1 Thursday, 19 March, 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The accused Prlic not present]
5 [The accused Pusic not present]
6 [The witness takes the stand]
7 --- Upon commencing at 9.00 a.m.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, can you kindly call
9 the case, please.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
11 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-74-T,
12 the Prosecutor versus Prlic et al. Thank you, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Registrar. Today is
14 Thursday the 19th of March, 2009. I would like to welcome the witness,
15 the accused, the attorneys, all the members of the OTP, as well as the
16 Registrar and the usher.
17 We shall resume Mr. Stringer's cross-examination this morning.
18 Mr. Stringer, you have the floor.
19 WITNESS: IVAN BANDIC [Resumed]
20 [Witness answered through interpreter]
21 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, and good morning Mr. President, Your
22 Honours, I see that the witness has something he wishes to say to the
23 Trial Chamber.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Witness.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning to everyone in the
1 courtroom. Good morning to Your Honours. Thank you for giving me the
2 possibility of addressing you.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment, the interpreters
4 haven't put -- switched their microphone on. Please repeat what you've
5 just said.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Once again good morning to everyone
7 in the courtroom. Good morning to Your Honours. And thank you for
8 giving me the opportunity of addressing you. And this is what I would
9 like to say: After yesterday's time spent here in the courtroom, I
10 simply have the obligation towards myself and towards every one of you to
11 tell you of a very difficult situation that I find myself in after
12 yesterday's beginning of the cross-examination by the Prosecutor.
13 The case that was mentioned, profoundly moved me, and I
14 introduced disquiet, although my conscious is quite clear of course, but
15 it was food for thought. And regardless of who compiled the document,
16 and I don't bring into question at all that the event took place, that
17 the thing happened, but as a man who is always conscious of one's -- his
18 dignity, one's dignity, that if there are any traces in the case of that
19 unfortunate man who ended fatally, if there is any trace leading back to
20 any connection of mine, then I should like to ask the Prosecutor and all
21 the Defence teams and anybody who has any document, and I do believe and
22 hope that some investigation was conducted, some proceedings were taken,
23 I would like to fully be able to clarify my possible role in that because
24 I continue to maintain that I never ever knew anything about any of that.
25 And the second thing that I'd like to say, now whether that
1 unfortunate man had a family or relatives and if he did, and I do believe
2 he did, then I would like to contact those people and to remove any
3 doubt. Perhaps those people have certain information saying that I was
4 in any -- in a certain way involved in the case. So I would like to
5 elicit all your assistance because this is something that is terrible.
6 It is terrible what happened to him. I can't have him come back, but I
7 want to rest assured and I can tell you that I didn't sleep the whole
8 night. So thank you, Your Honours, for allowing me to make that
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yesterday, we saw a document
11 and in this document someone's death is stated in circumstances which no
12 one knows anything about, but whatever the case may be this person died.
13 In this document Bandic is mentioned. Is it you, is it someone else, we
14 don't know. The Prosecutor asked you whether you were familiar with this
15 document and you said no, and he asked you whether you knew anything
16 about this event and you said no, that's how things stand. We can't say
17 any more than that. So what you have said has been recorded, let's wait
18 and see.
19 Mr. Coric.
20 THE ACCUSED CORIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, might I be
21 allowed to say just two sentences, to say something about the document
22 that was presents the to Mr. Bandic yesterday. If I have your permission
23 to do so. Thank you.
24 So I'm not going to make a statement, my Defence team has been
25 dealing with that document for quite sometime now, and so far none of the
1 people working on my team found a man who ever came across this document,
2 so I don't want to speak of the details of the document to challenge it
3 or do anything else, all I would like to say is that I personally, and
4 that is the statement that I'm giving, I personally never saw that
5 document, nor do I know of a single person who did. And especially I
6 look through the interviews that the investigators of this Tribunal had
7 with people who are signatories of the document, at least I'm certain of
8 one, not of the other, and that person -- well, that interview was
9 conducted over a period of almost 12 hours. It lasted for almost 12
10 hours. The person was shown over 100 documents, and when the document
11 came before his eyes, the man, I think, just as far as that document, he
12 said that he never saw that document or knew what it was about.
13 Now, I'd just like to refer to a detail from this document; that
14 somebody could throw 22 or however many people into the Neretva river,
15 yes, 29, just that particular detail. We held discussions and debates as
16 to the -- as to two men, and I assume that it would have been something
17 mentioned in some other document. The document hasn't got a stamp. It
18 hasn't got any signatures, no names at the bottom. And if you destroy a
19 man, then I'm being destroyed here by documents of that kind. And that's
20 not the only document of that kind. There was another document presented
21 here umpteen times from Capljina, if you remember, and everybody denied
22 having seen it. Nobody had ever seen it. But it is still being
23 presented here again and again.
24 And all I want to say, I'm not challenging that those people
25 should be discussed. I'm not talking about the destiny of any of those
1 men or those 29 men if you say that that was how many there were, I don't
2 know what happened. But the fact remains that nobody, and as far as I
3 heard from the other Defence teams and my own Defence team working on the
4 case, where there are 15 people on the team, that they never ever found
5 traces going back to that document, and yesterday the document was served
6 to knock out this man as soon as he sat down on his chair.
7 So thank you for allowing me to say that.
8 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Good morning to everyone in the
9 courtroom --
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Nozica.
11 MR. STRINGER: I apologise, Mr. President. I've got two hours,
12 and I'm worried about being able to use all my time today.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. The witness's
14 comments are on the transcript. Mr. Coric's comments have also been
15 recorded. He has told us that despite the research he has conducted, he
16 has found no traces of the author of the document in question. So all of
17 this has been recorded. Mr. Stringer, you have the floor.
18 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Sorry, just a detail for the -- Ms. Nozica
19 Ms. Nozica, sorry, a detail for the transcript, it would be good if we
20 had the number of the document which has been commented upon in the
21 transcript, and I think that it was not in the transcript.
22 Mr. Bandic, perhaps you can recall which was the number of the
23 document that you have commented.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, no, Your Honour.
25 MR. STRINGER: It's P03630.
1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: P03630.
2 MR. STRINGER: [Overlapping speakers]
3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you. I'm sorry. Ms. Nozica, I think
4 is ...
5 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. The
6 document is on the Prosecution list and the number is as at Prosecutor
7 said, well, he's told us, and 3641 as well. Number 3641 as well. And I
8 just wanted to say something with respect to what Mr. Bandic just said.
9 I didn't know Mr. Coric would stand up, and that I would examine the
10 document in redirect so we can leave it until later on. Thank you.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Please go ahead.
12 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President, Your Honours.
13 Cross-examination by Mr. Stringer: [Continued]
14 Q. Good morning, Mr. Bandic. When we finished with your
15 testimony --
16 MR. STRINGER: Mr. President, I believe we need to go back into
17 private session.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, please
19 [Private session]
11 Pages 38273-38300 redacted. Private session.
2 [Open session]
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
4 MR. STRINGER:
5 Q. Okay. Mr. Bandic, we are going to move to a different subject
6 now. In binder number 3, which is the one to your right, it's right
7 there, that's it, yes. It's Exhibit P10327. I have some questions about
8 this. It's not a document you've seen before, but I'm going to ask you a
9 few questions about it anyway.
10 It's a document of the special warfare section. I believe it's
11 directed to the special warfare section of the political administration
12 of the Croatian Defence Ministry. It's from deputy director Andre Rora,
13 R-o-r-a. It's dated the 6th of April, 1994. Do you have that document,
14 sir? ? You need to say it out --
15 A. Yes, yes, yes, Mr. Prosecutor, I do see that.
16 Q. The report that's being written about various activities of the
17 special warfare section of the political administration that were
18 undertaken by this person, Mr. Rora, in December of 1993 to April of 1994
19 where he says there at the beginning: He was sent as an expert assistant
20 to the HVO and the newly created defence ministry of the Croatian
21 Republic of Herceg-Bosna.
22 Now, I would like to direct you to page 2 of this document, page
23 2, both the English and the Serbo-Croatian, and I'm going to read a few
24 passages to you, starting at the top of the English on the fifth line:
25 "While providing assistance to this department, OP OR," and OP OR
1 is this special warfare section, "OPOR organised and published a
2 propaganda prospectus with information on Muslim crimes against Croat
3 civilians which was distributed to foreign journalist."
4 And then the writer of this report goes down, he continues
5 talking about the various things he did, which I'm going to skip over.
6 And then continuing on about 12 lines down, he says that:
7 "By applying the instructions the following psychological
8 propaganda material was produced in this section, not counting about
9 external contributors," and he talks about various media events,
10 articles, radio, TV reports, et cetera.
11 And then the part that I'm most interested in underneath that he
12 says that:
13 "For the production of PP material," which I believe is this
14 propaganda material, "the OPOR generously profited from the information
15 which nearly daily arrived from SIS and the VOS, the military
16 intelligence service."
17 And he says:
18 "Particularly good cooperation was established with the" latter,
19 I believe, is the intended word in English. "All SIS and VOS reports are
20 regularly archived."
21 My question, sir, is this: Whether you were aware whether it's
22 true that in fact an important function of the SIS of the HVO was for its
23 reports to be made available for the production of propaganda materials?
24 Do you know anything about that?
25 A. Your Honours, Mr. Prosecutor, I really don't know any of this,
1 any of what you are asking me about. But if I can just say, this is a
2 sort of working material, and if I can say something, it should be the
3 last variant. We don't know what SIS this is, whether the SIS of Croatia
4 or the Croatia Republic of Herceg-Bosna, we don't know what SIS it is
5 here, and I really don't know anything about it. I never heard about the
6 department, about this man, Mr. Rora or whatever, I think he was a
7 journalist. I seem to have heard his name in the media, the Croatian
8 media, but nothing other than that.
5 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I apologise, Your Honours, but the
6 Prosecutor is still going back to the topic of when the witness worked in
7 the intelligence service because the same topics from those materials are
8 being broached again, so perhaps we need to go into private session.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We need to redact this.
10 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] I'd like to object to the
11 question because it states that the HIS hid someone, we saw not a shred
12 of evidence in this courtroom. All the evidence we had that that was
13 done by the SIS and not the HIS, so may we make that point quite clear.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, can you prepare an
15 order to have this passage redacted, please.
16 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President. And I can come back to
17 that, actually.
18 Q. Let me move on to the next point, Mr. Bandic, which is in item
19 number 7 of this, and this relates to passage on page 5 of the English.
20 This is item 7(b). I'm just going to read this to you, and I'm going to
21 ask you if you can comment. Colonel Viktor Andric, since the HR HB
22 president dismissed, but only proform Ivica Rajic, commander of HVO
23 Kiseljak, due to international accusations for the war crimes committed
24 in Stupni Do, Vares municipality, we had to fill in that vacant command
25 position and cover up the further activity of Rajic. That is why the
1 person of Colonel Andric was invented who got the credit for all other
2 HVO activities in the free area of Kiseljak, Kresevo, Fojnica and Visoko.
3 And then the writer of this report goes on to talk about some of the
4 fabricated interviews he did with Colonel Andric.
5 Now, recognising, sir, that you haven't seen this report, you've
6 testified a lot about your knowledge and presence in the area of Stupni
7 Do, Kiseljak, and Colonel Rajic. My question, sir, is isn't that
8 essentially a correct description of what happened in respect of the
9 identity of Ivica Rajic, that the leadership of the HVO knowingly, in
10 order to hide him, assigned him a new identity Viktor Andric and left him
11 in his position commanding the brigade in Kiseljak?
12 A. Your Honour, Mr. Prosecutor, I wish to put you right first. I
13 was never in the Stupni Do area. Now, as far as Mr. Rajic or Mr. Andric
14 is concerned, I would see the man around and on during my last stay in
15 the Kiseljak area, I think in February or March, I'm quite certain that
16 General Petkovic was with me on that occasion, that's when I happened to
17 see him there.
18 Now, as to the decisions made by the leadership and President
19 Boban, that's not something that I know about, I would see the man over
20 there, and regardless of the fact that he shaved off his mustache, I
21 recognise the man. Now whether there was some Viktor Andric, some man in
22 the physical sense, whether a physical man by the name of Viktor Andric
23 existed, I don't know. I know many things from what the papers said.
24 But Ivica Rajic, the person Ivica Rajic was there, I saw him there, the
25 only thing is that the person shaved off his mustache. Although, it did
1 make a mark difference to his face.
2 Q. So you don't know anything yourself, you didn't get any
3 information as the SIS person at Main Staff, you didn't get any
4 information about switching the identity of Mr. Rajic; is that your
6 A. That's right, Mr. Prosecutor. The newspapers, the media
7 published that, but I did see that man over there, and General Petkovic
8 was with me and commented. All I know is that in those comments we noted
9 that President Boban had made the decision. And that's all. That's all
10 we could say.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, before the break, as
12 opposed to the Prosecutor, when I look at this text, he attributes this
13 to the HVO. This is not the conclusion I reach. The text we have before
14 us stems from the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia
16 is the deputy director of this body. When he talks about Rajic, he says
17 that it is I fabricated the interview. So one is under the impression
18 that all of this has been done in Zagreb
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, once again, I repeat,
21 I have never seen this document. You are quite right when you say that
22 it says the Republic of Croatia
23 Mr. Rora. I just came across his name in the media. Now, who took part
24 in this and in which way is something that I don't know.
25 MR. STRINGER: Last question [French on English channel].
1 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's apology.
2 MR. STRINGER:
3 Q. Mr. Bandic, just to wrap this up, we see here the distribution of
4 this memorandum and this was distributed, among other people, to
5 Mr. Kostroman, who is the person we've just spoken about; correct?
6 According to this.
7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters could not hear the witness.
8 MR. STRINGER:
9 Q. You have to speak more loudly, sir.
10 A. Yes, yes, that is correct. That can be seen here where it says
11 cc'd to. However, this is a work document. I believe that it is like
12 the original, but I don't see why we are not looking at the original.
13 MR. STRINGER: Mr. President, I'm ready for the break now.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We shall have a 20 minute break
16 --- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.
17 --- On resuming at 10.55 a.m.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Stringer, please proceed.
19 You have one hour and 8 minutes left.
20 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Q. Mr. Bandic, when we took the break, I was starting to ask you
22 some questions about events linked to Kiseljak and Stupni Do, and
23 particularly I was asking you about any knowledge you might have had
24 about the switch of identity of Ivica Rajic. Do you remember me asking
25 about that?
1 A. Yes, Mr. President, I remember.
2 Q. And you indicated, I'm just looking at the transcript here, you
3 indicated that the newspaper, the media, had published that, that you did
4 see that man, I think you are referring to Mr. Rajic, and that you were
5 with General Petkovic. You said, "All I know is that in those comments
6 we noted that President Boban had made the decision and that's all,
7 that's all we could say."
8 So I would like to ask you to look in that same binder at Exhibit
9 P10809. 10809. This is the Globus Article that you've been asked about
10 already by I think two of the Defence teams. 10809. This is an article
11 published in the Globus in -- on the 2nd of December 2005. 10809, do you
12 have that?
13 A. Yes, Mr. Prosecutor.
14 Q. I'm going to direct you to page 4 of the English translation.
15 And then in the Serbo-Croatian, Mr. Bandic, it would be the page that has
16 the number which ends in 0638. We don't have that paginated. But if you
17 look on the bottom right-hand corner, you'll see a number and it ends
18 0638. And there's a part on that I want to refer you to. And this is
19 what is published in this interview that you've already testified about a
20 couple of time.
21 You were asked: "Why did Rajic change his name to Viktor
23 And you said:
24 "That was Boban's order. He, Rajic, had to be moved or
25 camouflaged to appease representative of the international community whom
1 Rajic irritated, and he was camouflaged by changing his name and shaving
2 his moustache. Of course, everyone still knew who he was, and it looked
3 as if he were in fact mocking the international community with his new
5 Then you were asked:
6 "Did General Petkovic know?"
7 THE INTERPRETER: Would you mind slowing down, thank you.
8 MR. STRINGER:
9 Q. "Did General Petkovic know about the change of Rajic's identity?"
10 And you said:
11 "Yes, he was the one to convey the order."
12 You were then asked:
13 "How was finally Rajic moved from Bosnia-Herzegovina?"
14 You said:
15 "By the order of Minister Gojko Susak, he was moved to the
16 Republic of Croatia
17 a false identity was secured for him."
18 Finally, you were asked:
19 "Did General Petkovic know that too?"
20 And you said:
22 Now, this is the Globus article, Mr. Bandic, you've already
23 testified in your direct and I don't know if cross-examination by the
24 Petkovic team, isn't that a true statement? Isn't that a correct
25 statement of what you know and what you knew about the false identity of
1 Viktor Andric?
2 A. Your Honours, Mr. Prosecutor, allow me, please, to explain very
3 briefly the circumstances concerning this interview. For the sake of the
4 complete truth regarding everything that is referred to in this
5 interview. It was given about 15 years after the said events. It was
6 given involving knowledge I obtained subsequently as an average citizen,
7 or, of course, a person working in the diplomatic service.
8 At the same time, it was roughly the time when (redacted)
9 (redacted) with the OTP. I personally, I'm speaking personally now,
10 was greatly disappointed by that. This is free interpretation on the
11 part of the journalist, I did not authorise this interview. In the next
12 issue, or one after that, I actually asked in writing that --
13 Q. Yeah, I'm going to have to cut you off, and I'm going to try to
14 ask you just to be more direct, and I'll ask you a direct question. Did
15 you say this in this interview which has been published and which you've
16 already affirmed twice in the previous examinations, are these your
17 words? Do you accept this or not, that's my question?
18 A. I do not accept it the way it was put here in this weekly. Once
19 again, I wish to explain all the circumstances involved, how I gave this
20 interview and why, and of course as a Croatian diplomat, I had to have
21 consent for giving this interview because I could not appear in the media
22 just on my own.
23 Q. It's true, isn't it, Mr. Bandic, that General Petkovic did in
24 fact know and approve switching the identity of Viktor Andric?
25 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, objection to in
1 relation to the word "approve." Whether somebody could have approved a
2 decision or not of the president of the HZ-HB and the supreme command of
3 the HVO, I think that there is no need to go into that. It is
4 superfluous, so the word is wrong.
5 MR. STRINGER: I am allowed to use whatever word I want,
6 Mr. President, when I ask my questions. And if I use the wrong words,
7 I'm sure the witness will take full advantage of that. My question to
8 the witness-stands.
9 Q. Is it true that Petkovic knew and approved of the switching the
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Alaburic, the Prosecutor is
12 entitled to feel that in his view General Petkovic approved the switch of
13 identity. That's his case. That's why he asked the question, maybe the
14 witness will answer yes, no, I don't know. Your objection is of no use.
15 Just let the Prosecutor speak, and you can say General Petkovic never
16 approved it. But the Prosecutor is entitled to think that General
17 Petkovic did approve the switch.
18 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Your Honour,
19 precisely because an answer cannot be given to this question just in
20 terms of yes or no, a possible answer is, Yes, he knew, but he did not
21 approve it because General Petkovic cannot approve from his own position
22 decisions made by someone who is so much above him. I kindly ask
23 Mr. Stringer to subdivide his question into two, and therefore to make it
24 possible for the witness to respond to each and every one of those
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] He is master of his
2 questioning. He decides as to the way he is going to ask the questions.
3 It's at his own risk if he goes about it wrongly, too bad for him. The
4 Judges will judge.
5 My colleague would like to ask you to break down the question,
6 just as you please. My fellow judge would rather you would break the
7 question into two.
8 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President. And if I could offer
9 one brief comment because I've always been impressed by counsel's legal
10 and advocacy skills, but I think it's unfortunate when counsel continues
11 to object as a means of offering answers and suggesting answers to the
12 witness, which is clearly what's going on here, and I'd ask counsel to
13 kindly refrain from doing that. But I'll try to break the question down.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Stringer, I fully agree
15 with what you said, even in civil law countries, a lawyer would not dare
16 raise this kind of objection. They would let the Prosecutor put their
17 question, and then they would take over from that, so the objection has
18 to be raised only if something out of the ordinary is being said, but as
19 far as I can see, you are perfectly entitled to put your case. Please
21 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
22 Q. Witness, I'm going to ask you to go to a different exhibit, maybe
23 we can use that to break this down. In -- it's Exhibit P07352, which is
24 in this binder on your right -- it's in a different binder, sorry. Yes,
25 it's in this binder, 7352. This is a communication dated the 27th of
1 December, 1993, from commander Colonel Ivica Rajic, directed to the HVO
2 Main Staff, attention Milivoj Petkovic. 7352. Perhaps the Registrar
3 could assist you, otherwise I'm losing time.
4 Rajic says:
5 "After a review of the text that was delivered to you, it was
6 noted that you had been given the name of Martin instead of Viktor.
7 Please note that the correct information regarding the new name is Viktor
9 Have you ever seen this document before, sir?
10 A. Your Honours, Mr. Prosecutor, I've never seen this document.
11 Q. Okay. Could you then move to P07359. 7359. This is dated the
12 following day, the 28th of December, 1993. It's from commander Colonel
13 Viktor Andric. It's an urgent request directed to the HVO Main Staff in
14 Posusje to major General Petkovic asking for a written document again
15 it's coming from Viktor Andric. Have you ever seen this, sir?
16 A. Your Honours, Mr. Prosecutor, I've a never seen this document
18 Q. Have you ever seen any documentation or are you aware of any
19 communications between Milivoj Petkovic and Viktor Andric that go to this
20 period of time beginning in December 1993?
21 A. Your Honours, Mr. Prosecutor, I have not seen a single document
22 like this.
23 Q. Could you please go to P7401. 7401. This is an appointment.
24 It's dated the 30th of December, 1993, at 2150 hours in which the
25 commander of the central Bosnia
1 appointing a person named Colonel Viktor Andric to the position of
2 commander of the forward post command of the Vitez military district in
3 Kiseljak. Do you see that?
4 A. Yes, Mr. Prosecutor, I see that.
5 Q. Have you ever seen this document before?
6 A. I have not seen it before. This is the first time I see it,
7 Mr. Prosecutor.
8 Q. Okay. The next document, it's P7394. 7394. Now, this one, the
9 last one from Colonel Blaskic was dated the 30th of December at 2150
10 hours. This one is five minutes later on 30 December at 2155 hours. And
11 by this order, Colonel Blaskic is dismissing Ivica Rajic from the same
12 position to which he has just appointed Viktor Andric. Do you see that?
13 A. Yes, I see that.
14 Q. Have you ever seen this document before?
15 A. No, Mr. Prosecutor.
16 Q. Did you have knowledge about this, that is the fact that Colonel
17 Blaskic dismissed Rajic at the same time he appointed Viktor Andric to
18 the post of commander of the Forward Command Post in Kiseljak?
19 A. Your Honour, Mr. Prosecutor, I did the not know. Again, I
20 repeat, I saw the same person but with a changed identity.
21 Q. And you are saying still that you didn't have any knowledge that
22 General Petkovic, and I'll break it down now, you don't know that General
23 Petkovic was aware of that? That he had knowledge about that?
24 A. Your Honours, esteemed Prosecutor, I don't know whether General
25 Petkovic knew. I really cannot say.
1 Q. And that's despite the statements that are attributed to you in
2 the Globus article that we were just looking at; correct?
3 A. That is not correct. Quite simply, if you wish, once again, I
4 can repeat this. To the best of my knowledge, in terms of what I found
5 out subsequently, this switch of identity was approved, ordered by
6 Mr. Boban. Mr. Petkovic, General Petkovic and I saw the same man, we saw
7 the same man with a changed identity, or, rather, with a mustache that
8 had been shaven off.
9 Q. All right.
10 A. Now, that's the only thing that I can say. Whether General
11 Petkovic knew that it was the same person, I assume the answer is yes.
12 It wasn't that there were such dramatic changes on the man's face.
13 Q. Well, in fact, Ivica Rajic remained in command in Kiseljak as
14 Viktor Andric well into 1994; isn't that true?
15 A. Mr. Prosecutor, yes, he was commander there, but I don't really
16 know up until when. I don't know when he was replaced or withdrawn from
17 that position. I don't know that.
18 Q. And so wouldn't you agree with me, sir, that it would be
19 impossible for General Petkovic not to know that in fact Colonel Rajic
20 was in fact Viktor Andric, his subordinate in the field in Kiseljak?
21 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I've already said the changes on the man were not
22 that dramatic so as not to be able to recognise him as one in the same
24 Q. Well, we just looked at a couple of documents, a couple of
25 communications between Colonel Rajic, Viktor Andric, and General
1 Petkovic. Now, you said you hadn't seen those before. Now that you've
2 seen them, sir, would you agree with me that that would indicate in fact
3 that General Petkovic did have knowledge that Viktor Andric was the same
4 person as Ivica Rajic?
5 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I can agree with you in part. Once again, I
6 repeat, the changes on this man who is mentioned here, Viktor Andric,
7 Ivica Rajic, were not that dramatic so that one could not conclude that
8 it's one in the same person. That's the only thing I can say.
9 Q. Now, you've indicated already a number of times that the events
10 at Stupni Do generated -- you'll correct me if I'm wrong, but the events
11 at Stupni Do generated a lot of international interest, a lot of media
12 coverage, and therefore required a lot of attention; is that a fair way
13 of putting it?
14 A. Yes, you are right. In the media that was highly prominent.
15 Q. And would you also agree with me that once the events became
16 known and investigated, there was consensus that in fact war crimes had
17 been committed at Stupni Do?
18 A. I can agree with you, for me that was a war crime, yes.
19 Q. And would you also agree with me that during this period in
20 December of 1993 when we were looking at these documents about Viktor
21 Andric, that it was at the same time that the name of Ivica Rajic became
22 very closely linked with the war crimes committed at Stupni Do?
23 A. Mr. Prosecutor, yes, that can be seen from these documents that
24 I've seen here for the first time now. That can be linked up to him.
25 Q. Would you then agree with me, Mr. Bandic, that switching the
1 identity of Ivica Rajic, keeping him in command with a new identity would
2 have sent a strong signal to his subordinates that if you commit crimes,
3 the HVO will protect you?
4 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, objection, because
5 what is presumed in the question is that at that moment in 1993, somebody
6 believed that Ivica Rajic had myth committed a crime.
7 MR. STRINGER: The witness just said that, Mr. President.
8 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] The witness did not say that.
9 The witness said that a crime had been committed. He did not say that it
10 was Ivica Rajic who had committed it.
11 MR. STRINGER: Mr. President, the witness agreed --
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The question is very clear.
13 Witness, please answer it.
14 MR. STRINGER:
15 Q. Shall I repeat the question?
16 A. Please do.
17 Q. Let me go back to it just so that I get it right. Would you then
18 agree with me, Mr. Bandic, that switching the identity of Ivica Rajic,
19 keeping him in command with a new identity, would have sent a strong
20 signal to his subordinates, that if you commit crimes, the HVO will
21 protect you?
22 A. Esteemed Prosecutor, I would not agree with you in terms of any
23 part of the position that you have interpreted just now. If you wish, I
24 can explain in greater detail why it is that I disagree.
25 Q. I'll just -- I'll accept your answer, and I'm going to move on.
1 When did you arrive in Kiseljak -- let me rephrase it. I'm going
2 to stay with Stupni Do. We know that you were in the Kiseljak area in
3 November of 1993 which is when you had the meetings with the UNPROFOR
4 people that you testified about. The events in Stupni Do happened around
5 the 23rd of October, 1993, and the Trial Chamber knows that most of --
6 many of the soldiers in the units that participated in that operation had
7 just come down to Vares from Kiseljak.
8 Were you and General Petkovic in Kiseljak at the time of the
9 events in Stupni Do?
10 A. Correct. We were there then.
11 Q. When had you arrived? Let me ask this: Did you come with
12 General Petkovic?
13 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I am practically certain that that is the way it
14 was, that we had come together. It is almost impossible that we had come
15 separately because we were together almost always.
16 Q. And did you remain, then, in Kiseljak continuously until the
17 third week of November when you had your first meeting with the UNPROFOR?
18 A. Your Honours, Esteemed Prosecutor, no, as far as I can remember.
19 And I relate this to my birthday. That's when we returned to the area of
20 Kiseljak. In the meantime, we were probably in Herzegovina. General
21 Petkovic carrying out his duties, I carrying out my own. But after this
22 action around Vares, I cannot claim exactly what day it was. Was it one
23 or two or three days, but then we left that area.
24 Q. All right. You left the area one or two or three days after the
25 events at Stupni Do?
1 A. That's right, that's right.
2 Q. And then you returned at about the time of your birthday on the
3 17th of November?
4 A. I think that that would be the approximate time, Mr. Prosecutor.
5 Q. Could you go to P06519. 6519. Which is in binder number 2 which
6 I think is the one you have with you. 6519. Now, Mr. Bandic, you'll
7 correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty confident that from your
8 testimony already about this document, you are saying that you didn't
9 write this document, which is a report on the events at Stupni Do, you
10 didn't write it, and that you had not seen it; is that correct?
11 A. Your Honours, Mr. Prosecutor, I don't know what report you are
12 referring to. Are you referring to the report written by Mr. Rajic?
13 Q. This is a report, this is the Exhibit P06519. Yes, it's a report
14 appearing over the signatures of Ivica Rajic, and I have your testimony,
15 what you said about this report on your direct examination was that you
16 never drafted it and you never saw it; is that correct?
17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters could not hear the witness.
18 MR. STRINGER:
19 Q. Restate your answer please, a bit more loudly.
20 A. I stand by that statement.
21 Q. Okay. I would like to look at part of this document with you,
22 sir. If you could go -- we are going to go to page 8 of the English.
23 It's page 6034 of the Croatian, if you look at the bottom. 6034. Sir,
24 at the top -- top right, you'll see the number. There are some
25 conclusions here.
1 "... by analysing the evidence presented, the following
2 conclusions can undoubtedly be reached."
3 Starts with that:
4 "The Stupni Do operation was militarily justified." It goes on.
5 The third point I want to draw your attention to:
6 "The system of command and control, based on the principle of
7 subordination, was for the most part abided by. Individual unit members,
8 Zoran Filipovic of the Maturice and Franjo Bakovic of the Apostoli,
9 exceeded the instructions and the orders of their commanders, firing at
10 civilians located in houses."
11 And then continuing on to the next page in the English, I'm going
12 to skip some of these bullet points, but it continues on at the top of
13 the next page to say:
14 "A number of houses were set on fire by the BH Army and the
15 civilians themselves when they abandoned them. This especially pertains
16 to newer homes..." et cetera.
17 Next bullet point:
18 "It is evident that a number of civilians were killed which was,
19 for the most part, the direct consequence of combat, but also the fact
20 that some civilians, especially women, actively participated in defending
21 the village, while some of the civilians were killed as a result of
22 ill-considered conduct by certain members of our units."
23 And then again a reference to Filipovic and Bakovic.
24 Okay. Now, that's information that's contained in this report,
25 and I understand your testimony, sir, that you didn't write this report
1 or did not see it. Nonetheless, is that information that you were aware
2 of based upon your own presence in the area?
3 A. Mr. Prosecutor, you explained this document rather extensively,
4 but again I say that I have never seen it, I did not participate in its
5 making in any way. As for these names, I've never heard of them. The
6 ones that are mentioned here, these members of the HVO who went beyond
7 the rules of warfare, I can only say to you that --
8 Q. I'm just asking whether the information that I've just read out
9 to you, is that information that was known to you, even if you didn't
10 write the report? Did you know these things, two soldiers had been
11 involved in committing crimes, they burnt their own houses, things like
13 A. Your Honour, Mr. Prosecutor, I did not know at that point in time
14 while I was there. I knew nothing of this. The first more detailed
15 information I received from talking to the two members of the Apostoli.
16 Q. And that didn't happen until November, as I understand it, when
17 you came back?
18 A. That's right, correct.
19 Q. Now, turning to the very end of this document, page 10 of the
20 English. If you go to the very end where the signature of Colonel Rajic
21 appears, there are some initials there, and the initials ZD, or ZD, do
22 you see those? Is that Zoran Duno or would that be Zoran Duno?
23 A. Mr. Prosecutor, it could be. Those are the initials, and there
24 is a person whose name is Zoran Duno, so you can link that to this.
25 Q. Zoran Duno was with the SIS as part of the Ban Jelacic Brigade in
1 Kiseljak; is that correct?
2 A. Mr. Prosecutor, that is not absolutely correct. What I know is
3 that Mr. Duno was the assistant to Mr. Rajic for security in the brigade.
4 And there was Mr. Marjanovic in the brigade as far as I know, whom I know
5 personally, and to the best of my knowledge there was Mr. Rajic's
6 brother, Nenad, whom I never met, but I was told that he was in the SIS
7 of the brigade, which well, of itself is --
8 Q. Could you go to Exhibit 2D00944.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I have a follow-up
10 question on this document. We were aware of it, we had an opportunity to
11 look into these events through other witnesses. In this report by
12 Colonel Rajic towards the end, but also in the beginning, he said that a
13 procedure had to be initiated and that the military Prosecutor had to be
14 seized of it. In writing this, and it can be seen clearly at the
15 beginning of the report, the military judicial authorities are aware of
16 this. I wonder about this. What about the follow-up? If the
17 investigative judge was doing his work, he would summon Mr. Rajic, and
18 then the Judge would realise that this man was not Rajic but Andric, and
19 everything would be discovered. So what does this all mean to you?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. President, at that
21 time when this document was compiled, to best of my knowledge, or as can
22 be seen from the documents we looked at so far, Mr. Rajic was still that
23 man Rajic from those times. And the second thing you noticed, which
24 would also be logical for the military Prosecutor to call him and others,
25 the others who provide information, to call them to interview them, to
1 talk to them about it. And of course to try and talk to the people who
2 were there on the spot, to collect information, to take statements, and
3 so on and so forth. That's how I understand it.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Q. In binder number 3, which is the one on the floor next to you, if
7 you could go to 2D00944. If you keep that one with you also, if you can.
8 2D944. Page 5 of the English version, this is 19 November, 1993. This
9 is a list of the HVO units and SIS personnel in them. It appears over
10 the signature of your superior, Ivica Lucic. And on page 5 of the
11 English, and it's item number 9, there's a reference to the Ban Jelacic
12 Brigade, Kiseljak, Bojnice, Kresevo; do you see that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. You've already mentioned Mr. Marjanovic as one of the SIS people
15 with the brigade, does this also indicate that Zoran Duno is, as
16 indicated here, an advisor for the SIS with the brigade?
17 A. Your Honours, Mr. Prosecutor, as I said, there were there were
18 various titles in various documents, and as far as I know, as I've
19 already said, Mr. Marjanovic was in the brigade and Mr. Duno was the
20 assistant commander operative group 2; that is to say, Mr. Rajic for
22 Q. Okay, well, at least your superior, Mr. Lucic, thinks that
23 Mr. Duno works for the SIS, would you agree with me on that?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Did the SIS attached to the Ban Jelacic Brigade conduct an
1 investigation of the events on Stupni Do?
2 A. Your Honours, Mr. Prosecutor, I'm not aware of that. I don't
3 know, but it imposes itself logically that certain measures should be
4 taken and that people should work in that direction along those lines.
5 Q. Mr. Bandic, now we have you, and I know you had different titles,
6 but we have you basically as the number 2 man in the SIS administration.
7 You are attached to the Main Staff. You are going around everywhere with
8 General Petkovic as a security officer. Now, are you telling us, sir,
9 that you don't know if the SIS with the brigade conducted an
10 investigation at Stupni Do?
11 A. Correct, I don't know that. But I wasn't the second man in the
12 administration, the number two man. That post did not exist.
13 Q. Okay. Now, you were the security officer with General Petkovic.
14 You are linked in some way to SIS. You did nothing to ensure that an
15 investigation was being undertaken even though you were in the area
16 shortly after the event occurred?
17 A. Mr. Prosecutor, as soon as I went back to the area, and in view
18 of the events that happened, and as they were presented to the public
19 from different sides with a lot of propaganda, I, as an operative, and as
20 someone from the security system, I personally endeavoured to collect
21 information about it, and that is why I talked to the two people who were
23 Q. But you didn't make any official reports about it; is that
25 A. That's not correct, Your Honours, and Mr. Prosecutor. As to that
1 discussion, I did write a report to my superior, or rather, I sent the
2 report about my conversations with those two individuals. I sent it to
3 the administration.
4 Q. Will you please turn to P06647. 6647. It's in binder 2. It's
5 the one on the floor, sorry. 6647.
6 A. Yes, it's easier for me to look at it on the screen.
7 Q. However you wish. And it might be easier for you with this one,
8 because I believe from your testimony you've indicated that you authored
9 the majority of what is written in this document; is that correct? You
10 have to say it out loud?
11 A. Yes, yes, that is correct.
12 Q. Now, we don't need to go through this in detail, but as you've
13 indicated that you wrote it or you wrote the majority, let me just put it
14 to you this way, would you agree with me, sir, that this is your report
15 and it is -- it's about Ivica Rajic and his activities and some of the
16 people that he has been associated with in the Kiseljak area? Is that a
17 correct way of describing this?
18 A. Your Honours and Mr. Prosecutor, yes, that's what it is about,
19 and based on our information, as it was, Mr. Rajic did deal in these
20 unlawful acts. Had it been anybody else, we would have done the same as
21 we saw with the other case when it was a matter of crime committed by a
22 member of the SIS, the late Mr. Bosnjak.
23 Q. Now, at the end of this document it says, and we can take you to
24 it if you like, I can read it to you, at the very end, the conclusion or
25 last paragraph it says: "In view of what has been said above,"
1 et cetera, "... I propose that some personnel changes be made in the
2 military and civilian sectors of Kiseljak HVO."
3 This is page 5 of the English. "I propose that some personnel
4 changes be made..."
5 A. I can't see the last page but I can stand by that, because they
6 were opinions stated on the basis of information and knowledge gathered,
7 and that was one of the suggestions or possible suggestions that
8 something be done along those lines.
9 Q. And to be more specific, one of your proposals, or this -- I take
10 it you are recommending, among other things, that Mr. Rajic be removed
11 from his position; is that correct?
12 A. Yes, that is correct. And you can see that from this document.
13 Q. Okay.
14 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I apologise, I waited
15 for the answer, not to interrupt the Prosecutor, as Judge Antonetti told
16 us, but it doesn't say in this document -- well, if the Prosecutor is
17 interpreting it, it should be interpreted correctly. He is speaking in
18 the singular, as if it was witness's stand, whereas in the document the
19 plural is used, "we propose." So if the Prosecutor interprets what is
20 written, he should interpret it correctly and the witness can answer any
21 way he chooses.
22 MR. STRINGER: Well, I'm looking at 6647 where my translation
23 uses the singular, "I propose." Now, it's in 6828 where the plural "we
24 propose" is found, so that may be the reason for the confusion.
25 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] In document 6647, it says "we
1 propose," and the witness can read it out again, if need be, if there's
2 something contentious, then it's the translation that is wrong, but it
3 says the same, we propose, "predlazemo" in the plural.
4 MR. STRINGER:
5 Q. Mr. Bandic, can you -- you can see the end of the document there,
6 maybe you're the best -- well, you are obviously the best person to tell
7 us what you wrote. Did you say I propose or we propose, because my
8 English translation says "I propose that some personnel changes be made."
9 A. Mr. Prosecutor, it says, "predlazemo," "we propose," in the
10 plural. The O isn't very legible, maybe because of that, but it does say
11 we propose. And if I may explain why in the plural, because it's a
12 number of -- it's a collective report, a collection of reports, and on
13 the basis of those reports suggestions were made, so I couldn't propose
14 it myself to withdraw someone or something like that, replace. All I
15 could do was provide information about certain people.
16 Q. And the proposal of you and the others who with whom you
17 collaborated on this report was, among other thing, to remove Ivica
18 Rajic; correct?
19 A. Once again, let me repeat, I can't remove anybody or propose that
20 they be removed, all I can do is suggest on the basis of the information
21 we collected, and to indicate this to people and say which people were
22 responsible for such and such behaviour.
23 Q. Witness, will you go, please, to Exhibit P06963, which is in
24 binder number 2.
25 MR. STRINGER: And I believe this is a confidential document that
1 requires us go into private session.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, please.
3 [Private session]
11 Pages 38329-38339 redacted.
15 [Open session]
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In open session you attended
18 this meeting and the author of this report, this document we have before
19 us, says that General Petkovic was embarrassed. As far as you remember,
20 was that the case or not?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Esteemed
22 Mr. President, I really cannot remember. I can just confirm to you that
23 my talks -- that is to say, well, when Mr. Petkovic was there, obviously
24 I wouldn't even take the floor. I also felt embarrassed and, of course,
25 it wasn't very pleasant for me after a lot of information had gone into
1 the public by then, but I simply cannot remember what meeting that was.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The document mentions two HVO
3 officers and others who have been dismissed. The Prosecutor believes
4 that General Petkovic lied when he said this. As far as you remember,
5 was this ever mentioned or not?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. President, I
7 really do not remember that these two suspended persons were mentioned at
8 all. In this case, the Prosecutor said that these were men who had
9 already been killed. I really cannot remember this meeting. I think
10 this meeting actually took place later even.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The author of this report draws
12 his conclusion based on the fact that General Petkovic had information
13 provided by Radio Sarajevo or other sources. During your exchange of
14 views, was an interpreter present?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I can remember,
16 Mr. President, there was an interpreter. As far as I can remember, there
17 was an interpreter because we always spoke Croatian, and I know that the
18 young lady's name was Renata. Later on, when I attended other meetings
19 with Mr. Lucic, she interpreted there.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] As far as you remember, I know
21 it's difficult, did General Petkovic say, Yes, I know that because I
22 listen to Radio Sarajevo, or because I had other information? This is
23 what the author of the report states.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I cannot recall
25 these details at all, but I do remember that General Petkovic and I were
1 commenting on our way back how much misinformation there was, rumours
2 about everything that was happening out there, that is to say, before the
3 crime in Stupni Do, and afterwards, I think that on our way back we were
4 commenting on this. There was a great deal of information of different
5 kinds, rumours, et cetera, it was hard to find one's way.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One has the feeling that the
7 author of the document reaches the conclusion that the HVO was going to
8 carry out an investigation and take a disciplinary measures if need be.
9 This is what the author of this document states. Do you remember this?
10 Was this ever mentioned or not? Did General Petkovic say, We shall carry
11 out an investigation and do what needs to be done, because this is what
12 is stated at the end of this report? You don't remember?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Indeed, Mr. President, I cannot
14 remember any detail, whether there was specific mention of some person or
15 some persons or whether there were proceedings, I really cannot remember
16 these details.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I see that at the end of the
18 document there is something which the Prosecutor did not mention, which
19 is a comment of a general nature. He says that General Petkovic's orders
20 are not abided by by the commanders in Vares. In the course of this
21 conversation, was this issue addressed? Did General Petkovic say, Well,
22 I'm not aware of what has happened, the commanders are doing all sorts of
23 things? How is it that the author reaches this conclusion?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, once again, I repeat,
25 I cannot remember this conversation at all, the details involved, but in
1 my previous testimony, I told you about lots and lots of controversial
2 information about the situation in the HVO of Vares, and generally the
3 political and military circumstances that prevailed there just before
4 that tragic event.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In the document we have, other
6 important topics are addressed like the evacuation of the Mostar
7 hospital, the freeing of the detainees. But we can see that the person
8 who has drafted the document states that it is urgent to try and make
9 sure that General Petkovic goes back to Split by plane. Had he remained,
10 it was -- he had not left before because of the bad weather conditions.
11 Do you remember this at all?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. President, I just
13 remember that several times we were being transferred by UNPROFOR
14 helicopters. That detail I cannot recall what the weather was like. It
15 must have been bad if we could not fly. However, in addition to
16 helicopter flights, General Petkovic and I travelled by road as well, so
17 I cannot remember in this particular case whether we returned by
18 helicopter or by some vehicle.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have six minutes left, you
20 might be able to finish the end of your cross-examination before the
21 break. You have exactly six minutes left.
22 MR. STRINGER: I thought I had about 15 minutes, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Registrar has just told me
24 it's six.
25 MR. STRINGER: He is always right.
1 Q. Yes, I'll I think that we can try to finish this. Mr. Bandic,
2 just a different subject, P03227. 3227. It's in the first binder.
3 A. Two binders start with a P, so.
4 Q. And I think the next series should be close by. Okay. This is
5 dated the 6th of July, 1993. It's coming from Colonel Siljeg at the
6 north-west Herzegovina
7 "Final destination for all arrested military conscripts of Muslim
8 nationality from Rama area, should be urgently requested through the SIS
9 of north-west Herzegovina
10 administration of the Defence Department of the Mostar HVO, and the
11 arrested persons should be immediately sent to the designated location."
12 Now, Mr. Bandic, we talked about this at the very beginning of
13 your testimony about the arrests of all the Muslim males in the summer of
14 1993. Is it true, sir, as indicated here that the placement of the
15 detainees was something that was coordinated with SIS both in the
16 brigades and the SIS administration in Mostar.
17 A. Mr. Prosecutor, that is absolutely not correct. As a matter of
18 fact, that's not what the documents are called. I've never seen this
19 document before, and I do not know that anyone ever acted on the basis of
20 such a document.
21 Q. Okay. The next one is 3498. Okay? This is dated ten days later
22 on the 16th of July. This is from the Rama Brigade SIS to the SIS
23 administration Mostar, saying that:
24 "On the basis of the order of the commander of the operative zone
25 of 6 July, we send the following persons of Muslim nationality to
1 military prison."
2 And then it has a list of all the people who are the prisoners.
3 And then before I ask you a question, would you turn then to P03551.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Now, this is the 19th of July, three days later, this is from
7 Chief Valentin Coric, and this is regarding -- an information regarding
8 your report to the Mostar SIS, reference 03028293, which is actually the
9 document we were just looking at, which is the list.
10 Coric says:
11 "We are informing you that due to the large number of detained
12 persons of Muslim nationality, we are unable to receive the people that,
13 according to the aforementioned report, you are planning to sends to
14 Mostar central military remand prison, and that you should, therefore,
15 keep them detained within your operation zone."
16 So doesn't this in fact show these documents, sir, that the SIS
17 administration in Mostar was coordinating with the military police
18 administration, of which Mr. Coric was the chief, in terms of the
19 locating, transporting, and detaining of all of the prisoners who were
20 being arrested at this time?
21 A. Your Honour, Mr. Prosecutor, the way you put this, makes it
22 necessary to give an explanation. Military conscripts who were brought
23 in at that point in time, that is to say, at the level of brigades and
24 operative zones, obviously there were reports about that, to the best of
25 my knowledge, there were many problems at these lower levels of
1 coordination and so on. At higher levels, things functioned up to a
2 point, but if you allow me, I will give you a very telling example.
3 Q. Excuse me, unfortunately, we don't have time for that. Let me
4 just ask you one last question --
5 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I do beg your pardon, I did not mean
6 to interrupt my colleague, but sometimes even I do not understand how
7 these proceedings move along. P3418 is the document that he put to the
8 witness, and Mr. Siljeg is writing this document, and in paragraph 13 he
9 himself says that that is not the way things were done. When the
10 Prosecutor has these documents that clearly indicate that things were not
11 done this way, then the witness is being misled in a way. I prepared
12 this document for redirect, and, Your Honours, you can look at the
13 document, 3418, paragraph 13 of this document. Mr. Siljeg exactly says,
14 When we asked for them to be moved, no one helped us.
15 So the witness is being led to something in relation to which
16 there is an exhibit that says the opposite.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This is a classical question
18 for redirect, Ms. Nozica. Mr. Stringer, your time is up, please finish
19 as quickly as you can.
20 MR. STRINGER: The last exhibit and just a quick question about
21 it is P04274. 4274. Thank you, Registrar.
22 Q. It's a report dated 18 August, 1993
23 Brigade military police, which is in Ljubuski, someone named Ante Prlic
24 and Jure Herceg. I want to ask you a question about the procedure that's
25 referred to here. He's talking about prisoners of Muslim nationality who
1 are in the Ljubuski military prison.
2 "All prisoners who possess the guarantee letters and certificates
3 issued by SIS and crime department proving that they have no criminal
4 record were released, as well as those who possess certificates issued by
5 Defence Department. During the day, 24 prisoners who had such documents
6 were released, and they moved out within 24 hours along with their
8 Were you aware, sir, of a practice whereby SIS was involved in
9 issuing passes to prisoners who could be released from the prison as long
10 as they then moved out of Ljubuski with their families? Do you know
11 about that?
12 A. Your Honour, Mr. Prosecutor, I have to correct you. It isn't
13 passes that we are dealing with. They weren't passes. The security
14 service had the task of possibly checking to see whether certain -- they
15 have information about certain individuals with respect to certain
16 unlawful acts and so on, and then through their records, this would be
17 checked out, whether there were any criminal proceedings against them or
18 anything like that. But there were no passes, as far as I know. No
19 passes as such existed, at least I don't know of their existence. So it
20 was the SIS service which was one of the factors included in and involved
21 in possibly looking at the various people who were military conscripts
22 and civilians and persons against whom criminal proceedings had been
23 taken, so different categories of persons who had to be checked out.
24 Q. And then were you aware of the process where those persons who
25 were released under this procedure had to then go home, pack up, and
1 leave their homes and move on to third countries?
2 A. Mr. Prosecutor, that is your, how shall I put it, free
3 interpretation, a very free interpretation on your part. Most of the
4 people stayed on. Some of them left, however, unfortunately, that was an
5 area, the area of Bosnia-Herzegovina where regardless of the ethnicities,
6 many people wished to leave the area, leave the chaos of war.
7 MR. STRINGER: Nothing further, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, we are going to have
9 a 20 minute break and then we'll have your redirect.
10 --- Recess taken at 12.34 p.m.
11 --- On resuming at 12.56 p.m.
12 MR. STRINGER: Excuse me, Mr. President, can I ask to make one
13 observation before counsel begins her redirect. I've noticed a number of
14 times that throughout the -- at least the cross-examining, I don't know
15 if it was the direct but the witness has a notebook, and he has been
16 making notes and -- about things during the examination and since we were
17 in closed session for at least part of that, I don't know if it's
18 appropriate for the witness to be taking notes of closed session
19 proceedings out of the Tribunal when he leaves.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Witness, usually during
21 testimony, the witness does not make notes. I didn't see you because you
22 were hidden from me by the monitors, but that is -- that being said,
23 Ms. Alaburic, do you want to have some time for further questions
24 yourself, is that right?
25 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right, Your Honour.
1 In view of the fact that a large portion of the cross-examination of my
2 learned friend the Prosecutor was directed principally at my client,
3 General Petkovic. So I would like to have 5 to 7 additional minutes, I
4 think that's what I would need, just to clarify some details which I
5 consider were completely erroneously interpreted by the Prosecutor
6 looking at what was said in documents and showing my client in a
7 different light. In the wrong light. And I think that I have the right
8 to do so based on the guide-lines given by the Trial Chamber and the
9 Rules of Procedure and Evidence. And I'm sure that 5 to 7 minutes will
10 suffice. I don't mind letting Ms. Nozica go before me. I would just
11 like those additional 5 to 7 minutes.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment, please. We would
13 prefer for you to start, Ms. Alaburic, because this is a witness called
14 by Ms. Nozica, so she has to be the last one to speak.
15 Yes, Witness, do you have anything to? What did you mean to say?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, thank you for giving
17 me to the time the speak. You cautioned me about the notes. I can give
18 them to you, photocopy them for you or for anybody else. They are just a
19 few words I wanted to say when leaving the courtroom, but you can see
20 what I've written here if you would like to take a look.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, you dropped a sheet of
22 paper there.
23 Yes, Ms. Alaburic.
24 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Just
25 briefly. I think we'll be able to clarify some points looking at some
1 documents and see that Mr. Stringer linked certain allegations and
2 statements up completely incorrectly, so my additional examination
3 relates to P6144, that document, which is the UNPROFOR document that we
4 were discussing a moment ago.
5 Further cross-examination by Ms. Alaburic.
6 Q. Mr. Bandic, you discussed with the Prosecutor. Now, in the
7 document mention is made that certain officers of the HVO had been
8 arrested and some suspended, and the question now is who on that day, and
9 we are talking about the 25th of October, 1993, could have been arrested
10 in connection with Vares?
11 Now, take a look at the document, we'll look -- 6026 is the
12 document I'd like us to look at and have up on our screens. P6026, and
13 that's the document that we said had a message in handwriting at the
14 bottom by General Praljak to General Petkovic. And look at the
15 penultimate paragraph there, please. I'm going to read it out until we
16 get it up on our screens, this is what it says:
17 "Due to attempts at obstruction, the planned activities I have
18 placed in isolation Mr. Ante Pejcinovic, Zvonko Duznovic, and Ivica
19 Gavran. The commander of the brigade is in severe state of depression
20 and is not able to carry out his duty, and I attach a letter which I
21 received two days ago from the commander, Emil Harah."
22 And I am going to add now that we've already discussed how Emil
23 Harah was replaced and Mr. Kresimir Bosic was appointed to replace him.
24 Tell me now please, Mr. Bandic, to the best of your knowledge, on 25th of
25 October when a meeting was held with UNPROFOR, were those the only --
1 was that the only available information about the arrest and isolation of
2 any officer or member of the HVO staff in the Vares area?
3 A. Your Honours, counsel, I saw that report here for the first time.
4 At that point in time, I did not know what was going on within the HVO,
5 and I've mentioned a number of times that in Vares the political and
6 military situation was highly confusing and many details were ones that
7 we were not aware of at the time.
8 Q. And from what you learned later on, can you answer my question,
9 were they really the only arrests and instances of isolation that had
10 been undertaken up until that time?
11 A. To the best of my knowledge, it was that this had to do with
12 these particular individuals, and I was interested to see this because
13 there was a SIS member because it was a sort of settling of a political
14 accounts within the HVO, if I might be allowed to say so. Political
15 account settling, precisely.
16 Q. Now, Mr. Bandic, to the best of your knowledge at that meeting
17 was any mention made of the fact that Ivica Rajic would not -- did allow
18 UNPROFOR to enter Stupni Do? Do you happen to remember assertions of
19 that kind?
20 A. I really don't remember that, no.
21 Q. Very well. Now, let's look at the next document, P6078 is the
22 number, and it is a letter sent by General Petkovic to Ivica Rajic in
23 Vares. And in point 3 of that document it says, in the course of
24 tomorrow, regardless of the consequences, allow UNPROFOR to enter Stupni
25 Do, and in brackets it says, please understand that the more this is made
1 difficult for them, the worse it is for us.
2 Now, tell me, Mr. Bandic, this is a document dated the 25th of
3 October, 1993
4 best of your knowledge, Mr. Bandic, was it really the position taken by
5 General Petkovic, that is to say, if something had actually happened in
6 Stupni Do that UNPROFOR should be allowed to enter because the truth will
7 out in due course and everything should be done to assist UNPROFOR; is
8 that right?
9 A. Counsel, I never saw this order, or rather this piece of
10 information, but it was the general attitude taken by General Petkovic.
11 Q. Look at point 1 of that same document. General Petkovic is
12 asking Ivica Rajic to supply him with the right information, correct
13 information about Stupni Do, the number of Muslim soldiers killed, and
14 the number of civilians killed, and from this, I am able to conclude that
15 on that day, General Petkovic, did not have information about these
16 soldiers killed, belonging to the BH Army and the civilians who were
17 killed in Stupni Do. Tell me, Mr. Bandic, is my conclusion correct?
18 A. Yes, and it's logical from this letter of General Petkovic's.
19 Q. Let's look at the next document now, please. P6076. Of that
20 same day, the 25th of October. Ivica Rajic is sending a short note about
21 the situation in Stupni Do, and he says in the second paragraph, The
22 correct accuracy of this information can be checked out by members of the
23 UN because access to Stupni Do village by military observers is
25 Now, in this courtroom we had witnesses who confirmed that the --
1 on that day an UNPROFOR representative did indeed enter Stupni Do,
2 escorted by Mr. Ivica Rajic, who stayed up at the road. He didn't go
3 down to the village itself. Now, tell me to the best of your knowledge,
4 is that correct -- is it correct that on the basis of this permission
5 given by General Petkovic, that UNPROFOR was really able to enter Stupni
6 Do and to start the investigation?
7 A. Your Honours, counsel, I don't know. I'm not aware of General
8 Petkovic issuing that order. I don't know about that particular detail.
9 Q. Now look at the continuation and conclusion of this UNPROFOR
10 document in which your discussion was recorded as to the events in Stupni
11 Do. And this UNPROFOR officer says Petkovic gave written permission to
12 UNPROFOR to go to Stupni Do because, as he said, there's no purpose in
13 hiding what had happened. Now, tell me, Mr. Bandic, to the best of your
14 knowledge, this position by General Petkovic, did he express that in his
15 communication with representatives of the international community?
16 A. Let me say once again, I don't remember the details, but that was
17 General Petkovic's general stand and position. He said that there was
18 nothing to hide, nothing should be hidden.
19 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours, for
20 allowing that additional time to re-examine.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I recall that the
22 Trial Chamber granted this time because it turned out that during
23 cross-examination General Petkovic was the one that was most
24 incriminated, therefore exceptionally we granted this possibility for you
25 to ask additional questions.
1 Ms. Nozica, you may now proceed for your redirect since this is
2 your witness.
3 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Re-examination by Ms. Nozica:
5 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Bandic, I'd just like us to clarify certain
6 things with respect to the cross-examination conducted by both the
7 Prosecutor and the other Defence teams. And to start off with, and I
8 hope we'll get through this quickly and efficiently. We were shown a
9 document in the pink binder that you have in front of you. It's the
10 second document there. There's no need to look at the first document.
11 It is 4D1317. And I'd just like to remind you that Ms. Alaburic
12 questioned you about the be obligations under Article 25 of the Law on
13 Taking Over the Law on Criminal Proceedings which is a document, for the
14 transcript number P00592. And you have there several articles referring
15 to this particular document, and also an article which relates to the
16 duties of the organs of the interior in view of the criminal code taken
17 over from the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina at that time.
18 Now, we are going to make a different comparison in order to
19 clarify what the authorised persons of the security organs of the armed
20 forces, what they should do, what their duties were when it came to
21 applying the criminal code of Bosnia-Herzegovina. And in order to do
22 that, look at Article 25 first, please, which is to be found on page 2.
23 In Article 25, just to remind ourselves, it says, The duties and
24 authorisations specified by the Law on Criminal Proceedings is performed
25 instead of, and then it says, the organs of the interior, the authorised
1 personages of the security organs of the armed forces -- or authorised
2 persons for the organs of security, the armed forces shall preform the
3 duties and exercise the authority of organs of Internal Affairs.
4 Now, let's see what the organs of the Internal Affairs are.
5 Yes, thank you for warning me, I will do my best to speak slower.
6 Let's look and see what the authorisation and authority was of the organs
7 of Internal Affairs when it came to crimes, criminal acts, and in order
8 to do so let's look at Article 151 which is on that same page, and let's
9 look at paragraph 1. Para
10 "If there are grounds to suspect that a criminal act that is
11 prosecuted ex officio has been committed, the law enforcement agencies
12 must take all the steps necessary to locate the perpetrator of the
13 criminal act -- to prevent to locate the perpetrator of the criminal act,
14 to prevent the perpetrator or [indiscernible] from hiding or fleeing, to
15 direct and preserve the traces of the criminal act, and objects which
16 might serve as evidence, and to gather all information which might be of
17 use to conduct criminal proceedings."
18 Mr. Bandic, you during the examination-in-chief in response to a
19 question Mr. Judge Antonetti said, when asked who was supposed to take
20 measures and steps to initiate legal proceedings against perpetrators,
21 you said the commander of the military unit. Now, let's see whether they
22 were identical tasks set out in Article 151 of the criminal code, whether
23 they are identical to the tasks that were given to the commander of the
24 military unit, and in order to do that, go to the previous page of this
25 document, please, and we are talking about Article 27 now, let's look at
1 that, of the Decree on Military Districts Courts In the Territory of the
2 Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, HZ-HB, During the War, or in a Time
3 of Imminent Threat of War.
4 And this is a P document, 592 is its number. It says:
5 "The commander of a military units and of a military institution
6 must take all necessary measures to prevent the perpetrator of a crime,
7 under official Prosecution, from hiding or escaping, and must attempt to
8 preserve all traces of the criminal act and all objects that may serve as
9 evidence. He must also obtain all information which could be useful for
10 initiating criminal proceedings."
11 So if we compare those two articles, isn't it obvious,
12 Mr. Bandic, that it was in fact the commander of the military unit who
13 was given authorisation or the obligation, not the authorisation but
14 obligation, to undertake those steps and measures which according to the
15 criminal code should have been taken by the organ of Internal Affairs?
16 A. That's right. That is correct.
17 Q. Very well. Could you please look at the next document in the
18 binder, 2D940. During the cross-examination, you were asked several
19 times -- or, rather, a great deal of time was used in dealing with
20 whether there was SIS at the Main Staff or not. Could we please look at
21 this document once again. I did show it during the direct examination.
22 The date is the 8th of October, 1993. This is information that was
23 provided at the request of Mr. Petkovic. The reference number here is
24 Mr. Petkovic's --
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, do not display this
1 document outside the courtroom.
2 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, I do apologise, Your
3 Honour. I quite simply forgot of that detail -- I forgot about that
4 detail which is really important.
5 Q. So this is a response to document P, I'm just going to say what
6 it is, 5614. And that can be seen on the basis of the delivery number,
7 not to go into that again, and at the end of the document it says, Yet
8 again more detailed information you can receive from our officials who
9 are carrying out their duties at the Main Staff.
10 Was it "pri" or was it "u." That is what was discussed, what
11 preposition was used there. It seemed obvious to the person receiving
12 this information that there were officials of this kind at the Main
14 A. That's correct. If I may just add something.
15 Q. Please, go ahead.
16 A. I know it was in 1994, that is to say, many things had already
17 settled in or rather, fortunately, there were no longer any conflicts
18 between the Croats and Bosniaks in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I would meet
19 Mr. Coric every now and then and I asked him what things were like at the
20 Main Staff. He said to me, Now, it's a different story. I am a member
21 of the collegium and often information is provided at the collegium, and
22 I was glad to hear that. In a way, I knew these people, the situation,
23 and in a way -- in a way I welcomed this. I was very glad to hear that.
24 But this is the time after the war, of course, and many things finally
25 fell into place.
1 Q. Mr. Bandic, what I'm interested in here, primarily, is the date
2 of this document. I know that you did speak about this and you wanted to
3 give an answer to that when you were asked by Mr. Praljak, I think. But
4 this document shows that on the 8th of October, 1993, Mr. Lucic says
5 explicitly, ask -- Ask our officials who are carrying out their duties at
6 the Main Staff?
7 A. That's right, that's right. Someone from our ranks was there. I
8 don't know who exactly.
9 Q. All right. Mr. Bandic, you were asked about document 7035
10 extensively, so could you please have a look at it again. You were
11 questioned about the investigations that were conducted by the SIS
12 administration. So now I would like to ask you to explain to the
13 Honourable Trial Chamber where this information came from, the
14 information contained in this document. With regard to all these cases,
15 was it the SIS administration that was carrying out the investigation or
16 did you get the information some other way? Have you found the document?
17 It should be the next one?
18 A. It is a document where Lucic is sending it to Mr. Tudjman.
19 Q. Yes. My question is whether the administration of SIS was --
20 sorry. My question is whether it was the SIS administration that
21 conducted investigations with regard to these cases, or did you come
22 across this information some other way; could you please explain?
23 A. The SIS administration did not conduct an investigation. This is
24 a compilation of several sources from units and centres. This is
25 compiled information about what was going on in the HVO at that time.
1 For example, if you allow me just to add something, the administration
2 could not file criminal reports on the basis of intelligence only.
3 Q. Yes, that was supposed to be my next question. What is the name
4 of the result that you get in your intelligence work, and can that be
5 used as grounds for filing a criminal report or, say, an additional piece
6 of information if criminal charges are brought?
7 A. It cannot be a basis for criminal charges. It is intelligence
8 information that cannot be a basis for a criminal complaint. It can only
9 be used in the further proceedings.
10 Q. All right. Now, in relation to the work of the SIS
11 administration, yesterday, His Honour Judge Antonetti asked you at one
12 point in time whether the SIS were supposed to investigate what happened
13 in Stupni Do. Or, rather, whether you were supposed to go to the Bobovac
14 Brigade and look at documents, orders that are in their binders. Did you
15 have the authority to do that?
16 Your answer, Mr. Bandic, was that is part of the work of SIS, and
17 approximately a month after the event in Stupni Do, I went to the area
18 that was mentioned and so on and so forth.
19 I would be interested in this specifically. I mean, as a SIS
20 official, not as an official from the SIS administration, but also not an
21 official in the Main Staff, can a SIS official come to any brigade and
22 ask for orders and documents of that brigade, to have insight into these
24 A. I could not ask for that, and I could not behave that way. There
25 was a hierarchy, after all, that had to be observed. I was not in a
1 position to do that.
2 Q. Very well. Now we are going to move on to a few document that is
3 were shown to you by the Prosecutor. Today, you have the next document,
4 that is an order of Mr. Siljeg, P3227 is the number. The 6th of July,
5 Mr. Siljeg, in this order, asks that immediately through the SIS, the
6 operative zone, and the administration of the Defence Department, all
7 Muslim detainees should -- I'm going show you the next document now,
8 P4218 [as interpreted].
9 That is a letter from Mr. Siljeg dated the 13th of July, 1993
10 would like it to remind you that the Prosecutor asked you whether the SIS
11 administration, together with the military police, took these activities
12 in relation to the transfer of the prisoners. I am showing this document
13 to you, it is going to be a bit difficult to read but there's a
14 translation. Paragraph 13, it's Mr. Siljeg's communication.
15 He says: "We sought an agreement in view of dislocating Muslims,
16 military conscripts, from Rama --"
17 Thank you for telling me. The transcript records the wrong
18 number. The number is P3418. We will wait for a moment for it to appear
19 in e-court. Have you found it?
20 A. Yes, yes. It's quite illegible.
21 Q. I'll read it. We have it here now. So on page 2, it is
22 paragraph 13, it's an exhibit, this document, is:
23 "We asked for an answer for the dislocation of Muslims from Rama
24 of Herzegovina
25 there was no answer until we brought them at our own initiative to
2 We see here from Mr. Siljeg himself that they, I don't know if he
3 is -- I don't know who he is referring to, that they carry this out,
4 although it was requested in the previous document this be done by the
5 SIS of the brigade, and the administration of the SIS from the Defence
6 Department. Is that what seems to be correct?
7 A. Yes. I've already said that, Madam, but I'm really not familiar
8 with the circumstances involved in respect of what Mr. Siljeg was talking
10 Q. Yes. All right. I just wanted to show this because it was
11 brought up during the cross-examination. It was in the Prosecutor's
12 binder, but it wasn't shown to you, this document, I mean.
13 I would now like to clarify certain matters for you, Mr. Bandic,
14 and for the honourable judges. P3630. P3630, that is the note where
15 your name is mentioned. What I would particularly like to draw your
16 attention to is that it is obvious that there is no signature and stamp
17 or stamp on the document; is that right.
18 A. Yes, that's right.
19 Q. We have seen here notes without a signature, without a stamp, but
20 we have seen such documents before, but there is no delivery number on
21 this document; is that right?
22 A. Yes, that's right.
23 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, counsel. I apologise for the
24 intervention, but I think for this we should clarify because there is a
25 stamp that is in the upper right-hand corner of the document which shows
1 that it came from the HVO archives, made available to the Prosecution by
2 the Croatian government in Zagreb
3 that there's not the HVO stamp that's found at the end of the document,
4 but just for the record I think it's useful to make that distinction.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It is now on the record, please
6 proceed, Ms. Nozica.
7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Yes, but I do have to respond to
8 what my colleague said. I'm now going to say that -- or, rather, I'm not
9 [Realtime transcript read in error "now"] going to prove here that this
10 is a document that was compiled by the Prosecutor, whoever compiled it
11 will be established ultimately, and the Judges will assess the matter.
12 So let me continue --
13 MR. STRINGER: I think maybe we should clarify the transcript
14 which reads -- the transcript indicates that counsel just said that she
15 was going to say "... or, rather, now I'm going to prove here that this
16 is a document that was compiled by the Prosecutor."
17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: What was said was "not,"
18 I'm not going to prove here.
19 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Fortunately, my learned friend, I
20 have at least 15 witnesses here who heard what I said. I think that
21 whoever understands my language can say that we are not trying to imply
22 that the OTP compiled this, but it will be for the Judges to assess
23 whether this was a document that was done in any way apart from the
24 regular procedure, subsequently, or at any other point, and for whatever
1 Q. Now, I'm going to show you a series of documents of this author.
2 I know that you never had to come across them, but I am showing you all
3 of these documents so that you would see the difference between this
4 document and all the other documents that the Prosecutor has. The
5 Prosecutor has 72 documents by this author. These that were placed in
6 your binder, with the exception of the yellow one, which got in
7 mistakenly, are all exhibits, and they are all different from this
8 document. Now, I'm going to ask you to look at what the difference is.
9 Please look at the next document. P2607.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. All right. There is a stamp here and Mr. Kraljevic's signature,
12 but I insist on the following. There is a delivery number here, right?
13 A. Yes, that's right.
14 Q. Please look at the next document. P2889. This document also has
15 a stamp signature and a delivery number; isn't that right?
16 A. Yes, that's right.
17 Q. Please look at the next document, that is P2961. This document
18 also has a stamped signature and a delivery number; is that right, sir?
19 A. Yes, that's obvious, evident.
20 Q. Please look at the next document, that is P4340. P4340. That is
21 yet another document that does not have a stamp or a signature, but it
22 does have a delivery number, right, of the same author?
23 A. Yes, that's right.
24 Q. Please let's look at the next document, that is P05214. This is
25 a document which has a stamp, signature, and the compulsory delivery
1 numbers; is that right?
2 A. Yes, that's right.
3 Q. Let's look at the next document, that is P6349. That is also a
4 document that was signed by the same author, and it does have a delivery
6 A. Yes, that's right.
7 Q. And the last one in my binder is P6393. It also has -- let me
8 just have a look, please, it has a signature, a stamp, and delivery
9 number right?
10 A. Yes, that's right.
11 Q. Mr. Bandic, I think this is exceptionally important because of
12 what you said and because of the attempt made to discredit you, although
13 I know that this time is being taken off my Defence time, but I think
14 this is very important because it has to do with a very grave
16 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I would like to read out to the
17 Honourable Trial Chamber all the documents and their numbers that the
18 Prosecutor has on his 65 ter list that are not exhibits and they are from
19 this author. These are all the Prosecutor's documents from the 65 ter
20 list, and they all have a delivery number. If they do not have a
21 signature or a stamp, they have a delivery number. As opposed to
22 document 3630. These are documents P1552, P2167, 2412, 2607, 2889, 2961,
23 3422, 3439, 3448, 3469, 3758, 4318, 4319, 4320, 4323, 4324, 4326, 4327,
24 4328, 4329, 4332, 4334, 4336, 4337, 4338, 4345, 4349, 4350, 4351, 4353,
25 4354, 4355, 4356, 4357, 4359, 4360, and I don't think there's any need to
1 go on, there are 35 more. (redacted)
2 (redacted), and I really don't think
3 there's any need to waste any more time on that.
4 I just have one more clarification to make and for that may we go
5 into private session because it was something that was discussed in
6 private session during the cross-examination.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation]
8 [Private session]
11 Page 38366 redacted. Private session.
10 [Open session]
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, as a rule, the witness
13 don't say anything. If you would just like to thank us, then you may
14 take the floor. What is it that you would like to say?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour,
16 Mr. President. I had written down a few lines because we, in the
17 diplomatic service, would like to stick to protocol and do things by the
18 book, and it was my wish in the end to say thank you to you all, to thank
19 you for your patience and understanding. This was my first experience,
20 and this year I'm -- will be 50, otherwise in everything else I'm a
21 veteran, as I am in Karate, but I'd just like to thank everybody once
22 again, the Trial Chamber and for all your understanding and patience. I
23 would like to wish you every success and good health because as we know
24 all those things are linked up.
25 Now, I'm going back to my job, to my affairs, and in this
1 notebook, among other things, on page 1 there's a brief note that I wrote
2 down because on Friday when I was ready, when I was preparing to come
3 here, I went to see the president of the republic because the foreign
4 minister of Hungary
5 down. And you'll see that on this very day my two governments, the
6 government of the republic of the Croatia
7 republic of Hungary
8 diplomatic circles, and for me as the ambassador, this is a very
9 important point in my career. It very rarely happens to an ambassador.
10 So I do different things and I'm very proud to be working where two
11 nations cooperate so well together. Once again, thank you, and I
12 apologise if I was not always clear and I wish you all all the best.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, on behalf of
14 my colleagues, I thank you for having come to testify at the request of
15 Mr. Stojic and Mr. Stojic's Defence counsel. I wish you a safe journey
16 home, and I wish you well in your diplomatic endeavours.
17 So I believe we have a witness coming next week. I believe that
18 is not a problem. We shall reconvene on Monday at quarter past 2.00.
19 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.
20 to be reconvened on Monday, the 23rd of March 2009,
21 at 2.15 p.m.