1 Monday, 30 March 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The accused Prlic and Coric not present]
5 [The witness entered court]
6 --- Upon commencing at 2.16 p.m.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, can you kindly call
8 the case, please.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon,
10 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-04-74-T,
11 the Prosecutor versus Prlic et al. Thank you, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Registrar.
13 Today is Monday, the 30th of March, 2008 [as interpreted]. I
14 would like to greet the accused, the Defence counsel, the entire OTP, the
15 witness, as well as all the people assisting us in this courtroom.
16 I shall first give the floor to our Registrar, who has two IC
17 numbers to give us.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Some parties have submitted lists of documents to be tendered
20 through Witness Makar, Andjelko. The list submitted by 2D shall be given
21 Exhibit number IC 970, the list submitted by 3D shall be given
22 Exhibit IC971, and the list submitted by the Prosecution shall be given
23 Exhibit IC972.
24 Thank you, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. I have a minor
1 correction to make. On page 1, line 15, we are today, the 30th of March,
2 2009. We are all a year older, as of now.
3 The Trial Chamber would also like to ask the parties to give
4 their views on the Stojic Defence team that has asked for two documents
5 to be tendered, two documents that were not mentioned on their
6 65 ter list. So you have until 1900 hours to let us know whether you
7 object to this, given that the Defence team of Mr. Stojic has asked that
8 you have this done. This relates to the witness who has been proofed and
9 who will be coming next Wednesday to testify. So let me know whether
10 there are any objections to the mentioning of these two documents on the
11 65 ter list.
12 Sir, could you stand, please, to take the solemn declaration.
13 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, I'm sorry to interrupt at this stage.
14 Just before we commence with the witness, the Prosecution would
15 just like to briefly place a continuing objection on the record.
16 Last week, the Trial Chamber did rule on the Prosecution's motion
17 to exclude the irrelevant evidence of Mr. Milos, Mario, and certainly the
18 Prosecution does accept that ruling, Your Honour. Having said that, the
19 Prosecution does wish to reiterate that the shipment by Croatia of arms
20 to or from the ABiH at some times and in some locations is not disputed.
21 Testimony on this issue, therefore, does not relate to or advance the
22 search for the truth as to any issue in dispute. The Prosecution
23 therefore wishes to place on record its continuing objection to this
24 irrelevant evidence.
25 Thank you, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It's on the record.
2 Witness, can I have your first name, last name, and date of
3 birth, please.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mario Milos. The 6th of May, 1967
5 Grude, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What is your current
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I work for the Defence Ministry of
9 the Republic of Croatia
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, have you already testified
11 before a court of law on those events that unfolded?
12 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers please speak one at a time.
13 Thank you.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is my first testimony before
15 any court.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please read the text of the
17 solemn declaration.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
19 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
20 WITNESS: MARIO MILOS
21 [The witness answered through interpreter]
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, sir. You may sit
24 Sir, we'll try and be brief. Ms. Nozica has told you,
25 undoubtedly, that there will be no hearing tomorrow because of the
1 international conference that will be held next-door to this building, so
2 if we can finish your testimony today, this means that you will not have
3 to wait until next Wednesday.
4 Ms. Nozica, I'm sure, has told you how things work here. She
5 will put questions to you and show you a series of documents that are
6 contained in this binder, and you will answer those questions that are
7 put to you. After that, the other Defence lawyers who are sitting next
8 to her or behind her will also put questions to you, and the Prosecutor,
9 sitting on your right-hand side, will have the same time as Ms. Nozica to
10 put questions to you. The Judges before you may also put questions to
11 you on the basis of those documents that we have before us. Please try
12 and be as accurate as you possibly can when you answer those questions.
13 If there is a question that you do not understand, do not
14 hesitate to ask the person who has put you that question to rephrase it.
15 I hope you have understood me well.
16 Ms. Nozica, you have the floor.
17 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good
18 afternoon to all.
19 Before I commence, I would like to inform the Chamber that given
20 the statement made by the OTP today at the outset, and in order to make a
21 complete statement, given the importance of this statement, I can only
22 say that my chief will take no more than one and a half hours. Perhaps
23 I can even make it shorter. Given the nature of the statement, I think
24 we can speed things along a little, and I expect that we shall be
25 finishing our chief during our sitting today. If I manage to do that, we
1 could still remain in keeping with the schedule for this week, in view of
2 the fact that we are not sitting tomorrow.
3 Examination by Ms. Nozica:
4 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Milos.
5 A. Good afternoon to all in the courtroom.
6 Q. I would like to go through your personal details quickly. Please
7 just confirm at the end whether everything is true.
8 You were born in Grude in 1969, as you said. It was in Zagreb
9 that you completed a school for the commerce?
10 A. Yes. August 1991, I joined the TO for the east of Zagreb city,
11 Zesveta [phoen]. Up until September, I remained there. In September, I
12 started working with the security of the ordnance storage in Duboki Jarak
13 until December 1991, when I started working with the Croatian Army on a
14 regular basis as a storage-keeper in Duboki Jarak.
15 Q. Mr. Mario, can I just ask you one thing? We need to pause
16 between my questions and your answers, just to make sure that everything
17 is recorded properly. You will have to wait for me until I complete my
18 question before you start answering.
19 One thing that I wish to say is -- or, rather, as you have said
20 yourself, you were working in the Duboki Jarak storage unit. In what
22 A. I was the manager of that storage unit, the storage unit keeper.
23 I was in charge of issuing MTS.
24 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Sorry. Before you go too much into the merits,
25 the witness told the President, and that's what's recorded, that he was
1 born in 1967; and you have told him that he was born in 1969, and it is
2 not possible that both apply. It would be very extraordinary.
3 So, Witness, were you born in 1967 or in 1969, please?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 1967.
5 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you very much.
6 Excuse me, Ms. Nozica. I'm sure you have proof of this
8 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. My note,
9 too, reads "1967." I apologise if I misspoke.
10 Q. Mr. Milos, you said you were working in the storage unit as the
11 foreman or the manager; right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Was this a JNA storage unit or warehouse before the Croatian Army
14 occupied this area?
15 A. Yes. It used to be a JNA storage unit, and then there was a
16 broader operation in the Republic of Croatia
17 Territorial Defence took all the warehouse and storage units belonging at
18 that point in time to the JNA.
19 Q. What exactly was in this storage unit when the Croatian Army took
20 the storage unit?
21 A. Ordnance and MTS. We drew up lists immediately after entering
22 the storage unit.
23 Q. What exactly was your job in this warehouse, this storage unit,
24 from the moment you came there?
25 A. My job was to issue MTS, depending on its type and the amount
1 that was specified on requests.
2 Q. Can you please briefly describe to the Chamber what sort of
3 procedure was applied whenever MTS was issued? Which bodies were in
4 charge of what in terms of preliminaries for MTS to be issued?
5 A. All those who received equipment and who were supposed to pick up
6 MTS would get an order from Croatia
7 this order or request and go to the Technical and Traffic Department of
8 the Defence Ministry, and then based on that order they would write up a
9 request. They would then take that request and see me about equipment.
10 The Technical and Traffic Administration had a complete list covering the
11 situation and the amounts available in our storage unit and in all
12 storage units across the Republic of Croatia
13 Q. Can you just try to slow down a little bit, please. Thank you.
14 The Defence Ministry of the Republic of Croatia
15 order, if my understanding is correct, and then the Technical and Traffic
16 Administration would issue a request; right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. What exactly would eventually reach you? What did you get? What
19 was the name of the document that you received in your capacity as the
20 manager of that storage unit?
21 A. What I received was the request issued by the Technical and
22 Traffic Department specifying exactly who was taking delivery and the
23 name of the person who was in charge of the equipment, of receiving or
24 taking delivery of the equipment.
25 Q. And what was it that you would issue in return, what sort of
1 document, while issuing equipment?
2 A. We would issue a receipt to confirm that equipment was issued.
3 The place was recorded where the goods were issued; the kind, type, and
4 amount of MTS issued would be specified; the first and last names of the
5 person taking delivery or receiving equipment, normally the driver; as
6 well as the plate number of the vehicle onto which MTS was loaded.
7 Obviously, our own names, whoever it was that was in charge of issuing
8 MTS, would also be recorded.
9 Q. What about you and the person receiving equipment; would you not
10 both sign this receipt?
11 A. No, the receiving person would sign the receipts. Normally,
12 there were other persons with the drivers who had their own orders and
13 were in charge of receiving equipment, but they didn't sign for it. It
14 was the drivers who signed, and then there was normally a document
15 attached specifying that they were the ones who were in charge of taking
17 Q. How long did this procedure continue for? First, there was an
18 order. Then there was a request. Finally, there was a receipt, as
19 you've just described. Was the procedure applied throughout your time at
20 the storage unit?
21 A. No. This procedure continued until the end of 1992, and then the
22 procedure was computerised. The Technical and Traffic Administration
23 introduced computer-generated receipts replacing both requests and
24 receipts, so now we no longer drew up a receipt. We would simply record
25 our own personal details; first name, last name, goods issued, as well as
1 amounts, needless to say.
2 Q. Mr. Milos, what other storage units were there, for example, in
3 the broader Zagreb
4 A. In Zagreb
5 Duboki Jarak, and we were in charge of that storage unit too. It was a
6 subordinate storage unit, as it were. There was also the Precko storage
7 unit. There was Varazdin Breg in Varazdin at Precac at Ivinic Grad.
8 Those were the storage units that were directly under the central storage
9 unit of the Defence Ministry.
10 If I may just add, there were other storage units or warehouses
11 across the Republic of Croatia
12 storage units.
13 Q. Fine. Mr. Milos, what about you and your storage unit? Was MTS
14 issued for the purposes of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina?
15 A. Yes, indeed, it was.
16 Q. We will have an opportunity to look at some receipts for MTS from
17 your warehouse. Can you please tell us, based on your own recollection,
18 who were the storage-keepers in your storage unit?
19 A. Mirsad Malagic, Mario Juricin [phoen], Vukasic [phoen] --
20 Q. Slowly, please, because everything is being recorded.
21 A. Mirsad Malagic --
22 Q. One at a time, please. Thank you.
23 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat the name?
24 There was overlap. We didn't hear the name. Thank you.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Niksa Puharic , Marin Kohososter
1 [phoen], and me.
2 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
3 Q. All right. Can we now please go through a number of documents
4 that I've prepared. We're looking at orders, the orders that you talked
5 about that came from the Defence Ministry.
6 You have a binder in front of you, or, rather, do you? Does the
7 witness have the binder?
8 A. A binder, yes.
9 Q. All right. Could you please have a look. 2D956, that's the
10 first one up. Tell me as soon as you've got it.
11 A. Yes, I've got it.
12 Q. Can you please explain to the Trial Chamber, is this the kind of
13 order that you talked about? This was the step before any MTS was
14 issued. This was the first step-order issued by the Defence Ministry of
15 the Republic of Croatia
16 A. Yes. This was the sort of order drawn up by Croatia's Defence
17 Ministry. They would have forwarded this to us. There is mention here
18 of Mr. Bilic. He was one of the people working for the Technical and
19 Traffic Administration. The Technical and Traffic Administration would
20 receive an order like this, and then based on an order like this, they
21 would write up a request.
22 Q. Fine. Based on this order, Mr. Milos, can we see who the MTS was
24 A. This MTS was for the BH Army. It is stated here that
25 Mr. Fehim Nuhbegovic, whom I happen to know as the chief logistician of
1 the BH Army, and he was the one who most frequently came with any of the
2 drivers to pick up equipment. Therefore, it is quite beyond doubt, at
3 least to my mind, that this was for the purposes of the BH Army.
4 Q. The next one is P231. That should be the next document in your
5 binder. Have you got it?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Another order dated the 29th of May, 1992. Looking at this
8 order, can we see who the equipment was for? Who was supposed to get it?
9 A. This is identical to the previous one. Again, Mr. Bilik [phoen]
10 was supposed to get this directly. He was a man from the Technical and
11 Traffic Administration, and we can also see that Mr. Fehim Nuhbegovic
12 would be taking delivery, the logistician of the BH Army.
13 Q. The next document, P00238. Can you comment on this, please?
14 Another order, isn't it?
15 A. Yes, another one drawn up by the Defence Ministry, again,
16 Mr. Vragotuk, who was the head of the Technical and Traffic
17 Administration. Likewise, we see that delivery was taken by Mr. Fehim
18 Nuhbegovic. Therefore, there is no doubt the equipment was for the
19 BH Army.
20 Q. The next one, P262. Your comment, please. Is this the same --
21 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could there be a pause
22 between questions and answers, and could speakers please not speak at the
23 same time. Thank you very much.
24 JUDGE PRANDLER: May I interrupt you, Ms. Nozica.
25 Really, the interpreters have already at least five times asked
1 you and the witness to slow down and to wait between questions and
2 answers, so please try to do so. Thank you.
3 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Witness, please, just a little, a little, slow down.
5 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] I apologise to the Chamber. I
6 have only now seen the reference to this in the transcript, and I was
7 just about to caution the witness.
8 Q. Mr. Milos, looking at an order like this, can you tell us if some
9 equipment, for example, the equipment specified in the order before us,
10 could originate from the Duboki Jarak storage unit, which was your own
11 storage unit, and how was the decision taken as to which particular
12 storage unit any of these requests would eventually be sent?
13 A. Quite a few of these articles were in our depot at the time. The
14 decision as to from what depot goods would be issued was taken by the
15 Technical and Traffic Administration, which knew what the situation was
16 in each depot, so it was they who decided from which depot particular MTS
17 would be taken and who would be authorised to take delivery of it.
18 Q. And the last document of this type is P00267. Is this the same
19 kind of document?
20 A. Yes, it is the same kind of document. It's the same sort of
21 request, and to Mr. Vragotuk, the chief of the Technical and Traffic
22 Administration; and the same gentleman, Fehim Nuhbegovic, is taking
23 delivery of the MTS, which means the MTS was being issued for the needs
24 of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
25 Q. Mr. Milos, to sum up what has been said so far, you explained
1 that the Technical and Traffic Administration, after receiving an order
2 from the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia
3 request which arrived in the depot, or any depot, and based on that
4 request, persons working in the depot issued receipts. I will now show
5 you a certain number of these receipts, asking you to comment on who drew
6 them up and to whom the MTS was issued.
7 Now, please look at 2D951, 2D951, and then we will comment on
8 what is mentioned in this document. Have you found it?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Please look at record of issued items number 240. Are these
11 records of issued items which were filled in in the depot?
12 A. Yes. And from this record of issued items, one can see that the
13 goods came from the Duboki Jarak depot. I haven't seen this number yet
14 of the request, but the record of issued items is number 240. It bears
15 the date when the MTS was issued. Aziz Milkic received the goods. He
16 was one of the drivers, and one can see that the license plate of the
17 vehicle is from Travnik, and the goods were issued by Niksa Puharic. You
18 can see his signature here.
19 Q. To whom was this MTS issued, or for whom was it intended?
20 A. Well, it went to the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
21 Q. Very well. Now, please look at the next record of issued items.
22 It's number 242. Can you comment on which warehouse employee signed it,
23 to whom the goods were issued, and for whom they were intended? So tell
24 me those three pieces of information in the case of each record.
25 A. It was Niksa Puharic who issued the goods. Nermin Arnautovic
1 took delivery, and this went to the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Perhaps
2 the Trial Chamber will find it strange that it says that the vehicle was
3 HV, an HV vehicle, but very often the BH Army had poor vehicles, vehicles
4 which were not in good condition, and they were not registered. The
5 Croatian Army would allow them to have a temporary license plate on their
6 vehicles in order to be able to transport the goods to
8 Q. Mr. Milos, while you were working in the warehouse, did you get
9 to know most of these drivers who worked for the Army of
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina and the persons who were tasked with taking delivery
11 of the MTS?
12 A. Yes, I knew them all. I knew Mr. Fehim Nuhbegovic, Seta Sujab.
13 They were the only logistics men. The others were just drivers, but we
14 knew almost all of them.
15 Q. Could you now look at record 242 -- oh, I think we've just seen
16 it and that you've commented on it, so let's go on to number 245. It's a
17 record of issued items, and the number of it is 245. And can you comment
18 on it briefly?
19 A. Yes. I issued this MTS. It was for the Army of
20 Bosnia-Herzegovina. Mr. Mirsad Milkic took delivery.
21 Q. And did these goods go to the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
22 A. Yes, they certainly did.
23 Q. The next record of issued items is number 419. Let's go through
24 this more quickly and look at 419, 422, 424, and 423. Have you seen all
25 of these records of issued items, and can you say whether the MTS was
1 issued from your depot for the needs of the BH Army?
2 A. Yes. All this MTS was issued for the needs of the BH Army.
3 Q. Now let's look at record of issued items 425, 439, 447, 505, 506,
4 511, and 512.
5 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, I'm sorry to interrupt my learned
6 colleague, but I note that there are two records numbered 419, and I
7 wonder which one was actually being referred to, or perhaps both.
8 They're separated by number 422, I think.
9 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] 419, to clarify, and we can see it
10 on the screen. Maybe in your folder it has not been put in good order,
11 but 419 is 2D530063. 0063 are the last numbers, and I think we have it
12 in e-court now. It's followed by 422, which is 2D530064; and the next
13 one is 424, which is 2D530065. And in the break, if my learned friend
14 agrees, we can check whether something has been printed erroneously, but
15 they're now all in order, and to avoid wasting time we can clarify this
16 further during the break. Thank you.
17 I do apologise. I think -- excuse me, Witness. Let me just
18 check where we left off. I think the last one was -- well, there was
19 447, so please take a look at 505, and then all the way to 512, 518, 524,
20 531, 533. We'll stop there.
21 Q. Can you confirm that all these records of issued items were
22 issued in your depot and that all this MTS went to the BH Army?
23 A. All these records of issued items were issued in Duboki Jarak.
24 They were signed by me and my colleague. We were working in the
25 warehouse at the time, and all the MTS went to the BH Army.
1 Q. And, Mr. Milos, did you yourself write out and sign record 533?
2 A. Yes, I did.
3 Q. Now let's look at 534, 536, 537, 538, 539, 542, 545, 546, and
4 572. Can you confirm again that all these records of issued items
5 referred to goods issued from your depot and that all this MTS was for
6 the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
7 A. Yes. All these records of issued items were written out in the
8 Duboki Jarak depot, and all this MTS went to the BH Army. It was signed
9 by warehouse employees who were my colleagues working in the depot with
11 Q. Mr. Milos, please look at the next record of issued items. It's
12 number 37, and the page number is 2D530087. In the English version, it's
13 750060. Please explain to Their Honours when these records of issued
14 items were written out, and were such records also issued from your
16 A. This is a new type of record. As I explained earlier, it was
17 done according to a computer file sent from the administration of the
18 Technical and Traffic Administration, and we only signed who had issued
19 the goods, who had received them, and what quantities had been issued.
20 Q. Mr. Milos, the record of issued items number 37 refers to goods
21 issued from Precko. Is that from your depot?
22 A. No, no. The depot in Precko is part of the base, and I know
23 Mr. Sovic [phoen]. I know quite a few of these warehouse employees
25 Q. The next one is number 47, and we can see that there are two
1 versions. The lower one is signed. The amount of MTS is the same, and
2 it was issued in Precec, Ivanic Grad. That's not your depot, is it?
3 A. No, it's not the one I worked in, but it was part of the
4 logistics base of the central warehouse.
5 Q. And the next page is 56 and 48. Can you confirm that this is
6 from your depot?
7 A. No, this is from Precec, Ivanic Grad. It was signed by
8 Mr. Dominko Srecko. I know him personally, and you can see here that the
9 document was certified by Military Post Precec, 1085/15 Precec.
10 Q. Mr. Milos, I want you to tell us whether this new form of record
11 of issued items, used in all warehouses as of the end of 1992, is this
13 A. Yes, yes, it is.
14 Q. Now let's look at two more documents about the same topic; that
15 is, the new form of record. 960, 2D960, that's the next document in your
16 bundle. Mr. Milos, is this the sort of electronic record that was
17 created at the end of 1992?
18 A. Yes. After 1992 onwards, this is what they looked like, and we
19 can see the date here is 1993, so this is an example of a
20 computer-generated record of issued items.
21 Q. And could you please look at document 2D961. This is a record of
22 issued items of the 8th of March, 1993, again from Precec Ivanic Grad,
23 and in this record it says that the goods were taken over by Seta Sujab.
24 Did you know this person?
25 A. Yes, I knew him, as I knew Mr. Fehim Nuhbegovic. They were the
1 ones who usually came with their drivers to take delivery of the goods.
2 They were logistics men of the BH Army.
3 Q. Mr. Milos, to transport the MTS that were issued, was any form of
4 approval necessary? Were you shown such letters of approval by the
6 A. Yes. The drivers would arrive with approval issued by the
7 Ministry of the Interior to transport dangerous goods, a permit to drive
8 through the Republic of Croatia
9 issued by the SIS Administration for the route they were taking.
10 Q. Could we now take a look at some of -- this type of document,
11 2D197, please. This was issued in 1993, on the 15th of March, by the SIS
12 Administration of the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia
13 this the sort of approval that the drivers had to have when transporting
15 A. Yes. This is an example of what those certificates looked like.
16 Q. We see here that in this certificate of approval, it says that
17 MTS for the needs of the BH Army Centre for Logistics in Visoko is to be
18 transported; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And the leader of the convoy is listed. Did you have information
21 to the effect that if there was more than one driver, one was designated
22 leader of the convoy?
23 A. Yes. Sometimes one person and sometimes several would be listed
24 as those escorting or leading the convoy.
25 Q. Let's look at the next document now, 2D529. The 2nd of March is
1 the date on that document. It's an SIS certificate from the Defence
2 Ministry of the Republic of Croatia
3 transport of equipment for the purposes of the BH Army. That's how it
4 reads. Are we talking about the sort of certificates that the SIS would
5 issue, and then you knew that the drivers and the convoy leaders
6 transporting MTS for the BH Army had those on them?
7 A. This is one of the certificates. It's not only that I knew about
8 those. I actually saw drivers and convoy escorts carry these
10 Q. Another one, 2D531. Is this the same type, the 8th of March,
11 1993, the same type of certificate as the previous ones?
12 A. Yes, this is the same type, but you see, at the end it says
13 attached to the certificate, when being checked, a MUP decision. What I
14 told you previously about the MUP decision, this certificate shows that
16 Q. All right. Let's look at the MUP decision; not this specific
17 one, but another one that we've been able to locate. This is 2D00959.
18 That's the decision. Is this the sort of MUP decision that you spoke
19 about? Tell us what you know about this. What was the reason for these
20 decisions? Why were they issued?
21 A. This is a MUP decision. It says the Fire and Explosion
22 Protection Department, so every time there was ordnance being transported
23 with the Republic of Croatia
24 that said how much could be transported and who was allowed to do the
1 Q. The decision says exactly what you suggest. This is the Fire and
2 Explosion Protection Department. We see the driver's names there. Can
3 we please look at the next document which links up with this one, 2D --
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I have not said
5 anything so far, but I have something to say to this document that was
6 made on the 3rd of August, 1993. Earlier on, we saw a lot of documents
7 dating back to 1992 and March 1993. Here we have a document dated in
8 August. As far as you know, since you were a store-keeper, so far as you
9 can remember, throughout 1993 did Croatia delivery weapons, munitions,
10 and various other types of equipment to the ABiH?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, as far as I know.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] At your level -- you were an
13 ordinary store-keeper. I think you were a sergeant, that was your rank,
14 but sergeants do think too. So at your level, when Croatia would send
15 weapons throughout the year 1993, did it send weapons to a friendly army
16 or to an enemy, hostile army, or don't you know anything about it?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I don't know who on
18 earth would have the idea of feeding their own enemy or who would think
19 of providing one's own enemy with weapons to then end up killing you.
20 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Mr. Milos, from now on if the Chamber asks you any questions, or
22 anyone else in the courtroom, please provide direct answers. It is not
23 the usual practice to answer a question by asking another question,
24 although we all understand what you mean.
25 Mr. Milos, do you know if the BH Army had their own logistics
1 bases in Croatia
2 A. I heard the drivers talking, or the gentlemen who came to pick up
3 the equipment, about their bases in Croatia, but I -- I didn't know their
4 exact locations.
5 Q. We shall now be skipping a document and looking at 2D528. If you
6 can please tell the Chamber about this. This is a document, an
7 authorisation. This is 2D528. You have it on your screen, if you can't
8 find it in the binder: Authorisation signed by the Main Staff, the
9 Zagreb Operative Zone Command, the Logistics Sector, authorising
10 Mr. Hasan Rizvic, throughout the territory of the Republic of Croatia
11 transport the following MTS. We've come across this name before, Hasan
12 Rizvic. Did that name ring a bell to you?
13 A. Yes, it did.
14 Q. Who was he taking delivery of this MTS on behalf of?
15 A. For the BH Army.
16 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Witness, you have many times now given the
17 answer that the MTS that was given out by you went to the ABiH Army. Do
18 you know more precisely where they went, in which areas geographically,
19 or is that something that was not mentioned and did not enter in your
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was no way we could know
22 that. The BH Army is the BH Army. Where they were, where they had their
23 own locations, that was up to them.
24 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
25 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Authorisation, authorising Mr. Hasan Rizvic to transport the
2 following MTS in the territory of the Republic of Croatia
3 question would be: Did you know anything about the BH Army taking
4 delivery of MTS from anyone else, other than directly from your depot or
5 other similar depots across Croatia
6 A. What this document shows is that the BH Army probably continued
7 to take delivery from other military districts, as well, that were not
8 directly under the HQ. They were getting equipment from another base,
9 obviously. They were receiving assistance from all over.
10 Q. Can we now please look at 2D00962. Have you got that?
11 Mr. Milos, what we see here is a list of equipment itemised for
12 the BH Army, 1993. And then after that, there is an overview of
13 equipment issued to the BH Army in 1993, artillery and rocket ammunition,
14 infantry weapons and infantry ammunition. Can you please look at receipt
15 number 740, which is attached. This is 7.62 cartridge or bullets, a
16 million of those. And after that, receipt 288, another receipt issued by
17 your own depot, Duboki Jarak, on the 13th March, 1993. The previous one
18 was the 26th of March, 1993. Can you tell us who signed receipt 288?
19 Did this come from your own depot?
20 A. This was signed by Mr. Mirsad Malagic, who was one of the people
21 working in my depot. He was one of the keepers. The equipment came from
22 Duboki Jarak. You can tell the amounts: Rocket-launcher mines, 547;
23 Maljutka rockets, 50 pieces.
24 Q. Can you please look at receipt 763, which is the last one in this
25 document. Equipment taken from Precko; right? Seta Sujab taking
1 delivery. The date is the 13th of May, 1993. 7.62, 3 million
2 cartridges. I'm asking you all these questions, Mr. Milos, for the
3 following reason: The first overview of equipment issued to the BH Army
4 in 1993 was produced based on these three receipts. Do you know whether
5 other equipment was issued, aside from the equipment recorded in the
6 overview for 1993 for the BH Army?
7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could all the unnecessary
8 microphones be switched off, please. We can't hear anyone from the
9 background noise. Thank you.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's obvious that someone tried to
11 do something here, but I don't think this amount is accurate. The
12 quantities here are too low. We provided a lot more than that for the
13 purposes of the BH Army. I think we saw some receipts from 1993 that --
14 well, we've gone through some, and the amounts are reflected there, but I
15 don't see them here. I don't see them recorded anywhere here.
16 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Yes, we have gone through those. Can we now please go to 2D960,
18 and then we'll be going back to those two receipts. But this is supposed
19 to be the next receipt. Have you got that, sir?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. This is 128, receipt 128. This receipt, as well, dates the
22 8th of March, 1993; is that right, Mr. Milos?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Can you confirm whether this amount of ammunition, generally
25 speaking, was in fact included in the overview that we looked at a while
2 A. Well, it's evident the 52-millimetre cartridge is unmarked. It's
3 an artillery piece. It's not an infantry piece, but the quantity is not
4 reflected there, and it's simply unmarked, not marked as having been
6 Q. Rather, to be perfectly accurate, if we look at 2D962, we don't
7 find the quantity recorded there. 2D960 shows that the equipment was, in
8 fact, issued in 1993; isn't that right, sir?
9 A. Yes, that's right.
10 Q. Another document of the same type, 2D961. Again, receipt 133,
11 the 8th of March, 1993; delivery taken by Seta Sujab, as we've seen
12 before. Mr. Milos, can you please confirm whether this quantity of
13 bullets was recorded in the previous document, 2D962, and that was the
14 overview of equipment issued to the BH Army in 1993?
15 A. I can confirm that this was not recorded. If you go back to that
16 document, you'll see that information simply wasn't recorded. It wasn't
17 included, these quantities that were effectively issued.
18 Q. Mr. Milos, what about your own depot in Duboki Jarak? Were the
19 requests that you spoke about also kept there, and all the accompanying
20 documents, including orders and then requests? Was that kept or stored
21 anywhere in your depot? Have you ever seen that?
22 A. We kept all of the requests that we received, as well as any of
23 our receipts. We would previously fax those and report to the Technical
24 and Traffic Administration, specifying what equipment was issued and how
1 Q. Can you tell the Trial Chamber what became of your depot? Is it
2 still around? How long was it around for, being used as a military
4 A. The depot was blown up in the explosion in April 1994. All of
5 the documents were destroyed in the explosion.
6 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Mr. Milos.
7 Your Honours, this concludes my examination-in-chief. Thank you
8 very much.
9 I would also like to thank my colleague for his statement at the
10 outset because that greatly reduced the time that I required for
11 examining this witness.
12 Thank you.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
14 Witness, I have a very short follow-up question for you.
15 The documents issued state that in 1992-1993, the Republic of
17 ABiH. As far as you know, were these materials a military secret, or did
18 everyone in Croatia
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think nearly everyone knew,
20 although it was supposed to be classified.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's see which Defence counsel
22 would like to take the floor now.
23 Who shall we start with? D6, Mr. Ibrisimovic?
24 What about D1?
25 MS. TOMANOVIC: [Interpretation] No questions, Your Honour. Thank
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. D3?
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
4 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
5 My apologies.
6 Cross-examination by Mr. Kovacic:
7 Q. You mentioned several times yourself, and I looked at the
8 receipts, too, quite frequently there is a reference to Seta Sujab, but
9 another name, Fehim Nuhbegovic, as people who took delivery. You said
10 that they were the BH Army logisticians who were involved; right?
11 A. Yes, than's right.
12 Q. Can you tell me if you knew where those people were staying
13 whenever they came to a place?
14 A. Probably somewhere in Zagreb
15 Q. In Zagreb
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. So they did not travel every day in a convoy; they were actually
18 staying in the country as far as you know; right?
19 A. Yes. I think they were staying in their own logistics bases that
20 they had.
21 Q. Fine. Were they civilians or military personnel working for the
22 BH Army?
23 A. Probably military. I don't think they would have allowed
24 civilians to transport weapons.
25 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Witness. I
1 have no further questions.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Praljak.
3 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Military.
4 Cross-examination by Mr. Praljak:
5 Q. There were rumours circulating among the depot-keepers, so that's
6 why I'm asking. Witness, did you perhaps know that anywhere in Zagreb
7 Precko, or someplace like that, there were places where weapons were
8 being placed in cans for the purposes of the BH Army? Cans were opened
9 and then emptied and filled with bullets, that sort of thing, and then
10 were smuggled; anything like that?
11 A. That was the story. I don't know whether that was actually true
12 or not.
13 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
14 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] The Petkovic has no questions for
15 this witness, Your Honours. Thank you.
16 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] No questions,
17 Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The best would be to have the
19 break now, and then we shall begin with the cross-examination after the
21 Mr. Kruger.
22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
23 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, if I may indicate at this stage
24 already, the Prosecution also has no cross-examination for this witness.
25 Thank you, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, in that case, Witness,
2 you have understood that your testimony has now come to a close, so the
3 Prosecutor has no questions for you. The Judges have put their
4 questions. There will be no redirect, since there is no
5 cross-examination. So I would like to thank you for having come at the
6 request of Mr. Stojic's Defence counsel to contribute your testimony on
7 the delivery of weapons. I wish you a safe journey home.
8 I would like to ask the usher to escort you out of the courtroom.
9 [The witness withdrew]
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Stringer.
11 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President. Good afternoon to you,
12 Your Honours, counsel, and everyone else.
13 I can inform the Trial Chamber that in respect of the Stojic
14 Defence request to add two exhibits to its 65 ter list for the next
15 witness, the Prosecution has no objection to that.
16 And also, I have one request, which is in respect to the last
17 witness, Mr. Makar. Because of the suspension or the fact that we're not
18 working tomorrow and the fact that we are coming back, then, first thing
19 in the morning on Wednesday to continue the trial, it's our request if we
20 could have an extra one day to prepare and to submit our responses to the
21 two IC documents that were submitted just today by the two Defence teams.
22 We'd be grateful if we could just file our response to those on Thursday
23 morning, first thing, instead of Wednesday morning.
24 MR. KHAN: Mr. President, if it assists, there is no objection on
25 behalf of the Stojic Defence to that application.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I shall confer with my
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber has borne in
5 mind that no one can come and work tomorrow, so it is quite legitimate
6 for the Prosecution to have time to reply. Therefore, Mr. Stringer, you
7 will have until Thursday to file your written submissions.
8 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] A while ago, as far as those
10 two documents are concerned which Mr. Stringer does not object to, I
11 don't have the view of the other Defence teams. We have until 7.00 p.m.
12 but it would probably be better if it's until 5.00 p.m. today. If you
13 could give us your positions orally, we would gain some time.
14 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we have conferred,
15 and I don't think any Defence has any objections to raise about those two
16 documents being listed as 65 ter documents of the Stojic Defence.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Since we have some
18 time on our hands, I wanted to indicate to Mr. Praljak's Defence team
19 that the Prosecutor has filed written submissions concerning a number of
20 witness summaries. The Prosecution has broken these down one item after
21 the other. Please, if you could respond to the written submissions of
22 the Prosecution. I know that you're not starting tomorrow to hear your
23 witnesses, but I think it might be useful to look into this. There are
24 comments which are several pages long which have been submitted by the
25 Prosecution, so please review these and respond to the Prosecution. The
1 Trial Chamber would like to be advised of this.
2 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
3 We had intended to submit our response today or tomorrow, but we
4 still don't have all the required information. So if there is no
5 obstacle, I would prefer to wait for a day or two. However, we will
6 respond by the end of the week at the latest and maybe sooner.
7 Otherwise, we run the risk of having to amend our response with
8 information received subsequently. If we can wait until the end of the
9 week, our information will be precise and we will not need to make any
10 amendments or modifications to our response, so it will simplify matters.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.
12 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I have a personal question
14 regarding your written submissions.
15 We know that Mr. Praljak is going to testify. He has told us so
16 many years ago already he is going to testify. From what I understood,
17 when I read your submissions, I understand that you wanted to know what
18 he was going to testify about. I looked at previous testimonies by
19 several accused here at the Tribunal. It was my understanding that the
20 accused did not let the Prosecution know beforehand what they were going
21 to discuss during their testimony. I have a question mark here. Maybe
22 you can shed some light on this, I don't know, Mr. Stringer.
23 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President.
24 And let me just indicate right off the bat, I had an informal
25 conversation with Mr. Kovacic before the proceedings started today, and
1 he was kind enough to give us a bit of an advance preview of the intended
2 witness order, and it's our understanding that General Praljak will be
3 testifying at the beginning of the case in chief, so we do know that that
4 is going to be the case. And you've correctly indicated, Mr. President,
5 it's the Prosecution position that once the accused decides to take the
6 stand that the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence then apply to
7 that witness. He'll take the oath, and he'll be subject to
8 cross-examination. The Rules that apply to any witness will apply in
9 respect of General Praljak. So it's our view that in that situation, a
10 summary should be provided in advance, and we'd certainly be grateful to
11 the Praljak Defence were they to provide one to us, but that's certainly
12 the position of the Prosecution; not only a witness summary, but then two
13 weeks before the testimony begins, as is the case with other witnesses,
14 the documents that the Defence would be using on the direct examination
15 of General Praljak would also be provided or identified, not just for the
16 Prosecution but for the other Defence teams as well. And of course, I
17 can't speak for the other Defence teams, but they may also have a view,
18 in terms of advance notice, both in terms of a witness summary and any
19 documents that the Praljak team would be using on the direct examination.
20 So that's our position on that question, Mr. President.
21 And if I could add one last point. It is our intention to file a
22 very -- it will be brief, but we will be filing a response to the notice
23 that was filed by the Praljak Defence a few days ago about their proposed
24 plan on having a supplemental Rule 84 bis statement or possibly a sworn
25 statement of General Praljak in the nature of an opening statement, and
1 I -- during our conversation before court, I informed Mr. Kovacic
2 informally what I thought the Prosecution position would be in respect of
3 that proposal or notice. But, in any event, here within the next couple
4 of days, probably Wednesday or Thursday, since we're not here tomorrow,
5 we will be filing a brief response to that notice to inform the Trial
6 Chamber of our position on this issue of an opening statement.
7 Thank you.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacic, I have an
9 additional question to put to you.
10 I did not quite understand whether General Praljak is going to
11 testify before all your witnesses, or are the witnesses all going to
12 testify and he will testify at the end, or Mr. Praljak will be testifying
13 in the middle; you hear some witnesses first and some other witnesses
15 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Our plan, and we have had some
16 informal talks about it, our plan is for Mr. Praljak to testify first.
17 We will begin our case by calling him as a witness. After him, there
18 will certainly be two expert witnesses. We have not yet completed our
19 timetable for the remaining witnesses, which is why I told you I would
20 prefer to wait for two or three days longer so that all the details will
21 be correct, but we will certainly issue a schedule within a day or two,
22 which will indicate that General Praljak will be the first witness, then
23 two expert witnesses following him, and this will lead us to the last
24 week of June. And then in the next two weeks, we will send the schedule
25 for the remaining witnesses.
1 As regards the questions or the issues raised by my learned
2 friend, regardless of the practice at this Tribunal, we are now
3 completing our job as regards this, and we intend to submit the summary
4 of General Praljak's testimony and the documents that will be used during
5 his examination-in-chief as soon as we can, which means that I believe we
6 will be able to submit the summary by the 10th or 12th of April,
7 certainly before the first half of April is over, and the documents four
8 or five days later. So in any case, both the summary and the list of
9 documents and the documents will be submitted long before a fortnight
10 before the testimony begins, since according to the schedule, as it
11 stands now, General Praljak will not be able to start testifying before
12 the 6th of May. But we will certainly complete this task by the
13 15th of April, and, as I said, I hope that the summary will be ready
14 around the 10th or 12th of April and the documents two or three days
16 Regardless of what the practice is, we are guided by the
17 principle of transparency, that we wish to be open and that we wish to
18 enable our learned friends to prepare. We do not wish to conceal our
19 hand, and we will simply make a selection of the documents. Thank you.
20 Just as regards the proposal raised by the Prosecutor regarding
21 Praljak's 84 bis statement, we did plan, as we informed the Chamber, for
22 Mr. Praljak to make a statement under oath. We feel this is reasonable.
23 He will tell the Court what he feels is important, and we will have to
24 come back to many parts of that statement during his
1 So that is the general information we wish to provide at this
2 stage. Thank you.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacic, as far as the
4 submissions of the OTP are concerned, my attention was drawn on
5 Mr. Blaskic's testimony, as I read everything. You have planned to hear
6 this witness for two hours, and the Prosecutor feels that two hours is
7 not very long. So what is it you had in mind, exactly?
8 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it is we who will call
9 the witness, not the Prosecutor, so we will provide an estimate of the
10 time we need in the schedule, which we will provide within the next two
11 or three days. We are not obliged to examine any witness about every
12 possible issue that the witness could be examined about or about every
13 single thing contained in the witness's statement. We will question the
14 witness about what we consider to be the most essential points and the
15 most relevant points, in view of our limited time.
16 Let me also inform Your Honours that all our witnesses, with one
17 exception, have already given statements, and some might even be 92 bis
18 witnesses, but when we call them as live witnesses and we have their
19 statements, we will save time by asking the witness, in a relatively
20 short space of time, about the most important points in the statement,
21 and the rest of the statement, which we have in writing, we will submit
22 as 92 ter testimony. I feel that this is a reasonable method, respecting
23 the economy of the proceedings. And as far as I can recall, the OTP also
24 used this method when putting forward their case, and we feel it's a
25 rational and reasonable method.
1 As regards Blaskic, for example, to what extent we will be
2 putting questions in direct and how much will be covered by 92 bis is --
3 remains to be seen, but in our schedule we will certainly designate the
4 amount of time that we now consider we will need. However, when we proof
5 each witness, small changes may be made, small alterations.
6 Is there any other information Your Honour requires?
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacic, I thank you,
8 amongst other things, the fact that you want to make everybody's life
9 easier. You indicated that you would send the summary of the
10 examination-in-chief of your witnesses, as well as an exhibit list, as
11 quickly as possible. As I am perfectly transparent and don't wish to
12 take anybody by surprise either, I've been preparing myself for this
13 testimony for some time now, and I intend to put my own questions for at
14 least two hours. The other Judges on the Bench can do likewise. I will
15 need two hours to put questions to General Praljak, and my outline will
16 be what is contained in the indictment, so no surprise here. My
17 questions will be in line with the indictment and in line with the
18 documents mentioned in the footnote in the pre-trial brief and in other
19 documents. So my questions will not come as a surprise, which will be
20 entirely based on the indictment and the pre-trial brief and the
21 pre-trial brief of General Praljak, which I have studied from beginning
22 to end.
23 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] I had something, because I'm afraid
24 there may be a misunderstanding later on. It may also be a matter of
1 As regards the summaries of the remaining witnesses, we will
2 provide a summary for Praljak, no question about that. As regards the
3 summaries of the testimony of the other witnesses we will call live
4 before this Court, the Defence of General Praljak has, for the most part,
5 provided summaries in the 65 ter list we submitted in March last year,
6 with perhaps two exceptions, and after that we gradually disclosed to the
7 OTP and the other parties entire witness statements, far more than is
8 contained in the summary. And according to the Rules, we are bound to
9 provide the summary, so we have done this for all but two or three
10 witnesses, and that is what the OTP motion concerns. And as I said, we
11 will respond to it within two or three days, and Your Honours agreed to
12 this. We will be responding to this.
13 As regards Praljak, although there is no clear case law, we will
14 provide a full and detailed summary. We do wish to provide this in
15 advance to all parties, together with the documents, and it is our wish
16 that Praljak be treated like any other witness as regards the technical
17 aspects and the preparation for his testimony.
18 Thank you.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. That's very clear.
20 Mr. Stringer.
21 MR. STRINGER: Thank you, Mr. President. Just two quick points.
22 Counsel's made reference to Rule 92 ter, and the Trial Chamber
23 will recall, because the procedure of 92 ter hasn't really been used -- I
24 don't think it was used by the Prlic Defence or the Stojic Defence, as
25 well, so we're coming back to a Rule that was used quite a bit during the
1 Prosecution case but which has not been used a lot since then, and the
2 Trial Chamber might recall that when the Prosecution called Rule 92 ter
3 witnesses, obviously, because of the nature of how that Rule is applied,
4 the Trial Chamber in advance generally tended to look at the statement
5 and then to allocate time not only for the direct examination, if you
6 will, but also tended to often -- very often allocate a greater amount of
7 time for cross-examination of the 92 ter witness, because, of course, the
8 direct testimony might be limited to a little part of the statement, but
9 that the cross-examination, it was recognised, would have to cover the
10 entirety of the written statement. So I just mention that now because it
11 could impact the timing and the calender as we move into Rule 92 ter
12 witnesses because the amount of time taken for the direct might well be
13 exceeded in some cases significantly, possibly, and, for example, in the
14 case of General Blaskic, if it turns out that he's tendered as a 92
15 witness. I don't know if that's going to be the case or not, but it may
16 be that that additional time for cross could impact the calender at that
17 stage of the trial.
18 My second point is, and Mr. Kovacic just referred to the witness
19 statements, the witness statements that the Prosecution has been
20 provided, and while we're grateful for that, as we've said in our last
21 submission, it's our position that a statement is not a substitute for a
22 summary, a summary under Rule 65 ter, because a witness statement -- and
23 Mr. Kovacic just mentioned this earlier. A statement can cover a lot of
24 things, but it doesn't necessarily cover what will be the witness's
25 testimony when the witness is in the box. The purpose of the summary is
1 to enable all of the parties to have a much better idea of what the
2 witness is actually going to say, and so the summary serves a different
3 purpose, and it's our position that just because we've been provided with
4 a witness statement, that does not excuse or diminish the responsibility
5 of that same Defence team to submit a witness summary under Rule 65 ter
6 that relates more specifically to what the witness is going to say when
7 the witness is in the courtroom on direct, as opposed to what the witness
8 might have talked about in a witness statement that he or she gave a long
9 time ago. So that's our position on that, and we just wanted to state
10 that so there is not confusion about the level to which we agree or
11 disagree on the issue of witness statements and witness summaries.
12 Thank you.
13 MR. KOVACIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will not respond now
14 because we have to conclude. But as for this last issue raised by my
15 learned friend, that is "sob judica" [phoen], because a motion has been
16 filed. I'm duty-bound to file a response. You have agreed that I may do
17 so by the end of the week, so I will not now respond. It's best for you
18 to decide when you receive all the arguments in our written submissions.
19 But as for the first part of what my learned friend has said regarding
20 Rule 92 ter, I think that having checked what the practice and technology
21 is, I don't see any -- anything that is in doubt here. Of course, it's
22 up to Your Honours to decide what weight may be given to parts of the
23 statement, but that is not a logistical problem. It's a problem -- it's
24 something for Your Honours to decide. We can submit certain parts of the
25 witness statement as 92 ter, and you may then decide that the OTP has two
1 hours or two and a half hours to cross-examine. This has never been a
3 Thank you.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you.
5 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Stringer, I'm sure you'll be ever so happy
6 to assist the Chamber, and while what you have outlined is quite correct,
7 there is more time normally for cross when we have a 92 bis [sic]
8 statement, it would of course be expected that you ask the Chamber for
9 the amount of time you think you would need and justify this by giving
11 MR. STRINGER: Absolutely, Your Honour, yes.
12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] A minor error. It's not
14 92 bis, but 92 ter; page 38, line 25.
15 Everything has been said. Ms. Nozica, on Wednesday, within 48
16 hours, you will have two witnesses. No problem with them?
17 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, on Wednesday we have
18 one witness, and another on Thursday. That was our plan from the
19 beginning, and unfortunately that's how we called our witnesses. While I
20 could have done all this on Wednesday, but because of the situation
21 around the court, the witness was unable to come tomorrow. He can come
22 only the day after.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you.
24 I wish you all a very good afternoon. We shall reconvene on
25 Wednesday at 9.00, since we're working in the mornings.
1 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.50 p.m.
2 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 1st day of
3 April, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.