Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 9628

 1                           Tuesday, 22 July 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.21 p.m.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar, can you call the

 6     case, please.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you and good afternoon, Your Honours.  This

 8     is case number IT-03-67-T, the Prosecutor versus Vojislav Seselj.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation]  Thank you, Registrar.  Today

10     is Tuesday, the 22nd of July 2008.  I would like to greet the

11     representatives of the Prosecution, Mr. Seselj, as well as all the people

12     assisting us today.

13             Very briefly, some housekeeping matters.

14             First of all, if there are any objections from anyone, we shall

15     hold our hearing tomorrow morning and not tomorrow afternoon, because the

16     courtroom is now free.  Therefore, we will be able to sit tomorrow

17     morning.  That's the first point.

18             Second point:  This morning I signed an order pertaining to the

19     fact that Wednesday, the 3rd of September at quarter past 2.00, we will

20     have our hearing to try Mr. Petkovic.  I would therefore like to ask the

21     Prosecution to check its witnesses who will come as part of Mr. Seselj's

22     trial, make sure they have a witness for Tuesday and another witness for

23     the Thursday, because on Wednesday we shall be hearing Petkovic's case.

24     That was the second announcement I had to make.

25             The third is an oral decision which I wish to hand down now.

Page 9629

 1     It's a fairly short one which relates to the witness called Osman Kadic.

 2             Oral decision on the motion filed by the Prosecution on

 3     Osman Kadic pursuant to Rule 94 bis.

 4             Considering the statement made by the witness in question on the

 5     12th of July, 2006, in light to 94 bis, requesting the statement and the

 6     documents that go with it; in light of document 262 that was filed by the

 7     Prosecution on the 29th of March, 2007, Mr. Seselj declared he was

 8     against these documents and challenged them, and reckoned that Mr. Osman

 9     Kadic was not an expert witness, and stipulated that he wished to

10     cross-examine this witness, in light of the fact that these documents

11     have been disclosed to the accused in a language he understands and in

12     hard copy, on the 21st of September, 2007, pursuant to the Pre-Trial

13     Judge's decision on the 9th of July, 2007.

14             Considering the document 233 provided by the accused, dated the

15     2nd of November, 2007, in which the accused, first of all, challenges the

16     fact that the documents disclosed are, in fact, an expert report, and

17     therefore does not notify the Chamber pursuant to Rule 94 bis.

18             Second point:  He also states that he does challenge these

19     documents and does not wish them to be presented.  He wishes to

20     cross-examine the witness himself, only after having received the proper

21     expert report and the documents that go with it.

22             Considering that in its previous decision relating to expert

23     witnesses that I heard before the Chamber, this is how the Trial Chamber

24     provides the definition of an expert witness:  A person who, thanks to

25     his or her knowledge, qualifications, or special qualification, can help

Page 9630

 1     a trier of fact understand or determine a legal issue, has also stated

 2     that the Trial Chamber addresses the curriculum vitae, article,

 3     publications, professional experience.

 4             I'm going too fast.  Let me resume.

 5             Let me provide the definition of an expert.  Let me read it out,

 6     slowly.  Let me continue reading out this definition, as of line 22 ...

 7     or to determine a contentious issue.

 8              The Trial Chamber stated that it would bear in mind the

 9     curriculum vitae, the articles and publications and professional

10     experience, or any other information relating to the said witness for

11     which expert qualification is required.

12             Considering that in light of the documents provided by the

13     Prosecution, this witness was a doctor working in the Emergency Ward, but

14     had no specific knowledge as far as forensic medicine was concerned.

15     This person, therefore, has never conducted any other examinations or

16     exhumations or postmortem examinations, other than the exhumation in

17     Mostar, stated in his statement.

18             For the foregoing reasons, the Trial Chamber dismisses the

19     Prosecution's motion to admit these documents pursuant to Rule 94 bis and

20     decides to hear the witness, Osman Kadic, as a witness of fact relating

21     to the exhumations that were conducted in the Duborak [phoen] dump in

22     Mostar.  This witness will therefore be called as a simple mere witness

23     and not an expert witness, pursuant to Rule 94 bis.

24             A fourth point, which shall be a very short one:  Mr. Seselj, the

25     Trial Chamber has noticed, on reading an e-mail sent by one of your

Page 9631

 1     associates, Mr. Krasic, that insulting words had been expressed vis a vis

 2     a representative of the Registry.  We do not understand why your main

 3     associate thus insults the civil servants of the Registry.

 4             Had you been made aware of this or not?

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, you have to tell me

 6     what kind of message was involved and who the message was sent to.  To

 7     whom did Zoran Krasic send a message, and then let's hear what's so

 8     insulting in the message.  I really don't know what you're talking about

 9     now.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Since this message has not been

11     conveyed to you, we shall give it to you in the course of the afternoon.

12     Then you will be able to see what is in this message.  There is no point

13     in addressing this any further.  Whatever the case may be, we have

14     material proof of the fact that there is an insult in this e-mail.

15             As you know, this has created some friction.

16             You are quite right, we need to disclose this document to you so

17     you can see how you can reply to it, and if need be, you may tell us what

18     you will do in the future to avoid this happening again.

19             We have a witness --

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, could you tell me who

21     was the e-mail sent to?  You can tell me that at least now.  Is it an

22     e-mail that Zoran Krasic sent to the Registry, because I'm not aware of

23     him having sent e-mails to the Registry as of late at all; and I don't

24     know what the reason would be for him to send e-mails to the Secretariat.

25     As for e-mails to the Secretariat, it was only Marina Raguz, case manager

Page 9632

 1     who sent them, and that was the mail that was used for sending

 2     photographs and videos twice.  Zoran Krasic does not have any

 3     communication whatsoever with the Registry.

 4             As for scheduling visits of legal advisers, all of that is

 5     handled by Marina Ragus as well, so I really doubt that Zoran Krasic sent

 6     an e-mail to the Registry at all.  Let me tell you that straight away.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This e-mail which has been sent

 8     electronically will be disclosed to you.  I don't have it at hand at the

 9     moment, but we will make sure that you receive it.

10             Mr. Seselj, as you know, we have a 92 bis witness this afternoon.

11     From what I understood, this witness did not wish to be granted any

12     protective measures, but I need to make sure.  Therefore, we shall move

13     into closed session for the time being, and I will put the question to

14     him.  If he confirms that he does not wish to have such measures, we

15     shall then lift the blinds.  We shall drop the blinds for the moment and

16     move into closed session.

17             Mr. Seselj.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I had something to say to you

19     before the witness walks into the courtroom.  So should I wait for this

20     music to stop, then?

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Should I speak straight away?

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment.  Let's move into

24     closed session.  I don't see the little logo on the screen yet.

25                           [Closed session]

Page 9633











11 Pages 9633-9637 redacted. Closed session.















Page 9638

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18                          [Open session]

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're now in open session.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Perhaps you should oil the

21     blinds a little bit.  That means it would make less noise.

22             Witness, could you give me your first name, last name, and date

23     of birth, please.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My name is Ibrahim Kujan from

25     Nevesinje.  I was born on the 21st of April, 1941.  I'm from Nevesinje.

Page 9639

 1             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  1961.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What do you do?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm involved in agriculture and

 4     politics; agriculture because I am an agricultural engineer and producer,

 5     and I'm in politics because I am a member of the Club of Bosniaks in the

 6     Parliament of Republika Srpska.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In other words, you're an

 8     elected official, are you?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Since 1990 onwards.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Last question before you make

11     the solemn declaration:  Have you already testified before a court of law

12     on the events that unfolded in the former Yugoslavia or is the first time

13     that you testify today?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the first time.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please read the text of the

16     solemn declaration.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

18     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

19                           WITNESS:  IBRAHIM KUJAN

20                           [The witness answered through interpreter]

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, sir.  You

22     may sit down.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a few informative matters.

25             We are under the 92 ter procedure of the Rules.  This procedure

Page 9640

 1     will be conducted in this manner:  The Prosecutor will first read a brief

 2     summary of your written statement.  She will then put some questions to

 3     you.  She may also show you a certain number of documents, and for your

 4     deposition we have -- actually, for that particular phase we have 30

 5     minutes.

 6             The Judges may also put questions to you after this.

 7             The accused, who could have cross-examined you, but told us that

 8     he will not cross-examine you since he does not wish to put questions

 9     because we are proceeding under Rule 92 bis, so he did mention this on a

10     couple of occasions.  So Mr. Seselj will not put questions to you.

11             So this is how the hearing will be held.  It will be a short

12     hearing, since the procedure has it that the Prosecutor has 30 minutes

13     for you, and she will put a few questions to you.

14             So, Ms. Dahl, you have the floor.

15             MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, would you prefer that I read the a

16     summary of Mr. Kujan's statement before authenticating it or afterwards?

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, actually, read it before.

18             MS. DAHL:  Mr. Kujan is a Bosnian inhabitant from Nevesinje

19     municipality.  In 1991, at the beginning of the conflict, he was 30 years

20     old.

21             In June of 1991, a military unit called Karadjordje was set up in

22     Nevesinje.  The commander of this unit was Arsen Grahovac.  The

23     headquarters of the Karadjordje unit was a coffee bar called Ravna Gora.

24     Members of the Karadjordje unit cooperated with the local police.

25     However, they created roadblocks on all roads leading into Nevesinje, and

Page 9641

 1     they physically abused non-Serb people, whom they stopped at the

 2     barricades.

 3             In the Karadjordje unit were Chetniks who manned the

 4     check-points.  They did not have to pay for their consumptions in certain

 5     bars and restaurants.  The commander, Krsto Savic, provided refreshments,

 6     ammunition, food and money to the unit.

 7             Later, members of the Karadjordje unit started blowing up

 8     religious buildings and property belonging to Muslims in Nevesinje.

 9     Despite reporting these events to the police, there were no consequences

10     visited upon the perpetrators.

11             The war in Croatia started in the second half of 1991, and there

12     was a general call for mobilisation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  People in

13     Nevesinje, Muslims and Croats in Nevesinje, were fired from their jobs.

14     Their apartments were taken by force, and they were evicted without

15     cause.  Non-Serb members of the reserve police were not mobilised, and

16     their posts were taken by ethnic Serbs.

17             On 19 September 1991, JNA corps, including the Uzice Corps from

18     Serbia arrived in Nevesinje.  Among them were many JNA reserve soldiers

19     who brought a large quantity of military equipment, including tanks,

20     APCs, artillery weapons, and they took complete control of the area from

21     Mostar and Trebinje.  Their infantry never stopped shooting with their

22     weapons, including anti-aircraft guns.  They fired their weapons above

23     the houses of Bosniaks.  For those who were not ethnically Serb, life in

24     Nevesinje became like a prison camp.

25             The commander of the Uzice Corps was General Milan Torbice.

Page 9642

 1     On 22 September 1991, he organised a meeting of well-known and important

 2     Serbs in the municipality.  The general gave a speech on that occasion

 3     saying that for Serbs the moment had arrived to fulfill their historic

 4     wishes, and that access to the sea and the border along the

 5     Osijek-Karlovac-Karlobag line could be achieved within weeks.

 6             After that speech, Mr. Kujan observed Serbs carrying automatic

 7     rifles, threatening non-Serbs in the streets with their weapons.  They

 8     told non-Serbs that it was Serbian territory and they should leave.  They

 9     plundered public property and took it back to Serbia.  Non-Serbs were not

10     permitted to withdraw savings from banks.  Some people fled Nevesinje.

11             An ethnic Serb Crisis Staff was established in the beginning of

12     1992, which took over control of the municipality and replaced the

13     Municipal Assembly.  Members of the Crisis Staff included the chief of

14     the police, Mr. Savic, and Momcilo Golijanin, a deputy of the Assembly of

15     Bosnia-Herzegovina who had direct connections to Radovan Karadzic.

16             In April 1992, a few days before the shelling of Mostar began,

17     large convoys of ethnic Serbs from Mostar began to arrive in Nevesinje.

18     Leaders of SDS --

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a moment, please,

20     Ms. Dahl.

21             A summary is a summary.  You know, if you give us a summary

22     that's, in fact, a novel, then that's not really the idea.  When you

23     draft a summary, you have to focus on very important and meaningful

24     moments, points.

25             MS. DAHL:  Yes, Your Honour.  I'm nearly finished.

Page 9643

 1             Refugees arrived and took the apartments of non-Serbs.  In April

 2     1992, there was an arrest campaign.  Mr. Kujan and others fled to the

 3     woods.  Serb forces attacked on 14 and 16 June.  They attacked the

 4     southern part of the municipality.

 5             On 18 June, Mr. Kujan heard heavy explosions coming from the

 6     Gacko municipality.  The attacks continued.  They were directed by the

 7     local Serb police, members of the Karadjordje unit, Chetniks from Serbia

 8     and Montenegro, Arkan's men and Seselj's men, as well as regular army

 9     units.  Mr. Kujan saw these attacks from a distant hill by using his

10     binoculars.  He saw troops wearing red berets as well as wearing White

11     Eagle insignia.  During these attacks, Serb troops killed elderly people

12     who had remained behind in their homes.

13             After the attack on Postoljani, Mr. Kujan and other members of

14     the group he was with who had fled into the woods walked in the direction

15     of Bjelimici in the Konjac municipality.  Several elderly people who

16     remained behind were later killed when they were trying to get food.

17             When Mr. Kujan arrived in the Konjac municipality, he joined the

18     Territorial Defence.  In that position, he was allowed to interview

19     Serbian prisoners who told him that all of the remaining non-Serbs in

20     Nevesinje had been killed.  Mr. Kujan has since compiled lists of the

21     killed and missing.  He can establish that 316 Muslims and Croats were

22     killed, including 32 children under the age of 14.

23             Later, he learned that on 26th June 1992, 72 persons were caught

24     while trying to escape through the mountains and woods.  They were

25     captured on the Velez Mountain near a radio and TV installation.  All but

Page 9644

 1     three were caught and killed.

 2             I'd ask the Registrar to bring up 65 ter number 5036.

 3                          Examination by Ms. Dahl:

 4        Q.   Mr. Kujan, do you have your written statement dated 8 October

 5     1998?  If it's easier for you, it's also on the screen.

 6        A.   I have here all the necessary documentation, everything I need,

 7     and I would like to address the Judge --

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, you have to answer the

 9     questions that the Prosecutor will put to you.  She will show you

10     documents that you signed.  That's the purpose of this exercise.

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  Which documents?

12             MS. DAHL:

13        Q.   Let me first ask you to take a look at the screen.  The screen in

14     front of you has your witness statement on it.  Yes, that's it.

15        A.   I have it.

16        Q.   Let me ask you to take a look at the statement.  Is this your

17     written statement that you gave on 8 October 1998?

18        A.   All that I signed is my statement.

19        Q.   Does your signature appear at the bottom of the pages of the

20     document?

21        A.   Yes, it does.

22        Q.   Let me ask you to look at the second part of your written

23     statement dated 12 June 2004.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Dahl, in the oral decision

25     that we have rendered on the 9th of June, 2008, we had confirmed our

Page 9645

 1     decision of 27 February 2008, according to which this witness would be

 2     heard under Rule 92 ter regarding the statement that he gave on the 8th

 3     of October, 1998.  That's all, and this is the statement that we have on

 4     the screen right now.

 5             MS. DAHL:  Yes, Your Honour.

 6             In our motion, we'd indicated that the statement signed in 2004

 7     has a number of corrections in it that are an integral part of the first

 8     statement, and I can present those corrections orally or, for the

 9     interests of time, simply append that information to the original

10     statement.  I appreciate the distinction the Chamber is drawing, but I

11     want to make sure that you have the most accurate and complete

12     information available.

13        Q.   Did you provide the information contained in the written

14     statement that is 65 ter Exhibit 5036?

15        A.   Yes, yes, and I did make some corrections.

16        Q.   Yesterday, when we met, I asked you to review both statements to

17     make sure they were correct, and you gave me some handwritten corrections

18     that I've distributed previously to Mr. Seselj and to the Chamber.  Can

19     you go through the corrections with me, please?

20        A.   Under item 7, where it says "summer 1991," where I refer to

21     Vojislav Seselj, it was in fact the beginning of 1992.  I can't remember

22     the month or the date when he was in Nevesinje.  I don't actually know

23     Seselj.  I had seen him once in the 1970s, and on that occasion when he

24     was wearing a military uniform, when he came to Nevesinje with

25     Bozidar Vucurevic, Arsen Grahovac and Mr. Sprema, and I didn't really

Page 9646

 1     care who he was with.  That was the beginning of 1992, on the eve of the

 2     war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It could have been February or March.  I

 3     can't remember the date.  And on that occasion, Seselj was staying at

 4     Ravna Gora, which was a tavern and the basic of the Karadjordje

 5     Detachment.  The information was given me by Erhan Djubor [phoen] and his

 6     driver.

 7             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat?  He was saying

 8     this too quickly.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What they were talking about, I

10     don't know, and I don't really care.

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can you please repeat the name

12     of the chauffeur?  What was his name?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Tale Campara, and the information

14     was given me by Erhan Djubor.  There's another mistake.  Instead of --

15             MS. DAHL:  Just a second.  I have your original annotations, and

16     let's have them put on the ELMO so that the Chamber is able to follow

17     along.

18             For the record, the first correction that you referred to was at

19     paragraph 7 with ERN number 0363-1644, e-court page 6.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  It's very good,

21     it's legible.

22             MS. DAHL:

23        Q.   Mr. Kujan, would you proceed to the next correction that you made

24     to your statement?

25        A.   Instead of "Zejna Pijovic," it should be "Zejna Pajevic."

Page 9647

 1             MS. DAHL:  This is on page 9 in e-court with the evidence

 2     registration number 036317.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] 17.

 4             MS. DAHL:  Paragraph 17 of the document.

 5     Could Madam Registrar display that page?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Then again --

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Look at the screen, sir,

 8     because the annotations are on the screen, and you have the screen before

 9     you.

10             MS. DAHL:

11        Q.   In paragraph 19, you made a correction regarding when the mosques

12     and church in Nevesinje were destroyed.  Can you explain that, please?

13        A.   The mosque was not destroyed, as it was written.  All the mosques

14     were destroyed later.  An organised and professional team did that.  They

15     were quite qualified to handle explosives.

16        Q.   Were they destroyed after --

17        A.   Probably explosive experts.

18        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ...

19        A.   The mosques were all destroyed after Nevesinje was captured, and

20     the Catholic Church and the two town mosques were completely blown away.

21     Not even the foundations stayed intact.  The stones are now being sorted

22     to see what belongs to what, because all these buildings were listed as

23     cultural heritage of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

24        Q.   Were there any churches that were left standing in Nevesinje?

25        A.   Yes, the Serbian church and some smaller Christian orthodox

Page 9648

 1     churches were left intact.  The Catholic churches and mosques were

 2     destroyed.

 3        Q.   Let me ask you now, please, to turn to the statement that you

 4     gave in 1998.  And you included an additional name.  It's at e-court

 5     page 15, and the evidence registration number on the top of the document

 6     is 03631653.

 7        A.   It's very poorly legible.

 8        Q.   Can you look on the screen again?  They've got the device to show

 9     the picture.

10        A.   I can see that now, yes, I can see very well.

11           Since I was the commander of the reserve police force in Pridvorci,

12     the mobilisation of police reservists at that time avoided Bosniaks.

13     Bosniaks were not called up because weapons were being distributed and

14     because the decision of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina was

15     respected.

16             Djuro Miseljic, not Djuro Radic replaced me.  That's another

17     correction I have to make here, as a newly mobilised.

18        Q.   Okay.  Let me ask you to turn to the page in e-court, page 17.

19     It's 0363-1655, and you included the full name of Mr. Parezanin.  Can you

20     confirm that for me, please?

21        A.   Parezanin.  I knew that a someone who was searching and

22     interrogating some heads of families and setting ultimatums, we got an

23     ultimatum on the 18th of May to turn over the weapons that we didn't

24     have, and radio transmitters and all the rest, but this military security

25     service used some methods that were worthy of Goebel in the Second World

Page 9649

 1     War.  This man, whose last name was Parezanin, was called Svetozar.  As

 2     far as I managed to learn, he was head of the Military Security Service.

 3     Nothing could be done without him.  All the other units, including

 4     Seselj's men who were there, worked under his command.  The people who

 5     actually went to negotiate with Svetozar Parezanin were given certain

 6     conditions.  One of the conditions was for us to surrender, to turn over

 7     the people whom Svetozar thought to be extremist, including me, and to

 8     respond to the mobilisation call-up.

 9             And before the coup d'etat, the [indiscernible] in Nevesinje

10     while Vuk Draskovic had power in Nevesinje, mobilisation worked very

11     poorly.  But after Radovan Karadzic and his party, the SDS, won the

12     majority in the Parliament and in the authorities of Bosnia and

13     Herzegovina, they were impotent to do anything.  And sometime in

14     November/December 1991, these people were replaced, because practically

15     they were not able to work any longer, because the brandishing of weapons

16     above their heads was not really encouraging.

17             I have to say in this procedure that I was the representative of

18     Bosniaks in Nevesinje, where around 10 per cent of the population were

19     killed, which is equal to Srebrenica's massacre, and I felt it was my

20     moral duty to respond to the call of this Court, because there can be no

21     justice without truth.  I want to be absolutely fair, not to add anything

22     or hold back anything.  I'm not here to score points for any side, and I

23     wanted this to be a public hearing so that everyone could hear.

24             I'm saying again I saw Seselj once in passing in the 1980s in

25     Sarajevo.  I saw him in the beginning of 1992 in Nevesinje.  And after

Page 9650

 1     that, I heard no more of him.  But I heard that his people in Nevesinje

 2     were searching for Muslims, and there were cases when in some houses the

 3     refugees took over, Seselj's men came and said they were looking for

 4     Muslims.  We said there were no Muslims.

 5             The massacre in Nevesinje happened after the withdrawal of Serbs

 6     from Mostar, Konjac and that region.  That's from the 14th to the 28th of

 7     June.  The people who remained in Nevesinje later ended up in prison or

 8     in third countries.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Dahl, you have five more

10     minutes.

11             MS. DAHL:

12        Q.   Mr. Kujan, could you look at the last page of your statement

13     below -- with the number of persons who were killed in Nevesinje, and you

14     made some corrections.  This is on the same page that we were on, but

15     just at the bottom.  It's --

16        A.   Yes, yes.

17             MS. DAHL:  I think we need to go one more.  There we are.

18        Q.   Have you participated in the gathering of information about

19     people who were killed or missing?

20        A.   I was the leader of the Displaced Persons of Nevesinje, that is,

21     Bosniaks and Croats, people displaced during the last war.  We gathered

22     all the information.  I have lists, if somebody wants to see them.  We

23     have a total of 350 civilians listed as missing of Bosniak and Croat

24     ethnicity.

25             However, later on some people reappeared, who managed to survive

Page 9651

 1     in the woods.  One woman, with four children, managed to survive with the

 2     help of the Red Cross in Trebinje, so the number came down to 301

 3     Bosniaks and Croats.  Out of this number, 158 Bosniaks and 7 Croats were

 4     found dead, and we are still looking for another 148 Bosniaks and 8

 5     Croats.

 6             MS. DAHL:  With the permission of the Chamber, Mr. Kujan can

 7     speak to annex 10 of the third amended indictment, which is the schedule

 8     of victims whose remains are -- whose names are listed, and I'd like to

 9     have him review the list.

10             I have copies for the Court.  I had not anticipated, when I

11     prepared the Court binder, that he would be able to review the list and

12     testify as to its accuracy.

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, I know, this is part of

14     the civilians who had been killed.  The group consisted of 72 missing

15     civilians.  These civilians were captured on mount Velez in Jasenov Do.

16     Part of them were taken to the Alatnica in Nevesinje.  Later on,

17     according to my information, these missing civilians were killed near

18     Lipovaca.  In 1994, they were moved out of that pit, Lipovaca.  We did

19     not find out where the bones, the remains of these people are.

20             Could you please -- could you show me the other part of the list

21     now?

22             Well, at any rate, it has to do with civilians from Knunapresik

23     [phoen], the municipality of Nevesinje, and another village.  It has to

24     do with entire families, practically, from newborn babies to old men.  So

25     not much thought was given to who was there.

Page 9652

 1             As for this list, it was the biggest group that was killed in one

 2     place in Nevesinje.

 3        Q.   Let me ask you to take a look at the second page of annex 10.

 4        A.   It's one and the same group, except that the last names and the

 5     first names are different, and they suffered the same fate like the

 6     persons that I spoke of a few moments ago.

 7        Q.   If I may for a moment return to your written statements.  With

 8     the corrections that we have discussed, do these statements accurately

 9     reflect what you would say if you were asked questions today about the

10     events in the statements?

11        A.   I mean, what I said in my statement is something that I stand by.

12     Some kind of an error or omission can always slip in, because wherever

13     one works, one may make a mistake as well.  However, I made an effort to

14     have this statement be as balanced as possible.

15             However, what I wish to say before this Court is -- well, if you

16     allow me to do so, Your Honours.  Things started happening in Mostar a

17     lot earlier before the war and while things were being prepared, as it

18     were.  In 1989, the first rally was held in Nevesinje.  In 1990, Jovic

19     from Novo Pazova, I don't know his first name, he had a rally against the

20     government that was in power, and nobody was really opposed --

21        Q.   Let me make sure I get an answer to my technical question so that

22     before we run out of time I've given the Chamber all the information they

23     need whether to decide to admit your statements into evidence.

24             To the best of your knowledge, with the corrections we've made,

25     are these statements accurate, and if I asked you the same questions

Page 9653

 1     again, would you give the information contained in the statements?

 2        A.   I said, when taking the oath, that I would say the truth, the

 3     whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and that is what I wrote as well,

 4     so I don't think that there is much to discuss about that.

 5             MS. DAHL:  Thank you.

 6             Your Honour, may I move these statements into evidence, please.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, you may.

 8             Before the Trial Chamber settles this, I have a few follow-up

 9     questions to put to you.  I'd like to go to the point and discuss your

10     statement with you.

11                           Questioned by the Court:

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] There are two parts to your

13     statement; first of all, the arrival of the people in Nevesinje, and

14     after that the events which are directly tied to what happened on the

15     21st of June.

16             What I'm interested in is this:  When you saw the various forces

17     arriving in Nevesinje or its surroundings, or in the surrounding areas,

18     what entitles you to say that, according to you, there were Chetniks, and

19     who were the people who made up these Chetniks?

20        A.   I grew up and to this day I live in a place where the phenomenon

21     of Chetniks is not an unknown thing.  As for the intentions and

22     programmes of Chetnik programmes, we Bosniaks understand them to quite an

23     extent.  It wasn't only in this war.  There were wars before this one,

24     too.

25             The Chetniks in Nevesinje, as a special formation with special

Page 9654

 1     objectives, that is something that did not exist.  What existed was a

 2     programme of a Greater Serbia, and all the formations fought under a

 3     single banner.  However, different tasks -- well, my objective over here

 4     is to clear the name of honest Serbs who did not sully their hands.

 5     However, I think that on the orders of military security, there were

 6     individuals who did a great deal of evil in Nevesinje.  These were former

 7     communists and former JNA officers.  I mentioned one of them, Parezanin.

 8     I did not mention others, but Blagoje Adzic was certainly involved in the

 9     area of Nevesinje.  He's a general of the former JNA.  He lives in

10     Belgrade.  I don't know whether he's retired or not, but he is related to

11     some people in Nevesinje.

12             The president of the Municipality of Nevesinje, Vukan Bratic was

13     his name, he came after Bratic [as interpreted], he is probably related

14     to this general.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In your statement, you say that

16     the forces that attack were the following:  The local police, the members

17     of Karadjordje units, Karadjordje unit.  I don't know who these people

18     are.  You say there was Arkan's unit and Seselj's unit.

19             What I'm interested in is this:  Seselj's unit.  How do you know

20     that these were Seselj's men or Seselj's units?  How do you know this?

21        A.  When speaking of Seselj's unit, I know very little, but people

22     could still move about.  And these people who call themselves that,

23     Seselj's men, or as they were designated Seselj's men, they instilled

24     fear in the Serbs who did not want to respond to mobilisation or who

25     cooperated in any other way with other ethnic groups.  For me to have

Page 9655

 1     seen any one of them having killed someone or for me to know their names,

 2     I mean, they didn't really have names.  They were called the Yellow One,

 3     the White One, the Man of Vukovar, the Man of Pozarevac.  They had all

 4     sorts of nicknames like that.  I'm not going into all their nicknames

 5     now.  So, in this way, that was different.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Did you talk to these people?

 7     Did you speak to these people?

 8        A.  No, I did not talk to them at all.  I didn't find them

 9     interesting.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] According to what you say, the

11     head of these men was someone going by the name of Parezanin?  Can you

12     confirm this?

13        A.   Parezanin was the chief of military security who was in charge of

14     all units.  It wasn't only Karadjordje or whatever, Seselj's men.  He was

15     a JNA officer, of the former JNA, that is.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In your statement, you say he

17     was a colonel in the JNA?

18        A.   Yes, that's right, very well known to us in the talks, Judge.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Since you seem to be an

20     educated man and you are now an elected official, I'm sure you are going

21     to answer my question.

22             In your view, this JNA colonel was the person who had authority

23     over all the units present on the ground?

24        A.   Let me make a correction.  I am not a local counselman.  I spent

25     three terms as a local counselman, but my title is different.

Page 9656

 1             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter did not catch it.

 2        A.   He covered all units.  As for commands and orders, there is no

 3     doubt about that.  Tasks were issued as to who should do what.  When

 4     there would be a snag, when people did not obey, well, one knew who would

 5     go.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me get to the second part.

 7             You state that on the 21st of June, the villages of Postoljani,

 8     Donja Bijenja, and Gornja Bijenja were attacked, and you say that you saw

 9     this attack, since you had a pair of binoculars, and there were tanks and

10     artillery fire, and you saw troops, groups of Chetniks, around the

11     village.  This large-scale attack, since there are attacks -- this is a

12     large-scale attack, according to you, was this attack conducted under the

13     command of the JNA?

14        A.   Well, you see, Judge, on the 16th of June, below Mount Velez, on

15     this plateau by Mostar, the Serbs suffered a terrible defeat, where the

16     commander got killed, Pusara, commander of that sector, and in fact

17     there was no line between Mostar and Nevesinje.

18             On the 14th of June, before that, the village of Zulja was

19     torched, then it was the municipality of Nevesinje, and now the area

20     belongs to Mostar, and masses of people were taken out of that village.

21             On the 16th of June, was attacked was the village of Odzak, and

22     whoever happened to be there is not alive anymore.

23             On the 21st of June, in the evening, Gornja and Donja Bijenja and

24     Postoljani were attacked, and there was some artillery preparation before

25     that.  I was in the woods then.  I was an armed man.  I am a hunter.

Page 9657

 1             And at that time, I could not recognise who was a policeman, who

 2     was a man of Seselj's, who was this and who was that, but I'm convinced

 3     that they all took part because they had these big boom boxes and they

 4     were playing music.  And you could also hear that they spoke the Ekavian

 5     dialect.

 6             Yet again on the same day, there was an ultimatum to us that we

 7     would return, that an attack would begin in an hour, and that we should

 8     hand over our weapons, the weapons we had, and that we should go back to

 9     continue normal life.  Normal life in that kind of a situation, I mean,

10     that is mindless, because there has been no normal life in Nevesinje

11     since 1991, when the Uzice and Titograd Corps arrived.  We had over 350

12     civilians who were fleeing at the time, and also from some other villages

13     where the local Serbs helped us, Pluzine, Bratac, and in part of Odzak

14     people were wandering about, and then they joined us, and --

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What you are saying is already

16     in your statement, sir.  You're not answering my question.

17             What I wanted to know was whether this attack had been conducted

18     under the command of the JNA.  It's either "yes" or "no."

19        A.   Yes.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So you lived through this

21     attack, since you saw it, and then you say in your statement that you

22     joined the Territorial Defence in Konjic and, in fact, you did not

23     witness what happened after that, i.e., the crimes that were committed

24     against the inhabitants that were taken captive.  That, you don't know.

25     You heard about this afterwards.

Page 9658

 1             Do we agree on this?

 2        A.   We fully agree.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This is my last question now.

 4     And then I will ask my colleagues on the bench whether they have any

 5     questions to put to you.  My last question has to do with Grahovac, Arsen

 6     Grahovac.  Who is this person?

 7        A.   This is the way it was:  I knew Arsen Grahovac personally, he

 8     did not seem to be a bad person to me.  However, in 1991, Radovan Sprema,

 9     who was an MP in the then Parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina, or was it

10     the Chamber of Citizens or was it the Chamber of Municipalities, as these

11     things were called then, I don't know.  But, anyway, with Arsen, he

12     established this detachment that was named "Karadjordje," and also there

13     was this coffee bar called "Ravna Gora."  And then this detachment took

14     up all the roads and all the exists from Nevesinje.  People were

15     mistreated practically, some of them were even beaten, some were

16     searched.  If a person would go there ten times a day, they'd be searched

17     ten times a day.  And there were cases when people were made to graze

18     grass, and I don't want to go into all the things that happened.

19             Arsen's defence, I know that.  There are very few survivors, very

20     few of his soldiers survived, and this detachment stopped functioning.

21     It was established -- or, rather, what was established in Nevesinje was

22     the Nevesinje Brigade.  Novica Gusic was the commander, and he hails from

23     Bratac.  He's also a former JNA officer and lives somewhere in Belgrade

24     nowadays.

25             There was this man called Bratace.  I don't know him at all.  I

Page 9659

 1     didn't mention him in my statement.  He was also the commander of this

 2     Nevesinje Brigade.

 3             As for Arsen, I really have nothing additional to say.  In fact,

 4     this detachment was established by Sprema, and who issued tasks to Arsen

 5     Grahovac and the detachment, I assume -- I am I assume it was the

 6     Military and State Security, the former Yugoslavia.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You anticipated my next

 8     question.  I was going to ask you who Arsen Grahovac reported to.  You

 9     said you didn't know, but you assumed that he reported to the military

10     security bodies.

11             Thank you for having answered the question I was about to put to

12     you.  I shall turn to my colleagues on the Bench and see if they have any

13     questions.  They don't.

14             Since Mr. Seselj is not going to cross-examine you, I shall thank

15     you, on behalf of my colleagues, for having come to testify in The Hague

16     on those facts which you may have witnessed.

17             Your statement will be admitted into evidence, and I shall ask

18     the Registrar to give us an exhibit number, please.  Registrar, please.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection.

20             Mr. President, I'm going to have a procedural matter to deal with

21     before you assign a number to this statement, of course once the witness

22     leaves.  I don't think it is necessary for you to admit into evidence the

23     statement in the presence of the witness.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

25             Witness -- all this can be done in the absence of the witness,

Page 9660

 1     Mrs. Dahl.

 2             MS. DAHL:  If Mr. Seselj has an objection that can be cured by

 3     putting a particular question to the witness then we should take care of

 4     that now.  I also wanted to raise the question if the Chamber wants the

 5     handwritten corrections to be made part of the record or if the verbal

 6     testimony is sufficient.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, please make your

 8     objection.  If this needs to be checked in the presence of the witness,

 9     please go ahead.  What is your objection, Mr. Seselj?

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It has nothing to do with the

11     witness.  It is of a purely procedural nature.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] This has nothing to do with the

13     witness?

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It has nothing to do with the

15     witness.  It has something to do with the conduct of the OTP.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It has nothing to do with the

17     witness's statement?

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, there are two

19     statements involved.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, we have two, 2004 and

21     1998.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You are forcing me to present the

23     essence of my objection before the witness, and I don't want that.  I am

24     not -- I don't want the witness to say what he has to say in view of my

25     objections if I'm not examining him anyway.  So it doesn't have to do

Page 9661

 1     with me; it has to do with formal objections.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I shall confer with my

 3     colleagues.

 4                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Sir, you may now leave the

 6     courtroom, since this objection has nothing to do with the content of

 7     your statement.  I shall ask Madam Usher to escort you out of the

 8     courtroom.  You may leave now.

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

10                           [The witness withdrew]

11             MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, if we may --

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It's been decided, Mrs. Dahl.

13             MS. DAHL:  May we ask that the witness wait, in case there is

14     information that Mr. Seselj is providing that is germane to --

15              JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We can deal with that

16     afterwards, if need be.

17             Mr. Seselj, you have the floor to address this procedural matter.

18             Prior to that, nonetheless, we shall give an exhibit number to

19     the 1998 statement.  Registrar, please.

20             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will be Exhibit number P524.

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am not going to repeat my

23     principled opposition to the application of Rule 92 ter.  You all know my

24     objections in regard to that.  I am only going to point out here what you

25     stated at one point, Mr. President.  Your decision had to do with

Page 9662

 1     admitting this witness's statement from 1998 according to Rule 92 ter.

 2             In that statement, there is a single reference to Seselj's men.

 3     That is what you quoted, where he says the forces that were carrying out

 4     these attacks were the local police, members of the Karadjordje unit,

 5     Chetniks from Serbia and Montenegro, and Arkan's and Seselj's units that

 6     arrived in Nevesinje towards the end of 1991.  I saw them personally.

 7     They socialized with Savic, the chief of police.  They had special

 8     insignia.  They wore red berets and they had insignia with white eagles.

 9     You accept that this goes into evidence.  I mean, I'm not going to oppose

10     that at all.  However, that is the only reference to Seselj's men.  Let

11     us leave aside the fact that Arkan's men were never there, nor were there

12     any of Seselj's men there, but let's leave that aside.

13             In that area, there were never, ever any of Arkan's men.

14     However, I'd like to draw your attention to the following, that what is

15     stated here is that both Seselj's men and Arkan's men wore red berets,

16     which is absolutely incredible.  And then it says that Arkan's men had

17     white eagles, which is not true, because Arkan had his own insignia.

18     However, you admitted this statement from 1998.  You admitted it into

19     evidence, and you are going to assess its probative value.

20             Now it is your own affair.  You are in charge of assessing

21     probative value of statements that are admitted into evidence.

22             Now, on the basis of what do you --

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Why didn't you raise these issues in the presence

24     of the witness?  That would have enabled us to explore the matter.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Because in that way it would look

Page 9663

 1     like cross-examination, and I do not wish in any way to legalize your

 2     decision that any statement be admitted according to Rule 92 ter.  If I

 3     were to be involved in cross-examination, then I would be saying that

 4     you're right for admitting that into evidence, and I do not dare do that

 5     because that is the strategy of my defence.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you have, I'm sure,

 7     clearly noted that I addressed this paragraph which mentions Seselj's men

 8     when I put my question to the witness, and I asked him what entitled him

 9     to say that these were Seselj's men, and you heard his answer.  He said

10     that people were saying that these were Seselj's men, or some people were

11     saying it.  That's all he said by way of an answer to my question.

12             As far as the assessment is concerned, well, this will be weighed

13     globally.  We will not be satisfied with this statement only to assess

14     what actually happened, who is responsible for what, which units were

15     present, and so on and so forth.  Of course, it didn't escape me that

16     they had red berets.  It didn't escape me that they wore white eagles,

17     either.  Of course, it goes without saying, so this will be weighed by

18     the Judges.

19             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Seselj, hold on a second, because I wish to

20     add, in continuation of what the Presiding Judge has just told you, that

21     you can't, for your own strategic reasons, circumvent the procedural

22     rules of this Court.  You should have raised this issue while the witness

23     was there, which would have enabled the Judges to explore the matter

24     further.  We asked you specifically whether your intervention had

25     anything to do with the witness's statement, and you said, "No."  And

Page 9664

 1     then when the witness had left, it turned out that it had everything to

 2     do with the statement.  That is not a proper way of conducting your

 3     defence.  I'm sorry.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, I believe that the

 5     Presiding Judge questioned the witness correctly with regard to this

 6     matter.  I have no objections to raise in that context.

 7             Secondly, I believe that your decision is unlawful, in terms of

 8     applying 92 ter, because there is a provision in the Rules that says that

 9     newly-created amendments to the indictment cannot pertain to my case, and

10     if -- and that prejudices me.  And I certainly proved that that does

11     prejudice me.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you are very well

13     versed in procedural matters.  The Trial Chamber has already settled the

14     issue, the retractive application of 92 ter.  This has already been

15     settled.  Fortunately, I know my case back to front, which means that

16     I can answer your question.

17             If I were an incapable judge, I would just let you speak, and

18     everybody would be under the impression that your rights have been

19     infringed, but the point you have just mentioned is a point which has

20     been addressed many times by the Trial Chamber.  I believe Mrs. Dahl had

21     even responded.  And despite that, despite the fact that Mrs. Dahl

22     provided an answer, despite that the Trial Chamber has ruled on this, you

23     are putting this on the agenda once again.

24             We understand this full well, you feel this may prejudice you.

25     We have clearly stipulated that there is no prejudice because you have

Page 9665

 1     the possibility to cross-examine.  Since you do not wish to

 2     cross-examine, you have realised that the Bench, the Judges and I, go to

 3     the point.  We put questions to the witness in this way, and this is what

 4     I did in this case also.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please, you forced me to now repeat

 6     my earlier objections, but I haven't presented the gist of my current

 7     objection.  The first one was the illustration -- will you please warn

 8     Mrs. Dahl not to interrupt me?  That's an illustration.  However,

 9     Mrs. Dahl is now --

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, Mr. Seselj,

11     Mrs. Dahl is on her feet.

12             Mrs. Dahl, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. Seselj has not finished, so

13     he still wants to add something.  What did you want to say?

14             MS. DAHL:  I'm made to understand that we have a second witness

15     remaining.  There is a short amount of time --

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, exactly.

17             MS. DAHL:  [Previous translation continues] ... the recess, we

18     have to take a break.  If there is a --

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, you're right.

20             MS. DAHL:  [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Seselj can

21     file a written submission and explicate completely and clearly any new

22     fact or new argument that he has yet to present to the Chamber.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

24             So, Mr. Seselj, we have the second witness for today.  He's

25     waiting.  And we will also have to take a break.  If the latter part of

Page 9666

 1     your objection can be made very briefly, I will hand you the floor, but

 2     try to be brief, please.  And after that, we'll take a break.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Since you decided to accept the

 4     1998 statement under 92 ter, the Prosecution is now sneaking in another

 5     statement, saying it's just an amendment and a correction of the previous

 6     one, whereas I'm convinced that if you had had insight into this

 7     statement of 2004, you would have never decided that this witness testify

 8     under 92 ter.  You would have brought him viva voce.  That is the gist of

 9     my objection, because in this 2004 statement he's presenting new

10     assertions that he'd never featured before.  And here in paragraph 4 --

11     sorry, 7, he said I was in Nevesinje in summer 1991, and now he's

12     correcting himself, saying it was the beginning of 1992.  It's a huge

13     lapse of time.  It can't be a simple, genuine mistake.

14             And then he says for a fact Seselj appointed and authorised

15     Arsen Grahovac as the leader of the unit that was always in combat

16     readiness, whereas I showed you that he was a deputy of the Serbian

17     Renewal Movement.  If you think it's not in the interests of justice to

18     allow me to present this, you will drop me --

19             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I did not

20     understand.  You also wanted the other statement to be put in record?

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Seselj.  The 2004

22     statement is actually not going to be admitted.  In fact, it's the 1998,

23     not the other one.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If that is really so, then my

25     objection is pointless.  I had understood that you were admitting both

Page 9667

 1     statements, because the second one was presented by Ms. Dahl as an

 2     amendment and a corrective of the previous one.  If only the first

 3     statement is going in, not the one from 2004, then my objection doesn't

 4     stand, but I would like to hear from Ms. Dahl.  Does she want both

 5     statements admitted or just the one from 1998?  If she confirms that she

 6     tendered only the 1998 statement, then it's all right, but I'm certain

 7     that she tendered both.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mrs. Dahl.

 9             MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, we did tender both, because there are

10     corrections in the 2004 statement that go to the 1998 statement.

11                           [Trial Chamber confers]

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, very well.

13             The Trial Chamber decides to admit the 1998 statement.  And with

14     regard to some details and some points of the 1998 statements, that's in

15     the transcript.  So we have the 1998 statement, plus the transcript which

16     deal with some corrections; the fact that it was not in the summer of

17     1991, but that it was in 1992.  The changes are on the transcript.

18             So we are going to take a 20-minute break, and we will reconvene

19     in 20 minutes' time.

20             MS. DAHL:  I need the portion of the second statement that

21     includes the list of victims, or we can simply admit annex 10 as

22     identified by the witness, because the 2004 statement lists out the

23     people who were killed from the various villages.  And if I had

24     appreciated the Chamber was going to reject the 2004 statement, I would

25     have led that orally so that we could get that into the record.

Page 9668

 1             If I may just -- I can write a very brief written submission

 2     about the key pieces for --

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but what is your concern

 4     is basically the list of victims, the annex 10, if I'm not mistaken, but

 5     that is already in the indictment.

 6             MS. DAHL:  Well, I have to prove the indictment.  I can't simply

 7     rest on it.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, very well, but it's in the

 9     transcript --

10             MS. DAHL:  But if I may, I want to go --

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but, but -- one moment,

12     please.  But in the transcript, the person did confirm the list.  He did

13     confirm the list, so there is no problem, is there?

14             So you are seeking the admission of the list, such as recognised

15     by the witness from his statement.  But I will confer with my fellow

16     Judges.

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Gentlemen, Judges, I can assist

19     you.  I am not contesting the existence of these victims and the list of

20     victims, because I don't believe anyone would make up a list of people

21     who were killed.  So I'm not challenging that.

22             What matters to me is that you confirm to me that the statement

23     from 2004 was not admitted into evidence, because if it had been

24     admitted, that would have been unlawful, in my opinion.

25             That was the gist of my objection.

Page 9669

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  Let's give an

 2     exhibit number to the list.  Mr. Registrar, please.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, the list, which is annex 10 to the

 4     indictment, will be Exhibit number P525.

 5             MS. DAHL:  With regard, Your Honour, to the 2004 statement, there

 6     are a number of paragraphs that go directly to the prior statement to

 7     correct or augment information, in particular the lists of people who

 8     were killed, and I believe that Your Honour covered the information about

 9     Arsen Grahovac.  But I think in the interests of having complete

10     information before the Chamber, I would prefer that you admit it and then

11     determine what weight to give it.  I think his testimony did cover the

12     mosques and the church destructions.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No, no, no.  We have already

14     decided.

15             First of all, we are admitting the 1998 statement, then the list

16     of annex 10 recognised by the witness is also admitted.  Thirdly, the

17     corrections that were made regarding the 1998 statement are in the

18     transcript, and that's all.

19             We will reconvene in 20 minutes' time.

20                           --- Recess taken at 3.55 p.m.

21                           --- On resuming at 4.17 p.m.

22                           [The witness entered court]

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

24             Good afternoon, sir.  Can you hear me in a language that you

25     understand?

Page 9670

 1             Very well.  We will ask you to read the solemn declaration.  But

 2     before that, please give us your name, your date of birth, please.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Nebojsa Stojanovic, born on the

 4     28th of July, 1966, in Vranje.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Are you currently employed,

 6     sir, and if so, what is your profession?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  I work in the finance section

 8     of a private business.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Are you an accountant?  What do

10     you do, exactly?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Financial manager.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  Have you ever

13     testified before a tribunal regarding the events that took place in the

14     former Yugoslavia or are you testifying for the first time?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the first time.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

17             Could you please read the solemn declaration.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

19     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

20                            WITNESS:  NEBOJSA STOJANOVIC

21                           [The witness answered through interpreter]

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, sir.  You

23     may be seated.

24             Witness, before I hand the floor to the Prosecutor, I would like

25     to inform you on the way the hearing will take place.  This is a -- these

Page 9671

 1     proceedings may different than the ones you're accustomed to in your own

 2     country.

 3             First, what will happen is you will first have to answer to

 4     questions that will be put to you by the Prosecutor.  The Prosecutor may

 5     also show you some documents.  We have two hours for this portion.  Then

 6     Mr. Seselj, the accused, sitting to your left, will also put questions to

 7     you in cross-examination, and Mr. Seselj will also dispose of the same

 8     amount of time as the Prosecutor.

 9             The three Judges sitting before you will also be able to

10     intervene at any point in time, and we may also put questions to you.

11             Please try to be concise in answering questions put to you, and

12     if you do not understand a question, please ask the person putting the

13     question to you to rephrase it or to put the question again.

14             Every 90 minutes, we take a 15- or 20-minute break.  This allows

15     the witness to rest, because you will see that it can be tiresome to

16     answer questions, and also we may change -- or we have to change the

17     tapes, actually.  And if you are tired at any point in time, please tell

18     us and we will give you a break.  And we are also here to answer any

19     question or concern that you may have.

20             You are now sworn in and you are a Court witness, which means

21     that up until tomorrow, the end of your testimony, you're not to have any

22     contacts with anybody except, of course, with members of your family to

23     tell them that you're all right and that everything is going well.  Other

24     than that, you may not discuss this case with anybody.

25             I also notice that you took out some documents from your purse or

Page 9672

 1     case.  What are those documents?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all, I would like to say

 3     that I have certain problems that started back in Serbia, and I've been

 4     here for a couple of days.

 5             Second, I officially stated before this International Tribunal

 6     that I want to be a Defence witness, and I documented this.  I don't know

 7     whether the Trial Chamber received this documentation, authorised and

 8     verified officially in court, because there is a little difference

 9     between the judicial procedure, so I verified this statement in court.

10             After hearing from you, I am in two minds now.  I don't want to

11     violate any of your rules or be accused of contempt by failing to appear.

12     On the other hand, I have medical certificates that I have great health

13     problems, because the gentlemen from the Prosecution are exerting great

14     pressure on me and my family.  We have tried to do something about it

15     through my lawyers, but I received no answer from the president.

16     Instead, I got a new summons, so it is new pressure.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] First of all, I'm glad you

18     came, because if you hadn't come, we would have had to make an indictment

19     against you, and you would have ended up in jail.  So I am very glad you

20     answered the injunction to appear.

21             Now, we knew that you wanted to be a Defence witness, except that

22     the witnesses do not believe -- do not belong to the Defence or to the

23     Prosecution.  You are a witness of the justice, of the Court, and the

24     Prosecutor deemed that you are to answer questions that he will put to

25     you.  But the procedure calls for the fact that if the Prosecutor sees

Page 9673

 1     that you are not answering his questions, then he will state that you are

 2     a hostile witness.  And then he will have the right to put you leading --

 3     to put leading questions to you, because this procedure is the common law

 4     procedure and witnesses of the Prosecutor have to answer in a neutral

 5     way -- rather, the Prosecutor will put neutral questions.  He cannot lead

 6     an answer or get an answer from you or from any witness.

 7             Now, if you are a hostile witness or if he deems that you are a

 8     hostile witness, the Prosecutor may inform the Chamber of the fact that

 9     he believes that you are a hostile witness, and then he is allowed to put

10     other questions -- other types of questions to you, leading questions.

11             For the time being, you are here to answer questions put to you

12     by the Prosecution, by Mr. Seselj, and by the Judges of this

13     Trial Chamber.  You will answer on facts that you have witnessed.  Maybe

14     what you say will go in favour of Mr. Seselj.  Good for him.  But it can

15     also be in favour of the Prosecution.  Good for them.  But what the

16     Judges of this Trial Chamber wish is that you answer so that we can get

17     closer to truth.

18             Now you're under oath.  You've stated that you will tell the

19     truth, and nothing else but the truth.  This is what counts.  Whether

20     your testimony goes in favour of one party or another, that is not our

21     problem.  That is somebody else's problem, if you will.

22             However, you told me that you do not feel well, that you have

23     health problems.  If at any point in time you are not feeling well, you

24     have to let me know, and then we will call a doctor to examine you.  But

25     since you are taken care of by the Witness and Victims Section, I'm sure

Page 9674

 1     that you must have told them that you are suffering, that you're not

 2     well, and I'm sure that they must have brought this to the attention of

 3     the doctor.

 4             You seem well to me.  Maybe in the following seconds you will get

 5     a heart attack, but I can also die of a heart attack in a few seconds.  I

 6     cannot foresee this.  But for the time being, you seem quite capable to

 7     answer questions that will be put to you.  But if you are not feeling

 8     well, please let me know and we will stop.

 9             Now, your medical chart you may keep for you, because it is

10     covered by medical secrecy.  If you wish, you can tell us what medical

11     problems you have - that's up to you - but I am not authorised to ask you

12     what your health problems are, precisely, what you are suffering from.

13             Now, you've talked about pressure.  Now, I imagine that the

14     Prosecutor may have called you on a couple of occasions to ask you to

15     come, and I'm sure that he may have -- he must have told you that if you

16     don't appear before this Court, you will suffer the consequences.  I was

17     not there, I did not witness the conversation, I don't know what the

18     Prosecutor may have told you, but maybe it's just a friendly pressure.

19     What really is important, actually, is that you are here.

20             And also what's important, it is important for Mr. Seselj,

21     because he will be putting questions to you, and this is for his defence,

22     and this is why it is important that you also answer his questions.

23             Since you are under oath, you are now a witness of the Court.

24     This is what I wanted to tell you.  Maybe I've reassured you.  I hope I

25     did.

Page 9675

 1             Do you have something to add?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have nothing to fear, because I

 3     trust the Court and I trust you, the Judges.  However, I suffer from

 4     angina pectoris.  I have brought all the documentation on that,

 5     testifying to how poorly I'm feeling.  But as you've said, I did give the

 6     solemn declaration, and I'm willing to testify.  But I would like to

 7     testify once that contact is made with the Defence of

 8     Mr. Vojislav Seselj.

 9             The first statement that I gave to the Prosecution and which I

10     signed, it's true that I signed it without looking, because I was

11     verbally informed of the contents; but it's actually very different from

12     what I said.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, of course, but that's not

14     really a problem, because you came to answer questions.  So your

15     statement is not going to be taken into account.

16             This is not a type of trial where your statement will be

17     admitted.  When the Prosecutor puts questions to you, you will tell him

18     exactly what happened, according to you.  So maybe you will contradict

19     your own statement.  That doesn't matter.  What really matters is that

20     you will have to answer the questions that are put to you.

21             You received your statement because I suppose that Mr. Seselj's

22     Defence must have sent it to you.  You reread it and then you realised

23     that what it contains does not correspond either to what you said or to

24     reality, so you are here to explain it, in fact.  And you will explain

25     this for justice.  Maybe it's going to be in the interests of Mr. Seselj,

Page 9676

 1     maybe it's in the interests of the Prosecutor, I don't know, but we will

 2     see.

 3             Mr. Marcussen, you have the floor.

 4                           Examination by Mr. Marcussen:

 5        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Stojanovic.  My name is Mathias Marcussen.

 6     I'm a trial attorney for the Prosecution.  As you did not wish to meet

 7     any of the representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor after you

 8     arrived in The Hague, we have not had a chance to meet.

 9             As the President pointed out, I'm going to ask some questions

10     about events in 1991.

11             The Presiding Judge noted that you have some documents, and I can

12     see you still have them in front of you.  For the purpose of the

13     testimony, I think the best would be if you would be kind enough to put

14     your documents aside and just answer my questions, and I might show you

15     some documents along the way.  But it would be better if you wouldn't

16     mind putting your notes away, please.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a question, actually, for

18     the witness.  I wasn't seeing you very well, because in fact I have two

19     screens.  I see you have an emblem on your pullover or on your T-shirt.

20     What is it?  Is that a football club, or what is it, exactly?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's the Serbian coat of arms of

22     the Republic of Serbia.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you very much.

24             MR. MARCUSSEN:

25        Q.   Would you please put all your documents away.  But it's fine that

Page 9677

 1     you lie them down next to you.  I'm not asking for them to be taken from

 2     you, but it would be better if you would be kind enough to place them

 3     next to you, please.

 4        A.   Your Honour, I don't know, what's the problem with the judiciary

 5     of Serbia?  There is documentation, and I'm keeping all this.  It was all

 6     a long time ago, and I'm keeping this --

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand, but in our

 8     judicial system - this is an international criminal tribunal - this is an

 9     oral procedure, so the witness has to answer orally.

10             Very well.  So please set aside the documents that you have

11     before you.  Very well, thank you.

12             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Thank you very much, sir.

13        Q.   Sir, I'd like to start asking you whether you have done your

14     military service.

15        A.   I have.

16        Q.   And in what unit?

17        A.   Armoured Mechanised Unit in Belgrade.

18        Q.   When did you do your military service?

19        A.   1985/1986, in that period.

20        Q.   And after your military service, did you pursue any studies?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   What did you study?

23        A.   I graduated from a higher school in Vranje.  Later in Pristina, I

24     graduated from the School of Science and Mathematics from the University

25     of Pristina.

Page 9678

 1        Q.   I should tell you, sir, as we haven't talked about how our

 2     evidence should go, that I'm pausing a little bit.  That's because we

 3     have translations, so it's not that I'm doubting your answers.  I'm just

 4     allowing the translators to translate.

 5             After your military service, did you have a job somewhere?  And

 6     if so, what was your position?

 7        A.   Yes, I did.  I did this higher school in Serbia, the evening

 8     course, and that's the same I did with the university.  It was like

 9     on-the-job training or parallel -- studies parallel with work.

10        Q.   In the studies you did in Pristina, did you obtain a university

11     degree?  And if so, at what level?

12        A.   I received a diploma of Bachelor of Chemistry and Mathematics in

13     1999, so I have a university degree.

14        Q.   It was -- maybe I misunderstood, but after your military service,

15     where did you work?

16        A.   Before my military service, I had already started working.  That

17     was in 1995 [as interpreted].  I started working in the shoe factory,

18     Kostana.  And in Serbia, when you are 18 or 19, you apply to do your

19     military service, which lasts for a year, and during that time your job

20     is on hold, waiting for you.

21        Q.   And when you came back from your military service, in what

22     function did you work?

23        A.   Well, after that, when I completed that school, I was an ordinary

24     blue-collar worker, but I got promoted gradually; first, manager, and

25     then to the chief of the laboratory.

Page 9679

 1        Q.   How long were you the chief of the laboratory?

 2        A.   A year, perhaps.  I can't remember.

 3        Q.   And after that, where did you work?

 4        A.   After that, the business was not doing well, and after 1990, it

 5     went bankrupt.  I became later the general manager of a company in

 6     Bujanovac, a factory producing batteries.

 7        Q.   And how long did you serve as the general manager?

 8        A.   Until 2004.  The 21st of January, 2004.

 9        Q.   And after 2004, what have you been done since then?

10        A.   I moved to Belgrade to live there.  I got married.  I worked in

11     Galenika, a pharmaceutical factory, for two years, and then I moved to

12     another company, INVE, in Zemun, near Belgrade.  And now I'm working in

13     the business I've already mentioned in answering the Judge's question in

14     the beginning.

15        Q.   Thank you.  And I just have to clarify a question -- or an answer

16     that you gave.  It says on the transcript that you started to work

17     already in 1995.  Would I be correct that it's actually in 1985?

18        A.   1985.

19             MR. MARCUSSEN:  So that will be a correction to line 25 on

20     page 50.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because I completed the high school

22     at 18, and I immediately got that job.  There was some different

23     sections, different vocational orientations, and every graduate

24     immediately got a job.

25             MR. MARCUSSEN:

Page 9680

 1        Q.   And we understand that you have made quite a good career for

 2     yourself since then.

 3             I just wondered, what languages do you speak?  Do you speak any

 4     other languages than Serbian?

 5        A.   I speak French, and since 1999, after the NATO aggression in

 6     Serbia, I stopped using French completely.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I'm terribly sorry.

 8             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 9        Q.   Mr. Stojanovic, we will maybe get back to this later, but I just

10     wanted to clarify something before we go into your evidence.

11             Am I correct that you have given a number of statements to the

12     Prosecution?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   And you gave two statements in 2004 and one statement in 2006;

15     would that be right?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Now, as we didn't get a chance to meet, I wondered, have you had

18     a chance to review those statements before you came here today?

19        A.   Yes, I reviewed them.  I reviewed them, but I told even the

20     Presiding Judge that there are certain things that I have not said and

21     that are contained in the statement.  So the statement is different from

22     what I said.

23        Q.   I see.  Maybe we'll get back to some of those issues, and maybe

24     not.  I will ask you some questions -- I'm basing my questions on what I

25     know of your evidence from these statements, so that's the basis for the

Page 9681

 1     questions.  But we will see whether I have understood things correctly or

 2     not.

 3             Did you receive call-up papers from the army in 1991?

 4        A.   No.

 5        Q.   Did you receive any call-up papers at any point in time from the

 6     army?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   Have you served in the army since you did your military service?

 9        A.   Yes, in 1999, at the time of the NATO aggression.

10        Q.   Have you -- do you know of a training camp in a location called

11     Erdut?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Have you ever been there?

14        A.   I have.

15        Q.   When were you there?

16        A.   I think it was October.  I gave a letter to the investigators,

17     officially.  It's a military certificate.  October 1991, but I was there

18     briefly, perhaps a day or two.

19        Q.   October of what year?

20        A.   1991.

21        Q.   Where did you go after you had been in Erdut?

22        A.   They turned us back, "us," meaning the group of people who were

23     with me.  Maybe later you'll want me to explain which group of people it

24     was.  They turned us back to Sid.

25        Q.   Now, yes, what was that group of people?

Page 9682

 1        A.   It was a group of people from Vranje where, in 1990, 1991, after

 2     the multiparty elections and the establishment of new parties, we had

 3     formed the Serbian National Renewal, and the objective was to form the

 4     Serbian Chetnik Movement.  We had a great number of followers who wanted

 5     to take part on the frontline to defend Serbian lands as part of the army

 6     and units of the Territorial Defence in the region where we were sent

 7     under the command of the JNA.

 8        Q.   So how many -- how big was this group you were with?

 9        A.   Fifteen.

10        Q.   And so you went to Sid, and where did you go after Sid?

11        A.   From Sid, first we had to go to Lipovaca woods, where the

12     Territorial Defence of Slovenia, Western Slovenia and Baranja, and

13     Western Srem sent us.  First we had to go to a battery of exams to see if

14     people were in good health, whether they had any army training, whether

15     they knew how to handle weapons, whether they had training, because it

16     was a war zone.

17        Q.   At some point did you come to -- did you come to the area of

18     Vukovar with this group of people?

19        A.   A few days, we were in the Lipovaca forest, where we received

20     certain weapons and some training was conducted, and a number of people

21     had to go back primarily due to fear.  People did not know whether this

22     was a war zone.  Some people came there for other reasons; to loot, to

23     steal.  So they understood how serious this was.

24             A few days after the training, we went to Vukovar.  Buses were

25     organised for us.

Page 9683

 1        Q.   When you came to Vukovar, who did you report to?

 2        A.   Well, I could not report to anyone.  We were a group that had

 3     reported to the responsible person at Petrova Gora.  In our group in

 4     Lipovaca forest, there were other volunteers from other towns in Serbia,

 5     so we met most of these people the first time then.  And we had a leader

 6     who then reported us to their Territorial Defence.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I have a question.  I

 8     followed what you were saying very carefully.  You said that together

 9     with other volunteers, you were sent to Vukovar, but from what I

10     understand, this was something personal which you did on your own behalf.

11             At the time, did you have a membership card indicating that you

12     belonged to a political party or were you just fighting for your country?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I've already

14     mentioned that in Vranje, we had established the Serb National Revival

15     Movement.  Mr. Mirko Jovic was president, and we were pretty extremist in

16     terms of the Chetnik movement.  You know what the Chetnik movement is.

17     These are people who continue the tradition of the Chetniks from the

18     Second World War who defended the country.  And within our organisation,

19     there was an internal organisation; namely, that people were sent to

20     territories where the country would be defended or, rather, where the

21     unprotected Serb people would be defended.  That is how we set out.

22             Our headquarters were in Belgrade.  The commander was Zoraja, and

23     that was somewhere in the street of Kneza Milosa, near Jugobanka.  Some

24     offices that were there was rather disorganized.  They gave us papers to

25     go to Erdut.

Page 9684

 1             I mentioned already that the gentleman from the Territorial

 2     Defence returned us to Sid.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you for having clarified

 4     this.

 5             MR. MARCUSSEN:

 6        Q.   Mr. Stojanovic, under -- once you had come to the area of

 7     Vukovar, where were you stationed?

 8        A.   I already mentioned in my previous remarks that we became

 9     organised at Petrova Gora, and then we were organised so as to be in the

10     first line, in terms of guarding certain streets and houses, because

11     there was a war conflict going on there and the army -- or, rather,

12     appropriate formations that were freeing one street after another, I

13     mean, we would take up their positions because they would be withdrawing.

14     So we were guarding their houses -- or, rather, the houses that they had

15     liberated so that armed Croats would not return there from the National

16     Guards Corps, the ZNG, and all of those who carried weapons.

17        Q.   Were you serving under -- were you volunteers, were you part of

18     the Territorial Defence, or where did you belong in the armed forces that

19     were in the area?

20        A.   I mean the complete list of these persons who came as volunteers

21     joined the Yugoslav People's Army that was there was.  There was full

22     control of these units of volunteers, if I can call them that, and they

23     were fully organised, but independently from the army; that is to say

24     that they had their appropriate zone and their appropriate commander who

25     commanded them, that is to say, those volunteers.

Page 9685

 1        Q.   Who was the commander of your unit?

 2        A.   I mean Kameni and Kinez, but I don't really know them.  I never

 3     even saw them personally.

 4        Q.   Did you see any members of the SRS there?

 5        A.   Well, to tell you the truth, we were all in that unit, and quite

 6     simply no one could say that he was a member of the Serbian Radical

 7     Party, or of the SPO, or of whatever other party.  I just know that most

 8     people that were there were Serbs and from the area, that is to say,

 9     Vukovar, Borovo Selo, Bobota and the surrounding area, because they were

10     familiar with the area.  And that is how we were deployed.

11        Q.   When you were in the area, did you witness the capture of any

12     Croatians, people from the opposing side?

13        A.   Never.  Perhaps later in Velepromet, if that means anything to

14     you, if you want me to tell you about that now.  But as for these

15     activities, the war conflict during that month before the liberation of

16     Vukovar, I did not see any such thing, because we took up these buildings

17     and we could not follow the units that were liberating Vukovar.

18        Q.   Did Kameni give any orders regarding where any prisoners that

19     might have been taken -- where those prisoners should be taken to?

20        A.   I never heard of anything like that.  I repeat once again, we

21     were never in contact.  We had some kind of a leader of our own, who told

22     us where we would be staying, in which houses, because there were five or

23     six of us per house.

24        Q.   Did you ever witness the killing of any people who had been

25     captured in Vukovar?

Page 9686

 1        A.   Please repeat that.

 2        Q.   While you were in Vukovar, did you ever witness the killing of

 3     any people who had been captured?

 4        A.   Yes, I witnessed something like that once.

 5        Q.   Would you describe that for us, please?

 6        A.   I'm going to explain it to you now.

 7             I mentioned a few moments ago, after the fall of Vukovar -- can I

 8     talk about that now?  Most of the forces were withdrawn from Vukovar,

 9     whereas most of the people -- how should I put this?  The people who were

10     locals, from Vukovar, I mean, they stayed on at Velepromet.  Due to the

11     condition of my health, I was also transferred to Velepromet because the

12     conditions were somewhat better there, the living conditions.  So I could

13     follow most of the people who were brought in after the fall of Vukovar

14     to Velepromet for some kind of a check.  I mean, they looked at their

15     IDs.  They released some people and detained others, probably in order to

16     receive some intelligence as to what was going on and whether any of

17     these Croats had committed some misdeeds or crimes within Vukovar during

18     the siege of Vukovar by the Serbs or, rather, before this conflict

19     started between the Serbs and Croats.

20        Q.   And did any of -- my question was whether you had seen anyone get

21     killed.  Are you saying that in this context, somebody got killed?

22        A.   Yes.  Yes, yes.  90 per cent of these people I already mentioned

23     from Vukovar, they held Velepromet.  I mean, they questioned these

24     Croats, interrogated them; women, children.  They knew each other before

25     the war, before the conflict that broke out in Vukovar.

Page 9687

 1             I remember one night it so happened right before my very own

 2     eyes, these people from Vukovar whom I did not know, they got this man

 3     out and they killed him in Velepromet; that is to say, outside, there was

 4     screaming, things like that.  No one could have helped this person.  I

 5     couldn't have helped him, either, because I don't know these people and I

 6     don't know what would have happened to me.  However, when the army found

 7     out, on the very next day automatically they placed their own security

 8     there, and no one was allowed to enter Velepromet after that, none of

 9     these -- what do I call these people?  These people from Vukovar, that's

10     it.

11        Q.   When did this happen?

12        A.   This was after the fall of Vukovar, in the month of November.

13     Perhaps November, December, something like that.  I can't remember.  It's

14     been a long time now.

15             I'm a bit of an emotional person.  Perhaps I was not really cut

16     out for the front.  What can I say to you?

17        Q.   Did Kameni ever issue any orders to kill Croat prisoners?

18        A.   I have already mentioned, in the context of the previous

19     question, that I did not even know who Kameni was.  I saw him on

20     television perhaps a year or two ago in Serbia.

21        Q.   Did you ever witness SRS volunteers kill Croats that had been

22     captured?

23        A.   I'm saying once again that I didn't see or know any SRS

24     volunteers there, and I did not see them killing, because I did not have

25     any possibility of seeing that.  I wasn't at the frontline, I was

Page 9688

 1     guarding these houses.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, the Prosecutor is

 3     going fast.  It is important to put this in the right context.

 4             If I understand correctly, you were part of a group of people, of

 5     four to five people, and you had a leader.  What was the name of the

 6     leader of this small group?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot recall.  A man from

 8     Borovo Selo.  I can't remember.  Mirko or something like that.  I mean,

 9     he gave us instructions as to which house we would stay at, what we would

10     do, how we would stand guard duty, how we would guard these positions,

11     because we changed every two hours.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] While you were standing guard

13     at night or during the day, did you ever fight, did you ever fire shots

14     at the enemy, or were you patrolling and standing guard and you never

15     fired a single shot?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We never fired.  We never had

17     occasion to do so, quite simply.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Did you take anyone prisoner?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We couldn't have, because we didn't

20     take part in the conflict.

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Did you patrol around Vukovar?

22     Did you patrol through the streets?  Did you go to check-points, and did

23     you meet other fighters, other Serb fighters.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, this is the way it was:  We

25     could not patrol because we were at Leva Supoderica.  It was Milovo Brdo,

Page 9689

 1     that's what it was called.  We were guarding houses, and every two or

 2     three days, we would see army troops passing by, continuing to advance.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] With the exception of the small

 4     group of people headed by Mirko, did you ever discuss or talk to these

 5     people from Leva Supoderica to discuss the war with them, to talk about

 6     the weather?  Did you ever talk to them?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, yes, yes.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] When you met other fighters,

 9     did some believe they were volunteers of the SRS?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not have occasion to do so.

11     Most of these people were illiterate, and as time went by, I mean, we

12     lived there together with these people every day and then I realised why

13     it was they had come there in the first place, but they'd never said so.

14     They were interested in stealing, searching, because the army, as they

15     were liberating one house after the other, then we would -- they would

16     withdraw and we would take those houses.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] If I understand correctly,

18     these volunteers that were standing guard, they were patrolling around

19     and occupying the houses, you are saying that when the army left, you

20     played your part, and it is then, seemingly, that some people started

21     looting, pilfering, or doing I don't know what?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Among those people doing this,

24     did people say that some of these people were volunteers of the SRS or

25     was this something you heard about afterwards?

Page 9690

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, I never heard that.  Most

 2     of these -- let me call them that, "volunteers," they were locals, and it

 3     suited them because they knew which house was a Croatian house and which

 4     house was a house of wealthy people.  Then we would even put away some

 5     valuables so that they wouldn't be stolen.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] My last question, concerning

 7     the volunteers in the broader sense of the meaning, I'm talking now in

 8     percentage terms:  How many of them were locals and how many people came

 9     from elsewhere?  Could you give me a figure, please?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can.  From day to day, as the

11     fall of Vukovar was becoming imminent, more and more locals were coming

12     back to Vukovar, people who left their families in Serbia, and they asked

13     to be at the frontline, either out of revenge or for some other reason.

14     I don't know about that.  I just know that my team, consisting of five or

15     six men, we were there up until the very end, and that is when we went

16     our separate ways, when we parted from this man from Vukovar.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] At some point, out of the

18     hundred people on the ground, how many came from Vukovar and the

19     surrounding area, compared with people who came from Belgrade or

20     elsewhere?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sixty to forty, let me put it that

22     way.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are saying 60 to

24     40 per cent were locals; is that right?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.  I am saying 60 per cent were

Page 9691

 1     from Vukovar and 40 per cent were the people who came from elsewhere.  So

 2     the number was going down.  Part of the volunteers returned to Serbia,

 3     trying to find different ways and means, seeing that things were so

 4     difficult.

 5             MR. MARCUSSEN:

 6        Q.   While you were in Vukovar, did you see Mr. Seselj at any point in

 7     time?

 8        A.   No, I never saw Mr. Seselj.

 9        Q.   You never saw Seselj in Vukovar?

10        A.   Never, because, I mean, I did not have a situation of that kind.

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] A short question, Witness.

12             You are an educated man.  You studied mathematics.  When you

13     arrived in Vukovar, had you heard Mr. Seselj's name before?  Did you know

14     who he was?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  I mean -- I mean, that wasn't

16     the question.  I mean, I heard Seselj earlier on, on the political scene,

17     and then there was this rally in Vranje.  And I knew he was president of

18     the Serbian Radical Party.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So he was a well-known figure,

20     as far as you were concerned?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not personally, not that way,

22     because we are a party that did not recognise the Serbian Radical Party.

23     Our volunteers were volunteers of the Chetnik movement.  We did not

24     recognise those volunteers of the Serbian Radical Party, as a matter of

25     fact.  At that time, we even imposed a name on Mr. Vojislav Seselj,

Page 9692

 1     saying that he was the red vojvoda.  So there was no close relationship

 2     between the SRS and our Chetnik movement, the SNS.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Why was he a red vojvoda?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because we believed that at the

 5     time of the regime of Slobodan Milosevic, Mr. Seselj was on good terms

 6     with Mr. Milosevic, and we were fighting for the old Serbia, the return

 7     to old borders.  Let me say that we advocated -- our party advocated that

 8     old Serbia from way back, from the times of the king, and we wanted the

 9     king to come back to Serbia.  That is the kind of ideology that we had.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Now, you yourself, were you a

11     royalist, a monarchist?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] For many years or did you turn

14     royalist in the 1990s?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, a lot earlier.  We still

16     believe that a monarchy will come back to Serbia.

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And Mr. Seselj did not embody

18     your royalist aspirations, did he?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not at all.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

21             MR. MARCUSSEN:

22        Q.   Mr. Stojanovic, I understand you didn't see Mr. Seselj in

23     Vukovar.  Did you hear from anyone that he was present in Vukovar in --

24     while you were there?

25        A.   At one moment, I heard that he had come to visit the frontline,

Page 9693

 1     because as I have already said, we were not exactly on the frontline and

 2     we heard information coming through the loudspeakers, and I recognised

 3     Mr. Vojislav Seselj's voice very well.  He was asking the Croats, those

 4     who had taken up weapons, who had bloodied their hands and all others,

 5     that they surrender so as to avoid further bloodshed in Vukovar.

 6             Well, why would a city fall with thousands and thousands of

 7     people getting killed?  That was my idea with regard to this.  So he

 8     wanted to avoid a large number of casualties on the Croat side and on the

 9     Serb side.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, you are now discussing

11     something which is important to us.  You have just mentioned this, but I

12     would like you to be very accurate.

13             As far as you remember, well, of course, this happened 15 years

14     ago, I'm the first person to admit this, but as far as you remember, what

15     were the exact words uttered by Mr. Seselj?  Either you can answer this

16     question accurately or you can only answer it in vague terms.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot remember.  I know that it

18     was -- I mean over this loudspeaker that was on a combat vehicle of the

19     army.  This call was addressed to all Croats, all those who had weapons

20     in their hands; that is to say, all of those who fought on the Croat side

21     in defending the town, they were called upon to surrender, and they were

22     to be treated in accordance with the International Conventions on

23     Prisoners, and that they should surrender as soon as possible because

24     every day is increasingly difficult for the Serbs and for all of those

25     who are under siege.  I mean, it's been a very long time.  I mean, there

Page 9694

 1     were no signs of hatred that somebody should get killed or something like

 2     that.  I didn't hear of any such thing.

 3             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Are you quite sure that he

 4     said, "Surrender and you will be treated according to international

 5     treaties"?  Are you quite sure?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am sure, because every day up

 7     until the fall of Vukovar, things were getting increasingly difficult on

 8     the Croat side and on our side, I think, because the Croats were

 9     defending the town desperately.  I'm not saying Croat civilians, but

10     people who had weapons in their hands.  Later on I realised that Croats

11     within Vukovar who held weapons, who carried weapons, I mean, even those

12     Croats who wanted to leave Vukovar, I mean the Croats who carried weapons

13     would shoot at their fellow countrymen.

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

15             MR. MARCUSSEN:

16        Q.   Are you familiar with the command post a Nova Ulica?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   To your knowledge, was Seselj ever there?

19        A.   I don't remember, but I suppose he was because the military

20     command was there and anybody that was going to the territory and the

21     town of Vukovar had to be identified and checked, who he was and what he

22     was doing there, because the authorities of the JNA ruled there.  They

23     commanded -- they led the whole operation of the liberation of Vukovar.

24        Q.   You said you don't remember.  Now, you gave a statement -- or you

25     gave three statements to OTP, to the Office of the Prosecutor, as we

Page 9695

 1     discussed earlier.  One of these statements from 2006 I'd like to read a

 2     passage from and ask you if that might refresh your recollection on this.

 3             In your --

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection.  Judges, according to

 5     your own practice, on which you insisted when we heard some other

 6     witnesses, this is an impermissible way of refreshing the witness's

 7     memory.  You specified very exactly how a witness's memory may be jogged,

 8     but we have not even come to a point where the witness's memory has to be

 9     refreshed.  This is an attempt to suggest to the witness something that

10     the Prosecutor had written in the first place, as if the witness had

11     written it.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

13             Mr. Marcussen, when we proceed to the refreshing of the memory,

14     that's a common law procedure, so the Prosecutor should remind the

15     witness that he stated something.  You can only remind a witness of

16     something that he doesn't remember anymore, so you first have to put to

17     him a question on a topic, and if the witness already stated something

18     very clearly on that topic and if he answers something else, and if

19     there's a discrepancy between the two, then you can ask him, "Are you

20     quite sure of what you are saying today?"  And then, only then, you can

21     show him a prior text, and then you can tell him, "This is what you said

22     in such-and-such a year."

23             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Your Honour, the witness says, as page 61, line

24     2:

25             "I don't remember, but I suppose ..."

Page 9696

 1             And then he says what his supposition is.  That is quite

 2     different from the earlier statement, as a number of other points have

 3     been here today.  So I think we have established that the witness has

 4     said that he has an issue -- there's an issue of whether or not he might

 5     remember some facts.

 6             I'm happy to lay the foundation more specifically as to whether

 7     or not the statement was before him, but --

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, very well.  So you can put

 9     to the witness that he answered something, and you can say, "You don't

10     remember now, but in 2000-and-something you said this," so then you can

11     say to him -- tell him what he said then.

12             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Thank you, Your Honour.  That's what I was just

13     about to do when the accused made his objection.

14        Q.   In 2006, you state at paragraph 43 of your statement, after

15     speaking about the incident with a loudspeaker, you say:

16             "Afterward, at the command of Nova Ulica, where the guards

17     regiment was located, Vojislav Seselj had a meeting with the command

18     officers allegedly to discuss joint actions of the JNA and the volunteers

19     in the final operations of Vukovar.  Vojislav Seselj stayed there half an

20     hour/an hour.  Vojislav Seselj left Vukovar the same day.

21             "While we are on the subject, every day there were Chetnik music

22     played over big speakers mounted on an armoured vehicle as well as

23     recordings of Seselj's messages for Croats to surrender peacefully

24     because of the JNA and the volunteers would sooner or later liberate

25     Vukovar and their lives would be spared.

Page 9697

 1             "I did not see Vojislav Seselj commanding volunteers in Vukovar.

 2     His role was to organise them and boost their morale."

 3             And that's the end of that paragraph.

 4             Does that refresh your memory?

 5        A.   I emphasised to the Presiding Judge that I am astounded -- I was

 6     astounded to see my statement, because I hadn't received that statement

 7     from the Prosecution at the time when I gave it, because at that time

 8     that statement was not placed in the context of the Seselj trial.  I

 9     emphasised that certain things in it were not correct, and that's why I

10     came here in the first place, to tell the real thing to the Court.  Even

11     the statement that I read is in Croatian, it's not in my language,

12     Serbian.  I don't use the Croatian word for "train" or "vessel," and the

13     whole thing made me sick because I know that's not the statement I gave.

14     The thing that was read out to me was completely different, but trusting

15     the investigators who read it out to me, I signed the statement, and

16     that's one of the reasons why we are here today, to prove the truth and

17     only the truth.

18        Q.   Now I'd like to go back to Erdut.  Were you in Erdut in July or

19     August 1991?

20        A.   No.

21        Q.   While you were in Erdut, did you ever see Arkan there?

22        A.   In the month of October, as I said, I gave the OTP an official

23     certificate stating when I was sent to the frontline, for those two or

24     three days, and that's when I saw him, because when we were there we had

25     no access to that military installation.  Ordinary soldiers and

Page 9698

 1     reservists were not allowed to go in there or walk about.  We had a

 2     totally different base in Erdut.

 3        Q.   Did you -- did you see Mr. Seselj in Erdut?

 4        A.   No.  I was there for only two days.

 5        Q.   Are you familiar with a person called Radovan Stojisic, also

 6     known as Peca [phoen]?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   Were you ever deployed in Borovo Selo as a volunteer?

 9        A.   No.

10        Q.   Were you ever a member of the SRS?

11        A.   The Serbian Radical Party -- you mean the Serbian Radical Party?

12     1994 or, rather, 1996, part of the Serbian National Revival collectively

13     joined the Serbian Radical Party.  I had left it for a couple of months

14     because, as I said, my idea of Greater Serbia and the kingdom cannot fit

15     with the idea of the Serbian Radical Party and the ideas of Mr. Seselj,

16     who fought for a republic.

17        Q.   Were you a member of the SRS in 1991?

18        A.   No.  I emphasised that.

19        Q.   You mentioned earlier a rally that took place in Vranje.  When

20     was that rally?

21        A.   That was in 1991.  I don't remember whether it was in the month

22     of May.  My people and I from the Serbian National Revival stood there on

23     the side, observing the rally, observing Mr. Seselj.  There were

24     followers of that Serbian Renewal Movement there as well, lots of people

25     attending the rally, but I wasn't interested in that.  I just came to see

Page 9699

 1     whether they had changed their policy towards the Serbian Chetnik

 2     Movement.  That was the only thing that mattered to me.

 3        Q.   Did Seselj give a speech at the rally?

 4        A.   Yes.  He was the party leader.

 5        Q.   Do you remember what he said on the speech?

 6        A.   Well, the standard thing; you know, he was promoting the Serbian

 7     Radical Party because this municipal board was very young, it was in the

 8     process of being established, and he was doing the propaganda written

 9     into his programme and the plan of the party.

10        Q.   Do you remember anything he said?

11        A.   No, I can't remember.  It was quite a long time ago.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, just a small point.

13     I'm curious to know this.

14             You said that you were a royalist, that you were a member of the

15     Serb Renewal Movement.  Why was there a meeting in 1991?  Why did he hold

16     a rally?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I went just out of curiosity to see

18     who was going to attend the meeting.  Vranje is a small place, and this

19     multiparty life -- how shall I put it?  Everybody was curious to see and

20     to take part.  You know that at that time the ruling party was the party

21     of Slobodan Milosevic, including in Vranje, and the reds held

22     90 per cent, as we put it; but even they came to hear Vojislav Seselj.

23     My leader also came to Vranje to present our programme, the plan of our

24     party to get into the Assembly and gain the maximum of seats.  But I came

25     really out of curiosity, because even the Serbian Renewal Movement

Page 9700

 1     representatives came to that rally and they caused an incident.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

 3             MR. MARCUSSEN:

 4        Q.   Mr. Stojanovic, at the rally when Mr. Seselj made a speech, did

 5     he refer to the concept of Greater Serbia?

 6        A.   The way I understand it, he was talking about Karlobag,

 7     Virovitica, Vrace borders, that region, because Serbian people lived in

 8     those lands and the Serbian Radical Party in Serbia itself should take

 9     care of those defenceless people.  And I would, of course, accept it if

10     my own party leader said the same thing; nothing else.

11        Q.   Did Mr. Seselj use the word "Ustasha"?

12        A.   I can't remember.

13        Q.   Did he -- did he refer to Thompsons or radical Thompsons; do you

14     remember?

15        A.   I can't remember that either.

16        Q.   Now, since you can't remember, I'd like to read out a part of the

17     statement that we talked about before for you.  It's from paragraph 7 of

18     the statement, and a little down in the paragraph you say:

19             "At the rally, Vojislav Seselj boosted from the rostrum that

20     radical Thompsons were in action and that Ustasha at Borovo Selo were

21     killed.  The Thompsons was a World War II-era machine-gun.  By "Ustasha,"

22     Seselj referred to all Croats."

23             Now that I've read this to you, does that refresh your

24     recollection?

25        A.   Again, I don't remember, but it's a bit funny when you say that

Page 9701

 1     "Ustasha" was applied in reference to all Croats.  Very often you hear

 2     the word "Chetnik" in this courtroom.  It turns out that all of us Serbs

 3     are Chetniks.  You can't hold up that argument, and similarly not all

 4     Croats can be Ustashas.

 5             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, the Greater Serbia

 6     issue, I would just like to make sure what is it exactly you heard.  Can

 7     you tell us if Mr. Seselj, in his speech, spoke of Greater Serbia as a

 8     goal to reach, that -- was he encouraging to take territories in order to

 9     create that famous line Karlobag-Virovitica, or was he on the other hand

10     only referring to the Serbs who were living in that area in order to

11     protect them, which is of course not the same thing?  So as far as you

12     remember, what was the speech exactly about?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The point of his discourse was to

14     invoke, in fact, all the time the statute of his party, speaking about

15     how the party is functioning, and that those Serbs needed to be protected

16     over there because they are the majority population in Croatia.  But

17     there was no reference to volunteers in the battlefield, but I didn't

18     hear that anybody was called upon to go there with rifles or Thompsons or

19     anything else to defend anything.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I suppose that when he was

21     speaking, he was applauded, or was he booed?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] First of all, let me say that

23     people were clapping, but, you know, at that time the television had such

24     an influence on the people, on popular masses in the beginning of the

25     conflict that was starting in the territory of the former SFRY, whereas

Page 9702

 1     we were not empowered to be able to create this media policy.

 2             People in Serbia are strange.  There's always turmoil and

 3     dithering.  If Mirko Jovic would have come to speak, people would have

 4     clapped equally, so people have their own opinion.

 5             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Witness, as far as you remember,

 6     which impression did you get after hearing Mr. Seselj speak about the

 7     means that one should use to defend Serbs in that area?  At what cost?

 8     How did he intend to do all of this?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Back again to that point.

10             Our thinking, if you wish my thinking at that point, was not very

11     serious concerning the Serbian Radical Party.  I thought it was not

12     serious to suggest that the Serbian Radical Party should go there and

13     defend them.  It's the official authorities who should take care of that.

14     It was silly, in my opinion, to think that we volunteers could change

15     anything.  We were too small, in the perspective of all that was

16     happening with these political stresses between Milosevic and Tudjman,

17     and neither we nor the accused were in power.  We had no influence.

18             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] But according to you, Mr. Seselj

19     shared that opinion?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it was a bit frivolous, in my

21     opinion.  It was just party propaganda, as far as I'm concerned.

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Last question:  You were

23     present there in the month of May of 1991.  So Mr. Seselj gave a speech.

24     We know that also other people took the floor.  And he was applauded.

25     You say that he was applauded because he wanted to defend the Serb

Page 9703

 1     population.  But from where you were standing, as a listener - you are a

 2     loyalist, monarchist, we know, you told us - did you get the feeling that

 3     Milosevic was an opponent to Mr. Seselj?  Did you have that feeling?  Did

 4     you have the feeling that Mr. Seselj was actually giving a speech against

 5     Milosevic or not?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.  I was a young

 7     politician at that time.  I'm 43 now, and this was a long time ago.  At

 8     that time, I was a student, and I wasn't able to understand anything.

 9     There were some opponents there, and that's why a scandal broke out at

10     the rally.  It's my opinion that it was more about party propaganda than

11     about sending volunteers to the frontline.

12             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you.  You said that

13     earlier.

14             There was a scandal during that meeting.  What happened exactly?

15     You said it once already, but now you're repeating it.  What was the

16     problem exactly, what happened?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, we are now going back.  There

18     was another group, another party, the Serbian Renewal Movement, led by

19     Vuk Draskovic, and they were much more extreme in their approach to the

20     Ustasha movement and the Croatian people, and they thought that this

21     whole rally held by Mr. Vojislav Seselj is more political, it was more

22     about promoting the Serbian Radical Party in Vranje, and they were

23     shouting, "Duce, Duce," which was to mean that Vojislav Seselj was an

24     autocrat within his party.  And then a brawl started.  They threw things

25     towards the rostrum.  This group I'm speaking of is another group that

Page 9704

 1     sent volunteers to the frontline.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] They were saying "Duce, Duce,"

 3     comparing him to Mussolini?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, they were shouting that

 5     to Mr. Vojislav Seselj.

 6             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

 7             Mr. Marcussen, do you think we should take a break now?

 8             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Now is fine, Your Honours.

 9             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.  Let's take a

10     20-minute break.

11                           --- Recess taken at 5.38 p.m.

12                           --- On resuming at 6.02 p.m.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The court is back in session.

14             Mr. Marcussen.

15             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Your Honours, the Prosecution would like to make

16     some submission regarding the evidence of this witness, and I would

17     ask -- I think it's best if the witness is not in the courtroom while we

18     have those arguments.  So maybe we can have him removed for a little bit.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Usher, please stay behind

20     the door with the witness.

21                           [The witness stands down]

22             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen.

23             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Your Honours, the witness has departed from his

24     previous statements in aspects which are material to the Prosecution's

25     case.  The Prosecution believes that the witness is adverse now to

Page 9705

 1     telling what he has said was the truth before.  The Prosecution,

 2     therefore, will seek leave to change the modalities of questioning of the

 3     witness and be allowed to cross-examine the witness.  There is

 4     jurisprudence that supports this, that we can do this in the Popovic

 5     decision, which is a decision from the Appeals Chamber in the case of the

 6     Prosecutor versus Popovic and others in the case IT-05-88-AR-73.3.  The

 7     title of the decision is "Decision on appeal against decision on

 8     impeachment of party's own witness" from the 1st of February this year.

 9             We would also at the end be seeking admission of the witness's

10     prior statements into evidence.

11             I say that the witness has departed from his previous statement

12     on a number of material points, and I'd like to just go through some of

13     the main points.  But essentially the witness has departed from his --

14     the totality of the evidence he has in his earlier statements.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen, just to shed

16     some light on all of this, as far as I know it's not because a witness is

17     a hostile witness that this necessarily means that his written statement

18     should be admitted.  What case law are you relying on?

19             MR. MARCUSSEN:  The point is that the -- well, it's not that the

20     witness is adverse to the Prosecution in his demeanour or anything like

21     that.  The witness is, in our submission, departing from the truth in his

22     testimony today.  He is adverse to telling the truth.  The truth is in

23     his statements that he had earlier given to the Prosecution, and in my

24     examination I will go through the statements and some issues to

25     illustrate that to Your Honours.

Page 9706

 1             In the Popovic case, at paragraph -- in the decision of the

 2     Popovic case at paragraph 28 -- no, sorry, that's incorrect.  At

 3     paragraph 31, the Appeals Chamber made clear that a Trial Chamber may

 4     admit a prior statement as substantive evidence also from a witness who

 5     had testified before a Trial Chamber.  And the same is found in -- sorry,

 6     a decision from Trial Chamber II in the Limaj case, decision on the

 7     Prosecution's motion to admit statements as substantive evidence.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We shall look into the matter

 9     later.

10             Just, Mr. Seselj, two minutes you have now to raise your

11     objection.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it seems to me that the

13     Prosecutor took a bit longer.

14             First of all, there is absolutely no grounds to declare this

15     witness hostile to the Prosecution, because that would require open

16     hostility to the Prosecution in his demeanour here.  The witness, on the

17     other hand, behaved very adequately towards the Prosecution and answered

18     to the best his recollection and the best of his knowledge.

19             First of all, it's absolutely inadmissible if the viva voce

20     testimony does not suit the Prosecutor, then the witness statements that

21     the Prosecution wrote themselves and to which the witness objects cannot

22     be admitted into evidence.  And the witness says that even Croat terms

23     were used in these statements that the Prosecution tried to infiltrate

24     here, and this shows how the Prosecution coaches the witnesses and then

25     uses these arguments from previous decisions, written by the Prosecution

Page 9707

 1     themselves, to be admitted into evidence as an authentic statement.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber will

 3     deliberate on the matter, decide whether this witness is hostile or not,

 4     which would entitle the Prosecution to put leading questions to the

 5     witness.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Your Honours ...

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber, as you could

 9     see, has deliberated on the matter and has acknowledged that the

10     Prosecutor deems this witness is hostile.  Therefore, the Prosecution is

11     entitled to put leading questions to the witness.

12             But as far as the admission of written statements is concerned,

13     the Trial Chamber makes reservations and decides that this will be

14     decided upon at a later stage.

15             Therefore, at this stage, you may only put leading questions, and

16     in the time allotted to you.  I believe you still have an hour or so

17     left.

18             Let's bring the witness into the courtroom.

19             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Thank you, Your Honours.  And it was indeed my

20     intention.  I was just forecasting that I would be requesting the

21     admission of the statement at a later stage.  I was not intending to

22     request it at this stage.

23                           [The witness takes the stand]

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, a small piece of

25     information the Trial Chamber would like to share with you.

Page 9708

 1             The Prosecutor has asked the Trial Chamber to declare that you

 2     are a hostile witness.  The Trial Chamber has granted the application

 3     made by the Prosecution, which means that the Prosecution is entitled to

 4     put leading questions to you.  Therefore, the situation is different to

 5     what it was before, and the Prosecution is entitled to put leading

 6     questions to you.

 7             Mr. Marcussen, you have the floor.

 8             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Thank you.

 9        Q.   Mr. Stojanovic, just for your information, when you have been

10     declared a hostile witness, it's a technical legal term.  It doesn't mean

11     that we think you in any way have acted inappropriately in court towards

12     anyone here, just so you know that.

13             Mr. Stojanovic, in 2004 you've already mentioned you gave a

14     statement to the Office of the Prosecutor.  I'd like to show you that

15     statement, if the usher would assist me.

16             And, Your Honours, the statement I'm showing is also in e-court

17     as a new 65 ter number, 7265, and we could maybe call that up.

18             Mr. Stojanovic, could I ask you to look at the first page of this

19     statement, please.

20        A.   Very well, yes.

21        Q.   Actually, if you would look at the front page, please.  Could you

22     go one page back?  Thank you very much.

23             Mr. Stojanovic, do you remember -- do you remember giving this

24     statement?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 9709

 1        Q.   And is your signature on the front page?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Now, what I would like you to do is to go with me through this

 4     statement.  If you would now turn to the next page.

 5             Have you signed here on this page as well?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   And if we can turn to the next page, have you signed here?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   And would you turn once again to the page after this?

10        A.   Just a moment.

11        Q.   Sorry.  I just asked you whether your signature was on the page

12     you're looking at now.

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   And would you now turn to the next page of your statement -- of

15     the statement?  Is your signature also on this page?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   And on the next page of your statement -- or the statement, is

18     your signature found there?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   And if you would continue through, you turn it over again, is

21     your signature on the page you're looking at?  Maybe you would go through

22     the statement.

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And if we look at the last page of this, if you would stop -- if

25     you would go back now to the page, Mr. Stojanovic --

Page 9710

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... in the right-hand corner --

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   In the right-hand corner of the statement, there's a number.

 5     Actually, you're looking at the page now, I think.  It is a page which,

 6     in the right-hand corner, has number 03603451.  Is that correct?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   And there have you signed a declaration?

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   And on what date did you sign the declaration?

11        A.   It says here on the 18th of August, 2004.

12        Q.   Would you read out what that declaration says, please?

13        A.   "This statement has been read over to me in the Serbian language

14     and is true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.  I have given

15     this statement voluntarily, and I am aware that it may be used in legal

16     proceedings before the International Criminal Tribunal for the

17     prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of

18     international law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia

19     since 1991 and that I may be called to give evidence in public before the

20     Tribunal."

21        Q.   So when you gave this statement, you knew that the statement

22     might be used as evidence in criminal proceedings before this Tribunal;

23     is that right?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   And would it be fair to say that you, therefore, took care to

Page 9711

 1     present the facts as precisely as you could when you gave the statement?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   And apart from the fact that there is some words in here which

 4     appear to be in Croatian, can you -- can you read this statement and

 5     understand it?

 6        A.   I received this statement a month ago.  This statement was read

 7     out to me from a laptop, where it was typed out.  It wasn't taken out

 8     like this; that is to say, it was typed out on a laptop.  And the

 9     statement that I signed, believing the OTP employee over there, the

10     investigator, believing that what he read out to me was that, I signed

11     it, and I did not receive a copy.  This copy I received a month and a

12     half ago, or perhaps even more than a month and a half ago.  I was so

13     astonished that many things are different from what was read out to me

14     from the laptop; that is to say, it was typed out on the laptop by an

15     investigator of the OTP in Belgrade, and the situation was quite

16     different.  Trusting Mr. Djuro, the investigator, I initialled all of

17     these pages, but I did not receive the statement.  I did not receive the

18     statement.

19        Q.   But on the 18th of August, 2004, you signed this very statement;

20     right?

21        A.   Precisely on the 18th of August, 2004, I read the statement.

22     This statement was not read to me in the Serbian language.  It was read

23     out from the laptop, the computer, where it was signed.  I waited for

24     half an hour, an hour, for it to be printed out so that I could sign it,

25     believing that gentleman of yours who put questions to me there; and it

Page 9712

 1     wasn't written that it would be used against Mr. Vojislav Seselj as an

 2     accused person.

 3        Q.   You've been a director of a company, I understand.  Right?

 4        A.   Yes, yes.

 5        Q.   And as a director of a company, have you been signing business

 6     deals?

 7        A.   No, I do not sign it.  I'm one of the directors.  It is my

 8     superior who signs it.

 9        Q.   Have you ever signed any legal documents?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   What, for example?

12        A.   Well, something that my in-house lawyer would look at, or a

13     lawyer; and I would sign it, trusting the man.  I acted with full trust

14     here, also, and that's why I reacted before coming into the courtroom.

15     At the moment when I gave this statement, that can be read from the

16     stenographic notes, that this statement was completely different.  I

17     stand by the fact that I signed this, but it is quite different.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection.

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you can put your

20     questions when it's time for your cross-examination.  Let the Prosecutor

21     do his job for the time being.  He's trying to elicit from the witness

22     the fact that he signed something, which he doesn't agree with.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I have the right to

24     objections.  If you are denying me that right, I'm not going to voice any

25     objections anymore.

Page 9713

 1             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are entitled to raise an

 2     objection if it is justified.  For the time being, it is not justified.

 3     The Prosecutor is asking questions to see how it is that the witness has

 4     signed a statement that contains 42 paragraphs in his own language.  This

 5     is what we're trying to find out.  The witness has provided his

 6     explanation, which is worth what it's worth.  Let the Prosecutor do his

 7     job.  During the cross-examination, you can get back to this.

 8             Please proceed, Mr. Marcussen.

 9             MR. MARCUSSEN:

10        Q.   And today you are a financial manager.  Is it also a custom for

11     you, in your profession as a financial manager, to sign documents that

12     you don't read?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Now, I'd like to -- if the usher would collect that statement,

15     please, and I'd like to show the witness another statement.

16             Your Honours, this statement is in e-court as a new exhibit with

17     65 ter number 7264, and maybe we can call that document up.

18             Mr. Stojanovic, would you look at the first page, please.  Do you

19     recognise this document?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   What is it?

22        A.   But I don't know the English language.

23        Q.   Oh, I apologise.  I've given you the wrong version.  Could I get

24     the usher to swap this.

25             Well, we can leave the witness with the version that he has.  Oh,

Page 9714

 1     okay.

 2             This is a translation of the document that I just showed you.

 3     Could you tell us what it is?

 4        A.   Well, again there was this interview.  Paolo Pastore,

 5     Daniel Saxon, and Mr. Milan Kosanovic interpreted.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection.  The only statement that

 7     is signed is the one in English, and the witness doesn't understand

 8     English.  And the Serbian version is not signed.  And it says in the

 9     witness acknowledgment, "The statement was read back to me in English."

10     Obviously, the Prosecutor is trying to plant something on the witness.

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but without you saying

12     anything, the Trial Chamber has noticed this, that he signed the

13     statement in English.

14             Mr. Marcussen.

15             MR. MARCUSSEN:

16        Q.   So, Mr. Stojanovic, were you indeed interviewed in November 2004

17     by representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor and signed a

18     statement?

19        A.   Yes.  In English, yes.

20        Q.   And now I'd like to hand you back the copy that you had before.

21             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Witness, why did you sign the

22     statement in English?  Why didn't you sign the B/C/S version of your

23     statement?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because they tell me that that is

25     the correct version that I'm supposed to sign.  I trust the

Page 9715

 1     investigators, and that's why I signed it.  I don't know the English

 2     language.  And in this courtroom, when I walked in, my first sentence

 3     here was that that text that I stated by way of a statement was quite

 4     different, and that is why I reacted, and that is why I said what can be

 5     read in the previous paragraph.

 6             MR. MARCUSSEN:

 7        Q.   What I'd like you to do now, if I may, is just to let me know, is

 8     your signature on the front page of the statement that you're looking at

 9     now?  I know it's in English, but is it your signature on the front page?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Would you be kind enough to go through the statement?

12        A.   I have looked through it.

13        Q.   And is your signature on all the pages of the statement?

14        A.   I was just asked to initial these pages, not to write out my

15     entire signature; just a little initial.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, when you were

17     interviewed by the OTP, if I'm putting questions to you it is because in

18     the past I know what it is like to give statements - there was the

19     investigator and an interpreter.  The investigator was putting questions

20     to you, and you answered the questions.  Do we agree on this, Witness?

21     Can we agree on this?  The investigator puts a question to you in

22     English; the interpreter translates the question, and you answer the

23     question?  Can we agree on this?  This is how things happened?  After

24     that -- well, this lasted a while.  The investigator has his laptop.

25     He's going to write down your answers.  Then he will give you a

Page 9716

 1     printout - that is why you had to wait for it - and then did the

 2     interpreter read the entire statement back to you, and then you signed

 3     the text in English, or did the interpreter not read it back to you?  You

 4     trust the investigator and you sign the statement in English?  Can you

 5     explain to us how things happened?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is what happened:  I came

 7     there, and we agreed that we should start working.  I think it was

 8     afternoon.  I remember that well, and the gentleman whose an investigator

 9     was typing on a laptop.  He was typing in English, and I was speaking in

10     Serbian, answering every question.  So in relation to every one of these

11     paragraphs, regardless of whether it was 8, 9, 10, whichever, then the

12     interpreter would translate to me what was written by them over there.

13     After we finished, then I was told to sign; that is to say, I did not

14     have an opportunity to have the interpreter read the text back to me

15     again.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We have paragraph 8 in front of

17     us.  You have it in English as well.  Did the interpreter read

18     paragraph 8 back to you?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Most probably.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So what we have here is what

21     you said?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know that, because this is

23     in English.  I signed it at the end.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, very well.  I understand.

25             So the interpreter was telling you something, but since you don't

Page 9717

 1     speak English, you were not able to check.  It would not have happened if

 2     things were done differently at the Tribunal, if, for instance, the

 3     statements were taken in the language of the witness and then the witness

 4     signs in his own language.  The reason escapes me, actually, but this was

 5     the procedure that was adopted, so this is why you had to sign in

 6     English.

 7             But you may go on, Mr. Marcussen.

 8             MR. MARCUSSEN:

 9        Q.   So, Mr. Stojanovic, just to confirm, the statement was read back

10     to you in your language, and then you signed the English copy of the

11     statement and put your initials -- well, signed the first page, put your

12     initials on the pages in the middle, and then you signed at the end; is

13     that correct?

14        A.   Yes, but it was read out from the laptop.  I'm telling you that

15     again.  I trusted the investigators, so what I signed in Serbian, I

16     believed that that was it in English too.  So I believe that if somebody

17     gives an oath and says that what is shown to me -- I mean, what statement

18     I gave, I believe that that is the way it would be written.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Objection.  Your Honour --

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, it's quite

21     complicated, it's complicated enough.  You don't have to add on to this

22     confusion.  My questions were very clear.  You don't have to add anything

23     new.  We've all understood how it was done, and during the

24     cross-examination, if you wish to put more questions, even though the

25     Judges understood very clearly, you may do so during your

Page 9718

 1     cross-examination.

 2             Mr. Marcussen, you may proceed.

 3             MR. MARCUSSEN:  I'd like the usher to collect the statement and

 4     give the witness another statement, please.

 5             And, Your Honours, this statement is up-loaded into e-court as a

 6     new exhibit number, 7266 -- 65 ter number 7266.

 7        Q.   Mr. Stojanovic --

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   -- could you tell the Court what you have in front of you?

10        A.   What I have in front of me is some statement that I signed as

11     well in English.

12             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Your Honours, I apologise.  I seem to be making

13     the same mistake again.  Could we, with the assistance of the usher, swap

14     the document?  I think we should -- yeah, I think we should get the other

15     one back, just to make sure we are looking at the right document.

16        Q.   Now, this document, what is this?

17        A.   It is a statement to.  It says "witness information, witness

18     statement."

19        Q.   And what's the date of the statement?

20        A.   21st of June, 2006.

21        Q.   Did you recognise that statement?

22        A.   I recognise it because I see that I signed it.  And I see my

23     initials down there, too.

24        Q.   And what language is it?

25        A.   Serbian.

Page 9719

 1        Q.   Would you be kind enough to go through that, as you did with the

 2     other ones, page by page --

 3        A.   I beg your pardon.  I mean, I would like to ask you -- or,

 4     rather, tell you that this is in Croatian.  This is not my language,

 5     Serbian.

 6        Q.   Would you be kind enough to go through the statement and confirm

 7     that your initials are on each page?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9        Q.   And would you be kind enough to look at page 16 -- well, the last

10     page of the document you have in front of you?

11        A.   Yes.  289 are the last digits.

12        Q.   Is there -- sorry, on the page before this, is there an

13     acknowledgment by you?

14        A.   288.  Yes.

15        Q.   Could you read out that acknowledgment, please?

16        A.   "This statement of 23 pages was read out to me in the Serbian

17     language and is true to the best of my knowledge and recollection.  I

18     have given this statement voluntarily and I am aware it may be used in

19     legal proceedings before the International Criminal Tribunal for the

20     prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of

21     international law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia

22     since 1991 and I may be called to give evidence in public before the

23     Tribunal."

24             I signed it, yes.

25        Q.   Thank you.  And if you would go to page 20 of the document that

Page 9720

 1     you have.  If you would go back to page 20.

 2        A.   20.

 3        Q.   Is your signature on this page?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   And what does the paragraph just above the signature read?

 6        A.   "I confirm that I read the above paragraphs in my mother tongue

 7     and that the content is correct."

 8        Q.   So on the 21st of June, 2006, you signed this statement, and you

 9     said that you had read the statement and that it was true, the truth; is

10     that right?

11        A.   That is not correct.  I've already said that all the statements

12     that I received for signature -- well, in this sentence here, too -- I

13     never would have signed -- well, first of all, it's not correct, I mean

14     the Croatian words here "tocan" and all the rest.  Well, it doesn't

15     matter.

16             It was read out to me from a laptop, and I waited for more than

17     half an hour for all the documentation to be prepared so that I could

18     sign it; that is to say, that I did not have enough time.  And why would

19     I think about this?  Why would I not trust an investigator from The Hague

20     if they gave me to initial something and said that that's what I gave

21     them, why would I not believe that?  The information contained in these

22     statements, however, has been totally changed, because in the month of

23     October -- I mean, that's why I brought my documentation.  It says in

24     October that I was at the frontline, and there is some information

25     referred to as in May, June.  This is a bit illogical.  I cannot be

Page 9721

 1     somewhere where I was not.

 2        Q.   So you're telling this Court that you are a man who has a

 3     Bachelor from a university, you hold various responsible positions in

 4     different companies, that you have given one statement to the OTP, to the

 5     Office of the Prosecutor, in 2004 which you signed without reading it;

 6     you gave a statement three months later in November about the same

 7     events, and that one was read back to you in English and you signed it,

 8     without knowing what you signed; and then you signed this particular

 9     statement and initialled every single page, and then put your signature

10     on top of that at the last page just below a paragraph which said that

11     you had read the statement?  Do you want the Court to believe that?

12        A.   I don't know, but I'm telling you quite sincerely.  You can check

13     all of this.  I did sign the statement, but as for what happened and the

14     time distance, where I was at the time, that can be proven easily, very

15     easily.  There are organs and everything else, number 1.  I said straight

16     away, when I walked into this courtroom, this was my first objection

17     addressed to the Trial Chamber and the president of the Trial Chamber.

18     That is why I withdrew this documentation that you said I should not keep

19     on the desk.

20             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, when you saw these

21     documents again, you mentioned that it contained some things that you

22     never said; is that what you're telling us?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So consequently you believe

25     that it was the investigator and the interpreter who made a mistake; is

Page 9722

 1     that what you're saying?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot tell untruth regarding

 3     some people.  They read to me a completely different statement and I

 4     signed a completely different statement.  I don't understand why

 5     something was read out to me from the laptop instead of printing it.  I

 6     never received a single copy of what I signed.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, the statement that we

 8     have before us, made on the 21st of June, 2007, if I take the first

 9     paragraph, randomly I take that paragraph, the interpreter must have read

10     to you that first paragraph, even if you signed, or were you given the

11     document and you read to yourself each page?

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I read this statement.  I saw

13     my name, I saw the personal details, and I initialled every page that was

14     given me.

15             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So you did not check the

16     content of the statement; is that right?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not at all, Judge, because I

18     expected that the same statement will be given me to take home to

19     analyse.  That's the practice in our country and our courts.

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Mr. Stojanovic, you did sign the statements on

21     the same day in which you gave your evidence, did you not?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I remember, yes, but I

23     had to wait a half hour or an hour for that to be printed.

24             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You had to wait an hour for it

25     to be printed, and once it was printed --

Page 9723

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Maybe more, yes.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] -- you signed right away;

 3     right?

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  It was given me because

 5     Mr. Paolo was in a hurry to catch a plane and he said, "Hurry up,

 6     initial," because I usually don't just initial, I sign my full name.

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Did you have a chance to observe -- could you see

 8     the printer or was the printer in the same room?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, it was not in the same room.  I

10     was on the ground floor of the UN building, the Prosecution office in

11     Belgrade.  I don't know where it was printed.  There was a large desk,

12     and the investigator behind the desk, sitting at a laptop.  The

13     interpreter was next to the investigator.  I was on the other side of the

14     desk.

15             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Were you together with Mr. Pastore-Stocchi and

16     Mr. Saxon during the time that you waited for the printing?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was with one man there, or maybe

18     it was a woman, a girl.  I can't remember.  I had two coffees while

19     waiting.

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

21             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Witness, if I understand you

22     correctly, when you signed this statement for which you certify having

23     heard and that the comments that are stated there are true and accurate,

24     did you sign a false statement?  Should I understand it that way?

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Judge, I did not review it.  It was

Page 9724

 1     read back to me.  I did not review the statement that I was signing.

 2             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Aside from the pages that you

 3     signed, at the very end of each page of each statement, you also certify

 4     that what you have said is true and that what you heard was true to fact.

 5     I mean, is that a false statement?  That would be a false statement, if I

 6     understand you correctly.

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I was led by the

 8     investigators on which page to sign, and that applied to the last page,

 9     including the witness acknowledgment.  Why did the investigator ask me to

10     sign my full name there, whereas I initialled all the rest?  I was led,

11     directed where to sign.

12             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, I would just like to

13     know one thing.  At the very end, when you signed the last page, did

14     anybody read out to you the two sentences that are written before --

15     above, rather, your signature:  "I certify that ... ," so on and so

16     forth.  It's in Serbian.  I can't remember the text exactly.  Did anybody

17     read that to you?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not even that was read back to me.

19     I was just told, while we were writing the statement, number 1 was read

20     to me, number 2 was read to me, as it was interpreted by the interpreter.

21     And later, when it was printed out, that is, 60 minutes later - I

22     remember it was quite a while - he took -- I was very warm, I was

23     directed where to initial, where to put my initial.  And on that last

24     statement, the acknowledgment, the gentleman asked me to put my full

25     signature.  When I asked to get a copy, I was told that I cannot get a

Page 9725

 1     single copy.

 2             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Marcussen, is Mr. Saxon

 3     here tonight?

 4             MR. MARCUSSEN:  I believe that he is, Your Honour.  I don't know

 5     whether he's in the office today, but if your question is whether he

 6     works for the Office of the Prosecutor, then yes.

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could you please ask him to

 8     come in right away, and then he can be sworn under oath and we will put

 9     the question to him.

10             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Yes.  Would Your Honours -- should we have a

11     short recess to get him down here, or how would we -- we can try to send

12     him an e-mail and see if he's in the office.

13             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, or the Registrar can call

14     him and can ask him to come in immediately.

15             MR. MARCUSSEN:  Maybe I may put some questions while we wait for

16     that to be solved, or would Your Honours like us to wait?

17             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, go ahead.  Yes, please

18     continue.

19             MR. MARCUSSEN:

20        Q.   Mr. Stojanovic, when you met the representatives of the Office of

21     the Prosecutor the first time in 2004, did you bring some documents with

22     you?

23        A.   Yes, I did.

24        Q.   Am I correct there were two articles and three photographs?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 9726

 1        Q.   And when you gave your statement in 2006, did you review that

 2     material again?

 3        A.   No, I did not.

 4        Q.   You did not?

 5        A.   No.

 6        Q.   Did you make comments on the material?

 7        A.   I can't remember.  Maybe we did make comments.  It was a long

 8     time ago.

 9        Q.   If you would go -- if you would go to -- in the statement you

10     have with you, if you would go to the page which has number 0601-2286,

11     please.  It's nearly at the end.  It's one of the last pages.

12        A.   Yes.

13                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]

15             MR. MARCUSSEN:

16        Q.   On this page, have you again put your signature on the page up

17     towards the top?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   And what does the paragraph just above the signature say, if you

20     would be kind enough to read it out?

21        A.   "I confirm that I read the above paragraphs in my mother tongue

22     and the contents is truthful and correct."

23             I have already stated, in regard to this and the other

24     statements, that it was all read back to me from the computer, and I was

25     waiting for all that to be printed out.  Not for a moment did I hold a

Page 9727

 1     single statement in my hands to read all this myself or for the

 2     interpreter to read it to me.

 3        Q.   Mr. Stojanovic, I'd like now to talk about these statements with

 4     you and what is actually in the statements.

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   Now, could you just repeat to us again, were you a member of the

 7     SRS in -- no, sorry.  You were, in fact, a member of the SRS in 2001,

 8     weren't you?

 9        A.   2001?  I don't think so, unless they still keep me on the record

10     of members.  You mean 1991?

11        Q.   I mean 1991.  Thank you very much for your help.  1991.

12        A.   No, I was a member of the Serbian National Revival and the

13     president of the District Board of the Serbian National Revival in

14     Vranje.  We had our own offices, we were an officially-registered party.

15     We had an office received from the Municipality of Vranje and everything

16     else.

17        Q.   Would you look at paragraph 8 of the statement you have in front

18     of you, please?

19        A.   Yes.

20             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] I'm terribly sorry, but I need

21     to clarify a point.

22             Witness, you've told us that a month or a month and a half ago,

23     you received those statements.  Do you know who sent them to you?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Maybe even more.  I believe it was

25     in March, when we were writing the request, March or April, I said I

Page 9728

 1     wanted to be a Defence witness.

 2             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Who gave you the statements?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My lawyer, who got in touch with

 4     the Defence of the accused.

 5             JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] If I am not mistaken, therefore,

 6     your lawyer received those statements from the Defence, if I understand

 7     correctly.  Yes, very well, thank you.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Astounded me when I saw all the

 9     things that were written there.

10             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.  Well, we're waiting for

11     Mr. Saxon.  I hope that he'll come shortly, because it's an order issued

12     by the Trial Chamber, and it would be quite unpleasant, actually, if he

13     did not show up.

14             It is five minutes to 7.00.  You are free to go, Witness.  You

15     will come back tomorrow.  The hearing is starting at 9.00.  The Witness

16     and Victims Section will bring you to the Tribunal.  Your

17     examination-in-chief will continue tomorrow, and then Mr. Seselj will

18     start his cross-examination.  But, in any event, tomorrow we will end the

19     proceedings at 1.45.  And since you are now testifying, you cannot call

20     the press, you cannot call the Prosecutor, you cannot call anybody, you

21     cannot speak to Mr. Seselj's associates or anybody like that, but you can

22     call your wife, your children.  Of course, your family, you may speak to

23     them, but you may not speak about this case with anyone.

24             Did you understand me clearly?

25             Very well.  You may leave now, and you'll have to be back here at

Page 9729

 1     9.00 tomorrow morning.

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Previous translation

 3     continues] ... Judge, and that's why I have been feeling unwell, because

 4     I was subject to pressure from many sides.  And I came here from the

 5     hospital to testify completely truthfully and only the truth, because I

 6     respect this Court and justice, and I'm saying only the truth and --

 7             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, while we are waiting

 9     for Mr. Saxon, you could tell us how much time the Prosecutor has left

10     for tomorrow.

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I believe that he's got less

12     than an hour, maybe 50 minutes.

13                           [The witness stands down]

14             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Registrar will tell us when

15     he comes back.  He's probably running around, trying to find Mr. Saxon,

16     who is probably not too far from here.

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I hope you don't mind if I remind

19     you that Daniel Saxon was covered by my criminal report towards Carla

20     Del Ponte together with Hilde Retzlaff.  He was the third person cited in

21     that criminal report based in this matter based on the facts I indicated

22     in that report.

23             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, I do know.

24             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

25             MS. BIERSAY:  I believe that Mr. Saxon is on his way, I believe.

Page 9730

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] While we are waiting, I could

 2     clarify to you this alleged problem with Mr. Krasic, Mr. President.

 3             I contacted Zoran Krasic, and he informed me that he has not sent

 4     any e-mails today, and I have this excerpt from his computer, where we

 5     can see the first rubric are messages sent, and the last message sent

 6     here is included here.  It's visible, and you can see on the second image

 7     that the folder is deleted and empty, if you want to see this.

 8             Zoran Krasic has no idea who this official of the ICTY is, nor

 9     how it was possible that she was contacted in this way.  It was not done

10     from Mr. Krasic's computer, and if you wish to take this.

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, we will make the

12     appropriate verifications, but first I would like to confer with my

13     fellow Judges to see if Mr. Saxon should be sworn under oath.

14             Mr. Saxon, please come where the witness is.

15             MS. DAHL:  Sorry.

16             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.

17             MS. DAHL:  We would like an opportunity overnight to review the

18     transcript to what questions are at issue and whether there is --

19             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It's right now, it's

20     immediately, right now.  Mr. Saxon, please come to the -- it's an order

21     given by the Trial Chamber.  He must answer to the questions that we are

22     going to ask him.  We are going to question him on the way the statements

23     were given.

24             MS. DAHL:  With all due respect, Mr. Saxon is a staff member of

25     the United Nations ICTY, who has rights, just as I did when I was accused

Page 9731

 1     of misconduct by Mr. Seselj and witnesses whose statements he submitted.

 2     It is premature to call Mr. Saxon in and put him under oath.  That is an

 3     unfair procedure.  He has the ability and the right to know what

 4     questions are to be asked, and if there are other means available that do

 5     not intrude upon the Prosecution's staff members that can satisfy the

 6     Chamber's need for information, we would like to provide those first.

 7             Witnesses are interviewed in the presence of investigators.

 8     Notes are prepared.  There are mission reports, there are other types of

 9     information that are contemporaneous, and it is not fair to Mr. Saxon

10     to --

11             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam, you are now obstructing

12     justice.  Mr. Saxon is not accused of anything.  We are asking him to

13     come here and appear as a witness and to tell us how a procedure went.

14     He is not accused of anything.  That's all.

15             However, if you believe that he has something to hide, that's

16     another problem, or to reproach himself with, correction, but that's

17     another problem.

18             Do not cut me off.

19             We want to know what happened, how the statement was given, how

20     did the witness sign the statement.  That's all we wanted to know.  It's

21     not very complicated.

22             MS. DAHL:  It may be quite a simple matter to answer those

23     questions.  However, it does not impugn the integrity of the staff member

24     to insist on proper procedure, nor does my objection obstruct this

25     Chamber's search for information.  I think it would be appropriate to

Page 9732

 1     recess and allow us to take the matter under advisement and report back

 2     to the Chamber at 9.00 tomorrow morning.  I do not think it is fair to

 3     Mr. Saxon to bring him out of his office, without an opportunity to

 4     familiarise himself with material.  And if the Chamber wants the most

 5     accurate recollections and proper information, we need an opportunity to

 6     prepare and to consider the matter of Mr. Saxon's rights and what is

 7     going on here.

 8             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Everything the Trial Chamber --

 9     I can tell you that if Mr. Saxon does not come, I shall launch a contempt

10     proceeding.

11             I would like to repeat, we would like to know three things which

12     are very simple.  It's extremely simple.  So either you are obstructing

13     justice, and that is another issue, or Mr. Saxon comes and answers, under

14     oath, the three questions I will put to him.

15             MS. DAHL:  There's a request pending that we recess and allow our

16     office to consider the questions and report back tomorrow morning at

17     9.00, when we resume.

18             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I disagree entirely, and I

19     shall confer with my colleagues.

20                           [Trial Chamber confers]

21             JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Trial Chamber has noted

22     that Mr. Saxon would like to read the transcript in order to answer the

23     questions that will be put to him.  The Trial Chamber therefore

24     stipulates that Mr. Saxon will be questioned tomorrow morning at 9.00.

25     But if he's not there at 9.00, I shall issue an indictment for contempt

Page 9733

 1     of the Tribunal.

 2             We shall resume tomorrow morning at 9.00.

 3                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.07 p.m.,

 4                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 23rd day of

 5                           July, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.