1 Tuesday, 17 November 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.20 p.m.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, kindly call the
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon,
9 everyone in and around the courtroom.
10 This is case number IT-04-74-T, the Prosecutor versus Prlic et
11 al. Thank you, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
13 Today is Tuesday, 17th of November, 2009. Good afternoon to
14 everybody in the courtroom, the accused, the Defence counsel, the
15 witness. Good afternoon to you, Mr. Kruger and Mr. Stringer and your
16 case manager, and all the people assisting us.
17 We're starting five minutes late for a reason that has nothing to
18 do with the Trial Judges, who were in front of the door to the courtroom
19 at 2.15.
20 Mr. Registrar, you have three IC numbers for us, don't you?
21 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour.
22 3D has submitted its objections to the Prosecution's request for
23 admission of documents tendered through Witness Ivan Beneta. This list
24 shall be given Exhibit IC1109. 4D has also submitted its objections to
25 the Prosecution's request for submission of documents tendered through
1 Witness Ivan Beneta. This list shall be given Exhibit IC1110. The
2 Prosecution has also submitted its objections to 4D documents tendered
3 through Witness Ivan Beneta. This list shall be given Exhibit IC1111.
4 Thank you, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 I'm going to read out an oral ruling on the Petkovic Defence's
7 motion for leave to add Exhibit 4D01733 to its 65 ter list.
8 In its motion of 9th November 2009, the Petkovic Defence asked
9 the Trial Chamber for leave to add Exhibit 4D01733 to its 65 ter list.
10 The Prosecution filed its response on the 10th of November, 2009,
11 specifying that it did not object to the exhibit being added. The other
12 parties did not express an opinion.
13 The Trial Chamber first notes that the exhibit was submitted to
14 Witness Milan Gorjanc at the hearing of 27th of October, 2009. However,
15 the Petkovic Defence had not forewarned the Trial Chamber that the
16 exhibit was not in its 65 ter list.
17 Moreover, the Trial Chamber notes that the exhibit is tendered by
18 the Petkovic Defence without prior notice of it being added to its 65 ter
20 The Trial Chamber reminds all parties the provisions of
21 Guide-Line 8 in the Trial Chamber's decision of the 24th of April, 2008;
22 namely, that it falls to a party to first seek leave, before the
23 appearance of the witness, if it intends to submit an exhibit that is not
24 included in its 65 ter list, by way of written motion to the
25 Trial Chamber, leave to add the said exhibit to the list. It must
1 provide the reasons why this is essential to the case and the reasons why
2 this exhibit was not on the list filed pursuant to Rule 65 ter (G) of the
4 However, the Trial Chamber notes that this, Exhibit 4D01733,
5 presents all the necessary indicia -- all the prima facie indicia of
6 reliability, probative value, and relevance. Therefore, in spite of the
7 lack of due diligence by the Petkovic Defence, and in the absence of any
8 prejudice alleged by the other parties, the Trial Chamber decides to add
9 the exhibit to the 65 ter list.
10 Mr. Stringer, you have one minute.
11 MR. STRINGER: Thank you.
12 Good afternoon, Mr. President. Good afternoon, Your Honours, and
13 to everyone else.
14 Just a technical matter for the record. Yesterday was the
15 dead-line for the Prosecution to file its response to the Praljak
16 Rule 89(C) document motion, and that response was filed or was sent to
17 the Registry last night at around 6.00 p.m. However, we did not indicate
18 in the e-mail that yesterday was the dead-line, and under the rules that
19 the Registry operates under, the Registry treated the filing as having
20 been made today, rather than yesterday. It's a technical matter. It's
21 been distributed already to the parties, but I just wanted to bring it to
22 the Trial Chamber's attention in the event that if it's an issue for any
23 of the parties or the Trial Chamber, we can go back to Registry and have
24 the filing changed so that it indicates correctly that it was filed or
25 submitted on the 16th, which was the dead-line. But in any event, I just
1 wanted to put that on the record in case it's an issue for any of the
3 Thank you.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I don't think it will be a
5 problem at all.
6 We're going to proceed with the cross-examination by the other
7 Defence teams.
8 1D, Mr. Karnavas, do you have any questions for this witness?
9 MR. KARNAVAS: Good afternoon, Mr. President. Good afternoon,
10 Your Honours. Good afternoon to everyone in and around the courtroom.
11 I do have questions and I will probably use up all of my time.
12 However, it's my understanding that General Praljak will go first,
13 then -- yes, General Praljak will go first. Then it will be the Coric
14 team, and then I will go, assuming that there are no questions from the
15 Pusic team, and I believe there may be some questions from the Stojic
16 team. Of course, I can't speak for everybody, but that's my
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, let's start with the
19 Praljak Defence.
20 WITNESS: BOZO PAVLOVIC [Resumed]
21 [The witness answered through interpreter]
22 MS. PINTER: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Good
23 afternoon to you and everybody else in the courtroom.
24 First of all, a technical point. We don't seem to have the
25 transcript on our screens, and of course it's always useful to have it.
1 Now, with your permission, the cross-examination will be
2 conducted by General Praljak, himself, because it refers to part of the
3 examination-in-chief by Ms. Alaburic relating to the siege of Mostar and
4 the questions raised by Judge Antonetti towards the end of proceedings
5 yesterday, once again linked to the siege of Mostar.
6 Now, as we're dealing with military matters, and as we're dealing
7 with the period when General Praljak was personally in the area himself,
8 with your permission I'll cede the floor to General Praljak for him to
9 conduct the cross-examination.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Pinter, how many minutes
11 did you count on, because there are several different teams and you have
12 altogether one hour and a half, so how many minutes are you going to
14 MS. PINTER: [Interpretation] As the Defence has an hour and a
15 half at its disposal, and since we have five Defence teams, all of which
16 would like to conduct the cross-examination, that makes it 18 minutes
17 apiece, if my arithmetic is all right.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
19 Mr. Praljak.
20 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your
21 Honours and everybody else in the courtroom.
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Praljak:
23 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon to you, Colonel.
24 A. Good afternoon.
25 Q. Just give me a brief answer when you hear my question.
1 Nika, would you hand out this, please? Oh, they've already been
2 handed out. Fine, thank you.
3 When you became commander of the 3rd Brigade of the Croatian
4 Defence Council, did you ever, either alone at the level of the brigade,
5 or at the level of the operative zone, or at the level of the Main Staff,
6 and when I was the commander there, make any offensive plans towards the
7 BH Army in the Mostar area?
8 A. General, sir, I don't remember that the brigade took part in the
9 elaboration of any operative offensive plans at all.
10 Q. Thank you. So throughout that time, you were on the defensive
11 or, rather, carrying out your defence assignments?
12 A. Yes, that's right, the brigade had exclusively defence
14 Q. During that time from the 30th of June and later on in July, when
15 you took over the brigade, and the coming months, the months after that,
16 were you bombed with artillery weapons at your positions 'round the
17 clock, day and night?
18 A. Yes, every day. We were shelled every day by the artillery.
19 Q. Especially at night, could you know whether that artillery
20 assault was coming from the Army of Republika Srpska or from
22 A. That's something one cannot establish. You can't know that,
23 because their artillery weapons - I'm talking about the BH Army - were in
24 the vicinity of the positions of the Army of Republika Srpska, so we
25 weren't able to distinguish where the shells, the projectiles, were
1 coming from exactly.
2 Q. Colonel, do you know, especially with respect to the earlier
3 period, that the Army of Republika Srpska - and this is something that
4 Judge Antonetti asked you about - targeted both East Mostar and West
5 Mostar, trying to bring about a conflict? Did you have any information
6 about that? Were you aware of that? Did you discuss things like that?
7 A. Yes, the Army of Republika Srpska did target the positions in the
8 area of Stolac right up until the date that you mentioned, that is to
9 say, the 30th of June, and I can testify to that myself, directly,
10 because as far as I can remember, several days before that particular
11 date the projectiles launched from the positions of the Army of Republika
12 Srpska led to three of my soldiers being killed in Stolac.
13 Q. I'm not going to ask you about Mostar, but did your brigade hold
14 the positions south of Mostar, towards Blagaj?
15 A. Yes, my brigade did hold the positions from the town of Mostar to
16 the Buna River.
17 Q. Tell me, please, Colonel, throughout that area did you see -- in
18 front of you, were there houses in depth, family houses in that area?
19 Was it a built-up area with family houses?
20 A. Yes, it was. It was a built-up area.
21 Q. And were those houses linked by road, with cars going along those
23 A. Yes, of course.
24 Q. From your positions, could you see each of these roads between
25 the houses, could you see the cars and the pedestrians moving around?
1 A. No, especially not in Gnojnice, Dracevice. The roads were
2 visible just in some places.
3 Q. Tell me, Colonel, did your brigade have its own artillery?
4 A. Yes, it did, just like any other brigade.
5 Q. Did you ever, you personally, give an order for some pedestrians
6 to be targeted by the artillery, or did you receive an order to that
7 effect from the Main Staff at any time during that period?
8 A. No. The artillery could target only military targets, pursuant
9 to orders from a front-line commander.
10 Q. Tell me, please, you were a military commander yourself, at night
11 how many people from Mostar, in your view, could go to Blagaj unimpeded
12 and come back without anybody seeing them, and even if somebody wanted to
13 shoot at them, they didn't know how, they couldn't see them? Men, women,
14 children, how many using those roads in the area?
15 A. Well, the Gnojnice and Dracevice areas, you could move around
16 that area at night without any major problems. You could even drive
17 through. And on foot, you could go any time you liked and wouldn't be
18 hindered. So maybe a thousand people.
19 Q. Now, please, would you turn to P04103 -- no, I got it wrong.
20 4403. Yes, 4403. Take a look at this document quickly. I think you've
21 already seen it. Do you know who the head, Branko Kvesic, is?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. What was he, as far as you know?
24 A. He was the minister of the interior.
25 Q. Now, in this document, in the first part, it says that the
1 Muslims -- that their people met representatives of the Army of Republika
2 Srpska. At the time, did you have any information that was semi-public
3 about these two armies holding meetings?
4 A. Yes, and I said that yesterday. And with your permission, I've
5 also remembered that I read a book by my friend, General Drekovic. He
6 made me a present of the book, and in that book he says at one point --
7 or, rather, he describes the situation and says that after his arrival to
8 the 4th Corps of the BH Army as commander, he found unmanned positions
9 facing the Army of Republika Srpska.
10 Q. Thank you. We've already shown this book here in court. We've
11 seen it. But tell me, during that summer and autumn of 1993, who
12 attacked you, how many times, and with what intensity?
13 A. In the summer of 1993, we were attacked by the BH Army, and that
14 was two or three times, with greater intensity and with lesser intensity.
15 The attacks were daily.
16 Q. Tell us, please, Colonel, in these offensive attacks, did they
17 have any shortages in artillery pieces, or infantry, weapons, since, as
18 the Prosecutor says, that they were under siege? Did they lack
20 A. No. When they launched offensive actions in the Hum area, they
21 had very strong artillery -- a very strong artillery. And judging by
22 what they did up there and what we came across and found when we came
23 across their dead, they were very well equipped.
24 Q. Colonel, from this document do you know who, on the 30th of June,
25 took control of all the hydroelectric power-stations from Mostar to
1 Jablanica along the Neretva River? Who had control of them, in military
3 A. The hydroelectric power-plants along the Neretva River from
4 Jablanica to Mostar were controlled by the BH Army. I think four
5 power-stations in all.
6 Q. Thank you. Now look at the next document, which is 4D00798.
7 Have you found it?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Do you know who Sefer Halilovic was?
10 A. Yes, I do.
11 Q. Tell me, please, on this document, which is an extensive one and
12 I don't want to go through it all - all I'm interested in is "death to
13 fascism, freedom to the Bosniaks" - how do you interpret this cry at the
14 end of a text signed by the chief of the Main Staff of the BH Army,
15 Sefer Halilovic? It says "death to fascism," so who are the fascists
16 here, and what did the BH Army look like, if it says "freedom" and then
17 "only to the Bosniaks"? What does that tell you?
18 A. Well, from this we can see that as far as he's concerned,
19 everyone in Bosnia-Herzegovina was a fascist, they were all fascists,
20 except for the Bosniaks.
21 Q. Thank you. Now look at document 4D00793, which is the next
22 document. Do you know who Arif Pasalic is?
23 A. Yes, I do.
24 Q. Now, this document is dated the 20th of September, 1993, and
25 Arif Pasalic says here that the Ustashas are attacking the HVO and the
1 HV, et cetera, et cetera. And then, in item 2, he goes on to say that:
2 "Our forces," meaning the BH Army forces "have been moved towards
3 the south, center, and north, and that they managed to take certain
4 elevation points, important elevation points."
5 Now, on the 20th of September, according to you, was that the
6 fiercest attack within Neretva 93, precisely on the hill that you
7 mentioned earlier on?
8 A. Yes, General, sir, that is indeed the date when my unit, that is
9 to say, the 3rd Brigade, suffered heavy losses when it lost control of
10 part of its positions, when it was not prepared and ready for an action
11 of that kind, because just a few days before a truce had been signed, and
12 so they caught us unawares. We never thought that we could be -- that we
13 could come under attack. So they took control of part of Hum Hill and
14 part of the positions in town, as far as I remember, and also in the area
15 of Kovacina and that general area down there. And we managed to regain
16 control of it later on.
17 Q. And were all the positions regained later, the eastern ones?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. So is this a model of behaviour, that is to say, the HVO as
20 Ustashas, the Croatian Army attacking the blameless BH Army, and then
21 this is justification for their offensive actions? In your view, was
22 that what -- the kind of thing we experienced down there?
23 A. General, sir, I said that I remember this date very well, and
24 I can say with a great deal of certainty that at that time we respected
25 the order for a truce and cease-fire that came in from several levels.
1 And whenever a truce was agreed upon, there would be a BH Army attack
2 launched against us.
3 Q. Now, the next document is 4D00768.
4 Do you know who Rasim Delic is?
5 A. Yes, I know him personally.
6 Q. Let's look at paragraph marked "3," which states that the staffs
7 and commands of the 1st, 4th, and the 6th Corps must offer their
8 assistance in the implementation of the assigned tasks. And it says
9 "crossing from Dobrinja to Butmir." Is that Sarajevo, the exit from
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And then it goes on to say:
13 "Transport on the direction from Igman to Mostar."
14 "Transport," what does that mean, "transport from," when you
15 leave Sarajevo from Igman to Mostar? When they say "transport," what do
16 they mean; camels, donkeys, cars? Is it sitting in a car and going on a
17 good road, or some part of it would be a macadam road and then we would
18 reach Mostar?
19 A. What they mean is transport using motor vehicles, because there
20 was a road along this direction. And I personally did go to Sarajevo via
21 Igman, so that's how I know.
22 Q. Can you look at 3D00567. 3D00567. Do you know where this Bijela
23 Bridge is?
24 A. Yes, it's north of Mostar.
25 Q. And you know who Arif Pasalic is. Can you tell us what you can
1 see from this document? We are talking about the Bijela Bridge, that it
2 had been handed over to the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina for guarding; can
3 we see that from this document?
4 A. If I can read the document.
5 Q. Yes, go ahead. It was supposed to be de-mined, the bridge?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. So who was on the bridge if the Bosnia-Herzegovina Army was
8 supposed to de-mine it?
9 A. The Bosnia-Herzegovina Army.
10 Q. Can you look at document 4D - it's the previous document - 00726.
11 It's a document of the 26th of October, 1993. Who signed the document?
12 A. Arif Pasalic.
13 Q. Can you please look at the document, Colonel, sir. Does it state
14 that a unit of 20 soldiers would be assigned to --
15 A. Yes, that will take up the positions at Kuci and Potok Bijela,
16 Bijela Creek.
17 Q. But it says here "to strengthen" or "to fortify the lines." Who
18 is on the bridge if 10 to 20 people are supposed to fortify the lines?
19 A. Well, the strength of the force of that commander, so it would
20 imply the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
21 Q. All right, thank you very much. Let's look at the Bijela Bridge.
22 We have three photographs, 3D03789. Let's look at the first one. That's
23 3D43-1383. Colonel, sir, could you please show us where the Bijela
24 Bridge is or where the settlement that we call "Bijela" is?
25 And can we give something to the witness so he can mark it?
1 Can you please circle that spot and mark it with a "1"?
2 A. [Marks]
3 Q. Can you please now indicate whether you see this lake on the
4 Neretva? Can you show us where the dam is? Where does the lake end?
5 Where is the lake or the reservoir, and where is the hydroelectric
6 power-plant? Can you mark that with a number "2"?
7 A. [Marks]
8 Q. Can we look at the next photograph, 3D -- and you can initial the
9 bottom of that photograph and the date.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's have a number.
11 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. President, it might be good at this point for
12 General Praljak to ask whether the conditions are exactly the same then
13 as they are depicted in this particular photograph, because I believe
14 it's out of Google, which is of today. So perhaps the gentleman would
15 know. That way, there's no misunderstanding.
16 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] We will see that better
17 when we enlarge that place. So the Colonel can then say whether the
18 situation is different now as compared to then.
19 And let us look at the third photograph, finally, and then the
20 witness can respond to Mr. Karnavas' question.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, could you please
22 answer the question put to us by Mr. Karnavas? He wanted to know whether
23 the Google map that we have here, which dates 2009, reflects the same
24 thing as existed in 1993, whether the town of Bijela was there, whether
25 the river was there, whether the hydroelectric power-plant under number 2
1 is there also. So is it the same now as it was at the time?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Of course.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] He says, "Of course." Very
5 Registrar, could we have a number for the map?
6 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. The marked portion of 3D03789
7 shall be given Exhibit IC1112. Thank you, Your Honours.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] General Praljak, please resume.
9 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] The next map is 3D43-1384,
10 and this is now enlarged so we can see better.
11 Q. Colonel, these roads here around this area here, the Bay of
12 Bijela, did they exist at the time when you were working in Mostar for
13 two years, when the roads were constructed, they were being constructed
14 then? Can you please show us those roads, and can you answer whether
15 those roads existed then, and were they the same as we see on this map
17 A. [Marks]. The roads did exist to the right of Bijela.
18 Q. Yes, we'll see that on the next map. If you can just mark that
19 with number 1, number 2, and number 3.
20 And can we have a number for this, please?
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, could you please place
22 figures 1, 2, and 3, since we have three roads?
23 THE WITNESS: [Marks]
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, can we have an IC
25 number for this map.
1 THE REGISTRAR: The second marked portion of document 3D3789
2 shall be given Exhibit IC1113. Thank you, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE TRECHSEL: A small question, just to clarify that I
4 interpret the map correctly.
5 The road passing by Ravni looks here as if it were a dead-end
6 road; is that correct?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It does not end in a dead-end. I
8 cannot really tell here, specifically, but I think that it connects on to
9 this road [indicates].
10 JUDGE TRECHSEL: You think so, you think so. Do you see that on
11 the map? Because I fail, really, to see it on the map.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You cannot see it on the map, but
13 there was a road in this area that you could reach on foot or pass on
15 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Not a road, then, but a foot-path?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think -- I never passed that way,
17 but as far as I know, I think that there was a road that you could use.
18 You could pass -- you could perhaps not pass the road in a vehicle, but
19 you could use other means.
20 JUDGE TRECHSEL: What other means, except on foot and perhaps
21 with a mule, do you have in mind; a motorcycle, a bicycle, a mountain
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In terrain like this, we were using
24 horses, donkeys. These were the means that we used for transporting
1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
2 MR. STEWART: Your Honours, in my reluctant capacity as a sort of
3 self-appointed map monitor, could I observe that at line 7 at page 16,
4 "indicates," he indicated but didn't mark, and then when we get a few
5 lines later on, "but there was a road in this area that you could reach
6 on foot," all we got is "this area." And although at the time we could
7 see on the map what he was talking about, nobody, in a few weeks or
8 months' time, will know that.
9 The maps really do need -- I have said it quite a few times now,
10 with respect, Your Honour. Maps need very careful marking as we go along
11 if any of us are going to be able to make proper use of them on the
12 transcript in due course.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, you drew three roads,
14 1, 2 and 3, in red. My fellow Judge asked you whether you could drive in
15 a vehicle through these roads, and you said, No, these are just paths or
16 trails. So could you please tell us, so that it's on the transcript,
17 whether roads 1, 2, or 3 were asphalted roads on which vehicles could
18 drive or whether these were earth trails where you could only move with
19 mules, or animals, or motorbikes, but not with cars? Please make this
20 specific so we know exactly how it was.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You could drive in vehicles in a
22 certain part, and then another part it was not possible to go in a
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So could you tell us on which
25 part vehicles could drive?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This part from Bijelo Polje via
2 Ravni-Jasenjani. These were villages that had been inhabited up until
3 the war, people living there. They had their vehicles, and they would
4 drive to their homes.
5 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Colonel, sir, do you know where Jasenjani is on this main road?
7 Can you tell where Jasenjani is? If you don't know, you don't know.
8 A. I don't see it here, but it should be near Ravni.
9 Q. To the north or to the south?
10 A. Ravni-Jasenjani, it should be to the north.
11 Q. Is it true or is it correct that you actually don't know whether
12 you could pass in a vehicle and -- at the exact route? I mean, do you
13 know this exactly or perhaps you're not sure?
14 A. Up to the village of Ravni-Jasenjani, you could go by vehicle. I
15 know that 100 per cent. As for the rest of that road, I don't know what
16 the road is like because I was never there.
17 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. Let's
18 look at the third map, 4D31385.
19 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour. I apologise for
20 interrupting General Praljak, but if I may perhaps again take up the
21 point that my learned colleague Mr. Stewart has made.
22 After the witness signed the IC Exhibit 1113, after that time he
23 made another marking, Your Honour, and that is from just left of the name
24 "Gomile" or "Gomite," and that's the line which then proceeds for about
25 10 centimetres. And if he could perhaps just explain what that marking
1 is that he made, and perhaps mark that as well as a number 4,
2 Your Honour.
3 Thank you.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, when you started to
5 draw these four roads, 1, 2 and 3, road number 3 stopped at one point in
6 time, and my fellow Judge asked you whether this road was a dead-end.
7 You said, No, and then you drew a line to join it with road number 2.
8 And I see that you have actually marked number 4 on this portion of road.
9 So could you tell us what exactly this number 4 means so it's on the
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Number 4 marks that section that
12 I'm not sure you could pass in a motor vehicle.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. It's on the
14 transcript. Number 4 marks the section where the witness is not sure
15 that a motor vehicle could pass.
16 General Praljak, you have the floor. General Praljak, you have
17 already run over your time by 7 minutes. Our Registrar is telling us
18 that you've already used 25 minutes. So please finish your
19 cross-examination, and of course this time will be deducted from the time
20 allotted to other teams.
21 The Registrar is also telling me that this map needs an IC
22 number. Registrar, could we have an IC number for this new map?
23 MR. KARNAVAS: Mr. President, I'm not going to stand here and
24 have my time deducted because another Defence had to do their
25 questioning. Otherwise, if that is the new rule, then I will be
1 objecting as soon as -- I'll keep my own time and then start objecting
2 and cutting off witnesses or cutting off my colleagues. But I don't
3 think that we can just subtract. It's not fair to the rest of us. The
4 rest of us have cases. We're not monolithic here. I keep saying this
5 over and over again. But Mr. Praljak does need to --
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, you're absolutely right,
7 Mr. Karnavas, as usual. But the Registrar -- Mr. Registrar, please give
8 us a number.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 The third marked portion of document 3D03789 shall be given
11 Exhibit IC1114. Thank you, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] General Praljak, you have spent
13 7 minutes -- you've run your time -- you've run over by 7 minutes. You
14 know, and Mr. Karnavas doesn't want to give you any time. I don't know
15 if others want to give you any time. Maybe Mr. Pusic's Defence can give
16 you some time. I don't know where you stand.
17 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
18 I'm not going to burden anyone.
19 Colonel, sir, thank you very much for responding to my questions.
20 I'm sorry that I couldn't put a couple of more questions to you.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, we understood that
23 you're not very familiar with the roads that you drew on the map. It
24 looks like these were earth trails, but I'm a bit surprised. Can't a car
25 or a vehicle go through an earth trail? A long time ago, you know, I
1 remember in Arizona, in the US, there were earth trails on Indian
2 reservations, and I was driving on these earth trails. Of course, this
3 is not Arizona, but is it totally impossible to drive a car through these
4 earth trails?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You could not drive a car along
6 some roads, but you can drive a car along a macadam road that is in a
7 better condition, and we did drive along the macadam roads, yes.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
9 Mr. Coric's Defence.
10 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your
11 Honours, and everybody else in the courtroom.
12 I'd like to ask for the usher's assistance. Could he come up to
13 collect some documents to hand out? The documents have been handed
14 'round to the interpreters, so these are documents for the Prosecution,
15 the Trial Chamber, and the witness.
16 Your Honours, I hope I'll be able to get through everything I had
17 planned to do in 18 minutes. However, if that time is not sufficient,
18 I'm going to ask permission from the Trial Chamber to allow me, as it
19 allowed me in Mr. Buntic's case, with the 1D witness and with the 3D
20 witness of General Praljak, to use the time allotted to the Coric
21 Defence. So it might just be 10 or 15 more minutes. There was a
22 previous decision to that effect. If I may use the overall time and take
23 some minutes from the overall time.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please try and make it in 18
1 You have the floor.
2 Cross-examination by Ms. Tomasegovic Tomic
3 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Pavlovic.
4 A. Good afternoon.
5 Q. My name is Ms. Tomasegovic Tomic, and as you've just heard, I
6 shall be conducting the cross-examination on behalf of the Coric Defence.
7 You have the documents in front of you, and I'll take them in the
8 order that you have them before you. And the first document that I'd
9 like us to look at is 5D0344 -- 5D03044. Have you found the document?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Is this one of your orders, dated the 14th of April, 1993?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. In the order, it says that it is pursuant to the order of the
14 commander of the 1st Brigade, and this particular order relates to the
15 introduction of a police curfew and putting that curfew into effect. And
16 we see that the order was sent to the Stolac military police, the police
17 station in Stolac, and all the units, et cetera, et cetera, not having to
18 go through them all; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Tell me now, please, Mr. Pavlovic, according to the establishment
21 of the military police in the Stolac area, we had the 3rd Stolac Platoon,
22 the 3rd Company and the 3rd Military Police Battalion; am I right? They
23 were active in the area?
24 A. I think you're right, yes.
25 Q. So we can conclude, then, when you say "the military police of
1 Stolac," you actually mean that particular platoon; is that right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Very well. Let's move on to the next document, which is document
4 number P01888. This is an order, again, dated April, from the commander
5 of the Operative Zone for South-East Herzegovina, Miljenko Lasic, but
6 Petar Zelenika signed for him, for the commander.
7 Tell me now, please, you belonged to the South-East Herzegovina
8 Operations Zone, did you not?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. So underneath the date, we see that the order follows on from an
11 order issued by the Main Staff, and in item 1 we see that it relates to
12 the organisation of an operation. I don't have to read everything. You
13 can see it for yourself. In point 2, we have the forces listed to take
14 part in the operation, and a military police squad from the 3rd Military
15 Police Battalion. Can you see that?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Then in item 5, it says that the commander-in-chief for all the
18 forces is the commander of the 2nd Brigade. Do you see that?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And at the bottom, we see that the order was sent to, among
21 others, the 3rd Military Police Battalion commander?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Tell me, please, Mr. Pavlovic, according to the establishment of
24 the military police in the Operative Zone of South-Eastern Herzegovina,
25 we had the 3rd Military Police Battalion active there; is that right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Let's move on to the next document, then, please, which is
3 5D03046. This is another order of yours, once again dated April, and it
4 relates to letting through people through check-points, disarming anybody
5 who goes against orders, and at the bottom we see that it was sent to the
6 military police and the police station; is that right? Do you recognise
7 this order?
8 A. Yes, I do.
9 Q. So we're dealing with the same military police unit that we
10 mentioned earlier on, it's always that same unit; right?
11 A. Right.
12 Q. Now, just look at the number at the top of the order. The last
13 digits are 93-515 [as interpreted].
14 And now we come to 5D03048, which is the next document I'd like
15 us to look at. Here we have an approval from you. It doesn't say
16 "Order," "I hereby order." It says: "I hereby approve."
17 Just let me take a moment, please.
18 The document that we're looking at now is 5D03048, for the
20 As I said, this is an approval from you sent to the same military
21 police unit and the police station, and it is one of your documents;
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And in the last sentence, it refers to an order from the previous
25 document. You can check that out by looking at the numbers, 5D03046 was
1 the number of the document, of the previous document; is that right? Can
2 you compare those numbers and tell us?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Let's move on to the next document now, please, which is 5D03052,
5 and -- yes, I said 5D03052. This is another order of yours once again
6 sent to the military police of Stolac, and this time to the Command of
7 the 4th Battalion. Do you recognise this order as being one of yours?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Let's move on to the next document, which is P0 --
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] General -- Colonel, I mean,
11 when you sent this type of order to the military police, does this mean
12 that you are telling them that you have authority over them?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In part, yes, because they were
14 attached to the unit to perform police assignments in that area.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. You're saying, Yes,
16 in part. Well, could you tell us in which area you do not have authority
17 over them?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I can't supervise them. That
19 is, I can't order them to go into combat, for example, and I can't order
20 them to do other things, either. I can't remember all the instances.
21 But as far as police assignments, like setting up check-points, taking
22 people into custody, and things like that, then they were at the disposal
23 of the unit on the ground.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are saying that you
25 couldn't order them to go into combat, but if the unit of the military
1 police is subordinated to your brigade, in that case can you give them
2 order -- can you order them to go into combat?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If it was attached for police
4 purposes, for carrying out police assignments, then I can issue them
5 assignments from their police activities. However, if there is
6 permission from a superior, then I can attach them to a unit engaged in
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So, well, your answer is rather
9 vague, not very specific, but I'm trying to understand what you're
10 saying. If the order comes from a higher officer, for instance, the
11 commander of an operational group, then you can send them into combat and
12 you have authority over them; is that what you meant?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not have any such occasion.
14 However, if my superior issues an order to me, telling me that I can send
15 them into combat, then I can do that, because probably he had agreed upon
16 something like that previously.
17 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Not so relevant question, but could you tell us
19 where this place or locality or area, Begovina settlement, is located?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is located at the exit to Stolac
21 town, towards Berkovici, and it's up at the front-line.
22 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
23 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, to avoid any misunderstandings, in your response to
25 the questions linked to command of the military police, you are speaking
1 as a battalion commander and your experience in that post, how you
2 functioned in the Stolac area; am I right in saying that?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Let's move on to the next document, which is P01913.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Judge Mindua has a question.
6 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes. Excuse me, Ms. Tomasegovic.
7 I just want to be sure I understood the witness's answer properly, when
8 he spoke about orders to be issued to the military police, the Battalion
9 of the Military Police.
10 Witness, Witness Pavlovic, you said that you could, in part, give
11 orders to military police within your battalion if you, yourself, had
12 received instructions from your superior. Could you tell us from at what
13 level of authority this superior should be and whether he, himself, must
14 have or has authority over the military police? Because military police
15 is separate from other fighting units.
16 You see, what I fear is this: For instance, your superior,
17 giving you instructions to send men from the military police to the
18 front-line, would not have the authority to issue such an order. What do
19 you think of this?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can only carry out the orders I
21 receive from my immediate superior, in this case the commander of the 1st
22 Brigade. Now, probably -- well, who he decides this with, I don't know.
23 But if he has reached a decision and has reached an agreement and gives
24 me an order, then I will carry it out.
25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
1 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Let's move on to P01913,
2 the next document I'd like us to look at.
3 Q. This is titled a "Request" by your superior, Colonel
4 Nedjeljko Obradovic, and he says that entry to certain persons should not
5 be allowed, that others should be detained for 15 days, and so on. We
6 see that the request was sent to the active service military police.
7 Now, would you look at the number up at the top and remember it?
8 Keep that number, because we'll come back to it, but tell me, have you
9 ever seen this request before?
10 A. Yes, I have.
11 Q. All right, thank you. Let's move on to the next document, which
12 is P01972. And this is a daily report from the Command of the
13 3rd Battalion -- 3rd Company of the 3rd Battalion of the Military Police
14 of Capljina. According to the establishment, the 3rd Company of
15 3rd Battalion was active in the Capljina area; am I right in saying that?
16 A. I think so, yes.
17 Q. Now take a look at what it says under the heading of "Security,"
18 incidents of security interest. It says there that:
19 "Acting upon order number," and then you have the number,
20 "1100-01-93-236," "another two people have been taken into custody and
21 detained at the Grabovina barracks for 15 days."
22 Would you look at the number there and tell us whether it is the
23 number in the previous document, P01913 being the number of the previous
25 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have an objection
1 to how counsel called the previous document, which is a request, not an
2 order. I think she misspoke.
3 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Well, when I spoke
4 earlier on, I said "Request," it is titled, but in the report it is
5 referred to as "Order."
6 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] But then it might not be the same
7 document, because a request is a request, and an order is an order.
8 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] That's precisely why I'm
9 reading out the number of the document. So it was in P01913. I'll read
10 the number there again. It is 1100-01-01-93-236.
11 Now let's look at the number in the report under the title
12 "Incidents of Security Interest," which is 1100-01-93-236.
13 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Well, the numbers aren't the same,
14 because in the second document it's "01" just once. In the previous
15 document, it was "01-01"; that is to say, "01" came twice.
16 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Let's go back to the
17 contents of the document, then.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Put your question to the
20 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Let's go back to the
21 request, and let's see what the request asks, what Mr. Obradovic asks in
22 his request.
23 He says, under item 1:
24 "The entry of BH Army members is not allowed into our area of
25 responsibility from Rotimlje to Drenovac without my written clearance."
1 And then in item 2, he says:
2 "All members of the BH Army carrying BH Army insignia are to be
3 arrested immediately and detained for 15 days."
4 Now, in P01972, the other document, and the signatory is
5 Mr. Ancic, the commander of the 3rd Company of the 3rd Battalion, says
7 "Acting on the order, another two people have been taken into
8 custody and placed in detention in the Grabovina barracks for a period of
9 15 days."
10 Witness, I'm now going to put a question to you.
11 Q. In view of the text that I have just read, is this an identical
12 request to the order that was made in Mr. Ancic's report? If you're
13 unable to answer, please say so. And if you are able to, can you please
14 tell me if you know about it and if this was implemented?
15 A. This is a little bit confusing, but I think it is the same
17 Q. Can we look at the next document. This is 5D02195. This is an
18 order for taking into custody issued by commander of the 3rd Battalion of
19 the 3rd Company of the Military Police. In the order, the commander is
20 again referring to an order, and it has the same number as the one in the
21 report. But the only difference is the "1100-01" number from the request
22 by Mr. Obradovic. But since we're talking about an order to take into
23 custody, I conclude that again we're talking about the implementation of
24 the same request. Am I correct?
25 A. [No verbal response]
1 Q. You have to speak up, sir. We didn't hear your answer.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Sir, Mr. Pavlovic, can you please tell us why you think that --
4 or do you know why the persons who signed the report and the order refer
5 to this request by Mr. Obradovic as a order? Do they believe that they
6 have to act upon it in the same way as if it was entitled an order? As
7 it is a request, do they have the same weight?
8 A. From what I can recall from my testimony yesterday, I noticed a
9 document that is identical to this request, but it is in the form of an
10 order. Perhaps that's where the confusion lies.
11 Q. Sir, let's move to the next document.
12 JUDGE TRECHSEL: If I may just add a small question.
13 I see on this list one Edo Obradovic. It seems to me that you
14 have spoken about one Edo Obradovic yesterday. Is it the same person?
15 Can you say anything about this?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's possible that it's the same
17 person. But from what I can remember, we had several people with the
18 name Edin Obradovic in my unit, nicknamed Edo.
19 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
20 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] We're going to move to
21 the next document. This is 5D04380. This is another order sent to the
22 same unit of the military police in Stolac from late April 1993.
23 Q. Do you recognise it?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Let's look at the next document. This is 5D03019. This is an
1 order by Colonel Obradovic. I don't think that it's his signature.
2 I think somebody signed the document for him, but I cannot tell who it
3 was. It's an order from late May 1993, and it states that:
4 "With the actions of the 1st HVO Brigade VOS information on
5 activities and intentions of the B and H Army units and members, and with
6 a view to more efficient co-ordination and operation of the units
7 providing security in depth of the 1st HVO Brigade Knez Domagoj, issues
8 the following order:"
9 And then under number 1, Mr. Obradovic commands the military
10 police Active Service Company to provide security at check-point passes.
11 And then somewhere in the middle of that paragraph, it refers to the
12 Stolac check-point, with two military policemen.
13 Then in paragraph 2, the MUP Capljina police station is tasked.
14 And then the third paragraph refers to the assignment for the
15 Stolac MUP police station, and so on.
16 Then in item 9, it says that civilian police, active service, and
17 home guard commanders are responsible for the implementation of the
18 order. And we see that the order is addressed precisely to those
20 Can you please tell me, Mr. Pavlovic, if you are familiar with
21 this order? Was there a Gorica-Stolac check-point that is referred to
23 A. Check-points changed from day to day as needed. When it was
24 necessary, we did maintain a check-point for a long time. This is the
25 check-point at Aladinici, and the other check-points were set up as
2 Q. Are you familiar with this order? Did you see it before? Did
3 you know that actions and operations were co-ordinated in this way?
4 A. I cannot see -- I cannot recall seeing the order, but that's
5 probably how it was.
6 Q. Let's look at the following document. This is 5D0 --
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You have two minutes left to
9 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I'm going to just skip
10 some things, then.
11 Your Honours, it's important to me to show the period. I have
12 several documents, and I asked at the beginning, and I'm asking again, if
13 I may spend a few minutes allocated to Mr. Coric's Defence.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Coric. Before you
15 take the floor, I want to state my own feeling.
16 This witness is appearing on behalf of the Petkovic Defence to
17 speak to the events in Stolac, to the problems with the Serbs. Your
18 lawyer is now tackling from an angle that was not at all mentioned in the
19 examination-in-chief, which is the issue of the military police. You
20 will have an opportunity to call your own witnesses on this topic.
21 Therefore, if you're given additional time, this creates a total
22 imbalance, when it comes to witnesses called to speak to a specific
23 topic, to address the points of view of all and the accused.
24 So this being said, you may proceed.
25 THE ACCUSED CORIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, yesterday,
1 during the examination-in-chief, this witness was invited to testify that
2 the military police was under the command of someone else and not the
3 people who we are talking about today in our cross-examination, and it is
4 very important to us, this topic. We very rarely request additional
5 time, and today we insist that we be given more time in order to complete
6 our cross-examination.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'm going to ask my colleagues.
8 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, Your Honours, if you
9 permit me --
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphones, please.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
13 After discussing the issue on account of Mr. Coric's
14 intervention, who said that this was really exceptional for him to ask
15 additional time, the Trial Chamber grants the Coric Defence 15 additional
16 minutes that will be taken out of his overall time. In other words, you
17 have another 15 minutes to proceed.
18 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if you permit me,
19 I'm not going to oppose this decision. To the contrary, I wanted to
20 support the request by my colleague for extra time. I would just like to
21 clarify one thing.
22 In the examination-in-chief, the military police was referred to
23 exclusively in the context of the rights of the chief of the Main Staff
24 to command the military police. The topic of our examination-in-chief
25 was not what was happening with the military police in certain areas of
1 Herceg-Bosna. I absolutely appreciate the interest of Mr. Coric and
2 additional time for their cross-examination, and I support that, but at
3 the same time I would also like it to be taken into account that this
4 really is a new aspect of a topic. So during my redirect, I would like
5 to be permitted some extra time in order to be able to cover this topic.
6 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
7 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, let us now look at 5D01054. This is also your
8 order sent to the SSD and the military police. Do you recognise this
9 order? This is from May 1993.
10 A. Yes, I do recognise it.
11 Q. Let's look at the next document. This is
12 502548 [as interpreted]. This is a document -- P02548, and it is a
13 command by the commander of the 1st Brigade sent to, among others, to the
14 military police of Stolac and the active forces in Dretelj. These units
15 are in the area of responsibility of Mr. Obradovic. Am I correct?
16 A. Which units are you thinking of? I am reading the document, so I
17 wasn't following.
18 Q. I apologise to you. I was perhaps a bit fast. It's the military
19 police in Stolac and the active police in Dretelj. They're also in the
20 area of responsibility of Colonel Obradovic. One is in Capljina, and the
21 other one is in Stolac. The brigade covers Capljina and Stolac? This is
22 my question.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Let's look at the next document. This is P02640. This is a
25 search warrant that you sent to the Stolac military police in June 1993.
1 Do you remember that document?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Let's look at the next document. This is P03135. And while
4 we're looking for the document, I am just going to put one question to
6 Based on the documents that we've looked at so far, it's clear
7 that before the 30th of June, 1993, you and the commander of the 1st
8 Brigade were issuing orders to the military police in your area of
9 responsibility; am I correct?
10 A. Yes, I was issuing orders to them for the police assignments in
11 my area of responsibility.
12 Q. Now we have the document P03135. This is an order also by
13 Colonel Obradovic on the 3rd of July, 1993. I'm going to read just the
14 preamble and paragraph 1, because they're important to us. And it states
15 in the document:
16 "Based on the newly-arisen situation in the zone of
17 responsibility of the Knez Domagoj 1st Brigade of the HVO, and due to
18 increased crime and irresponsible behaviour by some commanders and
19 soldiers of the HVO 1st Brigade, and pursuant to unlimited powers
20 conferred on me over civilian and military structures in accordance with
21 the broadening of the area of responsibility, I hereby order:"
22 And then in paragraph 1, it states:
23 "Prevent any theft or any other form of appropriation of personal
24 and other property of people in our zone of responsibility. Arrest the
25 perpetrators and institute criminal proceedings against them through this
2 Before I put my question in relation to this document, I would
3 like you to look at document 5D04392. This is your order of the same
4 date, the 3rd of July, where you say:
5 "Pursuant to the order of the commander of the HVO 1st
6 Knez Domagoj Brigade, I hereby order:
7 "Members of the military police, personnel of the civilian
8 police, and those other soldiers assisting in manning check-point posts
9 in the IZM Stolac zone of responsibility are to prevent the theft of all
10 movable property," and then that type of property is listed, as well as
11 weapons and military equipment.
12 The order was sent to the military and to the civilian police.
13 Mr. Pavlovic, can you please tell me whether you recognise this order and
14 whether the order by the commander of the 1st Brigade, to which you
15 refer, is actually the one that we looked at in document P03135?
16 A. Yes, that is correct.
17 Q. I'm going to look at two more documents, and we will be finished
18 in a few seconds.
19 Let's look at document P03019. It's a document that was shown to
20 you by Mr. Petkovic's Defence yesterday.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, I have a question for
23 I've just had a look, a more thorough look at your order of the
24 3rd of July, 1993. At the end of the day, you're asking for
25 Colonel Obradovic's order to be carried out. But regardless of the fact
1 that you were given an order, I'd like to know this: The commander of a
2 unit, can he, without having received any prior order, ask the military
3 police to arrest and seize the weapons of individuals who are not
4 supposed to carry those weapons or move about? Is that not a classical
5 task of a military police at check-points, to carry out controls, and
6 when they find somebody with a weapon that is not authorised, that person
7 is arrested and the weapon is taken? Do you really need an order to do
8 that sort of a job?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've already said that the police
10 in the zone carried out military police assignments pursuant to our
11 orders, and that is precisely the job they should do; that is to say, to
12 control the area. And anything else, if there's any crime or anything
13 like that, then they have to prevent that.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] By way of an example, your
15 order was sent to the civilian police. Very well. Among the classical
16 task of a civilian police, they have to combat trafficking with food in
17 wartimes, all the people who sell food at very high prices. All that
18 sort of offences is the responsibility of the civilian police. They
19 don't need orders by the military police to do that sort of work. Why do
20 you give an order to the civilian police? Because it's part -- by law,
21 part of their job to do that.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right, but perhaps at
23 that point in time they didn't have all the necessary information about
24 what was going on there, and then we had to co-operate with them.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me give you another
1 example. Let's take a civilian. Normally, he should not be carrying a
2 weapon, unless he has a hunting rifle and also he has a permit to have
3 it. But apart from that situation, he's not supposed to have a weapon.
4 When a civilian policeman sees a civilian with a military weapon, well,
5 he can arrest that person without having an order to do so; do you agree
6 with me?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I agree completely.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
9 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I would like to add a question referring to even
10 a more previous document, P03135, but I don't think you have to look it
11 up because it's a very small thing.
12 Here, Colonel Obradovic speaks of "unlimited powers conferred on
13 me over civilian and military structures." What is your comment to this?
14 Is that a correct description of the legal situation or is Colonel
15 Obradovic going a bit beyond what the correct description of his position
16 would be?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I see here for the first time that
18 Colonel Obradovic sent an order of this kind, and I really don't know
19 what the motive was. Perhaps somebody prepared that order for him and he
20 just happened to sign it without really looking at it properly. I don't
22 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Try to finish before the break.
24 It would be good for you to finish and for us to finish with you before
25 the break.
1 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
2 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, let's look at document P03019, which is a document
3 shown to you by the 4D Defence yesterday. And I'd like us to focus on
4 item 10 of that document.
5 During my cross-examination, we have seen orders which you,
6 yourself, sent to the military police of Stolac throughout the spring,
7 including the beginning of July, 1993, and they were sent in the same way
8 every time. And if I understood you correctly, in response to a
9 question, I think, by the Presiding Judge, you said that you knew what
10 was going on from your level of command downwards and that you acted
11 according to the orders given to you by your superior, immediate superior
12 officer, in this case Mr. Obradovic. Am I right in saying that?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Am I also right in concluding that you, in fact, have no
15 knowledge about what was going on about your command level and in what
16 way the orders were sent and reached Colonel Obradovic? Am I right?
17 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, I apologise to object at this late
18 stage, but I think for such a crucial point and this being a new topic,
19 it's not appropriate that this information is solicited by leading
20 questions. Thank you very much.
21 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is not
22 a new topic, because the witness, on transcript page 46843 to 46845, was
23 asked what the authorisations were of the chief of the Main Staff linked
24 to command over the military police, and I just want to clear up with the
25 witness what level -- what his knowledge was, to ask him whether he knew
1 what was going on on the ground, whereas that he didn't know about other
2 things and couldn't testify about them. So I'd like the witness to tell
3 me whether I'm right or wrong when I say that.
4 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I agree with what you've said, but I find your
5 question not clear. You say:
6 "He had no knowledge about what was going on about your command
8 THE INTERPRETER: "Above," interpreter's correction, "above."
9 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you. I suspected that there was a problem
10 with the translation, and it's now been set straight. Please go on.
11 Excuse me.
12 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, it's been
14 Q. Could you repeat your answer to my last question? Am I right or
16 A. Well, I didn't give you an answer.
17 Q. Well, then give me one now.
18 A. Could you repeat your question, please? But make it shorter,
19 because it was rather a long one.
20 Q. From your testimony here today, I concluded, on the basis of your
21 answers to me and your responses to the Trial Chamber's questions, that
22 you base your answers on your knowledge emanating from your experience.
23 And your experience was how you commanded those you were in a position to
24 command in the area in which you were active in, and the orders that you
25 received from your immediate superior, which was Mr. Obradovic. Am I
1 right there?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Then I can conclude that you don't have direct knowledge, and
4 you've already told the Presiding Judge that in your response, what was
5 happening above that level; that is to say, from whom and in which way
6 orders reached Colonel Obradovic, himself?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. So now in the document that we have before us, let's look at item
9 10. In item 10, in brackets, it says:
10 "Co-operate with all forces in your zone."
11 And then it says:
12 "ATG," anti-terrorist groups, "the police, and military police
13 outside your structure."
14 Now, in view of the orders that I showed you here today, can you
15 tell me and do you know which was this military police outside your
16 structure and whether it was conveyed to you in that way? Because as far
17 as I understood it yesterday, you didn't see the order in written form,
18 but you received part of that order orally from Mr. Obradovic.
19 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, objection to those
20 orders, because Mr. Obradovic didn't say that he received the order from
21 General Petkovic.
22 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] I apologise.
23 Q. You said that some of these contents you received orally from
24 Mr. Obradovic; am I right?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Now, did Mr. Obradovic mention the military police outside your
2 structure at all?
3 A. Well, I can't remember. It was 17 years ago, after all. I can
4 just remember the assignment I was given in general terms, but not the
6 Q. Can you tell me what this means, "military police outside your
7 structure"? What is that?
8 A. Well, if we are to interpret the definition, then it is a unit
9 which is outside the unit which somebody commands.
10 Q. So that would be some other military police unit coming into the
11 zone, not the one that you commanded, that is to say, the platoon from
12 Stolac; is that how I'm to understand it?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now let's move on to the next document, Mr. Pavlovic, which is
15 P03160. It is the last document, and I'll be finished in a moment. It
16 is an order from Colonel Nedjeljko Obradovic, commander of Sector South,
17 dated July 1993, in which he says that:
18 "Due to the current situation in the field, and in order to
19 protect the citizens and towns, as well as their property, I hereby issue
20 the following order:"
21 Item 1: "The security protecting of the citizens of the towns of
22 Capljina and Stolac shall be taken over by the civilian police of
23 Capljina and Stolac in order to prevent looting and violence."
24 Item 2: "I hold the commanders of the civilian police of
25 Capljina and Stolac responsible for the execution of this order."
1 "Delivered to" at the bottom, it says:
2 "The commander of the civilian police of Capljina."
3 And: "The commander of the civilian police of Stolac."
4 Tell me now, Mr. Pavlovic, whether you've ever seen this order
5 before or did you know about it? And that's my last question.
6 A. I didn't see this order at that time, because it's the day that I
7 left Stolac and I can't remember having seen it.
8 MS. TOMASEGOVIC TOMIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Pavlovic.
9 Thank you, Your Honours. That completes my cross-examination.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We're going to
11 break for 20 minutes.
12 --- Recess taken at 4.00 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 4.24 p.m.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Karnavas, you have the
16 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you, Mr. President.
17 And, again, good afternoon, everyone in and around the courtroom.
18 And good afternoon, sir.
19 Cross-examination by Mr. Karnavas:
20 Q. I just have four brief matters, and I think we can get through
21 them rather quickly.
22 If I can have you look at first at 1D01704. You have it in front
23 of you, and if you could look at that very quickly. And then if you
24 could also take a moment to also look at 4D01067. They're both
25 connected, and my questions will --
1 THE INTERPRETER: Into the microphone, please, Counsel. Thank
3 MR. KARNAVAS: My questions will relate to these two documents on
4 the first topic.
5 Q. Have you ever seen this document before, sir?
6 A. Yes, I saw this second document during the proofing session.
7 Q. Okay. Now, as I understand it, during this period of time, if we
8 look at the documents, they seem to be -- the first one, that is,
9 1D01704, on or about 18 September 1993, and the other document, 4D01067,
10 is 19 September 1993; is that correct?
11 A. The second one, yes. But as to the first one, I can't read the
12 date. I assume it's correct.
13 Q. Now, this would have been the period when you were at the
14 Heliodrom; is that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And I just want to just briefly touch upon a couple of things.
17 We can see on the first document, 1D01704, the preamble, we see that --
18 that this is pursuant to Article 30, and it says: "... as the supreme
19 commander of the armed forces ..."
20 And if we go to items, for instance, 3, there is an order that
22 "The conditions in detention centres for prisoners of war which
23 are not in keeping with those envisaged in the International Law of War
24 and the Geneva Convention shall immediately be rectified accordingly.
25 The prisoners of war shall be treated in compliance with the Geneva
1 Convention provisions and other humanitarian norms."
2 And of course if we look all the way down, we see this is signed
3 by Mate Boban; is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. All right. And if we look at paragraph number 7, we see that:
6 "The Main Staff of the HVO shall communicate this order to all
7 subordinated commands and units, and render professional assistance in
8 its implementation."
9 My first question to you regarding this particular paragraph is:
10 At this point in time, who is your immediate superior officer?
11 A. Brigadier Miljenko Lasic.
12 Q. All right. Now, if we could turn to 4D01067, 4D01067, the next
13 document, dated 19 September 1993, we see that it's an order, and would
14 you agree with me that this is signed by -- it is signed for Mr. Lasic;
15 is that correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. All right. And, of course, we see that this order is copied to
18 various units or sectors; correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And immediately after that, we also see something that is
21 attached to this particular order, and that is from the Office of the
22 President, dated 15 September 1993. And if we look at the next page, we
23 see -- or if we look at the bottom of this document, we see that it's
24 signed by Mate Boban; correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And if we look at this attachment and we look at number 3, again
2 it says:
3 "Immediately ensure all conditions in case that they have not
4 been provided in the detention centres for prisoners of war, and ensure
5 that they are stipulated by the International Military Law and the Geneva
6 Convention. Observe provisions of the Geneva Convention as well as other
7 humanitarian standards during treatment of prisoners of war."
8 And then if we look at number 7:
9 "The HVO Main Staff will inform all subordinated commands and
10 units with this order, and offer expert assistance in realisation of the
12 Having looked at this second document, 4D01067, would it not
13 appear that Mr. Lasic is acting pursuant to the order that was issued by
14 President Boban?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And this would have been a period when, at least as you've
17 indicated, the second document would have been sent to you or you would
18 have been informed of it from your immediate commander, Miljenko Lasic;
19 correct? And that's my last question for this?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. All right. Now, let's move on to another subject.
22 Yesterday, you were referenced to a statement by someone, and the
23 document is P10153. That should be in the binder that was provided to
24 you by the Petkovic Defence. Do you have that available at the moment?
25 Mr. Usher, could you see to it that the gentleman has P10153 from
2 Do you have it, sir? It is a statement by a witness who has been
3 given the pseudonym of ED. It would have been in the Petkovic binder.
4 No? All right. My mistake.
5 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'd just like to say
6 that I didn't include the document in the binder because it was under
7 seal, containing the name of the witness. That's why I failed to do
9 MR. KARNAVAS: My apologies, my apologies.
10 Anyway, we all have it, and I'll just ask you a few questions
11 based on this document.
12 MR. STEWART: Excuse me. Could I just check the number? What
13 it's -- what number is it?
14 MR. KARNAVAS: P10133.
15 MR. STEWART: Oh, thank you, yes. So it came as "10153" earlier.
16 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes, my apologies.
17 MR. STEWART: No, thank you for that.
18 MR. KARNAVAS: My apologies, no. I can't read my own writing.
19 That was the problem.
20 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, if I may also just inquire, as the
21 document is under seal, perhaps we should go into private session to deal
22 with this.
23 MR. KARNAVAS: Well, I'm not -- it doesn't matter to me,
24 Your Honour, one way or the other. The gentleman did not --
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, private session,
2 [Private session]
11 Page 46919 redacted. Private session.
24 [Open session]
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session. Thank
2 MR. KARNAVAS:
3 Q. Now, the first -- the 1st Battalion, that was also under
4 Obradovic, was it not?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Okay. And I don't know if you know directly, you know, but can
7 you tell us whether it would have been normal, under the circumstances,
8 that Obradovic would inform all of his subordinates about what needed to
9 be done as far as isolating the Muslim HVO soldiers?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Okay. So fair to say -- fair to say that along with you, the
12 commander of the 1st Battalion was also informed by Obradovic what needed
13 to be done; correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Now, in addition to this order, you had another responsibility,
16 as I understand your testimony, and that was to sort of assist in the
17 realignment of the units, because with taking out large numbers of Muslim
18 soldiers -- Muslim HVO soldiers, something had to be done, because you
19 still had the confrontation line and the Serbs were still there; correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And as I understand it, it was only two or three days before this
22 incident that some HVO soldiers had been killed from the Serbs -- by the
23 Serb side; correct?
24 A. Several days before that.
25 Q. All right. So while there wasn't active -- active and intensive
1 fighting, nonetheless there was a need to keep the line secure; correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Now, here's my question: When you had this meeting and Obradovic
4 is telling you and the others and, as I understand it, when you carried
5 out the order, you also used the military police, the civilian police,
6 MUP, they assisted you -- something -- you know, in any event, all of you
7 had to carry out this order, did Obradovic specifically tell you where
8 all of these individuals, who were HVO soldiers, where they had to be
9 isolated? Did he give you a specific place in mind?
10 A. We asked him. We said we couldn't isolate those people near the
11 front-line, and he told us to take them to the Grabovina barracks.
12 Q. Now, you had been to those barracks before, had you not?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And you're familiar with what is available and what was available
15 at that time; correct?
16 A. Roughly, yes.
17 Q. All right. Now, under oath today, I'm going to ask you one
18 question, and I would appreciate a very straight answer, a very direct
19 answer. At that point in time on June 30th, or July 1st, or July 2nd,
20 did Gabela and Dretelj exist as prisoner of war camps, as they later on
21 came to exist, as we learned later on? Did they exist at that point in
22 time? Yes, no, I don't know, those are the choices.
23 A. They did not exist, or at least I didn't know about them at all.
24 But I don't think they existed.
25 Q. And you say at least you didn't know about it, but you were in
1 the area for an entire year?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. All right. Now, I understand that there was this confrontation
4 line, but were there ever provisions made in the eventuality that large
5 numbers of Serb POWs, for instance, would have been captured? Because
6 I think it's fair to assume that the incident of the June 30th was not
7 predicted in advance in order to make all these provisions.
8 A. There were no preparations, and we didn't plan for any number of
9 detainees, and not even Serb ones, because at that time there were no
10 intensive combat actions.
11 Q. And one final question. During the period that you were at the
12 Heliodrom, and as I understand it, it was approximately July 3, 2 or 3,
13 to --
14 A. 12th of July.
15 Q. Sorry, 12th of July --
16 A. 20th of July.
17 Q. 20th of July until October; correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Did you attend any meetings -- any civilian meetings at the HVO
20 municipalities in Capljina or Stolac where discussions might have been
21 held concerning Dretelj or Gabela, the POWs in general, or anybody who
22 had been detained and was being detained?
23 A. No.
24 MR. KARNAVAS: That's all I have, sir. Thank you very much, and
25 thank you for coming here to give your evidence. And good luck.
1 That's all, Mr. President. Thank you very much.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Does the Stojic Defence have
3 any questions?
4 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
5 I would like to greet everyone in the courtroom and to ask the
6 usher to distribute the documents for the Judges, for the witness, and
7 for the Prosecutor.
8 Your Honours, I would just like to inform you that I have some
9 problems with my back. Probably it's a professional injury. So if I
10 have to sit for a minute, I am going to let you know, but basically I am
11 able to stand if I lean on the lectern.
12 Cross-examination by Ms. Nozica:
13 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Pavlovic, you have received my binder of
14 documents. We have a limited amount of time. I'm briefly go through the
15 cross-examination, and in order to inform you and the Trial Chamber, I'm
16 going to refer to any previous reference in the case to our documents.
17 Can we please look at 2D00281. This is in the pink binder.
18 Mr. Pavlovic, this is an exhibit, so there is no need for you to
19 confirm the entire document. I'm going to draw your attention to some
20 parts, and I'm going to do that in relation to your answers when you were
21 shown document 4D478.
22 Yesterday, during the examination-in-chief -- we don't need to
23 look at the document. I'm just going to remind you that it's a document
24 where Mr. Pizovic is asking Mr. Lasic, if you remember, to use the
25 long-range weapons, if you remember that.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And the document is dated the 6th of -- the 30th of June. And
3 this document that we're looking at is the 26th of January, and it is
4 also signed by Mr. Pizovic. The first part of the document is an
5 analysis of the Bregava Brigade up until this date. We're going to look
6 at item 1. It talks about the beginning of the organisation for combat
7 and resistance to the aggressor in the Stolac municipality territory, and
8 it says that the bearers of these activities were certain members of the
9 SDA, in the form of assembling the manpower, forming of the units, and so
11 Mr. Pavlovic, can you confirm that this was so, according to your
12 information, and that members from the SDA party approached the
13 organising and the forming of this unit in Stolac? Is that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, document 4D478. Yesterday, based on your answers
16 to Judge Antonetti's questions, you said that at that time in February,
17 the co-operation between the B and H Army -- or, rather, the
18 Bregava Brigade and the HVO was good; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. I'm going to now show you page 2 of the translation, in the
21 section marked with the number 3, and it deals with the way they acquired
22 arms. This is the third dash from the bottom, where it says:
23 "Arming by way of seizing the weapons from ex-JNA members and
24 later on from the HVO units."
25 Mr. Pavlovic, at that time during this period of good
1 co-operation with the Bregava Brigade, were you aware that individuals
2 stole or seised weapons from the HVO? I will use that term, "seised."
3 A. In a way, yes.
4 Q. In paragraph marked "6" of this document, Mr. Pizovic - this is
5 in January 1993 - suggests certain things, he puts forward some
6 proposals, and he proposes the formation, training, and equipping of
7 units for sabotage actions. You told us that you knew a little bit about
8 the Jug South Operation, and I'm going to ask you if you knew whether
9 these units actually did carry out sabotage actions shortly before
10 Operation South was carried out in that area.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Can we now look at document 2D3060. This is the one-but-last
13 document in the normal binder. I apologise to you and to everyone,
14 because I did not arrange the documents in the order that I was going to
15 use them. I didn't know how the questioning would proceed --
16 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Excuse me, Ms. Nozica. I seem to have missed
18 I thought that in the previous -- or with regard to the previous
19 documents, 2D00281, under number 6, you referred to "sabotage," and I
20 fail to find the word in number 6. Perhaps I've misunderstood something.
21 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if we look at
22 paragraph 6, where it says: "Begin with specialised training of basic
23 units for commanders," then the second one is: "To begin with training
24 of low-level units to achieve strength of troops," and then we have the
25 third dash where it says: "Formation, training, and equipping of the
1 unit for diversion actions" --
2 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I would not translate "diversion actions" as
3 "sabotage actions." I understand this to mean actions which create an
4 error as to the intentions of the troops with the enemy so that his
5 attention is diverted from what our own troops actually want to do.
6 There's a German word for it, which would be "Uplinkskom [phoen]
7 manoeuvre," "divert the attention."
8 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm going to look. So
9 in case the term is inappropriate in the translation. It's something
10 that we do not have time to deal with right now, but we will then make a
11 correction in the translation, if we deem that it is appropriate. I hope
12 that that is all right with you.
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Definitely, and I will do a bit of linguistic
14 research in the meantime.
15 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Witness, I suggested that we look at 2D3060. Have you found it?
17 It's the one-document-but-last. This is a document signed by
18 Mr. Mehmed Dizdar, and it's dated the 28th of January, 1993. Sir, I'm
19 going to ask you to repeat, very briefly, if you know this gentleman, and
20 what was his post at that time, and what was he doing before that?
21 A. He was the commander of the Stolac Police Station until Stolac
22 was liberated from the Serbian aggressor. And later, from what I know,
23 when the Bregava Brigade was formed, he was a member of the
24 Bregava Brigade, whose task was to organise the police station as part of
25 the Bregava Brigade and to transfer policemen of Muslim ethnicity from
1 the police station to the Stolac Police Station.
2 Q. During yesterday's examination-in-chief, you were talking about
3 his role with -- in terms of the army, the Serbian Army?
4 A. Yes.
5 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please be asked to repeat her
6 question, and could all extra mikes be turned off, please.
7 MS. NOZICA: [Interpretation]
8 Q. When we're talking about this document, I am going to ask you to
9 look at this proposal of measures. It's a report that he drafted. I'm
10 going to read just one of these proposals of the measures:
11 "Monitor all that is going on at the camp area of Rotimlje, and
12 in that aspect co-operate to the utmost with the population."
13 This speaks about the responsibilities and -- the
14 responsibilities of the police, about information, the political and the
15 military situation in that area, and it says here "co-operate with the
17 I am going to ask you, Mr. Pavlovic, did you have information
18 from that time that other than members of the Bregava unit and the MUP,
19 headed by Mr. Dizdar previously, citizens also -- all the other citizens
20 were included in these activities, as it says here? Did you have such
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now I'm going to ask you to look at document 2D288. This is the
24 third document from the top, and this document is actually something that
25 was shown to you during the examination-in-chief. My colleague
1 Ms. Alaburic showed it to you under number 4D586.
2 All I would like to do is to mention that this document is
3 already an exhibit under the 2D number, and this is for purposes of the
5 And then my colleague Ms. Alaburic asked you about this last
6 sentence. This is a document by Mr. Fikret Muslimovic, and it's the
7 Armed Forces Supreme Command headquarters, and it's sent to the Command
8 of the 4th Corps, and it says -- about the expectations of a
9 deterioration of relations with the HVO, and it says it is very important
10 that, for such a situation, to make the Muslims within the HVO as passive
11 as possible and to influence their transfer from the HVO to the B and H
12 Army. Mr. Pavlovic, yesterday you confirmed that you knew that is
13 exactly how action was carried out in this regard; is that correct?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. I'm going to show you document 2D286. This is the second
16 document from the top. This is also a document. It's a diary by a
17 member of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Army. His name is Safet Nozic. I'm
18 going to refer to documents that were shown to you on the same topic in
19 relation to this document. These are documents 4D33, 4D34, 35, 36, and
21 Can you please look at the diary entry for the 18th of April, and
22 can you please look at the time entry, "10.30." You probably had a
23 chance to read all of it, and it refers to Bregava, the Bregava Brigade.
24 It says:
25 "Accepting the battle, if it is imposed by the HVO, linking up
1 our people in the HVO together with the B and H Army."
2 And then it says:
3 "Capture Stolac with our people from the HVO."
4 Mr. Pavlovic, does this document confirm what you said yesterday,
5 that, as we have seen from Mr. Muslimovic onwards, that the 4th Corps
6 orders came from the Supreme Command and were finally implemented in the
7 area where you were in Stolac for the members of the Muslim ethnic group
8 from the HVO be transferred to the Bosnia and Herzegovina Army? And here
9 it says then that they were to carry out the capture of Stolac precisely
10 with those people?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And the last document. This is document 2D3059. This is the
13 fourth document from the top, and it has that yellow tape, so you will
14 not have a problem to find it. Look at this document. This is the
15 document of the 3rd Brigade of the HVO of the 27th of August, 1993,
16 signed by the deputy commander for operative affairs of the battalion,
17 Damir Cavar, and the commander of the 4th Brigade, Misic. It's a report
18 on the events on the 4th [as interpreted] of August, 1993.
19 I would like to tell you, Mr. Pavlovic, that today you responded
20 to questions by Mr. Praljak on page 10, lines 10 to 15, where you spoke
21 about the events of the 20th of September, 1993, about events when the
22 Bosnia and Herzegovina Army was not adhering to the cease-fire, and that
23 that was the reason for the attack on the HVO on the 20th of September,
24 1993. Can we please look to see if the same situation is referred to in
25 this document?
1 We're looking at the third paragraph. It says:
2 "The enemy is using the signed cease-fire, and it is determined
3 that sniper nests are active closer and closer to our lines of defence,
4 with the assistance of prisoners. This morning, at about 9.30, from
5 some -- one such newly-erected sniper nest, Branislav Safradin was killed
6 and Anton Serdajrevic was heavily wounded."
7 We are skipping the next paragraph, and then it says:
8 "Immediately after that, using the cease-fire, MOS forces
9 transferred their forces over the Old Bridge."
10 It says:
11 "Our artillery is helpless because of the explicit ban to open
13 So from a general paragraph, he says:
14 "I emphasise that MOS forces are masterfully using the cease-fire
15 and they are grouping and strengthening forces along our line so that
16 they could, according to my assessment and reports received from scouts
17 and the VOS, execute the attack on our defence line, which is what
18 happened on the 24th of August."
19 And then he says that this situation affects the soldiers' morale
20 and that it is impossible to control the soldiers, et cetera.
21 Now, this is your 3rd Brigade, Mr. Pavlovic. You were the
22 commander at that time. Are you aware of this report? Do you know about
23 it and can you confirm the events set out there, and whether there were
24 similar events of this kind that you can recall?
25 A. This report is absolutely correct, because I personally saw
1 things like this. At that time, the forces of the BH Army were not
2 respecting the cease-fires and truces agreed upon, and that every time a
3 truce was established, there would be movements in their positions along
4 the defence lines. This would take place in advance. There would be new
5 fortification, and then they used that for their advance.
6 Very often, they carried out isolated actions; that is to say,
7 actions by which they wished to break through individual points along our
8 defence lines and to destroy a bunker that was of vital importance to
9 them, and in that way to weaken our defence generally.
10 Q. Mr. Pavlovic, was there any sniper fire, as is described here in
11 this report? And I assume the report reached you. You must have seen
12 it; right?
13 A. Yes, that's right. Their snipers opened fire many times, and
14 unfortunately many civilians were killed from sniper fire. And I had
15 fatalities of that kind in my own family.
16 Q. I apologise, Mr. Pavlovic. I haven't met you before. Perhaps
17 you don't like saying it, but have you -- having told us, could you tell
18 us who was injured in your family and where, if you want to tell us?
19 A. My uncle's daughter was wounded in the settlement of Dum. And,
20 yes, I can say quite frankly that was about 300 metres behind our
21 front-lines of defence. And 15 days later, she died as a result of those
23 Thank you, Mr. Pavlovic. I do apologise for asking you. I
24 didn't know that anything like that had happened to you, but as you had
25 brought it up, I thought I'd ask you.
1 Thank you. That concludes my cross-examination.
2 I'd just like to correct something on page 61 of the transcript,
3 line 9. The date should read the 14th of August and not the 4th of
4 August, 1993, that is. Thank you.
5 And thank you, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You're welcome.
7 For Mr. Pusic, Mr. Ibrisimovic, do you have any questions?
8 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President, for
9 giving us the opportunity of cross-examining, but we have no questions
10 for this witness.
11 Thank you, Mr. Pavlovic, for coming in to testify.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 Mr. Kruger, you may cross-examine the witness.
14 MR. KRUGER: Thank you.
15 A very belated good afternoon to Your Honours and to everybody in
16 and around the courtroom.
17 If I may just check.
18 [Prosecution counsel confer]
19 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, if I could ask the assistance of the
20 usher to help distributing the binders, and if I could also ask for their
21 assistance to obtain a lectern, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour, and thank you to the ushers.
24 Cross-examination by Mr. Kruger:
25 Q. Good afternoon or good evening, Mr. Pavlovic.
1 A. Good evening.
2 Q. And just to start off: During 1992, did you become a member of
3 the HDZ?
4 A. No.
5 Q. When you were appointed as commander of the 3rd Brigade on the
6 20th of July, 1993, is it correct that your appointment was signed by
7 Mr. Boban?
8 A. Yes.
9 MR. KRUGER: For the record, the exhibit is P03582, and it's
10 already in evidence. I won't show it to the witness.
11 Q. The appointment by Mr. Boban, it stated that he made the
12 appointment, but who made the recommendation for your appointment?
13 A. The Personnel Department probably recommended me, of the
14 Main Staff, to that position. I can't know exactly, but that's what
15 I think. The president appointed me. Now, at whose recommendation, I
16 really can't say.
17 Q. You said -- while we're on that topic, it's been touched on
18 previously tonight as well: Yesterday, you were asked whether
19 General Petkovic participated in the planning of Jug, and you said, No,
20 to your knowledge. But just to go further on this: So you, yourself,
21 didn't participate in the planning of Operation Jug?
22 A. That's right.
23 Q. That's right, you didn't participate, or you did participate?
24 A. No, I didn't participate, no.
25 Q. And you weren't privy to what went on in those meetings where
1 this was planned, the Operation Jug?
2 A. That's right.
3 Q. And you don't know actually who attended those meetings or
4 participated in those meetings; is that also correct?
5 A. That is correct.
6 Q. So from your own personal knowledge -- actually, you cannot say
7 whether as -- you cannot state as a fact that General Petkovic did not
8 participate in those meetings for the planning of Jug?
9 A. I didn't claim that. I said that I didn't think so. I don't
10 think he did, to the best of my knowledge.
11 Q. Okay. Sir, let's look at something else. This is also just a
12 general matter. And for this, we're going to -- we're focusing still on
13 your taking over of the command of the 3rd HVO Brigade. And if you look
14 in your binder, I'm going to refer you to document P05933.
15 Now, you'll see in your binder that you have tabs, and these tabs
16 are in numerical order. So if you can find, on one of those tabs,
17 P05933. It's a little beyond the -- half of your binder. 5933.
18 If I may ask the usher for his assistance to help the witness
19 find this document.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kruger, I don't know how
21 you work, what your work method is, but I think it's easier to order the
22 documents as you're going to use them. I think these are the basic rules
23 to comply with in order not to waste time.
24 MR. KRUGER: Your Honour, I fully understand that. The problem
25 is that it's not clear exactly which topics we will be dealing with
2 Q. Sir, you have the document now?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And you will see that this is the report dated 18 October, and
5 this was actually when you handed over your brigade to your successor,
6 and that was Mr. Stanko Sopta; is that correct?
7 A. The day I handed over the brigade was the 4th of October, and I
8 stayed on assisting Mr. Sopta for another 10 days with the hand-over and
9 take-over of duties, informing him about the area of responsibility of
10 the brigade and with everything else that the brigade had in its hands so
11 as to introduce him to the brigade gradually.
12 Q. And that's, indeed, what it says in the first paragraph. The
13 hand-over was the period from 4 October to 14 October 1993.
14 Now, if we can just look at the last two bullet points in
15 paragraph 4, towards the end of the document. It says:
16 "In the past 10 days, we did the rounds of all units and
17 positions, and the new commander was informed of the existing situation
18 and the problems in the brigade."
19 And that's correct, that's what you've just told us indeed
20 happened, isn't it?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And it also says:
23 "The old commander did his best to inform the new commander of
24 all the details he was interested in and help in the removal of existing
1 And that's also correct, because you also told us about that;
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. Now, sir, is it correct that as a responsible commander, you
5 would have informed your successor of every problem that there was which
6 you thought would affect his ability to function properly in his new
8 A. Of course.
9 Q. You wouldn't leave him guessing about anything?
10 A. I'm that kind of person. If I think something is useful to
11 someone and that they need to know something, I would certainly draw
12 their attention to it.
13 Q. You wouldn't leave a problem so that your successor could be
14 surprised by something?
15 A. Not consciously, no.
16 Q. Now, sir, when you received the brigade -- the 3rd Brigade from
17 your predecessor, I suppose you also received a hand-over from him.
18 A. Not in this way, no.
19 Q. Giving a hand-over -- or when one commander comes in and takes
20 over from an old commander, was it essentially standard procedure that
21 there was some kind of hand-over which took place, such as this?
22 A. There wasn't any special procedure, and the superior commanders
23 dictated how this would be done.
24 Q. Sorry. Did the -- I didn't catch that. Did the superior
25 commanders dictate how that should be done?
1 A. The superior commanders dictated how that would be done, and in
2 this particular case I was given the task of staying -- having to stay
3 with the new commander for 10 days to hand over my duties to him and to
4 inform him about the situation in the unit.
5 Q. And if you say it was your superior commanders who gave you that
6 instruction, which superior commanders are you referring to?
7 A. When I mean the commander in this case of the Operative Zone of
8 South-Eastern Herzegovina, that is to say, Mr. Lasic.
9 Q. Sir, just to conclude with this topic, I would just like your
10 reaction on this. I put it to you that actually even though the
11 procedures may have differed from case to case, essentially it was
12 standard procedure in the HVO at all levels of command, right up to the
13 chief of the Main Staff, to provide a hand-over from an outgoing
14 commander to an incoming commander.
15 A. I can't claim this for all cases, but I can describe some cases
16 where I was present, where I was concerned.
17 Q. Okay. Sir, let's step on to a new topic, and I now want to turn
18 back to the liberation -- the occupation and then the liberation of
19 Stolac in 1992. The first general questions relate to what you referred
20 to yesterday.
21 And you mentioned that there was, indeed, a joint defence plan
22 for Stolac prior to the occupation by the Serbs; is that correct?
23 A. Yes, Croats and Muslims cooperated because it was evident that
24 the Serbs would attack us, and the defence at the time, as far as I know,
25 and I did take part in some segments, was jointly planned.
1 Q. And this joint plan, ultimately it wasn't implemented because, as
2 you said yesterday, the Croats left, but the Serbs stayed in Stolac; is
3 that correct?
4 A. The Muslims stayed.
5 Q. Yes. And the Muslims who stayed in Stolac, they couldn't
6 implement the plan on their own to defend against the Serbs; is that
8 A. Correct.
9 Q. Now, sir, just for a moment I would like you to place yourself in
10 the shoes of a Muslim who remained in Stolac when the Serbs approached
11 and their Croat neighbours had left. If you were in their shoes, would
12 it be safe to say that the Muslims who remained in Stolac could have felt
13 betrayed by the Croats?
14 A. Sir, I can reply to this question in this way: You asked me had
15 I been in their place, what would I have done. I would have done the
16 same as a part of them did, some Muslims did, and which the bulk of the
17 Muslims planned to do. I would have withdrawn from the town of Stolac,
18 from captured territory, because in no event would I have allowed myself
19 the luxury, and especially not have allowed that luxury to my children
20 and to my family, of leaving them in an uncertain situation which, in
21 certain cases, meant certain death. And if I may add something else to
22 this as well.
23 All Muslims who had left Stolac, and their families, were
24 accommodated and received in the same way that my family was received
25 that had also left the Stolac area. They were provided with schooling,
1 meals, accommodation in hotels or other types of accommodation, and
2 there was no difference between a Croat or a Muslim family in that
3 regard. You can believe that. I know that. I am absolutely convinced
4 of that.
5 Q. Sir, I suppose it wasn't really possible for all Muslims to
6 leave, but regarding those who left, if I could refer you to evidence
7 that was led by a particular witness who has a pseudonym. It's not
8 necessary to go into closed session. The evidence was led in open
9 session, and I'll just read to you what this witness said, who was a
10 Stolac inhabitant.
11 The transcript reference is transcript page T-11828 from line 6
12 onwards. This witness said:
13 "When the Serbs took over Stolac, the Stolac SDS," which was
14 mainly Serbs, "tried to get the Stolac SDA to become involved in the Serb
15 autonomous region of Herzegovina. The SDA refused because we Bosniaks at
16 the time were convinced that we should respect the
17 internationally-recognised Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, its
18 constitution and its laws, and that was our sole option."
19 Having heard that, you don't dispute that this was the view of --
20 could have been the view of many of the Serbs -- the Muslims who remained
21 in Stolac during the Serb occupation?
22 A. Yes, that could have been the position, but the information that
23 reached me later indicates something different, quite different. At
24 first, the Yugoslav Army and the Serbian forces wanted to break up the
25 co-operation between Muslims and Croats in order to capture that area
1 more easily. But when they had acquired firm control over the area and
2 established the positions they wanted, then they embarked on the measures
3 that I referred to earlier. According to my information, information
4 that I have, they killed a number of people in the Stolac area, they
5 detained a large number in the Bileca prison, and then the Muslim
6 leadership signed loyalty to that state, but all of this was done under
7 considerable pressure. The last information that I have is that the
8 Croatian forces at the time did not organise quickly, and in just two
9 months, had they not returned that area to their control, the Serbs had
10 plans to cleanse Stolac in the same way that they did in Gacko, Nevesinje,
11 Trebinje, Bileca and other places. When those forces were being expelled
12 from that area, I was receiving those people with my men and giving them
13 first aid, food, and equipment, and I was transporting them on to safe
14 territory, because there were a lot of women and children among them.
15 Q. Thank you. So from what you've said now, it appears to me that
16 one could say that those Muslims who had remained in Stolac, they didn't
17 really have much of a choice than to make the best of the Serb
18 occupation, and they had to co-operate with the Serbs to at least be able
19 to survive. They were co-operating not because they really wanted to and
20 because they accepted the Serbs, but simply they didn't really have a
21 choice. Could we say that?
22 A. I said the risk by their political leadership to leave them was
23 quite substantial.
24 I just want to mention one thing. The bulk of the Muslims, on
25 Flower Sunday in 1992, left together with the Croats from Stolac. We're
1 talking about the 10th of April. It was Flower Sunday or Palm Sunday,
2 just before Easter. Halfway, though, some of them were returned, and the
3 bulk of them were returned from Pocitelj, where there were from 10.000 to
4 15.000 refugees. They were returned by their party leaders and religious
5 leaders. This is a true event.
6 Q. Sir, but it's safe to say, in any case, and you don't
7 disagree - you mentioned this yesterday - that when -- or after the
8 liberation, the Muslims, they were very eager to join with the HVO, and
9 as you said, at that stage:
10 "I didn't see any misgivings in Muslims to join the HVO. They
11 were pleased to be liberated."
12 So I put it to you, from this, that generally at that stage the
13 Muslims, there was a chance for them to live with the Croats. They were
14 pleased, This is our joint municipality.
15 A. Yes, I can confirm that, and I can provide some details in the
16 form of a description, because that is how I experienced it, actually;
17 that the Croatian Defence Council and the Croatian Army were greeted by
18 the Muslim population as an army of liberators, and they voluntarily
19 joined their ranks.
20 Q. Now, sir, we're going to be looking at this for a moment, but
21 just before we look at it specifically: You arrived in Stolac on the
22 1st of July, or at least on that date you were appointed by
23 Colonel Beneta as the commander of the forward command post in Stolac; is
24 that correct?
25 A. I was appointed as the commander of the Stolac headquarters, and
1 I was assigned to Colonel Benko. This is the Municipal Staff of the
2 Stolac area.
3 Q. But the point remains, then, that Colonel Beneta was the
4 commander of the 116th Metkovic Brigade of the Croatian Army, meaning
5 that Stolac felt at that -- fell at that stage in the area of
6 responsibility of a Croatian Army unit; is that correct?
7 A. That is correct, because I don't know how familiar you are with
8 that, but when the Croats fled from the Stolac municipality area,
9 conscripts were mobilised. They were supposed to respond to the call-up.
10 But as the majority of them were in the area of the Metkovic, Neum,
11 Ploce, and Makarska municipalities, they were told to report to the Blace
12 village in the municipality of Opuzen, and that is where they began to
13 turn up from the 21st of April. And as each unit was formed, it was
14 being added to the 116th Brigade. Finally, a strong battalion was formed
15 as part of the 116th Brigade, and it was a striking force in the
16 liberation of the town of Stolac.
17 MR. KRUGER: Thank you.
18 Your Honour, if I may just conclude this part and this topic.
19 It's only about two minutes or three minutes, as I see it's probably time
20 for the next break. Thank you.
21 Q. Now, sir, the 116th HV Brigade, did that essentially transform,
22 or parts of it, then, into the 1st HVO Brigade, Knez Domagoj?
23 A. As soon as I arrived, the Stolac Battalion turned into a unit of
24 the Stolac Municipal Staff, and we then carried out an additional
25 mobilisation and formed all the staff services, another infantry
1 battalion, and units at the level of a platoon or, as much we needed,
2 some logistics, artillery, communications, and other types of units.
3 After the 1st Herzegovina Brigade was formed, the Stolac
4 Municipal Staff, all of it and all of its functions, was transferred to
5 the 1st Brigade, where it was reorganised.
6 Q. Okay. And could you put a date to that, roughly, when the
7 1st HVO Brigade was formed? I think you did mention it yesterday.
8 A. I don't know the exact date, I really don't know it, but the 1st
9 Brigade was first of all set up in Capljina, and it encompassed the
10 Capljina units, and then units from Neum and Stolac were added on. This
11 was sometime in late July/early August. I don't -- I think that was the
12 period of time.
13 Q. My last question on this, sir: Those parts or elements of the
14 116th Metkovic Brigade which then became or eventually transformed into
15 parts of the Knez Domagoj Brigade, did they retain all their equipment
16 which had -- which they had as HV Army members; they carried that into
17 the HVO?
18 A. Personal weapons and equipment, yes, and the rest that we had --
19 at that time, we were already receiving additional weaponry, so I don't
20 know what they received from the 116th Brigade before I came, but yes.
21 MR. KRUGER: Thank you.
22 Your Honour, if we could have the break.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, a 20-minute break.
24 --- Recess taken at 5.43 p.m.
25 --- On resuming at 6.07 p.m.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Court is back in session.
2 I believe that Mr. Praljak wants to take the floor. The Trial
3 Chamber is giving him one minute.
4 THE ACCUSED PRALJAK: [Interpretation] Your Honours,
5 Ms. Nika Pinter, my Defence counsel, translated for me your admonishments
6 towards me, and I can say that, well, the Judges were right and Praljak
7 was wrong. So I apologise to the Judges and to the ladies. They don't
8 have to listen to my outbursts. Of course, people always promise to
9 behave better in future. Now, before I tried to do that, but what
10 happened, it's -- to say "never" is child's play, I can't say "never,"
11 but I'll do my best and I apologise once again. Thank you.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Kruger, you
13 have the floor.
14 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Q. Sir, now, we were still talking about 1992, after the liberation
16 of Stolac from the Serbs, and your evidence yesterday, and if I
17 understand correctly, was essentially that initially there were some
18 tensions, but there was co-operation, but trust improved immensely after
19 the September Serb attack and the joint defence then against that attack
20 against the Serbs. Is that correct?
21 A. Well, from the first day of my arrival until the beginning of
22 1993, trust and confidence within my unit was --
23 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness repeat what he said, please.
24 MR. KRUGER:
25 Q. Sorry, sir. The interpreter has asked that you repeat what you
1 said. She didn't catch that.
2 A. I said that from the first day of my arrival and as time went by
3 until 1993, trust and confidence increased from one day to the next, it
4 was bigger and bigger, because the soldiers were together every day up at
5 their positions, and you know when you spend all day every day together,
6 seven days and seven nights up at a bunker, your fellows become your
8 Q. And you also testified or documents were shown to you yesterday
9 which indicated that as late as February 1993, such trust still existed
10 at least in certain circles; correct?
11 A. When it comes to trust, I can testify here and now that trust
12 within the units of the Croatian Defence Council, except some individual
13 cases, was at a high level to the very end. It grew and grew, and once
14 it reached a level of high trust, that's where it stayed to the last day.
15 It was always on a high.
16 Q. But, actually, there was a problem, and that is that the good
17 co-operation was eventually destroyed. Let's take a look at what
18 soured it -- or possible causes of the souring of the good co-operation
19 or trust, and for this I'd like to put to you a little bit of evidence by
20 a witness who testified, and this is Witness CR. The transcript
21 reference is page T-11850 from line 11 onwards. Sir, this witness said:
22 "Good co-operation in the Stolac IZM and Crisis Staff lasted up
23 to October/November 1992, when Andjelko Markovic returned as president of
24 the Stolac HDZ."
25 Sir, is that correct? When Mr. Markovic returned or came to
1 Stolac in October/November 1992, did relations with the Muslims become
2 problematic, or were they affected, rather?
3 A. Mr. Prosecutor, co-operation at the forward command post of
4 Stolac was good to the very last day. Nobody could influence that, not
5 least the mentioned Mr. Markovic, so I don't see how he came to make that
6 observation that co-operation had become -- had deteriorated, because our
7 soldiers were everything that we were required to be. And we didn't make
8 any distinction between the soldiers, except, as I said yesterday, that
9 there were individual cases that we knew about, and we had to isolate
10 these people to prevent it spilling over to the other soldiers.
11 Q. Sir, would you disagree with a statement that
12 Mr. Andjelko Markovic was a hard-line Croat nationalist?
13 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, the question is rather vague. What
14 is considered a hard-line Croat nationalist? What does he mean by that?
15 MR. KRUGER: I'll rephrase the question.
16 Q. Would you say that Mr. Markovic was a nationalist, a Croat
18 MR. KARNAVAS: Again, define what is "nationalist." Is that
19 somebody who likes what he is, his heritage? What is a nationalist?
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, let's not waste any time
21 on this issue.
22 Yesterday, there was a document, and I wanted to ask the
23 question, and I didn't just to avoid wasting time. In this document, it
24 was said that there were Croats from the HV or from the HVO who were
25 extremists, and this was in a document that was mentioned. Maybe
1 "extremist" meant "nationalist," I don't know. We don't know. But
2 Mr. Kruger might just ask the question, and the witness is an officer. I
3 believe he's fully competent to answer. He doesn't need the help of a
5 Mr. Kruger, please put the question again, and we'll see what the
6 answer will be.
7 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Sir, what would your reaction be? Was Mr. Markovic a
9 hard-line -- I'm sorry, I'll just -- was he an extremist,
10 Mr. Andjelko Markovic?
11 A. Mr. Prosecutor, up until now in my testimony, I don't remember
12 having mentioned the term "extremist" for either side, and it's very
13 difficult to define that expression. So I cannot claim that anybody is
14 an extremist. People who are prominent in certain areas more than others
15 need not necessarily be extremists.
16 And if we wish to answer the question of nationalist, was he a
17 nationalist, then I think that a nationalist can also be positive --
18 I think it's a positive concept and every individual, in his own nation,
19 in a way, is a nationalist.
20 Q. I won't press you on this, but we'll be coming back to this theme
21 a number of times during your cross-examination. Actually, we're going
22 to continue on it right now, and for this I'm still with the evidence or
23 the testimony of Witness CR, who testified, and this is once again in
24 the -- within the transcript references that I've made for the previous
25 one, T-11850 onwards, the witness said:
1 "In January, Markovic," it's Andjelko Markovic he's referring to,
2 "tried to force the Stolac SDA leaders to endorse Stolac's incorporation
3 into the HZ-HB. When they refused, this was also the end of any
4 co-operation with the Muslims. Although they were still members of the
5 Stolac management on paper, in practice they were ignored and not even
6 notified of meetings."
7 Do you know about this?
8 A. Mr. Prosecutor, I really didn't understand the political
9 situation much at the time, as I understand politics today, because at
10 the time I was 24 or 25 years old, I was a young officer, and all I was
11 interested in was fighting, and I was interested in building my own
12 personality up as a professional soldier, and I really did try to just
13 focus on the military profession, and then later on my superiors sent me
14 off for military training, so that as far as relations within political
15 structures go, I didn't understand much of that, nor was it a subject of
16 interest. I had my own job to do. Now, what they did over there, I
17 really don't know.
18 Q. But certainly you would have known what the concept of HZ-HB was
19 at that stage. Did you?
20 A. Well, it's clearer to me now, although I did know what the HZ-HB
21 was then, too.
22 Q. And you also knew that Stolac was included within the ambit of
23 the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Okay. So would you -- you wouldn't disagree if I said that from
1 this piece of evidence, what this witness is saying is that the Stolac
2 SDA leaders, or those would be the Muslim leaders, they didn't want to
3 endorse the inclusion of Stolac into the HZ-HB? You wouldn't disagree
4 with that?
5 A. I didn't know that at the time. All I know is that there were
6 some disputes about the formation of the municipality, but I couldn't
7 interfere in that or meddle in that because I don't know what they did,
8 nor did I take part in any of that, so that what the reasons were why
9 they were fighting over that, I don't know.
10 Q. Sir, I'd like to refer you to the second-last exhibit in your
11 binder, and that's Exhibit P --
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, earlier there was an
13 ambiguity. On line 10, page 80, the Prosecutor is asking you, Did you
14 know that Stolac was included within the project or the ambit of the
15 Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna, and at line 12 you say, Yes. And
16 then the Prosecutor presses on, and then you say that that was not
17 something you were interested in at the time. So I don't really know
18 what you knew and didn't know at the time.
19 You told us earlier, so I know that you were 24 at the time, and
20 it's true that when you're 24, you're not really aware of what's at
21 stake, politically. But the Prosecutor is putting to you a very specific
22 question, and we need to be very specific in your answer.
23 At the time, and you were only 24, were you aware of the final
24 goals of the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna? I'm not talking about
25 today. At the time, when you were 24.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All the time [as interpreted], I
2 knew that Stolac belonged to the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna. And
3 clearly on every document from that time, in the heading it would say
4 "the Croatian Community" and later "the Republic of Herceg-Bosna." Now,
5 as to other matters, whether organisational goals or so on and so forth,
6 I didn't know much about that. That's true. I was a soldier who had his
7 assignments, and I wasn't much interested in what the political circles
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kruger.
10 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'd just like to
11 correct something in the transcript on this page, line 14. It says that
12 the witness said "all the time." The witness said "at that time." Thank
14 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Q. Now, sir, you've just mentioned something interesting to me. You
16 mentioned that you knew that Stolac belonged to the HZ -- or the
17 Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna. Now, if having that impression, did
18 you also believe that in Stolac the symbols of the Croatian Community of
19 Herceg-Bosna should be implemented for everyone?
20 A. Of course, they were symbols which -- symbols of the Croatian
21 people, and we received those symbols officially, too, and I had to use
23 Q. But did you believe that they had to be used for everybody in the
24 municipality, not only Croats; also Muslims?
25 A. Of course I did, but at the time those symbols were the ones that
1 were in use. I don't know which other symbols could have been used.
2 Q. Let's have a look now at the second-last document in your binder.
3 That's Exhibit P11107, P11107.
4 MR. KHAN: Mr. President, while that's being done, may I just
5 raise, for the attention of the Court Officer, that on the two tables, at
6 least, of the Stojic team and the Pusic team, our LiveNote is no longer
7 working. So some technical assistance is requested.
8 MR. STEWART: The same here, Your Honour.
9 MR. KRUGER: May I proceed without the --
10 MS. ALABURIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'd just like to
11 object. If my information is correct, the document that Mr. Kruger has
12 just presented was not on the 65 ter list of the Prosecution, so if we
13 can know what it's about and what the purpose of this document is, in
14 keeping with the ruling.
15 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Indeed, that's correct. Your Honour, it's the position of the
17 Prosecution, of course, that we are entitled to show documents, even
18 though they were not on the 65 ter list, to witnesses to solicit their
19 reaction and --
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kruger, this is an ongoing
21 problem that crops up all the time. The Appeals Chamber rendered a
22 decision according to which you can use the document to test the
23 credibility of the witness. Now, if you want to use this document to
24 deal with a new topic, you must lay the foundation, say why you're using
25 the document, why you haven't put the document on the 65 ter list at the
1 time, what were the circumstances that forced you to use this document
2 years after the 65 ter list was set up, and this is after the closing of
3 your case, you know, this problem crops up all the time.
4 If you want to use this document because the witness talked about
5 Stolac, you know, earlier you talked about Witness CR, well that's
6 enough. There's no need to go and unearth a document where a witness
7 will say exactly the same thing or maybe different things. But please
8 tell us why you absolutely need to use this document now.
9 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Your Honour, indeed, the Prosecution will be using this document
11 to test the credibility of the witness, and I suppose that we could
12 then -- thank you, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, go ahead.
14 MR. KRUGER:
15 Q. Now, sir, this document --
16 MR. STEWART: Sorry. We'd be quite interested to know --
17 Mr. Kruger said the document would be used -- sorry:
18 "... the Prosecution would be using this document to test the
19 credibility of the witness, and I suppose that we could then --"
20 Then he said: "Thank you, Your Honour."
21 We never got the "then" bit.
22 MR. KARNAVAS: And if I just may, and I don't wish to exacerbate
23 the Bench or the mood of the Bench, but I should say that if we look at
24 this particular document, Your Honours, it is a statement, and so what it
25 appears to be is a back-door approach of trying to adduce a 92 bis
1 statement. That's what this is all about. The gentleman isn't here,
2 he's not going to be confronted ever, so it is against our right to
3 confront this particular witness. And because this has the appearance of
4 being an official statement, it is, in our opinion, repugnant, as such,
5 to be brought in in this fashion. It is a clever way of trying to
6 introduce a statement similar to a 92 bis without any of the protective
7 valves. So for their purposes, I would say that the statement cannot be
8 used for any reason, unless they intend to introduce this person and
9 bring him here so he can be cross-examined.
10 MR. STEWART: Can I say that although it may be that Mr. Karnavas
11 has correctly anticipated the position, but I wouldn't have minded having
12 an answer to what the "then" bit was from Mr. Kruger first, perhaps,
13 because then we would know what the Prosecution were actually saying that
14 we might or might not object to.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kruger, I understood that
16 you wanted to use this document to test the credibility of the witness,
17 and that's why I said, Very well, go ahead. Can you confirm this?
18 MR. KRUGER: That's correct, Your Honour.
19 And, Your Honour, if I may complete the thought, as requested,
20 and it's also in response to Mr. Karnavas, the issue of the admissibility
21 of the document is a second phase which comes when we tender this in the
22 IC -- through the IC lists. Thank you.
23 MR. STEWART: That's true, Your Honour, certainly that's the
24 culmination of the process, but the reason why I asked for the thought to
25 be completed, and Mr. Kruger has -- well, he's obviously meant to do
1 that, is that we get, under the -- they're not strictly guide-lines, but
2 we get under the Court's order, the Trial Chamber's order, the idea of a
3 document which may be used for two purposes, and then the Trial Chamber
4 will want to know whether a document which is being put to test
5 credibility may also then be proposed for the truth of its contents,
6 which is the point which Mr. Karnavas was, in fact, correctly
7 anticipating. And so it's all very well saying, Well, you know, maybe in
8 due course, and so on, but at this point it is reasonable for us to know
9 whether that second use, which is obviously usually a more substantial
10 use of a document, is something which is specifically already in mind.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Stewart, the Prosecution is
12 going to put its questions. If thereafter it seeks to tender the
13 document, you will be able to raise objections in writing.
14 So let's not waste any time on this. We all know, and you do
15 know as well, Mr. Stewart, because you're very experienced in the
16 practice of this Tribunal, you know better than anyone that in 1999 and
17 in the year 2000, the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina had
18 investigations and heard victims and witnesses, and we have the minutes
19 here that shows that the agency for -- the AID did hear this person whose
20 name we have here, and in all the trial proceedings before the ICTY we've
21 had these type of documents.
22 So please continue, Mr. Kruger.
23 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm not meaning to be difficult or
24 exacerbate the situation, but on a completely separate point: I would
25 just like to observe that because the teams are supplied customarily with
1 one set of documents, there are other members of the Defence teams on
2 this side that are entirely dependent upon e-court to access this
3 material. So when we are in the position as reported by Mr. Khan a few
4 minutes ago where we can't get our LiveNote up, we are -- oh, it's all
5 right, problem solved. It's here again. I rest my case on that,
6 Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kruger.
8 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE PRANDLER: I'm sorry, Mr. Kruger.
10 I would like only to remind ourselves that actually in our
11 decision on this subject matter, you will find paragraph 24, and I will
12 quote it in French, in the original, that:
13 [Interpretation] "However, the Prosecution can, during a
14 cross-examination, present new documents in order to test the credibility
15 of a witness, or to refresh his or her memory. The Trial Chamber will
16 then decide, on a case-by-case basis, whether or not it is appropriate to
17 admit the document in question, pursuant to Rule 89(C) of the Rules."
18 [In English] I believe that this rule should be borne in mind if
19 we are talking about this matter. Thank you.
20 JUDGE TRECHSEL: In order to assist you, this quotation is from
21 the decision of 27 November 2008:
22 [Interpretation] "Decision on presentation of documents by the
23 Prosecution in cross-examination of Defence witnesses."
24 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Do read this decision again so
1 that we don't waste any more time next time.
2 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Q. Now, sir, this document that you have before you is a statement
4 taken by the Bosnia and Herzegovina Agency for Investigation and
5 Documentation, and it's a statement by Mr. Ibrahim Mahmutovic. Now, my
6 first question: Did you know a Mr. Ibrahim Mahmutovic, or did you know?
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Prlic.
8 THE ACCUSED PRLIC: [Interpretation] I would like to make a brief
9 invention. The Presiding Judge mentioned this, and now the Prosecutor
10 has repeated it. This isn't the Bosnia and Herzegovina Agency for
11 Investigation and Documentation. We're dealing with 1999, and at that
12 time and a few years before that, in fact, one of the basic goals of the
13 international community in Bosnia-Herzegovina was precisely to abolish
14 this agency. And I think one should bear that in mind.
15 MR. KRUGER:
16 Q. Sir, did you know then a Mr. Ibrahim Mahmutovic?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Who was he or how did you know him?
19 A. I know him. He was my professor. He was a teacher of mine in
20 secondary school. And then later on he was chief of the Civilian Defence
21 in Stolac.
22 Q. Now, why I'm showing this document to you, I want to just put
23 certain very limited parts to you to obtain your reaction. Now, the
24 first thing is, just to establish that Mr. Mahmutovic also knew about
25 you, and if we look in the English translation on page 3, towards the
1 middle, and in the B/C/S version it's on page 2, eight lines from the
2 bottom, so you'll be looking on -- sorry. In the front, sir, you will
3 find you have the English document, and behind the English document is
4 the B/C/S version. I think you do have the B/C/S version. If you look
5 at page 2, eight lines from the bottom, it says:
6 "Already during that period," and he's referring here to July
7 1992: "Already during that period, the HVO Knez Domagoj Brigade had its
8 zone of responsibility in that area of Stolac municipality. The overall
9 commander of the brigade was Nedjeljko Obradovic, also known as Nedjo,
10 while Bozo Pavlovic was at the forward command post in Stolac and was
11 responsible for the defence of the town of Stolac."
12 So that's correct? We don't dispute that, do we?
13 A. Not that Nedjo was the commander of the 1st Brigade, that I was
14 at -- commander of the forward command post, but I can't say here what
15 the time was, what time this refers to.
16 Q. It's not all that crucial, because what I do want to put to you
17 appears on the next page, page 4 of the English version, about two-thirds
18 of the way down the page, the sentence starting with: "The HVO
19 authorities and the Croats ..." In the B/C/S version, if you look at
20 page 3, 16 lines from the bottom. Page 3, 16 lines from the bottom, and
21 it says:
22 "The HVO authorities and the Croats in the Crisis Staff demanded
23 that a stamp with HVO insignia be on all documents, but the Bosniaks did
24 not agree, so that we in the Civilian Defence used the stamp from the
25 previous system. At that time, the HDZ and the HVO were clear about
1 their intentions. They wanted to impose their symbols and their
2 authority on us Bosniaks. In November 1992, Dr. Andjelko Markovic,
3 president of the Stolac HDZ, Bozo Pavlovic, and Marinko Papac demanded
4 from me that Civilian Protection members be issued with membership cards
5 marked 'HDZ Stolac Civilian Protection.' We rejected their demand, as
6 did the Bosniaks in the Crisis Staff."
7 Now, sir, in light of your previous position, that you felt that
8 the HVO symbols were fine for Stolac, what would be your comment on this?
9 Is this correct?
10 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, I would object. This is not testing
11 the credibility of the witness. The witness has already indicated his
12 lack of knowledge. That's the problem. He has to link it up.
13 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Mr. Karnavas, is it convincing that he has lack
14 of knowledge when he is implied as having acted in this respect? I think
15 there's a clear contradiction. The witness says, I don't know anything,
16 I was not interested in that. Here we have a witness who said -- another
17 witness who says that this witness tried to impose HVO stamps.
18 MR. KARNAVAS: No, I don't -- I don't believe it says that,
19 Judge Trechsel. It talks about the government, itself, trying to do
20 that. If you read --
21 JUDGE TRECHSEL: I thought this witness's name was Bozo Pavlovic,
22 and that's the name that I find in the text here as one of the persons
23 who demanded "from me," the other witness, that Civil Protection members
24 be issued membership cards.
25 MR. KARNAVAS: I stand corrected, then, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE TRECHSEL: Thank you.
2 MR. KRUGER:
3 Q. So, sir, can you answer the question? Is this correct, what this
4 witness -- what this person stated?
5 A. Sir, I would like to ask you, if possible, at least in future, to
6 allow me to read the whole document, because when you were talking I just
7 glanced at the document and I did see a couple of untruths, and I can
8 confirm that this is untrue because I never toured positions with
9 Andjelko Markovic and his assistant, and I did not issue any tasks to
10 anyone together with him.
11 Q. Okay. Let's step off this document --
12 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
13 MR. KRUGER:
14 Q. Let's step off this document. Sir, I put it to you that quite
15 early on, at least by January 1993, you knew that the Muslims in Stolac
16 were not in favour of incorporating Stolac into the HZ-HB. What would
17 you say to that?
18 A. I cannot give you an answer to that piece of information because
19 I didn't really communicate too much with people, and when I did, we
20 never discussed those topics.
21 Q. Let's step on to a new topic, and I suspect that we'll start now
22 and we'll continue with this topic tomorrow.
23 I want to move to the aspect of the arrest of members of the
24 Bregava Brigade, or Bregava Brigade, in April 1993. Now, my first
25 question, sir, the first aspect we'll explore: If the Bregava Brigade
1 had existed at the time of the liberation in Stolac in July 1992, do you
2 think it would be safe to say that all the Muslims who joined the HVO at
3 that stage would probably have joined the Bregava Brigade? Would that
4 be -- could that be expected?
5 A. That can just be something hypothetical. I really cannot take a
6 stand vis-a-vis that.
7 Q. Now, sir, the members of the Bregava Brigade, I think you
8 mentioned yesterday that these people were essentially men from Stolac,
9 Stolac municipality; is that correct?
10 A. According to the information that I have, members of the Bregava
11 Brigade were from a number of municipalities in Eastern Herzegovina, and
12 some from Mostar, Capljina, Gacko, Nevesinje, Trebinje, the bulk from
14 Q. Okay. Now, you mentioned a little while ago that Stolac belonged
15 to the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna. Now, let's explore that a
16 little bit. At that stage -- and I think you weren't 24. I think you
17 were 26, perhaps. You were born in 1966, is that correct, just to --
18 A. Yes, maybe 25, 26. And when the war began, there were a couple
19 of years less, yes.
20 Q. Now, despite your age, I suppose that you would have known that
21 in June/July 1992, the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina had been
22 established, had been recognised, and was even a member of the United
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And the municipality of Stolac was included within the territory
1 of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina; is that correct?
2 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat his answer?
3 MR. KRUGER:
4 Q. Sorry, could you please repeat your answer? The interpreter
5 didn't catch the answer.
6 A. I said, Yes, and today still.
7 Q. Now, the government over the sovereign territory of the Republic
8 of Bosnia and Herzegovina was the government in Sarajevo at that time; is
9 that correct?
10 A. You could say, Yes. But if I can add, at the time the
11 authorities in Sarajevo did not do anything towards the defence of Bosnia
12 and Herzegovina in the area where I was, and where I was staying and
13 where I was waging war. You could not see any indications of any actions
14 on their part, and we didn't know of any such actions.
15 Q. So when, in August 1992, the Sarajevo government established
16 the -- or gave instructions to establish the Bregava Brigade in Stolac,
17 that was one of those actions to at least participate or do something for
18 the defence of Stolac; would you agree?
19 A. This is a question that is very difficult to answer in one
20 sentence. With the establishment of the Bregava Brigade, the
21 Bosnia-Herzegovina authorities did not automatically take responsibility
22 for the town of Stolac. The town of Stolac was safe before that or
23 secure, and the Bregava Brigade did not defend the lines of defence in
24 Stolac for a single day, except in the segment that we know about in the
25 village of Rotimlje, which was part of the Stolac municipality.
1 Q. Sir, is it also correct that the fact that the Bregava Brigade
2 deferred to the decisions of the Main Staff of the HVO was actually a
3 measure of -- it was a practical measure to assist in the defence against
4 the common enemy, which is the Serbs? I'm talking of 1992.
5 A. I can say that the Bregava Brigade joined the defence force and
6 was implementing its tasks in the area. But I really cannot give an
7 answer to the previous question. I can confirm that it was part of the
8 defence forces.
9 Q. Okay. Now, sir, I put it to you that the Bregava Brigade, being
10 assigned to Stolac or to be stationed or operational in Stolac by the
11 government of -- or the defence portion, at least, of the Republic of
12 Bosnia and Herzegovina, they actually had a legitimate right to be in
13 Stolac and to co-operate with the HVO in the defence of Stolac? They
14 were legitimate, they had a legitimate right to be there; isn't that so?
15 A. Sir, I'm really trying to understand you, but from what I know,
16 as part of the command and control of the units, units are issued tasks
17 in the field. The Bregava Brigade also was issued tasks in the field,
18 and I think that they were issued to it in agreement with the 4th Corps
19 of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Army and the South-Eastern Herzegovina
20 Operations Zone. I cannot say that the Government of the Republic of
21 Bosnia and Herzegovina directly commanded them.
22 Q. Now, sir, I put it to you that the Bregava Brigade, they wanted
23 to have a larger role in the defence of Stolac, but that they were denied
24 having a larger role by the HVO. The HVO kept it side-lined in Stolac.
25 What would you say to that?
1 A. The Bregava Brigade did not receive any tasks in Stolac, and I
2 don't know why it wasn't given a zone in Stolac. On the other hand, I
3 assume that because the zone that they were holding around Stolac, the
4 4th and the 5th Battalions of the HVO were very well fortified and
5 secure, and this had proved to be so throughout the war, even when we
6 were organised the least on the 15th of August, so I believe that there
7 was no need for that zone to be taken away from us. And probably in the
8 area where there was a greater need to engage forces was where the
9 brigade was given an assignment. I cannot confirm that it was being
10 prevented from participating in the defence contingent of forces.
11 Q. Sir, we'll come back to that perhaps tomorrow very briefly.
12 I think in the minute or so before the time is up, I'll just touch upon
13 one peripheral issue.
14 Today you were shown a document which was signed by
15 Mr. Arif Pasalic and which ended with:
16 "Death to fascists, freedom to Bosniaks."
17 Do you remember that?
18 A. I think this was signed by Sefer Halilovic, as far as I remember.
19 Excuse me. Yes, I remember that.
20 Q. I stand corrected. That's correct. Sir, now just to finish:
21 Isn't it so that Croats would often also sign official letters with "God
22 and Croats"?
23 A. I did not complete any such dispatch, I didn't sign any such
24 official letter in that way. I don't know if this was something common
25 or not, but I never saw anything like that in my unit.
1 Q. But if a Bosniak were to have seen a letter signed as such, a
2 Bosniak would probably take offence to that; would you agree?
3 A. I probably would. But in my unit, no Bosniak could have seen
4 such a document, no.
5 MR. KRUGER: Thank you, sir.
6 Your Honour, do we still have time or --
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Kruger, you have used one
8 hour and five minutes so far. Therefore, you have one hour and
9 fifty-five minutes left tomorrow.
10 Witness, you'll be back here tomorrow. The hearing will start at
12 I do hope that the Gotovina Trial Chamber will, for once, stop at
13 a quarter to 2.00, as I always do when we sit in the morning, in order to
14 avoid problems for the next Trial Chamber.
15 So we shall reconvene tomorrow at quarter past 2.00. The hearing
16 stands adjourned.
17 [The witness stands down]
18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.00 p.m.,
19 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 18th day of
20 November, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.