municipality. Here we speak of the
20 defence of Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Croatian nation as a
22 And, then, if we go further down, it talks about, you know,
23 Chetnik hoards. So at least we know we can sort of glean as to when this
24 leaflet might have been printed out in any event.
25 Assuming that this is a true and accurate document -- and I say
1 assuming because we don't have a signature, we don't have a seal, and we
2 don't have a date, and I want to be fair to the Prosecution because I'm
3 constantly being attacked of being less than fair.
4 But assuming that this is a true and accurate and complete
5 document, does it not here say that contributions can be earmarked for
6 Bosnia and Herzegovina, and, in fact, it gives a particular account to
7 where that money can go to, which fund, and how to designate it for Bosnia
8 and Herzegovina? Does it not say that?
9 A. Correct. And that just confirms what I said a moment ago, that
10 money came into the account that was controlled by the government of the
11 Republic of Croatia and that very little was transferred to us.
12 Q. All right. Now very quickly I want to go --
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, to save time, this
14 document that has been provided by you. Where does it come from? What
15 its origin? It looks like a letter, a circular letter sent to all those
16 abroad, but how did you get it? The Prosecutor may have an objection to
17 this document being admitted, so perhaps we should settle that if you have
18 some information to provide us with.
19 MR. KARNAVAS: The only information I can provide you,
20 Mr. President, is that this was something that was being distributed; and
21 through our investigation we came across in document. It's a sort of
22 leaflet that we saw earlier. If you recall, once before, we saw a leaflet
23 that came with the Mujahedin and how -- what they should do and how they
24 should behave.
25 This is the kind of leaflet that apparently -- these sort of
1 things were being circulated at the time to provide notice to the people.
2 That's -- so it came through our investigation. But, in due course, we
3 will be able to tie all of this up, Your Honour, to demonstrate, to
4 demonstrate, contrary to what the Prosecution indicates, but to
5 demonstrate that yes, indeed, money was being earmarked for Bosnia and
6 Herzegovina that was going through Croatian banks. So we will be able to
7 tie this up, Mr. President.
8 Q. If we go on to the next document, 1D 01754, just very quickly,
9 1754, this is a -- that is document. It's titled "Croatian national fund
10 Chicago. Names of donors of aid to Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina in
11 1991, 1991, 1992, 1993." Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina.
12 Now, if we look at this, it would seem that we have a list of
13 names. I don't know whether you've seen this document before, but am I
14 correct in assuming that this was a rather transparent process by which
15 Croats from the diaspora could donate their money and there was an
16 accounting as to who gave what, when, where, how much?
17 A. I've never seen this document before, but the fact is that
18 documents like this did exist and that they're now becoming apparent,
19 especially in the case of General Zagorac.
20 Q. All right. Okay. Very good. Now if we look at the next document
21 1D 01753, this is just a sampling again. This is dated August 27, 1992.
22 This is from an Ivan Nenadic, MD. "MD" stands for medical doctor. We see
23 here that as of August 27, 1992, it's a letter. It's a letter to Mr.
24 Mirko Volaric, president of the Croatian national association in Los
25 Angeles, California. It's a brief summary of what they were able to
1 achieve through south-west medical teams since September 1991.
2 And if we just look at, for instance, on the very first page under
3 the entry of March 15, 1992, we see that there's medical supplies,
4 Ministry of Health, Republic of Croatia, delivered to Bosnia and
6 MR. KARNAVAS: I'm raising my voice to make sure my colleague here
7 hears me.
8 Q. So here we see it's going the Ministry of Health of Croatia for
9 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
10 Okay. Let's move on to the very last document. We can handle
11 this before the break. This is somewhat different, but I think it might
12 be helpful to the Trial Chamber. But just getting back to this last
13 document, I need to ask you one question.
14 You see where at least Mr. Nenadic is noting that in March 15,
15 1992, he and others were able to collect medical supplies and have them
16 earmarked for Bosnia and Herzegovina through Croatia? You see that?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. And, in fact, this is not some isolated incident. This was
20 occurring throughout the wartime?
21 A. Correct.
22 Q. Now the very last document, 1D 01774, 1774. This is a -- you will
23 see this is a letter. It's coming from the Republic of Croatia, the
24 Ministry of Justice. It's addressed to a Mr. Karnavas. That would be
25 me: "Subject: Mr. Jadranko Prlic, accused before ICTY-information and
1 documents delivered."
2 I'll read the whole part, and then I'll ask you a question.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas.
4 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, there's an address
6 here. It must be a public document. There's an address in Zagreb
7 mentioned here.
8 MR. KARNAVAS: My particular office was closed after it was
9 ransacked a week before trial, in the middle of the day. So anyway,
10 that's -- we don't have to worry about the address. As far as the
11 Ministry of Justice, I think it's a public office. So I don't see that to
12 be a problem, and I --
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'm sure you've understood me.
14 It was your address.
15 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes. Yes.
16 Q. So if we look at this, we see here and I'll just read it: "Further
17 to your letter dated --"
18 MR. SCOTT: Sorry, Your Honour. Excuse me, Mr. Karnavas. I
19 apologise interrupting. But on this occasion, Your Honour, I --
20 MR. KARNAVAS: Go ahead.
21 MR. SCOTT: -- I have to object on this point. This is a
22 document, and I understand Mr. Karnavas has every right to prepare his
23 Defence case. That's not -- that's not at all in question. But I submit,
24 Your Honour, that it's not appropriate to introduce it through this
25 witness. There is no indication that this witness has any knowledge of
1 this document or the content of the document.
2 This document was obviously specifically created at Mr. Karnavas's
3 request, and he can certainly put that in in his case if he decides to put
4 one on, and that's his choice. But this witness cannot provide any
5 evidence about this document, and this is simply putting the Defence case
6 in during cross-examination of a witness who has no knowledge of this
8 MR. KARNAVAS: If I may, Mr. President. If we look at the very --
9 the third paragraph of this document, it says: "Also, according to the
10 data the Ministry of Finance has, there were no direct payments from the
11 budget of the Republic of Croatia to BiH."
12 MR. SCOTT: And this witness cannot possibly have any personal
13 knowledge about this.
14 MR. KARNAVAS: If I -- if I may just at least respond for the
15 record, I'm not posing a question. Now, when I pose the question,
16 Mr. Scott can jump up and he can object, and I'm sure I'll respond. But
17 until such time, at least allow me the courtesy, Mr. Scott, of making my
18 record as well.
19 Now, there were several questions posed by Mr. Scott, and I didn't
20 object. I didn't object. I stand here. He was trying to elicit from the
21 gentleman, you know, answers with respect to monies that were supposedly
22 being paid from the Republic of Croatia to Herceg-Bosna --
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ask your question.
24 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You're entitled to ask him that
1 question which actually is the crux of the matter.
2 MR. KARNAVAS: Okay if we look at --
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If the witness doesn't answer, I
4 don't know which witness or what witness could answer this.
5 MR. SCOTT: There is a witness, Your Honour. With all due
6 respect, with all due respect, again, this witness comes from Mr. Muljacic
7 from the Republic of Croatia. He is the one that prepared and made this
8 assertion. I do object to this because this is improper. This is an
9 improper way of introducing evidence from a third party that has no
10 connection with this witness.
11 If Mr. Karnavas wants to call Mr. Muljacic, or call a
12 representative from the government of Croatia, which, which the
13 Prosecution would then have an opportunity to cross-examine, we can do
14 that, Your Honour. But this is just nothing more and putting in
15 self-serving Defence evidence, and he is entitled to do that in his own
16 case, but through this witness who has no connection to this letter or the
17 content of the letter. It's improper, Your Honour.
18 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. President, Mr. President --
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 MR. KARNAVAS: If I --
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, I have settled the
22 objections. You may put your question now.
23 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you, Mr. President.
24 Q. This was a letter, sir, that was generated based on a request that
25 was made during our investigative efforts to get to the truth in this
1 case. Something that does matter to some of us.
2 Now --
3 MR. SCOTT: I object to that, Your Honour. Why do we have to have
4 these constant personal remarks and attacks. There's no purpose to this.
5 It matters to some of us. It's nothing but a snide comment. There's no
6 reason for it.
7 MR. KARNAVAS:
8 Q. If we look at paragraph 2, it says, "the agreement between --
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed, Mr. Karnavas.
10 MR. KARNAVAS:
11 Q. -- the Republic of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina on
12 cooperation and mutual assistance in customs issues was signed in Sarajevo
13 27 July 2000, which means that the Ministry of Finances does not have the
14 documentation on cooperation with the customs service of BiH in the period
16 It thence goes on to say, based on certain questions that were
17 being asked as part of our investigative efforts to get to documentation
18 that might help had us get to the truth: "Also, according to the data the
19 Ministry of Finance has, there were no direct payments from the budget of
20 the Republic of Croatia to BiH."
21 Can you comment on this? If you can't, that's fine.
22 MR. SCOTT: Now, before he answers the question, I want to know
23 what's his personal -- what is his foundation to have knowledge? Before
24 he answers and voices an opinion, I want the witness to be asked: Do you
25 have any personal knowledge of this matter.
1 MR. KARNAVAS: Before we get there, first, it's can he answer the
2 question. Yes or no? If it's yes, then I can go that one next step.
3 MR. SCOTT: Well --
4 MR. KARNAVAS: I appreciate Mr. Scott's assistance in teaching me
5 how to lay a foundation.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott, I don't approve of
7 the way with which you work. In the indictment, the accused are being
8 charged with joint criminal enterprise on funding coming from the Republic
9 of Croatia.
10 The Defence is trying to come up with data that contradicts what
11 you have said. Defence counsel is putting questions. The Ministry of
12 Justice is answering, and says in second paragraph that they have no
13 documents from 1991 to 1994. But in the third paragraph, the Ministry of
14 Justice states that according to the Ministry of Finance, there have been
15 no direct payments from the budget of the Republic of Croatia to the BiH.
16 The witness is a witness who has been in charge of financial
17 matters, who was a deputy minister. He may have an opinion and may have
18 something to say about such a document.
19 Mr. Scott.
20 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, then I have to strenuously object. The
21 Chamber doesn't understand nature of my objection. My objection is not
22 that the Defence does not have the right to put on such evidence in a
23 proper way.
24 If, if we were in the Defence case, if we were in the Defence case
25 and Mr. Karnavas wanted to tender this document to the Court, he would
1 have to put it in through a -- he couldn't just say, "Your Honour, I
2 tender a letter from Mr. Muljacic, and I think it's very important." He
3 would have to produce a witness who could come into court and be subject
4 to cross-examination about such a letter.
5 You would not allow him in the Defence case to simply tender this
6 document with no foundation and no witness. You wouldn't allow that, but
7 now you're going to allow him -- you're allowing him to do it through a
8 witness who has no connection to this document at all and no basis for
9 it,, the witness was, again, very careful yesterday.
10 The Chamber may recall, and Your Honour, Mr. President, you
11 characterised this witness yesterday as essentially a courier. He was
12 essentially a courier. That was the President's, your own words.
13 Then he says, "I don't want to take about anything I didn't see
14 other hear himself." Here, we're going to ask him to voice an opinion on
15 a letter from the assistant minister in Croatia.
16 I strenuously object, Mr. President.
17 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. President, if I may be heard and perhaps we
18 could just cool the temperature in the room a little bit.
19 The Prosecution in direct examination was trying to elicit very
20 specific information from this particular witness. At the time, the
21 Prosecution was very confident in posing those sorts of questions and
22 expecting the sorts of answers that I guess he hoped to get.
23 At that point in time, the witness, obviously to the Prosecution,
24 seemed competent to answer those questions. The witness occasionally said
25 that he was a courier. That was primarily what his function was, but
1 nonetheless he was pressed. And when the gentleman was unable to answer
2 some of the rather direct questions that the Prosecution was posing, then
3 the Prosecution's tactic changed.
4 At that point in time, the witness became, although not claimed to
5 be hostile, became in a sense a hostile witness and was treated as such,
6 not merely in the form of the questioning, but also in the tone of the
8 Now, as you've indicated, Mr. President, the gentleman here has
9 dealt with financial matters. At this point in time, I'm merely asking a
10 question whether he knows. We haven't heard the answer. If he doesn't
11 know, I sit down. If he knows, I ask him how do you know? He explains.
12 If it's sufficient, I move on and press forward.
13 Also, might I remind the Prosecution that, in the Defence case,
14 assuming there is one, I'm also to avail myself of the very same tactics
15 that the Prosecution does; in other words, introduce documents without any
16 viva voce testimony, or any foundation, for that matter. The Prosecution
17 does it routinely.
18 I'm merely asking one simple question. It is not a self-serving
19 document either. This was based on a request made. It was a formal
20 request. We got an answer. So it's not something I asked from this
21 gentleman, who incidentally is a diplomat, an ambassador right now. I
22 didn't ask him to help the Defence in any personal matter.
23 This was an official of the government of the Republic of Croatia,
24 and he has an obligation to help because he works on the Office of
25 Cooperation. It's through that office that we make formal requests. This
1 was an investigative effort, and I don't see why the Prosecutor is getting
2 all excited. I simply do not understand. What have I done to the
3 Prosecutor today?
4 MR. SCOTT: I am excited because this is an entirely improper way
5 to introduce this sort of evidence, Your Honour. Yes. I am excited
6 because this is entirely improper. It's entirely improper, and it's not
7 the same as what the -- you know, Karnavas's ploy is, you know, a best
8 defence is a good offence, and he turns around and he attacks the
9 Prosecution every time.
10 This was a document prepared specifically at the request of the
11 Defence team by Mr. Muljacic or someone. Mr. Muljacic should be required
12 to come into court and defend what he says in this statement, not getting
13 it in, sneaking this document in through a witness who doesn't know
14 anything about it.
15 This is entirely improper. It has nothing to do with anything the
16 Prosecution has done.
17 MR. KARNAVAS: Okay. Just by way of example, Mr. President, just
18 very quickly; then we can take the break and we can decide what to do.
19 Earlier, I referred to a document, Prosecution document P 00985.
20 That was the document that was in the particular motion that I indicated
21 that we need to respond to. That was the document that was not fully
22 translated, and it was not in the bundle.
23 This is the sort of same document, same type of document that the
24 Prosecution is now using through its motions. Nobody's coming in to
25 testify about these documents. No foundation is laid, nothing, but the
1 Prosecution seems to think that that's okay. Now I'm learning from the
2 Prosecutor. He's teaching me these techniques. I'm doing exactly what
3 they're doing, and I'm grateful for his -- for his teaching.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You need to remain calm,
5 Mr. Karnavas.
6 Witness, the problem is as follows: We have before us a document
7 that seems to be saying that, according to the Republic of Croatia, there
8 was no funding from the budget made available to the ABiH [as
10 Even if you were a courier, you did indicate that you worked in
11 the finance department. Perhaps you know nothing about it. In that case,
12 we can leave it at that.
13 But at the time, when you were in Grude and when you were working
14 alongside Mr. Boban and you were involved in financial matters, did you
15 then have any knowledge or indication that there was some form of official
16 funding on the part of the Republic of Croatia or not? This, of course
17 would mean that the money would have been provided or funded by the budget
18 of the state.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yesterday or the day
20 before yesterday when we were speaking, I said to you that this was 1992
21 and 1993. Believe me, I wouldn't know where the money came from. Since
22 what happened to me happened, I said that from the Republic of Croatia in
23 1992 about 1.4 million German marks came, but not from the budget but from
24 the Republic of Croatia, from the money that was paid by our people from
25 abroad; and, in 1993, it was about 4.5 million.
1 MR. SCOTT: Do I understand -- excuse me. Do I understand, Your
2 Honour, that, Mr. Rupcic has now become an expert witness, who has
3 conducted an analysis of all the budgets of the Republic of Croatia?
4 Excuse me?
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] He is your witness and --
6 MR. SCOTT: Yes, and I asked him about --
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] -- he answered the question
9 MR. SCOTT: Yes. I asked him about specific questions about
10 specific documents and specific transactions: Did you withdraw this cash
11 on this day? Did you go and pick up this money? Is that your signature?
12 Those are the questions. I didn't make him into an expert on the
13 financial dealings of the Republic of Croatia. This is not proper, Your
15 MR. KARNAVAS: Just for the record, on line 10 on page 46, Your
16 Honour, it says "ABiH," and I believe you intended or you'd said "HVO."
17 So that should be corrected, so not ABiH. That's all.
18 I have no further questions, Mr. President. I do apologise for,
19 you know, all this storm in this little teapot of ours. The intention was
20 merely to elicit the kind of testimony that the Prosecution was attempting
21 to elicit, and, unfortunately, the Prosecutor is not happy with his own
22 witness. I cannot help that.
23 Thank you.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It is now time to have a break.
25 We shall have a 20-minute break.
1 --- Recess taken at 10.48 a.m.
2 --- On resuming at 11.10 a.m.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica, according to the
4 calculations of the registrar, you should have one hour and-- according to
5 the very accurate calculations of the registrar, you should have one hour
6 and 45 minutes: An hour for you, half an hour from Mr. Pusic, and 15
7 minutes from Mr. Karnavas.
8 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Good afternoon. Thank you, Your
9 Honours. Thank you, Your Honour. Yes, that would be the right time
11 Cross-examination by Ms. Nozica:
12 Q. Good day, Witness.
13 A. Good day.
14 Q. Now I would like to deal with some of the things you explained
15 during your direct examination; namely, when you explained how the defence
16 department in 1992 and in part of 1993 or throughout 1993 paid personal
17 incomes to professional and active-duty units. I would like you to
18 confirm whether I understood correctly what it was that you were saying.
19 Members of the professional units signed professional contracts,
20 and that was the reason why all members of these units had salaries paid
21 to them. Is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Before we proceed, since you and I speak the same language, please
24 keep your headphones on. For the interpretation, we need to pause between
25 my question and your answer so that everything could be interpreted.
1 As for the active-duty members, do you agree that these are
2 members of the commands of the Main Staff of the HVO, the operative zones,
3 the operative groups, and the commands of brigades? Would that be it, the
4 active-duty members who were paid by the defence department?
5 A. That would be it. Brigades and units have a set establishment of
6 active-duty personnel.
7 Q. You explained that in the right way. Through this book, logbook,
8 it is exactly established a which personnel is in these positions, and
9 these persons were paid out these salaries; is that right?
10 A. Yes, that's right.
11 Q. Yesterday, on several occasions, we heard from you during your
12 direct examination yesterday and the day before yesterday and today during
13 cross-examination by Mr. Karnavas, and we saw this through certain
14 documentation, that some municipalities also financed some units.
15 Now I would just like to ask you to go back to a document. You
16 don't have to look at it. You don't have to go through Mr. Karnavas's
17 binder. It's going to be in e-court, because I'd just like to clarify one
18 thing. That is 1D 01762.
19 While we're waiting for the document in e-court, I'm going to
20 remind you what this is about. This is a document that was adopted by the
21 HVO of the municipality of Livno on the 24th of September, 1993. That is
22 a decision on the professionalisation of the army within brigade, the HVO
23 Brigade Petar Kresimir IV, and defining adequate salaries of TIP.
24 Sir, you answered that professional units, especially you said
25 this in response to the intervention made by His Honour Judge Antonetti,
1 were supposed to be paid by the defence department. However, this
2 decision dates back to September 1993.
3 We see in paragraph II, let's have a look at it together, it says
4 that it is the HVO of Livno, the municipality of Livno, made a decision
5 that members of the professional units of that brigade, starting from the
6 1st of September, 1993, these members would receive a special salary
7 adequate to TIP, something that is called "TIP."
8 You said that you did not see this document before. You said that
9 there was great diversity in payments. You said that there was not an
10 established system, and you also said that the defence department -- or
11 rather, your financial department did not always have enough resources to
12 pay out salaries and to cover other expenses, even for those brigades and
13 units for which they had the duty to do so.
14 Doesn't this document show that at least from the 24th of
15 September, 1993, the municipality of Livno took over the obligation to pay
16 these professional units, too, within the brigade of Petar Kresimir IV?
17 A. That is what can be seen in this document; however, I have to
18 note, and we saw this in previous documents, while they were Home Guard
19 Units, they were still paying their salaries.
20 Q. I have a problem in terms of understanding here. Are you sure
21 that this was a Home Guard Unit, or was this a mobilised brigade?
22 A. A mobilised brigade means a Home Guard Brigade. It's the same
23 thing. Before, in the Yugoslav People's Army, within that system, you had
24 the Territorial Defence, and the Croatian expression for Territorial
25 Defence is Home Guard regiments or Home Guard Units.
1 Q. On the basis of what I've learned so far in this case, I didn't
2 think I would be dealing with this, but there were mobilised members who
3 were in brigades - just a moment, let me finish - then there were separate
4 Home Guard Brigades. Am I right? If you don't know anything about this,
5 if you think it's the same, I'm not going to insist on it.
6 A. No. It's the same brigades. Mobilised brigades are Home Guard
7 Brigades. These are people who did a certain type of work; and then,
8 because of the war and in order to defend their homes, they were mobilised
9 in a unit that was a Home Guard Unit.
10 Q. That is your interpretation. I'm not going to go into that any
11 further, but please let us --
12 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Somebody's intervening. Right?
13 I think that Mr. Praljak would like to help me, and I'm not
14 opposed to that, because I'm almost certain that as far as this particular
15 subject matter is concerned he knows more than I do.
16 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel please speak into the microphone.
17 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Mr. Rupcic, there were
18 professional brigades, there were brigades attached to municipalities,
19 and -- and there were reserve brigades.
20 Now, it was only later that those brigades were -- came to be
21 known as Domobrani or Home Guard brigades. Before that, they were reserve
22 brigades; and then, later on, they had Home Guards who were over the age
23 of 55 or 60, and these people were referred to as Domobrani. But
24 professional brigades, reserve brigades that changed their composition by
25 a third, a half, or two-thirds would be at home while a third would be up
1 at the battle front, and Domobrani, the Home Guards, would be only those
2 who were mobilised from these brigades to perform some very light duties.
3 So would you agree with my interpretation?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You have far greater experience in
5 that area than I do. I would stick to my profession, which means
6 finances. I allow for the possibility that that is so.
7 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I'd like to thank Mr. Praljak. I'd
9 like to continue.
10 I'd like to inform the Trial Chamber that, during the preparations
11 for cross-examination of this witness, Mr. Prlic's Defence cooperated with
12 the Stojic Defence. However, we weren't able to cover all the documents,
13 all of us together. So I'd just like to follow on from what Mr. Karnavas
14 was doing.
15 Q. And, in that sense would, you take a look at my own document which
16 is 2D 00538. It is the pink binder that you have in front of you, and it
17 is the seventh the document from the top, the seventh document in order.
18 Tell me when you've found.
19 A. Yes, I've found it.
20 Q. This is, in fact, a decision on the financing of the Croatian
21 Defence Council of Livno municipality - so we're still staying with Livno
22 municipality - by our workers temporarily employed abroad.
23 Now, Mr. Rupcic, in my next few questions, I'm going to try to
24 show documents and establish that the municipalities, regardless of their
25 obligation of the defence department, financed and collected certain money
1 to finance the brigades which were in their area.
2 Now, Mr. Karnavas showed you document 1D 01761. You don't have to
3 look for it. I'm just saying this for the transcript. The date is the
4 26th of March, 1993; then another document, 1D 00307, dated the 2nd of
5 April, 1993, from Livno municipality about this kind of financing.
6 I want to show you the document because it is a document dated the
7 9th of December, 1992; that is to say, from this document, which is very
8 similar to the one we've already seen, it follows that already in 1992 the
9 Livno municipality had taken a decision on financing the defence. Is that
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. I'd now like to ask you to look at Article III of that document,
13 and you've spoken at length about the situation. This is what it says:
14 "All funds gathered abroad for financing the OHVO of Livno municipality
15 shall be directly to the Livno community in Frankfurt,"" And then there's
16 a bank account number. Article IV addresses that matter, too.
17 Is that what you said, that all the funds that were paid in for
18 the defence of the HVO in 1992 and in 1993 - and that was Mr. Praljak's
19 intervention, too - was in fact paid in to certain accounts outside
20 Bosnia-Herzegovina and indeed outside Croatia, and that's what this
21 document says? Is that right?
22 A. Yes. Correct. So we see here that this municipality of Livno had
23 opened an account in Frankfurt. I didn't know about that account.
24 Q. Thank you. Now let's take a look at the next document. It is
25 2D 00536. It is the fifth document from the top in my binder. We're
1 going to go through this document quickly, and it is the wartime council
2 for Posusje municipality. Tell me when you've found it.
3 It is the war defence council of Posusje, and it is dated the 4th
4 of June, 1992. Once again, it is a decision about remuneration to
5 mobilised recruits, and that's what we mentioned a moment ago --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Mobilised conscripts.
7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation].
8 Q. Now, in Article III, let's see what it says: "Mobilise military
9 conscripts who did not receive compensation at their companies,
10 institutions, or at privately owned businesses due to any reason, as well
11 as mobilised military conscripts who are not employed, shall receive
12 monetary compensation from the fund for the defence of Posusje
14 Article IV goes on to say: "Mobilised military conscripts can
15 receive monetary compensation own on one basis. That is either at the
16 company, institution, and privately owned business or from the fund for
17 the defence of Posusje municipality."
18 Now, in the statement of reasons on the second page of this
19 document, it explains why this decision is being made, and it says: "War
20 events have had deep consequences and have deeply affected the overall
21 life of our municipality. The economy is on its knees." And then, in
22 Article VII: "for mobilised military recruits, that shall be 6.000
23 Croatian dinars."
24 Now, we see from this decision by the war council of Posusje
25 municipality that, in June, the municipality of Posusje has made a
1 decision to finance mobilised military conscripts; is that correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. I'm now going to go on -- to move on, but I have a question before
4 that. When you distributed personal income, salaries, at that time, did
5 you know that the municipalities themselves in their own way were
6 assisting units that had been established or that were on their territory?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you. Now I'd like to move on to the Tomislav municipality,
9 and for that please look at document 2D 00539. It is the fourth document
10 from the bottom of my binder.
11 I have quite a number of documents but I have selected just the
12 most characteristic ones which refer to what you spoke about during your
14 Have you found it?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. This is a decision by the Tomislav municipality dated the 21st of
17 December, 1992, and it is in fact a conclusion made on amendments to the
18 conclusion on taking measures against military conscripts who did not
19 fulfil their obligations from the 15th of December, 1992.
20 I'd like you now to take a look at point 3, paragraph 3, and then
21 I'll ask you a question. It says: "The amount paid as an aid to the
22 Republic of Croatia shall not be calculated into the settlement of
23 financial obligations."
24 Now, Mr. Rupcic, did you know, were you aware that Croatian
25 citizens, and not only citizens who were Croats during the aggression,
1 during the JNA attack against Croatia, paid in certain donations for
2 assistance to Croatia in defending itself from the Serb aggression, and
3 that all this was going on in 1991 and 1990; that is to say, far before
4 the conflicts in Bosnia-Herzegovina began?
5 A. Well, if you remember what I said, that is what I confirmed in my
6 previous statements.
7 Q. So from this decision made by the Tomislavgrad municipality, well,
8 it states that you have certain obligations to finance units which were
9 established in Tomislavgrad municipality, but it says that the amount paid
10 as aid to the Republic of Croatia shall not be calculated into the
11 settlement of these financial obligations.
12 So Mijo Tokic says, the president of the HVO, you have a new
13 obligation to assist the defence of the HVO; right?
14 A. Yes.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. A while ago you
16 referred to this, but we don't have your statements and that's a problem.
17 And, in paragraph 3, there's something new, a new piece of information
18 which I've just discovered.
19 It seems that, as far as the municipalities are concerned, some
20 funds were sent to the Republic of Croatia to help the Republic of
21 Croatia. Is that how we should understand this paragraph, paragraph 3?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Judge, when I was
23 talking about the overall aid which came in from the Republic of Croatia,
24 I said at the time that the Croatian people from Bosnia-Herzegovina paid
25 in considerable financial resources into the account in Villach, which was
1 called the account for the defence of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.
2 From that money paid into that account and other accounts,
3 Bosnia-Herzegovina, or rather, the HVO received 1.400.000 in 1992 and 4.5
4 million in 1993.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. But my question was a more
6 accurate question. I wanted to know whether this document establishes
7 that there were funds that were -- the money was coming from these
8 municipalities and sent to the Republic of Croatia and that the money was
9 only coming from Croatian citizens abroad.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Croats who were living abroad. Now,
11 the municipality would say, "Yes, you did pay in that money into that
12 account, but it is your duty to defend your municipality, or, rather, to
13 financing your own municipality. So the fact that you paid in money over
14 there, we're not interested in that. We don't count that. Give some
15 money to us."
16 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
17 Q. For us to clarify this whole issue and the question raised by
18 Judge Antonetti, well, you have given an answer and you said that it
19 wasn't the municipalities which financed the Croatian defence but
21 Now, I'd like to ask you, to make certain that what you're saying
22 is correct, for us to go back to a document shown to you by Mr. Karnavas,
23 which is in my own binder, and it is 2D 00540. It will come up on e-court
24 but you can also look at did in hard copy. It is the third document from
25 the bottom.
1 Tell me when you've found it. It's come up on e-court.
2 We'll see from that document that, in fact, the Tomislavgrad
3 municipality, on the 2nd of August, 1992, made this decision to finance
4 the requirements of a total national defence; and pursuant to this, in
5 Article 2, it gives -- passes this responsibility to citizens. It has so
6 much for men, so much for women, and then citizens employed in Austria,
7 and then you have the men, women columns.
8 Was this in fact financing by individuals and not financing of the
9 municipality, which possibly the municipality then transferred to Croatia?
10 A. Well, that's what I said. The municipality collected money from
11 individuals, and it didn't send that money to Croatia. It financed its
12 own soldiers on its own territory.
13 Q. Before that, it was individuals from that municipality as
14 individuals paying in sums of money for -- in order to assist the defence
15 of Croatia from the JNA aggression; is that right?
16 A. That's what I said a moment ago. They said, "What you paid into
17 those accounts, we're not interested in any way of that. You should now
18 pay in to the municipality money that can be distributed to their own
20 So it was the defence department that did not have information and
21 did not dispose of the money that was paid into the municipalities.
22 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers kindly slow down and make
23 pauses between question and answer. Thank you.
24 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I've been asked to slow down. Yes.
25 Q. I'm going to ask you now to move on to another document. It is 2D
1 00535, which is the fourth document in my binder. Tell me when you've
2 found it, please.
3 A. I have found it.
4 Q. This is a document compiled by the Croatian Defence Council of
5 Tomislavgrad, on the 20th of February, 2003 [as interpreted]. It is the
6 financing of Tomislavgrad --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: 1993.
8 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation].
9 Q. -- until the present day. It calls for financing to be taken over
10 and to compensate the costs incurred to date.
11 Now, in the first sentence, and I'm just going to focus on certain
12 parts of the text, it says in the first sentence: "As you already
13 know..." This was sent to the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna, the
14 Croatian Defence Council. It says: "As you already know, Tomislavgrad
15 municipality and its area ... has 3.500 soldiers engaged, of which 2.800
16 soldiers from its territory."
17 It says: "From the beginning of the war until the present time,
18 Tomislavgrad municipality did not receive financial help either from the
19 HZ HB or any other municipality. It had to bear all war expenses by
20 itself, and thus was forced to engage its material and monetary funds."
21 Now, take a look at the Croatian version and the last paragraph on
22 the first page. It says: "Within the Kralj Tomislav Brigade, there is
23 one battalion from Kupres, one battalion from Posusje. It could hardly be
24 expected from Kupres municipality for it to bear the expenses for its army
25 and refugees by itself, and also Posusje municipality did not take over
1 expenses for its battalion ..."
2 Well, it's a battalion that was in the Tomislavgrad area. I don't
3 know if you know anything about that, but that's what it says here.
4 And then it goes on to say in the Croatian text: "Besides that,
5 the organisation and training of the Jajce battalion was organised, which
6 after the fall of Jajce was again situated in the area of Tomislavgrad,
7 together with the refugees, was borne by the Tomislavgrad municipality,
8 which created additional financial and material burden."
9 Now, we have a calculation of how much Tomislavgrad municipality
10 spent on defence; and then, in continuation, there's a proposal asking
11 that the HZ HB take over the financing of all expenses for defence and
12 that it should compensate Tomislavgrad municipality for expenses incurred.
13 Now, do you know that even after this date, the 20th of February,
14 1992 [as interpreted], in fact, this financing was continued by the
15 Tomislavgrad municipality, or rather, the defence department never had
16 sufficient funds for -- in order to finance all the members of the HVO?
17 A. That is correct.
18 Q. Now I'd like to move on to another topic.
19 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] My colleague tells me that that is
20 mistake in the transcript, and I thank her for that. The page is 60, line
21 22. It's not 1992. That's right. It is 1993. That's the year.
22 Q. We're going to move on to another topic now, one that the
23 Prosecutor insisted upon during the direct examination; namely, how
24 decisions were made on the allocation of resources that were coming to
25 your financial department. Who made these decisions in different periods
1 of time?
2 Could we now please focus on the initial period? We can say that
3 that was 1992, and perhaps 1993, half of 1993, when you said, actually,
4 that throughout that time, and even after that, there was never enough
5 money; and that, to the best of your knowledge, the priorities were set by
6 Mr. Boban as to who would be paid out. Did I understand you correctly?
7 A. Yes, you did understand me correctly.
8 Q. I assume that you still have the Prosecutor's binder in front of
9 you. Yesterday, the Prosecutor showed you document number -- do you still
10 have it?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Could you please take it. Yesterday, the Prosecutor showed you
13 P 10290. We have the document in e-court, but could you please find it as
14 well. It's going to be easier for you to see it.
15 A. I've found it.
16 Q. This is a payroll for the month of October 1992. Isn't that
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Before speaking to the Prosecutor, did you see this document?
20 A. Before speaking to the Prosecutor, no, I do not recall.
21 Q. You said that the document was not signed by Mr. Stojic, and that
22 can be seen from the document itself.
23 A. That's right.
24 Q. You said that the document was signed by Mr. Majic, your superior.
25 Am I right?
1 A. Yes. I said that having seen the card of depositor signatures, I
2 recognised the signature of Mr. Majic.
3 Q. As we can see, the document is not verified by a stamp of the head
4 of the defence department. Do you perhaps know what this stamp looked
6 A. I don't know.
7 Q. Very well. Let us look at page 1. Was this document written on
8 the official paper of the defence department? Did you have occasion to
9 see that? It's the upper part.
10 A. Yes. It said the defence department on the top.
11 Q. On the document, there is a log number, whatever you call it,
12 03-2541/92; is that right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Could you please have a look at the document -- or rather,
15 document P 00586. That is the document with a yellow sticker towards the
16 bottom of my binder.
17 Sir, when you find it, 586 is the number, yellow sticker.
18 A. I've found it.
19 Q. We are not going to go any further. Just look at page 1. It has
20 to do with the establishment of the defence section, and it is a document
21 dated the 17th of October, 1992, so just a day before the one that we
22 looked at a minute ago. The number on it is 03-142.
23 On this document, it says exactly what you said that the
24 letterhead says, "the defence department"; right?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Mr. Stojic signed that, and that cannot be contested; right?
2 A. I recognised it also from the card.
3 Q. Let's go back to document P 0290?
4 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Can counsel please speak
5 into the microphone. We have great difficulty hearing her. Thank you.
6 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
7 Q. We see a difference here in terms of the number of this document
8 in addition to other noted differences, which makes it obvious that the
9 document was not written at the office of the head of the defence
10 department. Could you draw the same conclusion?
11 A. I don't know where it was written, the form, that is, but I know,
12 or rather, I see -- well, I have seen this difference, yes.
13 Q. Sir, I asked you all of this because you said that at first, when
14 the HZ HB started functioning, as far as the allocation of resources was
15 concerned, when there was money, Mr. Boban made the decisions. However,
16 you also said and this document does show that this money was withdrawn
17 and distributed to the mentioned units, and that cannot be contested;
19 A. No doubt about that.
20 Q. Sir, was there a technical problem? Well, I'm going to give you
21 an assumption. Mr. Boban perhaps did not propose this document, did not
22 give a number, did not give it to Mr. Majic to sign it. Would it be
23 technically logical that it was drafted by -- that had it been drafted by
24 Mr. Stojic, he could have done that in his office and sent it by fax to
25 Grude; then it would have had the stamp, the signature, and the number
1 that is required and that would show that this had to do with the things
2 that he was deciding about at the time?
3 A. Well, it would have been possible for them to do that.
4 Q. I am sorry. I will slow down.
5 The situation is identical with document P 0291. Can you find
6 that document? Now it is that binder of documents, the Prosecution
7 binder. Can you find the document that is the payroll actually?
8 A. I found it.
9 Q. We haven't got it in e-court, but I hope that we will see it on
10 e-court as well. The page is 0289 -- 0289-8284. That's the ERN number of
11 the Croatian translation. So it's the same document, and the date is the
12 same; however, these are just salaries for December; is that right?
13 A. That's right.
14 Q. You were authorised to collect the money by Mr. Jelavic and
15 Mr. Majic?
16 A. That's right.
17 Q. You withdrew the money on the 17th of December 1992?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. I would like to ask you to have a look at this document and see
20 for which purposes this amount of money was withdrawn. Can you confirm
21 that there's a reference here to the HVO in municipalities that were not
22 within the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna?
23 I'm going to help you. It is the HVO Zepce under number 1; then
24 2, Maglaj; 3, Novi Seher; 4, Teslic; 5, Zavidovici; and 12, Zenica. Am I
1 To the best of your recollection, were these municipalities within
2 the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna?
3 A. As far as I can remember, they were not.
4 Q. Sir, do you know that the HVO -- that actually HVO units existed
5 throughout the territory outside HZ HB, and that in some territories they
6 even fought together with the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina against the Serb
8 A. That's right.
9 Q. I would like to note that these HVOs are noted in the previous
10 list of salaries for October.
11 The Prosecutor asked you, during your interview in 2005, why item
12 22 for the 1st Herzegovinian Brigade exceeds the amount for other cases.
13 If you remember your answer, could you tell us what it was? It is 22.
14 A. This brigade was in the area of Capljina and Stolac; that is to
15 say, that it included that area which was engaged in immediate activity.
16 So, in that area, there was absolutely no economic activity. Nothing was
17 functioning at the time. No money could be collected, so, well, almost
18 half of that brigade consisted of Bosniaks.
19 Q. Sir, was it a big brigade in terms of personnel levels?
20 A. Yes. It had about 5.000 men.
21 Q. As far as I remember, that's what you said to the Prosecutor, too.
22 Did that brigade include Neum, Capljina, and Stolac, as far as you can
24 A. Yes. Yes, that entire area.
25 Q. Could you now find in my binder document 2D 00150. There is a
1 yellow sticker there.
2 A. Yes, I've found it.
3 Q. Sir, we see, in this document, it's a defence department document,
4 the 9th of June, 1993. It says: "Overview of the national structure of
5 the members of the HVO," and then it is being delivered.
6 Please look at page 2, and we will find this 1st Herzegovinian
7 brigade. It is under number 14 here. Have you found it?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. On the date, this was received in June 1993. In the month of
10 June, can you confirm, if you remember, that already then there was a
11 conflict between the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the HVO?
12 A. Yes, in certain areas.
13 MR. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I am sorry. I apologise to
14 interpreters. We are going to be more careful.
15 Q. At that point, the brigade has 4.686 members, out of which 1.659
16 are Muslims. That is roughly what you remember, too; right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. His Honour Judge Antonetti asked you about the professional unit
19 called the Convicts Battalion, so could we have a look at item 36. It's
20 the Convicts Battalion. It had 280 members, is that right, that is what
21 it stated here, out of which 116 were Bosniaks or Muslims? Do you
22 remember that it had a large number of Muslims?
23 A. I don't recall the exact number, but I did know that they had
25 Q. Finally, sir, I would like to ask you to look at another document.
1 If it's hard for you to find it I'm going to ask for it in e-court. It
2 has to do with the transfer of resources and what you were involved in.
3 P 10291 is an order issued by Mr. Susak.
4 The document has an ERN number, 0289 -- 0289-8283. You'll see it
5 on e-court.
6 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Yes, precisely. Thank you. Thank
7 you. We are getting very efficient assistance.
8 Q. Please, the Prosecutor showed you this document, but let us focus
9 on this transaction of 306.000.000, et cetera, Croatian dinars. Does it
10 say here, in paragraph 1, that this is a loan?
11 A. Yes.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could counsel speak into
13 the microphone. We really cannot hear her.
14 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
15 Q. We're going to move on to the annual report, so could you please
16 look at the Prosecution binder. P 089 -- 08181 is the number, P 08181.
17 A. Okay.
18 Q. When you find it, could you tell me.
19 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Could we please go to the page that
20 has to do with the finance department and the page that has to do with the
21 structure of revenue from the 1st of January until the 31st of December,
23 Q. It is roughly page 7.
24 A. Okay.
25 Q. You've found it, but the others need to follow it, too.
1 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] It's not in my binder, so I will say
2 in the Croatian version it is page 03469322. I'm sure that it will be
3 found. I think that it's the seventh page in English, and I'm sure that
4 the Honourable Trial Chamber will manage to find it as well.
5 Q. The Prosecutor asked you something about expenditures but not
6 about revenues. Before any question about this balance sheet, Mr. Rupcic,
7 can you confirm to us that the records of expenditures and revenues that
8 were compiled in 1993 were proper and regular, and that can be seen from
9 the cards that follow?
10 Was everything recorded, all the expenditures and all the revenues
11 in that year?
12 A. I can confirm that absolutely everything was recorded and that
13 this report went to the finance department, later the Ministry of Finance,
14 the civilian one, and it was used as proof.
15 Q. We are talking about the structure of revenues here for all of
16 1993 expressed in Croatian dinars; is that right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Let us try to see what it was in 1993 that the defence department
19 of the HZ HB received from Croatia. I'm going to put a question to you,
20 and you're going to tell me.
21 Here it says, "Revenue from the budget and from donations." Is
22 the first item the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia, Zagreb?
23 A. It says, "The Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia,
24 Zagreb," but we're going back to my testimony earlier on, to the effect
25 that the Republic of Croatia, or rather, the individuals such as Mr. Susak
1 and Mr. Zagorac, were authorised to use money in foreign banks, deposited
2 in foreign banks. So they were the signatories on the accounts. Their
3 signatures were deposited, and they transferred the money.
4 Q. We'll come to that in due course, sir, but this is what it says
5 here, and that was where we had our discussion when Mr. Karnavas asked you
6 about this. You claim that large sums of money, donations from citizens
7 of both Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia, were paid in to certain accounts
8 for the defence of the HZ HB, and that part of that money, de facto, would
9 appear as if it had passed through the Ministry of Defence of Croatia on a
10 piece of paper like that. Am I right in saying that?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. But we're not going to deal with that now. We're just going to
13 calculate the sum. You said the amount, and you told us how much there
14 was in 1993 that came from Croatia. Here, we have the exact figures from
15 a document provided to us by the Prosecution, so we don't have to guess.
16 We can calculate it exactly, and please help us out here.
17 A. It is 16.760.000 -- I beg your pardon, 16.764.924.236 Croatian
18 dinars, which corresponds to --
19 Q. Just a moment, please. We'll calculate it in just a moment.
20 Would you take a look at the first item, where it says "Received in DEM."
21 Does the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia appear here as
23 A. Yes, it does.
24 Q. From the entire structure of revenues, these were only two items
25 which arrived - and you can confirm that, can you not - from the Defence
1 Ministry of the Republic of Croatia, or rather, that would be the sum
2 total of all the individual transactions shown to you by the Prosecutor.
3 Isn't that right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Now, do you believe me when I say - I'm not as good a
6 mathematician as you are but I use the computer - that if you add up these
7 two figures, it would come to 17.033.694.236 Croatian dinars?
8 A. That's right.
9 Q. I'm sure you can see that visually and check out the maths of
11 A. Correct.
12 Q. And you said that was about 4.5 million, if I understood you
13 correctly, roughly 4.5 million; is that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Marks, marks? 4.5 million marks; right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Sir, to avoid any guesswork, the Prosecutor showed you many
18 documents from which, with your help, we can calculate exactly what the
19 exchange rate of the Croatian dinar was on different days. Since this is
20 the sheaf for 1993 as a whole, I would like to ask you -- and this will
21 come up on e-court, I assume, because we haven't had this document in
23 But, anyway, it is in the binder which in the binder is P 10297,
24 and the ERN number is 0342-4345.
25 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] As that contains a large number of
1 documents, I would like to have it on e-court. The next one. That's not
2 the right document. I'm looking at another document, ERN number
4 It is a document from the Privredna Banka of Zagreb, where it says
5 "Sales" at the top.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. I'd like to come back to a
7 document, the document which shows the balance between expenditure and
8 revenue, which is document 2118. 2118, Revenue. I can see "Republic of
9 Croatia, Ministry of Defence, Zagreb," and I can a total of 16.764.924.236
10 Croatian dinars. Apparently, that would be a contribution from the
11 Republic of Croatia. Next, on the next page, you can see the total of all
12 the revenue. As a total, you have 185.682.783.197 dinars.
13 This takes different items into account among which some foreign
14 currency amounts; and, incidentally, I note that the HVO has a dollar
15 amount for 1.156.000.997 dollars, et cetera. I think aren't dollars,
16 because the Americans aren't in Tuzla. This is my reasoning.
17 If I look at what Croatian Republic has given, 110.000.000.000 and
18 185.000.000.000, the direct funding from Croatia is less than 10 per cent.
19 Correct me if I'm wrong.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, no, you're not wrong,
21 but let me underline, once again. It's not that the Republic of Croatia
22 gave that. It just transferred the money on. It went via Croatia.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. Fine.
24 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I was going to come to
25 that through my questions, but I just want to see if we can confirm what
1 the witness said.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could it be quick, please.
3 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I'd like us to arrive at the
4 witness's answer - and he repeated his answer several times - at how much
5 that sum was in marks, to confirm that through the documents that we have.
6 We now have on e-court a document which is called "Sale." And in
7 that document, we have all the elements on the basis of which we're able
8 to calculate the exchange rate of the Croatian dinars for the 12th of
9 November, 1993.
10 Q. We can see here - now, Witness, please help me out here - that
11 12.447.600 Croatian dinars is equal to 3.280 German marks. Am I right?
12 A. Correct.
13 Q. If we divide these two figures, then we would obtain the exchange
14 rate, or rather, the value of one mark. Is that correct?
15 A. Correct.
16 Q. When we calculate this division, it appears that 1 mark was equal
17 to 3.795 Croatian dinars on the 21st of November, 1993, when this
18 transaction was carried out?
19 A. Correct.
20 Q. So, following on from that calculation, although it cannot be
21 applied for the 31st of December when the inflation was even greater; am I
22 right in saying that?
23 A. Yes, you are.
24 Q. Then, this sum, which came from Croatia, in fact would represent
25 4.488.445 German marks. Is that what you knew and what you testified
1 about? Am I right?
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. Thank you. I'd like to move on now to another set of questions
4 directly related to your last answer to His Honour Judge Antonetti, and it
5 refers to donations.
6 If I might interpret it in my own way, you in fact said you
7 consider that the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia sent on
8 money from the resources collected and deposited in different accounts
9 paid in by citizens, both of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, for
10 assistance to Bosnia-Herzegovina. Am I right in saying that?
11 A. Correct.
12 Q. Now, I am going to continue on from where Mr. Karnavas left off in
13 his cross-examination because I have several documents here, and one of
14 the documents is technically perhaps better than the one shown by
15 Mr. Karnavas.
16 So let's look at 2D 00534, please, and it is the last document in
17 my binder. It's the last document. It's a document described by -- or
18 rather, signed by Mr. Boban on the 20th of April, and addressed to three
19 people: Pero Milolaza, Martin Soljic, and Ivo Zrno. It is 1992.
20 Let's see what Mr. Boban tells them: "Based on an invitation to
21 all donors for a fund to aid for Herceg-Bosnia from abroad, please submit
22 the cash which you brought to the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of
23 Croatia. On the money order, state that payment is aid for Herceg-Bosna,"
24 and then it goes on to say, "please convey our deep gratitude to all the
25 donors," et cetera, et cetera.
1 I'm quite sure, sir, that you've never seen this document before.
2 Am I right?
3 A. Yes, that's right. I've haven't seen, no.
4 Q. You said that you knew that these funds existed; right?
5 A. Especially after the affairs in Croatia.
6 Q. From this document, does it emerge quite clearly that Mr. Boban is
7 telling the donors that he asks that the cash that they brought in be hand
8 over to the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Croatia; and from this
9 document, what you have been claiming all along can be seen that those
10 donations were handed over to the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of
12 A. Whether to the Ministry of Finance or not, I didn't know that.
13 But to accounts opened by the Croatian state in foreign banks, I knew
14 about that.
15 Q. Yes. It is my suggestion that not only the Ministry, yes, because
16 we can see that, that is correct, and the funds that you showed in the
17 balance sheet for 1993, that certain funds came from other accounts, not
18 only via the Defence Ministry; is that right?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Let's look at another document that follows on from this is
21 2D 00533. It is the penultimate document in my binder, to see where the
22 funds arrived ultimately and whether what Mr. Boban signed for here is
23 correct. It is a confirmation from the Ministry of Finance, confirming
24 the receipt of money, and that foreign currency was handed over to the
25 tune 224.000 marks.
1 It says: "The Ministry commits to inform the Croatian national
2 committee at Grude about the amount of funds received which are allocated
3 for the defence of Herceg-Bosna," and it says: "The Croatian Defence
4 Council should inform municipalities in the communities of Herceg-Bosna."
5 Their municipalities are enumerated. In the signatures -- and the
6 signatures we have Martin Soljic, Pero Milolaza, and Ivo Zrno. They
7 appeared in the first letter we mentioned signed by Mr. Boban; right?
8 A. [No verbal response].
9 Q. From these two documents, I know you don't know about these two
10 documents; but as you have already told us, you do know about how the
11 system functioned; if not then, at least later on.
12 So from this documents, can we see that those donor resources,
13 quite a large number 224.000 deutschemarks, were money received from
14 individuals handed over to the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of
15 Croatia? Is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Sir, can we now take a look, once again, at a document that we've
18 already seen? It's important in view of Judge Antonetti's question. It
19 is 2D 00532, and it is the third document from the top. It is Mr. Boban's
20 letter. We weren't able to see his actual signature a moment ago. Tell
21 me when you've found it.
22 A. I've found it.
23 Q. It is true, sir, that this document does have Mr. Boban's
24 signature, and let's confirm one thing, again.
25 On the basis of the document we saw a moment ago, did you notice
1 that Mr. Boban is mentioning funds for assistance to Croatia? They are
2 documents from April 1992. Here, he says: "In recent times, there are
3 more and more actions of gathering aid for Bosnia and Herzegovina, both in
4 the Republic of Croatia and abroad. At this moment, that aid is of
5 exceptional -- extreme importance."
6 Then, he goes on to say that: "All your assistance for
7 Bosnia-Herzegovina," I'd like to emphasise that, "Bosnia and Herzegovina,
8 goes through Zagreb and our fund for aid to Croatia at Villach, Austria,
9 which has been in existence for a long time, and is under the control of
10 the government of the Republic of Croatia, which you used so far to make
12 Then it says: "On the payment orders, you can underline or
13 transfer orders. You can underline that your contributions are intended
14 for Bosnia and Herzegovina." Right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Mr. Boban goes on to say, in the second sentence of the
17 penultimate paragraph, he says that: "Defence is not something that is
18 specifically linked to just one village or municipality. That it is a
19 question of the defence of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Croatian
20 people as a whole, and that is why our defence must be comprehensive,
21 complete," and then he goes on to say, "defence from the Chetnik hoards."
22 And then we have these bank accounts; right? We have bank
23 accounts into which the money was supposed to be paid.
24 Now, clearly, from this document, it emerges that it is assistance
25 and aid to both Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina; is that right?
1 A. Yes, it is.
2 Q. Now I'd like us to look -- well, Judge Antonetti asked you whether
3 this was acted upon, but let's look at 2D 00543, one of my own documents.
4 Tell me when you find it.
5 A. I've found it.
6 Q. This is a document from an Austrian bank. We can see, on the
7 first page of the document, that this has to do with depositing funds in a
8 particular account, 53.000 deutschemark. Mr. Jure Zovko made the payment,
9 and we see on the right-hand side that the payment was made on the 27th of
10 April, 1992.
11 Sir, one thing that is very important: We see here the number of
12 the account, and we see the name of the account. Could you please have a
13 look at the previous document as well, that is to say, Mr. Boban's
14 document, so that we are assured that this payment made is based on the
15 previous document.
16 We see the number, /647/643, and it says, "Funds for supporting
17 Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina. Can we see that from the original? It can
18 be seen in the translation, but we can see it in the original, too.
19 I am going to give you time. It is of particular importance for
20 me to -- for you to compare the numbers of these two accounts in this
21 document and in Mr. Boban's proclamation.
22 A. The first account in Mr. Boban's proclamation corresponds to the
23 number here, and it has to do with German marks.
24 Q. Sir, Mr. Jure Zovko made this payment; right? Is that is what is
25 said here?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. We also have attached here a list of persons from whom this month
3 any was collected. Mr. Zovko is number 3; am I right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. On the basis of these documents and your own knowledge from that
6 period, the major donations were coming in for assistance to
7 Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Croatian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and this
8 money was actually paid abroad and arrived in the way that we just
9 described and showed?
10 A. Correct.
11 Q. I have only two more groups of questions. One could be a bit
12 longer, but could I --
13 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me, counsel. Just before we leave that
14 document, can I, so the record is clear, I take it it's the position of
15 the Stojic Defence at least that then the Boban letter predates, predates
16 April 1992. Is that your understanding, since you say the payments from
17 the other document flow from that letter? So I take this letter is dated
18 sometime prior to April 1992?
19 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] No, my learned friend. As for this
20 payment, document 2D 00543, you can see that the document is the 27th of
21 April, 1992.
22 MR. SCOTT: Yes.
23 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] On that document, you can see that
24 the payment was made to the account that is referred to in Mr. Boban's
25 document. That is document 2D 00532. The Defence is just claiming what
1 is logical. May I just finish, please?
2 We are saying the only logical thing; namely, that this document
3 written by Mr. Boban must have been written before the 27th of April,
5 MR. SCOTT: Thank you.
6 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] In all fairness, in all fairness,
7 this document does say that these funds for Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia
8 were paid earlier; but in Mr. Boban's document, it says that: "In the
9 future, this money should not be paid only for Croatia but also for Bosnia
10 and Herzegovina," and that is shown by this document.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could counsel please speak
12 up. We can barely hear her.
13 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, counsel. So that the record is clear,
14 then, the Boban letter is dated prior to April 27, 1992.
15 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] The Stojic Defence did not say that.
16 I just linked up two documents, and I drew a conclusion on the basis of
18 MR. SCOTT: Well, what's your conclusion? I'm sorry to belabour
19 the point, Your Honour, but I think it's a point worth making given what's
20 been said by the Defence. Counsel, on one hand, I quite properly
21 understood her to be saying, that she connected the two documents
22 together, referred to the accounts, and specifically suggested that the
23 contributions made on the -- as reflected in the document dated the 27th
24 of April, 1992, flowed from Mr. Boban's letter, which is number 2D 00532.
25 That's my understanding of it, and, therefore, counsel says it's
1 only logical. I don't think it was a response. I don't think the month
2 was coming in response to a letter that was sent sometime later. You
3 can't respond to a letter that doesn't exist yet.
4 I just asked counsel, and I thought it was fairly straightforward,
5 if we could just have a confirmation, then, that Mr. Boban's letter is
6 dated sometime prior to 27 April, 1992. It seems logical.
7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] My learned friend, thank you, but it
8 seems to me that you're trying to confuse me. I am not making a statement
9 here. I am showing documents here, and I'm saying what my conclusions are
10 on the basis of these documents. It is also the right of the Prosecution
11 to draw their own conclusions on the basis of the documents that are
12 here -- shown here.
13 MR. SCOTT: So the fact of the matter then is we don't know if
14 there is any connection between the two. Counsel doesn't want to make the
15 connection between the two documents then.
16 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could you please cut
17 this short --
18 [Overlapping speakers]
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] -- let's look at these three
20 documents: There is Boban's letter, 20th of April, 1992, asking Soljic,
21 Milolaza, Zrno to act when it comes to the payment of funds. This is
22 document number one.
23 The second document, this is the Nuremberg bank, 27th of April,
24 1992, with 53.000 deutschemark.
25 There is a third document which is not dated, which was a letter
1 which was probably sent by Boban to donors, which is undated, in which
2 there is an account number, 350647643, for payments in deutschemark. The
3 payment should be, no doubt, in a bank located in Austria.
4 Nuremberg, for all those who are not aware of that, is not located
5 in Austria.
6 You can proceed.
7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] By your leave, I would just like
8 briefly to say something in relation to a sentence from document 2D 00532.
9 It is the second paragraph where Mr. Boban says: "All your
10 assistance for Bosnia-Herzegovina goes through Zagreb, and our fund for
11 supporting Croatia in Villach, Austria, which has been in existence for a
12 long time now and which has been under the control of the government of
13 Croatia and to which you have been making statements so far."
14 And the most important sentence: "On the money orders, you can
15 underline the assistance is meant for Bosnia and Herzegovina," and that is
16 why I showed this document from the Austrian bank, where it does say that
17 it is the fund for Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.
18 That is why I concluded that this proclamation written by
19 Mr. Boban had to pre-date there money order.
20 Q. You were a member of the HVO; and, later on, you started working
21 in the Federal Ministry of Defence, as you explained to us; is that right?
22 A. Yes, that's right.
23 Q. Can you tell me, as a member of the HVO and as a member of the
24 Croatian component in the army of the federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
25 you received vouchers for privatisation just like members of the army of
2 A. Yes, I did.
3 Q. When was it that these privatisation vouchers were being handed
4 out and when could you use these benefits? Tell me roughly what year this
6 A. 1999, 2000, something like that.
7 Q. Did you get them precisely as a soldier of the HVO, and did
8 these -- were these vouchers based on your total number of years of
9 service in the HVO?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Let us explain this to the Court, if you can help me. Every
12 member of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the HVO in Bosnia-Herzegovina
13 received certain vouchers with which he could take part in the
14 privatisation process of state property, and the value of these vouchers
15 was established in accordance with the number of years of service spent in
16 the HVO and the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina equally.
17 A. Yes, that's right. 400 marks per month.
18 Q. Perhaps the questions are going to seem too simple for you, but
19 please answer them?
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We will proceed in a few
21 minutes' time. We will have a 20-minute break now and resume afterwards.
22 So we will have a 20-minute break now.
23 --- Recess taken at 12.33 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 12.53 p.m.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Now, as far as our timing is
1 concerned, Ms. Nozica, you should have approximately 40 minutes left.
2 Mr. Coric's Defence counsel has 15 minutes.
3 Mr. Scott, how much time would you need for your redirect?
4 MR. SCOTT: Obviously, Your Honour, I can only give an estimate
5 since there's still outstanding cross-examinations, but I would expect
6 perhaps around 20 minutes.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Right. Mr. Coric's Defence
9 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I wanted to say that we
10 won't be having any questions, so we cede our 15 minutes to Ms. Nozica if
11 she needs the time.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So, Ms. Nozica, if
13 you would like to have these extra 15 minutes, this means that you have an
15 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I am almost
16 certain that I'll be able to complete my cross-examination within 15
17 minutes. So with the time that Mr. Scott said he would need, this means
18 that we ought to finish by the end of the day today.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Please proceed.
20 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Well, if I'm
21 at least in part responsible for that miracle to happen, then I'll be very
23 Q. Before the break, we talked about vouchers and privatisation, and
24 you said that you had the same rights and the same rights were recognised
25 through those vouchers your entire affiliation with the HVO; is that
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. Did every soldier in Siroki Brijeg have the same rights as HVO
4 soldiers in Travnik, Sarajevo, Tuzla, Posavina, and Bihac?
5 A. Yes, they did.
6 Q. So that means the same rights amongst themselves equal to all
7 those rights that each member of the BH army had; right?
8 A. Right.
9 Q. I specified the rights to privatisation. Now, can you confirm
10 that they also had all the other rights, the rights to a pension, the
11 rights to receiving commendations, medals, and all the other rights that
12 belonged to them while they were members of the HVO, that they were the
13 same as members of the BH army members to the present day? They enjoy all
14 those rights to today; right?
15 A. Yes, that's right. They have absolutely the same rights.
16 Q. The parliament of the federation, for example, of the federation
17 of Bosnia-Herzegovina, decides about medals and commendations. Now, did
18 the HVO members also have the right to receive medals and commendations
19 for their participation in the HVO?
20 A. The members of the HVO had their commendations. They were not
21 called the same as those for the -- the BH army, but they enjoyed the same
22 rights. That is quite true.
23 Q. Now, the HVO or members of the HVO, did they have the same status
24 in all respects as the BH army members, if the members were a Croat, for
25 example, and the command of the army of the federation was a Muslim and
1 vice versa?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Can you confirm that after the signature of the Washington
4 Agreement, the Ministry of Defence of the federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina
5 mostly functioned in such a way as if the minister was a Croat, the deputy
6 was a Muslim, and vice versa? Is that how things worked?
7 A. Yes, correct.
8 Q. But, ultimately, all the rights for the members of both armies
9 were equally recognised and they were treated equally; is that right?
10 A. Yes, that is right.
11 Q. Now, sir, I'd like to ask you, and this will be my final question,
12 whether you know about this and can confirm it: For 1992 and 1993, the
13 defence department did not compile its budget?
14 A. No, it did not compile its budget, for the simple reason that
15 there were no indices on the basis of which you could calculate a budget.
16 Q. So can that also be said for the civilian part of the HVO, as you
17 call it? Do you know about that? Did they not calculate their budget for
18 1992 and 1993 for the same reasons?
19 A. No. They certainly didn't, because they weren't able to calculate
20 it and compile it because we had no indicators according to which that
21 could be done. You have to have certain parameters on the basis of which
22 you're going to write it.
23 Q. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
24 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. That
25 completes my cross-examination.
1 Questioned by the Court:
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, just before giving the
3 floor to Mr. Scott for his redirect, I have a short question to put to
4 you. I would like you to look at 2D 00150.
5 As far as the HVO is concerned and the breakdown, how many
6 Croatian, how many Muslim members make it up. Do you have this chart?
7 A. Yes, I do.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This chart, for the transcript,
9 indicates that the total number of soldiers is 36.797, broken down as
10 follows: 30.841 Croatians and 5.956 Muslims.
11 A. Correct.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This chart provides a breakdown
13 according to each brigade, and we can see that there are brigades which
14 have a greater number of Muslim members. For instance, under point 5,
15 101st Brigade, there would be 35 per cent, 56 per cent, 34 per cent; 105th
16 brigade would have where the Muslims are in the majority, 48.41; however,
17 in some brigades, the 4th Brigade, for instance, out of 3.953, there are
18 only 200 Muslims.
19 I find these figures surprising. This clearly indicates that
20 there are a great number of Muslims in the HVO. Were you aware of such a
22 A. I knew that there were Bosniaks, that is to say, Muslims, in HVO
23 units. Now, how many exactly, well, I didn't deal with that kind of
24 thing. Quite simply, when calculating the active-duty salaries, I would
25 come across Bosniak names.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Now, having have a look at
2 number 36, the Battalion of Convicts. Have you heard of this battalion?
3 A. I didn't understand the question. Could you repeat it, please?
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could you please look at point
5 36, item 36, the Convicts Battalion. They would be 280 in all. It seems
6 that 116 members are Muslims, approximately 41 per cent. Were you aware
7 of that?
8 A. I knew there were Bosniaks, Muslims, in that unit. But how many
9 exactly, I didn't know. Well, quite simply, I wasn't interested in that
10 kind of thing.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. As this document was
12 adduced by the Defence, I wanted to understand a few mention about it.
13 Mr. Scott, you have the floor. You have plenty of time as we have
14 40 minutes left.
15 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Your Honour, and Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott, to avoid any
17 difficulty, generally speaking, when we have redirect, this creates extra
18 tension in the courtroom. When we talk about redirect, you must state
19 that the Defence as put such-and-such the question, the witness has
20 answered, and then you take it from there. The redirect should always be
21 directly connected to the questions put by the Defence teams.
22 MR. SCOTT: Thank you, Your Honour. I think all the questions I
23 put that I anticipate putting will be fairly -- it will be very clear that
24 they flow from the Defence questions and Defence exhibits.
25 Re-examination by Mr. Scott:
1 Q. Just a couple of beginning points, Mr. Rupcic, and good afternoon.
2 Can you just tell us, in case if it comes up in the future, we'll know
3 this, where were you located and what were you doing in the period
4 October/November 1993?
5 A. I was in the same place, in Grude.
6 Q. And what was your position or title at that time?
7 A. I was in the financial department --
8 Q. And --
9 A. -- underneath Mr. Pero Majic.
10 Q. And I take it, we can understand throughout your testimony over
11 the last couple of days or so, that you were obviously not only working in
12 Grude, but I assume you also lived in the Grude area throughout that time?
13 A. For a short period of time, we lived in the hotel at Grude; and
14 when we had some free time, we could spend the night there; but Ljubuski
15 is not a long way from Grude, and then I would go back and forth.
16 Q. But we can understand, then, that in October/November 1993, you
17 were living and working in the Grude area; is that correct?
18 A. Not living; working, yes.
19 Q. And living in Ljubuski?
20 A. That's right.
21 Q. All right. I think I asked you about this, sir, but there's a
22 second part that I'm not sure. I believe you've testified in the last
23 couple of days that the amount of the HVO outstanding debt at the end of
24 the war, I believe you told us the other day, was approximately
25 100.000.000 deutschemarks; is that correct?
1 A. Yes, over 100.000.000.
2 Q. And I think I showed you some documents in relation to that. I
3 don't recall if I asked you, but can you tell the Judges, as of
4 approximately 2005, when you were -- when I spoke with you before,
5 approximately how much of that debt, that 100.000.000 deutschemark debt,
6 was still outstanding at that time?
7 MR. KARNAVAS: I don't mind this, the question, but it isn't
8 redirect. I just want to make sure that the Trial Chamber understands
9 that, and especially, you know, if he can -- I don't see where he's going,
10 how it's tied into the cross-examination. But this is not redirect, and
11 this information was elicited on direct examination.
12 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, if it was, if it was, and I agree that I
13 have not researched the transcript for every entry, if the Chamber would
14 humour me on this one question, I would appreciate it, if there's really
15 an objection to it.
16 Q. Sir, can you recall -- can you remind us again, please, how much
17 had been paid by 2005 out of this had 100.000.000 deutschemark debt,
19 A. By 2005. Well, I can't tell you up until 2005. All I can tell
20 you is up until the time I left the Ministry of Defence what it was, and
21 it was the 1st of January, 1999.
22 Q. And what was it?
23 A. About 80.000.000 marks --
24 Q. Outstanding?
25 A. -- was the debt outstanding. Yes, outstanding. That was just the
1 HVO component's debt. The Bosniak component was far greater.
2 Q. All right. I would like to ask that you turn in the -- you still
3 have the various bundles. You can take the bundle from the Prlic Defence
4 team, please.
5 Sir, I didn't want to interrupt you any more than I did during the
6 cross-examinations, but I with like to explore your knowledge of some of
7 these documents, and if you could please find, first of all, 1D 01771,
8 1D 01771.
9 A. [In English] Okay.
10 Q. So, just so we can be clear on this, you have no real personal
11 knowledge of this decision or anything that happen at any meeting where
12 this decision was taken, do you?
13 A. [Interpretation] You're right.
14 Q. And if you could look at Exhibit 1D 01760 --
15 MR. KARNAVAS: If I just might register an observation, Your
16 Honour. Again, I have no objection to the Prosecution doing this. This
17 is a technique that I picked up from the Prosecution. They've been doing
18 it for the last 18 months, and I find that what's good for the Prosecution
19 is good for the Defence.
20 So I don't mind wasting the next 20 minutes, if that what he
21 intends to do, but might I remind the Trial Chamber that routinely they
22 bring in witnesses here. They show them documents which they've never
23 ever seen, and then they elicit testimony from; and yet -- and then
24 documents, they then introduce by way of motion, hundreds, in the
25 thousands of pages of which there is absolutely no viva voce testimony.
1 The whole purpose of the cross-examination was not whether the
2 gentleman attended these sessions. Now, if the gentleman from the
3 Prosecution office wishes to contest the authenticity of these documents,
4 and I dare say he should not because he can find them in the Official
5 Gazettes that are available and were available to him throughout the seven
6 years that he's been working on this case, that's a different matter.
7 But the content is what it is, and I don't see the point in this
8 exercise. But if we do go down this road, I certainly would want the
9 Defence to be availed of the very same process.
10 MR. SCOTT: Your Honour, Mr. Karnavas has just said he doesn't
11 really have an objection, so this is commentary and I don't want to waste
12 my time responding to a non-objection.
13 So if we could please go to 1D 01760.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed.
15 MR. SCOTT:
16 Q. This was a document that Mr. Karnavas showed you by Mr. Topic and
17 asked you about the intention or the design of indicating that transitions
18 should take place in Croatian or Yugoslav dinars.
19 Sir, you can't tell these Judges what Mr. Topic's intentions were,
20 can you? Did you talk to Mr. Tomic about this decision and what his goal
21 was in adopting this decision?
22 MR. KARNAVAS: Objection. There was no mentioning of Mr. Tomic.
23 Mr. Tomic has nothing to do with this, unless he can connect this. But
24 you this is Topic, not Tomic. They are two different individuals and one
25 has one to do with the other.
1 MR. SCOTT: Excuse me.
2 Q. Mr. Topic, sir. Mr. Topic, sir --
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Topic.
4 MR. SCOTT:
5 Q. The Mostar municipality, in its session of the 25th of July, 1992,
6 passed the following decision, were you present at this session?
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I said Topic, not Tocic.
8 MR. SCOTT:
9 Q. Sir, this document refers to this decision having been taken at
10 the session of the July 25th, 1992 meeting of the Mostar municipality.
11 Were you present at that session?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Did you talk to any people who were present at that meeting who
14 explained to you what their intentions were in adopting that decision?
15 A. No. No, I wasn't present, nor did I talk to anybody, any of the
16 people who were there at the meeting, but I did know why the Jugo dinar
17 was being banned from the territory, because there was a general looting
18 going on after that.
19 Q. The Jugo dinar. Okay. Could you go please to 1D 01762, 1D 01762.
20 There's a reference in the heading under the words "Decision." It
21 talks about the professionalisation of the army, and I think two Defence
22 counsel showed you this document. It talks about the adequate salaries of
23 TIP. Can you tell us what "TIP" stands for?
24 A. I think that this is a mistake, and that's my personal opinion
25 now. It's a typing mistake because TIP, T-I-P, is not actually an
1 abbreviation. It was a professional army of the type, T-Y-P-E, type 1 and
2 so on.
3 Q. Just so the record is clear, when you say there's a mistake, we're
4 not just referring to the English transcript, but that's the way it's
5 written. It's also T-I-P in the Croatian-language version, which I assume
6 is the one you were looking at. Is that correct?
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Read it in your own language.
8 Read paragraph II in your own language so that the interpreters can
9 translate it.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it says the right thing: "The
11 decision on professionalising the army within the Petar Kresimir IV
12 brigade of the HVO and determining adequate salaries of the type A. So
13 when we discussing whether you or I, or whatever the discussion was that
14 we had here, I said that a professional soldier at a certain period of
15 time had a salary of about 400 deutschemarks when the inflation was
16 rampant. So this would drop to 200 and then go to 400. And the
17 active-duty had about 150 to 200 German marks. That's was what their
18 salary was.
19 MR. SCOTT:
20 Q. And when it makes reference to in the second numbered paragraph,
21 II; the special salary, do you know what "the special salary" was?
22 A. Well, I've just explained to you. That's the type A salary for
23 professional soldiers.
24 Q. And do you know whether this was a supplementation that was being
25 given at this time to the HVO salaries or how much was coming from the
1 Livno municipal HVO?
2 A. This is something that the Livno municipality paid out.
3 Q. I know that, sir, but were they paying the entire salary, are you
4 suggesting, of this unit, or was it a supplemental payment, or was it a
5 one-time payment, or what can you actually tell us about what's the
6 content of this document?
7 A. Well, it's like this: What I can read from this document is this:
8 I don't know if I can remember all the details. Members of the
9 active-duty units, or rather, this unit, the active soldiers received
10 salaries from Grude, but only the active-duty personnel with the
11 commanders as specified in the establishment booklet, and all the reserve
12 units were paid by the Livno municipality.
13 Now, by some decision of theirs, that is to say, the Livno
14 municipality, for reasons known to them alone, asked that their unit be,
15 if I can put it this way, professionalised, or rather, that they would be
16 paid the same amount as the professional soldiers of the HVO received.
17 Q. All right. Can I ask you to go to P -- excuse me, I'm sorry,
18 1D 00858. 1D 00858.
19 A. Yes, I've found it.
20 Q. Can you share with us any knowledge you have about how this
21 platoon was organised and financed?
22 A. It refers to a unit which belonged to the BH army, so I can't
23 really tell you anything about that.
24 Q. And what can you tell us about this reward? In II, it says:
25 "Pursuant to the unit commander's assessment, this reward can be granted
1 to the whole unit ..."
2 What did you know about this reward?
3 A. It refers to the BH army. As I just said, I wasn't a member of
4 the BH army, so you can't expect me to interpret that.
5 Q. All right. So you don't really know anything about the document.
6 Can I ask you to go to 2D 00538. 538, my apology -- no, I guess I was
7 right, 38.
8 A. It's just in the other binder.
9 Q. Yes. I'm sorry. It's in there, yes. Thank you. If you can just
10 scan down this page or this document, please, I think it was presented to
11 you, if I'm not mistaken, as related to the HVO military, and perhaps you
12 can just confirm that there's nothing in this document that indicates that
13 it relates to the HVO military, but is financing for the HVO municipal
15 A. Correct.
16 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that was the document
17 that I presented to the witness, and I didn't say that it referred to the
18 financing of the military sector but of the HVO municipality of the Livno
19 municipality, and I didn't bring that into connection with the military
20 wing. I was discussing the municipality's defence, the defence of the
22 MR. SCOTT: The witness has answered, Your Honour, and the
23 transcript will certainly speak for itself.
24 Q. Now, you indicated again, in response to a question of counsel for
25 Mr. Stojic, that, again, it was Mr. Boban making all the financial
1 decisions of the military arm of Herceg-Bosna. Can you just describe to
2 us how Mr. Boban would go about making those decisions?
3 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Your Honour. Your
4 Honour, I do apologise, but the witness never ever said that Mr. Boban
5 made all the decisions. I asked the witness whether, because of a lack of
6 resources in 1993 and 1992, certain decisions on the redistribution of
7 funds were made by Mr. Boban.
8 Now, if the Prosecutor shows me where the witness said that, I
9 must say that I didn't note that because that wasn't my intention at all.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I talked to you and here in
11 court, I also said that I was never present when Mr. Boban made any
12 decisions. However, Mr. Majic sat in the same office as me across from
13 me; and, so, from what he told me, I can confirm that.
14 Q. And how did Mr. Boban go about making these decisions? What
15 information did he consider? Who did he talk to first? What documents
16 did he have in front of him? Perhaps you can help us with that.
17 A. I wasn't there. I didn't attend the meetings. I wasn't present.
18 I would happen to meet people in the corridor, and we would communicate
19 that way, people coming to see Mr. Boban. I knew some of these people
20 from earlier on in our civilian life.
21 And, so, after they would go into his office, Mr. Boban's office,
22 Mr. Majic would be called to attend; and when he returned, he would make
23 out payments, money orders, or whatever.
24 Q. But you answered the first part of my question, and that is you
25 don't know who he talked to. You don't know how decisions were made; is
1 that correct?
2 A. I didn't understand your question.
3 Q. Well, as I said, how did Mr. Boban go about making these decisions
4 in his office? Who did he consult with? What documents did he have in
5 front of them? Please, tell us.
6 MR. SCOTT: I assure the Court that I am quite serious about these
7 questions. There is no humour involved in this at all. He made certain
8 decisions, and I want to know the basis for those being given.
9 Q. Tell us, please. How many times did he receive faxes from the HVO
10 Main Staff? How many telephone calls did he make?
11 A. You're asking me something now. Well, how would you expect me to
12 know that?
13 Q. Exactly, sir. You don't know, do you?
14 A. That's right. I don't, and I never said I did.
15 Q. If you can please look at Exhibit P 08118, it's the annual report
16 of the ONP that we looked at several times, including on
17 cross-examination. In reference, if you can find the page that we were
18 looking at, Mr. Stojic's counsel was asking you about the numbers. It's
19 the first real page of columns of numbers, and we were talking about the
20 money coming from the Republic of Croatia, for example. Do you have that?
21 What "Revenue from Budget"?
22 A. Yes, I've found it.
23 Q. Under "Revenue from budget and donations," apart the Ministry of
24 Defence portion, do you see under that "the HZ HB finance department
1 A. I do.
2 Q. Do you know -- and then it indicates 131.000.000.000 dinar. Can
3 you tell the Chamber how that 131 -- what that 131.000.000.000 dinar, how
4 that's comprised? Where did that money come from?
5 A. As far as I know, as I've already told you, the funds were
6 collected from taxes and contributions and customs dues and donations paid
7 into that particular account; that is to say, the resident account in
9 Q. So you're saying that 131.000.000.00 dinar, we should be able to
10 find that, you're saying, in the account at Privredna Banka that we looked
12 A. Yes, on the cards that we were looking at earlier on from
13 Privredna Banka, the commercial bank, and the financial department; that
14 is to say, the civilian part. We looked at expenditures and revenues.
15 Q. My apology. I cut off the interpretation. In the portion, that's
16 titled "Received in deutschemarks."
17 And about the seventh -- perhaps the seventh item down, once again
18 is the finance department Mostar, we see again 16.790.000.000, et cetera,
19 which I think everyone can see accounts for the very vast majority of
20 everything in the bottom number of 19 billion. Again, can you tell us
21 where that 16.790.000.000 came from?
22 A. What figure are you referring to can you repeat that please?
23 Q. Next to the finance department Mostar, 16.790.935.555.
24 A. It says here: Finance department, 131.000.000 million. As for
25 the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia, they provided
2 Q. I think we must be looking at a different document, sir.
3 Finance department Mostar, you're looking at German marks. First
4 item is Republic of Croatia Ministry of Defence; correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Then we go down one, two, three, four, five lines down. Do you
7 see "HR HB finance department"?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Do you see the number 16.000.000.000?
10 A. I do.
11 Q. All right. My question to you was: Do you know where that money
12 came from?
13 A. What do you mean where they came from? They came from the foreign
14 currency account of the civilian finance department.
15 Q. And how do you -- well, do you really know the breakdown at all?
16 Do you really know where that money came from? Do you have personal
17 knowledge of the sources and amounts of money that make up that
18 16.000.000.000 dinar?
19 A. No. No. I wouldn't know that. Off-the-cuff, I would have to
20 look into documents and establish everything. But if you turn it into
21 German marks, the amount would be 4.000.000 German marks.
22 Q. I'm not arguing with your math, although I certainly haven't done
23 it as quickly as you have. But the answer is: You don't know. You
24 really don't know what that money consists of specifically. Correct?
25 A. Correct. German mark and Croatian dinar was the currency that was
1 used and depended on the person providing the funds whether they would
2 make the payment in German marks or in Croatian dinars.
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Rupcic. I have no further questions.
4 Questioned by the Court:
5 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Witness, if you turn to the English
6 version of this document, this is the annual report financial statement,
7 on page 7. I don't know whether you can answer my question. But as far
8 as item "Receipt in German marks" is concerned, I see "Received in German
9 marks. Republic of Croatia, Ministry of Defence, Zagreb."
10 If I understood you correctly, this was money sent by private
11 individuals, donors, that transited through the Ministry of Defence in
12 Zagreb; is that correct?
13 Thank you very much.
14 A. [No interpretation]
15 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Now, then, second item: Croatian
16 Catholic mission, Esslingen. What is this about? Is this also private
17 donors or the church, the parish?
18 A. In that town in Esslingen, there is a Catholic -- Croatian
19 Catholic mission, and members, parishioners of that mission raised the
20 funds and made the payment into a savings account, from which the money
21 was then taken.
22 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well. If I've understood you
23 correctly, these are private individuals who provide the funds, and it is
24 not the parish or the religious authority in that location. I didn't
25 understand your answer.
1 A. You have to realise that Catholic missions throughout the world
2 joined into fundraising efforts for the defence -- defensive war. This
3 was true in Australia, in America, in Germany, and anywhere in the world
4 where Catholic missions exist.
5 Croatia is a Catholic country. Bosnia and Herzegovina -- or
6 rather, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, one of the constituent people are
7 Catholics by religion, and they raised funds for the defence of Catholic
9 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] I don't understand. We're talking
10 about private individuals X, Y, Z, who privately decided to collect the
11 money, whether it be the archbishop or the parish priest who collects the
12 funds and then hands them over.
13 A. The person who headed the Catholic mission was somebody they
14 trusted, then members of that mission brought the money to him, and then
15 he in turn would -- just as we saw in another example. There was another
16 document showing 50.000 deutschemarks were raised, and next to that was a
17 list specifying who gave exactly how much.
18 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
19 MR. SCOTT: Mr. President, I'm sorry. I do have one question,
20 just a clarification, and I do admit it's just to clarify a number. I
21 just simply wanted -- if the Chamber doesn't want the witness to give an
22 answer, I'll certainly accept that.
23 I simply wanted to clarify, on page 8, "the Republic of Croatia
24 Ministry of Defence Zagreb," the reference to "911.750." I simply wanted
25 to ask the witness if he could clarify what form of -- unit of currency it
1 was. I don't know at that point of the chart whether we're still walking
2 about dinars, dollars, deutschemarks. If I could please clarify that, if
3 I'm allowed.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, please do.
5 Further Re-examination by Mr. Scott:
6 Q. Towards the end of the statement of revenue, several lines up from
7 the bottom, there is another reference to Republic of Croatian Ministry of
8 Defence Zagreb. Can you help us with what the units of currency were?
9 A. Mr. Prosecutor, can you add up apples and pears, or apples and
10 oranges? It says herein the amount is in Swiss franks. Maybe it was in
11 Swiss franks initially, but then later on all the amounts were converted
12 into Croatian dinar. So all the amounts in this report are in Croatian
14 Q. You mean except where they say specifically say German
15 deutschemarks or American dollars or Swiss franks or Austrian shillings.
16 A. They are converted as well, sir. This is not a case where
17 268.000.000 marks was withdrawn but, rather, 268.000.000 Croatian dinars.
18 When you convert it, you see that it's about 60.000 marks.
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, for counsel.
20 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I apologise. If I may intervene to
21 assist. Would you please look at the top of this list. I think that
22 would clarify Mr. Scott's question. It says here: "The structure of
23 revenue from the 1st of January, 1993 until the 31st of December expressed
24 in Croatian dinars, but received in different currencies."
25 This is what the witness is saying, and this is what the document
1 reflects as well. All the amounts in the document are expressed in
2 Croatian dinar.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I think it looks quite clear.
4 In the chart we have in front us, everything is denominated in Croatian
5 dinars, but some amounts have been paid in foreign currency. The Catholic
6 parish of Lausanne has paid the money in Swiss franks, but the Swiss
7 franks have been converted to Croatian dinars. Is that right, Witness?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct, Your Honour. In
9 bookkeeping, there are synthetic accounts and analytical accounts. In
10 synthetic accounts, you have an amount of 185 billion and some millions.
11 That's synthetic account, and it reflects revenue. And, in analytical
12 accounts, you can see the breakdown, where it actually says, Miro raised
13 and provided this much, and Pero provided this much.
14 I'm now simplifying it. But in the analytical account, you can
15 see the breakdown. You can see exactly what the revenue was.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Scott.
17 MR. SCOTT: I'm sorry, Mr. President. I was simply trying to be
18 very clear about some numbers at the end of the document. I'm sorry if
19 I'm the own one who may have had some confusion. I apologise, but I thank
20 the witness for the answer.
21 Thank you.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
23 Witness, on behalf of my colleagues, I'd like to thank you for
24 having come to testify on the request of the Prosecution. I wish you a
25 safe journey home.
1 You have raised your hand. What would you like to say?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise. I didn't come here at
3 the invitation of the Prosecution. I came pursuant to the order of the
4 Chamber. I was subpoenaed here, and this is how I came to be here.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. That goes without saying,
6 but, initially, the Prosecutor had asked you to come. It wasn't the
7 Defence, and it wasn't the Trial Chamber either.
8 So I wish you a safe journey home, and I wish you well in the
9 future also. It is somewhat uncertain, given your past history, but you
10 should be able to start on a new journey in your professional -- in a
11 professional environment soon.
12 [The witness withdrew]
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So as far as next week is
15 Mr. Scott how are things going to unfold next week?
16 MR. SCOTT: We have one witness which will again take up the week,
17 or at least some part of it. As we see today, it might -- you know, we
18 may finish by Wednesday if we don't go into Thursday day, but we are
19 arranged. We do have a witness arranged.
20 I do have one other matter, Your Honour, again, just in terms of
21 all the outstanding paperwork. Earlier this week, Your Honour, responses
22 were filed by the Defence to the Heliodrom 92 bis motion and also to an
23 earlier motion concerning approximately, I don't have the exact number in
24 my mind, but approximately 300 documents. We, the Prosecution, would like
25 to have and ask to have until the 22nd of October to reply.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, did you get up to
2 discuss this or something else?
3 MR. KARNAVAS: No. If it were up to me, I would grant the
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So your wishes have
6 come true because the Trial Chamber grants you until the 22nd of October,
7 Mr. Scott.
8 MR. KARNAVAS: Just very quickly, Your Honours. There was --
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very quickly, because we've
10 overstepped our time. Please quickly.
11 MR. KARNAVAS: On the 27th of September, 2007, in the Prosecutor
12 versus Perisic case, there was a decision that came down regarding the
13 Defence's request for -- for a B/C/S transcript of the accused's statement
14 in that case. Judge Robinson ordered that the Prosecution provide a B/C/S
15 version of the transcript given that the Prosecution in that case, as in
16 this case, is attempting to use that -- that interview as part of their
18 I would, at this point in time, I'm making an oral application for
19 an order to the Prosecution to transcribe the -- the interview, given that
20 as it was stated by Judge Robinson that -- that this is an obligation that
21 the Prosecution cannot be relieved of, especially given the magnitude and
22 importance of the -- of what is at stake. The accused is entitled to have
23 this sort of document in his or her own language. So I ask for an order.
24 You know, I don't need it right now, but at some point I wish for the
25 Trial Bench to order the Prosecution to commence with the translation of
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I am discovering
4 Mr. Scott.
5 MR. SCOTT: Two brief responses, Your Honours. Of course, the
6 Chamber should be aware that this was a videotaped, this was a videotaped
7 interview, and a full set of the videotapes were not only given to the
8 Defence in connection with disclosure in this case, but were given to
9 Mr. Prlic back at the original date when the statement was taken.
10 So all the -- all the questions and answers in Croatian or B/C/S,
11 whichever term one wants to use, are available to -- to Mr. Prlic in his
12 own language; in fact, his own words. You can hear his own words on the
13 videotape, and we have provided that a long time ago.
14 I think a number of Chambers - I didn't anticipate this question
15 being raised by Mr. Karnavas. I'm not complaining - but I believe it's
16 been a long-standing practice in a number of Chambers that the provision
17 of a recording satisfies the requirement to provide it in a language the
18 accused understands. Number one.
19 Number two, Your Honour, if the Chamber wants a hard copy B/C/S
20 translation to be prepared, we can certainly refer that to CLSS. I have
21 no idea when they will be able to get to it.
22 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. President, in the Perisic case, it was
23 videotapes. I am sure Mr. Scott knows or should have known about it.
24 That's number one. And number two, it's quite clear the obligations of --
25 of the Prosecution concerning this sort of -- this sort of matter.
1 Now, we have made a request. The registry pointed us to this --
2 to this decision and asked that the Trial Chamber issue an order, and so
3 we are asking for an order. We're asking that this be done by December,
4 by December 13th. And if the Prosecution has to hire outside sources to
5 do it, they should do it. They have a war chest, a war chest.
6 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
8 MR. STEWART: I hope this is helpful. In the Krajisnik case, it
9 isn't a translation that is required. It is just a transcription. So the
10 task is less actually less daunting, and, therefore, there is all the more
11 reason why Mr. Karnavas's application should be granted.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. As the Chamber will
13 meet in a few minutes' time, we will deliberate and let you know what
14 decision we take.
15 We shall adjourn and meet again on Monday at a quarter past 2.00.
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m.,
17 to be reconvened on Monday, the 15th day
18 of October, 2007, at 2.15 p.m.