1 Tuesday, 15 July 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The witness entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 8.32 a.m.
5 [The accused entered court]
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. This is an open
7 session. Mr. Registrar, could you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you and good morning, Your Honours. This
9 is IT-03-67-T, the Prosecutor versus Vojislav Seselj.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Welcome to everyone. I greet
11 our witness. I greet the representatives of the OTP. I greet Mr. Seselj
12 as well as everyone helping us. We will now quickly move into private
13 session, Mr. Registrar, please.
14 [Closed session]
11 Pages 9346-9388 redacted. Closed session.
21 [Open session]
22 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honours, as Ms. Biersay explained while we
23 were in closed session, we have -- oh.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are now in open session.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We are back in open
2 session, so I would like to say that the Prosecution will present some
3 audio material and the Prosecution will tell us how it is going to be
5 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honours, as Ms. Biersay explained, the
6 intercepts we will be playing today are divided into four categories. I
7 will not repeat them, but we will explain what the four categories are as
8 we move through them. Your Honours, the first category of intercepts,
9 which is composed our selection today is composed of four intercepts is
10 relevant to the issue of the JCE and the shared purpose among a number of
11 Serb leaders and people mentioned in the indictment, to create a
12 Serb-controlled area in Bosnia-Herzegovina in case Bosnia-Herzegovina
13 could not remain within Yugoslavia
14 The intercepts will also be relevant to the issue of what the
15 Prosecution submits that is a decision to expel non-Serbs from these
17 The first intercept is of a conversation on the 12th of October
18 1991. The speakers are -- well, we will let the speakers identify it if
19 needed by the witness but the speakers are Radovan Karadzic and Gojko
20 Djogo. Your Honours will hear references to the consequences of a
21 decision by the Muslim side to declare independence and it is being
22 forecast that that would lead to bloodshed and the disappearance of
23 Muslims from the face of the earth. You would also hear --
24 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation] I did not hear the name of
25 Karadzic's alleged interlocutor. The interpreter could not hear it
1 properly either.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, could you please give us
3 the name of the second person speaking?
4 MR. MARCUSSEN: Djogo, Gojko. Your Honours will also hear
5 reference to the accused, and that Mr. Milosevic, President Milosevic,
6 has decided to have an alliance with him so this confirms from the
7 Prosecution submission is relevant to the issue of whether or not there
8 was a shared purpose between the accused and President Milosevic. And,
9 yeah, I think that might be enough just to explain the relevance. So if
10 we could now play Exhibit 65 ter number 572, and I propose that we listen
11 to the first nine minutes and eight seconds of this. The full intercept
12 is 21 minutes and 46 seconds long. Let's play it.
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: In which binder is it?
14 MR. MARCUSSEN: I believe that's in binder 1, Your Honours.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Again I'm objecting I'm absolutely
16 opposed to having only part of the recording heard because the other part
17 may always contain an explanation of what was stated during the first
18 part, if the recording is authentic, which is something I also doubt.
19 MR. MARCUSSEN: Sorry, Your Honours, the intercept is in binder
20 2, I apologise. As to the accused's submission, the Prosecution has of
21 course made an effort to present this evidence in a fair manner, and we
22 have not tried to cut out relevant information from any of the intercepts
23 we play, and I will respectfully submit that the accused can either read
24 the transcripts of these intercepts or listen to the intercept himself
25 later on and make written submissions if he has objections based on that
1 but for the purpose of the Prosecution case, all we would need to play is
2 the first nine minutes and eight seconds. And if Your Honours agree, I
3 would propose we play the intercept now.
4 [Intercept played]
5 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honours, the interpreters are trying to
6 translate or read the subtitles, but they are not being put into the
7 transcript. I was going to seek Your Honours' guidance on this. Last
8 week we did not, I believe, have the translators translate the audios and
9 we didn't have any transcript of it. Of course, the transcript would be
10 separate exhibits. My proposal would be that we do as last week that we
11 just listen to the tape and then admit transcripts.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, what we should do is the
13 following: Let's listen to the conversation. We have the transcript on
14 the screen so we can read it. And if there is something very important,
15 we can play it again and we can ask the interpreters to interpret
17 So let's start from the beginning.
18 MR. MARCUSSEN: Okay. So let's play it again.
19 [Intercept played]
20 MR. MARCUSSEN: Could we stop? Your Honours, at this stage, I
21 would seek the admission of 65 ter number 572. Sorry, maybe I should do
22 that after the accused has had a chance to comment.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. I would like to rewind to
24 five minutes when the tape says, five minutes. I would like to hear in
25 translation what is said when Mr. Seselj's is mentioned. So could we
1 please rewind to five minutes and some seconds? And I would like the
2 interpreters could please translate what they are hearing in Serbian.
3 [Intercept played]
4 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] Yes that would be his enormous
5 strength if you understand, yes, enormous strength in the opposition
6 because he does not have a candidate opposing him in the opposition, yes,
7 yes, and now he relies on that option of Seselj's, this and that, but
8 which could cost him dearly. Yes, not too seriously, that is not your
9 SDS, that is not it, yes, and this cannot -- well, get burned again, yes,
10 yes, I don't know but I think that France is terribly afraid of Germany
11 and that it is prostituting itself, yes, and it's only England that is
12 not prostituting itself and that is our only chance and Spain and Greece
13 well it's all American. All this is well --
14 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note, this is not exactly
15 conducive to interpretation, overlapping speakers, very fast, and you can
16 barely hear it.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I asked for this excerpt to be
18 played again where Mr. Seselj is mentioned. It seems that the two people
19 are talking about a political option, one of Seselj's option, and they
20 say that this could have a boomerang effect. We can infer from this that
21 the people holding the conversation do not share Seselj's opinion. At
22 least when listening to their conversation.
23 Mr. Seselj, do you have any comments to make? Please spare us
24 any speeches but could you please comment, do you have any technical
25 comments to make, or anything to say regarding yourself since you're
1 mentioned in this conversation?
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, in a way, you are
3 disqualifying me morally in advance, Mr. President. You're saying don't
4 make speeches. As if I were making speeches all the time, whereas I
5 never had any speeches made in this courtroom, although the Prosecutor
6 tendentiously accused me of things like that. First of all I'm
7 challenging the legality of this intercept, this recording, because the
8 wiretapping was carried out in an anti-constitutional way without a
9 warrant and a warrant is required by the constitution of
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina that was in force then.
11 Obviously, the conversation was wire tapped by an illegal
12 conspiracy organisation.
13 Secondly, I doubt the authenticity of the conversation, and I
14 support this by the unequal tone of the recording. The sound spectrum
15 would have to be tested to see whether this is coherent, authentic.
16 Thirdly, most importantly, the alleged conversation, I mean with
17 all these suspicions of mine regarding authenticity, the alleged
18 conversation is taking place purportedly between Radovan Karadzic and
19 Gojko Djogo. At that time Gojko Djogo was a high official of the
20 democratic party who is president was Dragoljub Micunovic later on Zoran
21 Djindjic. The Serb Radical Party throughout 1991 was in a clash with the
22 democratic party. I'm making a comment because the Prosecutor is
23 presenting this as evidence of joint criminal enterprise. Please --
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, wait a minute.
25 Mr. Marcussen took the floor, and we didn't even hear his objection.
1 Mr. Marcussen, you have the floor.
2 MR. MARCUSSEN: Mr. President, the accused has now moved from
3 authenticity provenance and technical issues with respect to the
4 recording to testify about the different persons and events that are
5 being mentioned in the tape. So he is now started to testify. So we
6 respectfully submit that the accused should be directed to confine his
7 comments to the issues that you had just outlined to him a few minutes
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Seselj, I told you not
10 to make speeches or comments. You recall the grounds on which you oppose
11 this recording being admitted. You can say in a few second that
12 Mr. Gojko Djogo was a high official of the political party to which the
13 late Zoran Djindjic belonged and later headed actually. That's enough.
14 Cut it short, please.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, in a couple of
16 seconds, I cannot say anything and I truly admire people who can.
17 Secondly, as for this alleged intercept, the Prosecutor is proffering it
18 as evidence of the existence of joint criminal enterprise. Between and
19 among who? Radovan Karadzic, the president of the Serb Democratic Party
20 of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Gojko Djogo, a high official, I think the
21 vice-president, of the democratic party in Serbia. Please, if I do not
22 have the right to say that here, then I'm not going to make any comments
23 whatsoever. And don't even call me into the courtroom. Just mail your
24 judgement to me and let's get there comedy done and over with.
25 If I cannot say who these persons are and that at that point in
1 time, the relevant point in time, I have nothing to do with these persons
2 whatsoever and that these persons have no relevant ties to Milosevic, as
3 a matter of fact, how can I come up with counter-arguments with regard to
4 the thesis of the OTP that there is a joint criminal enterprise? There
5 is a joint criminal enterprise at that time between Radovan Karadzic and
6 Dragoljub Micunovic, the president of the democratic party in Serbia
7 why am I not allowed to say that here and now?
8 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you are talking
9 about your case. Fine. We'll hear your case. But not now. You will --
10 during the cross-examination, you have plenty of time. You will also
11 have plenty of time during the examination-in-chief when you ask
12 questions to your witnesses, to expound your case, as well as in your
13 brief, your final brief. You can develop your case on everything
14 presented, even the intercepted conversation. But you are not allowed to
15 testify now. You can also testify at a later stage. You are not
16 entitled to do so right now. We are not preventing you from presenting
17 your case. Of course, not. But you must use the rules of procedure to
18 do so.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Seselj, my fellow
20 judge is absolutely right. I'll give you the floor in a second. But let
21 me supplement what I wanted to say. My fellow judge justly said that if
22 you wish to highlight the fact that this Gojko Djogo was working hand in
23 hand with Karadzic in a goal that was different than the goal alleged by
24 Prosecution, you will have plenty of time and plenty opportunities to do
25 so. Be it when you will testify, for example. The day you actually
1 testify, you'll have plenty of time to talk about this.
2 But we have a difficulty which is as follows: I cannot rule and
3 govern what is happening according to the former Article 314 of the
4 Criminal Code that was in place in former Yugoslavia. I'm no longer in
5 the lead. It's the Prosecutor and yourself that are leading. If I was
6 in charge, I would be dealing with this now. But it's not the time now.
7 I will -- I'm sure I will ask questions about this when you testify
8 because I'll be allowed to ask questions then. Because if you're telling
9 me all this now, and I start asking questions where you have a right to
10 remain silent and you can remain silent if you wish to, I could
11 jeopardise my own situation in relation to the rules of procedure. My
12 fellow judge was very clear: There are rules to this trial and people
13 are allowed to take the floor at different moments. Right now, we are
14 technically assessing a wire tap. You have some -- you have the floor to
15 tell us why you oppose it, you have a few words to tell us if you have
16 reservations as to this conversation because this Gojko Djogo was this or
17 that but you cannot go any further right now.
18 Mr. Seselj, you wanted to supplement what I said?
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have the right to object to the
20 relevance of this evidence that's been proffered. In my objection, I
21 claim that this evidence is irrelevant and I base that on the fact that
22 the alleged conversation, because I'm challenging the authenticity, takes
23 place between Radovan Karadzic, the president of the Serb Democratic
24 Party in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Gojko Djogo, a high official of the
25 democratic party in Serbia
1 joint criminal enterprise in any one of these trials. No allegations
2 were made to that effect.
3 If Gojko Djogo were accused along with Radovan Karadzic and
4 myself then I would understand why the Prosecutor is offering this.
5 Since Dragoljub Micunovic the then president of the democratic party was
6 not included as a member of a joint criminal enterprise, I think this is
8 Secondly, the Prosecutor is not offering any explanation as to
9 what kind of Seselj option this is that Gojko Djogo refers to, and I have
10 no idea what this is all about.
11 Thirdly, I think that you brought me into a very difficult
12 position on purpose, in a premeditated way. The listening of these
13 intercepts had to take place during the direct examination and then in
14 the cross-examination I would ask the witness, "Mr. So-and-so, do you
15 know that Gojko Djogo was a high official of Micunovic's democratic
16 party? That he had such a position in this political party and then so
17 on and so forth." Then all of that would make sense. You think all of
18 my substantive objections should be left for my Defence case then what is
19 my role here in the first place?
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Let's move back to
21 private session for a few seconds.
22 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honour, maybe I can solve this issue by
23 clarifying what the purpose of playing there intercept is.
24 Your Honours, this intercept is probative of the views expressed
25 by Radovan Karadzic. As I said in the beginning, it shows knowledge of a
1 plan that there would be bloodshed if the Muslim side took certain steps.
2 We are offering this to show the existence of a plan in which we say
3 Radovan Karadzic was a member and it's relevant to his intent and we
4 submit ultimately, when we have the totality of the evidence, we would be
5 submitting that the views expressed by him, Milosevic, the accused, based
6 on a number of documents and testimony before Your Honours, that they
7 share a common purpose and were part of a joint criminal enterprise. We
8 are not alleging that the other speaker on this tape is part of that
9 enterprise but that does not render the evidence irrelevant and I take
10 note of the accused's objection but we are simply putting this forward to
11 illustrate what the views of Radovan Karadzic is. I hope that clarified
12 matters and then maybe we don't need to go into these issues. We simply
13 don't --
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's not open a debate on
16 this. We will move briefly into private session, please.
17 [Private session]
11 Page 9400 redacted. Private session.
2 [Open session]
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, could we move back into
4 open session, please, Mr. Registrar?
5 THE REGISTRAR: We are now in open session.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I consider that this alleged
7 intercept cannot be relevant as an exhibit of the OTP inter alia because
8 it's evident that the alleged collocutors, if they really are Karadzic
9 and Djogo, speak about me in negative terms. They express themselves as
10 my political opponents, and they say that my political option, they are
11 referring to the Serbian Radical Party is neither comprehensive nor
12 serious and they compare it to the Serbian Democratic Party; and Djogo
13 allegedly says to Karadzic it's not the same as your Serbian Democratic
14 Party so he's pointing to essential differences between the Serb Radical
15 Party and the Serb Democratic Party. And both of them here are
16 manifesting themselves as Milosevic's opponents.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen?
18 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honours, these are matters for final
19 submissions. This is not addressing relevance.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, please give us a
22 number for this tape.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit number P502.
24 MR. MARCUSSEN: Just so the information is close together in the
25 transcript the 65 ter number was 572.
1 Your Honours, the next intercept that we would play is 65 ter
2 number 606. It is found in binder 2 of your materials. This intercept
3 is also relevant to the existence of the JCE. It is between
4 President Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic. And I would particularly
5 mention two aspects of this intercept that we submit are of interest
6 to -- or maybe three aspects that are of interest to Your Honours. At
7 the beginning of the tape, you would hear reference to the fact that the
8 Radovan Karadzic saying that they, meaning --
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection. The Prosecutor cannot
10 explain to us in advance what we are going to hear. Let him play the
11 tape and then we will see what we will hear. He cannot suggest us in
12 advance what we are going to hear.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Marcussen? Maybe it
14 would be best to hear the tape first and if there are any comments to
15 make you can make them afterwards. I think it would be best to hear the
16 tape first. Otherwise you're going to precondition our hearing, if I
17 could say so. But, please tell us when this conversation was tapped and
18 when it was held.
19 MR. MARCUSSEN: 24th of October 1991, Your Honours. To explain
20 if I just may without quoting from the transcript, the relevance is --
21 it's relevant to whether or not there existed a plan to create Serb-held
22 areas in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the issue of whether or not the Serbs
23 had a plan to take over control in a number of municipalities.
24 Let's play the intercept now, please. And it's 11 minutes and 48
25 seconds long.
1 [Intercept played]
2 MR. MARCUSSEN: I think we have to stop a brief minute. There
3 seemed to be no subtitles rolling up. We'll try to play it again and see
4 if it's just a technical issue that's going to fix itself.
5 [Intercept played]
6 MR. MARCUSSEN: Let's stop again. Your Honours, there seemed to
7 be a problem here with the subtitles. We don't have subtitles. Now this
8 presents us with the question of whether or not we should play the tape
9 so that the B/C/S speakers, notably the accused, can hear what's being
10 said and the rest of us will rely on the transcripts that we have in
11 front of us, or whether or not we should ask the interpreters could try,
12 although we know it's difficult for them, to try to interpret as we move
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The subtitles, do you have it
15 some place? Is it just a technical hitch?
16 MR. MARCUSSEN: I will try to find out.
17 [Prosecution counsel confer]
18 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honours, we are trying to see if we can
19 solve that straight away. Otherwise we can maybe push this particular
20 intercept to later on today while we have time to try to find it. There
21 should be a synchronised version where we have the transcript.
22 Your Honours, I think we should try our luck with the next one
23 and hope we can get this fixed and then pick up this particular intercept
24 later on.
25 So what we will play instead is the intercept which has 65 ter
1 number 977. It is a conversation that takes place on the 13th of
2 February, 2002, between Radovan Karadzic and a Lukic, first name unknown.
3 This is again an intercept which is relevant to the issue of what
4 the Prosecution submit is the alleged goal of creating a Greater Serbia.
5 I propose that we play the whole intercept, which is six and a
6 half minutes long.
7 [Intercept played]
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen could we please
9 rewind to 2 minutes? At one point of time there is mention of Greater
11 translation also.
12 [Interpret played]
13 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover]
14 "However, we cannot give away. We have given away as much as we
15 could. The optimum for us is Greater Serbia if not, then federal
17 giving away. When you look at this map --"
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Could we listen to it
19 once again? I believe that what is said is extremely important. Back to
20 120 seconds, please.
21 [Intercept played]
22 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] To achieve success. However we
23 cannot give way. We've given way as much as we could. The optimum for
24 us is Greater Serbia, if not then federal Yugoslavia, if not then there
25 is nothing but this, there can be no further giving way. When you look
1 at the map we can go for this, two cantons, ten kilometres we lack only
2 one village to have it all in one piece, if only there was ten kilometres
3 less then we could have it all in one piece."
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
5 In this sentence, it says, "The optimum for us is Greater Serbia.
6 If not, then federal Yugoslavia
7 is important. What did you want to add, Mr. Marcussen?
8 MR. MARCUSSEN: No, Your Honours, maybe we can leave it at this.
9 The main issue here is Karadzic expressing what we submit is a views that
10 are relevant to the existence of the JCE. I don't think I need to spend
11 more time on that.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Seselj, any
13 comments on the authenticity of the tape as well as its relevance?
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I consider that this was illegally
15 and unconstitutionally taped. I doubts the authenticity. I think there
16 have been interventions. I think it's been doctored according to the
17 wishes of the person who commissioned. They have at their disposal the
18 most up-to-date technical equipment, and they can doctor the tapes. I
19 think it's totally irrelevant because Karadzic never was in favour of
20 Greater Serbia
21 someone but that doesn't prove anything. It proves absolutely nothing,
22 because thousands and millions of people could have mentioned Greater
24 either by Milosevic or Karadzic or anybody else.
25 The OTP is now grasping at a detail as if clutching at straws.
1 This is not testimony. This is concerning relevance. I'm objecting to
2 the relevance. If a politician never said this in public, or secretly at
3 an official meeting of his party or a state organ, if he mentioned this
4 in passing, as an optimum in a chat, what does that mean? Nothing. It
5 doesn't demonstrate the existence of a joint criminal enterprise and
6 especially as we don't know who he's talking to, a Lukic, what Lukic?
7 Nobody knows. If you take as evidence a conversation with an unknown
8 person, then you can try me for raping an unknown girl.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Mr. Registrar, could we
10 please move into private session for a few seconds? It's going to be
11 very short.
12 [Private session]
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are back in open session.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Yes?
24 MR. MARCUSSEN: I would respectfully request the admission of 65
25 ter number 977 which is the intercept we just heard.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Can we please get a
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit number P503.
4 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honours, I don't know if we have -- well, I
5 think we have time if Your Honours want to play the relevant parts of the
6 next exhibit before the break but we are getting close, so I wanted to
7 get Your Honours' guidance on this before --
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It's better to take a break now
9 and then we'll continue after the break.
10 We'll take a 20-minute break now.
11 --- Recess taken at 11.45 a.m.
12 --- On resuming at 12.07 p.m.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The hearing is resumed.
14 Mr. Marcussen, you have the floor for the third tape.
15 MR. MARCUSSEN: Thank you, Your Honours. The technical problem
16 with 65 ter number 606 has been resolved. I introduced that exhibit
17 already. So in the interests of time, I propose that we just listen to
18 it now.
19 [Intercept played, no sound]
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, we don't have the sound
21 but we have the text.
22 [Intercept played]
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We've already --
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed.
25 [Intercept played]
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Marcussen?
3 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honour, if I may, I think that it is clear
4 that the accused has two objections to all the intercepts so maybe we can
5 just take note of those two objections. One is the legality because
6 there is no court order allowing the intercept and the second one is he's
7 objecting to the authenticity to all of the intercepts. So it's just
8 going to propose in the interests of time that he address other issues
9 and the Court takes notice of these two other objections as being
10 objections to all these intercepts that we play today.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. Very well. So
12 Mr. Seselj, you don't have repeat each time every objection as to the
13 illegal character of these intercepts and so on and so forth. It's
14 perhaps better to focus on relevance.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm not opposed to you
16 acknowledging that I consider all these conversations to have been wire
17 tapped in an anti-constitutional way by an illegal and conspiratorial
18 organisation and that I challenge the authenticity. There is no need for
19 me to repeat all of that. It goes without saying that I object to all of
20 that. So I would just deal with the relevance of the proffered evidence
21 on the assumption that they are authentic. I challenge this recording
22 even if it were authentic as irrelevant to this case because why would
23 the two most prominent Serb politicians of the 1990s not speak on the
24 telephone? What is particularly important is that Karadzic and Milosevic
25 here do not agree on the strategic steps that Karadzic is planning as the
1 leader of the Serb Democratic Party. It has to do with convening the
2 assembly of the Serb deputies from the parliament of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
3 Throughout this conversation, Milosevic is opposed to it. That
4 is obvious. Therefore, this cannot be evidence of the existence of a
5 joint criminal enterprise even among them, let alone me. No one can
6 explain where my place is in all of this. I am no where to be found here
7 and I'm so sorry that I'm no where to be found here.
8 Now I would like us to make a contribution to that effect. Let
9 us incorporate some more stuff in this conversation and lets me appear as
10 well. Science has advanced so far that I can indeed become the third
11 interlocutor in this conversation between Karadzic and Milosevic. I
12 accept that for you in advance. But just in order to be incorporated.
13 I'm no where to be found. I'm desperate because I'm no where to be
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. Registrar, can
16 we get a number, please?
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, that will be Exhibit number P504.
18 MR. MARCUSSEN: And that was 65 ter number 606.
19 Now, the next intercept we would like to play is 1363, 65 ter
20 number 1363. We are still in binder 2, Your Honours.
21 The witness has already explained, when he testified, how the
22 interlocutors speaking in the intercepts have been identified. This is
23 an intercept of a conversation from the 26th of May -- 25th of May 1992,
24 it is between Milanko Mucibabic and Momcilo Mandic. I will play as I
25 said the witness have explained how these people have been identified in
1 the transcript, but I would play the beginning of the transcripts where
2 the speakers introduce themselves or are being introduced at least in
3 part, and then I'll stop and move to the part of this intercept which is
4 relevant. So that's how I'm going to proceed with this. The full
5 intercept will be over 17 minutes, nearly 18 minutes, to play, but I
6 believe we don't need to do that.
7 So if we can now play -- start playing this tape.
8 [Intercept played]
9 MR. MARCUSSEN: I think you can stop here. This was just to have
10 the speakers identify themselves.
11 I'd now like to move if we can to nine minutes and 40 seconds or
12 a little before. Yeah, that's good.
13 [Intercept played]
14 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honours, the relevance of this from the
15 Prosecution's submission is that it illustrates the shared purpose
16 amongst a number of Serb leaders. Your Honours have just heard how there
17 is talk about expelling Muslims from areas around Sarajevo, Ilijas among
18 others, and this is I said in May 1992 so it's during the relevant time
20 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation] Objection. I consider that this is
21 absolutely irrelevant, along with all my doubts concerning authenticity
22 and legality, Momcilo Mandic was tried before the state court of
23 Bosnia-Herzegovina pursuant to an indictment for war crimes and he was
25 Secondly, Momcilo Mandic is a long-term associate of The Hague
1 OTP. He testified in some Prosecution cases, and the OTP delivered to me
2 the transcripts of his statements, running to about 100 pages, where he
3 expresses himself about me in very negative terms. He doesn't to be sure
4 accuse me of war crimes but he describes my character in the worst way.
5 And fourthly I have been in a fierce conflict with Momcilo Mandic
6 for two decades. The public knows of our conflict. There is no way I
7 can be together with him in any kind of enterprise including a criminal
8 enterprise. If this conversation is authentic, it has -- it concerns the
9 OTP. The OTP is using this man. He may have improvises this
10 conversation pursuant to orders from the OTP in order to fabricate
11 evidence. I suspect that that's what happened.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen?
13 MR. MARCUSSEN: I don't even know if I find it worth commenting
14 that of course the OTP has not manufactured this intercept. We have
15 heard evidence about how this intercept came about and how it has been
16 delivered to the Office of the Prosecutor. I have no further submissions
17 on that.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. Registrar, could
19 you please give us a number for this exhibit?
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit number P505.
21 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honours, we will now pass to the next set or
22 segment of intercept that we have chosen for today. This segment is
23 related to the previous intercept -- segment in that it also is relevant
24 to the JCE aspect of the case.
25 As a general matter, these intercepts shows how different alleged
1 members of the joint criminal enterprise had communication with each
2 other. One of the things, general things, I would recall to the Chamber
3 is the evidence you have heard about the command of the JNA and how
4 Mr. Milosevic, although he did not have any formal functions in the
5 command of the JNA, gave instructions in the summer of 1991 to Kadijevic
6 and Adzic and how there were various meetings. One of the themes in this
7 case is how various players in fact corroborated with each other with a
8 view to implement the common goal we allege exists in the indictment.
9 And these intercepts form part of the evidence that be --
10 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation] Objection.
11 MR. MARCUSSEN: He cannot object to my information of
12 relevance --
13 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation] Objection.
14 MR. MARCUSSEN: -- in this way. Thank you.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, wait a moment,
16 please. You have to allow Mr. Marcussen to finish saying what he has to
17 say and then you can make an objection, if you wish, because you cannot
18 cut him off. He was just telling us something and you just interfered.
19 What did you want to tell us?
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen or I?
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No. You. What did you want to
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, firstly, it's
24 evident that whenever the Prosecutor rises, you interrupt me. So he is
25 able to interrupt me.
1 And I understood this to mean that I also had the right to
2 interrupt him. I wanted to say that you should not permit him to give
3 political speeches. We can hear the tape and then we can get additional
4 information if needed. But he is making a political speech even before
5 the intercept has been presented. That's what I wanted to say.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Marcussen?
7 What did you want to say? You wanted to tell us what we can hear in this
8 wire tap and this is related to the indictment, is that what you wanted
9 to say? This is what I thought you wanted to say.
10 MR. MARCUSSEN: Indeed, Your Honours, I believe that I was
11 referring to evidence that has previously been presented before the Trial
12 Chambers rather than making speeches as sometimes happen in the
13 courtroom. I don't think I need to elaborate further on the general area
14 of -- that these exhibits cover. So I was going to address now the first
15 of these intercepts which is found in binder 1 of your material. It is
16 65 ter number 348. It is an intercepted conversation which took place on
17 the 8th of July 1991, between -- the relevant part is between Karadzic
18 and Milosevic, but it begins with persons named Vukojevic -- I apologise.
19 The intercept in our submission is relevant in that it illustrates offers
20 by Mr. Milosevic to provide superior -- material support to the JNA for
21 operations in Bosnia
22 with JNA generals in -- in the area, and again I recall this as relevant
23 to the issue of Milosevic's role and how different players in different
24 structures were actually operating together. So I propose --
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, let's proceed, then.
1 Let's listen.
2 [Intercept played]
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I would like to come back to
4 four minutes to hear the excerpt where he mentioned Mr. Seselj.
5 [Intercept played]
6 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover].
7 "And that Kupres we've got 750 people but it's important for us
8 that this battalion which is mobilised by the army is in Kupres and that
9 everything will be as it should be, it will be, let those who remain be
10 put under Hess command because Kupres is terrible it's 50/50 and Serbs
11 suffered a lot there during the war, even this crazy Seselj fucked the
12 opposition's mother yesterday. I heard that he said now that the JNA is
13 supposed to be defending the Serbian people you mustn't attack the JNA,
14 he said the one that has the tie of Zimmerman's waiter. Yes, yes,
15 fucking hell. So it's clear even to him, clear, clear, I've seen that.
16 I've seen that. He's in direct contact with Mesic, do you have Uzelac's
17 telephone number. No but let your people find it."
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Stop. Thank you.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection. First of all, the fact
20 that RAM is mentioned here, that has been introduced into this context
21 subsequently because even the person to whom the OTP has shown the
22 greatest confidence here, Aleksandar Vasiljevic, on the 28th of December
23 2007, said or rather denied the existence of any kinds of ram plan. This
24 has been inserted for some reason. The whole plan concerns the efforts
25 to support the JNA in opposing the Croatian separatists. This was when
1 the rebellion of the Croatian population in western Herzegovina started.
2 I assume that's why Kupres is being mentioned, if this conversation is
3 authentic at all.
4 Further, I have an objection to your translation. The
5 translation is not good. This sentence that concerns me, because in the
6 original it says, "Seselj fucked the opposition's mother." And it was
7 translated to you as, "Seselj fucked the opposition." I have to use this
8 nasty word even though it's not a habit of mine, and I am irritated by it
9 but I'm just trying to point out that the translation is not a good one.
10 I happened to observe that. Had it not been for the swear words I might
11 not have noticed it.
12 And there was something else I wanted to say to you. If
13 Milosevic says that crazy Seselj, he is revealing what he thinks of me,
14 and at that point, when he liked one move of mine in the National
15 Assembly, he is still demonstrating an overall antipathy towards me. Why
16 am I crazy? Because I'm an anti-communist because I was prepared to
17 sacrifice my life fighting the communist regime. He has no other
18 evidence of my craziness. No one has ever managed to get any such
19 evidence although many have tried, and if this is used in a conversation
20 of this sort, then this conversation cannot be evidence of the existence
21 of a joint criminal enterprise. There is no joint criminal enterprise
22 between Milosevic and Karadzic either because they are both trying to
23 help the JNA, to help the mobilisation, to support -- if this
24 conversation is authentic, which I doubt, they mention 750 volunteers who
25 want to join the JNA, in one place, 70, in another place, Kupres is a key
1 strategic point in Bosnia-Herzegovina which was not to be allowed to fall
2 into the hands of Croatian separatists in 1991. In 1991, there was no
3 conflict between the Serbs and the Muslims, absolutely no conflict.
4 There was only a problem in that a certain number of Muslims failed to
5 respond to the call-up, to join the reserve forces of the JNA, and that
6 was all. Bosnia
7 That is why this is not relevant and cannot be relevant.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I have a question, sir, could
9 we please move into private session for a brief moment?
10 [Private session]
11 Pages 9418-9422 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open session]
5 THE REGISTRAR: We are now in open session and 65 ter number 348
6 will be Exhibit number P506.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen?
8 MR. MARCUSSEN: Your Honour we have indeed taken up a lot of time
9 on objections and various matters. The exercise has maybe also shown the
10 utility of the procedure that has been adopted. We have made it in terms
11 of time, I think we are well beyond halfway through the intercepts we are
12 going to play because some of these intercepts have been very long and
13 the next ones to come are going to be shorter. There are still a number
14 left that we intended to play, so I wanted to seek the guidance of the
15 Chamber on whether or not it would be useful to continue this tomorrow,
16 if the witness is available, and of course I have no idea because we have
17 no communication with the witness but we should maybe wrap that up before
18 we --
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I will put this question but I
20 believe we should move back into closed session.
21 [Private session]
13 [Open session]
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour we are back in open session.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen, you have the
17 MR. MARCUSSEN: Thank you, Your Honour. The next intercept is
18 fortunately a short one. It is 65 ter number 357 -- sorry, 353. It is
19 an intercept which -- of a conversation which took place on the 9th of
20 July 1991, between Duvnjak and Veselinovic and - I guess I'm getting
21 tired - Veselinovic. The issues that this intercept is relevant to is
22 the same as the previous one, namely coordination of military support and
23 mobilisation. Let's try to play the tape. And it mentions, sorry, and
24 of course what is in our submission relevant here is not the speakers but
25 the people that are being discussed in it and the coordination between
1 Karadzic and Milosevic and Kadijevic and things like that.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please, first of all, let us hear
3 loud and clear who the participants in the conversation are. Who is
4 Duvnjak and who is this other one, Danilo. I have absolutely never heard
5 of these people. Let us see who these people are. Then let us see what
6 kind of conversation they are conducting.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen, do you know who
8 this Duvnjak is or this Danilo person, or do you have no idea?
9 MR. MARCUSSEN: I'm not aware of that and I do believe looking at
10 the transcript that I omitted to mention that the second speaker in this
11 transcript will be Radovan Karadzic, who we do know, who is a -- and it
12 is what he says that is relevant.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, let's move to
14 closed session, please.
15 [Private session]
11 [Open session]
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And let's listen to the tape.
13 THE REGISTRAR: We are now in open session.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Please go ahead,
15 Mr. Marcussen, we can listen to the tape now.
16 MR. MARCUSSEN: I believe it's coming up.
17 [Intercept played]
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's go back to 55 seconds.
19 [Intercept played]
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
21 Well, so, Mr. Seselj, please hurry because we are just about to
22 finish the session.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] [Microphone not activated]
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In addition to my suspicion that
1 this is not authentic and my statement that this is illegal, I believe
2 that this is fully irrelevant for this case. First of all, the
3 conversation is taking place on the 9th of July 1991 and the joint
4 criminal enterprise on the basis of what the Prosecution states in my
5 case and in the Milosevic case started on the 1st of August; and
6 obviously if this is truly Radovan Karadzic's voice, that he is
7 advocating rallies as many volunteers as possible within the JNA ranks
8 and it is the JNA that should be in command of all.
9 It is the Croatian separatist rebellion that is under way and
10 obviously this is the time just before the JNA was involved in this open
11 showdown with the Croatian separatists. Obviously, this has nothing to
12 do with the -- with any joint criminal enterprise because the JNA is the
13 only regular military force in the territory of the former Yugoslavia.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you. It's on
15 the record.
16 Mr. Registrar, give me a number, please.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, that will be Exhibit number P507.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
19 Mr. Marcussen, we will continue tomorrow because we have no more time for
20 today. I don't know how much longer you will need, how much more time do
21 you need, or how many more tapes do you have, approximately ten, I
22 suppose. They must be shorter than the ones we heard, I imagine.
23 MR. MARCUSSEN: Fortunately we will move to intercepts that are
24 going to be much shorter and it's very difficult to say how long it will
25 take tomorrow but we will definitely be able to finish both the
1 intercepts and the witness tomorrow.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. So the hearing is
3 adjourned, and I wish you a nice afternoon, pleasant afternoon, and we
4 will see each other tomorrow at 8.30.
5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.13 p.m.
6 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 16th of
7 July, 2008, at 8.30 a.m.