1 Thursday, 3 April 2008
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 2.21 p.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Registrar, would you please
6 call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours.
8 This is case number IT-03-67-T, the Prosecutor versus
9 Vojislav Seselj.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you,
11 Ms. Registrar.
12 This is Thursday, April 3rd, 2008. Welcome the OTP, to
13 representatives, Mr. Seselj, as well as everyone helping us.
14 Today's hearing is going to be devoted to videos, but first there
15 is a small matter we need to solve.
16 Mr. Seselj, yesterday you showed the witness a number of
17 documents coming from -- that were legal documents. You read out a
18 number of excerpts. They were translated, and they are now on the
19 record. And the Judges discussed this amongst themselves and decided
20 that this might be sufficient and that there is no real need for asking
21 for these documents to be tendered, since the documents were translated
22 by the interpreters, and that we have the translation now on the
24 If you're asking for these documents to be admitted, since they
25 are not translated, we would only be able to give MFI numbers.
1 So what's your position? We need to know what your opinion is.
2 These are documents that you presented during the cross-examination, so
3 it's up to you.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I did not tender these documents.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you.
6 Furthermore, I'm not sure I understood you properly yesterday. I
7 would like you to tell us what you said exactly yesterday.
8 At one point in time yesterday, when talking about the witness,
9 and I will not mention his name, since this is a protected witness, you
10 challenged the truthfulness of what he was saying, and you said he was a
11 false witness. That's your point of view. But you also added something
12 else which was a bit of a problem for me, and I was thinking about it all
13 night, actually, because you said that you intended to publish, on your
14 website or on maybe some other media, the testimony or statement of this
16 So did I misunderstand you or did I understand you properly,
17 because consequences could be huge.
18 As you know, Mr. Seselj, you're a qualified lawyer, so you know,
19 like everyone here, that the statements of protected witnesses are, by
20 definition, also protected, and it is absolutely banned to publish
21 outside this legal arena, these kinds of statements. Maybe I
22 misunderstood you, and I would like to be reassured as to what you intend
23 to do.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I think it is
25 indispensable for you to demand that CLSS compare the recording of the
1 cross-examination of this witness with the text of the transcript. You
2 will then see that I said that no one can declare secret the statement.
3 Aleksandar Gajic gave to me, in which matters are mentioned that concern
4 this witness.
5 Also, I never said I would publish on my website the testimony of
6 the witness who testified yesterday. This was when I opposed moving into
7 private session. I can't repeat everything verbatim, but I remember the
8 purport of what I said. So I ask that you get your interpretation
9 service to compare the interpretation with the transcript.
10 Yesterday, there was some other important matters that remained
11 unsaid. I tried to bring them out in my cross-examination, but I'm not
12 sure I was precise enough, when the witness lied to say that the
13 headquarters of his organisation were on the same premises as the Serbian
14 Chetnik Movement. But you will recall that the witness himself said that
15 the Serbian Chetnik Movement was never registered. When I asked him
16 whether the State gave state offices to such organisations, he confirmed
17 it, but it gives them only to registered ones, not unregistered ones.
18 And I checked and found out that the humanitarian organisation the
19 witness mentioned was never registered.
20 I slept very well last night, but I had to conduct some extra
21 checks, just as the OTP does when I say something, put something forward
22 in this courtroom, and usually they only confirm -- the things they find
23 out only go to confirm what I said.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
25 Yesterday, you said something. The Chamber has not conferred on
1 this yet, so I can't say anything as to what the Judges think on this,
2 but I can tell you one thing that's extremely clear and straightforward
3 for everyone here, which is the following:
4 A witness makes a statement under oath, everybody will listen to
5 what the witness is saying, and it's up to everyone, each and every one,
6 to assess whether this witness is telling the truth or not. But to judge
7 on the veracity of this, we can only do this by crossing this with other
8 statements, other documents, other elements. Otherwise, it would be
9 impossible to work as a judge, because we would be asked to draw
10 conclusions when somebody is saying "white" and another witness will be
11 saying "black," and draw conclusions on this, and we'd be supposed to
12 say, maybe, the one who said "black" had lied, but we can't do this.
13 So we cannot have an immediate answer to this kind of request.
14 Yesterday, Mr. Seselj, you said, and I remember it very well, you
15 said, "I'm asking the Judges to sanction this witness, to convict him for
16 false testimony." And you said this just because the witness had said
17 one thing and another witness, for which you had one element, was saying
18 the opposite. But this is not sufficient to draw conclusions at this
20 The conclusions can only be drawn once we have the entire body of
21 evidence, and then we'll be ready to draw conclusions. And if you were
22 in our shoes, you would say exactly the same thing.
23 It's not because someone is saying "white" and the other is
24 saying "black" that you should draw conclusions, final conclusions,
25 without any other elements. Other witnesses will come and they will
1 either confirm or contradict what yesterday's witness said, and you will
2 be -- you will have time to come back to this, and then you can ask us to
3 draw the consequences. But as of today, this is totally impossible.
4 There will be an entire series of witnesses, and we will have
5 plenty of time to assess the body of evidence. That is the whole nature
6 of the contradictory procedure. The whole procedure starts with a trial
7 and ends at the end of a trial. You cannot draw conclusions in the
8 course of the trial. This is not possible.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, (redacted)
14 (redacted). You
15 will see that the witness later on retracted what he said, and you will
16 see that quite evidently he lied but because there is no trace in the OTP
17 that he had made such a statement. That's why I asked you to take
18 appropriate measures against that witness.
19 Secondly, another problem arises here. I know that in these
20 contradictory proceedings, the rules that apply are mainly those of
21 Anglo-Saxon law. However, even under Anglo-Saxon law, there is an
22 investigation. Your OTP is not conducting investigations at all. They
23 are engaged in passing surveys, in conducting surveys, passing
24 questionnaires around. People, educated and uneducated, make statements,
25 and that's it.
1 It's actually the duty of the Prosecutor to check the statements
2 made by their witnesses before they call them, because the OTP is
3 responsible for everything that fails in this courtroom. We have heard
4 so many fantastic stories here. I've managed to debunk them all, but
5 this is continuing. It's happening again and again. The OTP calls a
6 witness, and the witness produces testimony which is supposed to be true,
7 but then when it's demonstrated that not only is it not true but that
8 99 per cent of it is false, nothing happens. The witness goes away and
9 the next witness comes. Something like this is impermissible even under
10 Anglo-Saxon law.
11 If the OTP brings four or five witnesses who lie, who make things
12 up, invent things, make false accusations and so on and so forth, and
13 this is demonstrated, then there cannot fail to be measures instituted
14 against the OTP. After these failed expert witnesses, you should have
15 taken certain measures.
16 I'm not an impatient man, I can wait, but certainly, in my
17 opinion, matters have come to a head and the conditions are now in place
18 for you to take measures.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, we take note of this, but
20 now I think my fellow Judge would like to take the floor.
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes, because there was another matter that is
22 still pending from yesterday, and I'm raising it because you, yourself,
23 now raise the issue of contempt proceedings.
24 The issue that was raised yesterday by the Presiding Judge was
25 the issue of interpretation and respect for the Chamber's order for
1 protective measures, because it would seem as if the production of a
2 statement from the gentleman that you contacted, whose name I will not
3 mention here and whose statement we saw yesterday, that statement must
4 have been made under the condition that the gentleman knew that the
5 protected witness was coming here to testify, and the Chamber's order for
6 protective measures for that witness includes, of course, that no one
7 outside the Defence team and the Prosecution team is being informed of
8 the fact that this witness would come to testify.
9 I don't think we ever got an answer from you about this problem
10 yesterday, because it seems as if your Defence team must have revealed to
11 the gentleman who gave the statement to you the facts that the protected
12 witness was going to testify to here, and if that is correct, then that
13 would seem to be in violation of the Chamber's order.
14 I would like you to explain, if you can.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I never give confidential documents
16 to anyone for their inspection, apart from the members of my team.
17 However, when preparations are being made for cross-examination, the
18 members of my team are duty-bound to obtain appropriate material for me,
19 and they go in search of that material.
20 I called over your phone and said I learned that this witness
21 participated in a bomb attack on the Belgrade mosque, "Get me from the
22 Belgrade District Court the entire file." And my legal adviser went and
23 got it. And then the people in the court know that we asked for the file
24 of such-and-such a person, but no one told them in the courtroom, "This
25 is a protected witness in these proceedings and that's why we're asking
1 for this." But if you think that absolute protection of protected
2 witnesses is possible, well, it's not. There's always someone who
3 recognises them.
4 Look at what happened yesterday, last night. I got this
5 information 15 minutes ago. I have a mobile telephone number written
6 down here. I don't want to go back into private session or have this
7 redacted from the transcript, so I won't mention the number. If you ask
8 me for it, I'll give it to you right away. But Natasha Kandic rang up
9 Aleksandar Gajic, and she asked him, "Are you looking at our friend?
10 Let's meet, let's have a chat. We have to." And so on and so forth.
11 And he is my Defence witness who previously contacted Natasha Kandic, and
12 we discussed this in open session yesterday.
13 Once Natasha Kandic mentioned the name of a protected witness of
14 the OTP on a TV broadcast. We have the broadcast. I think you received
15 the transcripts of that broadcast.
16 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Seselj, I think you're beating around the
17 bush. My question to you was if anyone from your team disclosed to
18 Mr. Gajic the fact that the protected witness was coming to testify here.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No. I told you that from the
20 outset. No one from my Defence team disclosed the name of any protected
21 witness called to testify here. However, as soon as this witness began
22 testifying, a certain number of people recognised him, because he was
23 describing his role in the war during the examination-in-chief.
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Seselj, as the Presiding Judge noticed
25 yesterday, the statement by Mr. Gajic was dated before the person even
1 came here to testify.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Why shouldn't it be dated before?
3 Does it say anywhere in the statement that Aleksandar Gajic learned that
4 this man was going to be a protected witness on such-and-such a day? My
5 legal advisors are conducting a investigation, I have a team of
6 investigators, and they discover things on the ground. In a day or two,
7 they'll turn up in front of the house of another witness to take
8 photographs of certain people so that I can check whether these really
9 were the people who appeared in the courtroom or whether the witnesses
10 who came were actors, pretending to be those people. Such suspicions
11 arose in previous trials.
12 If you declare a witness to be protected, does that mean I
13 mustn't say anything to anyone, but I have to grapple with his
14 imagination in the courtroom and then we have to compete to see whose
15 imagination is more vivid?
16 I was never in the places where the witness was. I've never seen
17 the witness before in my life. The witness confirmed that he had never
18 met me, and then what am I supposed to do? He's protected, and I mustn't
19 conduct any sort of investigation to unmask his false statement, to learn
20 about other circumstances impeaching the witness, and so on and so forth.
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: If you have concerns about the true identity of a
22 witness, you can raise that in court. There is no way in which you can
23 start this against a protected witness outside the courtroom. The court
24 is the relevant forum in which this issue is to be dealt with, not
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I fully agree with
2 what my fellow Judge has said, but maybe the problem is the following:
3 Your associates are continuing with their investigation. You
4 know, for the trial, you have to prepare for the cross-examination and
5 you also have to prepare for your own witnesses in the future. So I
6 guess that your associates on the field are working, and there's probably
7 some dozens of people working for you, because the lists show they're
8 quite numerous. They're working.
9 Okay. I assume, but I have no element to be sure of this, but I
10 assume that your associates, either when they come to see you or on the
11 phone, tell you and keep you abreast of the development of their work.
12 Maybe this is where there is the problem.
13 Let's imagine that at one point in time one of your associates
14 says, "Okay, Mr. X could be an interesting person. We've contacted him
15 to try and solve this or that problem." You have the list of protected
16 witnesses, and at this point of time, since you know that the witnesses
17 are protected, do you tell your associates, "Watch out, this is a
18 protected witness. You cannot contact him, because he has been granted
19 protective measures. Set him aside"? Or do you tell them, "Continue
20 with your work and contact this witness"? And then this witness could
21 very well tell the OTP, "Mr. Prosecutor, I will agree to be your witness,
22 I have been granted protective measures, and suddenly the accused's
23 associates have called me up, which means that they know that I've been
24 granted protective measures." Have you ever been in this situation, and
25 if so, what was the conduct that you adopted?
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, there were no such situations,
2 but last year, before the identity of all the protected witnesses was
3 disclosed to me, and you know very well that four or five witnesses have
4 not yet been disclosed, before that happened people turned up offering to
5 be witnesses for my Defence. I had no idea that somebody was planning,
6 with reference to a certain man whose name was constantly mentioned
7 yesterday, to call as a protected OTP witness.
8 At the point in time when he contacted my associates and brought
9 them the video of his interview as a suspect, and I published this in a
10 book of mine, he never told us this. He was scared, because he knows
11 that whoever ends up in The Hague Tribunal never gets out. So he brought
12 some document, tried to wriggle out of it, brought other people to
13 confirm his witness, brought them here, and this witness said so
14 yesterday. There are several instances of this kind, but the fact that
15 some people declared to be a protected witness, and these people have
16 never been notified that they would actually be protected OTP witnesses,
17 that's a problem.
18 There's a man whose name I mentioned more than once yesterday who
19 the OTP declared to be a protected witness, and in the statement I
20 received from the OTP, it says that he refuses to be a Prosecution
21 witness, that he would prefer to be a Defence witness. And this is
22 contained in the statement disclosed to me by the OTP. And in spite of
23 this, they declare him to be a Prosecution witness.
24 The Prosecution cannot have a monopoly on all the people they
25 ever interviewed. They interviewed some people as suspects, other people
1 simply took down information. But a person makes a statement, and as
2 soon as he does, he automatically becomes a Prosecution witness. How can
3 this be? That can't be so. The person, himself, has to decide whose
4 witness he wants to be, if he wants to be a witness, a Prosecution
5 witness or a Defence witness.
6 As soon as it was said that there would be no new indictments
7 raised, these people took courage. They were no longer afraid, and then
8 immediately they said they wanted to be Defence witnesses, not
9 Prosecution witnesses, because they're no longer afraid of being
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I think you're
12 perhaps making a mistake.
13 You are right, the OTP can no longer bring out new indictments.
14 You are 100 per cent right on that. On the other hand, and the Rules of
15 Procedure state this, the OTP, if they discover that a witness may have
16 taken part in a crime against humanity, a war crime, or a crime relating
17 to the Statute, can and should, indeed is duty-bound to send the
18 procedure before the local prosecutor, and he or she can start up
19 proceedings once again, inasmuch as a crime against humanity does not
20 benefit from a Statue of Limitations.
21 So when you assert, "Well, they have no fear of anything," I'm
22 not as fully convinced as you are, and the best evidence of this, and you
23 know this full well, there are indeed trials that are going on in
24 Bosnia-Herzegovina, in Croatia and in Serbia, against people who have
25 committed this type of infringement. Some are ongoing. There will
1 perhaps be others later.
2 So to say that they have nothing to fear any longer, well, I am
3 not as sure as you seem to be.
4 Secondly, there's another point, and my fellow Judge pointed this
5 out. Let's come back to this.
6 You said on several occasions that sometimes there are actors who
7 come along before this Court. You must have seen that I, and I think I'm
8 the only one to do this in this Court, systematically I always ask the
9 interested party, first of all, what his or her name is, surname, first
10 name, function, title. I ask him or her whether he or she has been heard
11 by other courts, and very soon to avoid the problem that we came up
12 against yesterday, I will be asking them whether they have been judged
13 and sentenced by other courts.
14 Why do I do all this? Well, I do this, indeed, to avoid having
15 before me a witness who does not have the identity that he or she is
16 assumed to have. That's why I ask this type of question, and I think I'm
17 one of the few ones who do this in this Court. And the history of
18 judicial proceedings in some countries have, indeed, shown that some
19 people have been sentenced under false identities or witness under false
20 identities, and that's why I ask all these questions first.
21 But on the other hand, if you have information about a witness,
22 please do share -- or doubts, rather, about a witness, please do share
23 these with us, and I will make sure that the witness shows us his or her
24 passport. If you have any doubt whatsoever, please share these doubts
25 with us so that we don't have to imagine that we are dealing with actors.
1 Theoretically, it is possible, but if you exercise your control and if
2 the panel also does its work, this will not arise.
3 Mr. Seselj, you can go ahead.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, you have broached
5 two problems here. The first is this:
6 It is true that the people that were interviewed in the capacity
7 of suspects and who really did commit certain crimes cannot be certain
8 that once the mandate for the raising of new indictments is closed for
9 the Prosecution, that they won't be indicted anymore, because pursuant to
10 International Criminal Law for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity,
11 each Court is competent in the world and every country can initiate these
12 proceedings if they seize a suspect or an accused. But if we're talking
13 about people who have never perpetrated a crime, like Ljubisa Petkovic,
14 for example, I can say, for example, Ljubisa Petkovic is this kind of man
15 or that kind of man, but I can put my hand in the fire and say that he
16 has never committed a crime of any sort, whereas the Prosecution puts the
17 fear of God into him and he lives in fear until the Statue of Limitations
18 expires for the raising of indictments. So that's the status of these
19 people, and the vast sentences looming ahead of them, and then something
20 clicks in their heads.
21 Mr. President, I'm convinced that all of the charges in my
22 indictment and everything stated in my indictment, and what the
23 Prosecution has in its possession with respect to this indictment, no
24 court in France, Italy, or Denmark would not hold me accountable and take
25 me to task, initiate proceedings against me. It would be ludicrous for
1 people like that to be brought before the tribunals, but you can do all
2 this at the Hague Tribunal, and that is normal.
3 Secondly, you say here that if I express doubts. Now, I'm
4 surprised why you did not express doubts about the identity of those two
5 Muslims who were victims and witnesses last week. If you look at the
6 first statements they gave to the Muslim authorities, for example,
7 neither of these witnesses remembered having given those statements.
8 They had absolutely no idea about them. So doesn't that raise your
9 doubts into their very identity? Whereas they remember all the details
10 in their story related to the war, but when they came to the statements,
11 where they were shown their statements, they had absolutely no idea about
13 Now, they were asked to provide their passports. I think you've
14 heard of the Zemun clan in Belgrade, the mafia clan that was held
15 responsible for the killing of Djindjic. Djindjic was too a member of
16 the mafia, but that's not important now. Some of them had Croatian
17 passports, for example, not forged passports. They had officially-issued
18 Croatian passports in false names, and that was established during the
19 legal proceedings in Belgrade. Those passports were shown, they came to
20 light. And now you think that something is proved on the basis of the
22 Well, the authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina or anywhere else
23 can issue passports with any name you like. That's no proof or evidence
24 at all.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, let's end this.
1 So you say -- you tell us today that there were two witnesses
2 that came about whom you had doubts as to their identity. We take note
3 of what you have said, and the panel will assess all this.
4 At this stage, of course, we cannot draw any definite conclusions
5 at all. Today, we are going to be looking at a series of videotapes.
6 The OTP gave you the timetable for the videos that are distributed, like
7 last time, on the basis of subject matter.
8 Mr. Seselj, we would be very grateful if you would keep your
9 comments to the minimum and either say, "I don't dispute this," or else
10 you say, "I dispute this for such-and-such a reason," and to summarise
11 those as far as possible. So don't start some major pleadings about a
12 given videotape. You will have further opportunity to come back to them.
13 So try and be efficient.
14 Last time, things went quite smoothly, and today the same should
15 be the case.
16 Mr. Mundis, perhaps we can begin. Please proceed as you did last
17 time. Tell us where the video comes from, its subject matter, and then
18 we look at it.
20 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Good afternoon, Your Honours, Dr. Seselj and everyone in and
22 around the courtroom.
23 The first collection of videotapes has been put under the theme
24 of "Greater Serbia." This is 65 ter number 6002A, clip A. I note the
25 time is indicated on the list that was distributed. That's actually the
1 length of the entire tape. What we'll be showing is a clip that runs one
2 minute and 10 seconds' long. This tape was received on or about 18
3 August 1999. It is from an unknown source. It is amateur footage of a
4 speech made by Dr. Seselj in Dusseldorf, Germany. This is 65 ter 6002A,
5 clip A, and the date of the video is approximately 8 August 1989.
6 [Videotape played]
7 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "VS: I considered that the
8 boundaries of the Serbian state could -- within Yugoslavia, or outside of
9 Yugoslavia, if the Croats and Slovenians decide that the Yugoslav should
10 not cease to exist can only be the borders which are internationally
11 recognised, and the only internationally-recognised borders of Serbian
12 statehood are the ones set out by the London agreement of 1915 in which
13 the Western Allies guaranteed to the Serbian people a territorial
14 expansion, a unification of all Serbian lands and all Serbian population,
15 taking into account the enormous Serbian contribution to the overall
16 allied effort in World War I. And this means ...
17 And this means that the borders of the Serbian federal unit or
18 the Serbian state must encompass not only the territories of the present
19 so-called Narrower Serbia, but also Vojvodina, Kosovo, Metohija,
20 Macedonia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dubrovnik, Dalmatia, Lika,
21 Banija, Kordun, Eastern Slavonia and Baranja."
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no comments to make, but
24 this is footage from 1989, which is not a relevant year as far as the
25 indictment is concerned. And the footage is fairly bad, it's a bad copy,
1 but I'm grateful to the Prosecution for having found it, because I don't
2 have that footage in my possession, I don't have it. So I would like to
3 be disclosed that footage in its entirety, if at all possible. Thank
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can we have a number for this,
7 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit P325, Your Honours.
8 MR. MUNDIS: We will certainly ensure that the accused gets a
9 copy of that tape in its entirety.
10 The next videotape to be shown bears 65 ter number 60004A. This
11 is clip A. This tape runs approximately two and a half minutes' long.
12 It was taken on or about 4 September 1989. It is a speech given by the
13 accused in Hamilton, Canada, at the Serbian Orthodox Church of
14 St. Nicholas. It is also amateur footage. It was received from the Open
15 Society Archives, Central European University in Budapest, seized or
16 received on 14 February 2003. Again, this is 65 ter number 6004A.
17 [Videotape played]
18 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "You mentioned the London agreement
19 a moment ago. I have already somewhat forgotten history, it has been a
20 long time since I studied it, but as you said, the border would be 0
21 Serbia. If Serbia would be a state, it would include Dalmatia, Lika,
22 Kordun, Banija, Eastern Slavonia and Baranja. My question, considering
23 present situation in Europe, how politically realistic would this be?
24 Number 1, if Serbia were to be a separate state, and even if it were to
25 be a part of the Yugoslav Federation, how realistic would it be for the
1 Serbs to be able to achieve this? My second question is this: Since I
2 went to school in Yugoslavia, I was in Split, later I went to Belgrade,
3 one of the greatest dangers for the Serbian people in Croatia is quiet
4 assimilation, because we're simply in a minority over there, our script
5 has been neglected, and our religion was suppressed. The situation is
6 probably different now, and I believe this is one of the biggest problems
7 and an issue which should be given due attention, because until we become
8 part of a larger Serbian community, we are more or less left in the
9 lurch. Thank you.
10 "Very well. As far as your second question is concerned, you
11 gave the answer yourself right away, and basically I agree with you. And
12 as far as the first question is concerned, how realistic it is to realise
13 the Serbian borders as guaranteed by the London Agreement, I think that
14 the present international political situation in Europe is perfectly
15 suited for us, because we are not threatened by the possibility of a
16 foreign military intervention either from the East or West. The Soviet
17 Union and her allies are preoccupied with their internal problems, and I
18 suppose they would never dream of intervening militarily here in
19 Yugoslavia, regardless of what happens here. The Soviet Union was forced
20 to withdraw from Afghanistan.
21 "I also think that this is not the moment when there is a threat
22 of armed intervention from the Western powers, so that fortunately all of
23 us living in Yugoslavia are left to our own devices. So we will see what
24 our heroes' fortune brings, and God hold us in this test."
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have two comments to make. The
1 first is this:
2 You see what technology can do? This quite obviously is not my
3 voice. It's like one of the voices of your protected witnesses here,
4 which is distorted to avoid being recognised. Now, how this came about
5 in this particular footage, I don't know, but can you imagine if you gave
6 this tape to a witness to listen to and ask him whether he recognises it
7 as being me speaking or not?
8 Now, the Prosecution intends to play some intercepted telephone
9 conversations to see if they can be identified, and I say that is
10 impossible. Telephone conversations can only be identified by
11 professionals or with the people actually speaking.
12 Secondly, this could not have been in Hamilton, Canada. That's
13 absolutely impossible, because in September 1989 I was not in Canada. I
14 was in Canada that same year, but in the month of May, whereas in
15 September 1989 I was somewhere in Western Europe. Where, I can't say
16 exactly, because I made a tour of Great Britain, France, Germany,
17 Switzerland -- well, those four countries.
18 Now, where this was, I really can't remember now. Quite
19 obviously, it's me on the tape. I can see the date. I don't doubt the
20 date, either. But it cannot be Canada. So I don't know how you can
21 identify this without the Prosecution finding the exact facts as to where
22 this was and when.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, someone is asking
24 you two questions. The first is directly related to the London
25 Agreement, and the second is a question about Serbs in Croatia whose
1 religion is suppressed, allegedly, and the alphabet also neglected.
2 Someone answers, and I thought it was you. And you're saying that it
3 wasn't you, that it's not your voice. Someone answers, saying -- well,
4 the second question, the answer is obvious, and the person who's
5 answering immediately goes on to the first question, saying, there's no
6 risk, either from the East or the West. The Russians cannot intervene,
7 and their allies can't either, for such-and-such a reason, and the
8 Western forces can't either. So there's nothing very special in that
10 But where I'm amazed is where you say, "It's not my voice,"
11 you're disputing that the answer given was your voice. Is that right?
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, in court you listen to my
13 voice, you can hear my voice in court, in the courtroom, and just listen
14 to the voice on the tape. I didn't say it wasn't my voice. I said that
15 through certain technological procedures, my voice was modified or
16 distorted. It is me on the tape, and the contents of the speech are
17 mine, but why has my voice been distorted?
18 I rather like the voice I heard. It's even deeper than my deep
19 and strong voice, which I'm very proud of, and this is an even deeper
20 voice. Can you imagine if I spoke like that every day in court here,
21 with that deep, deep voice?
22 So I'm asking the question of why my voice has been distorted
23 there. Why has it been modified? I'm not challenging the fact that it
24 is, in fact, my voice.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, according to
1 Mr. Seselj, his voice has been distorted, and he is formally disputing
2 that this could have happened on the 4th of September in Canada,
3 Hamilton, because he wasn't there at the time.
4 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, all I can indicate is the information
5 that is contained on what is called our MIF or ERN registration system as
6 to where we got the tape and the description that the investigator
7 entered into the system upon obtaining the tape. So I certainly can't
8 stand here and give you evidence as to whether or not this was actually
9 in Canada. All I can do is convey information that is contained within
10 the Prosecution's Evidence Unit concerning this material.
11 With respect to the concern over the possibility of the tape or
12 the voice being distorted, again, I don't know. I was, to be honest,
13 listening to the English channel and not the original. Perhaps we can
14 play it again.
15 I will say, as I said last week or the week before, the quality
16 of many videotapes deteriorates over time. Perhaps the tape, when it was
17 digitised, was run at a slightly slower speed than normal, which of
18 course causes human voices to sound deeper than they actually are, or it
19 could be a question of the tape, actually at the time it was digitised,
20 the quality of the tape had degraded such that the voice sounds to be or
21 seems to be distorted. I don't know the answer to that question. I
22 assure you that no one within the Office of the Prosecutor has distorted
23 tapes in order to alter the sounds of the accused's voice. I can
24 certainly give you that assurance.
25 So the tape is what it is. It speaks for itself. I'm happy to
1 play that clip again if the Chamber would like to hear it again to listen
2 to the original.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I don't think it's necessary.
4 Shall we give it an MFI number?
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] As it stands, we won't accept
7 it because of the objections, but we will be giving it an MFI number.
8 Madam Registrar.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit P326 marked
10 for identification.
11 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, I'll actually at this point seek some
12 guidance from the Trial Chamber.
13 The next two clips on the list are obtained from the same
14 original tape or the same source, they are simply different clips. We
15 can either play them and again most likely have the same objections, or
16 we can simply skip them.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The best is, indeed, to listen
18 to them, and we'll give them MFI numbers.
19 MR. MUNDIS: The next clip is 65 ter number 6004B. Again, I
20 won't repeat where we got it from. It's part of -- it's simply another
21 clip from the same longer-running Q-and-A session. So this is 65 ter
22 number 6004B.
23 [Videotape played]
24 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "As far as the borders of the
25 Serbian Federal Unit are concerned they are determined as borders of the
1 Serbian State by the London pact. Borders guaranteed by the Western
2 Allies to Serbia for its enormous contribution to the victory over the
3 axis forces, that is, the forces of the central pact. And these borders
4 of the Serbian state, according to the London Agreement, encompass not
5 only the present-day -- not only present-day Serbia proper, as a somewhat
6 extended Belgrade province, but also Vojvodina, Kosovo, Metohija,
7 Macedonia, Montenegro, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Dubrovnik, Dalmatia, Lika,
8 Banija, Kordun, Eastern Slavonia and Baranja."
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the possibility exists that I
10 might actually have spoken that way. Perhaps my voice was like that at
11 one time, and perhaps in the intervening six years while I've been in
12 detention in The Hague, they gave me some wrong medicaments or hormones
13 which led to a voice change. So that might be grounds for a new
15 Now, this reminds me of the voice of the late Russian
16 General Alexander Lebed who was a presidential candidate at the elections
17 in Russia in 1996, and after that he was killed, I think, in a traffic
19 Well, I've just heard General Lebed with a deep voice like that,
20 or perhaps I'd operated -- had an operation on my throat. Usually, when
21 you have cancer surgery and take your vocal chords -- your vocal chords
22 are taken out, you have a special apparatus to replace them, and that's
23 how your voice sounds. I don't know what else it could be, what other
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We shall now give an MFI number
1 to this document.
2 Madam Registrar.
3 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit P327 marked for
4 identification, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just an observation so that
6 this appears on the transcript.
7 The "P325," which is the first video we saw, is dated the 8th of
8 August, 1989, and relates to the borders arising from the London
9 Agreement. That video, which apparently was shot on the 4th of
10 September, 1989, because we see the date on the tape, in fact restates
11 what was said in the London Agreement and adds other elements. That's
12 all we can say about this. We don't know where it took place.
13 Mr. Mundis.
14 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 The next clip, Your Honours, is --
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If I may raise another objection.
17 This previous clip again I'm not sure is dated properly, because
18 I remember this tour of mine. It began in the beginning of August 1989
19 in England. However, I'm not sure that by the 8th of August, I had
20 already arrived in Dusseld orf. It should have been a bit later, because
21 I stayed in England for a few days, and then from England I went to
22 Munich, and then I toured all of Germany and visited Dusseldorf towards
23 the end of the tour, and then I went back to England via France. The
24 tour began and ended in England. So the date is suspect, the 8th of
25 August. It may have been in August, but a little later.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. That has been taken
2 on record.
3 The next clip, Mr. Mundis.
4 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Your Honours, the next clip is 65 ter number 6004C. This again,
6 as with the two preceding clips, comes from the same tape. This is
7 65 ter 6004C.
8 [Videotape played]
9 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, my case manager informs me that we
10 need to restart that so that the subtitles work properly at the bottom of
11 the tape. So if we could please play that one again from the beginning.
12 Mr. President, we seem to be having some problems getting these
13 subtitles to work properly. I know it's a bit early. Perhaps we should
14 take our first break at this point in time in order to see if we can get
15 some technical assistance to make the presentation go a little more
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
18 We'll have a break, and we'll have the gods of technology solve
19 everything at the moment during the break, and we'll meet again in 20
20 minutes, then.
21 --- Recess taken at 3.19 p.m.
22 --- On resuming at 3.46 p.m.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The hearing may resume.
24 I believe the technical problem has been overcome. I hope so.
25 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 I believe the gods of technology have smiled upon us today.
2 The next clip is 65 ter number 6004C.
3 [Videotape played]
4 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "I gave an extensive lecture on
5 this topic, you know, because the majority of people here today have
6 already heard this previous lecture. I was mainly not adding things, but
7 I can give you a short answer. I believe what is necessary is a new
8 colonization of Kosovo and Metohija which would involve the transfer of
9 the Serbian and Yugoslav capital to Kosovo Metohija, most likely
10 Pristina, which would also cause hundreds of thousands of state
11 employees, civil servants, and members of their families to move, all
12 state institutions and establishments, then the transfer of all the
13 military and police academies and military institutions, which would
14 cause the move of several thousands of officers, non-commissioned
15 officers and policemen, and their families to Kosovo and Metohija.
16 "I also supported the expulsion from Yugoslavia of all 360.000
17 Albanians immigrants who came to Kosovo and Metohija after April 6, 1941,
18 also for the nationalisation of an agricultural belt running along the
19 Albanian border, let's say some 50, maybe even 100 kilometres long,
20 considering that state interests of Serbia and Yugoslavia require this
21 because the Albanian national minority has, in most cases, proved itself
22 unable to come to terms with the Serbian and Yugoslav sovereignty on this
23 vital territory of ours. I don't think that all Albanians are like that,
24 but the majority of them have separatist tendencies, but their numbers
25 are negligible. That is in a couple of -- they can go to Croatia and
1 Slovenia, since there they like them best, they can support them."
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, there's nothing here to
4 indicate where or when this speech was held, and the OTP is unable to
5 identify this. However, looking at this speech, and I can see how clever
6 it was, I regret that I didn't come to power in time, have political
7 power, and implement this plan. Then we would have avoided all wars.
8 I see that my main problem is that I didn't come to power in
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, are you in favour or
11 against the admission of this?
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm not opposed to admitting into
13 evidence any clip where I can be seen and where I am speaking. But I am
14 raising these objections for the benefit of the Chamber. The voice has
15 been modified in an inadmissible manner, and the OTP is unable to say
16 when or where this clip was taken.
17 You can see that the clips are not all from the same place.
18 They're all marked "Hamilton," but evidently it isn't Hamilton. Either
19 it is Hamilton but not this state or it's some other place. I visited
20 many places in Canada, Hamilton, Toronto, Montreal, and many small towns
21 in the interior where there are Serbian communities, but the OTP should
22 identify the places.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We'll give an MFI
25 number, then. If later on the OTP could find a date for this recording,
1 as well as a place, we would lift the MFI. But may we have an MFI number
2 for the moment, Ms. Registrar.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P328 marked
4 for identification.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] 327 or 328, because the last
6 one was 327. It must be 328, P328.
7 Would you please say it?
8 THE REGISTRAR: Certainly, Your Honours.
9 Exhibit P328 marked for identification.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
11 Mr. Mundis, you have the floor.
12 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 The next clip bears 65 ter number 6007. This is, we believe,
14 undated, but it is sometime in 1991. This is a documentary -- or from a
15 documentary called "Speerspitze, Serbians, produced by Austrian
16 Television, received from the open society archives on 4 June 2003. This
17 clip runs a little bit longer than two minutes.
18 Unlike the previous tape, this tape does not show Dr. Seselj
19 speaking, but does show an individual whom an earlier witness has
20 identified as one of Dr. Seselj's men.
21 This is 65 ter number 6007.
22 [Videotape played]
23 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Commander Ljuban used to be a
24 carrier and barkeeper. He's prepared for a long war.
25 "I expect the whole affair will be over in two years.
1 "Why so long?
2 "Nobody can create a neutral zone in an area here which has to be
3 cleansed, purged, and then separated in a short time."
4 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter notes that this is German and
5 she's unable to check whether the translation is correct.
6 [Voiceover] "We cannot ... [German spoken]
7 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note that the speaker is
8 speaking in German, and we therefore cannot translate from German,
9 although we have, of course, the text in English.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I would like to tell the French
11 booth that we have two French booths working simultaneously and
12 translating simultaneously. One of the French booths will translate, and
13 that will be enough.
14 Let's continue.
15 [Videotape played]
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think this is absolutely
18 inadmissible for several reasons.
19 First of all, we heard nothing of what these people were saying.
20 We heard only the interpreters interpreting a subtitled text.
21 Secondly, what witness in the courtroom here identified this
22 Ljuban Macakanja, as it says here. This is the first time I've heard
23 this name, and I have no idea who this man is.
24 Secondly, Sava Grujic is mentioned here as a Serb volunteer and
25 lawyer. I knew Sava Grujic, from Novi Sad. He was never a member of the
1 Serbian Radical Party, but he was the president of some sort of patriotic
2 organisation of which I don't recall the name right now. The name is
3 well known, but it has nothing to do with the Serbian Radical Party.
4 Nothing is known about this clip, where, when, how, or why it was taped.
5 None of these people has been identified as being a member of the Serbian
6 Radical Party, so this clip is absolutely irrelevant.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber will not
8 accept this document.
9 MR. MUNDIS: The next clip indicated on the list, Your Honours,
10 indicates it was previously admitted as P2, bearing 65 ter number 6015.
11 The indication that it was P2 is erroneous. What was previously shown
12 and admitted was clip E from the same tape. What we're now proposing to
13 play is clip A from this tape. So the marking on the list indicating
14 this has previously been admitted is not correct. We will now show
15 65 ter number 6015A, which is clip A from the same videotape. This clip
16 runs approximately 79 seconds. The originator was the AID, Sarajevo.
17 The submission date or the date of receipt in OTP was 27 August 1998.
18 This is 65 ter number 6015A.
19 [Videotape played]
20 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "According to you, there were two
21 or three key determinants of the party that you're at the head of.
22 Firstly, the Serbian Radical Party and its collective members, the
23 Serbian Chetnik Movement, the Serbian Cultural Club, the Serbian Women's
24 Volunteer Association, the Serbian Renaissance and the Sokol Society and
25 the Peasants Association are in favour of -- and we consider that even
1 when you include Vojvodina and Kosovo and Metohija, the state should
2 include Serbian-Macedonia, Serbian-Montenegro, Serbian-Bosnia,
3 Serbian-Herzegovina, Serbian-Dubrovnik, Serbian-Dalmatia, Serbian-Lika,
4 Serbian-Banija, Serbian-Kordun, Serbian-Slavonia and Serbian-Banija, and
5 then in the political sphere we're fighting for a democratic and free
6 society with a multi-party system, a modern legal system, and citizens'
7 freedom and rights. We have an economic programme based on
8 re-privatisation, paying off foreign debts, and giving full ownership of
9 a suitable number of our factories to foreign creditors. Then we have a
10 very complete social program, a national program, and particularly a
11 program for resolving or rather crushing Albanian separatist insurrection
12 in Kosovo and Metohija and other things."
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no objection, but I can give
14 you a piece of information, if you're interested.
15 Here, along with the Serbian Chetnik Movement, I'm also referring
16 to another section of the Serbian Radical Party, but this is May 1991,
17 when the party had just been registered, and we were too ambitious in our
18 approach to setting up these sections within the party. We then gave it
19 all up, except for the Serbian Chetnik Movement, which lasted until 1994.
20 All the other sections never actually began to function within the party.
21 This is simply to avoid confusion.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] A number, please.
23 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit P329, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Next.
25 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Before we go forward, because I don't want to forget, I want to
2 express our extreme gratitude to the interpreters who have to follow
3 these videotapes at a relatively fast pace, and we do appreciate their
5 The next clip or tape is --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] AID, Sarajevo, that's the
8 Secret Services of Bosnia-Herzegovina, is it not?
9 MR. MUNDIS: That was the former name, yes, the Agency for
10 Information and Documentation. That was the former name of the
11 intelligence services. It no longer goes by that name, but at the time
12 we received the material, yes, "AID" was the Bosnian intelligence
14 The next clip bears 65 ter number 6019 --
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection. As this service has
16 been mentioned, its name was "IAD." Everyone who's heard of it knows it
17 under that name. I mentioned it when the two Muslim witnesses were heard
18 here. This is a service that prepares witnesses and tutors them for
19 their testimony before this Tribunal. It coaches them.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So it's "IAD" and
21 not "AID"?
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's called "Aid." You know, in
23 the Serbian language, you can create a word out of an abbreviation. This
24 is A-I-D in English, in the English alphabet, but in the Serbian
25 language, when you have a three-letter abbreviation, you can pronounce it
1 as if it were a word.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
3 MR. MUNDIS: Certainly, in English, it is in fact known as A-I-D.
4 Of course, the Prosecution would not agree with the accused when he
5 indicates that they prepare or coach witnesses for their testimony. I
6 will put that on the record.
7 The next clip is 65 ter number 6019A. The date of this tape is 1
8 June 1991. This is clip A from this tape. It runs approximately two
9 minutes and six seconds. It's from TV Novi Sad, from a television
10 programme called "NS Plus." This is the second of three videotapes
11 connected to a collection of information and data from the Croatian
12 Ministry of the Interior from a video entitled "Vojislav Seselj, HRT
13 Archive Material." The collection of information and data was sent to
14 the Tribunal or to the OTP on 20 March 1996 by the War Crimes Commission,
15 Zagreb, pursuant to a request of the Office of the Prosecutor dated 19
16 February 1996. This is 65 ter number 6019A.
17 [Videotape played]
18 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Vez na Radovanvic, what sort of
19 future do you see for Yugoslavia and what is your position with regard to
20 the nations that constitute Serbia?
21 "Well, I don't think Yugoslavia has any future. I think there
22 are two possibilities with or in regard to this question. In any event,
23 Yugoslavia will cease to exist, I am profoundly convinced of this. The
24 first possibility is that Yugoslavia will split up into three states: A
25 greater Serbia, a small Slovenia and an even smaller Croatia. If the
1 Croats don't like this idea, the second possibility is for us Serbs to
2 come to an agreement with Italians and establish a Serbian-Italian border
3 on the Karlobag-Ogulin-Karlovac-and-Virovitica line and it is only fair
4 to return to the Italians what is theirs. We could also talk to the
5 Hungarians and the Austrians. Austria is interested in gaining access to
6 the sea through Austria and Germany, and it would probably be fair to
7 grant this to Austria. But we shall certainly talk to the Hungarians,
8 because they have certain historical rights. There was a time when the
9 Croats themselves handed over their state to the Hungarians, who built a
10 big port on the Adriatic coast in the last century called Rijeka, so
11 perhaps it would be fair to give Rijeka back to the Hungarians.
12 It all depends on how these neighbouring states of ours behave.
13 So far, they haven't behaved well at all. You see the Austrians support
14 our enemies, the Hungarians help Croatia to arm itself. Their
15 governments are short-sighted, not to use a worse expression. Whereas if
16 they want to obtain certain objective, the Serbs are their natural
17 allies. They, let's say the Hungarians, will never be able to get even a
18 part of Vojvodina. That's something they've got to understand. The only
19 territory they could get is there in the west, Rijeka, which is beyond
20 the Croatian Zagorije region, could provide them with access to the
21 Adriatic Sea. Only the Serbs could be allies in this case, which is why
22 they should think about their policies. If the Hungarians and the
23 Austrians don't change their attitude, we'll come to an agreement with
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that the OTP should have
2 disclosed this material to me under Rule 68(1) as exculpatory material,
3 because it shows what a just person I was in analysing international
4 relations. I wanted to resolve all these ancient historical injustices
5 towards Italy, Austria, and Hungary. So this, in fact, is exculpatory
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Let's have a
9 THE REGISTRAR: This will become Exhibit P330, Your Honours.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, as to the source from which
11 this material came, I have something to say.
12 A few years ago, I applied to the then Trial Chamber, and
13 I think, Mr. President, you were then a member of that Chamber, to issue
14 a subpoena obliging the government in Zagreb and the Muslim government in
15 Sarajevo, as well as the governments of some Western countries, to
16 disclose to me, for the needs of my defence, all the materials their
17 intelligence services have where my name or the name of the Serbian
18 Radical Party is mentioned. And the Trial Chamber rejected this motion.
19 I cannot ask anything from Croatia directly because Croatia is a
20 hostile state. I can neither ask it for anything, nor contact it, nor
21 can any of my legal associates contact it or travel there.
22 Secondly, the USA, France, and Great Britain are a special
23 problem, because they have many documents in their archives. I have sent
24 official requests. The Americans sent me a reply. They've already
25 calculated how much it would cost and what the methodology would be to
1 request this. I am unable to pay for this.
2 I delivered to a Trial Chamber the response of the US government.
3 The other governments, the governments of France and Great Britain,
4 turned a deaf ear to my application, which was sent to them through their
5 embassies in Belgrade. I think they have an abundance of documentation
6 and that much of it would be exculpatory.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Regarding this, you are right,
8 I was in Chamber number 2. I don't have a specific knowledge of this
9 submission, because you made thousands of them. You know, you'd have to
10 have the memory of an elephant to remember everything. But today there
11 is a new Trial Chamber, and my position is extremely clear.
12 You're entitled to ask a government to disclose to you documents
13 that they have. Then you request, and the government will answer. It
14 seems that the Americans have answered you, but they're asking you to
15 pay, which you want.
16 If you are running into difficulties, then you can make a
17 submission to the Chamber and file a motion, and the Chamber will have --
18 is able -- is entitled to subpoena the government, and the government
19 will see whether it wants to make sure that some documents remain
20 confidential, as under Article 70, and there's a procedure for that. So
21 if you did not get an answer, you could always file a motion to the Trial
22 Chamber, tell us what is happening, give us a copy of all the mail that
23 might have been exchanged, and then you make a new request in good order.
24 Then the Trial Chamber will seize the state involved, and this state,
25 because of cooperation requirements, must provide the documents. There's
1 no reason why a state could give the OTP documents and not provide the
2 accused with documents, since the document [as interpreted] should have
3 the same access to documents as the OTP, of course subject to the
4 reservation that states might want to restrict some documents because of
6 There are documents that could be declassified, on the other
7 hand. There are countries where commissions have been set up. For
8 example, in my country there are commissions that are there to rule as to
9 the declassification of documents. So there are a lot of opportunities
10 and possibilities that are open to you.
11 As far as I'm concerned, I will look into this request -- into
12 this motion that was denied in order to know why it was denied at the
13 time. Maybe the reasons why it was denied at the time no longer apply.
14 But remember, you have a possibility, through the Rules, to do something,
15 and the Trial Chamber will do its utmost, of course, to help you have
16 access to documents which you may require for your defence.
17 Let's now move to the next video clip.
18 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 The next videotape bears 65 ter number 6022A, 6022A. This clip
20 is dated 21 June 1991. It runs approximately two minutes. It is
21 material that was originally from Radio-Television Serbia. The
22 Prosecution received it on 1 May 1995. This is 65 ter number 6022A.
23 [Videotape played]
24 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "The leader of the Serbian Radical
25 Party, people's deputy Dr. Vojislav Seselj, says he supported the sending
1 of peace forces to Yugoslavia, but to the western borders of Serbia with
3 "What else was discussed with representatives of the fourth
5 "The president of the Serbian Radical Party, Dr. Vojislav Seselj,
6 welcomed the proclamation renewal of the Republic of Dubrovnik, the
7 establishment of its government, and its decision to remain within
8 Yugoslavia. At a press conference in Pristina, Seselj stated that the
9 Serbian Radical Party welcomed the decision of the presidency of
10 Yugoslavia to invite the blue helmets, but demanded that they be deployed
11 on the Karlobag-Ogulin-Karlovac-and-Virovitica line and by no means on
12 the borders of the Avnoj, Tito's Yugoslavia. On this occasion as well
13 Seselj called on all Serb patriots to go to the front, especially to
14 Western Slavonia.
15 However, he believes that volunteers from Kosovo and Metohija
16 should not be sent there. Serbs from Kosovo and Metohija must remain
17 here in strength and be well-organised, armed, and trained to nip in the
18 bud any possible uprising of Albanian separatists. The Serbian Radical
19 Party also warns all members of the Siptar national minority and the
20 members of the Croatian minority on the territory of Kosovo and Metohija
21 that there can be no life in the territory of Kosovo and Metohija for
22 those families whose members are serving in the Ustasha Armed Forces, the
23 Ministry of the Interior of Croatia, or the National Guard Corps of
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm grateful to the Prosecution for
2 having come by this footage. I didn't have it in my own archives, and I
3 would like to have it in its entirety, if possible.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
5 Mr. Prosecutor, please disclose the entire footage to Mr. Seselj.
6 And could the Registrar please give us a number.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit P331.
8 MR. MUNDIS: The next clip bears 65 ter number 6025C, 6025C.
9 This is from July 1991, from TV "Politika." This was provided to the
10 Office of the Prosecutor on 19 September 2003 by a protected witness in
11 this case. This is 65 ter number 6025C.
12 [Videotape played]
13 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "These are now unified volunteer
14 detachments that go under the patronage of the Association of Serbs from
15 Croatia and they now have no party-related markings. These volunteer
16 detachments have their own uniforms and symbols, of course no
17 five-pointed star at all, the symbols of the Serbian four S with a cross
18 on the cap, on the sleeve, and here on the tunic.
19 "And these units shall operate -- dress the same way. The
20 members of the Serbian Radical Party, the Chetnik Movement, Serb National
21 Renewal, Serbian Democratic Party and National Party and other volunteers
22 from other parties will be among them, we draw no distinction between
23 them, even the ones who are not party organised. So all those who are
24 ready to fight for these fundamental patriotic ideals of ours."
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Before I give the floor to
1 Mr. Seselj, it's unfortunate that the camera that was zooming in on the
2 insignia on the shirt worn by Mr. Seselj all of a sudden stopped. It
3 would have been interesting to actually see that insignia, because
4 according to what Mr. Seselj is saying, the volunteers of the Serbian
5 Radical Party have that insignia. That's what I understood.
6 So, Mr. Seselj.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, you didn't understand this in
8 the best possible way. I have the traditional Serbian coat of arms on my
9 chest. In this case, it was gold, a golden one. So not the kinds that
10 were sold on the streets as a souvenir, but a specially-manufactured one
11 for Chetnik Vojvoda.
12 Now, I indicate where the new symbol is worn, the symbol that the
13 Association of Serbs from Croatia decided to wear, the cross with the
14 C-scroll or S-scroll ornamentation, which is also the traditional Serbian
15 symbol. And when we're talking about a double-headed eagle, then he has
16 this same symbol on his breasts, and I am pointing to where it is worn on
17 the uniform, not the coat of arms that I had like the one that was agreed
19 Now, I have an objection here. I would like to have this
20 admitted into evidence, but I must give you my comments and objections.
21 This is a time which is not relevant for the indictment, because the
22 indictment goes after the 1st of August, 1991. That's what it's based
23 on. And according to their concept of the alleged joint criminal
24 enterprise, from the point in time that the Serbian Radical Party
25 cooperates with the JNA. Now, this is a time when the JNA was not
1 included in the conflict at all, so we have several phases, and I think
2 this is important for you to understand. We have the first stage, where
3 the Serbian Radical Party sends certain groups of volunteers to defend
4 Serb villages. That is from April 1991 onwards.
5 Now, in July, it becomes -- the Association of Serbs from Croatia
6 becomes involved with its headquarters in Cviceva [phoen] Street
7 Belgrade, and it tries to conjoin the efforts of all the political
8 parties in that direction, and wants these volunteers not to have any
9 party affiliation symbols, but to be a uniform and that the state of the
10 volunteers be uniformed. And that was in July, and you had the document
11 dating to the end of August or beginning of September, where Ljubisa
12 Petkovic ask that all volunteers be returned to Belgrade so as to have
13 re-organisation take place, and an agreement was reached with the JNA in
14 the background that in future all volunteers should be sent through the
16 And I think that was important for me to clarify, although it's
17 not the right comment to make, looking at the footage itself. But I do
18 agree that the footage can be entered into evidence.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So you are in agreement under
20 the proviso of the remarks you just made.
21 Let's give this document a number, please, Madam Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit P332.
23 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, the next clip bears 65 ter number
24 6025D. The date of this clip is 25 July 1991. This is clip E from this
25 tape. Again, this tape came to us from a protected witness. The
1 Prosecution received the tape on 19 September 2003.
2 [Videotape played]
3 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Everything that happened in that
4 republic, Seselj says, we blame Ante Markovic, because what happened in
5 Slovenia was another deception against the Serbian people with the aim to
6 besmirch the Serbian weapons to accuse the Serbian people. He condemns
7 the move to send 19-year-olds into military operations as being conducted
8 in Slovenia. That is why the Serbian Radical Party rues over the
9 innocent blood that is being shed. The Vojislav Seselj is asking himself
10 why the army intervened Slovenia and not in Croatia, which would be
11 logical as far as he's concerned, as in Croatia and Ustasha false
12 government was constituted where genocide has been started. And Ante
13 Markovic, he says, wanted to spare his republic.
14 "Seselj blames the Serbian leadership, too, because they accepted
15 the conditions and ultimatums. The Serbian Radical Party will never
16 accept the Stipe Mesic as president of the Yugoslav Presidency,
17 and believes neither will the Serbian people.
18 "Answering the many questions by journalists, Vojislav Seselj
19 said, among other things, that the Serbian Radical Party has no volunteer
20 units in Serbia proper but that they are going to continue to support the
21 Serbs in Krajina, Baranja, Slavonia, and Srem, not only financially. 'We
22 will send volunteers,' says Seselj, to those places where they are most
24 "Scheduled for the July the 17th is a large commemoration on the
25 occasion on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the death of
1 General Draza Mihajlovic in front of the Prince Mihailo monument in
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
4 THE INTERPRETER: We hear the journalist --
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] There was no interpretation in
6 English, so we'll start all over again. So I'll start over again, since
7 there was no English interpretation.
8 It is working now. Good.
9 So the Chamber observes that what is going on is a press
10 conference with a lot of journalists there drinking fruit juice and Coke,
11 but we don't actually hear Mr. Seselj speaking. The journalist is the
12 one who seems to be summarising what Mr. Seselj said during the same
13 press conference. That's what we can see.
14 Mr. Seselj.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have two objections.
16 First, it seems that the Prosecution cuts off this footage in a
17 crucial place, because I would have liked to see what the continuation of
18 the tape was, but they withheld that pleasure for me. And it's a
19 little -- it lacks seriousness to say that this is the 27th of July,
20 1991. This must have been far earlier than that, because you can see
21 here that the journalist is interpreting my words, that we were going to
22 organise a large commemorative meeting in Belgrade to mark the
23 anniversary of the execution of General Draza Mihajlovic, which was the
24 17th of June, so this must have been a few days before the 17th of July.
25 It could not have been on the 25th of July. I could not be saying this
1 then; that is to say, eight days after the commemorative meeting was
2 held, to announce that a commemorative meeting would be held.
3 And that's what I keep telling you here. The Prosecutor receives
4 a tape, receives a date, and takes it to be the right thing, whereas they
5 would have to check it out to see whether it was the truth, whether it
6 was broadcast on Television Serbia, to ask explanations, to determine the
7 exact date, so that we don't have this contradiction appearing in the
8 tape itself and the attending text.
9 So it's not the 25th of July, but several days before the 17th of
10 July, in fact. And I agree that it be admitted, regardless of the fact
11 that the journalist -- there's a voiceover by the journalist who is
12 interpreting it. I think it's fairly reliable.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Inasmuch as the
14 journalist's interpretation seems to you to be reliable, under the
15 proviso that the date is not right, you do not object, so we can go on
16 and give it a number.
17 Madam Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit P333.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
20 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, the next clip bears 65 ter number
21 6025E. Again, there's an error on the list. This should be "6025E."
22 This is clip D from the same tape obtained from the same witness on 19
23 September 2003. This clip, which runs a little bit less than two
24 minutes, was originally broadcast on Radio-Television Serbia, RTS.
25 Again, 65 ter number 6025E.
1 [Videotape played]
2 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Unless we're serious enough at the
3 level of historical requirements, we will waste a historic chance of the
4 Serbian people. Whether we are aware of the situation into which this
5 historic whirlwind has thrown us or not, that is a secondary issue. We
6 are here. We have to take a serious position in the matter. This time,
7 if we gamble away our chance, we will definitely lose. The boundaries
8 that the West will have established in five, ten days, or a month, they
9 will remain the final boundaries within which the Serbian people will
10 live. That is why we must not gamble with it. Karlobag-Ogulin-
11 Karlovac-and-Virovitica, that line must be our choice and that is the
12 border to which the army must withdraw all its troops. If they are not
13 in a position to withdraw them from Zagreb without combat, they should
14 engaging in combat and shelling Zagreb. The army has enough capacities
15 it has not used at all.
16 If the troops are in danger, it has the right to use napalm bombs
17 and everything else from its storage, and we must not be playing games in
18 that regard. It is more important to save a military unit than to worry
19 about some accidental victims will fall there. Well, whose fault is it?
20 They wanted the war, they have it. The army must withdraw from Slovenia
21 and from Croatia, from Rijeka. The Rijeka Corps must pull out from
22 Zagreb as well. Where -- everywhere where Croats live, the army has
23 business in territories that are not ours. Once the army has withdrawn
24 to the line which we consider our western border, it will become an
25 invincible army."
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have three objections or, rather,
4 First of all, why has the footage been made smaller and a
5 landscape shown? I think it's the landscape of Belgrade. That's
6 unnecessary. I think the full footage from the Assembly should be shown,
7 because the Assembly holds all its sessions with their transcripts. So
8 it shouldn't have been third-hand and handed down that way.
9 Secondly, you can see that I behave here just like American
10 General Wesley Clark, except he was an aggressor on foreign territory and
11 I'm defending my own territory, my own country.
12 And as to collateral damage, none of us took that into account
13 when we invoked the assistance of the Air Force, to the great sorrow of
14 The Hague Tribunal and everybody else, I had no power over the Air Force
15 otherwise, this war would have ended quite differently.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So do you accept that it be
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] [Previous translation continues]...
19 everything that testifies to my prominent historical role in the Balkan
20 crisis, I am in favour of being admitted into evidence and save for
21 future generations in every way possible.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam.
23 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] For the Chamber, too, not just
24 for the future generations.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You know that I'm more interested
1 in history than a court judgement or court proceedings or anything like
2 that. I have ceased to live a normal life. I'm living a great
3 historical life, and all that's left to me now is history.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, yes, Mr. Seselj, but
5 sometimes history is also made up out of judgements. That is why we need
6 to have evidence.
7 Well, so we shall have this video entered into the file, and the
8 Registrar will give it a number now.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit P334.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 Yes, Mr. Mundis.
12 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 The next clip bears 65 ter number 6041C. The date of this tape
14 is 23 November 1991. It is clip C. It runs approximately two and a half
15 minutes. It was originally broadcast on TV Benkovac it was received from
16 the Croatian government in 2001, 65 ter number 6041C.
17 [Videotape played]
18 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "A message to the Serbian people in
19 Benkovacka Krajina. I'm very pleased that the Serbs here are holding
20 together and are unified, that they are so decisive to endure in this
21 justified battle against this uncontrollably wild beast embodied in
22 Ustashas. I am happy that you represent dignity and honour of the
23 Serbian people here, at the outermost boundaries of the defence of
24 Serbdom. I'm happy that the Serbs here will not give up this fight, and
25 I am happy because the Serbian Zadar will once again be in Serbian hands.
1 Stay together and preserve unity. Do not allow anybody shake you, divide
2 you, or tear you apart. We shall help as much as needed and as much as
3 we can in cooperation with the army and our volunteers. Serbian Chetniks
4 and your territorial defence members, the whole of the Serbian people
5 will triumph because the Croats are no match for us. They only know how
6 to commit crimes. They've never learnt to win in a chivalrous fashion on
7 the battlefield.
8 "What can you say about the political turmoil in Krajina, and do
9 you have a message to the whole of the Serbian people in relation to that
10 political turmoil?
11 "This is not the time for political turmoil, conflicts and
12 divisions. We must endure in harmony and unity, and when we win we will
13 all get our place according to the results at the democratic elections.
14 If you lose, you lose, and there's nothing to be done about it, but
15 before the victory is achieved, nobody has the right to put their
16 personal interests before the interests of the Serbian people. I am
17 convinced that your most important political leaders, Dr. Milan Babic and
18 Milan Martic, will find a way to communicate, and that together they will
19 bring this struggle to an end, the struggle the two of them started. I
20 am also convinced that their accord and unity will serve as an example to
21 all other Serbs. All in all, there is no room for Ustashas among us or
22 with us. There is no room for Ustashas in neither in Serbia Zadar or in
23 Serbian Sibenik. Those are Serbian territories, Serbian people live
24 there, and I hope I will spend my summer vacation at the Serbian seaside
25 next year in Serbian Zadar."
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We've already seen excerpts from
2 one unified tape, and you will remember my conflict with Captain Dragan
3 at the frontline at Zadar, between Benkovac and Zadar, in fact. And now
4 the question arises of why the Prosecution is dividing this up. Why
5 didn't we have the entire tape shown, because all this was taken with one
6 camera, Serbian Television Benkovac camera, my arrival in Benkovac, my
7 journey to the frontline, the appearance of Captain Dragan, my conflict
8 with him, meetings with the combatants afterwards, and the statement for
9 Television Benkovac. So why has this been divided up into small
10 sections? It would have been much better if we could have seen the tape
11 in its entirety and then have it admitted into evidence in its entirety.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I derive from that that you're
13 not against this being tendered into evidence, but you make us notice
14 that it would have been better to have the recording in its entirety, in
15 particular the part where you are seen to challenge Captain Dragan.
16 So we've put this into the transcript, and now let's allocate a
17 number, Madam Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will become Exhibit P335.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have something else to add,
21 This tape is very important to me, in its entirety it's
22 important, because it shows where I was when Vukovar was liberated, it
23 shows my whereabouts. I was 300 or 400 kilometres away. I went to Banja
24 Luka by helicopter, then Western Slavonia. From Western Slavonia, I went
25 by car to Knin, and then from Knin by helicopter to Mostar, and then from
1 Mostar by helicopter to Podgorica, and then towards the end of November
2 from Podgorica I returned to Belgrade by plane. So this tape, in its
3 total, is important to me, and I would like you to give instructions to
4 the Prosecution to provide the tape in its entirety, because then you can
5 see the context. But when you put it out of context and just show
6 excerpts of one or two minutes, you can't see the context in which the
7 entire film was taped.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, the entire
9 recording, how long does it last?
10 MR. MUNDIS: One hour and nine minutes.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
12 MR. MUNDIS: I can assure the Trial Chamber that this tape, in
13 its entirety, if it hasn't already been disclosed to Dr. Seselj, will be
14 disclosed to him, and he, of course, will be at liberty to play the one
15 hour and ten-minute tape during the Defence case, if he so chooses.
16 The next clip bears 65 ter number 6008A, again from 1991. This
17 clip runs approximately one minute and seven seconds. It was originally
18 broadcast on RTS, Radio-Television Serbia. Again, the tape was received
19 from a witness on 20 December 2002.
20 [Videotape played]
21 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "All I --
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
23 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "In the fighting for Milovo Brdo
24 near Vukovar against Croatian separatist rebels, Serbian volunteers
25 suffered two men killed, 11 injured. Putting forward his party's stance
1 on the arrival of the blue helmets, Petkovic said that those forces must
2 be deployed west of the Karlobag-Ogulin-Karlovac-Virovitica border and
3 that there must not be any soldiers in those units who are from countries
4 which are hostile to us. The Serbian Radical Party has assessed that the
5 Yugoslav People's Army has consolidated its forces, but at the same time
6 it was requested that General Kadijevic and Admiral Brovet resign. In
7 reference to the government in Serbia, it was said that it should be
8 given support and assistance and that it may be changed only once the war
9 is over and the western Serbian is established. At the end of the
10 conference, journalists were appraised of the information accusing
11 General Ante Markovic. Because of the fact, as they state, he worked
12 against the country's interest, the Serbian Radical Party requests that
13 the state security of Serbia to ban the federal prime minister from
14 entering Serbia."
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Once again, an objection. We have
16 a very interesting tape, but at the most interesting point the Prosecutor
17 cuts it off. He keeps saying that the tape was received from witnesses.
18 No, it was not. From suspects, it was obtained from suspects, and he
19 should say that. They received the tape from a suspect, and that
20 particular suspect will never be a Prosecution witness, he will be a
21 Defence witness.
22 Otherwise, I have no objection to having this admitted into
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We shall give a
25 number to this document.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit P336.
2 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, the next tape bears 65 ter number
3 6047A, 6047A. The date of this tape is 30 January 1992. The clip runs
4 two minutes' long from Radio-TV Belgrade. The material originally came
5 from the SFRY Television. It was submitted to the Office of the
6 Prosecutor on 1 April 1996. This is 65 ter number 6047A.
7 [Videotape played]
8 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "'The Serbian Radical Party will at
9 no cost allow the independent state of Bosnia-Herzegovina in the present
10 borders,' said Vojislav Seselj at a press conference. According to him,
11 there are two options for this republic, to remain a federal unit within
12 the rump of Yugoslavia or to be divided among the ethnicities living in
13 it on the basis of the principle of majority domination in respective
14 territories. The Serbian Radical Party will not accept the results of
15 the referendum and the further insisting of Bosnia and Herzegovina
16 leadership on that could lead, as Seselj claims, to bloodshed even
17 greater than happened on battlefields of Croatia and Krajina.
18 "Seselj called upon the Serbs of Bosnia-Herzegovina to boycott
19 the referendum. He proposed the same to the Muslims in order to avoid,
20 as he said, the participation in adventurism and megalomania of the BiH
21 leadership. Seselj condemned the federal authorities following their
22 actions related to the citizens' foreign currency, savings accounts, and
23 passed on the requests of his party to the federal -- federation to
24 guarantee the citizen's savings accounts with all its assets.
25 "Seselj reproached the Serbian government for not allowing the
1 opening of the free zone in Serbia and regarding the decision to freeze
2 prices and salaries, saying it could be nothing good. Commenting on the
3 arrival of the blue helmets, as Seselj said, 'We do not categorically
4 oppose their deployment on Serbian territory. As a party, we generally
5 accepted the Vance plan because we consider it a far lesser evil than
6 intervention by the European community and that in any case Vance's plan
7 assures that Serbian Krajina no longer be a part of the Croatian state,
8 the independent state of Croatia, and that the independent state of
9 Croatia would never again be able to control Serbian Krajina.'
10 "With respect to the demonstrations by the volunteers in
11 Belgrade, Seselj was categoric, 'If they take part in the demonstration
12 the volunteers of the Serbian Radical Movement and Chetnik party will be
13 excluded from the party or movement.'"
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have a number of objections.
16 First of all, I think that this should have been under 68(1) ter
17 exculpatory material, that it should have been disclosed to me under that
19 Secondly, you can see a meeting of volunteers which was scheduled
20 is mentioned here that the witness spoke about, that testified about here
21 yesterday, and you can see how the party distanced itself from this and
22 said that anybody taking part would be excluded from the party.
23 And there was a small rally of just 15 or 20 people once it was
24 held, but I think that's important so that you can link it up to the
25 testimony of yesterday's witness.
1 Thirdly, the Prosecutor every time speaks about the source of the
2 tape, whereas this time he doesn't provide the source, because he was
3 ashamed to say that it was Natasha Kandic who provided this video
4 footage. I now understand why the Prosecutor is ashamed. I would be
5 ashamed, too, if I collaborated with Natasha Kandic in any shape or form.
6 So I agree that this footage be admitted into evidence.
7 I'd just like to draw your attention once again to this. You see
8 how naive we Serbs are when we believed in the United Nations, whereas
9 the United Nations tricked us.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We shall now give a
11 number, Madam Registrar, to this document.
12 THE REGISTRAR: This will become Exhibit P337, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minor observation,
14 Mr. Seselj.
15 You say that this document was provided by Natasha Kandic and
16 that the OTP didn't want to mention that. Let me just point out that in
17 the list, I saw another video that was handed over by Natasha Kandic, and
18 that was pointed out there. So why would the Prosecutor give the origin
19 of one video and not the other? I don't -- I wouldn't really understand
20 what the rationale would be, but perhaps Mr. Mundis can enlighten us
21 about why he didn't provide the origin of that video, which is actually a
22 press conference. There's nothing very special here.
23 Do you have an explanation, Mr. Mundis?
24 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, I'm simply trying to move as
25 expeditiously as possible. All of the information is provided on the
1 table or on the charts which have been provided to the Chamber and to
2 Dr. Seselj. If the Chamber would prefer me to read all this information
3 into the record for each and every one of these tapes, I'm happy to do
4 so, but that of course will mean that we will not finish this exercise
5 today. I'm simply trying to move as expeditiously as possible, in light
6 of the fact that all the information is available to the Judges and to
7 Dr. Seselj.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Next video.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I think that it is
10 thanks to my very brief and concise comments that the Prosecutor is
11 proceeding very well today with showing this footage. I did not hold him
12 up in any way.
13 Secondly, you said that we had Natasha Kandic as a source. We
14 haven't had her yet today. This is the first time that we had a tape
15 that she provided.
16 As to all the previous video excerpts, the Prosecutor told us the
17 source, but failed to do so for Natasha Kandic. I didn't say that the
18 Prosecutor wishes to hide this. He informed us in this piece of paper
19 that the source is Natasha Kandic. But this is a public session and he
20 is ashamed to say in public that received it from Natasha Kandic and that
21 he has intense cooperation with her. So that is the crux of the comment
22 I made.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We shall now go on to the next
24 video, the 6062A, if I'm not mistaken.
25 MR. MUNDIS: Absolutely correct, Mr. President, the next tape
1 bears 65 ter number 6062A. The date of this tape is 18 March 1995. It's
2 clip A from a tape originally broadcast on Srpska Radio Televizija, and
3 this was provided by the embassy of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina by
4 way of the liaison officer of Bosnia-Herzegovina to the Tribunal on 18
5 March, 1996 in response to a request for assistance from the Office of
6 the Prosecutor dated the 20 February, 1996. This is 65 ter number 6062A.
7 [Videotape played]
8 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "On the way to Knin and the most
9 western Serbian state, Seselj, president of the Serbian Radical Party,
10 made a call on Prijedor, where several thousand residents of Prijedor
11 greeted him this morning with large applause and acclamation on the
12 plateau in front of the Patria department store. Although somewhat
13 overwhelmed and surprised by such a warm welcome, the popular Vojvoda
14 would not let this take him aback.
15 "'Today we are only passing through heroic Serbian Prijedor on
16 our way to Serbian Krajina, which is currently the most endangered of
17 Serb lands. The future of Serbian Krajina is in the unification -- its
18 unification with Republika Srpska, in the establishment of a single
19 Serbian state, Western Serbia, Western Serbia with its capital in Banja
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This time, I have a very serious
23 objection to make; that this has been a montage, or the Prosecutor cut
24 this and then gave a segment where I strive for the unification of
25 Krajina with the Republika Srpska. This is the 18th of March, 1995.
1 That's the date of it, and I heard that an aggression was being prepared
2 on the Republic of Serbian Krajina, and I set off from Belgrade for
3 Serbian Krajina and held rallies throughout Serbian Krajina and the
4 unification of its western parts, explaining to the people that an
5 aggression was being prepared and that the Americans and other Western
6 states were behind that aggression.
7 So the Prosecutor cut that part out. Tendentiously I agree that
8 this should be admitted, but I demand that the entire tape be admitted
9 and shown. It wasn't a long speech, it wasn't a planned rally.
10 Suddenly, I was greeted by an overwhelming mass of people, and I made a
11 short speech of maybe 15 to 20 minutes.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, do we have the
13 duration of the entire footage?
14 MR. MUNDIS: Well, Mr. President, this again is a compilation
15 tape that was provided to the Office of the Prosecutor. The entire tape
16 runs four hours and five minutes.
17 I'm not sure, sitting here right now, how long Dr. Seselj's
18 speech in Prijedor on this occasion is on that tape, but I will say that
19 this is a clip from a tape that runs more than four hours' long.
20 And, again, let me indicate something that I said a couple of
21 weeks ago, when we were talking about videotapes.
22 You know, on two prior occasions the Office of the Prosecutor has
23 attempted to disclose a number of these tapes on the accused, and he's
24 refused to accept them. As I indicated, I am producing a list. I hope
25 to have it by early next week so that he can select exactly what tapes he
1 wants, and we will again attempt to disclose all of these tapes to him.
2 But I have noticed on several occasions he's indicated that he wants
3 these tapes. We have tried to give him these tapes in the past in
4 digitized electronic form, and he's refused to accept them.
5 So all I can say at this point, Your Honours, is of course
6 Dr. Seselj will be free to show whatever clips he wants during the course
7 of the Defence case. He can show entire clips. He can show as much or
8 as little of this material as he would like.
9 I'll simply leave it at that.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but I believe that last
11 time -- well, he said that he would accept them now. I think that's what
12 he said at the latest time, that he would accept them as long as they
13 were entire -- as long as there was a DVD format so that he could see
15 Regarding this video footage, this is very short. It was --
16 well, it's only a minute long. It's less than a minute long. But we
17 need a number for it.
18 Ms. Registrar, could we have a number?
19 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P338, Your Honours.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have another objection, Judges,
22 I rejected DVDs at a time when the OTP was attempting to disclose
23 to me transcripts of witness testimonies of Prosecution witnesses in
24 other cases, collections of documents and so on on DVDs, and then I
25 rejected everything that was on DVD.
1 Now that the Chamber has guaranteed that everything that was on
2 paper has to be disclosed to me on paper and translated into Serbian, I
3 agreed to receive anything that was originally on DVDs, in DVD form. So
4 the Prosecutor should hurry up and disclose all that to me.
5 And, secondly, I wish to point out that every compilation is a
6 manipulation and that the Chamber should reject any compilation
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All the more so that you should
9 have the entire footage, notably the tape that's four hours and five
10 minutes' long. Then, you know, once you've seen the entire tape, you can
11 come back to this issue, showing that what the Prosecution is presenting
12 must be scrutinised in light of other elements, which you will be
13 providing during the cross-examination of a Prosecution witness or when
14 you are showing your own witnesses, or leading your own witnesses, or
15 when you testify yourself. But for the moment, everything must be kept
16 as it is.
17 Now, let's move on to another topic, the JCE, joint criminal
18 enterprise. I believe that's what we have on the table.
19 Mr. Mundis.
20 MR. MUNDIS: That's correct, Mr. President.
21 The next tape, Your Honours, bears 65 ter number 6013B. This
22 tape is from 7 April 1991. It's clip 1 from a larger tape. This
23 material was received in the Office of the Prosecutor on 28 September
24 2006. This clip runs a little bit less than eight minutes. It includes
25 a variety of different types of material. This is 65 ter number 6013B.
1 [Videotape played]
2 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "In this sort of atmosphere,
3 Vojvoda Seselj started his speech.
4 "Voja, Voja, Serbia, Serbia, Serbia, Serbia, Serbia.
5 "The Serbian people live here. This is Serbian land, and it will
6 remain Serbian forever.
7 "After labelling the decision on the establishing of the Serbian
8 Autonomous District of Krajina, historical Seselj said: 'Serbian
9 brothers and sisters, you find yourselves on the front lines defending
10 the Serbian cause, Serbian state borders. You are in the most difficult
11 position, and you are the pride of the whole of Serbdom.
12 "He has promised them that they will not be left to themselves
13 and that all the Serbs in Croatia have only one party, the Serbian
14 Democratic Party.
15 "'You have a wise and brave leadership here, headed by the heroic
16 Dr. Milan Babic.'
17 "'Those who divide the Serbian people he labelled as traitors.
18 Only Ante Markovic's mercenaries and those of foreign intelligence
19 services believe today that there are more important problems than your
20 defence, your protection. They offer you up to Tudjman. They would sell
21 you. You will not be sold or betrayed.'
22 "Instead of calming them down, Seselj sent a message to the
23 gathered people at the end:
24 "'We are sending a message to the new Ustasha head of state and
25 the Ustasha regime in Croatia. Serbian heads have rolled struck down by
1 the Ustasha hand in the Serbian Krajina. A Serbian head has rolled in
2 Serbian Western Srem and Slavonia as well. We will revenge Serbian
3 blood. We will.'
4 "And when, after Seselj's speech, it seemed that calls to the
5 conquest of Plitvice would not find response, a part of the meetings
6 participants started moving towards the Yugoslav Peoples' Army who had
7 blocked the passage. Despite warnings from the JNA officers that they
8 would not let them pass and that they would use firearms, several
9 thousand participants of the rally passed alongside the tanks heading in
10 the direction of Plitvice."
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just one observation, after
12 having listened and watched this tape. It would have been interesting to
13 see the crowd moving towards the JNA, and what's going to happen
14 afterwards, and then suddenly it's cut. Just a small detail.
15 Mr. Seselj, it was raining that day and there's a lot of
16 umbrellas out there.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I think the date is
18 wrong here. First of all, it wasn't on the 7th of April, 1991. I'm sure
19 it was on some other day.
20 And, secondly, I think it's scandalous that the footage is cut
21 off here, because in the continuation you can see me going through seven
22 military barricades on the way to Plitvice. I break through some of them
23 with a large mass of people, in spite of well-armed soldiers pointing
24 machine-guns at us, machine-guns where you can see rounds of
25 bullets sticking out, sometimes bypassing them over the hills or over
1 meadows, and all this has been cut out by the Prosecutor. And this is
2 highly significant.
3 In April 1991, and I think it might have been on the 1st or 2nd
4 of May 1991, we were opposed to the JNA. We were in conflict with the
5 JNA. And I think it's very important to show that. You should not
6 permit this.
7 I think you should order the OTP to bring this entire footage
8 here, and then it can be entered into the record.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, when the recording
10 ends, we see the tags. Could we see some extra minutes just to see
11 what's going on?
12 MR. MUNDIS: I believe, Mr. President, the way this is set up
13 through Sanction, that we would actually have to make another clip of the
14 tape. I'm not sure how long it would take my case manager to do that.
15 It's not very long. Perhaps after the next break --
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, we'll have time to come
17 back to it, anyway, and Mr. Seselj can present this, as long, of course,
18 as he has the entire footage.
19 Personally, there is one thing I would like to note. At that
20 date, we don't know whether it's May or April, but obviously there seems
21 to be an opposition between the one making the speech and the crowd and
22 the army or law and order -- law enforcement forces that are there. We'd
23 have to see the entire footage, anyway.
24 Mr. Seselj, you're not against admitting this excerpt, are you?
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am only asking that the entire
1 clip be admitted.
2 Mr. President, the trigger for this was a conflict between the
3 local Serbs and the Croatian special police on the 31st of March, 1991,
4 after which there was a JNA intervention, and the JNA took the Croatian
5 side. The Serbs had to leave Plitvice. Then the Serbs organised a large
6 march towards Plitvice, in spite of the attempts by the JNA to prevent
7 it. The JNA was formerly ostensibly neutral, but it was actually acting
8 on the Croatian side. And I think it's very important to show this from
9 this clip.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. This is on the
11 transcript, and the Bench will take into account what you said.
12 Ms. Registrar, could we have a number for this clip.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit P339.
14 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, the next clip bears 65 ter number
15 580A. According to our information, this videotape was taken on the 15th
16 of October, 1991. It's about less than 30 seconds' long. This CD,
17 containing documentary film, originated from the BH government and was an
18 exhibit in the Milosevic case. This is 65 ter number 580A.
19 [Videotape played]
20 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Please, take this seriously. What
21 you are doing is not good. This is the road that you want Bosnia and
22 Herzegovina to take, the same highway of hell and suffering that Slovenia
23 and Croatia have gone through. Don't think you won't take Bosnia and
24 Herzegovina to hell and the Muslim people to possible extinction."
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's scandalous that only 23
1 seconds of this footage has been shown. It's evident that Dr. Radovan
2 Karadzic is warning the Muslim political leadership not to one-sidedly
3 declare the independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina. He's warning them that
4 this cannot be done without a war.
5 We have to see this through a more complete fragment. I'm not
6 asking for the entire speech now, but for a more extended clip.
7 Karadzic is acting with good intentions here, not with malicious
8 intentions. This is evidently -- this 1991, before there was any sort of
9 war in Bosnia, October 1991. There was no war between the Serbs and
10 Muslims in Bosnia at that time. This was before independence was
12 And I explained to you in my opening statement that no one could
13 declare the independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina without one of the
14 constituent nations. Any manipulation with footage is falsifying the
15 footage. If you cut off the footage in a most inconvenient place, you're
16 actually falsifying the event.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. What you have said
18 is on the transcript. You're telling us that when he's talking,
19 Dr. Karadzic is talking in a certain direction, and we shouldn't misread
20 what he is saying. According to you, if we looked at the entire footage,
21 we would have the real meaning.
22 In passing, I could say that this might be established when
23 Mr. Karadzic will be heard as a witness and when we hear him in this
24 Tribunal. It's not in despair. Maybe we'll have enough time to find
1 Now, this being said, these 30 seconds will be admitted, and we
2 need a number. Of course, this cassette must be seen again at one point
3 in time. I'm sure Mr. Seselj will be able to have this cassette shown,
4 maybe when he has Mr. Karadzic as a witness.
5 Mr. Seselj, you want to take the floor?
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm convinced that no one will ever
7 catch Dr. Radovan Karadzic. I'm absolutely sure of that. But I might
8 call him as a Defence witness in these proceedings. Before that, he
9 would have to have safe passage, a guarantee that he can come here
10 freely, testify, and then go back to where he came from. Under such
11 conditions, I would call him here as a Defence witness, both Dr. Radovan
12 Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, and Hadzic and Stojan Stupljin [phoen]. I
13 know where they are. I can reach them easily, but I don't want to until
14 you grant them safe passage. I would sacrifice my life for them never to
15 be brought here in handcuffs.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, I'm not going to ask him
17 where they are, because I'm not sure he would tell us.
18 Let's give a number, please.
19 Just a minute.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. The Trial Chamber
22 agrees with Mr. Seselj. We would need to have a more comprehensive view
23 of the footage to know what was said beforehand and after. Thirty
24 seconds is a bit short to assess anything. However, we will give it an
25 MFI number.
1 Ms. Registrar.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P340 marked
3 for identification.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Let's move on.
5 MR. MUNDIS: I'm not sure what time the Chamber was anticipating
6 the next recess. Perhaps --
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's have the break now, 20
9 --- Recess taken at 5.07 p.m.
10 --- On resuming at 5.25 p.m.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis.
12 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 Perhaps before we proceed to the next clip, I do have now, and I
14 would ask with the assistance of the usher, I have the 12 DVDs containing
15 all of the videos that are on the Prosecution 65 ter list, and I would
16 just at this point ask that these be provided, along with two copies of
17 the receipt, to the accused, Dr. Seselj, so we at least have eliminated
18 the disclosure of those videotapes, and we can clear that off the radar
19 screen for the foreseeable future.
20 If I'm not mistaken, Mr. President, we will adjourn this evening
21 at 1830. Is that correct? I do have a couple of other issues that I
22 would ask to address the Chamber on at the end of the videotapes, so I
23 would propose what we do is complete the current theme, if you will, and
24 then skip the rather large number of --
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Usher, could you please get
1 the receipt from the accused, to give it back.
2 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you very much.
3 Your Honours, I would propose that we complete the videos in the
4 current theme and then, in effect, skip the section on instigation, hate
5 speech and propaganda for a later day. We could then continue with the
6 two smaller themes that contain a smaller number of videotapes, because
7 as I indicated, I have a couple of other issues that need to be raised
8 before we adjourn for the week.
9 So what I would do is play these sections and then skip the theme
10 on instigation, hate speech and propaganda, save those tapes for another
11 day, and then skip to the remaining two or three themes that only have a
12 small number of videos, which should allow us to finish by 1830 today, if
13 that's okay with the Trial Chamber.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Perfect.
15 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you very much.
16 The next clip bears 65 ter number 1836B, 1836B. This is clip E
17 from a tape that was originally broadcast on Serbian Television. This
18 tape was received in 1998 from an unknown source. At the end of this
19 programme, the date 15 May 1993 appears. This is 65 ter number 1836B.
20 [Videotape played]
21 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Mr. Milosevic, in his last
22 conversation with journalists, one which was broadcast on television,
23 stated that no one can dispute the existence of Republika Srpska.
24 "Yes, but this is the first time he has said something like that.
25 He never made such statements before. And if you remember after the
1 Vance-Owen Plan, they stopped even using the term 'Republika Srpska' on
2 news broadcasts. Instead, they used the Serbian side in Bosnia, the
3 Muslim side, the Croatian side, and that went on for a few months. Now
4 they are come back to that because they have the pre-election propaganda
5 need to prove themselves as nationalists, as true Serbian patriots.
6 "Tell me, these people who were arrested in the last couple of
7 days for possession -- illegal possession, that is, of weapons and for
8 some other acts for which a reasonable doubt exists, there are grounds
9 for suspect, do they belong to your party?
10 "Some of them belong to the Serbian Radical Party, but most of
11 them are not our members. Milenko Petric, for example, is one of our
12 members, and he received an automatic gun with a receipt from the
13 government, from the police at the time when the Serbs living in border
14 region of Srem, Sandzak, and Kosovo Metohija were being armed. He got it
15 with a receipt, and now they arrested him because of it, and they
16 arrested some other people who got this with a receipt from the state at
17 the time of arming.
18 "Then they arrested Gradimir Milosevic in Sremska Mitrovica in
19 whose possession no weapons were found. And they also arrested some
20 other members of ours, and most of them are not our members but are put
21 into the same pot. And they are showing a lot of weapons, but I would
22 not be surprised to find out these are the same weapons they show when
23 they arrest Albanian terrorists, when they arrest Muslim terrorists from
24 Sandzak and so on. On one recording you could even see a stamp with a
25 Croatian coat of arms. This is the best evidence of what sort of framing
1 is going on. You can clearly see the 'sahovnica,' the Croatian
2 checkerboard coat of arms."
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This can in no way be dated the
5 15th of May, 1993. This must have been filmed sometime in October 1993,
6 when there was already a vehement conflict between the Serbian Radical
7 Party and Milosevic's regime. And the police started arresting members
8 of the Serbian Radical Party and other people, not only members, on whom
9 they found a certain weapon. And then Milosevic's party started a
10 campaign against the Serbian Radical Party. The most unscrupulous means
11 were used in that campaign. We were accused of being criminals. I was
12 said to be an alcoholic and so on. They did not choose their means.
13 Anyone who was arrested in October was soon released. Their
14 arrest was only for the purposes of the election campaign, because the
15 Serbian Radical Party set out to topple Milosevic's government.
16 Milosevic disbanded the National Assembly, and so elections were about to
17 be held. So this must have been in November or October of 1993. It
18 cannot be in May.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
20 Given these observations you made, you seem to say that this
21 video must be dated in October, not in May.
22 It needs a number.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And one more thing, Mr. President.
24 You know that the indictment is limited. The relevant time is
25 limited to the beginning of the conflict between the Serbian Radical
1 Party and myself, personally, with the regime of Slobodan Milosevic, and
2 that's September 1993. So the question of relevance arises, the issue of
3 temporal relevance. But that's not so much at issue. What matters is
4 the correct date be given to the footage.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Let's give it a
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P341.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, just to give you my
9 opinion on relevance. There is relevance because there is mention of
10 weapons that would have been given by the JNA with receipts. Having
11 heard this, I think I understand that when volunteers were given weapons,
12 they had to sign some kind of form, some kind of receipt. So this could
13 be very interesting, to have this evidence, even if it is outside the
14 period of reference.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to say this has never been
16 mentioned here before, but this is not just about volunteers, but also
17 the arming of the population in the border belts and in flash-points; for
18 example, in the west of Srem, in B acka, where the Croats infiltrated
19 sabotage groups, some of these groups were arrested. The local
20 population was issued with weapons and the receipts written for these
21 weapons, and it was for them to defend themselves.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you for this.
23 Mr. Mundis.
24 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 The next clip bears 65 ter number 6059A. This tape apparently is
1 from sometime in 1994. This clip runs a little bit less than one minute.
2 It was provided to the Office of the Prosecutor by a protected witness.
3 We received this tape on or about 1 May 1996. This is 65 ter number
5 [Videotape played]
6 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "You said on television yesterday
7 that in the past he was the one who actually gave weapons to your
8 volunteers and took an active part in this, and then he turned his back
9 on everything. What's that?
10 "Yes, that's a fact. Milosevic was pursuing a prominently
11 patriotic and nationalistic policy in 1991 and 1992, and we had maximal
12 cooperation at the time. We sent almost 30.000 volunteers to all the
13 battlefields where the Serbian people were fighting in this war, and
14 Slobodan Milosevic equipped us with weapons, ammunition, military
15 uniforms, he put a barracks in Bubanj Potok at our disposal, provided
16 transportation to battlefields and so on."
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Evidently nobody knows when this
19 interview was filmed and on what occasion. But at the beginning, we had
20 an insert from a courtroom. I think this is the trial in Sabac of
21 members of the Yellow Wasps. These two things are linked here in an
22 illogical manner. I explained this in public more than once. This
23 attack on Milosevic is, in fact, a personification of the regime. So
24 when I say "Milosevic," I'm referring to the whole regime. Milosevic was
25 the center we were striking at. Whatever the regime had done, we said
1 Milosevic had done it.
2 The figure of 30.000 volunteers is exaggerated. I was
3 exaggerating this for propaganda purposes. However, the expert who knows
4 nothing, says there were only about a thousand. The realistic figure
5 would be 10.000. For reasons of propaganda, we blew this figure up a
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Let's give this a
9 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit P342, Your Honours.
10 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, the next clip bears 65 ter number
11 2068A, 2068A. This clip apparently is from 13 August 1994. It runs two
12 minutes 45 seconds' long. It was received from AID Sarajevo on or about
13 20 May 1999. This is 65 ter number 2068A.
14 [Videotape played]
15 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "The president of Republika Srpska
16 and speaker of the Republican Serbian Assembly, Radovan Karadzic and
17 Momcilo Krajisnik, and Krajisnik met this evening in Republic Presidency
18 with the Serbian Radical Party delegation headed by Dr. Seselj. After
19 their talks and their address to the press, Seselj and Karadzic
20 emphasised the following:
21 "The top-level delegation of the Serbian Radical Party is
22 visiting Republika Srpska. We came here to express our solidarity
23 between the Serbian Radical Party and our brothers this side of the Drina
24 at this crucial moment in their fight for freedom. The Serbian Radical
25 Party strictly condemns the blockade imposed by the regime in Belgrade
1 against Republika Srpska, and we're going to do everything in our power
2 to lift this blockade as soon as possible. This blockade is by far more
3 severe and harsh than the one imposed on Serbia and Montenegro and
4 therefore it has to be lifted sooner, let alone its inhumanness, lack of
5 morals, let alone that nothing similar has ever been recorded in the
6 history of the Serbian people. The Serbian Radical Party has always been
7 supporting the fight of our brothers this side of the Drina River, Serbs
8 from Republika Srpska, and we feel that their fight will soon be
9 victorious and that the Serbian cause will triumph, regardless of all the
10 problems and difficulties and temptations the great powers put before us
11 and lately even the regime in Belgrade.
12 "The Serbian Radical Party has always supported the leadership of
13 Republika Srpska because we respect their patriotism and dedication in
14 the service of their people.
15 "It is our pleasure to have had a top-level delegation of the
16 Serbian Radical party visiting us. This is precious to us, especially in
17 view of the situation we are in at the moment. It is precious from the
18 viewpoint of preserving total unity of the Serbian people. It is
19 precious from the aspect of the support we have, which is more precious
20 at this moment than it would be in peace time or in any neutral
21 situation. We have always had good relations, and more importantly we
22 have never been in a position to fight for power. Even if that would be
23 the case, it seems to me that we would never sacrifice national interests
24 to a mere power struggle. I will repeat that every vote, those in Serbia
25 who understands us, is particularly precious to us, especially if it's a
1 parliamentary or influential party, and in that regard we're happy that
2 this visit came about, and some other parties have announced their visits
3 to show their solidarity.
4 "The radical Party of Serbia also express their support to the
5 people of Republika Srpska and their leadership."
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no objections to make. I'm
8 proud of this tape and grateful to the Prosecution for digging it up,
9 because I haven't got it in my possession.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Registrar, please.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be Exhibit P343.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The last video in the series.
13 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 This tape bears ERN -- excuse me, 65 ter number 6068A. The date
15 of this tape is 13 March 1995. It originally was broadcast on Srpska
16 Radio-Televizija. This clip runs a little bit less than 3 minutes'. It
17 was received by the Office of the Prosecutor on 20 October 1995 from the
18 liaison officer of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Mrs. Vidovic.
19 [Videotape played]
20 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "It is much harder for us to send
21 volunteers now than it was in 1991, 1992, or 1993. When we sent
22 volunteers at that time, we had good cooperation with Slobodan Milosevic.
23 He would give us uniforms, weapons, buses. He granted the entire
24 barracks at Bubanj Potok. He put it at the disposal of the Serbian
25 Radical Party and all the technical equipment that we needed, and this
1 functioned much better. Because of treason committed by Slobodan
2 Milosevic, the Serbian Radical Party now faces huge difficulties when
3 sending and equipping volunteers. Our volunteers now have to leave
4 wearing civilians clothes to areas where they're called by some commands
5 of the Serbian Krajina, mostly the western part of Serbian Krajina, where
6 the population is scarce and where our assistance is most needed. These
7 volunteers travel by buses through the corridor via Banja Luka and so on,
8 and the Serbs there know about this. We can't speak of any numbers, but
9 it's much harder for us to provide buses now, for example, and basic
10 equipment for the volunteers.
11 "The volunteers are given weapons in the places where they
12 arrive, and they are given uniforms, and footwear, and everything else
13 they need, and our situation is all the more complicated, and the process
14 of preparing volunteers takes more time. But in spite of this, we're
15 able to send as much volunteers as the Command of the Serbian Army
16 requests at any one time."
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the question of relevance
19 arises here. If the Prosecution wished to prove that I stated something
20 like this on the 13th of March, 1995, then the Prosecutor has proved
21 that, because I really did state that. But what is the purpose of it
22 all, where's the relevance? If the Prosecution wishes to show the
23 truthfulness of these words and that they were suited to the occasion,
24 they're not able to do so, because this is a political appearance where
25 the entire regime is personified in Belgrade and equated to Milosevic, in
1 his name. And the Prosecution has shown a lot of evidence and will have
2 many witnesses at its disposal, and everybody in the OTP knows how the
3 volunteers were armed, how they received their uniforms, who they
4 received them from. It's no secret. At this point in time, it was still
5 a secret, the barracks at Bubanj Potok, the way in which cooperation with
6 the JNA evolved and so on, and then personifying the attack on Milosevic
7 for blockading Republika Srpska, for instance, and for not allowing a
8 passage across the Drina River and because the blockade took on more
9 intensive forms, and so on and so forth.
10 We come to the question of what the Prosecution wishes to prove
11 here. If they wish to prove that I stated this, then it's done that. If
12 it wishes to prove the conflict with Milosevic, it has done that. Now,
13 if this is prove and evidence about the way in which the volunteers were
14 armed, equipped and prepared, then this is no proof whatsoever because it
15 is in collision with the other evidence and exhibits -- material evidence
16 that the Prosecution disposes of, the papers relating to arming,
17 equipping, and so on and so forth.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
19 So the Prosecutor will later on say to us what he is attempting
20 to prove in this way, and this will no doubt appear in his last brief or
21 during the questioning of future witnesses.
22 Let's give it a number.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P344.
24 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honours, at this point we would propose
25 skipping the next chapter entitled "Instigation, Hate Speech, and
1 Propaganda," moving approximately four or five pages ahead to the section
2 entitled "Recruitment and Location of Volunteers."
3 The next clip is 65 ter number 6015B. This is from May 1991. It
4 is a clip from a programme entitled "Without Incisions and Without
5 Anesthesia," from TV Novi Sad. The clip runs approximately one minute
6 and 35 seconds. This tape was received from AID Sarajevo on 27 August
7 1998. This is 65 ter number 6015B.
8 [Videotape played]
9 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "You said modestly within the
10 framework of our capabilities and limits. What is the Serbian Radical
11 Party and Chetnik Movement doing in terms of concrete action to help the
13 "Well, the Serbian Chetnik movement organises the sending of
14 volunteers, Serbian Chetniks, where the Serbs are in jeopardy. We've
15 already sent a lot of Serbian volunteers, Chetniks, to various parts of
16 Western Serbian lands in Slavonia, Baranja, Western Srem, and Dalmatia,
17 Lika, Banja, and Kordun."
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I don't know why this is so
20 brief, just a few seconds. I don't mind it being admitted into evidence,
21 but I think it should have been a more extensive excerpt. I would like
22 to draw your attention to the fact that it is outside the period relevant
23 to the indictment. It is May 1991. And here we see a persistent
24 tendency on the part of the OTP, on the part of the Prosecution, to
25 equate the state of the volunteers from April, May, and June 1991, and
1 then from July and August 1991, and then from September 1991 onwards when
2 the cooperation was established with the JNA. It was done in one way
3 when it was only the Serbian Radical Party that was engaged in this. It
4 was different when various parties pooled their efforts with the
5 Association of Serbs in Croatia, that was in the summer of 1991, and it
6 was done in a third way when cooperation with the JNA was established.
7 So I have the impression that this is intentionally misleading.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So that has been
9 taken note of. You have called the attention of the Chamber on several
10 occasions to the importance of the dates, and what we see, volunteers.
11 Let's give this document a number.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P345.
13 MR. MUNDIS: The next clip on the list, Your Honours, is 65 ter
14 number 6045A, 6045A, from 27 July 1991. This clip runs approximately 70
15 seconds, is from RTS, and was submitted to the Office of the Prosecutor
16 on 25 October 2002. This is 6045A.
17 [Videotape played]
18 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Dr. Vojislav Seselj, president of
19 the Serbian Radical Party, visited Borovo Selo today.
20 "The Serbian people located in the most dangerous areas have to
21 persevere. They must show patience and will because they bear the heavy
22 burden. Most things depend on their strength, courage, and
24 "Are the units of your party ready to help at this moment?
25 "We have no party units. What we do is to organise the
1 registration of volunteers in Serbia and send them where they're needed,
2 and they appear in villages where they're being asked to come by Serb
3 villagers, and they immediately join up with the local units under the
4 command of the village staffs. So we have no special units in the
5 region, nor is there any need for them. We'll all Serbs today,
6 regardless of our party affiliation. I don't recognize any party
7 divisions until the borders of Serbia are secured.
8 "Vojislav Seselj, president of the Serbian Radical Party, met
9 with Vladika, the orthodox bishop Lukijan from the area of Osijek-Polje,
10 who said that all Serbs must be unanimous and united, because that is in
11 their best interest."
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have no objections.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could we have a number, Madam
15 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit P346, Your Honours.
16 MR. MUNDIS: The next clip bears 65 ter number 6062B, 6062B. The
17 date of this tape is 20 March 1995. This clip comes from Serbian
18 Radio-TV. It runs approximately one and a half minutes 'long. This was
19 provided to the Office of the Prosecutor on 18 March 1996 by the liaison
20 officer of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Vasvija Vidovic,
21 pursuant to a request for assistance dated 20 February 1996. This is
23 [Videotape played]
24 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Vid Vukelic from Banja Luka, local
25 Commune of Laos, asks whether and how far are the radicals ready to help
1 their brothers on this side of the Drina River in the case of a major
2 enemy offensive.
3 "We are ready at any time we're needed and are able to send a
4 certain number of volunteers. Even now, we have several groups active in
5 the territory of Republika Srpska. At Majevica, Manda Maksimovic has
6 been there since the beginning of the war, Slavko Aleksic, also a
7 Vojvoda, at the Jewish cemetery at Sarajevo. One group is in
8 Herzegovina, Vojvoda Nedeljko was killed there recently. We also sent
9 groups of fighters according to need to Srebrenica, Olovo and Vogosca.
10 We have one group with Vojvoda Vesko in Cekrcici from the first day of
11 the war near Ilijas and so on. The moment they're needed, we will send
12 them again.
13 "This time, it will be much more difficult than before. Before,
14 we had the weapons and uniforms and buses of Slobodan Milosevic and his
15 regime and the barracks in Bubanj Potok. This time our people will come
16 to go in civilian clothes, but this time too we will send as many
17 volunteers as needed and wherever needed."
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My objection is this: The tape is
20 not an integral one. If we were played the whole tape, then you would
21 see the whole situation. I say where we sent volunteers and where we had
22 volunteers of the Serbian Radical Party, but I enumerated the places
23 where we had volunteers, not ones sent from Serbia, but the local ones,
24 Mita Macevic [phoen], Manda Majevica [phoen], for instance, Vasvija
25 Vidovic in Cerkrici near Ilijas, Slavko Aleksic at the Jewish cemetery in
1 Sarajevo and so on and so forth. So one should differentiate between the
2 two. I am saying where we sent them, to Srebrenica, but that was not in
3 1995. It was in 1992 and 1993 when the Muslims from Srebrenica broke
4 through into the surrounding Serbian villages and slaughtered the people,
5 burnt them and so on. In January 1993, that was. We sent two groups to
6 Skelani to liberate Serbian villages, and a group of Serb soldiers were
7 under siege in the village of Jezero, for example.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Let's give this
9 document a number.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P347.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I believe there's still one
12 more to go.
13 MR. MUNDIS: That's correct, Mr. President.
14 This tape is 65 ter number 1808A, 1808A, taken on 17 March 1993.
15 This clip runs about four minutes' long from ITN. It was seized on 17
16 February 2003 and provided to the Office of the Prosecutor by Andres J.
17 Redelmeier. This is 1808A.
18 [Videotape played]
19 "The people of Bijeljina gather in the town's main square to bask
20 in the first springs sunshine. Their enjoyment is marred by the noise of
22 "They're levelling the site where the town's main mosque used to
23 stand. It was still there last Friday night. Now there's nothing left.
24 "These pictures were taken from a moving car because we were
25 strictly forbidden from filming the demolished mosque site. We were not
1 even allowed to get close to where the town's four mosques stood. They
2 were also destroyed in the early hours of last Saturday.
3 "This is what the main square used to look like. The mosque a
4 prominent feature of the multi-ethnic town. That chapter of the" --
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We must stop there, Mr. President,
6 we must interrupt this, because I'm not receiving any interpretation
7 whatsoever. At the beginning, the interpreter just said, making a
8 voiceover, that they didn't have the transcript, so this cannot be shown
9 until the transcript is provided.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, let's start over again
11 and ask the interpreters to translate for Mr. Seselj.
12 [Videotape played]
13 "REPORTER: The people of Bijeljina gather in the town's main
14 square to bask in the first springs' sunshine. Their enjoyment is marred
15 by the noise of bulldozers.
16 "They're levelling the site where the town's main mosque used to
17 stand. It was still there last Friday night. Now there's nothing left.
18 "These pictures were taken from a moving car because we were
19 strictly forbidden from filming the demolished mosque site. We were not
20 even allowed to get close to where the town's four mosques stood. They
21 were also destroyed in the early hours of last Saturday.
22 "This is what the main square used to look like. The mosque a
23 prominent feature of the multi-ethnic town. That chapter of Bijeljina
24 history has been wiped out.
25 "Two hours before the mosques were blown up, full telephone lines
1 form Bijeljina were cut. Bulldozers had to finish the demolition job at
2 this mosque because it was only partially blown up to spare surrounding
3 buildings. It is allegedly the work of an extreme Serb nationalist
4 militia we encountered on the streets called 'The Panthers.' Their
5 commander, not seen here, is called Ljubisa Savic, but is known as Major
6 Mouser [phoen]. He wants all the Muslims out of Bijeljina by April 15th.
7 "The Serbian mayor of Bijeljina apparently knew beforehand and
8 opposed the plans to destroy the mosques. With the sound of bulldozers
9 behind him, he talks of his helplessness.
10 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "It is my ...
11 "REPORTER: My feelings about this are ones of sorrow and sadness
12 and I'm trying to come to terms with it because I think this act will do
13 nobody any good, least of all the Serbian people. We've always lived
14 with the Muslim population quite normally.
15 "The sound of gunfire is often heard on the streets of Bijeljina,
16 and people pretend not to notice. There's been no fighting in the town
17 since last May. The firing from the guns of the paramilitaries is purely
18 to create fear among Muslims. Of some 15.000 Muslims who originally
19 lived here, around 4.000 remain.
20 "And many of those are now leaving too. These Muslim families
21 are bound for Vienna. The armed militia men who put them on these
22 coaches out of sight of our cameras say these people are leaving
23 voluntarily and it's true that they want to go to flee. They're too
24 afraid to say they've been driven out by acts such as the destruction of
25 the mosques.
1 "This old man was one of the few Muslims willing to risk being
2 seen talking to us. 'This lady was not born in Serbia. She's not
3 Serbian, only Bosnian. A Bosnian Orthodox, but not Serb. I am Muslim.
4 But I'm not Arabian or Turkish. I'm a Bosnian Muslim. This man is a
5 Catholic, not from Rome or Germany but a Bosnian Catholic. And what now?
6 Somebody forced us to hate each other and is still forcing it.'
7 "We left the man outside the local Red Cross office where
8 families divided by war try to contact each other. This Serbian's
9 woman's older son is off fighting somewhere on the front line. She
10 thinks her husband is still at their home in Muslim held territory.
11 "'If I could only hear the voice of my child. I want to know if
12 they're alive or not. They had to surrender because they were the
13 minority. I know it's asking for so much to put us in touch for each
14 other, I would even pay for it, just to know that they're still alive.'
15 "Most local Serbs appeared shocked by what had happened to the
17 "'This is just propaganda to get us to fight each other.
18 Everybody is against it. The army officer said that asking each other
19 who is responsible, someone who really wants Serbs and Muslim people to
20 fight. I was in church today and the priest was crying, saying how sorry
21 he was, asking What's happening to us.'"
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that this videotape is
24 absolutely irrelevant, and I oppose to it being admitted into evidence
25 for the following reasons:
1 This happened in 1993. The mosque was destroyed in Bijeljina.
2 That is an indisputable fact, and that's one year after the liberation of
3 Bijeljina. On the tape, it is stated that the mosque was destroyed by a
4 paramilitary unit called "The Panthers."
5 Now, the Prosecution has a large number of documents and evidence
6 from which we're able to see that the Serbian Radical Party and the
7 Serbian Chetnik Movement, in Bijeljina, were constantly in a severe
8 conflict with this paramilitary formation called "Panther," and that they
9 publicly attacked it for the persecution of the Muslim population. The
10 Prosecution has that.
11 Now, the Command of that Panthers military unit was Ljubisa
12 Savic, nicknamed Mouser, and later on he was the vice-president of the
13 Democratic Party in Serbia, vice-president to Zoran Djindjic and the
14 president of that party in Republika Srpska when Djindjic decided that
15 the Democratic Party from Serbia should expand to include the territory
16 of Republika Srpska and to be in competition there to Karadzic's
17 Democratic Party, a rival to it.
18 The Prosecutor can show you those documents from which you can
19 see this constant clash between the Serb radicals and Mouser and his
20 paramilitary units. Now whether this is truthful or not, whether he
21 really did destroy the mosque, I can't say. I don't actually know who
22 destroyed it. But on this tape, it says that this was done by the
23 Panthers, the paramilitary formation, and it has absolutely nothing to do
24 with the Serbian Radical Party, no connection between the Serbian Radical
25 Party and the Panthers. There never, ever was.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me ask my fellow Judges
2 what their position is, please.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
5 After having deliberated, the Bench believes that it would be
6 appropriate to admit this video into the evidence, and we shall attribute
7 a number to it as a consequence.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P348.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
10 Mr. Mundis, you can keep on standby the other videos that you
11 will be able to show us when we will have an opportunity to do so. For
12 instance, if witnesses don't come along, we can use them to fill in the
13 extra time.
14 Let me give you the floor for the other issues you wanted to
16 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President, and we will also be
17 reviewing other video material, perhaps supplementing the list of
18 material that was left over from today, and of course we'll be providing
19 that list in both English and Serbian in due course.
20 I wanted to address two or perhaps three issues briefly. The
21 first had to do with the issue regarding the disclosure of transcripts of
22 the testimony of Witness VS-51.
23 Two days ago, the accused raised the issue concerning disclosure
24 of the transcripts of this witness, and based upon our information,
25 contrary to what he has stated, he has received full disclosure of the
1 transcripts of the testimony of this witness. I believe there is perhaps
2 some misunderstanding about what exactly is available and what was, in
3 fact, disclosed.
4 It would appear that the accused has alleged that upon review of
5 the transcript, it appeared to him that the witness had testified on 15
6 February 2006. I don't know what the basis for that belief is. Clearly,
7 based on the transcripts of the prior trial, the witness began his
8 testimony on 16 February 2006, as reflected of page 4477 of the English
9 transcripts. I do have a copy of that, if that would be of assistance to
11 The witness finished his testimony on the 22nd of February, 2006,
12 which is readily apparent from the fact that the transcript of the
13 hearing the following day, the 23rd of February, 2006, at page 4863,
14 clearly indicates that a new witness is taking the oath and beginning his
16 Secondly, Your Honours will recall --
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please, let's deal with matters one
18 at a time, Mr. President, with your permission.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, go ahead.
20 Mr. Seselj, what can you say about this?
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Looking at the transcript during
22 the weekend, I've read through everything that was supplied to me, the
23 transcript begins on the 17th of February, as far as I know from what I
24 received, and in the text, on page 1, somebody is saying to the witness,
25 perhaps the lawyer asking the question says, "Yesterday, you said
1 such-and-such," or the Prosecutor is continuing with the interview. I
2 can't remember. Perhaps Mr. Mundis has it in front of him.
3 But, anyway, on page 1 of what I received, it says that there was
4 something that happened the previous day, on the 16th, whereas I have the
5 transcript of the 17th. And on the last page, which is the 22nd of
6 February, the last page that I received, it says that there was a pause,
7 a break, and that things would continue at 1605 hours in the evening. So
8 the break was at a quarter to 6.00, and like now, five past 6.00, there
9 was a continuation, but I don't have the continuation. Perhaps they got
10 together at 6.15 and somebody said, "We're going to finish there and not
11 conduct the interview further," but maybe they did go on working, maybe
12 for five minutes or 55 minutes. That's the portion I'm lacking.
13 You see, I remember everything quite precisely, although it was
14 last weekend.
15 So if page 1 is the 17th of February, you can read what it says
16 there and you'll see that somebody is asking the witness what he said on
17 the previous day, which would be the 16th. You have that in front of
18 you. And if the last page is the 22nd of February, see when the break
19 was announced and when the continuation at 1605 hours took place.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis.
21 MR. MUNDIS: I will put here on the record the fact that the
22 witness testified on five days; 16 February 2006, 17 February 2006, 20
23 February 2006, 21 February 2006, and 22 February 2006. Those are the
24 days of his testimony.
25 The disclosure receipt number 202 indicates that we have
1 disclosed to the accused the transcripts both on the 13th of February,
2 2008 -- sorry, the 16th of February, 2006, and on the 4th of December,
3 2007. So these transcripts from these five days have been previously
4 disclosed on the 16th of February, 2006, with respect to certain days,
5 and again on the 4th of December, 2007.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, Mr. Seselj is
7 saying that he was looking at the transcript, the transcript of the 17th
8 of February. He noted that somebody said, "Yesterday, you ... " this or
9 that, so "yesterday" would mean the 16th of February. And Mr. Seselj is
10 saying there must be a transcript for February 16, and Mr. Seselj is
11 telling us that he only obtained the 17th of February and not the 16th of
12 February. I don't have the page of February 17th in front of me, but
13 that's what I understood.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I certainly did not
15 receive the transcript of the 16th of February, and Mr. Mundis can check
16 and see whether they have it translated in the OTP. So why haven't I
17 been provided with the 16th of February one? My transcript begins with
18 the 17th of February and ends with the 22nd, up until the break. Now, I
19 don't know what happened after the break at 1805 hours. That's where it
20 ends, as far as I'm concerned. That's all I have.
21 MR. MUNDIS: I will check again with respect to the transcript on
22 the 22nd of February, 2006. But according to our records, on the 13th of
23 February, 2008, receipt number 202, the transcripts of the witness on the
24 16th of February, 2006, were disclosed. So there is a transcript from 16
25 February 2006, and it was disclosed to the accused on the 13th of
1 February of this year under receipt number 202. And I will double-check
2 the transcripts from the 22nd of February, 2006, to determine if there
3 was, in fact, anything that happened after the break, the last break of
4 the day.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, Mr. Mundis is
6 telling us that the transcript for February 16th was disclosed to you,
7 and that corresponds to receipt 202.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, there's only one
9 receipt. The prison guards bring me what the OTP sends me. It may be
10 ten different documents, and I don't count the pages of each and every
11 document I receive. I sign for everything I receive from the OTP twice,
12 a receipt for the prison administration, the registry, and one for the
13 OTP. I receive this in good faith. I don't count the pages.
14 However, once I started working on this material, and that was
15 last weekend, I saw that the transcript of the 16th of February was
16 missing. Let's make an experiment. Let Mr. Mundis show you that there
17 is a transcript of the 16th of February in Serbian, and then he will be
18 more right than I am, but I don't have it in Serbian, the one of the
19 16th. And I stated on time that I didn't have it. I stated on Tuesday
20 last week that I didn't have it, and the witness was due to appear the
21 following week.
22 So I wasn't trying to throw a spanner in the works of the OTP. I
23 was simply stating that I did not have this.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, do you have the
25 transcript of February 16th in B/C/S? If you do, please give it.
1 MR. MUNDIS: Yes, we do have it. I'll print it right now. I
2 don't have it in hard copy, sitting here. We'll print it out right now,
3 and it will be provided immediately.
4 And perhaps while I'm on my feet with the next topic, my case
5 manager can also check the 22nd and see if there's anything after 1800 on
6 that day concerning the witness.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The 22nd of February, after 1805
8 onwards, that's what I'm missing.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If the Bench may break at
10 6.00 p.m. -- either if they were going to resume at 6.05 or if they made
11 a break at 6.00, there should be something -- there should be an end to
12 the transcript, unless they decided to make a break and not resume the
13 hearing. That might be.
14 So for February 22nd, the last page of the transcript, all pages
15 have a number, so the last page of the transcript must show some trace of
17 MR. MUNDIS: We're checking, and I have just now been handed the
18 signed receipt 202 that makes reference to disclosure of the transcripts
19 of 16 February 2006. I'm happy to provide this both to the Chamber or to
20 the accused, if he'd like to see it, but I do have a signed receipt dated
21 the 13th of February of this year, indicating that we disclosed the
22 transcripts from the 16th of February. But as I said, I've asked that
23 they be printed out again, and they're on their way down here as I speak.
24 And we're checking the 22nd.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
1 In this document, it states very clearly that there was February
2 16, then 17, 21, and 22nd. If he signs, maybe he didn't check
3 immediately that the 16th was actually included. And then later on, when
4 he looked at it, he noticed that he had the 17th, the 20th, the 21st, and
5 the 22nd, and that the 16th was missing. That might have happened.
6 There might have been an error in the transfer and disclosure, you
7 thought it was included in the series and it wasn't. That's a
9 MR. MUNDIS: At any rate, Mr. President, the transcript is being
10 printed and is, hopefully, going to appear like magic within the next few
12 Let me turn, then, to the issue of the 22nd of February, 2006.
13 As reflected on page 4844 of the Sljivancanin trial, at the top
14 of the page Judge Parker basically tells -- I don't want to name the name
15 of the witness, but Judge Parker says -- speaking to the witness:
16 "Would you please go with the Court Officer and we will hear what
17 counsel have to say. We will then have a break, and if you are wanted
18 again, you will be advised and will come in after the break. Thank you."
19 The witness withdrew from the courtroom. There were then some
20 submissions by counsel. A recess was then taken at 17 hours 47 minutes.
21 The hearing then, as reflected on the transcript on page 4853, indicates
22 the hearing resumed at 18 hours 9 minutes. The witness was not brought
23 back into the courtroom. There is no further testimony of the witness
24 after the break, and then the hearing adjourned after, again, some
25 further submissions by counsel in that case.
1 So the testimony of the witness, based upon what is reflected in
2 the transcript, was not recalled after the final recess or break on that
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That page, Mr. President, that
5 page, where you can see that the witness's testimony did not continue
6 after 6.05 or 1805, I didn't receive that, so I didn't know whether the
7 witness had continued testifying after that time or not. That page is
8 missing from what I received. The Prosecutor might have said that at
9 once. It did not continue.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, I believe that the
11 best solution is to print out the last page, the one that you have just
12 read out, and disclose it to Mr. Seselj in his own language. That way he
13 will understand that the Trial Chamber asked the witness to leave the
14 courtroom, telling him, "We'll listen to your counsel, and if we need --
15 we'll listen to counsel, and if need be, you'll come back." They
16 listened to the submissions, they had the break, and then they found out
17 that they didn't need the witness back, and so the witness never came
18 back in the courtroom. They moved on to another topic. I believe that
19 this is what is -- that is what happened.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I even have the
21 procedural discussion by the counsel. I have everything up to the break
22 which was declared, and the hearing was to resume at 1805. I have the
23 debate. I think the Prosecutor was involved as well.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, after 6.05, when
25 the hearing resumed, there must be a trace of the topics that were dealt
1 with, and the hearing must have been adjourned at 7.00 p.m. So this last
2 page does exist. It can be printed and given to Mr. Seselj, and that way
3 he will see, you know, the witness never came back into the courtroom.
4 MR. MUNDIS: They resumed at 1809, not 1805, and the transcripts
5 continue for approximately ten pages, where counsel are discussing a
6 number of procedural matters. I will -- we do not have that translated
7 into Serbian. I will put that into the pipeline, but of course that
8 means other priorities will have to be pushed off, number 1, or, number
9 2, this will go to the end of the queue and it will be many, many months
10 before this transcript might be made available.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please, I have to interrupt
12 Mr. Mundis and cut this short.
13 It suffices for me that Mr. Mundis told me orally that the
14 witness did not reappear in the courtroom, so let me just get the 16th of
15 February document that Mr. Mundis says has been translated, and then that
16 makes it simple.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. Seselj is trusting
18 you. He believes that the witness did not come back after 6.05, at 6.09,
19 when the hearing resumed. All he wants is a transcript for February
21 Let's move on to something else.
22 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
23 The next issue concerns the schedule for next week. Perhaps out
24 of an abundance of caution, we should perhaps go into private session
25 very briefly.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Private session, please.
2 [Private session]
11 Pages 5802-5809 redacted. Private session.
16 [Open session]
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In open session, I say this:
19 We will resume on Tuesday. The legal officer will tell the
20 Prosecution and Mr. Seselj the time that we have set aside for procedural
21 matters. That way, everybody will know what is scheduled for next week.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.45 p.m.,
23 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 8th day of April,
24 2008, at 8.30 a.m.