1 Thursday, 23 October 2008
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 8.35 a.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, could you please
6 call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning,
8 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-03-67-T,
9 the Prosecutor versus Vojislav Seselj. Thank you, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, registrar.
11 This is Thursday, October 23rd, 2008. I welcome Mr. Mundis,
12 Ms. Biersay, Ms. Dahl also. On his right, I also welcome their case
13 manager. And I greet Mr. Seselj.
14 We are here to continue with the cross-examination of our
15 witness, Mrs. Tabeau, but in the meanwhile I believe that the Office of
16 the Prosecution has a housekeeping matter to deal with.
17 MR. MUNDIS: Good morning, Mr. President. Good morning, Your
18 Honours, to my learned colleagues, and everyone in and around the
20 Very briefly, there's a matter I feel needs to the drawn to the
21 Trial Chamber's attention. Yesterday, before the commencement of the
22 trial, the accused provided the Prosecution with a copy of his most
23 recent book, "The Hague
24 its offensive nature, I'm not going to ask the AV booth to show this
25 publication, but I do want to hand it up to the Trial Chamber and I ask
1 you to please take a look at the cover of this book as well as briefly
2 scan the contents.
3 Your Honours, it's our submission and our position that the
4 accused with the publication of this book has once again crossed the
5 line. This book, especially its title and its cover, are offensive and
6 it's our view that this conduct is a deliberate affront to the dignity of
7 these proceedings, and it must stop now.
8 In accordance with his oft stated -- oft repeated statements, the
9 accused's mocking the international Tribunal. He is mocking this Trial
10 Chamber. He is mocking the Office of the Prosecutor, he is mocking the
11 victims, and mocking the international community as a whole. Outrages
12 such as this must stop, and the Trial Chamber must take steps to bring
13 this type of behaviour to an end once and for all.
14 I would now ask if we could please go briefly into private
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are now in private session.
18 [Private session]
11 Pages 10992-10995 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open session]
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, making this book a problem
6 is quite simply not commensurate with these proceedings and bringing it
7 up within these proceedings in trial. If Mrs. Christina Dahl considers
8 that she is been labelled and that any evil has been done to her, she can
9 have me up for slander with the court in Belgrade. She can file a
10 criminal report, although in Serbia
11 sentences that can be passed; it's just a monetary fine. And she can
12 take me to court to seek compensation.
13 The political methods during this trial, that is to say, to
14 attack this book during the trial has absolutely no sense as well. The
15 book was printed in 10.000 copies at the beginning of September, and you
16 cannot ban the book through the courts because it has been distributed
17 and almost all the copies have been sold out. You can't send someone
18 from door to door to seize the books, nor do you know the list of
19 purchases. And a large number of copies were handed out free of charge
20 as the Serbian Radical Party does. Usually it hands out books free of
21 charge or otherwise sells them at a symbolic price.
22 So as far as the book is concerned, this Tribunal does not have
23 the authority to deal with the matter, nor is it in order to raise that
24 matter within these proceedings. I handed over a copy of the book
25 yesterday to the Prosecution through the registrar because I wish to use
1 the book while examining certain future witnesses. Whether they are
2 going to appear as Prosecution witnesses or Defence witnesses is a matter
3 I'll have to decide in due course. But I handed it over to the OTP
4 yesterday. I could have handed it over in September, but I was in no
5 hurry to do so. So I did that yesterday and I received just one copy,
6 and a second copy arrived subsequently so that I was able to hand that
7 one over later on.
8 Now, as far as the title page goes or the cover of the book,
9 that's up to the artistic vision of the person designing the cover.
10 Someone might find it abusive; somebody else might look upon it with
11 sympathy. If somebody did something like that to me, perhaps I'd be
12 angry. Perhaps I'd just laugh it off. Perhaps I'd find it funny.
13 Now, Mrs. Christina Dahl's attitude towards the cover page is up
14 to her. If she considers that she has been done and can claim damages,
15 then it's up to her to bring a lawsuit against me, but it comes under the
16 authority of the court in Belgrade
17 of it.
18 Look at the list of books I've published to date, Mr. President.
19 Just have a look at what I said about certain judges of this Tribunal in
20 those titles. Have the Hrtkovci affair book provided to you by the
21 Prosecution. It's a big book, so I can't carry it around. It's heavy.
22 But you have a list of all my books there. See what I said about Judge
23 Alphonsus Orie. I said much worse things than I did about Christine
24 Dahl. I'm not going to read out the title, so you don't have to move
25 into private session.
1 What about the Registrar Hans Holthuis, what I said, and what I
2 said about Carla Del Ponte. And what I said about that Justice Moloto,
3 the Judge who asked in the Miletic trial, Why didn't you Serbs, when you
4 weren't recognised by the Croats, didn't you go to Serbia where you are
5 recognised? And several other examples. Judge Schomburg, for example, a
6 whole title devoted to him, the title of the book, one whole book.
7 So let them take me to court. Let them sue me. What I said
8 refers to Christine Dahl is the mildest of my observations, and you can
9 look at my collected works for that matter.
10 Now, are you going to try me because of the titles of my book?
11 All right, go ahead, try me for that, too.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, let's stop here.
13 We have a witness and we have another witness listed for today. The
14 Trial Chamber has heard you, has heard Mr. Mundis. Let me return this
15 book to Mr. Mundis, because this was handed to the Prosecutor in the
16 first place. What did you want to add, Mr. Seselj?
17 THE ACCUSED [Interpretation] Since you've brought up
18 administrative matters, two questions very briefly, ones that I'd like to
20 Yesterday I submitted to you a (redacted)
21 (redacted), that I received the day before yesterday. I received it
22 properly through the prison administration, and I handed it over to the
23 registry so that it can be copied out for you. I hope that you have
24 received a copy. No, it's not that paper. No, this is the one that I
25 handed in this morning. Yesterday I handed over the letter so that it
1 could be photocopied for the Judges and for the OTP.
2 Today I brought in an order from the prison warden. You have it
3 in the English language, too.
4 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's move to private session.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are now in private session
7 [Private session]
11 Pages 11000-11006 redacted. Private session.
5 [Open session]
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judges, since you were surprised
7 yesterday by the fact that I have been denied telephones for telephone
8 communication with my legal advisors, I brought in this letter by way of
9 proof. This is a letter from the prison warden sent to me on the 29th of
10 September, 2008.
11 On that day, on that evening, I had a scheduled conversation with
12 my legal advisors at 1800 hours, or at 1900 hours. It doesn't really
13 matter. I very properly asked the guard to have the line established and
14 I sat there and waited for 10 or 15 minutes and then the guard came with
15 the Registrar's letter and said that this became forbidden, conversations
16 from that telephone. The same evening I received this letter from the
17 prison warden. This is proof that I could no longer speak from that
18 particular telephone.
19 Before the 29th of September, on this list of telephone numbers,
20 in addition to Bojan Gajic, who is the consul of the Republic of Serbia
21 in Holland
22 of some administrative matters for us or whatever else, there was just
23 the name of Slavko Jerkovic, too, on this list; that is to say, I could
24 not contact all my legal advisors in the case, only Slavko Jerkovic.
25 That is why I would have to schedule a meeting with Slavko Jerkovic and
1 to say that the other members of the team should be in attendance as well
2 and then we could all talk together.
3 Well, from the 29th of September onwards, you see the date here,
4 I have not been permitted to call Slavko Jerkovic from that telephone
5 either. Now I can only call Bojan Gajic, the Serbian consul in the
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed. The document is
9 very straightforward and the Trial Chamber will review it.
10 Let's have Ms. Tabeau brought into the courtroom. Let me remind
11 you, Mr. Seselj, that you've already used one hour and 45 minutes. You
12 have, therefore, 15 minutes left, but after consulting my fellow judges,
13 we decided to grant you 15 additional minutes. In other words, you have
14 half an hour left. I suppose there will be objections, questions by the
15 Bench, and I suppose we'll need to go until 10, until the break. After
16 the break there may be some re-examination, I'm not sure. But let's have
17 Ms. Tabeau brought in. You have 30 minutes to complete your
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I needed more time, but if that is
20 your ruling, what can I do about it? I did need at least an hour more
21 than the time that has been granted to me.
22 [The witness entered court]
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Good morning, Ms. Tabeau.
24 Please accept our apologies. You had to wait outside the courtroom, but
25 we had a number of housekeeping matters to deal with.
1 Mr. Seselj, you have the floor.
2 WITNESS: EWA TABEAU [Resumed]
3 Cross-examination by Mr. Seselj: [Continued]
4 Q. [Interpretation] I'd like to continue the discussion about your
5 sources, Mrs. Tabeau. You used three basic sources - the book by
6 Marko Kljajic, "The Parish Priest from Petrovaradin," based on
7 information data from the records of the Hrtkovci parish office and
8 information that you got from the Croatian authorities. Now, you did the
9 matching of that, and it was fairly unsuccessful from the aspects of what
10 you were looking at doing, matching of those three lists; right?
11 A. Indeed, the matching rates were not very high.
12 Q. Well, Mrs. Tabeau, why did you state here that the list of
13 Marko Kljajic relates to the period 1992 to 1993 when Marko Kljajic had
14 in mind a much longer period until the book was actually published and he
15 incorporates people who had moved out after 1995? Are you aware of that?
16 A. The list of 280 families you are referring to includes
17 individuals who left Hrtkovci in 1992, as far as I know.
18 Q. But just individuals; right? Now, when you had that book in your
19 hands and saw on the second cover that Marko Kljajic was a Roman Catholic
20 priest from Petrovaradin and that he had dedicated the book to the
21 well-known notorious criminal and war criminal Franjo Tudjman, did a red
22 light go on in your head? Did you have any suspicions to the effect that
23 that book did not correspond to some moral or professional criteria and
24 the aspiration to reach the truth and so on? Didn't it enter your head
25 it might be propaganda with a political goal in mind?
1 A. I didn't use the book in my study. I used a list that was
2 published in the book. And I knew that the source for the list is VS-61
3 and as such it was the same source as for parish records. And knowing
4 that the parish records were not fully complete, not all requests were
5 registered in the book. Naturally, this list was an expansion of the
6 parish records that I also used in my study.
7 Q. Very well. But you attach here a letter by Bishop Ciril Kos
8 addressed to the Serb patriarch. Didn't you wonder straight away and ask
9 yourself, well, that it was obvious that they had a lengthy
10 correspondence and then ask to see their previous letters, the
11 patriarch's letters to Bishop Kos and other Croatian bishops, so that you
12 could see what all this was about? Didn't you have any doubts and
13 suspicions that it's quite obvious here that there had been previous
14 correspondence and that the Serb patriarch appealed to the Roman Catholic
15 Croatian bishops to become involved and prevent the persecution of Serbs
16 by Tudjman's regime, and then at a point in time, Bishop Kos thought that
17 he had an argument to answer with the same measure and to tell the Serb
18 patriarch, It's not only that the Serbs are being persecuted over there,
19 the Croats are being persecuted over here. Didn't that idea come to
21 A. I didn't study the correspondence between these two churches.
22 What I was interested in was the statistical information that I needed
23 for quantification of the departures from Hrtkovci. And at some point I
24 decided that parish records is the right source and the best source I
25 could use at that time for my study. And my purpose was to assess this
1 source and the related list of 280 families. This is why I found the
2 letter that was presented yesterday, together with the list, important
3 and relevant. It is just yet another confirmation that the list was
4 making sense, was real, and could be taken as a source for studying in my
6 Q. Do you know that every parish office of the Roman Catholic church
7 has a logbook, a protocol book, in which entries are made of the
8 reception of all documents and in which any documents being issued are
9 recorded, entries of that are made?
10 A. Well, I don't know exactly what kind of logs the churches have.
11 I believe it would make sense to have a log of incoming and outgoing
12 correspondence. If I --
13 Q. But you should have consulted those logbooks because they can be
14 proof in evidence that, for instance, in May a certain number of
15 christening certificates were issued or marriage certificates or
16 whatever. That would be a very good way of proving this. And do you
17 know that in the records, the source records, no entries are made of when
18 copies are made from those records, that is, recorded in the logbook, not
19 in the records, parish records themselves? And I think the situation is
20 the same in Poland
21 -- of a marriage certificate or birth certificate, the very fact that
22 this copy has been issued and extracted, it's not recorded in the basic
23 records but in the logbook. Am I right in saying that, Mrs. Tabeau?
24 A. I think that the very important fact is that church book itself,
25 it is the primary document that really matters. And it is important
1 because in this document information about individuals is complete, for
2 instance, when it comes to baptism, a child is first born. There is a
3 date of birth, place or date of the child, information about the parents,
4 information about the christening, information about the godparents.
5 Q. This has absolutely no sense at all because we know that. You're
6 just wasting my time.
7 MR. BIERSAY: This is not for Mr. Seselj to comment on, the
8 quality of the witness's testimony.
9 THE WITNESS: We know everything that is entered.
10 MS. BIERSAY: If he could stop interrupting and allow her to
11 finish, we could probably get through this more quickly.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It's for the Chamber to
13 eventually rule on the quality of a testimony of this witness.
14 Mr. Seselj, please put questions to the witness and let her
15 answer. When it comes to the proper value of the testimony of this
16 witness, it will be for the Judges to decide.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But you see, Mr. President, what
18 I'm saying is this: Nowhere in the records are the entries made that
19 extracts have been issued. In certain countries, for example, extracts
20 have a three-month deadline and then you have to have a new extract
21 issued. So the basic records do not contain entries of the extracts.
22 This is done in a logbook. And the witness's answer to me is that she
23 describes all the entries made in the basic record, in the register, in
25 So I'm saying that they were -- that the Prosecution has been, I
1 fear, instructed to waste as much time as possible in my
2 cross-examination because I won't have time to ask all my questions if
3 the witness irrationally uses up all my time and says things that have
4 nothing to do with my questions.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Tabeau, Mr. Seselj seems to
6 be suggesting that you did not quite answer his question.
7 THE WITNESS: Well, I want to finish what I started.
8 So in these basic records there is information, the date of
9 request, and in this way for me, for my statistical information,
10 purposes, this is what I exactly need, all the information there.
11 In addition to this, I have the list of the 280 families, and
12 this can be seen as some kind of overview. It is an overview of the
13 families who most likely all requested the certificates. I know that the
14 request in the books are incomplete and this is why it makes sense to use
15 the two things together. I don't need any separate log of incoming and
16 outgoing correspondence made by this church.
17 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Instead of drawing up the graph that is really rather
19 frightening, you could compile the graph even if you had only five
20 extracts being issued during the month of May. But anyway, didn't you
21 ask yourself, since statistics is the science of large numbers, that you
22 were now in a situation where your figures, your numbers, were too small?
23 Seventy extracts issued in May, 17 in June; these figures are too small
24 for you a priori to think that they are telling.
25 The Petrovaradin Catholic priest Marko Kljajic and the priest
1 from Hrtkovci could have sat down one afternoon and entered into the
2 notes of the register all the data that you have taken as being true and
3 correct. Nobody would accept them just like that, accept their validity
4 without testing them and checking them out; isn't that right?
5 A. Well, somebody instructed you, Mr. Seselj, to speak about
6 statistics and big numbers in statistics, how important they are. But
7 you are mixing up things.
8 This report presents empirically observed data. It has nothing
9 to do with estimating unknown parameters or unknown numbers. The issue
10 of the sample size, how big it is, does matter in the statistical
11 estimation of unknown information about the population in this particular
12 case. I do work with real observed data, and the numbers produced in
13 this report are minimum numbers. So is Annex A, the list in Annex A, and
14 so are the distributions, the timing that I present.
15 So your point is simply invalid in this case. And it is not true
16 that any observed events must be big in order to make sense. If you
17 think a little bit of situations in epidemiology for instance, there are
18 diseases that the prevalence of which is really very, very low, so don't
19 speak about sample size.
20 Q. Mrs. Tabeau, I'm a layperson where demography is concerned, but
21 don't tell me that I need instructions about the substance of the
22 statistical method. I'm a doctor of science. I study the methodology of
23 social sciences and I know what is meant by the statistical method. And
24 the statistics of science is a science of large numbers only when -- and
25 only when it compares certain groups with large numbers can the result be
1 reliable. As soon as it boils down to small numbers, it is highly
3 But since you've gobbled up so much of my time and you did not
4 heed my request, let's go to your expert report and Annex A. And may we
5 have it placed on our screens so that we can go through your list there
6 and see just how serious your work has been.
7 You compiled the list by matching up two lists of the state
8 authorities of Croatia
9 on the basis of information and data of the register in Hrtkovci. And
10 I'm just going to point to a number of examples which speak of imprecise
11 unconsciousness and irresponsible work, and that is my initial thesis.
12 Now I'm going to ask you concrete questions in that regard.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have the list brought up.
14 It is Annex A. I now have the title page of the expert report, but I
15 need Annex A. I have it here if the court administration doesn't have it.
16 MS. BIERSAY: I believe it's at around approximately page 37 of
17 the report, to assist the registrar.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, it's the annex to the report,
19 and additional section. And the title "List of Persons that Left
20 Hrtkovci in Relation to the Events in May-August 1992," that's the title.
21 Can we zoom into that please, now.
22 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Now, let's look at the first person on that list and let me
24 repeat the title. "List of Persons that Left Hrtkovci in Relation to the
25 Events in May-August 1992."
1 Akrap, Anto, is number 1. He exchanged his property before those
2 events and had a contract on the exchange which was recorded in Zagreb
3 the 10th of January, 1992. And you have that piece of information in the
4 Croatian authorities records; right?
5 A. No, I don't.
6 Q. All right. Now, let's look at number 5, Akrap Marija. Just like
7 Akrap, Anto, the situation is the same, the 10th of January, 1992?
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mrs. Tabeau, let's go back to
9 number 1. Mr. Seselj is submitting that this Anto Akrap would have
10 exchanged his flat. This flat would have been swapped in January 1992.
11 If he makes a swap, he leaves, so why is it that he is noted down as
12 having left on December 15th, 1992? Of course assuming that what
13 Mr. Seselj is saying is true, assuming, number 1, that there has been a
14 contract to exchange flats, and 2, that Mr. Anto Akrap did say that he
15 left in January 1992, because here we see December 15, 1992, the figures
16 don't match.
17 THE WITNESS: Well, I said I don't have the information
18 Mr. Seselj has, so this is what was my answer. It is -- I report what is
19 reported in the refugee tables from the Croat authorities. And I don't
20 have the contract related to the exchange of houses, so I simply don't
21 know. In my statistics, he is reported in December 1992 as having left
23 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Look at number 3, Ivan Akrap. He reported that he no longer
25 resided in Hrtkovci on the 19th of January, 1982, and he moved to Zagreb
1 and then he registered residency on Zagreb on the 2nd of February, 1982
2 You have this information in the secretariat of the interior of Serbia
3 and you also have the list of the Croatia
4 to you. Did you have that particular information? Number 3 on your
6 A. Well, you are speaking of Akrap, Ivan?
7 Q. Ivan.
8 A. He is reported in the list of family members that I received as
9 additional to the list of 280 families, and in his record his first
10 registration in Croatia
11 in this record about his property. I don't know whether he exchanged
12 property or not. I know that he most likely, according to the record,
13 worked temporarily in Croatia
14 before 1992. If he had a permanent address in Hrtkovci, he is reported
15 in this record as having the permanent address in Hrtkovci. So this only
16 means that he made a final decision in 1992 to leave the village.
17 Q. Why did you check with the Serbian authorities to see that he
18 cancelled his registration in 1982? He is the son of Anto Akrap
19 registered under number 1. He was born in Hrtkovci in 1982. He moved to
21 joined by his father, having signed a contract for the exchange of
22 property. So your very own information shows what kind of forgeries you
23 resort to. His son lived without interruption in Zagreb from 1982
24 onwards, and now in view of the fact that the priest Marko Kljajic only
25 has a list of heads of households, since you know that he is a Kinsmen of
1 this person, you artificially include him in this list of yours so that
2 you would have a bigger list.
3 Now, let's move on. Number 2, Gordana Akrap --
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mrs. Tabeau, the list that we
5 have here is a list that was drawn up by Croatian authorities. Number 3
6 is Mr. Ivan Akrap, who is the son of Ante Ivan, so everyone should think
7 -- one can think and infer that the whole family is leaving at the same
8 time - mother, father, son, and so on. But there's a problem with what
9 we have on Ivan Akrap, and I did deal with this yesterday, I addressed
10 the problem yesterday. We know that, in fact, he was registered in 1982
11 in Zagreb
13 on the list as a person that could potentially be an expelled Croat can
14 cast some doubt on this document.
15 Didn't you think, you know, at the time that maybe in a household
16 -- within a household some people in the household might already have
17 left Hrtkovci, and that in this case what should have been done is to
18 check on the City Hall registers whether his place of residence was
19 actually Hrtkovci, to be a hundred percent sure?
20 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] I have a question on this.
21 Yesterday we saw a document where we saw that there was -- he had a
22 residence in Hrtkovci until 1992. Where did you get this information?
23 There's an address, too, if I remember well.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, Ms. Tabeau, when you take
25 a look at this list made by the authorities, you see that the address in
1 Hrtkovci is unknown. If this person is a refugee, he should give his
2 previous address, and here it says "unknown," whereas we have the address
3 in Zagreb
4 THE WITNESS: Well, it is -- first of all, Akrap, Ivan is
5 reported with three family members as number 1 on the list of 280
6 expelled individuals from the book of Marko Kljajic. There is an address
7 there. It is Lenova [phoen] Street, which is mentioned on the list, so
8 obviously there is an address in Hrtkovci for this family. And on the
9 other list that was received from a totally different source, from the
10 Croatian authorities, there is no address in Hrtkovci. Obviously, the
11 Croatian authorities didn't have the information about the address
12 because probably the information was not given to them. I don't know
13 what is the source for this.
14 Well, it's further stated in the records from the Croatian
15 authorities --
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but with this type of
17 computation, when you add all the members of this 280 households, you end
18 up with 722 individuals. But if Ivan Akrap was already residing in
20 was not expelled because of being frightened and so forth and so on.
21 There may be others that are in exactly the same situation. I don't know
22 about this.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, two-thirds of the
24 names on this list are that way. Two-thirds. And I have many other
1 THE WITNESS: What I want to comment here, first of all, the list
2 of 280 families represents 805 individuals. For every family, the size
3 of the family in Hrtkovci is reported. There is an address reported in
4 Hrtkovci. So this list was not made up I believe because there are
5 concrete pieces of information in there. I don't say that everybody in
6 1992 was living in Hrtkovci. I said yesterday and I'm saying today, it
7 was quite a common situation in the former Yugoslavia that people who had
8 permanent address of residence in one place were working and living in
9 another place. And it was often done between people like here, living
10 with permanent address in Hrtkovci but actually residing in Croatia
11 that is how it was.
12 But what does this mean? If the rest of the family -- son was in
14 family, then some family members lived in Hrtkovci, well, how should we
15 consider cases of this kind? Whether it was a person who can be
16 considered an expat or refugee or what, I believe these are people who
17 eventually decided to leave the village, decided to exchange or were
18 pushed into exchanging property --
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, people. We do not contest
20 the fact that people left the village. Number 24, for example, in the
21 Colonel Gruzic's list, he has an address in Hrtkovci, so that's fine.
22 For a number of them there are addresses in Hrtkovci. But we need to see
23 exactly when they left Hrtkovci, whether they left Hrtkovci before or
24 after May 1992. That's one problem.
25 Secondly, the Croatian authorities do their job very well, like
1 any other administration of course. But when I check this document, and
2 Mr. Seselj is saying that there's two-thirds of them, I see that for a
3 great number of people there is no address for Hrtkovci whereas there is
4 an address for Zagreb
5 weren't already residing there in Zagreb. Why would Croatian authorities
6 have the specific address for some and not for others?
7 THE WITNESS: The address is available for everyone, every
8 family. The address for Hrtkovci is reported on the list of 280
9 families. The list of family members is just an expansion of the list of
10 280. There is the link between these two lists. There is the family
11 head, so the address is reported on the first list for family heads, also
12 valid for all family members. It really doesn't matter that on the
13 expansion of the list of 280 there is no address in Hrtkovci, because as
14 a matter of fact, the address is available from the other list, from the
15 list of 280.
16 These are families, family members I was checking when comparing
17 the list of family size. So the family size is different when you
18 compare the size reported in the first list with the size reported in
19 terms of family members. But the issue is complicated here --
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, proceed. We've
21 heard your explanation. Thank you. We are in a rush, so please
22 continue, Mr. Seselj.
23 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
24 Q. In relation to what the expert said, I just wanted to say that
25 I'm just talking about residence, and that is a permanent category,
1 whereas addresses are a temporary matter, and I'm not talking about that.
2 Gordana Akrap, under number 2, she is a permanent resident of
4 by the Croatian authorities, right?
5 Then number 4, Kata Akrap, she deregistered in Hrtkovci in 1980.
6 You could have checked that at the municipality of Roma
7 even try to do that.
8 Number 6, Petar Akrap, he was born in Zagreb on the 29th of June,
9 1983. At that time on the 17th of July, two weeks after his birthday in
10 1938, he was registered as a resident of Croatia. He never changed his
11 residency. You have it in your list provided by the Croatian
13 Then Ankica Akrapovic, number 7, she never resided in Serbia
14 rather in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and she registered on the 4th of
15 November, 1988, in Croatia
17 MS. BIERSAY: I respectfully request that Mr. Seselj give the
18 witness an opportunity to respond to what is now just merely assertions
19 instead of compiling them in such a manner -- if he could do them
20 singularly, it would be helpful.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
22 So he mentioned a number of cases. Could you please answer now?
23 THE WITNESS: Obviously Mr. Seselj has additional information
24 about these individuals that I don't have.
25 From my analysis of this data and familial relationship between
1 the individuals reported on the first list and the individuals reported
2 as family members, it was justified to include both the family heads and
3 the family members in my list attached in Annex A. If there is
4 additional information that I don't have that Mr. Seselj has, then I
5 would really like to see it, because if it is the truth, what he is
6 saying, then obviously a number of individuals have to be taken out of
7 the list.
8 But having this discussion without having this information
9 doesn't make much sense because I must answer that I don't have this
10 information, and in order to make informed decision, I need to see it.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you have mentioned
12 some cases and very serious cases actually. You seem to say there are
13 people that are on this list who had been who were no longer in Bosnia
15 appear on a list of expelled people. That's extremely serious because
16 this could mean that these documents are forged. So where did you obtain
17 this information, please?
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, 04225 is the
19 document that you should see, that's the 65 ter number. It was provided
20 by the OTP. That's where the information is contained. Look at number
21 16, for instance. Let me just help you. Number 16 from the annex to the
22 expert report, Nada Akrapovic. Please, on page 2 of this document,
23 according to 65 ter, you'll find the name of Nada Akrapovic somewhere
24 around mid-page. It says in that document that she was born in 1948 and
25 that she lived in Belgrade
1 she moved to Croatia
2 been a permanent resident of Zagreb
3 authorities, of the Croat authorities, that was provided to me by the
4 Prosecution expert, you see that, and the OTP. You see that the expert
5 cannot find her way in her own documents. She lived in Belgrade. In
6 1994 she moved from Belgrade
7 May I proceed now?
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, on this specific case,
9 this person living in Belgrade
10 you say on this person? Mr. Seselj, can you tell us exactly the exact
11 page where we have this person? This person living in Belgrade.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is the Prosecution designation
13 04239016. I may have misspoken. 96, this is one of the lists provided
14 by the Croatian authorities, the ones that I objected to yesterday and
15 then you said that they should be marked for identification. So that is
16 the list providing more detailed information.
17 Have I been of assistance to you now? At least a bit. You have
18 three lists from the Croatian authorities. The first one is the table
19 with the very fine print, the second one is yet another table, and this
20 is a list with more detailed information.
21 And now on page 2 of that list, around mid-page, it says Nada
22 Akrapovic lived in Belgrade
23 information apart from the information that the expert witness has;
24 however, I use the same information from her successfully.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Witness, on page 2, Nada
1 Akrapovic, there's an address in Belgrade. She was registered in Zagreb
2 on February 2nd, 1994
3 that this happened -- how can we think that this person comes from
4 Hrtkovci? What is the link?
5 THE WITNESS: The link is through the Ivan Akrapovic who is
6 reported as number 3 on the first list, 280 heads. There are two
7 Akrapovics - Akrapovic, Ivan, with six family members and Akrapovic,
8 Ivan, with two - and they are both listed in the second list with the
9 family members with Akrapovic Ivan, number 3, he is born on 11th of June
10 1974. Address in Serbia
11 arrived in Croatia
12 other two --
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I understand what you did. You
14 took the family head Ivan Akrapovic who lived in Ruma and left for Zagreb
15 in August, and then you attached to this family head all those who were
16 in the list of the Croatian authorities and who have the same name, the
17 same surname. But that's extremely dangerous and perilous or risky.
18 Because Nada, for example, Nada Akrapovic might be a member of this
19 family, might have nothing to do with all this. She might not be
20 involved by all the events. She might just decide to out of the blue to
21 go to Zagreb
22 THE WITNESS: Who made the link? That is the answer. The link
23 was made by the Croatian authorities who checked in the population
24 register how many family members were associated with the family heads.
25 For me, I'm taking the first list, 280 individuals who are culled and
1 expelled persons from Hrtkovci and whom I know they were expelled in 1992
2 when they left Hrtkovci, departed from Hrtkovci in 1992. And I associate
3 additional information about them and family members as obtained from the
4 population registered in Croatia
5 And I want to explain a few things about the population register.
6 It is the dates of registration in the register that should not be taken
7 as the actual dates of arrival in Croatia. So this is why in our list in
8 Annex A, we actually --
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me stop you here. Document
10 4225 is called "Information on Families Expelled from Hrtkovci." So
11 anyone reading this would first read the title, see all these names, and
12 at first sight would say this represents a great amount of people
13 expelled from Hrtkovci. That is what you could infer at first sight.
14 And then we'll find all that in the bar charts and in the statistical
15 tables. But when you take a closer look at this, it doesn't always
16 match. This Nada Akrapovic does not live in Hrtkovci, so you can't say
17 she was expelled from Hrtkovci. She didn't live there. Can't you agree
18 with me, yes or no?
19 THE WITNESS: Not really because it is a matter of how you read
20 the record of Croatian authorities. That she had an address in Belgrade
21 at some point, first of all, we don't know when was it. I have no idea.
22 What kind of timing here is involved, that is one thing. And as far as I
23 can see, she registered in Croatia
24 exactly when she departed. The only information about departure I have
25 is from the family member, from the family head, which comes from the
1 first list.
2 So it's not that the information from the population register can
3 be taken as resembling the actual population movement. And this I'm
4 saying, people in the former Yugoslavia
5 at the same place. The list that we are talking about, the family
6 members was submitted to us as an expansion of the first list, 280
7 individuals of whom we know they were from Hrtkovci, of whom we know we
8 have their addresses, and we know that they left Hrtkovci in 1992.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me look at another. Take a
10 look at Ankica Akrapovic.
11 THE WITNESS: Belgrade
12 registered in Croatia
13 mean that she could have moved between 1992 and 1994 from Hrtkovci to
15 time of the conflict at all.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Let me take another
17 example. Ankica Akrapovic. Address is Kacuni, it's Kacuni. Kacuni is
18 not Hrtkovci.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Bosnia-Herzegovina, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. And she is recorded
21 on November 4, 1988
22 head of family left Hrtkovci, of the relatives attached to that family
23 who may be in Croatia
24 the conclusion is that they were all expelled from Hrtkovci. But when
25 you detail it all, when you look into details and look at all the
1 different families, it's a bit different. It seems to be more
2 complicated than that. You know, when you do your work properly as a
3 judge -- do you agree with this?
4 THE WITNESS: I have a different opinion on this. For instance,
5 if you look at this Akrapovic, Ankica, and you look at the family head,
6 it is Akrapovic, Stipo, one record earlier on the list. And the address
7 of Stipo is also in Bosnia and Herzegovina. His arrival in Croatia
8 1993, as you see, and it is, in my eyes, perfectly possible that he left
9 Hrtkovci in 1992 as reported on the first list, moved to
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and eventually from Bosnia he moved to Croatia
11 because he was in Bosnia
12 is already his second country of destination. And in this case
13 absolutely impossible to include such a person as a refugee.
14 So what I'm trying to say, reconstructing the migration history
15 is a very difficult task. This is why initially the plan for this
16 project was to compare the census data and to study the records of people
17 known not reported at the later census in the registers of displacement.
18 And this is a source that is most certainly relevant, but it shouldn't be
19 taken literally as the reported dates have a more complex context than
20 what we think should be in there. This is all I can say about it.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I fully understand what you are
22 saying because in your theory, these people might have an address some
23 place and go through Hrtkovci at one point in time, which is why I asked
24 you yesterday whether you went to take a look at the registers in town
25 hall, whether you went to take a look at the tax records, tax registers
1 to get, you know, a formal proof of all this. But you told me that you
2 did not check all these registers. But we cannot draw conclusions if we
3 don't have -- if we are not a hundred percent sure. And I can only be a
4 hundred percent sure if I have an address in Hrtkovci on this document.
5 It's straightforward. But if there's no address in Hrtkovci, this is
6 going to cast doubt in my mind, of course. I'm going to wonder whether
7 things really happened like I'm told, like you are telling me, especially
8 -- the title of the list is "Expelled People." If these people were
9 truly expelled, I need at least to know a hundred percent sure that the
10 person was residing there in 1992. I'm sure you understand me.
11 I'm not going continue on this because it's 10.00.
12 Unfortunately, Mr. Seselj, you have one minute left. Well, you have 15
13 minutes. We had 15 additional minutes, so you will have 15 additional
14 minutes after the break, but please be fast.
15 Maybe Mrs. Biersay will have additional questions. Mrs. Biersay,
16 do you think you'll have additional questions, yes or no?
17 MS. BIERSAY: Yes, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. For how long?
19 MS. BIERSAY: I think I can do it in less than 15 minutes.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We have another
21 witness scheduled.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, since I'm not going
23 to waste any of our time with that second witness and as Biersay has said
24 she'll just take 15 minutes, may I be given a little more time now?
25 Because I really have some very important questions to ask, and I don't
1 think any of the question that I've asked so far were insignificant. You
2 can't say that about any of my questions. And we are dealing with an
3 expert witness. So I did make an effort to save time with many witnesses
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We'll try to do some math. Our
6 goal is to hear witness -- the second witness under Rule 92 ter, so just
7 a few questions are put to this witness. We will also want Mrs. Biersay
8 to put some additional questions because she needs time for that. We'll
9 do some math over the break. We will see if we can give you 30 minutes
10 instead of 15 minutes. We'll check on this.
11 --- Recess taken at 10.02 a.m.
12 --- On resuming at 10.27 a.m.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Court is back in session
14 without Judge Lattanzi, who has to attend to some other business. But
15 we'll proceed with the hearing according to the rules with the two other
16 judges of the Bench.
17 Mr. Seselj, please proceed. According to my math, you have until
18 11.00, provided there aren't any objections. The Judges will refrain
19 from asking questions in order for us to hear this witness and the
20 following witness. Please proceed, Mr. Seselj.
21 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Mrs. Tabeau, take a look at the number 18, and you'll find the
23 name Alisa Andrasek.
24 She didn't move out of Vojvodina at all. She moved from Hrtkovci
25 and set up residence in the neighbouring village of Platicevo
1 she is in the pre-electoral campaign of the Serbian Radical Party for the
2 local elections in the Ruma municipality. She is involved there, whereas
3 you have put her on the list of expelled persons. Why? That's number 18
4 I'm referring to.
5 A. I don't have the information you have. Perhaps if I had it, I
6 would have changed my mind.
7 But, Your Honour, if I may comment on the discussion we had just
8 before the break. I wanted to close this discussion with some other
9 remarks, very brief, if I may. I would like to direct your attention to
10 Table 13 in my report, page 26.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We are wasting my time again,
12 Mr. President. This is on my time, time that I was at pains to regain.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] It won't be deducted from your
14 time, Mr. Seselj.
15 Please proceed quickly, Witness.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 THE WITNESS: This list contains an overview of the records in
18 Annex A, the 722 [indiscernible] accepted records for refugees; 116
19 address in Hrtkovci is all known and available. For family heads
20 accepted, 266 addresses in Hrtkovci, known and available. For family
21 members, 88 addresses uncertain. Not for all. It is a maximum that for
22 88 addresses in Hrtkovci wouldn't be available and known. For a number
23 is unavailable, unknown. Christenings and marriages 170, 82; address in
24 Hrtkovci, available from the church books.
25 So the answer that you were talking about relates to up to the
1 maximum of 88 records. The information from Croat authorities shouldn't
2 be read as to point -- as pointing exactly to the dates of the departure
3 and residence at the time times reported in this records. The
4 information was provided to us as available to the Croat authorities.
5 Addresses and dates were reported in the past and relate to different
6 time periods and not to the time period we are talking about, that is,
8 That is all I wanted to say, and I hope this is useful.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please proceed, Mr. Seselj.
10 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Science -- in science you just have to have reliable data.
12 Science doesn't cater to speculation, and this kind of speculation is
13 something that not even philosophy can take. Maybe theology, but not
14 that either.
15 Look at number 34. Baric, Ana moved to Austria before the war
16 and is still living there. All the inhabitants of Hrtkovci know that.
17 Have you ever been to Hrtkovci, Mrs. Tabeau?
18 A. I haven't.
19 Q. You've never been and never tried to see and investigate matters
20 in the field? All right. Perhaps that comes within the scope of the
21 framework of the methods you have applied.
22 Now, the next name we have, 35, Ana Baric. She is a permanent
23 resident of Croatia
24 find that in the list compiled by the Croatia authorities.
25 A. Again, my comment is you shouldn't read this list literally,
1 Mr. Seselj. It is -- what matters is the personal information about the
2 individuals, and the rest is not necessarily relevant and exactly as it
3 should be taken.
4 Q. You can't know in advance, Mrs. Tabeau, what is relevant and what
5 isn't. You compiled and submitted your expert report and the annexes,
6 and I am proving that that is unreliable, because if we were to take you
7 at face value, that would support the indictment. However, since I'm
8 refuting the indictment, I'm refuting your report, too.
9 Now, let's look at number 48. That is Ljubisa Baric. In 1974,
10 on the 1st of February, she moved from Hrtkovci to Preboj, and Preboj is
11 a town in Serbia
12 the Ruma municipality, you would have had that information. But since
13 you didn't travel there, then this priest from Petrovaradin seems to be
14 the main source of your information.
15 Now look at Petar Baric. I assume that's her husband. He moved
16 to Preboj on the 31st of January, 1974. Number 37 on your list.
17 Now take a look at number 70, Katica Baricevic. She appears on
18 your list twice. Also number 464, she's the same person but changed her
19 surname to Paulic when she married. You could have established that in
20 the marriages register in Hrtkovci. Now, look at number 77.
21 MS. BIERSAY: Your Honour, excuse me. Was there -- what was the
22 question to Madam Tabeau with respect to the first one he mentioned?
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, you have identified
24 a number of cases. Please put your question to the witness now because
25 otherwise we are going to get lost and lose the thread and Ms. Biersay
1 will object. And then you can proceed with other examples.
2 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Well, my question was implicitly contained in the observation.
4 Why is Katica Baricevic on the list twice, having married and changed her
5 surname? Just to increase the number of names and numbers; right?
6 A. This is unjustified, what you are saying. First of all, I didn't
7 have the opportunities to check the records. Then I could answer. But
8 more generally, I would like to say it is not that I wanted to increase
9 the size of the individuals listed. I explicitly say in my report the
10 list might be first incomplete, but on the second hand, it can also
11 contain duplicates because the information of such individuals is not
12 complete, certain pieces of information were not there. I note even
13 approximately 40 potential duplicates that are now included in the list.
14 Of these 40, I know a number are not duplicates because even though they
15 are listed with identical names, they have different addresses in
17 So my marking of potential duplicates should be seen to you as
18 being honest and not inflating the size of the list. I think I did it
19 conservatively because I know that a number of these records are not
20 duplicates, but I still mark them as potential duplicates in the list.
21 So I think you should read my report very carefully and then you would
22 see that it is not what I'm doing, what you are saying.
23 Q. I hope, Mrs. Tabeau, that it has become quite clear to you what I
24 think about your honesty. So let's leave that subject to one side. I
25 don't want to speak about that now.
1 Now, look at number 77 and 78. You took one and the same person
2 and that person's name is Gabor Bartok. And then with number 78 you put
3 Gavra Bartok, as if it's a female, whereas it's the same person, the same
4 man. His name is Gabor and his nickname is Gavra, given to him by the
5 Serbian community where he lived. Gavra is a male name, a man's name,
6 not a female name. Perhaps it is exists somewhere. But anyway, you list
7 one person in two places, and in the first place you say it's a man, for
8 sex, and in the second one, you say woman, whereas -- and the date of
9 birth is the same, whereas no twins like that were born ever in Hrtkovci;
10 isn't that right?
11 A. Well, I'm not sure at all that Gabro and Gavra is one and the
12 same person. To me these names are different. And I have a native B/C/S
13 speaker in my unit who was looking at the names and who decided whether
14 or not the names can represent one and the same person or not. My answer
15 is perhaps you know more about it than I do. But from the names I
16 wouldn't decide these are exactly the same person.
17 Q. But you didn't check it out on the ground, in the field, nor did
18 you go to the official state registers to check that out.
19 Now, take a look at number 82, Lucija Batista. Everybody in
20 Hrtkovci knows that she's been living and working in Germany since before
21 the war, so how come you put her on this list?
22 A. Well, yet again, it telling me things based on common knowledge
23 or source that I don't have at my disposal. In order to be able to
24 respond to what you are saying, I would need these additional
25 information. That is all I can say about it.
1 Q. Well, you should have checked it out so that you can stand by
2 every name that you put on the list. You should have investigated.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Ms. Tabeau, if we look at the
4 case of Ms. Batista who, according to Mr. Seselj, is currently working in
6 that very fact. That's what he found out after conducting an
7 investigation. I don't have the relevant documents, but I would find it
8 difficult to believe that he could state something completely false,
9 because if it appears that this lady does not work in Germany, then it
10 would mean that Mr. Seselj had lied.
11 Of course I understand that you were not in a position to check
12 this particular information. It may very well have been that the OTP
13 should have conducted such checks, but it was not done. That's all we
14 can say about this matter. But you did not exclude the possibility of
15 duplicates or mistakes in these lists; you've stated that yourself and we
16 take due notice of that. But if what is being said about Mrs. Batista is
17 correct, then it appears that this lady could not have left Hrtkovci as
18 an expellee. Would you agree with that?
19 THE WITNESS: Now, is it possible -- then how is it possible --
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, may I just add one
21 thing. Not anywhere on the list of the Croatian authorities --
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let the witness complete her
24 THE WITNESS: This is that this person has reported based on the
25 parish books, christening records, and I'm asking myself why this person
1 would request for the certificate on the 16th of May, 1992. Well, I did
2 not investigate this case in Germany
3 investigate all other cases. That is an impossible task for a person
4 like me. I have to rely on some resources, statistical resources, and
5 this is how this report was made.
6 But if Mr. Seselj has additional information which I will find
7 reliable, I'm prepared to revise the list. It is the only answer. It is
8 not that I think this report was made to help understand what happened in
9 this village, and I still see this report as such. The only purpose of
10 my work is to bring a better understanding. So whatever more information
11 is available, I will most certainly take it into account and revise Annex
12 A and whatever else is necessary. That's all I can say. As of now I
13 haven't received anything that I can work with. That is where we are
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
16 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
17 Q. But it never crossed your mind that two Catholic priests very
18 nicely forged information within the campaign that was carried out. You
19 simply take everything from them at face value; right?
20 Look at 93, Martin Begic. In 1970 he moved from Hrtkovci to
21 Sabac. Had you checked in the municipality of Ruma
22 proof of that; namely, his deregistration in the municipality of Ruma
23 Martin Begic. But you didn't check anything, did you? And since he is
24 not on the list of the Croatian authorities, wouldn't that be an
25 indicator to you to become suspicious of what the priests gave you? Am I
1 not right? Just say yes or no and let's move on.
2 A. You are not right. In my eyes, it was not my task to investigate
3 every single person. If I would have to investigate, for instance,
4 Srebrenica victims, I would be busy investigating the first 1.000 victims
5 as of now and there would be a few more thousand to go. So that is not
6 the way -- how things are done in these days, Mr. Seselj.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let's take the example of
8 Begic. According to Mr. Seselj, he left Hrtkovci in 1970. I'm not sure
9 if this individual requested a christening or marriage certificate, but
10 let's assume that Mr. Seselj and his investigators find Mr. Begic and ask
11 him whether he filed an application for a christening certificate. Let's
12 assume that Begic responds, I've never requested a baptism certificate or
13 christening certificate. What would be the impact of this from a
14 statistical perspective?
15 THE WITNESS: Well, I think it is, first of all, not realistic to
16 believe that parish records are made up, so I think that the information
17 from parish records is detailed and correct. And there is a note of
18 Mr. Begic's request for certificate on the 28th of May, 1992, so this is
19 what we see in the records. What would be the impact here? Yes.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, absolutely, yes. Yes, we
21 have a record here showing that he made that request on the 28th of May,
22 1992. But when you are a judge worth his salt, when you do your job
23 properly as a judge, and that's what I hope to be doing, you need to
24 check things and you need to check first if Mr. Begic, indeed, made that
25 request on the 28th of May, 1992. If he made that request, fine. But if
1 he did not requested such a certificate, then we have a question posed
2 about this register, this parish book and this record and this entry in
3 the register.
4 Mr. Seselj, please proceed.
5 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
6 Q. You mentioned Srebrenica. You appeared there as an expert
7 witness, too, and you took part in falsifying the information concerning
8 the number of executed prisoners in order to create a background for
9 declaring genocide. This is how you did it: You included more than
10 1.000 persons on the list of executed persons who had actually lost their
11 lives before 1995; then also you included many persons who lost their
12 lives during the breakthrough from Srebrenica to Tuzla
13 included the victims of the inter-Muslim fighting; and then you resorted
14 to different statistical finesse, and one is proverbial, comparing the
15 1991 census from there and the 1997 election lists or lists of voters.
16 You did all of that in order to artificially increase the number of
17 victims in Srebrenica and to create a basis for declaring falsely the
18 genocide had been carried out there. That's right, right? Okay. Now we
19 move on.
20 MS. BIERSAY: Objection, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, this objection is
22 sustained. We are not dealing here with events that happened in
23 Srebrenica, Tuzla
24 this. Our expert witness is here to testify solely on the study she
25 conducted about Hrtkovci, and it's solely on that basis, on the basis of
1 that report, that we should decide whether the work was conducted
2 properly, whether it should be completed or not. That's all.
3 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
4 Q. All right. Number 96, you have Tomislav Begic, and on the 10th
5 of October, 1991, he was in Zagreb
6 exchange immovable property. Why didn't you check that in Zagreb
7 just have his first registration here, the one that took place almost a
8 year later in 1992. However, he registered his contract on the exchange
9 of immovable property already in 1991. Isn't that right?
10 A. Well, if you give me this contract, exchange contract, then I can
11 tell you more about this case. Again, it's your reading and your
12 interpretation of the data provided to us by the Croatian authorities,
13 and I have a different interpretation and different perspective on this
15 So I think before you can draw any conclusions at all, you have
16 to submit the additional information that you have that would support the
17 conclusions you are drawing from this data. As of now, I absolutely
18 don't accept what you are saying.
19 Q. Now, you would have had that contract on your screen had I not
20 been dis-communicated from my associates.
21 110, Blazic, Ana Blazic, she never moved from Hrtkovci. She died
22 there in 1999. And you could have established that in the death register
23 in the municipality of Ruma
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, let's return to
25 this contract, assuming that there is such a contract, and if you mention
1 it, I suppose that you checked that. This contract was drawn up in 1991,
2 so that person may have left for Zagreb
3 related to what happened in 1992. But Ms. Tabeau is right in saying that
4 nothing proves that this person was still -- was not in the village. So
5 you are right and she is right. What should have been done is check with
6 Tomislav Begic exactly when he settled in Zagreb. This should have been
7 checked by the OTP, by the Defence maybe, but as things stand, both of
8 you are right. It's extremely difficult to decide which way to go.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
11 Q. All right. I'm always in favour of believing the Prosecutor and
12 the OTP because they are the truth-loving people in this Tribunal.
13 Why did you include this person under number 110 in your list
14 when she never moved out of Hrtkovci and she died in 1999? You don't
15 even know that she died, right? Because you didn't carry out any kind of
16 onsite investigation. You never consulted the official books there and
17 registers, right?
18 A. If she died, I would have seen a record of her death in the books
19 and I would have taken this record for my database, so that would be if
20 she was part of the Catholic church, registered simply in these books.
21 Q. You did not consult the death register at all. The death
22 register is kept by the municipality of Ruma
23 is not the obligation of every Croat to be a Catholic or to be buried
24 according to religious rights. That is yet another reason for the
25 unreliability of your church records. There's only one proper source and
1 that is the death register of the municipality of Ruma
2 theocracy to proclaim church records as official records, and we have
3 seen how preachers can falsify that in a single afternoon.
4 MS. BIERSAY: If Mr. Seselj could just restrict his comments to
5 questions instead of lecturing the witness, we could be done with this.
6 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation] All right.
7 Q. Number 112, Antun Blazic. You put him on the list of allegedly
8 expelled persons whereas he never moved out of Hrtkovci. He died in
9 Hrtkovci in 1999, and that was registered in the death register in the
10 municipality of Ruma. And you don't even have that piece of information,
12 A. No, sir, you know that I didn't use the death register, and if I
13 had a record in the parish books -- and I would have the record in the
14 parish book if he died and was buried in the Catholic church, and I would
15 most certainly exclude him from the list. But you said he died in 1991,
16 right, in Hrtkovci, so he never left, so you are saying that --
17 Q. 1999. 9. 1999.
18 A. Yes, this is what I said, 1999. But your point is that there are
19 people who never left Hrtkovci and are on the list. Well, it is possible
20 there are people who never left Hrtkovci on my list. There might be a
21 few. But on the other hand, if you look at the census in comparison to
22 the size of the Croat population, then you see that 250, 250
23 approximately are still there. Whether they are the same persons, I
24 hope, yes. That not everybody left the village, but I don't know because
25 I didn't study this, who was going, who was staying in Hrtkovci.
1 Q. Don't turn things the other way around. I'm not challenging the
2 fact that many Croats left Hrtkovci having exchanged their property, but
3 your list about them is highly unreliable so these are two completely
4 different matters. Your heading here should have been "The List of
5 Persons who had Certificates of Birth or Marriage Issued to Them," not as
6 you did.
7 Vesna Blazic, 116. In the meantime she got married and now her
8 last name is Vujicic. Obviously she is married to a Serb. She lives in
9 the neighbouring village. She never left Vojvodina, and to this day, she
10 works as a teacher in Hrtkovci. Vesna Blazic, number 116 on your own
11 list, she is a teacher in Hrtkovci to this day. This is not quite
12 reliable. I think that she is also a member of the Serb Radical Party,
13 but I'll check that. Why did you put her on the list?
14 A. Because she is in the christening records, and she requested a
15 certificate in 1992. This is why I put her on the list. Why would she
16 do that, I don't know. Perhaps she, after all, changed her mind.
17 Obviously in 1992 she requested a certificate. After all, she wasn't
18 feeling that safe if she made this decision to be prepared for living.
19 So this is how the parish records should be read. This is the --
20 Q. You have no proof whatsoever of her having asked for a
21 certificate. The fact that some preacher later on recorded it, that is
22 not proof that she actually asked for it, whereas you should have
23 investigated on the ground.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, if we look at 116,
25 the case of Vesna Blazic, apparently your associates conducted a number
1 of investigations about this person. It would appear that she is now a
2 teacher in the same village. All right. She may even be a member of
3 your own party. All right. But if that's the case, what prevented you
4 and your team from going to see that lady to ask her whether indeed in
5 1992 she requested a christening certificate? Two things may have
6 happened. She may have said, I requested a certificate for such and such
7 a reason, or secondly, she may have said, I never made that request. Why
8 didn't your investigators conduct -- do that?
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My investigators probably already
10 took care of that. But for a month now I haven't had any communication
11 with them. Even when they start telling me something in relation to this
12 trial, I stop immediately. I say, No, no, don't talk about that. We are
13 being eavesdropped on.
14 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Ruzica Bogovic is someone who you placed on your list twice, 128
16 and 691, but under her maiden name Velez. You could have established
17 that in those preacher books of yours, of marriages. So it is 128 and
19 Then 133, since this is a duplicate as well, I'll link it up. It
20 says "Mirjana Damjanovic," who also appears under number 513 as Mirjana
21 Radocaj. Why did you --
22 A. I am sorry. I'm unable to follow these records because
23 Mr. Seselj is proceeding so quickly.
24 MS. BIERSAY: And I'm standing up to ask the Court to require
25 that Mr. Seselj pose a question to the witness instead of testifying,
1 which is essentially what he is doing. We would also strongly object to
2 any reliance on Mr. Seselj's assertions, factual assertions, about the
3 status of these people absent any records provided to either the witness
4 or to the Prosecution.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I've already told
6 you, in order to avoid objections by the Prosecution, you have to put
7 questions to the witness. For example, Witness, I'm looking at the case
8 of number X on the list and I find such and such thing, and so on and so
9 forth. Please put actual questions to the witness and to avoid wasting
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I pointed out that I
12 want to link up two cases because they are identical in terms of the
13 nature of the forgery involved, because the same persons appear on this
14 list twice but under different surnames because they got married in the
15 meantime. The first one got this new last name, Velez, and then the
16 other one got the last name of Radocaj. I've given the numbers already.
17 Let me move on to the next question because this I've done in vain.
18 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Number 172, you have Zlatko Damjanovic. According to my
20 information, he is abroad in Germany
21 and he registered his residency in Croatia on the 11th of November, 1999
22 that is to say, from Germany
23 there. You have him on the list of Croatian authorities. Why did you
24 put him on the list of expelled persons from Hrtkovci?
25 A. Because I didn't have your sources, Mr. Seselj. And as long as I
1 don't have these sources, I can't say anything. I'm still having trust
2 in the sources I use and in the records I place on my list, and I can
3 only say when I will receive additional information I'm able to revise
4 what I presented. That's all. I'm not taking your words for granted,
5 sorry, but you have to give me something.
6 Q. Well, yes, I have this list that you gave to me, the list by the
7 Croatian authorities. You can see Zlatko Damjanovic there, first
8 registered in the Republic of Croatia
9 Bjelovar, Tomar Bakrav [phoen] Street, number 38. There you have the
10 information. You could have checked that out in your own documentation
11 had you been conscientious in fulfilling your task. Have you found him?
12 A. I think you're wrong in saying I had information on Zlatko
13 Damjanovic from the Croats. He reported on the basis of christening.
14 Damjanovic, Zlata is a refugee.
15 Q. Come on, please. Here he is on the list compiled by the Croatian
16 authorities. Here he is on the Croatian list. The last two figures, 29,
17 you can see that for yourselves, Judges. What we've already looked at,
18 29 are the last digits. And the number -- it's under number 54. And I
19 should assume it should be 54 after that as a family member. In 1999 he
20 was registered in Croatia
21 Furthermore, why on the list do you have 189 as being Antun
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute, Mr. Seselj. For
24 Zlatko Damjanovic, in the Croatian document, he has an address in
25 Hrtkovci. Nazoro Street, number 26.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right, Mr. President.
2 But in 1999 he moved to Croatia
3 below that. They have not got the information that he worked in Germany
4 so that's my additional information, that he worked in Germany from
5 before the war. But in 1999 he came to reside in Croatia, and that's
6 what it says there, too. I'm not challenging the place of birth, his
7 place of the birth.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Tabeau, above there's
9 Zlata. This person must be a relative. I see that Zlata is born on
10 March 6th, '24
11 Zlata's son. However, if Zlata lives in Hrtkovci, the Croatian
12 authorities maybe put his residence in Hrtkovci, even though he is
13 working in Germany
14 THE WITNESS: Of course this can be an explanation, but we don't
15 know what the Croat authorities really did when it comes to addresses and
16 dates. He is included in my list based on christening records, not on
17 the records of the Croatian authorities or the records from the refugee
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, a judge could infer,
20 could have the following explanation: This Zlata leaves Hrtkovci on July
21 14, 1993. We don't know when he left, but he is registered on July 14,
22 1993. Now, maybe Zlata at that point in time asked the priest for all
23 christening certificates of the entire family, of the entire household,
24 and he was provided with these certificates. And his son Zlato, who
25 according to Mr. Seselj works in Germany, would have left Germany
1 and would then be registered in Croatia
2 explanation of all this, which would mean also that Zlato had not been
3 expelled from Hrtkovci. Maybe his father was but not him. Otherwise,
4 the Croatian authorities would have recorded him on July 14th, 1993, both
5 father and son.
6 THE WITNESS: Well, it is one of the complex cases for which we
7 don't know the migration history and, well, according to the approach
8 taken in my report, Zlata and Zlato are reported from two different
9 sources. Zlato is a refugee. He's taken based on the christening. I
10 don't want to speculate about the migration history. But, again, it is
11 if the --
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We have a problem with the
13 other brother, Zdenko. He is recorded on September 24, 1996. I don't
14 know where he lived, where he was, but there could also be a problem with
15 him, with Zdenko. However, Rijana [phoen], who might be the daughter,
16 was recorded on February 18. Then there's Adrijan, another relative, who
17 is recorded on August 27, 1999
18 THE WITNESS: Yes, this is what I'm saying. It is a complex
19 situation. If you look, Your Honours, on the address in Hrtkovci, it's
20 all the same address. Obviously it is a family living in one and the
21 same place in Hrtkovci. And it is possible that some members of the
22 family --
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand. Let's
24 assume the father lives in Hrtkovci but all the others might be scattered
25 anywhere else. So who is expelled here? It's the father, not the other
1 members since they are elsewhere. Unless you decide that when expelling
2 one -- the father, you expel the entire family, even if some relatives
3 live in Canada
4 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Why, under 189, did you put the name of Antun Engert when he died
6 in Hrtkovci in 1991? And his death was recorded in the register of
7 deaths in Ruma municipality. E-n-g-e-r-t. Because those preachers gave
8 you that piece of information. Perhaps that priest was under the
9 influence that day when he provided you that data, and you're taking it
10 as all being true and correct.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mrs. Biersay.
12 MS. BIERSAY: Mr. Seselj asked: "Why, under 189, did you put the
13 name of Antun ..." Could the witness please be allowed to answer?
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, please answer. It seems
15 that this person died in 1919, so why is it on the list?
16 THE WITNESS: There was no record in the death -- parish book of
17 the death, and he is reported in my list based on the request for
18 marriage certificate that was made on the 7th of June, 1992. That is the
19 answer. And I didn't check the death registration in the municipality of
20 Ruma, and according to Mr. Seselj, if I had done this, I would have
21 information about the deaths. I believe that deaths are also
22 parallel-registered in the parish books.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But there's danger in focusing
24 only on the church records. If this person died in 1991, maybe a
25 relative, a son or daughter, for problems that have to deal with
1 inheritance or other problems, might need a certificate, and then goes to
2 the church to ask for this church record on June 7th, 1992, and you can
3 draw the conclusion that he had asked for this certificate because he was
4 being expelled. You could draw this conclusion.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I continue?
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I believe my fellow Judge had a
7 question to put.
8 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you. In fact, I had the same problem and
9 the same question to you that the Presiding Judge just put to you,
10 because it seems to me, in reviewing the parish list, that of course the
11 parish list is not complete, and you have stated this at several
12 locations in your report and during the testimony here. I think that is
13 a fact that is easily accepted by the Chamber. The difficulty, however,
14 comes from the title of the document, because the title seems to suggest
15 that the people who are mentioned in the list actually left Hrtkovci, and
16 that is a conclusion that may not be warranted necessarily by the fact
17 that Croats in Hrtkovci required from the priest certain certificates,
18 either of birth or marriage or whatever. That is the shortcoming that I
19 see in the importance and significance of this list. Can you give us a
20 brief comment on that?
21 THE WITNESS: Well, it is in the church records, the dates for
22 requests, I said several times should be seen as proxies for certain
23 decisions related to the departure. It is not that the decision to be
24 ready to go is exactly the same as just going. And as I said earlier in
25 my testimony, I didn't see -- or documents or myself -- buses taking
1 these people away and soldiers escorting these people to the border, so
2 it is not what I'm saying. I'm saying this is a good proxy for the
3 decision, and it's possible that some of these people didn't even leave
4 the village, but a majority of them did because this is what we see from
5 other sources as well. And it is a matter of the timing of the
6 departures. Ideally we would like to see a data of the dates when these
7 people were going away and places where they went to, but that is not
8 possible. I don't have this data.
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: I accept that. I accept that fully. Of course
10 we will give the weight to this list that we will determine in the end.
11 The only problem is that the title of the document suggests that these
12 people actually left and so that's why I feel that the title of the
13 document is slightly misleading.
14 THE WITNESS: I understand, yes.
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: I think this is also Mr. Seselj's point.
16 THE WITNESS: I think that is an issue here. The issue related
17 to the fact that physically these people who are reported on the list,
18 not all were at Hrtkovci at the time of the events and I'm not saying
19 they were all there, physically speaking. However, here is the question:
20 If there is a family that is composed of six people, there is a mother,
21 father and four children, and two of these children are studying, one in
23 somewhere in Vojvodina, not necessarily in Hrtkovci; there comes 1992,
24 the political situation becomes unstable and difficult, and the family,
25 the parent physically being there, decides it's time to go because it is
1 too risky to stay. Then a decision is made as a matter of fact for the
2 entire family. The question not to me but I'm afraid to Your Honours and
3 to this Chamber is how to --
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I don't agree with what you are
5 saying. If the father and the mother decide to leave, they decide for
6 themselves. It's their decision. If their children are minors, fine, I
7 agree with you. But if their children are adults and live and work
8 elsewhere, you cannot claim that because the father and the mother
9 decided to leave, the entire family left. I cannot agree with this
10 interpretation because I believe it goes too far. They can take a
11 decision for a minor, that's fine, but they cannot make a decision for
12 their relatives who are adults who might be living in other cities, who
13 might be in other places, and who might not have made the same decision
14 had they been in Hrtkovci. We don't know anything there. I believe that
15 with your interpretation, you inferred that if the head of the household
16 decided to leave, the entire family left. So I'm saying, Okay, for
17 minors but not for adults, because I believe there is a problem.
18 Mr. Seselj.
19 THE WITNESS: May I add one comment? There is the issue of the
20 family, and there is intergenerational transfers. It is a very
21 well-known fact that people who were working in western countries were
22 transferring money, and a lot of it, to families back home, and houses
23 and property was mainly coming from these extra sources. And the same
24 with children. It is not that the children are able to finance
25 themselves when studying. So the families, I think in the western
1 family, it is indeed minors, end of story. But we are speaking of a
2 family in a totally different environment. We are speaking of a family
3 in a little village, Hrtkovci, in a country which is exceptional among
4 all post-communist countries. You are speaking of a country when the
5 borders were open since the beginning of the 1970s, and people were
6 travelling freely were making money and bringing money a lot of
7 properties were paid with this money. So the family is different. It's
8 the traditional family. It is multigenerational families living in the
9 one house. The house belongs to the entire family. This is my rationale
10 behind this list. So I didn't want to mislead anybody. But we are
11 speaking of a totally different family situation here compared to western
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That is absolutely not true.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj.
16 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Why, under number 263, did you put the name of Kata Ilic, when up
18 to 2003 she lived in Opovo [phoen]? That is also in Vojvodina but in a
19 region called Banat
21 list under number 90. So in 2003 she came to reside in Tejn [phoen] near
23 village near Osijek
24 your list, she's number 263.
25 A. Well, I think I have to explain this again in exactly the same
1 way. In my list she's taken from the family heads. That is what I see
2 here on the list. And there is additional information and she's reported
3 in 2003 by the Croat authorities. Again, it is a misreading of the
4 Croatian sources, as far as I can see. That is all I can say.
5 We can proceed like this record by record, but I think that this
6 will not change the basic principle I used to make this list, and it will
7 not have any impact on what I said so far about these sources and about
8 the records included based on these sources.
9 And so once again, if there is more information, please give it
10 to me. I will look into it and assess it and revise, if necessary. But
11 on the other hand, I still stand behind the principle and the sources I
12 used for this list.
13 Q. I'm absolutely opposed to you changing your report subsequently.
14 The Prosecution can engage a new expert. You had your opportunity. You
15 had the chance to change your report before testifying.
16 Why, under number 264, do you have the name of Milan Ilic when he
17 didn't live in Hrtkovci but in Platicevo? And you have him under number
18 91 on the Croatian list, and there it says that his address was
19 Platicevo, in Platicevo, whereas you list him as a Hrtkovci inhabitant.
20 Number 264 is what I am referring to.
21 A. It is listed in my list based on the family head records. He is
22 reported as departed to Croatia
23 other list, it is number 92. He is reported in Platicevo, but I can't
24 see here the date when he was -- he is reported from Platicevo, in
1 have no idea whatsoever when --
2 Q. Well, what do we care when he left Platicevo. The important
3 thing is that he didn't leave from Hrtkovci. That's the point.
4 A. The point is that in family heads he is reported in Hrtkovci with
5 an address. So the point is that the address given in the Croatian
6 records, we don't know to which time, moment, it refers. So it is
7 perfectly possible that the person left Hrtkovci in 1992, moved somewhere
8 else within Serbia
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could I please have the time
11 left, Mr. Registrar. I'm worried about the time.
12 Mr. Seselj, I believe that your time has run out, so please speed
13 up. Move to the core of your question. I mean we could review all these
14 cases one by one. It would take forever. Please put a question that
15 would sum up the problem.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. President, I think that
17 these special cases are the most effective way of challenging the entire
18 expert report. This is key evidence to the lack of seriousness on the
19 part of the expert and her report. I have a few more significant
20 examples. You know, yesterday when I made all these attempts to have an
21 expert discussion with the expert, all of that proved futile because she
22 gave answers that were way too extensive, and also I'd ask one thing and
23 she'd say something completely different in reply. Now she has no way of
24 dealing with it when she's put specific questions.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Put your question and quote the
1 numbers of the relevant cases. Put your question and the expert will
2 answer. You've used up 2 hours and 37 minutes so far. You've now almost
3 had 40 minutes more than the Prosecution had.
4 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Under number 364, why did you put the name of Antun Ledenko when
6 he exchanged his property on the 14th of November, 1991, and the contract
7 on the exchange of immovable property was registered? Antun Ledenko.
8 A. It is included based on the family head's record as departed to
10 which if you give it to me, I will look through it and assess it and
11 possibly, or not, revise my list. It depends on what you would give me.
12 That's my answer.
13 Q. Well, wasn't it more important for you to study the exchange of
14 -- registers of contracts on exchanges than to focus on information that
15 was fabricated by the two parish priests? You were only interested in
16 that, nothing else. If other objective sources testified to the
17 contrary, so much the worse for the objective sources.
18 Jure Mrkonja, why did you put that name on your list when he
19 exchanged his property and on the 5th of November this contract was
20 registered in Zagreb
21 authorities. On the 5th of November, 1991.
22 A. What number is it on my list?
23 Q. 411. 411 on your list, the list of those whom I expelled from
24 Hrtkovci, as you say. List of my victims.
25 MS. BIERSAY: Objection. The witness made no such statement
1 these people were expelled by Mr. Seselj. That is an allegation that we
2 make in the indictment, but this witness has never said such a thing.
3 THE WITNESS: In the record, number 411, Mrkonja, Jure. Based on
4 the family heads table, he is included in my list as departed from
5 Hrtkovci in 1992 and heading to Croatia
6 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Well, isn't it possible that he exchanged property in 1991, and
8 in 1992, when he needed that for obtaining Croatian documents, he then
9 asked for an extract from the birth register in Hrtkovci? Is that
11 A. He is not registered in my list based on the parish records. It
12 is family heads list. Well, I think I'm feeling very uncomfortable with
13 the questions related to the exchanges because the exchanges is something
14 that goes beyond this report. I didn't study this and I don't have data
15 on this, and moreover, I don't have the contextual information about how
16 the contracts were made. So I think it is not a fair question to ask me
17 to comment on this. It's just not my subject.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, the Trial Chamber
19 is fully informed of all this. We've understood the problem. This lady
20 did not know about the contracts. We know that she worked from three
21 sources only, and we see, as we look at a few cases, that there are some
22 problems. Everyone is fully aware of this now. You've used up 2 hours
23 and 40 minutes. You may ask one last question, but I'm going to cut you
24 off very soon.
25 MR. SESELJ: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Why did you put the name of Jure Mrkonja under 411 on your list?
2 I've already asked you that.
3 Under number 416, why did you place the name of Stjepan Muzik
4 when he did not move out of Vojvodina? To this day he lives in Novi Sad
5 and is registered there. Novi Sad
6 A. This record is based on the record in the parish books. He is
7 registered with the request for a christening certificate made on the
8 19th of June, 1992. And Novi Sad
9 than Hrtkovci, so if I had an opportunity to go from a small village to a
10 bigger environment, urban environment, I would consider this seriously.
11 So this is not -- the departures had to be Croatia only. People
12 could have moved in all kinds of directions, and I believe several of
13 them moved within Serbia
14 they went to. To all kinds of countries, including Croatia and western
15 countries, of course.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I told you this was your last
18 Mrs. Biersay, do you have additional questions?
19 MS. BIERSAY: I do, Your Honour. May I inquire what time the
20 Chamber hoped to take the break just so that I can ...
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The break is around quarter to
23 MS. BIERSAY: Thank you. Your Honour.
24 Re-examination by Ms. Biersay:
25 Q. I'd like to direct your attention now to, I believe it's in your
1 binder under 65 ter number 2859C, and it's specifically I'd like to
2 discuss the organisational chart 1. Do you have that before you?
3 A. Yes, I do.
4 Q. Could you describe for the Trial Chamber what role the overlap of
5 sources, what role did that play in your assessment of the reliability of
6 the information you provided in Annex A?
7 A. This overlap confirms information included in one source, in the
8 second source, and it gives the opportunity to have a more complete
9 record of information. So here in this figure, the sources are
10 visualised as three groups - refugee tables, christening and marriages
11 books, and the third group is the family heads and family members. So
12 obviously there are -- the sources are interrelated, and obviously one
13 could have hoped for a higher matching rate, but the matching rate is not
14 extremely high.
15 But I want to point out a few things that would explain that the
16 overlap was not perfect. Well, for instance, between parish books and
17 refugee tables, there is a huge time difference. The records of the
18 refugees provided as of mid-2005, parish books registrations made in
19 1992, and that is the family members and their family heads, these two
20 sources which overlap with each other by 97, so out of 202 persons
21 reported as family members, 97 are included in the family heads, which is
22 roughly one-third of the family heads. And the list of family members is
23 made alphabetically. It is that the Croats authorities were able to
24 compile additional information for the first 97 family heads reported
25 among the 280. And as for the first or 100 or one-third of the list,
1 this is a very consistent sources, these two sources.
2 Q. And just to be clear, 65 ter number 2859C is a page from your
3 report; is that correct?
4 A. Yes, it is. It is page 9 in my report. Yes.
5 Q. Thank you. In assessing the sources that you just described,
6 what did you do with any duplicates that you discovered?
7 A. Duplicates were checked within each source and duplicates that
8 were found within sources were eliminated. And a second time at the time
9 the sources were merged, we looked for duplicates again. These
10 duplicates would represent the overlap of sources, and overlapping
11 records were eliminated as well. There is a table in the report which
12 summarises the elimination.
13 Q. Directing your attention to page 26, table 13 of your report, is
14 that the table to which you are referring?
15 A. What page was it you said?
16 Q. Page 26, table 13.
17 A. Yes, this is -- no, no. Yes, yes, yes, it is. This is the table
18 we just discussed today in the context of the availability of the
19 addresses in Hrtkovci for these individuals that are listed in Annex A.
20 And in this table the duplicated records among the sources, that is, the
21 overlap of sources, are explicitly mentioned. So that is the summary of
22 what is in Annex A.
23 And as I mentioned already earlier today, the addresses for a
24 majority of these individuals, addresses in Hrtkovci, are available.
25 There is this 88 persons, family members of whom -- for a number of whom
1 there is uncertainty about their place of residence in 1992 and about the
2 migration history. But for the rest, for the remaining individuals, the
3 information about their residence is clear and available.
4 Q. I'd like to move from the overlap of the sources as an indicator
5 of reliability for the Annex A, and I would like to shift to your
6 assessment of the comparison between the 1991 census and the 2002 census.
7 What, if anything, did the results of that comparison indicate to
8 you with respect to your findings in Annex A?
9 A. We remember there was a very significant change in the ethnic
10 composition in Hrtkovci. There was a decline in the Croatian population
11 and in other non-Serb populations. For Croats, the decline was by 750
12 persons, which is approximately 76 percent of the 1991 population. These
13 750 persons who initially were living in Hrtkovci 1991 are still not
14 there as of the time of the census in 2002. So there is no doubt that
15 there was -- there were departures from Hrtkovci in the interceding
16 period and based on the timing in my report shown in my report, it is
17 clear that majority of the departures or decisions made to prepare for
18 the departures were made in 1992, between May and August, and more
19 significantly in May and June 1992.
20 Q. I'd like to direct your attention specifically to the refugee
21 table that we've discussed. Could you summarise for the Trial Chamber
22 the numbers of people who reported having left Hrtkovci in 1992? So,
23 generally speaking, when you assess the departure, is there a spike in
24 1992 at any time?
25 A. Yes. You are speaking of the refugee table which contains
1 records of 116 refugees from Hrtkovci. 116 of these left in 1992. We
2 have specific data on departure, including the day and months of
3 departure in 1992. So the same analysis I presented here in this
4 courtroom based on parish records was also done for this source. And I
5 looked at the timing. I have drawn the same chart based on these records
6 as for the parish records. So I have the chart. I'm not sure I can use
7 it, but perhaps I can use it.
8 Q. If you can just describe for us the numbers for that year.
9 A. Yes. So I see on this chart that the maximum departures were
10 particularly in June 1992. There were 34 departures out of 113. And in
11 May there were 11. The next -- third highest number was in August, and
12 later at the end of 1992, in October and November. In all these three
13 months there were reported departures from Hrtkovci, and there were of
14 course also departures reported in the period outside May. August --
15 well, perhaps it is interesting to take a look at the number of
16 departures before May 1992, not to bias or mislead anybody, and the
17 number of these departures is 15. So 15 departures out of 116 reported,
18 or 113 reported in 1992; 15 were before May. The rest were May and
19 later, with a maximum in June and May and August and again more towards
20 the end of this year. So this timing is actually latterly consistent
21 with the timing that I saw in the parish records.
22 So for 1992, I don't think there is any serious significant
23 inconsistency between the sources. So the analysis that are presented in
24 the report based on merged sources are basically resulting from the
25 patterns contained in single sources. That would be the refugee table
1 and the parish books. As in other sources, there were no details about
2 the dates of departure. Just generally for family heads, 1992 was
4 So what I'm trying to say is, the estimated or shown timing based
5 on the empirically observed numbers indicates that May and June were the
6 months in 1992 where the maximum departures took place.
7 MS. BIERSAY: And, for the record, the refugee table is 65 ter
8 number 4100, which is also Exhibit MFI P568.
9 Your Honours, that would terminate my questions to the witness at
10 this time. However, I would like to move several additional exhibits
11 into evidence because they were either used or referred to during the
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please give us the numbers.
14 MS. BIERSAY: The first -- excuse me, Your Honour. The first one
15 would be 65 ter number 2764, and that was the document from which
16 Dr. Tabeau read extensively during your cross-examination, I think, in
17 response to some questions from the Bench, in addition to questions posed
18 by Mr. Seselj.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. We'll give an MFI number
20 to this document. The Trial Chamber will rule afterwards.
21 Mr. Registrar, can we have an MFI number for this document?
22 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour --
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Judge, the document was never
24 mentioned during the cross-examination.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, 65 ter number --
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One moment. We'll need to
2 check that. Witness, or Ms. Biersay, when was this document mentioned?
3 MS. BIERSAY: Two points. One, it's a source in the report and
4 it's identified on page 2 of the report, and I believe it was mentioned
5 at page 20 of the transcript from yesterday, October 22nd. But perhaps I
6 can get some assistance from Dr. Tabeau. If she could turn to 65 ter
7 number 2764 just to make sure we have the right document. And it should
8 be in the second one, forgive me.
9 THE WITNESS: It is 64 or 54?
10 MS. BIERSAY: 2764.
11 THE WITNESS: Yes. Yes. That's the document and this is the
12 report for made by the provincial secretariat for demography, family and
13 child welfares in the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, according to the
14 2000 census dated November 2003.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, 2764 shall be given Exhibit number
16 P00573, marked for identification. Thank you, Your Honours.
17 MS. BIERSAY: And finally, Your Honour, there is a series of the
18 reports for the individual ethnic groups that Mr. Seselj discussed
19 yesterday during the cross-examination that we'd also like to move, with
20 the Court's permission. May I read them out?
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Please do.
22 MS. BIERSAY: The first, 65 ter number 2756, and that one
23 pertains to the Croatian ethnic majority in the Autonomous Province
25 THE WITNESS: Minority.
1 MS. BIERSAY: Minority.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That is not used. This is not
3 true. It was only used for the Hungarian, Romanian, Slovenian and
4 Ruthenian minorities.
5 MS. BIERSAY: In any event, the Prosecution would move for the
6 admission of that one to complete the presentation of all the separate
7 ethnic groups, and I believe it was discussed yesterday.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] One number, please.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, 65 ter number 2756 shall be given
10 Exhibit number P00574. Thank you, Your Honours.
11 MS. BIERSAY: The next one.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] MFI, Registrar. MFI.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, the document shall be given
14 P00574, marked for identification.
15 MS. BIERSAY: The next one is 65 ter 2757. That one pertains to
16 the Hungarian ethnic minority in Vojvodina.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Could you please repeat the
18 number of this document because it has not been transcribed properly,
19 Ms. Biersay.
20 MS. BIERSAY: 2757.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Mr. Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. 65 ter number 2757 shall be
23 given Exhibit number P00575, also marked for identification.
24 MS. BIERSAY: Your Honour, I have four more. The next one is
25 2754, which is the report on the Slovak ethnic minority in Vojvodina.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Registrar.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, 65 ter number 2754 shall be given
3 Exhibit number P00576, also marked for identification.
4 MS. BIERSAY: The next, 2753 65 ter number, which pertains to the
5 Romanian ethnic minority in Vojvodina.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter 2753 shall be given number
7 P00577, marked for identification.
8 MS. BIERSAY: The following is 65 ter number 2755, and that
9 pertains to the Ruma ethnic minority in Vojvodina.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter number 2755 shall be given
11 Exhibit number P00578, marked for identification.
12 MS. BIERSAY: Finally, 65 ter number 2758, which pertains to the
13 Ruthenian ethnic minority.
14 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter number 2758 shall be given
15 Exhibit number P00579, marked for identification.
16 MS. BIERSAY: And that would conclude the Prosecution's redirect,
17 Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Ms. Tabeau. On
19 behalf of my fellow judges, I would like to thank you for having come to
20 testify on behalf of the OTP to contribute to establish the truth in this
21 case. I wish you a pleasant return to your usual occupations.
22 Before we take the break, one question for Ms. Dahl: Are there
23 any protective measures for the following witness?
24 MS. DAHL: The Chamber may recall that according to the August
25 decision, the witness was given a pseudonym that would expire upon the
1 witness's testimony. No additional protective measures will be sought.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. We are now going to
3 break for 15 minutes, not more than 15 minutes.
4 [The witness withdrew]
5 --- Recess taken at 11.47 a.m.
6 --- On resuming at 12.05 a.m.
7 [The witness entered court]
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, madam. I hope
9 you are in a position to hear what I'm saying in your own language. I
10 would like you to stand up because I'm going to ask you to read the
11 solemn declaration.
12 Please give me your first name, last name, and date of birth.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Jelena Radosevic, I was born on the
14 10th of April 1951.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Are you retired or do you work?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not working at the moment. I
17 still haven't met the necessary conditions to retire either.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Have you ever testified
19 before a court about the events that took place in the former Yugoslavia
20 or is it the first time you've testified about these matters?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the first time.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Please read the
23 solemn declaration.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
25 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. You may be seated.
2 WITNESS: JELENA RADOSEVIC
3 [Witness answered through interpreter]
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, before I give the
5 floor to the Prosecutor who will apply the 92 ter procedure, I have a
6 number of questions to put to you.
7 I know that you are Serb. Before you came here to testify before
8 this Tribunal, have you received any telephone calls? Have you met
9 people who tried to intimidate you in order to convince you not to
10 testify, or is it the case that no one got in touch with you?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I had no such calls, nor did
12 anybody attempt to do any of those things or to prevail upon me not to
13 testify or to influence me in any way.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. So you are
15 testifying here freely, without any problems? That's right?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. Let me give you some
18 explanation about the way we are going to proceed today.
19 First, the Prosecutor will summarise what you said in your
20 written statement. The Prosecutor will ask you to confirm a number of
21 informations. He may show you a number of documents attached to your
22 statement, and he may ask you other questions. The Prosecutor has half
23 an hour to do all this.
24 The two Judges sitting in front of you -- let me add that,
25 normally speaking, there are three of us, but one of the Judges is not
1 here today, so the two of us will then ask you questions, at least I am
2 going to ask you a number of questions.
3 As a general rule, when we have a witness here, the accused
4 cross-examines the witness, but Mr. Seselj, for whatever reason, has
5 decided not to cross-examine witnesses called under Rule 92 ter. This is
6 a position adopted by Mr. Seselj and the Judges have nothing to say about
8 That's the way we are going to proceed, madam. When you are
9 asked a question, please try to answer very accurately, very
10 specifically. If you do not understand the meaning of the question, do
11 not hesitate to ask for the question to be rephrased.
12 It's 10 past 12.00. We'll conclude today at a quarter past 1.00,
13 so we'll start for about an hour. But if you feel unwell, Witness, do
14 not hesitate to raise your hand and ask for the hearing to be stopped.
15 But I hope that everything will run very smoothly.
16 Mr. Prosecutor, it's for you now to start this procedure.
17 MR. RINDI: Good morning. I will begin with a short summary of
18 the statement that the Prosecution seeks to admit under Rule 92 ter.
19 At the beginning of the conflict, Jelena Radosevic was living
20 with her family in Slatina, in western Slavonia. Because of the rising
21 tensions between Croats and Serbs in Slatina, at the beginning of
22 September 1991, the witness moved to Vocin. In Vocin, the witness worked
23 as a nurse in the infirmary -- in an infirmary.
24 At the beginning of October 1991, the witness saw seven buses in
25 front of the former Sumarija company building in Vocin. On the front
1 side of the buses were various flags. The witness also noticed armed men
2 in front of the buses wearing olive-grey uniforms, with a fur hat on
3 their head and a cockade. The witness later learned by talking to them
4 that the soldiers who arrived with those buses were volunteers.
5 A couple of days after their arrival, Radovan Novacic came to the
6 infirmary. He presented himself as the commander of one of the volunteer
7 units, and he told the witness that he had come to visit his wounded
8 soldiers. The witness heard that his soldiers called him Vojvoda, and
9 she concluded that he was the commander of Seselj's volunteers.
10 Members of the Territorial Defence told Jelena Radosevic that the
11 volunteers were mixed with members of their units; however, the
12 volunteers were indisciplined, would not cooperate, and did not want to
13 obey the orders of the TO Commander. They were rough, and the witness
14 saw them drunk in the streets on a regular basis.
15 On one occasion, sometime in November 1991, 14 volunteers came to
16 the infirmary looking for Davor Jusufovic, a member of the Croatian
17 Defence Forces, wounded in his shoulder. The volunteers were all very
18 young, up to 25 years old, and had a white bird on their sleeve patches.
19 One of the volunteers told the witness, "Hey, sister, we heard that one
20 Ustasha is here. We would like to chop him to pieces." The witness did
21 not allow them to see Davor, which made the volunteers very angry. They
22 had a Serbian accent, were rough, and one of them even shot accidentally
23 a bullet to the ground.
24 At the end of November or in the first two days of December 1991,
25 Vojislav Seselj came to Vocin. The witness noticed several cars parked
1 in front of the building of the command, and a volunteer who was standing
2 there told her that Seselj was in that building. She noticed that in
3 front of the building there were military policemen dressed in blue
4 uniforms. They wore white belts on which was written "Military Police."
5 The witness heard from members of the Territorial Defence that on
6 that occasion Seselj paid a visit to his soldiers in Lager Seculicia,
7 Lisicine, and Ceralije. The witness believes that the main reason behind
8 Mr. Seselj's visit was to give moral support to the volunteers. The
9 witness is not aware of whether Seselj gave orders for civilians in Vocin
10 to be killed. However, she did notice that the killing of Croat
11 civilians started after his visit.
12 Although very few Croats had been killed before Seselj's visit,
13 the majority of Croat civilians were killed in two weeks after his visit
14 in Vocin. Members of the Territorial Defence command were helpless and
15 afraid of volunteers.
16 The witness knew that JNA uniforms, weapons, and ammunitions were
17 stored in the Catholic church in Vocin. She knew this because every time
18 a Serb soldier got killed, as a nurse, she had to dress the victim with a
19 JNA uniform before burial. She would get those uniforms from a man who
20 told her that he collected them in the Catholic church. The witness was
21 later told that the church was allegedly destroyed to prevent materiel
22 and weapons from falling into the hands of Croatian forces.
23 The witness left Vocin on 9 December 1991. When she left the
24 volunteers were still in Vocin.
25 Your Honours, this concludes my summary.
1 Examination by Mr. Rindi:
2 Q. Witness, have you ever met with a representative of the Office of
3 the Prosecutor of this Tribunal?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Witness, do you remember meeting myself yesterday during the
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Do you remember also meeting Mr. Mussemeyer, my colleague who is
9 standing here next to me?
10 A. [No interpretation]
11 Q. Yesterday, during the proofing, you had an occasion to review a
12 statement that you had signed before representative of the Office of the
13 Prosecutor. Do you remember doing so yesterday?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Do you remember when you signed that statement?
16 A. The first statement. Well, everything that's recorded here, I
17 signed that first statement in 2001, in Munich. I can't remember the
18 exact date, though. I think it was May, but not the -- I don't know the
20 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Thank you. Did you have a
21 chance to meet with a representative of the Office of the Prosecutor a
22 second time after having met them in 2001, as you just described?
23 A. Yes. Last year once, and another time this year.
24 MR. RINDI: Usher, could we please have the document bearing the
25 65 ter number 5052 displayed on the screen. Usher, could you also please
1 hand out a hard copy of the statement in question to the witness.
2 Q. Witness, could I please direct your attention to the last three
3 lines highlighted in bold on the first page of this statement.
4 MR. RINDI: Usher, this is still the first page of the statement
5 that we have displayed on the screen.
6 Q. Could you please confirm that you -- that on the 15th of August,
7 2006, you met with a representative of the Office of the Prosecutor?
8 A. Of course I did. Yes, yes. I apologise for mixing up the years.
9 Yes. The answer is yes, as it is stated here.
10 Q. Thank you. On this occasion, did you make any corrections to
11 your first statement that you signed in 2001?
12 A. Well, I can't remember that, really, whether I did make some
13 corrections or not. But what we read through yesterday is quite all
15 Q. Thank you. If you look at the first page of the statement that
16 you have in front of you, do you recognise your signatures at the bottom
17 of the page?
18 A. Yes, I do recognise it.
19 Q. Thank you. Could you please now slowly flip through the pages of
20 the statement and tell the Trial Chamber if you recognise your initials
21 at the bottom of each page.
22 A. Yes, I do. Yes. Yes. Mmm-hmm, yes.
23 MR. RINDI: Usher, could we please have page 9 of the statement
24 displayed on the screen. It's page 9 both in the B/C/S and in the
25 English version.
1 Q. Witness, yes, if you could please look at page 9 of the
2 statement. Do you recognise your signature at the bottom of the page?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Thank you. Witness, you already mentioned to us that you had a
5 chance to go through your statement yesterday during the proofing. Could
6 you --
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. RINDI: Usher, could we now look at paragraph 12 of page 3 of
10 the statement. It's the same page in both the B/C/S and the English
12 Q. Witness, I would like to direct your attention to this paragraph,
13 to paragraph 12 of the statement. I will read out the relevant lines for
15 "A couple of days after their arrival, I spoke to the commanders
16 of the volunteers. He came to the kindergarten. That was a place where
17 patients were taken for medical care. I asked who he was and he
18 presented himself as Radovan Novacic from Loznica. He was about 35 years
19 old. He said that he was the commander of one of the volunteer groups
20 and came to visit his soldiers when he arrived in the infirmary. I heard
21 that the soldiers called him Vojvoda. I think he was the commander of
22 Seselj volunteers."
23 Witness, why did you conclude that Radovan Novacic was the leader
24 of the Seselj volunteers in Vocin?
25 A. Well, I didn't conclude that myself. He said so himself when we
1 started talking, and when I asked him, that's what he said himself.
2 Q. Thank you. Could I now direct your attention to paragraph 21 of
3 the same statement. Usher, if you could also please display that
4 paragraph on the screen?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. I will read out the relevant lines of the statement for you:
7 "Vojislav Seselj came to Vocin on the end of November 1991 or
8 during the first days of December 1991. Once, I went to the bakery and
9 saw a crowd of people and several cars parked in front of the building
10 where the command in Vocin was in."
11 Witness, when you mention the building of the command in Vocin,
12 to which command are you referring to?
13 A. Well, before the war, it was the forestry, the Sumarija, and when
14 the war operations began, the military command was established there.
15 But I'm referring to the command of the Territorial Defence in actual
16 fact. Not the command of the Vojislav Seselj, but the other command.
17 Q. Thank you. Witness, with the clarifications that you just
18 specified, does the statement accurately describe the events that you
19 described therein?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So if you were asked questions about those events today, would
22 you give the same answers that are contained in this statement?
23 A. Certainly I would, yes. Except for some dates. I might have
24 forgotten some dates. But otherwise, this is exactly how I experienced
25 the situation.
1 MR. RINDI: Your Honours, at this time I would like to move for
2 the admission of the document bearing 65 ter number 5052 into evidence.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, could we have a
5 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. 65 ter number 5052 shall be
6 given Exhibit number P00580. Thank you, Your Honours.
7 MR. RINDI: I would also like to show to the witness a number of
8 documents that are attached to her statement --
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Just a minute. There's a
10 mistake on line 6. Mr. Registrar, could we have the number again. I
11 believe it not transcribed correctly.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. 65 ter 5052 shall be given the
13 Exhibit number P00580. Thank you, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
15 MR. RINDI: Usher, could you now please display on the screen the
16 document bearing the 65 ter number 834. Thank you.
17 Q. Witness, could you please look at the document that you have in
18 front of you.
19 A. Yes, I can see it, thank you.
20 Q. Could you please describe to the Trial Chamber what this document
21 refers to.
22 A. Well, this is a description of all those people who were victims
23 on the 13th of December, 1991, in Vocin when we withdrew or during those
24 days, 12th and 13th. Mostly people who were killed in Vocin on the 13th
25 of December, 1991.
1 Q. Are you familiar with any of the people listed in the document?
2 A. Yes, yes, certainly. I knew them all. I knew where they lived,
3 and we all knew each other, yes.
4 Q. Are you aware of what the ethnic origin of the people listed in
5 the document is?
6 A. Yes, perhaps just two names on that list. Well, they are all
7 Croats with the exception of two names perhaps.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. RINDI: Your Honours, at this point I would like to move for
10 the admission of this document into evidence.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, could we have a
13 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. 65 ter number 00834 shall be
14 given Exhibit number P00581. Thank you, Your Honours.
15 MR. RINDI: Usher, could you please now display on the screen the
16 document bearing the 65 ter number 506 on the screen. For Your Honours'
17 information, this is Exhibit number P431, which has already been admitted
18 in this trial.
19 Q. Witness, could you please look at the document which is displayed
20 on the screen in front of you.
21 A. Yes, I've seen it, thank you.
22 Q. Could you please tell the Trial Chamber what this document is
24 A. Well, this is a set of physician's findings and it relates to
25 Kresimir Doric whom I knew. It is a medical report. And he was beaten
1 up in Vocin. I know the doctor that signed this document. I also knew
2 Kresimir Doric, and I know this, this is a document which is quite in
4 Q. Thank you. You just told us that you knew the victim. Are you
5 aware of what the ethnic origin of the victim was?
6 A. Yes, he is a Croat.
7 Q. Are you aware of what the ethnic origin of the perpetrator is?
8 A. Well, I mean, the name mentioned here is a Serb name, of the
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MR. RINDI: I do not need to move for the admission of this
12 document as it has already been admitted.
13 Usher, could you please now display on the screen the document
14 bearing the 65 ter number 498. Thank you.
15 Q. Witness, could you please look at the document which is displayed
16 on the screen in front of you.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Could you please tell the Tribunal what this document is about.
19 A. Well, this is a document that shows that Antun Simic, whom I also
20 knew, was beaten up in Vocin. I know him as well. I know the director
21 who has signed here, and I know the people on the right-hand side, those
22 who were the perpetrators in this incident. I knew all of them. And
23 this is a truthful document.
24 Q. Thank you. Do you know what the ethnic origin of the victim is?
25 A. Croat.
1 Q. Thank you. And do you know what the ethnicity of the perpetrator
3 A. Serb.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 A. You are welcome.
6 MR. RINDI: Usher, could you please display on the screen the
7 document bearing the 65 ter number 07222C.
8 Beg your pardon, Your Honours, I would like to tender into
9 evidence the document that we just discussed.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, 65 ter number 498 shall be given
11 Exhibit number P00582. Thank you, Your Honours.
12 MR. RINDI: Could you please show the second page of this
13 document. Usher, this is -- is this document number 07222C? Because I
14 believe this is ... I have the ERN number of the document for your
15 convenience. Or we can put the document in question on the ELMO. It
16 would probably be easier. Thank you.
17 Q. Witness, could you please look at the picture which is displayed
18 on the screen in front of you. Could you please describe to the Trial
19 Chamber what this picture represents.
20 A. Well, what is written here is "Main Staff, the Serbian Chetnik
21 Movement." This is a skull and behind the skull are bones probably,
22 bones of a corpse.
23 Q. Have you ever seen this patch before?
24 A. Well, I can't remember now whether I did -- I'm not sure. I'm
25 not sure. Now I'm no longer sure whether I had seen it before.
1 Q. Do you remember if you have seen this patch, if at all, in Vocin,
2 during the time you were there?
3 A. Well, in Vocin there were quite a few such emblems in 1991, quite
4 a few. However, I cannot be sure now whether I recall this picture.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MR. RINDI: Usher, could we now please display the document
7 bearing the 65 ter number 07222D. Thank you.
8 Q. Witness, could you take a look at the picture which is displayed
9 on the screen in front of you.
10 A. Yes, yes, yes, I know that.
11 Q. Could you please tell the Trial Chamber what this picture
13 A. Very well. It's written here "White Eagles Assault Battalion."
14 It was one of the emblems that volunteers wore on their caps and on their
15 shoulders, but I do remember it from Vocin in 1991. I did come across
17 Q. Thank you.
18 A. You are welcome.
19 MR. RINDI: Your Honours, at this point I would like to move for
20 the admission of this document into evidence.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, 65 ter number 07222D shall be given
23 Exhibit number P00583. Thank you, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Prosecutor, wasn't this
25 document already in the exhibit -- in the list? Because a book has
1 already been admitted in the case.
2 MR. RINDI: Yes, the whole document has a 65 ter number, but --
3 JUDGE HARHOFF: And has been admitted?
4 MR. RINDI: I don't believe it has been admitted into evidence.
5 It has a 65 ter number but we submitted individual pages of this
7 Usher, could you now please display the document bearing 65 ter
8 number 07222E. Could you please display the second page of this
10 Q. Witness, do you recognise this picture?
11 A. Yes, yes, yes. As for this patch, I also came across it in 1991.
12 I remember it.
13 Q. Thank you. And where have you seen this patch?
14 A. Yes, yes, I did see it on the insignia of the Serb volunteers who
15 came from Serbia
16 remember this sign.
17 MR. RINDI: Your Honours, I would like to move for the admission
18 of this document into evidence.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter number 07222E shall be given
20 Exhibit number P00584. Thank you, Your Honours.
21 MR. RINDI: This is the last document I will show to the witness.
22 Usher, could you now please display the document bearing the 65
23 ter number 4203 on the screen.
24 Q. Witness, could you please take a look at this picture. Do you
25 remember having ever seen this picture, this flag, before?
1 A. Right now, I cannot remember having seen it. I cannot state with
2 certainty that it's somewhere in the recesses of my mind. I can't
4 Q. Thank you, witness.
5 MR. RINDI: Your Honours, this concludes my examination.
6 Questioned by the Court:
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, I would like to put a
8 number of questions to you. Where do you currently reside, in Croatia
9 in other country, in Serbia
10 A. In Croatia
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You stated that you arrived in
12 Vocin in 1991. Vocin is a small town. What was the population size in
13 Vocin, roughly?
14 A. I lived in Slatina and I went to Vocin. That's 23 kilometres
15 away from Slatina. Vocin is a village, and in 1991 it had a population
16 of 1.700. In 1991, that is.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Why did you leave Slatina for
18 Vocin? What is the reason for your departure?
19 A. Well, for 20 or so years before that, I had lived in Slatina.
20 And everything was all right up until 1990 or 1991 when this great fear
21 was instilled in me. The HDZ won and I as a Serb felt very unsafe. We
22 were threatened. My husband lost his job. At work it was quite
23 difficult to deal with all the things that I had to deal with then, like
24 the other Serbs in Slatina. That's why I went to Vocin, because I
25 thought that's where my parents are, the population is Serb, and I
1 thought that that would last only for a few days. So I thought that I
2 should try to get away from something that I didn't even know what I
3 would term it and what it would look like.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You've just stated that the HDZ
5 had won the elections and that you noticed a change in the atmosphere and
6 that Serbs were under threat. That is why you decided to go to Vocin.
7 To your knowledge, did Serbs in Slatina leave Slatina to go to Serbia
8 to another country?
9 A. Well, I don't know. It's not that we talked amongst ourselves,
10 who was going where. We just knew that we were all afraid and that we
11 wanted to go somewhere, somewhere where everybody individually would feel
12 safe. I don't think it was only Serbia
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. At the time, did you
15 hear that it was possible to exchange flats; for example, if you had a
16 flat in Slatina as a Serb, you could exchange it with a Croat living in
19 A. You mean then, in 1991? No.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So you never heard about that
21 at all?
22 A. No. No. Not me.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine. You arrived in Vocin.
24 In what month of 1991 did you arrive in Vocin?
25 A. I came to Vocin on the 4th of September, 1991.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Then you worked as
2 nurse; is that correct?
3 A. Not immediately, a few days afterwards. I wish to correct
4 myself. The date was the 5th of September, if it matters. But I didn't
5 go to work straightaway at this newly established centre. It was about
6 15 days later.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Later on you saw Serbs arrive.
8 They carried weapons; they were wearing uniforms. In your view, why did
9 they come to Vocin, these Serbs? What was their purpose? You haven't
10 heard my question. Let me repeat it then.
11 A. Yes, I didn't seem to hear something. I came to Vocin then --
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me repeat my question. You
13 were there and you saw Serbs arrive in Vocin. They were armed; they had
14 uniforms. According to you, what was the purpose of these Serbs? Why
15 did they come to Vocin?
16 A. Since I worked in the medical profession and I was a civilian
17 there, I don't know much about military things, but we, the population in
18 Vocin, heard that they had come to help us in the conflict between the
19 Serbs and Croats.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. So they wanted to
21 help the Serbs who lived in Vocin, I suppose. At some point in time you
22 met with Radovan Novacic, a man aged about 35, and his men would call him
23 Vojvoda. So if I understand correctly, you had a talk with him, you had
24 a chat with him?
25 A. Yes, yes, twice.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And what did he tell you? What
2 did you ask him?
3 A. Well, for the most part, he kept quiet. His head was down, and
4 he kept quiet. When he walked into the room where we were working, he
5 introduced himself and he said why he had come. Mostly he would sit
6 there and keep quiet. He didn't talk, but we knew who he was and the
7 soldiers who were there addressed him as Vojvoda, and he didn't say
8 anything else.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Why are you saying that
10 Radovan Novacic was, according to you, the commander of Seselj's
12 A. He introduced himself as such.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And he actually stated, "I am
14 the commander of Seselj's volunteers," that's how he introduced himself?
15 A. Well, it's not that he introduced himself that way when he
16 introduced himself in terms of what his name was. He stayed at the
17 infirmary for awhile and then he asked about his soldiers, who were
18 there. And in this conversation, it's not that I asked him, but it was a
19 very small room and all of us were doing something there and somebody
20 asked him in what capacity he was there. Perhaps it was the wounded who
21 had addressed him; I cannot recall that detail now. But I do know that
22 what was said was that he was one of the commanders out there.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. So he was one of
24 the commanders, but was it stated that he was the commander of Seselj's
25 volunteers? It was something that somebody told you, but you didn't hear
1 -- rather than Radovan Novacic tell it to you personally, didn't tell
2 that to you personally?
3 A. He said it and I heard it. The only difference was that I was
4 not the one who had asked him. He said it and I heard it.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Okay. You heard it said. At
6 the time did you know who Mr. Seselj was, or was it someone you didn't
7 know at all?
8 A. Oh, no. I had heard of Mr. Seselj then, in 1991.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And when Radovan Novacic said
10 that he was the commander of Seselj's volunteers, for you it was
11 something rather normal? I mean, it didn't raise any questions in your
12 mind, or did it?
13 A. But of course it did. I immediately complained to him -- well,
14 how should I put this? How do I describe this to you? I complained
15 about this conduct of his soldiers that was not very nice, if I can put
16 it that way. I remember that I was really happy to have the opportunity
17 to meet someone to whom I could say that I was so afraid of these
18 soldiers who were in the street and who behaved so improperly. And when
19 they came to the infirmary, too, as the Prosecutor mentioned. Yes, yes,
20 I did say that to him. Of course I did.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And what did he say?
22 A. Nothing. Nothing. He just shrugged his shoulders.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, in Vocin, there was the
24 TO, yes or no?
25 A. Yes.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Who was the commander of the
3 A. Now, who was the commander then? Now I'm not quite sure. Was it
4 Rajko Bojcic or -- or I've already forgotten that.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] What about the ethnic
6 composition of Vocin? Which ethnic group was in the majority? Was it
7 the Croats or the Serbs?
8 A. In 1991 there were 95 percent Serbs, and the remaining 5 percent
9 were Croats. Perhaps it wasn't exactly 95 percent, but ...
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We now know there was this
11 commander of the TO. Did you see anyone from the JNA in Vocin, yes or
13 A. Well, I didn't see anyone from the JNA, but I know that people
14 were talking at the time, November 1991, or somewhere around that time,
15 that it was only Jovan Trbojevic who had come from the JNA. Now I've
16 forgotten what rank he had, but he had a pretty high rank. He is the
17 only one who had come in 1991 from Novi Sad, from the Novi Sad
18 the JNA.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In your statement, you said
20 that Jovan Trbojevic had a fight with the TO. Do you remember stating
21 that or not?
22 A. Well, perhaps not exactly the way you just put it now, sir. It's
23 not that they quarrelled, but there was discord. You could feel it, that
24 there was this thing between the territorials and the JNA. There was
25 something wrong there. I'm not the military type myself, but well, it's
1 not that there was some kind of cooperation that could be seen or felt.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] There is a slight contradiction
3 here. You said that there was no cooperation between the TO and the JNA,
4 but at the same time you are saying that Colonel Trbojevic was on his
5 own. Were there other men from the JNA there or not?
6 A. No, no, I do apologise to you. No one was there from the JNA
7 except for Mr. Jovan Trbojevic. He had come from the JNA. The
8 Territorial Defence is something different. I really wish to correct
9 myself now. There was cooperation between the JNA and the territorials,
10 but it's not that there was that much cooperation. I really do apologise
11 to you. With the Serb volunteers, as far as I could feel, there wasn't
12 that much of that there. What I'm saying now is quite different.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We have Serb volunteers who
14 behave very badly, and if I remember properly, you stated in your
15 statement that some of them were in prison and suddenly became
16 volunteers. Did they mention that to you as well, because you took care
17 of them? Did they tell you that they were in prison before becoming
19 A. That's right. That's the truth of it. There was a man called
20 Ivan who was there in a bed. I didn't know his surname. He was 18 years
21 old at the time. He came and said he was Ivan from Pancevo and that he
22 was a Serb volunteer, and he came to us to the infirmary because he had
23 jaundice. And I asked him, I asked him how come he was there when he was
24 the same age as my daughter. I said, Have you done your military
25 service? He said no. He said, No, sister, what military service,
1 because for one month in prison, I get four months at liberty. And
2 that's why I became very afraid when I heard from him that he had
3 actually come to us from a prison.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Let me now turn to the arrival
5 of Mr. Seselj in Vocin. Did you see him arrive with your own eyes in
6 Vocin, yes or no?
7 A. No.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Who told you that he was
10 A. Well, stories were going around. People were talking about it on
11 the streets, at work, in the bakery, everywhere.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Okay, everyone was talking
13 about it. Did he deliver a speech, or did he come and meet have with the
14 volunteers and the local population? Do you remember that or not?
15 A. As for the civilian local population, I don't know if he had a
16 meeting with them, but people said that he had toured Sekolinci [phoen]
17 which is where, as far as I was informed, was where his soldiers were put
18 up, and he toured the rest of the terrain in Vocin where the soldiers
19 were stationed.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] He went to see the soldiers,
21 all right. You stated that in front of the building where he was, there
22 were military policemen wearing belts. I was wondering whether these
23 were JNA military policemen or TO military policemen. If there was no
24 JNA in Vocin, who were these military policemen in your view?
25 A. They were members of the TO, the Territorial Defence.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. They were members
2 ever the TO. Fine.
3 Why did you leave Vocin? For what reason did you leave Vocin in
4 December? Why did you leave?
5 A. We left, or rather I left on the 9th of December 1991 -- 2, and I
6 went with my husband to Belgrade
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. My fellow Judge has
8 a few questions to put to you. I'm looking at the clock so I'm going to
9 ask you one last question.
10 You wrote three books. Two of them were confiscated by the
11 Croats and we learned that you were imprisoned by the Croats. Why? For
12 what reason were you arrested?
13 A. Well, I was imprisoned in 1995, part of October and November, and
14 I was imprisoned because, well, I don't know what article that was that I
15 was sentenced by, but I was a rebel under some article and -- well, I've
16 forgotten. I had to prove something but I forget what is it was now.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. What did you write
18 in these books? Did you write these books to talk about your experience
19 as a nurse, or did you write them to talk about your experience, because,
20 I'm sorry, I haven't had the pleasure to read you. But why did you write
21 these books? What was your purpose?
22 A. Well, because I was very sad at the time and I found it very
23 difficult at the time, and I thought that only if I wrote it all down
24 would I be able to remain normal and sane. That was a sort of defence
25 mechanism that I used to defend myself from everything around me that was
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Fine.
3 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you, Madam Radosevic. I just have a couple
4 of questions for you in relation to the link between -- please go ahead,
5 if you need. The link between the beating up of your two friends that
6 you named Kresimir Doric and Antun Simic. This happened, if I understand
7 correctly, and I just want you to confirm, this happened well before the
8 volunteers arrived to Vocin; is that correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 JUDGE HARHOFF: So did you form any relation yourself between the
11 beating up of these friends of yours and the volunteers?
12 A. No, not me.
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: [Interpretation] So the beating up. In
14 principle. Could not have had anything to do with the volunteers, could
15 it? I just want to be sure that I've understood it correctly.
16 A. That's right. That's right, yes.
17 JUDGE HARHOFF: The other question I had to you was in relation
18 to your mentioning of the Catholic church and I was just curious to know,
19 why would, as I understand it, Serbs hide weapons, ammunition and
20 uniforms in a Catholic church? Was it empty, or can you tell us a little
21 bit about that?
22 A. Well, yes. Yes, that's a good question. That's what I was
23 wondering myself, many times. The church served as an institution -- as
24 a religious institution, as a church in 1991. It was a Catholic church,
25 a functioning Catholic church. Was it empty? Well, it was the same as
1 any other church would look like for the services it held.
2 And in 1991, I think I said that in my statement, I happened to
3 learn due to force of circumstance that the TO had made a warehouse, a
4 depot there. I didn't see it myself. But when we went to collect
5 uniforms, then a person who was in charge of distributing -- I seem to be
6 talking too fast again, all right. I apologise.
7 When we went to collect our uniforms, as I was saying, then the
8 person in charge of distributing the uniforms did bring those uniforms
9 precisely from the church. And the church was mined in 1991. Probably
10 the way I described it in my written statement, that's what the rumours
11 going around were, so that the uniforms and weapons and whatever else
12 that was there, I don't know, would come into the hands of the Croatian
13 army. But I wondered why myself, because as far as I'm concerned, the
14 church is always a religious edifice, whatever.
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: It does seem to be odd, doesn't it? But did you
16 ever hear that also the Croatians and the Croatian army availed itself of
17 the weapons and ammunition and uniforms that were available in the old TO
18 depot in that church? Or was it only something that the Serbs used?
19 A. Oh dear, I don't think I can answer that question. Whether the
20 Croats used it, too -- well, could you repeat your question, please.
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: My question was, if you knew or heard of the
22 ammunition and weapons and uniforms that were deposited in the old TO
23 depot in the Catholic church, whether these things that were there were
24 also used by the Croat army and the Croat Defence. You have told us that
25 it was used by the Serbs, and I'm just curious to know whether also the
1 Croats came there to pick up weapons or ammunition or uniforms?
2 A. Yes, thank you, I understand you now. It was only the Serbs that
3 used it. Yes.
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you very much.
5 A. You are welcome.
6 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Witness, thank you very much on
7 behalf of the Trial Chamber for coming to testify here in The Hague. I
8 wish you a very pleasant trip home.
9 Before we adjourn, let me tell everyone that next week we'll be
10 sitting in the afternoon, but on Thursday, the afternoon sitting will be
11 transferred to the morning. In other words, on Thursday we'll be sitting
12 in the morning. Please take good note of this.
13 Mr. Seselj, please take note of the fact that we'll be sitting on
14 Thursday in the morning and the two other days, in the afternoon. I wish
15 you a very pleasant day.
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.12 p.m.
17 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 28th day of
18 October, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.