1 Friday, 19 October 2001
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.33 a.m.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Good morning. The registrar please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Case number
8 IT-95-9-T, the Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Milan Simic, Miroslav
9 Tadic, and Simo Zaric.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, can I just very briefly
11 raise one very small matter?
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
13 MR. DI FAZIO: That's the order of witnesses. I want to let the
14 Defence know. I mentioned to you earlier this week, I mean to the Chamber
15 earlier this week, the order, and I think I said that Muhamed Bicic would
16 be called, then Hasan Bicic, then Ibrahim Salkic. They're all witnesses
17 that give general evidence but also concern the defendant Milan Simic in
19 The order will have to be changed, and I now propose to call Hasan
20 Bicic first, followed by Muhamed and then Ibrahim. So I thought I'd let
21 the Defence know that.
22 That's been occasioned by the fact that Muhamed Bicic has got this
23 American court commitment, and they're arranging some sort of videolink
24 for him to testify in the American case from here, in fact, and so that
25 means he's going to be -- have his mind occupied with that and attending
1 to that. So for that reason I've altered the order, and I just want the
2 Defence to know.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes, Mr. Zecevic.
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, if I may have the floor for just one
5 short comment. Only two days ago, I have asked the Prosecutor, because I
6 knew that the session in the American court is scheduled for the 22nd of
7 October. I asked them loud and clearly whether Muhamed Bicic will be here
8 or not and whether Muhamed Bicic will be the first witness. They said
9 Muhamed Bicic will be the first witness.
10 On the eve of the witness coming into the court, we have been
11 notified that there is another change. This is the fourth time they've
12 changed it from Muhamed to Hasan. I mean, with all due respect, I really
13 believe this is -- I mean, this is really not something that should be
14 happen before this Tribunal.
15 The order of this Honourable Trial Chamber was that we have a week
16 in advance programme how the witnesses are coming so we can prepare
17 ourselves for the cross-examination, and, therefore, in this case, we
18 really are brought into the position where we have prepared everything for
19 Muhamed Bicic, then Muhamed Bicic is exchanged for another witness. And
20 this might go on forever with that. Because we cannot really prepare
21 within one day. Okay. In this particular case, we have a whole week -- a
22 whole weekend so that we can prepare, but I mean as a matter of principle,
23 I believe this is not acceptable. Thank you.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. It is the experience of the Tribunal that
25 there arises incidents which make it impossible for the Prosecutor to
1 stick to their order of calling witnesses.
2 What the Trial Chambers in the past have done is that at least
3 within the week the same witnesses are called regardless of the order, and
4 we have always accepted the changes in practice because of various
6 Now, in this case, as you rightly pointed out, it would be ideal
7 to have the order retained as was first agreed upon, but there is an
8 intervening incident and then the witness has to come later on, more or
9 less later on but within the same week, hopefully. But at least you have
10 the weekend, as you said, to prepare for this one alteration. And the
11 Tribunal does expect counsel to work on Saturdays and Sundays during the
12 trial proceedings so that we go ahead with our trials.
13 That is understood, and we do -- you wanted to say something?
14 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. Of course we understand, and we agree a
15 hundred per cent with you, Your Honour. The point is that -- the point I
16 was trying to make was that only 48 hours ago, I insisted whether it's
17 going to be Muhammed Bicic, because I know that he is committed to go into
18 the American court, and I have told my learned colleagues that. And they
19 said, "No problem. He's not going over there." And that is the point
20 which I am trying to make, because we were brought into the position that
21 we know for sure that it's Muhammed Bicic on this week and the beginning
22 of next week, whatever commitments he has. Thank you.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Mr. di Fazio, you understand that he had
24 insisted whether or not you were sure, because according to him, he was
25 sure that this witness would be giving testimony in the other case.
1 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Well, I appreciate that and I understand my
2 learned friend's concerns about that. I'm not suggesting that he should
3 not be concerned about that, and I apologise for any inconvenience caused
4 to him. But there are intervening causes that have necessitated this
5 change, and it's not the sort of matter that can't be rectified by the
6 Defence. After all, both witnesses give fairly brief statements. In
7 comparison, for instance, to the statements of Mr. Izetbegovic or
8 Mr. Dragan Lukic or Mr. Sulejman Tihic, they are positively minuscule.
9 It's a question of -- I can't even --
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. That is understood that there was an
11 intervening problem --
12 MR. DI FAZIO: Eleven pages of statement, that's all.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: -- but as much as possible, let's stick to the
15 MR. DI FAZIO: I'll endeavour to do that, but the problem arose
16 because of the late development of this videolink conference idea.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.
18 MR. DI FAZIO: And it would mean, probably, having to stop
19 Muhammed's evidence, Muhammed Bicic's evidence, halfway through so he can
20 go off and attend to this other court commitment, and that would be
21 undesirable from his point of view and from the Chamber's point of view.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Notwithstanding that we all know the primacy
23 of the Tribunal.
24 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, of course.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Let's go ahead.
1 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm not --
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Let's go ahead.
3 MR. DI FAZIO: -- making any comment about that. And I take on
4 board what Mr. Zecevic has said, and every effort will be made to stick to
5 the order that's announced --
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
7 MR. DI FAZIO: -- whenever and wherever possible. Thank you.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we continue with our cross-examination of
9 the witness, Mr. Pantelic?
10 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Good morning, Your Honours.
11 WITNESS: IZET IZETBEGOVIC [Resumed]
12 [Witness answered through interpreter]
13 Cross-examined by Mr. Pantelic: [Continued]
14 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Izetbegovic. After analysing
15 your testimony so far, I have come to the conclusion, Mr. Izetbegovic,
16 that I have to remind you of a number of facts. The first fact is that
17 before the International Criminal Tribunal -- that you are before this
18 Tribunal. The second fact is that you have taken a solemn declaration
19 that you will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
20 truth. And a third fact is one that my learned friends from the
21 Prosecution may not have informed you of, as well as the Witness and
22 Victims Unit, that it is possible to institute criminal proceedings
23 against a witness in this Tribunal for perjury.
24 Yesterday I was very correct when I asked you about a particular
25 fact and gave you the opportunity to correct yourself, when I asked you
1 whether you were a hundred per cent sure about a certain fact. I will
2 continue to be correct, and I shall give you another chance.
3 We agreed yesterday that there were unintentional lies due to --
4 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I object to this.
5 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] -- memory faults or something like
7 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. di Fazio.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. I object to this. I don't recall any
9 agreement about unintentional lies yesterday, and if the question is to be
10 asked, a question by Mr. Pantelic is to be asked, let him ask a question,
11 not make a speech. Let's get to it and let's ask the question.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Actually, I was about to ask Mr. Pantelic why
13 he finds it necessary, as counsel, to start warning the witness, because
14 that's the duty of the Trial Chamber, Mr. Pantelic. You are given
15 permission to cross-examine.
16 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: And I hope you will stick to that.
18 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Thank you.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: You are way out of your obligations under the Rules
20 of the Defence counsel.
21 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: I hope so, because you will be ordered out of this
24 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Madam President, for your directions.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: And the co-counsel will take over and the trial will
2 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. I know there is a lot of possibilities, but
3 let's go to the issue.
4 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Izetbegovic, on the 16th of October, on page
5 2360 of the transcript, lines 16 to 20, said the following. I will read
6 it in English, as I don't have a transcript in your language: [In
7 English] "I saw on the coffin the surname Zurovac."
8 This is a moment that I want to clarify this name.
9 Who is Zurovac?
10 A. I assume he is Zarko Zurovac's son, who was technical director in
12 Q. Tell me, Mr. Izetbegovic, do you know Zarko Zurovac?
13 A. Very well.
14 Q. Do you know the name of his son?
15 A. I've forgotten that. When he was little, we moved away. We were
16 no longer neighbours. He grew up in the meantime. I know his mother's
17 name, Vasa, and I know his sisters too, but we didn't meet each other for
18 a long time after that. It is the only Zurovac family that lived there.
19 MR. PANTELIC: The witness said -- intervention for the
20 transcript, for the interpretation. The witness said the only Zurovac
21 family that live in Orasje, O-r-a-s-j-e?
22 A. That I knew, of course.
23 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Thank you. You lived close by. In fact, you were next-door
25 neighbours, were you not? That's what you said.
1 A. Not next door. Orasje's a small place, so even a hundred metres
2 can be considered a neighbouring house. But we did socialise. We visited
3 each other at home.
4 Q. So you lived in Orasje, not in Samac?
5 A. A long time ago. In 1966 until 1968.
6 Q. And you celebrated when Zarko Zurovac's son was born, whose name
7 you don't know. You celebrated his birth?
8 A. Yes, I did. He had two little girls. I can't remember exactly
9 whether it was the birth of one of the girls - it was a long time ago -
10 but I know that we did celebrate the birth of one of them.
11 Q. Because on the 16th of October, you said that you remembered the
12 event. So do you remember or do you not remember?
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Which event?
14 MR. PANTELIC: The same event, Madam President. I'm referring to
15 his statement from page 2360, line 16.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, yes. I just want to know, is it the event
17 surrounding the birth or the death?
18 MR. PANTELIC: No, of the birth, of the birth of son of this
20 Q. [Interpretation] On the 16th of October, you said you remembered
21 the event. Now you're telling us that you don't remember. So please make
22 up your mind so that we can move on.
23 A. I told you a long time ago that -- not to hold me to the dates. I
24 said I attended some celebrations. I don't know how it's gone down. How
25 could I have said that I knew exactly when he was born, on the 16th?
1 Q. So, Mr. Izetbegovic, you do not seem to understand me. When I'm
2 saying the 16th of October, 2001, I'm relying on the transcript of your
3 testimony here. I'm not saying that he was born then. So let me remind
4 you. You said then, and that is on the 16th of October, here before this
5 Trial Chamber: [In English] "As we were neighbours, next-door neighbours,
6 we celebrated when he was born. I remember that."
7 [Interpretation] I'm asking you now, do you remember when his son
8 was born and the fact that you celebrated the event or do you not
9 remember? I'm not asking you for the date.
10 A. I celebrated many events. I remember that I celebrated the birth
11 of two children with him. I can't remember exactly which one now. So if
12 it is so important which birth it was and when he was born, I moved out,
13 so I didn't know the boy well after that.
14 Q. Yes, but we are now talking about the event when you entered the
15 military helicopter at Pelagicevo. And bearing in mind everything that
16 you said, that you knew his father and that you were family friends, do
17 you still abide by what you said earlier, and that is that the surname
18 Zurovac was written on the coffin and that it was the coffin of the son of
19 your friend whose name was Zarko Zurovac? Yes or no.
20 A. It was written -- the word "Zurovac" was written on the coffin. I
21 cannot claim I remember the first name. But it did say "Zurovac" 100 per
22 cent, and I assumed it was the son of Zarko Zurovac, because I didn't know
23 any other Zurovac family in Orasje, and I know there weren't any other
24 Zurovac families there.
25 Q. In your testimony on the 16th of October before this Trial
1 Chamber, you said the following [in English] inter alia --
2 MR. PANTELIC: He's speaking about this person in the coffin.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, how important is this?
4 MR. PANTELIC: Very important, Madam President, because I want to
5 establish whether we hear the truth here or not truth. So then --
6 JUDGE MUMBA: The witness has explained that he saw a coffin with
7 the name "Zurovac." He remembers that. He has said that so many times.
8 He assumed that the person in the coffin must be the son of Zurovac,
9 because according to him, he knew the Zurovac family in Orasje and it was
10 the only family then. So what is the problem?
11 MR. PANTELIC: The problem is, Madam President, that he said
12 something which I just want to read on 16th of October, and I want to
13 clarify that thing.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: I hope it is an important issue to your defence,
15 because what is important here is that there was a coffin.
16 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. And also what is important for Defence, Madam
17 President, is whether we have reliable witnesses here or not, or whether
18 we have the truth or not.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: I know you have to deal with credibility, but this
20 is not the way to deal with it.
21 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. I just want to finish this line of
23 JUDGE MUMBA: I hope you're finishing this particular point --
24 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: -- because it doesn't carry any importance at all.
1 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honour pleases, I understand when
2 Mr. Pantelic started this line of questioning about the coffin what he was
3 trying to achieve, and with all due respect, he has achieved that. This
4 witness has said now twice that he's 100 per cent sure of the identity of
5 the person who was in the coffin, and we can contrast that with other
6 evidence that we have heard and we can all draw our own conclusions. It's
7 like trying to draw blood out of a stone. You can't get any better than
8 100 per cent certainty by this witness. The point's made, isn't it?.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. And usually it's important to remember that
10 you have your closing arguments --
11 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: -- and you can deal on the contradictions if you see
13 they are contradictions. All right.
14 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely. There is some other contradiction and
15 I just want to clarify that. So if you permit me, Madam President.
16 Q. [Interpretation] So in your statement of the 16th of October, you
17 said, among other things, the following - I will read it in English - and
18 this relates to the son of Zarko Zurovac, who was allegedly inside this
19 coffin. You said he [Previous translation continues]...
20 So that means you saw his face. How did you know how he was
21 dressed? Was the coffin open? Did it have a glass cover or what? How
22 could you establish that he was dressed? Please answer that for me and
23 then we can move on.
24 A. I never said any such thing. The coffin was closed and carried
25 inside, and I don't know who could have written any such thing.
1 Q. Very well. So we've cleared that up. It must be an error in the
2 interpretation, which is quite possible, and we've cleared that up. But I
3 would like to know who could have added any such thing.
4 A. I'm not retarded to have said anything like that. The coffin was
5 closed. So how could I say that he was dressed? There's no logic there.
6 So I think something is being planted there for me.
7 Q. I was just reading the official transcript of these proceedings.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: You can get that correction through the audio unit.
9 I hope this time it will be done so that we get a written transcript as
11 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Let us go back, Mr. Izetbegovic, but really, to be efficient,
13 please say yes or no in answer to my questions regarding this event that
14 we were discussing yesterday.
15 The Prosecutor seemed to indicate that there were some false death
16 sentences which were threatening you, and this is something that the
17 President of this Chamber accepted, so this is a very serious issue, and
18 that is why I wish to clear it up.
19 My first question, Mr. Izetbegovic, is: In your statement to the
20 investigators in 1994 and 1995, you said the following:
21 "On one occasion the death sentence was read out for Tihic and
22 myself. The guard brought in a newspaper, Vecernje Novosti, a Belgrade
23 newspaper. Tihic read out that we had been sentenced to death and that we
24 had been sentenced to death by our own party as traitors."
25 Something to that effect was stated by Mr. Tihic, too, in this
2 A. I apologise. Please be brief in your questions, because by the
3 time you come to the end of your statement, I forget what you were going
4 to say. I have a feeling that you are trying to mislead me.
5 Q. I cannot shorten your own statement. It is my duty to read it out
6 in extenso. My question now is --
7 JUDGE MUMBA: [Previous translation continues] ... you can read it
8 slowly, especially slowly.
9 MR. PANTELIC: I just did it. I just did it.
10 Q. [Interpretation] Tell me, Mr. Izetbegovic: This statement that
11 you gave to the investigator, do you agree with it? Is it correct?
12 A. Will you please read it out once again which was this statement
13 and ask me to comment on it alone, and then move forward.
14 MR. PANTELIC: With your permission, maybe it would be better that
15 I can give this -- his own statement. Maybe he can read it. Maybe it's
16 better for him.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: In Serbo-Croat.
18 MR. PANTELIC: Sorry? In Serbo-Croat, yes.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: In Serbo-Croat?
20 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Yes.
21 JUDGE MUMBA: Just indicate the paragraph to the usher. Then he
22 can indicate it to the witness.
23 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. I already made the line here.
24 Q. [Interpretation] So please read that, Mr. Izetbegovic, slowly, and
25 tell us whether you confirm what you said or not.
1 JUDGE MUMBA: And the witness should read it aloud so that we have
2 it on record, since --
3 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
5 MR. DI FAZIO: You want the witness to read it out loud?
6 JUDGE MUMBA: In Serbo-Croat.
7 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Into the microphone, you mean?
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
9 MR. DI FAZIO: Perhaps the usher could -- perhaps --
10 JUDGE MUMBA: I thought the microphone was on.
11 MR. DI FAZIO: It is. He's intent on reading it. Perhaps if
12 Mr. Pantelic could ask him to re-read it out loud.
13 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Mr. Izetbegovic, will you please read out aloud, because the Court
15 and the Prosecutor think that would be a good idea. Read out the
16 highlighted lines.
17 A. But it's been read out already. It's been read out once, the
18 death sentence for Tihic and me.
19 "The guard brought a newspaper, the Vecernje Novosti, a Belgrade
20 newspaper. Tihic read out that we had been sentenced to death and that we
21 had been sentenced to death by our own party as traitors."
22 Q. If you don't mind, read out the next sentence, too.
23 A. But it hasn't been underlined.
24 Q. Never mind.
25 A. "One of the guards asked why I didn't react, and I answered that I
1 had never heard of a political party condemning people to death."
2 Q. Next sentence, please.
3 A. Why didn't you underline it?
4 "Later on, in Sarajevo, I found a newspaper in which it was said
5 that I had actually been executed, that the death sentence had been
6 carried out."
7 I don't know what's unclear there.
8 Q. Everything is clear to me too. So you still abide by what you
9 said then?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Thank you. We now have to clear up something that you said before
12 this Court on the 16th of October, because there are some things that are
13 not clear, and this is partially reflected on the understanding of the
14 Trial Chamber of that particular fact.
15 You said in this Court that on the basis of certain evidence and
16 proof, which might have been false, and because of the procedure from
17 Samac and at Batajnica, were sentenced [as interpreted] to death by the
18 Yugoslav authorities, and that then Tihic read out that sentence to you at
19 Batajnica. I think, on the basis of all these facts, that in fact it was
20 in the Belgrade papers that the news item was published and printed that
21 you had been sentenced to death by your party in Sarajevo, and that that
22 was read out to you, the newspaper article, and not an official sentencing
23 act of any kind. Could you clarify that for me, please?
24 A. Thank you for being so persistent. I shall try and answer.
25 Mr. Attorney, I think that you will recall, and I think I remember very
1 well, that I said that I didn't see an act of any kind, that it was read
2 out from the newspapers, and that there was a document, but that I did not
3 see it; I did not have it in my hands. Perhaps Mr. Tihic will be able to
4 answer that better when you see him here, because I didn't have the actual
5 act or document in my hands. I saw that he was just holding a piece of
6 paper in his hand. He wasn't near me for me to see, nor did I dare ask to
7 see the piece of paper.
8 Q. Yes. I understand that. Thank you for your answer. So what the
9 Prosecutor asked you re: the 16th of October is, to all intents and
10 purposes, incorrect, and the answer you gave him is not correct. I am
11 speaking about the fact that -- actually, what I mean is that the
12 Prosecutor probably misunderstood the whole episode, which led him to ask
13 you the questions he did.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: No. You can't make that conclusion.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Sorry, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: Just go ahead with your questions. You are dealing
17 with the witness --
18 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: -- not the Prosecutor.
20 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, absolutely.
21 JUDGE MUMBA: And stick to your cross-examination, please.
22 MR. PANTELIC: Okay. Yes, sorry, Judge.
23 JUDGE SINGH: Mr. Pantelic, may I just interpose with a
24 clarification from the witness.
25 Mr. Izetbegovic, can you clarify how many times were you told,
1 were you told, that you were sentenced to death? Was it once or twice?
2 And where was this done: in a park or in an office?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At Batajnica, in a cell, in the cell
4 we were sitting in. We were told once, and that was not repeated.
5 JUDGE SINGH: And was Tihic there?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Tihic was reading it out.
7 JUDGE SINGH: Thank you.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome.
9 MR. PANTELIC: Unfortunately, Your Honours, in spite of your
10 instructions and directions, the Defence were not provided by
11 the, actually, sort of official transcript, so I have to read from my
12 draft version, and the pages are not corresponding to the regular pages.
13 So that's a problem. It's a rough version.
14 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Tihic [sic], the Prosecutor asked you on the
15 16th of October:
16 [In English] "On this occasion when you were lined up and told
17 that the death sentence has been passed upon you, were you informed for
18 what it was for? In other words, was there some connection between the
19 imposition of this death sentence and overthrowing the system or whatever
20 that you had been informed about in Bosanski Samac?"
21 [Interpretation] That is what the Prosecutor asked you, and this
22 is your answer. Listen to me carefully, please:
23 "It was mostly based on everything from Bosanski Samac, and they
24 kept talking about the undermining and overthrowing of the system and the
25 failure to report for the mobilisation of the army, that he hadn't
1 responded to the call-up. Then I was seen as a deserter and I said,
2 'Well, it is no longer my army. It was once, but it is no longer my
3 army. It is a different country altogether, a different state
4 altogether.' That was my defend [sic]. I defended myself in that way."
5 [Interpretation] You see, Mr. Izetbegovic, you make no mention of
6 a newspaper article here at all or that somebody had fabricated your death
7 sentence from Sarajevo. You are building up your case in direct response
8 to the Prosecutor's question, that on the basis of certain facts from
9 Samac and from Belgrade, you were sentenced to death, and that is what
10 this Trial Chamber understood, that it was a sort of psychological
11 duress. And I'm taking you back to your statements of 1994 and 1995 and
12 I'm reminding you of Tihic's statement. And I state - and this is my
13 thesis, and please put me right if I'm wrong - that Tihic read out
14 something from some newspaper, or explained this to you, and that it was a
15 newspaper article and not an official sentencing document. Am I right or
16 am I not? Please answer so we can move on.
17 A. I have already said it all. Do I have to repeat ad infinitum,
18 until I go mad? I think it should be clear to you by now.
19 Q. Would you please answer my question, Mr. Izetbegovic, and the
20 question is the following: Did you on that occasion have knowledge of the
21 fact that your party in Sarajevo brought a death sentence of any kind
22 against you and Tihic and that that was read out to you by Tihic? Yes or
24 A. No.
25 Q. Thank you. You mentioned - and we're still in Batajnica. Let's
1 stay in Batajnica. You mentioned in your statement that -- you referred
2 to a certain General Tumanov in a situation in which you were having
3 problems with the investigations and the proceedings against you, and you
4 asked them to call General Tumanov. You wanted to see General Tumanov.
5 Is that correct?
6 A. Of course I asked to see him, because they didn't believe anything
7 I was saying.
8 Q. Just a moment, please. Let's pause. Can you explain to me
9 briefly your relationship with General Tumanov?
10 A. I don't think it is my duty to give you information of that kind.
11 I don't think I need do so, especially as I don't think this is the
12 subject we are dealing with in this Trial Chamber.
13 MR. PANTELIC: First of all intervention for the transcript. It's
14 T-U-M-A-N-O-V instead of "O", Tumanov.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: You mean the name.
16 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. The name of this General.
17 Q. [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Izetbegovic. I'm not quite certain that
18 we do not have the right to learn of the nature of your relationship with
19 the general. We have several ways open to us. If you have anything
20 confidential, we can move into a private or closed session, but at all
21 events, we do have the right to learn about everything -- learn everything
22 about something that is mentioned in the proceedings and if it has any
23 bearing on this trial.
24 So I'm asking you once again, and I should like you to answer me
25 briefly, what is your relationship with General Tumanov? You said that
1 you didn't wish to answer that question, but I'm asking you to do so now.
2 A. Well, as you were so nice about it, let me try. The nature of our
3 relationship or how we came to know each other was through business, the
4 business that we did with each other with respect to the exchange of
5 Vukovar citizens, nothing else. That's how we came to know each other, on
6 the basis of that exchange. We had lunch together. We talked during
7 lunch. He left a very good impression on me. I thought he was a fine
8 man, and I thought that in that difficult period for me that it would --
9 he come in handy. And as you know, somebody drowning catches at straws.
10 Q. Yes. I understand that situation fully. Tell me, please. How
11 many times did you meet with General Tumanov approximately?
12 JUDGE SINGH: Mr. Pantelic, where is that going to take us? I
13 mean, where are you going from there? Please go on to the ingredients of
14 the charge and the elements which your client is facing.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. I will follow that direction.
16 It is only one question. I want to establish the nature of this relation
17 and then to make some checking on the field, because this name was appear
18 for the first time in these proceedings, not in his previous statement.
19 So probably because it's related to the process of exchanges on the
20 territory of Bosanski Samac in 1991 and as well as 1992 to some extent, we
21 don't know yet, I just want to establish some facts, because this is
22 opportunity for this witness to tell us. Just the last question, Your
24 Q. [Interpretation] General Tumanov is which branch of the armed
25 forces, the infantry, the navy, or the air force? Tell me that and we can
1 move on.
2 A. I wasn't able to notice that on the uniform that he wore. It
3 wasn't marked, except for his rank, of course.
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Izetbegovic.
5 A. You're welcome.
6 Q. Mr. Izetbegovic, in your statement, the one you gave to the
7 Prosecutor, when you spoke about certain political activities in Samac,
8 you said that you relatively frequently had contacts with the other
9 parties, the SDS party and the HDZ, in order to transcend the problems and
10 to try and find a peaceful solution to events in 1992. Is that right?
11 A. Yes, it is.
12 Q. You said that about a week prior to the attack, the SDS organised
13 a meeting in the municipality. Now, if the attack was on the 17th, this
14 would mean that it might have been around the 10th of April, that meeting
15 in the municipality. Is that right?
16 A. I keep saying that I don't remember dates. I'm very bad with
17 dates. That is one of my faults. I remember dates very poorly, even
18 telephone numbers. But approximately, taken broadly and as there was no
19 time to hold a second meeting, I can conclude that it might have been
20 around about that date.
21 Q. Mr. Izetbegovic, I understand your situation. These are criminal
22 proceedings. Places, dates, descriptions are very important matters, and
23 that is the crux of my cross-examination. But if you say you don't
24 remember, well and fine. That's another matter. And bearing the mind the
25 fact that your memory was fresher in 1994 and 1995 and that you said,
1 "Approximately one week prior to the attack I was at a meeting convened
2 by the SDS and chaired by Blagoje Simic." Do you still stand by that time
3 category? Was it at that period? And that's why I'm trying to refresh
4 your memory, as indeed my learned friend of the Prosecution did before me,
5 because you're now talking several years after -- you were talking several
6 years after the event.
7 A. Yes, but so -- I needed a lot of time to become stable, to
8 stabilise myself. I can't remember the date.
9 Q. Thank you. You told us yesterday that with members of your own
10 party and with members of other parties, you followed the efforts of the
11 International Community diligently with respect to solving the problems in
12 Bosnia. That's true, is it not?
13 A. Yes, it's true.
14 Q. You also told us that certain topics linked to delineation in
15 Bosnia, demarcation on an ethnic basis, and certain constitutional
16 solutions at that time were the overriding topic elsewhere and in Samac as
17 well by the same token. Is that -- would that be correct to say?
18 A. Yes, but I think that a lot of things began in Samac as well. I
19 do not exclude the HDZ when I say that.
20 Q. Mr. Izetbegovic, in your statement, you said that you were present
21 in the municipality, going about your business, and you were the
22 vice-president of the executive board at the time, and that you came to
23 the meeting where the representatives of other municipalities and parties
24 were present; is that correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 JUDGE MUMBA: Excuse me, counsel. When you say "in your
2 statement," do you mean the statement that he gave to the Prosecutors?
3 MR. PANTELIC: No, here.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: His testimony.
5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, his testimony. Sorry.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: It would be easier to follow.
7 MR. PANTELIC: I have to make reference, yes.
8 JUDGE SINGH: When you refer to the statement here in the Court,
9 just refer to it as the transcript. I think that will differentiate it
10 from the other statement.
11 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely, Your Honour.
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Counsel can go ahead.
14 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Sorry, Your Honours. Just for your
15 reference, it was quite extensive way of -- line of questioning, so it's
16 between page 2221 and 2248. So this is a part of this particular meeting
17 that was called.
18 Q. [Interpretation] Therefore, Mr. Izetbegovic, nobody called you to
19 attend the meeting; is that right?
20 A. No. I received no invitation.
21 Q. You were the vice-president of the executive board of the
22 municipality; is that correct?
23 A. Correct, Mr. Lawyer.
24 Q. You were the vice-president of the SDA party in Bosanski Samac;
1 A. Yes, correct.
2 Q. And on that day - we don't know when because of your memory - came
3 to the municipal hall where you encountered the representatives of various
4 parties from the surrounding areas and various political leaders of the
5 different parties; is that right?
6 A. Right. And there were military structures as well.
7 Q. On the occasion, you said -- that is to say, in your testimony
8 before this Trial Chamber, you said that they were the representatives of
9 Odzak; is that right?
10 A. Yes. I enumerated some of the ones I knew.
11 Q. Let's just move forward. Answer my questions. Odzak; is that
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Orasje, Gradacac, Bosanski Samac?
15 A. Yes, yes.
16 Q. Those were the presidents of the municipalities, because you said
17 that by hierarchy they were automatically the presidents of their parties
18 as well.
19 A. Well, I assume so, yes. The mayors or presidents of the municipal
20 assembly were there. I knew them, yes.
21 Q. Among other things, you said that your party president was not --
22 did not attend.
23 A. I don't think he was present. I don't remember exactly. He
24 tended to steer clear of meetings, political meetings.
25 Q. Yes. You say that on page 228 -- 2228, lines 14 and 15, that he
1 was not present.
2 Mr. Izetbegovic, would you agree with me that in fact the topic of
3 the meeting was one of the activities, inter-party activities in the
4 region in order to discuss certain solutions of the International
5 Community about the peaceful solutions to the situation in Bosnia and the
6 different divisions therein? Yes or no?
7 A. No. We did not have any --
8 Q. No. Just a moment. No. That will do.
9 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, the witness --
10 JUDGE MAY: Yes, Mr. di Fazio.
11 MR. DI FAZIO: The witness must be permitted to finish his answer,
12 and this is a very important area of evidence, as we know. So I don't see
13 that it's fair on the witness for his answer to be -- to be cut off. The
14 witness started -- started to say, "We did not have any" and then was just
15 cut off by Mr. Pantelic.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes, I see. I see the transcript.
17 MR. PANTELIC: But, Madam President, that was, you know, occasion
18 for the examination-in-chief. I mean, this is cross-examination. If you
19 want to mix, you know, principles from examination-in-chief --
20 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no. Mr. Pantelic, don't waste time.
21 MR. PANTELIC: Okay.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Let the witness complete his answer, and he's going
23 to complete the answer.
24 MR. PANTELIC: Okay. Thank you.
25 A. You said an attempt to divide up Bosnia. Now, why are you
1 constantly leading me to the terrain of the entire republic? I have said
2 umpteen times here that I am talking only about the events in Bosanski
3 Samac itself, and that is the only subject that I am qualified to talk
4 about. So very often in your questions you tend to lead in some state
5 qualities, and I don't want to enter into the realm of the state. So
6 please don't do that. It wouldn't be fair towards me. I consider that I
7 have been fair and said everything I know so far.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Witness, witness --
9 A. Perhaps not everything --
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Stick to answers. You and counsel are not to
11 lecture each other. Stick to the answers, give your answer as correctly
12 as you can, and if you have to add that, "I'm limiting my answer to
13 Bosanski Samac," say so. All right?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you very much. That is
15 clear, and I do apologise.
16 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Therefore, Mr. Izetbegovic, we cannot avoid or sidestep the
18 influence of the International Community on Samac and the region, can we?
19 I ask you to take a look at the map.
20 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Usher, please, would you assist
21 us? It is the map linked to the -- showing the municipalities of Bosanski
22 Samac, Odzak, Gradacac, and Orasje.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: [Previous translation continues] ... exhibit number,
24 unless it's a new map.
25 MR. PANTELIC: No, Your Honour. I don't want to tender it in
1 evidence. This is just for the purposes of identification about the
2 general geographic area. It's a map from the Prosecutor, actually,
3 witness expert who should appear here, just in order to clarify some
4 things. I don't want to tender that in evidence, not yet, I mean.
5 JUDGE MUMBA: We can't use the maps which are already an exhibit?
6 MR. PANTELIC: No, because this is a very good map with the good
7 lines of the borders of Dayton Peace Accord, so just to facilitate the
8 explanation of this particular witness. That was my --
9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I just wanted to be clear whether we can have
10 it as your exhibit, because you are using it.
11 MR. PANTELIC: It's not necessary. It's just illustration.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. di Fazio.
13 MR. DI FAZIO: I think counsel is referring to a map from the
14 report of Ewa Tabeau, who is proposed to be called as an expert witness in
15 this case. If that is so, then I have no objection to that map being
16 shown to the witness and then marked for identification. The report will
17 subsequently be produced into evidence.
18 JUDGE MUMBA: Right.
19 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. Yes, we can proceed along those lines.
21 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, yes. Just to --
22 JUDGE MUMBA: The map is from the report of the witness who is yet
23 to come, and it will be produced by the Prosecution.
24 MR. PANTELIC: Please. You can put it on the ELMO, if you would
25 be so kind, and then ...
1 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Izetbegovic, please take the pointer. If you
2 prefer to look at the map directly, please do so, whichever you prefer.
3 Do you prefer to look at the screen or the document itself?
4 MR. PANTELIC: Mr. Usher, please, we would like to have a map by
5 itself. Can you zoom it, but -- we have the larger -- the whole map,
6 please. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much.
7 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Izetbegovic, what do you prefer: to look at
8 the screen or the map itself?
9 A. I don't know what you're interested in.
10 Q. I'm interested in you pointing to the red line. You're a person
11 who understands maps. You were involved in construction and town
12 planning. Show us the top and the bottom red line, which we will agree, I
13 think, is the dividing line on the basis of the Dayton agreements.
14 A. This red line.
15 Q. Yes, that's fine.
16 A. That's right.
17 Q. So those are the dividing lines on the basis of Dayton?
18 A. I don't know. This is the first time I see this map.
19 Q. Very well. On the left-hand side, please point out the
20 municipality of Odzak.
21 A. [Indicates]
22 Q. Please point to Bosanski Samac, the municipality of Bosanski
24 A. [Indicates]
25 Q. Orasje, please.
1 A. [Indicates]
2 Q. Modrica.
3 A. [Indicates]
4 Q. And Gradacac.
5 A. [Indicates]
6 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
7 JUDGE MUMBA: So the witness pointed out the areas asked, as shown
8 on the map.
9 MR. PANTELIC: That's correct, Your Honour.
10 Q. [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Izetbegovic. Could you please
11 tell me now: Do you have any knowledge that Odzak municipality was
12 divided according to Dayton?
13 A. What I learnt from the newspapers, that's all.
14 Q. So your answer is yes, you do know that it was divided. Will you
15 tell us aloud, please, not just nodding.
16 A. Yes.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: That's the wrong conclusion, because the witness has
18 said what he learnt from the newspapers. It's important to differentiate
19 that, what we learn from newspapers and what is a fact.
20 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely. He made a nodding by his head, Your
21 Honour, and therefore --
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, because it's possible to mislead him.
23 MR. PANTELIC: And then I just tried to clarify this thing,
24 because --
25 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no.
1 MR. PANTELIC: -- it is not on the transcript.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no. Once he answers according to the way he
3 understands, you leave it there. You don't make a conclusion. You are
4 the same people -- I think the Defence raised that motion, I remember.
5 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.
6 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Izetbegovic, you probably know from the media
7 or from some other source that the municipality of Bosanski Samac has also
8 been divided according to Dayton, if we look at this map.
9 A. Also from the press.
10 Q. I see. From the press. But the press can sometimes be a good
11 source of information. Was the Orasje municipality also divided according
12 to Dayton?
13 A. I suppose everything was based on Dayton. I don't know. I don't
14 know much about these things.
15 Q. Was the municipality of Gradacac also divided according to Dayton?
16 A. I don't know why we're talking at length about Dayton. I can't
17 discuss it. I had no functions, I had no involvement. Please let me free
18 of Dayton.
19 Q. Yes, Mr. Izetbegovic. I just wish to see how much you know about
20 what was happening in Bosnia, in your country. You're an educated man.
21 Nothing more than that.
22 A. Yes, but you have no right to exploit that. That is my private
24 JUDGE MUMBA: And in addition to that, we stick to the indictment,
25 Mr. Pantelic.
1 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: I know it's very tempting to go into other matters,
3 but we have a trial here.
4 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, of course. This is very much related to the
5 issue that I just raised, I mean the meeting in the municipality,
6 obviously, because of the dividing of the municipalities.
7 JUDGE SINGH: Mr. Pantelic, this map is self-explanatory. You
8 have got in the legend to the Dayton line, and I don't see your need to
9 ask this witness questions on the division of these areas. It's
11 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour, you're right. But still, this
12 witness is trying to - I don't know for which reason - to avoid direct
13 answers, you know, because this is obviously a fact of common knowledge.
14 So it was just that I might try to establish some facts with regard to the
15 events in 1992 and with the actual situation.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Izetbegovic, do you remember, since your
17 party president did not attend the meeting, could you mention some other
18 names and personalities who were present when you were discussing the
19 division of these municipalities?
20 A. I've already said that once - you can look it up in the
21 transcript - and I abide by what I said.
22 Q. Actually, the problem is that, according to my information, your
23 president, Mr. Sulejman Tihic, did attend that meeting, and it's very
24 strange that you don't know that your president was there if you yourself
25 were there. So that is what I wish to learn from you.
1 A. We would probably have been sitting together, but as I was alone,
2 then he certainly wasn't there. He may have come later and sat in a
3 corner somewhere, but I didn't see him.
4 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Izetbegovic, for
5 that answer.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: How much more time? We've had more than one and a
7 half hours yesterday.
8 MR. PANTELIC: Ten minutes. Yes. As I said, Madam President, it
9 wasn't my fault. I mean, if the witness --
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. How many more minutes?
11 MR. PANTELIC: -- yes or no, we would -- otherwise it's a story
12 and story again. Not more than ten minutes.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.
14 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Izetbegovic, let us now address some aspects of your
16 personality, because it is important for us to establish your
17 credibility. You left your place as president of the party to Mr. Tihic.
18 We're talking about the year 1992.
19 A. I didn't leave it to him. We had an assembly meeting, there were
20 elections, and he was elected. I was not.
21 Q. You have a high opinion of Mr. Tihic. He was a former judge, a
22 former prosecutor, former lawyer. He was a respectable member of your
23 community, wasn't he?
24 A. Yes, I do have a high opinion of him, and he held high positions
25 at the same time as Mr. Zaric and Mr. Pisarevic. They held three key
1 positions, and that is common knowledge: state security, the police, the
2 courts, the public prosecutor's office. You know how important those
3 places are. They held those positions. I'm not sure whether that was at
4 the same time, but all three of them held these high positions.
5 Q. Please be kind enough, Mr. Izetbegovic. Let us follow the
6 instructions of this Trial Chamber. If you keep elaborating your
7 answers - I'm not asking you that - we will spend the rest of the day
8 here, so please let us follow the instructions we have been given. When
9 I'm asking you a specific, concrete question, please give me a concrete
11 So you have a great deal of faith in the personal and professional
12 qualities of Mr. Tihic. You consider his assessments to be realistic and
13 founded on --
14 JUDGE MUMBA: I think we're going too far.
15 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] -- an analytical approach.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: We are going too far, because Mr. Tihic is a witness
17 in this case.
18 MR. PANTELIC: It is a very important issue here.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: No. I don't think that's the way to go about it.
20 Just ask the question you want to ask. For the reason that he is a
21 witness in this trial, it is important to limit how far you put the
22 integrity of this witness to another witness, regardless of the fact that
23 they were in the same political party or they lived in the same area where
24 the events are being discussed.
25 MR. PANTELIC: It's very much connected, Your Honour. Just be
1 patient, just a few seconds, and you will see the answer.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: I'm very patient, Mr. Pantelic, otherwise I would
3 have ordered you out.
4 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation].
5 Q. Mr. Izetbegovic, you believe that what Mr. Sulejman Tihic
6 says - and he was in the meantime elected president of the SDA party for
7 the whole of Bosnia - carries weight when he says something or writes
8 something. He has prestige; yes or no?
9 A. It is impossible to compare those days and the present.
10 Q. So in those days, you wouldn't say of him that he was reliable
11 when he says something and when he analyses something. We are talking
12 about those days, 1992.
13 A. I will not discuss anybody's moral integrity, and not his either.
14 Q. I didn't ask you that, Mr. Izetbegovic. Let me ask you the
15 following: You like to socialise, you like to go out to restaurants, you
16 like to have fun, don't you?
17 A. Yes, and sometimes I have a drink too many.
18 Q. That's fine. The fact that you get drunk occasionally absolutely
19 does not affect your regular obligations and your daily life; you're not
20 dependent on alcohol?
21 A. No. I never was addicted, and particularly not today.
22 Q. But from some sources, Mr. Tihic believes that you and Alija
23 Fitozovic were prone to alcohol consumption in 1992, and he had problems
24 with you in party activities; is that correct or not?
25 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please --
1 A. No.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, that's an objectional
3 question, for several reasons. It's, A, irrelevant; and B, it's asking
4 this witness to comment on what Mr. Tihic thinks. Now, why doesn't
5 Mr. Pantelic simply ask Mr. Tihic that if it's somehow relevant? So for
6 that reason, I object to the question and the answer. And indeed, there
7 have been a number of questions of this witness asking him,
8 Mr. Izetbegovic, what Tihic thinks of him.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: I've already given instructions to Mr. Pantelic. He
10 seems to be thinking that he can go around this issue another way.
11 MR. DI FAZIO: I haven't objected thus far, thinking that we'll
12 get to something that I can grasp, but we're not getting there, and so I
13 must object to any further questions that ask this witness what Tihic
14 thinks of him. The person to ask that is Tihic.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The objection is sustained. I think the
16 problem appears to be to differentiate how to deal with credibility issues
17 regarding any of the witnesses. I think that is a problem. Do give the
18 questions to the witness dealing with himself.
19 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely, but --
20 JUDGE MUMBA: I did say do not ask him to discuss the characters
21 of other Prosecution witnesses, especially for Tihic, who is yet to come
22 for cross-examination.
23 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely. That was not my intention, Your
24 Honour. It was just a previous question to establish the sort of
25 standards between the -- I mean, within one group of persons, whether they
1 respect each other or not, you know, and then to see what the weight of
2 certain opinions might arise. But I --
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You see, that's the very danger. This is a
4 criminal trial. It's not a political meeting.
5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, of course. It's even not a meeting in the
6 cafe or bar, I mean, although Mr. Izetbegovic was very extensive about
7 these explanations.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: You have five minutes.
9 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you so much, Your Honour.
10 Q. [Interpretation] You will agree with me, Mr. Izetbegovic, in
11 saying that your party in Bosanski Samac invested a lot of effort to arm
12 members of your party for the purpose of self-protection; yes or no?
13 A. No.
14 Q. [Interpretation] You will agree with me, Mr. Izetbegovic, that
15 together with Alija Fitozovic, you were involved in illegal activities of
16 arming? You brought in large quantities of explosives from Croatia. Yes
17 or no?
18 A. No.
19 Q. You will agree with me, Mr. Izetbegovic, that within your party
20 you had a Reconnaissance Attachment, a Hunters Detachment, a Sabotage
21 Detachment, and a detachment for obstacles and surveyance; is that right?
22 A. As far as I know, no.
23 Q. You will agree with me, Mr. Izetbegovic, that your activities with
24 Alija Fitozovic were directly coordinated with representatives of the
25 Croatian side in Slavonski Brod on Croatian territory?
1 A. No.
2 Q. I would now like to clarify a few things about your property in
3 Samac. The Prosecutor tried to create a situation as if you were having
4 certain problems to regain your property over there.
5 In the first place, Mr. Izetbegovic, you are a co-owner of a house
6 in Bosanski Samac; is that right?
7 A. The largest owner of the house I am living in. There are two more
8 sisters and children of two brothers. Most of it has been carried over to
9 me. Mr. Pisarevic drew up the testament, so he knows best.
10 Q. I just want to clarify a few things, that's all. You are not the
11 100 per cent owner of that house. Yes or no?
12 A. If you want to say that I made a false statement, don't put it to
13 me like that. Such questions can't be answered with a yes or no.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: You're using the same language, so you have
15 forgotten that the interpreters are waiting to interpret.
16 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Mr. Izetbegovic, it is not my intention to accuse you of falsely
18 testifying, I just want to clarify a point, please. Are you the owner or
19 a co-owner of that house?
20 A. Those are unfair blows. I've told you I have the majority share
21 of that house.
22 Q. Thank you. But that is still your property. That property has
23 been entered as your property in the real estate books; is that right?
24 A. After my father's death, I am not sure whether we have regulated
25 those things in the books, in the cadastre.
1 Q. But you have every right to do what you will with that property,
2 to sell it or to rent it out or to do what you will; is that right? Yes
3 or no?
4 A. Yes. That is what it should be.
5 Q. The gist of my question, Mr. Izetbegovic, is that there were no
6 restrictions placed on the part of the authorities in Bosanski Samac with
7 respect to your property, no ban on selling it or any -- any restrictions
8 whatsoever regarding your right to fully control that property. That's
9 all that I wish to establish here.
10 A. I said that I have still not filed any request, so I still am not
11 certain as to what I wish to do.
12 Q. Thank you, Mr. Izetbegovic. One more point and that will be it.
13 So we can agree, I think, that the houses and property of all the
14 inhabitants of Samac, regardless of ethnicity, Serbs, you mentioned Dusan
15 Simic, your teacher Sofia, and others, of course, were shelled by the
16 Croatian part and in the conflict and that virtually all houses were
17 damaged regardless of the ethnicity of their owners. Yes or no?
18 A. I didn't say who did the shelling.
19 Q. Yes, but they were damaged during the war operations?
20 A. Yes, during the war operations.
21 JUDGE MUMBA: But let's clarify that answer. According to you,
22 Witness, that was not done by the Croatian authorities, the shelling, the
23 destruction of the houses. Is that part of your answer or you don't know
24 who did the shelling, who destroyed the houses, all you know is that the
25 houses were destroyed?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The houses were destroyed. Whose
2 shell fell on them, I don't know.
3 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Thank you. One more question. In connection with the
5 circumstances in the surroundings of Samac in March and April 1992,
6 Mr. Izetbegovic, are you familiar with certain criminal acts committed by
7 Croatian forces against the Serb population in the villages of Sijekovac
8 and the village of Lijesce left of Samac? Do you have any knowledge about
10 A. No, I have no knowledge of that.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honours. That is the end of my
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. Re-examination by the Prosecution.
15 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you, Your Honours.
16 Re-examined by Mr. di Fazio:
17 Q. Mr. Izetbegovic, just on these last few questions and answers, you
18 referred to houses being destroyed and damaged. Was your house destroyed
19 or damaged?
20 A. As two shells fell on it from the garden side, the staircase caved
21 in. How it was destroyed, I don't know. So to this day it is not
22 possible to climb upstairs.
23 Q. But the building is still there, is still standing? It may have
24 received damage?
25 A. Yes. Yes. The building still stands.
1 Q. Thank you. Now, very briefly, very briefly indeed, I'd like to go
2 back to this question of coffins. On the flight in the helicopter from
3 Bijeljina -- sorry, from Pelagicevo to Batajnica, you've told us about a
4 coffin you saw and the name on the coffin. Was that the only coffin in
5 the helicopter?
6 A. The only one.
7 Q. Okay. You've also given evidence of a flight that you took in a
8 helicopter from Batajnica to Pale. Were there any coffins in that
10 A. No, there weren't any.
11 Q. Thank you. On Wednesday the 17th, you were being asked questions
12 by Mr. Pisarevic, and he put to you or suggested that there was a plan of
13 attack, a plan of attack on Bosanski Samac which was made up or devised by
14 the command of an armed unit of the SDA together with the Croatian Defence
15 Council of Bosanski Samac municipality, and you said that you didn't know
16 of any such plan. If such a plan had in fact existed, would you normally
17 have been made aware of it?
18 A. Probably I would have known because I was in the board of the
19 party. So surely I would have known.
20 MR. DI FAZIO: Can the witness just be given the series of
21 exhibits that were produced by Mr. Pisarevic, D2/4, D3/4, D4/4, D5/4,
22 D6/4, and I'll just deal with them briefly in sequence.
23 Q. First of all, D2/4. Did you have that document?
24 A. Yes, I see it.
25 Q. It has at the top, at least in the English translation, a
1 reference to "annex number 2," "copy number 2." What does "annex" mean
3 A. It is probably the document I saw before.
4 Q. The system of writing "annex" and "copy" at the top right-hand of
5 a page, was that some sort of system that the SDA --
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Mr. di Fazio, I'm sure --
7 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm sorry, I didn't see counsel.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: The one on the screen is in English and the accused
9 may not follow.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm sorry. I do apologise. Perhaps the B/C/S
11 version could be placed on the ELMO. That's again English. Yes. There
12 we go. And could we just lower it a bit, Mr. Usher, so that we can see
13 the top right-hand corner as well. Thank you.
14 Q. It's a very quick, brief question. You see at the top right-hand
15 corner there are the words "annex number 2" and "copy number" with a "2"
16 handwritten in. Is that system of identification of documents that the
17 SDA used at the time, back in 1992?
18 A. Under no circumstances, I don't know.
19 Q. Also, the document on the face of it lists the president and the
20 members of the municipality Crisis Staff. Is that an exhaustive list of
21 the members of this Crisis Staff? In other words, were there other people
22 also on the Crisis Staff?
23 A. There were people attached. This was the backbone. There were
24 others who participated in discussions when we had them.
25 Q. Thank you. When you look at the document itself, D2/4, the B/C/S
1 version, is there any way that you can tell if that document existed by
2 itself or was part of another larger document? In other words, is that
3 page taken from a larger document or did it exist by itself or can't you
5 A. I am not familiar with the larger document, so I don't know
6 anything more about that.
7 Q. Thank you. Now look at D3/4, please.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: Could we have the B/C/S version placed on the
10 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have an objection to
11 the transcript. The witness said, "I am not familiar with the larger
12 document, so I don't know anything more about that." "I think it was on
13 its own," it is not entered into the transcript. Perhaps the Prosecutor
14 could correct that.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: You mean the complete answer.
16 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. We would like the complete
17 answer to be entered into the transcript.
18 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. di Fazio.
19 MR. DI FAZIO: I will be happy to do that. I'm just not following
20 what -- I'm sorry. If Your Honour pleases.
21 JUDGE MUMBA: Page 41, line 4. "I'm not familiar with the larger
22 document, so I don't know anything more about that." Defence counsel says
23 that was not the complete answer.
24 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.
25 Q. Mr. Izetbegovic, I asked you about D2/4 and whether it formed part
1 of a larger document or whether it stood by itself, and you said -- you
2 gave an answer. Can you -- to the effect that you were not familiar with
3 the larger document and you don't know anything more about that. Can you
4 just try and now repeat the answer that you gave, your full answer that
5 you gave?
6 A. I do not know that there was a larger document, and I was not
7 familiar with it at all. I don't know.
8 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, Your Honours, but all of
9 us here who speak B/C/S heard the witness say, "It was on its own," and I
10 think that the Prosecutor could ask the witness whether he said that,
11 rather than giving a fresh answer.
12 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Thank you. That's precisely what I was
13 trying to find out, and I'm grateful to my learned friend for pointing
14 that out.
15 Q. Did the document exist on its own? Is that what you're saying?
16 In other words, it wasn't part of a larger document?
17 A. I think it was not part of a larger document. I wasn't familiar
18 with it. I would have known. I said I was in the board of the party. It
19 is possible. I still don't understand the question.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 A. I did not know about a larger document.
22 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, it's just past 11.00. I
23 won't be much longer.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: If counsel wishes, we can again ask the audio unit
25 to give us a correct transcript. Yes.
1 It's now 11 hours. We'll have our break and continue at 1130
3 --- Recess taken at 11.05 a.m.
4 --- On resuming at 11.30 a.m.
5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The Prosecution continues re-examination.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
7 Q. D4/4, please. Would you have a look at that. Now, your position
8 is that you don't know the person who apparently signed the receipt, this
9 Dzananovic Nerfid?
10 A. I am hearing the name for the first time, and I don't know the
11 document either.
12 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. D5/4.
13 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. di Fazio.
14 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Judge.
15 JUDGE WILLIAMS: I wonder, just going back to the last document,
16 if I could just clarify with the witness the answer. He said, "I'm
17 hearing the name for the first time, and I don't know the document
18 either." The last part, "I don't know the document either," I'd like a
19 clarification on what he means by that.
20 MR. DI FAZIO: I'll ask, if Your Honour pleases.
21 Q. You heard the Judge's inquiry. When you say you don't know the
22 document, do you mean that you've never seen it before? Are you not
23 familiar with this type of document? Can you amplify upon that so that we
24 understand precisely what you mean when you say, "I don't know the
1 A. I have never seen it until my arrival here to the trial.
2 Q. All right. Thank you. D5/4. Now, this is a document apparently
3 signed by yourself. Do you know, are you able to state clearly, what O/4
4 and M/160 refers to in that document?
5 A. I don't know.
6 Q. Can you shed any light on the meaning of the words, "I will use
7 the above-mentioned objects in accordance to the order of the person who
8 gave me the objects, or his representative, and turn the objects back upon
9 his request"?
10 A. I don't know that I formulated a text of that kind. I don't know
11 who wrote it down like that. I see my signature. How it came to be
12 there, I don't know. Maybe it's a real document. But I'd like to see the
13 original somewhere, and then I could confirm or refute. I don't know,
14 this way.
15 Q. The signature -- you may have been asked this. Forgive me. The
16 signature, is it apparently yours?
17 A. Judging -- to all intents and purposes, yes, 99 per cent it is,
18 although my signatures tend to vary. I don't always sign myself the same
19 way. So I'd like to see the original for that reason.
20 Q. Thank you. The document itself also has a series of lines drawn
21 in, obviously for someone to fill in that part of the document. Can you
22 tell us if this is some sort of standard-form document, or you can't tell
24 A. Well, I don't know anything about it.
25 Q. And just a final question on this document. In his questioning,
1 Mr. Pisarevic put this question to you, and you provided this answer:
2 Q. This ammunition, this ammunition mentioned here,
3 could you tell us what it means, 0/4 and M/160?
4 A. I'm afraid I don't know that either. It was a long
5 time ago.
6 Now, I just want to be absolutely certain about your position on
7 this reference to 0/4 and M/160. Mr. Pisarevic assumed, by virtue of his
8 question, that it was ammunition. Is it still your position that you
9 simply don't know what it's a reference to?
10 A. I don't know what it's a reference to.
11 Q. Thank you. Could you now look at D6/4?
12 MR. DI FAZIO: Does the witness have the original? Because the
13 original was also provided into evidence at a later stage. There was a
14 photocopy and an English translation and also the original of this
15 particular document. I think this was given a different exhibit number
16 than D6/4. It may in fact be D7, unless I'm mistaken.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The one that we said looks like a carbon
19 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, that's the one.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay.
21 MR. DI FAZIO: It's clearer. That's the only reason I need it.
22 Thank you.
23 Q. Yes, you can see the stamp. It's a bit clearer there and it says,
24 stamp: "Military post Number 2130 Slavonski Brod." Would that indicate
25 that the document was stamped on its way either into or out of Croatia at
1 Slavonski Brod?
2 A. I can't say anything about the document because I didn't take part
3 in it. I simply don't know.
4 Q. You're not familiar with that sort of stamp?
5 A. Apart from what it says, I never encountered a stamp of this kind
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: I've done with those documents.
9 Q. I'm now asking you questions again about your evidence in answer
10 to Mr. Pisarevic's questions on the 17th of October. He asked you of --
11 whether you attended, on behalf of the SDA, a meeting with representatives
12 of the Croatian Democratic Community. You said that there was an attempt,
13 but you managed to break it up and nothing came of it. And then
14 Mr. Pisarevic asked you a further question about a meeting held in Prud on
15 the 19th of May, 1992, that you went there uninvited, expressed your
16 opinion, and that no joint Crisis Staff or anything like that was formed.
17 I'd just like to be clear about this meeting. Who were the
18 participants in it? And by that I don't mean necessarily individuals.
19 I'm more interested in groupings, any parties or official bodies.
20 A. Exclusively representatives of the HDZ and SDA.
21 Q. Why did you go uninvited? And if you could also comment on why
22 you didn't get an invitation. Those are two questions, I know, but if you
23 could answer both of those.
24 A. Well, it's like this: Many people didn't believe me, either side,
25 because of my unfortunate and also beautiful surname, although I -- and I
1 claim today the same thing, that I was -- in all the events that were
2 taking place, I tried to be as honest as possible, as realistic as
3 possible, as frank and open as possible. And I think that I was somebody
4 who could do everything but the kind of things that would lead to the
5 worst. And if I had to speak for a thousand days, I would always be
6 against events taking the turn that they did turn.
7 Tihic and Fitozovic were invited, but I took it upon myself to
8 go. They told me because they knew I would hear of it. And I said,
9 "Well, I'm going with you too to see what they want." And when I arrived
10 I saw what I saw, and I did what I did.
11 Q. Thank you. So invitations were extended to SDA officials but you
12 weren't included in the invitation list.
13 A. I assume that they received oral invitations, but nobody received
14 any written invitations, nobody at all.
15 Q. You say that nothing came of it and that there was no joint Crisis
16 Staff. Was that an official position adopted by the -- sorry. Was that
17 the result of an official position adopted by the SDA?
18 A. I think it was, yes.
19 Q. What was the basis of your opposition to such a proposition?
20 A. From the very beginning, from the time that the party was formed
21 and throughout its duration, all the time and even today, I never was a
22 combatant or advocate of the creation of any kind of coalition with one
23 side of the two sides involved. We're either going to be all three of us
24 together, all three sides together, or not at all. That was my position
25 from the very beginning, and that is my position today as well.
1 Q. Thank you. Mr. Pisarevic was still questioning you about that
2 meeting, and you stated that you realised where the meeting was leading
3 and that you were -- the SDA was not going to participate in such a
4 meeting, and then you all walked out or you walked out. Then
5 Mr. Pisarevic put to you this question:
6 Q. Are you familiar with the fact that it was decided
7 at that time that the commanders of the joint armed
8 units should be Marko Bozanovic, a Croat, and
9 Mr. Alija Fitozovic, a Muslim?
10 Now, my question is: Were you aware of any joint armed units at
11 all, regardless of who was their head?
12 A. There were no joint units. If some of the Muslims were on the
13 side of the HVO, which was seen in the war, then there were Muslims in the
14 4th Detachment as well, and we never speak about a coalition of any kind.
15 It was the will of certain individuals who --
16 Q. Now, we've heard evidence that Bozanovic and Fitozovic were --
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Zecevic.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours. Would we let the witness
19 finish his answer? I mean, throughout these couple of days we have been
20 insisting on giving the opportunity to the witness to finish his answer
21 and now are we changing the rules?
22 JUDGE MUMBA: No. No, we are not.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Sometimes it's just the overlap. So let him
25 complete the answer.
1 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, I apologise.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, counsel, please.
3 MR. DI FAZIO: I didn't realise that I had cut off the witness. I
4 heard a -- I certainly didn't mean to cut him off.
5 Q. If I cut you off, Mr. Izetbegovic, I apologise. Please complete
6 your answer.
7 A. Well, it appeared that you cut me off, but I just wanted to add
8 two more words. Otherwise, I answered, to all intents and purposes.
9 If there were any Muslims in the HVO, then there were also some of
10 them on the 4th Detachment side. That is their personal affair. They
11 opted for that themselves. We were not the ones who went to convince
12 people and say, "You're Muslims, you must be here. That's where you ought
13 to be." It was the free will and decision of the citizens. So that's my
15 Q. Bozanovic and Fitozovic were, we have heard, appointed as
16 commanders or in high-ranking positions in the TO. That appointment or
17 those appointments, I should say, resulted from a meeting. Was it this
18 meeting in Prud or was it another meeting where it was decided that they
19 would become heads of the TO or hold high rank in the TO?
20 A. While we were in Prud, there was no mention of the Territorial
21 Defence. That followed the next day, and it was quite different.
22 Q. Thank you. Mr. Pisarevic asked you this question and you gave
23 this answer, and he was talking about the general instability in Bosanski
25 Q. Was it because of this uncertainty and insecurity
1 and the general state of affairs as it was that the
2 SDA started to form party patrols which had their
3 checkpoints during the night in the town of Samac
5 A. Precisely because of the prevailing situation, one
6 in which there was no security any more. There was
7 no safety for the citizens of the towns, the Muslims
8 saw to that. They had the right to
9 self-organisation to protect themselves. That was
10 the sole purpose and none other.
11 Your answer doesn't make clear your position on the issue of SDA
12 checkpoints. Did the SDA establish checkpoints throughout the town during
13 the night?
14 A. Yes, the checkpoints did exist, but there was a list for the duty
15 people to be on duty during the night that was sent to the police station
16 in Samac, so that nothing was secret, nothing was clandestine, and some of
17 the work was done together, jointly.
18 Q. What sort of checkpoints were these? Checkpoints where cars were
19 stopped, or something else?
20 A. No. No. It was pure observation. Nobody had the right to
21 intervene in any way. They were just there to observe and monitor.
22 Q. That's what I mean. The word "checkpoint" imports a certain
23 activity. It imports that people might be stopped, questioned, then
24 allowed to move on. I want to understand if it was that sort of
25 checkpoint, something the police might normally set up on a road, or the
1 army, that sort of thing, or was it something altogether different?
2 A. No, it wasn't that type of checkpoint. It was pure observation,
3 and if somebody attempted to do anything, something that was not in
4 keeping with proper conduct, then they could prevent an individual from
5 doing that.
6 Q. Thank you. Mr. Pisarevic, on Thursday, the 18th, asked you some
7 questions about your movements around the town on the 17th of April. You
8 said in evidence that you drove a red Yugo Kedi - I'm not sure if I've got
9 the car right, but I think it's enough to identify the type of car that
10 you mentioned - and that you drove it home. How do you reconcile that
11 with your evidence that you went to your daughter's apartment to evade
13 A. My daughter was at their uncle's, her husband's aunt, in fact.
14 That's where she was. And I went there to leave the car. I took the keys
15 to her flat and went to the flat alone, on foot.
16 Q. So you didn't go home -- when you said you went home, you didn't
17 go to your residence; you went to your daughter's residence?
18 A. Yes.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: Counsel, if I may interrupt, before we rise, we may
20 need ten minutes for some housekeeping matters we need to discuss before
22 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. I can assure you that I don't intend to be
23 more than a few more minutes, and then we'll have our next witness to
25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, precisely that, because we're trying to discuss
1 something before the next witness comes.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. That will be done. Thank you.
3 Q. You said, in answer to counsel for Mr. Tadic, Mr. Krgovic, that
4 you participated in some exchanges, three in all, exchanges that occurred
5 in Bosanski Samac. Who was exchanged? Who was being exchanged on these
7 A. Prisoners were being exchanged from the battlefront at Vukovar.
8 Q. Soldiers?
9 A. I think there were very few soldiers. All of them were in
10 civilian clothing. There were elderly people and women, a lot of elderly
11 people and women from Vukovar, sick people, all kinds of people. There
12 were no soldiers from Vukovar at all.
13 Q. So what ethnic background were the people who were being held in
14 Bosanski Samac prior to the exchange? Were they Croats, Serbs, Muslims,
15 or mixtures?
16 A. They were mostly Serbs and Croats. They were being exchanged, no
17 others. There were perhaps some Muslims here and there, but that was a
18 rarity, somebody who happened to find themselves there at that particular
19 time, that's all.
20 Q. Who were they being exchanged for?
21 A. One side would bring their own people in a bus and the other side
22 would do the same, and then they would switch buses. People from one bus
23 would move to the other and vice versa. And us locals were present there
24 to organise this, to give them some sandwiches, something to eat, some
25 first aid, food. And everybody received that assistance, both parties,
1 but the Vukovar people had to stay on - this was done by the Red
2 Cross - until they received agreement and were allowed to -- until Croatia
3 said that it would accept them.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.
5 MR. PANTELIC: Madam President, we have to clarify, and I think we
6 have to ignore the question, a part of the question of my learned
7 colleague. It's page 52, line 3. He said, "So what ethnic background
8 were the people who were being held in Bosanski Samac?" which my
9 understanding is that these people are maybe in detention or in camp or
10 whatever, and then going to exchanges. But obviously, the witness said,
11 very precisely, they just switched the buses in Samac, who was the transit
12 point or something like that. So if my learned colleague can clarify
13 that, because this formulation, "being held," I think --
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. You want that clarified.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Thank you.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: I'm sure the Prosecutor got that.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: I do apologise.
18 JUDGE MUMBA: It's the use of the word "held" that the counsel is
19 concerned --
20 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm just looking at the transcript, and may I just
21 very briefly confer with my colleague before I --
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, you can go ahead.
23 [Prosecution counsel confer]
24 MR. DI FAZIO: Right. I think I understand the problem.
25 Q. The people who were in Bosanski Samac being exchanged, were they
1 being held, or you can't comment on that? In other words, were they
2 prisoners or not apparently prisoners?
3 A. They could leave Samac freely, and we even took some people to
4 lunch at the hotel, to have something to eat, until the order came from
5 their side that they could start on their exchange journey and that they
6 would be accepted.
7 Q. Do you know how the people came to be in Bosanski Samac?
8 A. I do. I sat with a group of them on one occasion in the hotel
9 while they were having lunch. We went to dress some of them, because they
10 were in pajamas. They had been taken out of the hospital. We gave them
11 clothes to wear from the Red Cross.
12 Q. And do you know how long before April 16 these exchanges took
14 A. As I was saying, there were several exchanges, so I can't
15 remember. When an exchange was happening, there were many representatives
16 from Belgrade, from Zagreb, from the military structures of both sides,
17 and we, as the hosts - at least that's how we considered ourselves to
18 be - we helped them as much as we could, as far as the humanitarian side
19 is concerned. We didn't help in any other way. Of course, we helped as
20 much as we could.
21 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
22 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. di Fazio. I wonder whether we can
23 go back to your question as to line 53.21, where you say, "Do you know how
24 the people came to be in Bosanski Samac?" And Mr. Izetbegovic's answer
25 is: "I do." And then he talks about sitting with them at lunch, but we
1 don't get an answer beyond the "I do." Could we have a little bit of
2 elaboration, please.
3 MR. DI FAZIO:
4 Q. The people you sat with at lunch, how did they come to be --
5 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, Mr. Di Fazio.
6 MR. DI FAZIO:
7 Q. How did they come to be in Bosanski Samac? How had they arrived
8 there? How had they been taken there?
9 A. They were exchanged. This side, the Serb side, went immediately
10 across the bridge in the direction of Belgrade, I suppose. There were
11 cases when from Zagreb approval had not been given to accept them. So we
12 had no other way out but to take them to the hotel to warm up, for some of
13 them to change, and to have something to eat. That's how it was, and that
14 is how it went on. And when approval arrived for them to leave, they
15 left. No one slept.
16 Q. Thank you. You've described -- you told the Court how they left,
17 but how did they get there in the first place? How did they get to
18 Bosanski Samac?
19 A. We took them, because there was no point in keeping them there, to
20 make them suffer even more than they had suffered already. We tried to
21 ease the situation for them, to have something to eat, to refresh
23 Q. Did they arrive in buses in Bosanski Samac?
24 A. Yes. The buses came in front of the hotel. They got off the
25 buses, went into the hotel, then from the hotel back to the buses again.
1 Q. Where had the buses come from?
2 A. The exchange took place in the customs-free zone in Bosanski
3 Samac, right next to the bridge on the Sava River, and from there to Samac
4 it's about 3 kilometres, and that is why we took them there.
5 Q. Those people that you looked after, fed, took to lunch to the
6 hotel, were they people coming into Bosanski Samac?
7 A. I don't understand what you mean "coming into."
8 JUDGE MUMBA: They were not resident of Bosanski Samac. It looks
9 like they came from somewhere else, from outside the town. Where did they
10 come from? With their buses, where did they come from?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They came from the direction of
12 Vukovar. They were brought there as prisoners of the Croatian army and
13 Croatian citizens. They came from that part to be exchanged. We took
14 them to Samac. There was no one from Samac. They were all from the
15 Vukovar area.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
18 Q. Thank you, Mr. Izetbegovic. Mr. Pisarevic asked you questions
19 about people abandoning the town of Bosanski Samac, and he asked you
21 Q. You mentioned that there was unrest in town, that
22 people were taking their children out of town. Does
23 that mean that the town of Bosanski Samac, in that
24 period of time, was being abandoned by entire
25 families or parts of families?
1 And you replied:
2 A. Both, whole families and parts of families.
3 Now, are you -- were you saying there that people were abandoning
4 the town of Bosanski Samac on a permanent basis, going and never coming
5 back again? Is that what you were saying?
6 A. No, that is not what I meant.
7 Q. What did you mean?
8 A. Everyone went thinking that it would last a couple of days and
9 then that it would be over and they would come back. They didn't go far.
10 They went to neighbouring villages, some to Slavonia. Whoever had someone
11 close by, family or friends, they went there where there was no danger.
12 Q. Thank you. You were asked questions by Mr. Pantelic yesterday --
13 I'll withdraw that question. Thank you.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: I have no further questions.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you very much. Can we release the witness?
17 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour --
18 JUDGE MUMBA: What did you want to say?
19 MR. PANTELIC: I just want to have a right, with your permission,
20 to a very narrow issue, one question in re-cross in order to clarify
21 something which is in the interest of justice --
22 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no, no, no, no.
23 MR. PANTELIC: -- and complete the facts --
24 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no, no, no.
25 MR. PANTELIC: -- for the information of this Trial Chamber.
1 JUDGE MUMBA: No. You don't cross-examine twice. After the
2 examination, that's the end.
3 MR. PANTELIC: I think it will be very useful for this Trial
4 Chamber to know these two directions, and actually, I want to help to my
5 learned friends from Prosecutor, and as well as the Trial Chamber, in
6 order to establish these very simple facts about the ways of buses coming
7 from one point to Samac and vice versa. I mean that's the only question
8 that I want to say.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: You see, the Trial Chamber doesn't want to establish
10 a precedent where after re-examination counsel for the Defence, and even
11 for the Prosecution when it comes to the Defence case, to do what you're
12 trying to do. What is the point? First state the point.
13 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. The point is I want to ask a very simple
14 question of Mr. Izetbegovic, from which town the buses came in Samac.
15 There are two towns, two regions actually in Croatia. And who conducted
16 these exchanges, you know, in order to clarify. Because it doesn't seem
17 to me it's clear from the transcript that that was the case.
18 So that's my intention, but, Your Honour --
19 JUDGE MUMBA: Why? You have your intention --
20 MR. PANTELIC: About the principle, Your Honour, please.
21 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you remain silent when I'm talking to you?
22 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, of course. Yes.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: I've explained the point, and I'm sure the witness
24 has understood what clarification you need. So the Trial Chamber will
25 adopt it and ask the witness to answer and clarify.
1 MR. DI FAZIO: I don't think he's quite understood -- I don't
2 think the witness has quite understood that the Chamber is putting the
3 question to him now rather than --
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Did you catch what Mr. Pantelic was saying yourself,
5 Mr. di Fazio? You had your microphone off.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Yes. I heard, yes. Do you want me to ask
7 the question?
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
9 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. I do apologise.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do I need to say anything?
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Let me ask.
12 Questioned by the Court:
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Counsel for the Defence wanted clarification on the
14 people you said had come from Vukovar. He wanted to find -- on the
15 buses. He wanted to find out in which regions they came from, if you do,
16 or which towns they came from other than Vukovar, or if Vukovar is a
17 region. Can you explain, as far as you know, where they came from, the
18 towns, the regions, if you know?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Except by the licence plates of the
20 buses, I can't know anything more. I didn't have lists of names of the
21 people in the buses. My duty was to provide humanitarian aid. There were
22 Zagreb, Vukovar, and Cakovec registration plates and also Vinkovci
23 registration plates.
24 So this side that brought them, who I assume were Serb prisoners,
25 they had licence plates from Zagreb, Vinkovci, Cakovec. As for those from
1 Vukovar, they were Croatian prisoners.
2 I just saw the licence plates, no others than those I have
3 mentioned. I didn't see any others.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: The examination is through with you, and we are very
5 grateful that you have been very patient and have given evidence to the
6 Tribunal to assist us in our trials. Thank you very much. You are
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you too.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, counsel.
10 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honours. We do not have any
11 questions or things like that for this witness, but maybe it would be
12 useful, because during the re-examination, the Prosecutor has showed the
13 document D5/4, which was in the copy. We would like to offer --
14 JUDGE MUMBA: The witness can be led out. Yes, the witness can be
15 led out.
16 [The witness withdrew]
17 MR. LAZAREVIC: And we think it would be useful just to see the
18 original of this document, because the witness stated that he was 90 per
19 cent certain that it is his signature, but maybe he should see this.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: Where was the original in the proceedings? When he
21 was being examined, where was the original?
22 MR. LAZAREVIC: We had it, Your Honours, during, but we did not
23 believe --
24 JUDGE MUMBA: You said that. But why didn't you offer the
1 MR. LAZAREVIC: Because the witness did not make any doubt about
2 his signature. Now he said it's maybe 90 per cent.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Immediately he said that, and you knew you had
4 the original, why didn't you bring it up? Why didn't you do that?
5 MR. LAZAREVIC: We were waiting for the Prosecutor to finish his
7 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no. You can't give that as an excuse. You have
8 seen your colleagues intervene, object, do whatever they want to do during
9 the re-examination. Those are things which will not be accepted by the
10 Trial Chamber. Okay?
11 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: As Judge May said some time back, these are not
13 trials by ambush. All right? You put your case on the table. The other
14 side puts their case on the table. Okay? No more --
15 MR. LAZAREVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: I'll leave it with the Prosecution, if they think
17 it's worth pursuing, to deal with it.
18 Yes, Ms. Baen.
19 MS. BAEN: Your Honour, I don't have any problems or anything
20 other than a question, because I'm not familiar exactly with how this
21 works over here.
22 Is this witness being released now? Is he going to talk to the
23 Victims and Witnesses people now for the investigation or is he going to
24 be coming back and do we get a report? I'm just --
25 JUDGE MUMBA: Which witness?
1 MS. BAEN: The investigation with Mr. Izetbegovic, about his
2 conversation or what --
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You have no confidence when the Trial Chamber
4 says the matter is under investigation?
5 MS. BAEN: No, I have total confidence.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: So what is your problem?
7 MS. BAEN: My question is: Is he leaving now or is he going to
8 talk to them now or is he coming back and do we get a report? I just
9 don't know. It's a different procedure than from where I come from so
10 that's why I'm asking.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. So you just wait. If all you wanted to do was
12 remind the Chamber about it, you should have done so. So you don't ask
13 about the procedures.
14 MS. BAEN: I'm just asking for the state of the report.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: The matter will be taken care of.
16 MS. BAEN: We will receive a report? That's all I'm asking. I
17 don't understand. I've read all the jurisprudence here in the ICTY, and I
18 haven't seen this procedure before, so I'm just asking if we get a report,
19 because all my co-counsels are asking me how it's done in the United
20 States. It's done differently. So I'm merely asking, very respectfully,
21 Your Honour, if we're going to receive a report as to what the --
22 JUDGE MUMBA: The Trial Chamber will take a decision, and the
23 Trial Chamber will inform the parties.
24 MS. BAEN: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: The Prosecution -- I wanted to find out who the next
1 witness is.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: The next witness is Hasan Bicic and that witness
3 will be led through his evidence by my colleague Ms. Reidy.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. I just wanted to raise the issue that
5 was discussed at pre-trial stage regarding conflict of interests
6 concerning Mr. Pisarevic and his client Mr. Simo Zaric. I'm sure you've
7 read the pre-trial proceedings.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: I have read them. I haven't read them recently.
9 This --
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Because the Trial Chamber has been reminded of the
11 issues that were raised then. We just want to be sure that now that the
12 trial is proceeding whether the matters were as they were discussed and
13 decided, and I would like to hear from Mr. Pisarevic, who is counsel for
14 Mr. Simo Zaric, again.
15 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, perhaps before we --
16 JUDGE MUMBA: That matter is discussed, yes.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: No, no. Before you call upon the Defence, I'm
18 informed by my -- by Mr. Weiner that the two witnesses who are to be
19 called, the Bicic brothers, were in fact represented in legal proceedings
20 or some legal matter - I don't know the nature of it - in Yugoslavia by
21 Mr. Pisarevic. Now, problems that might arise, I don't know, but I just
22 thought I would inform the Chamber that that is the fact, that is the
23 situation, and --
24 JUDGE MUMBA: From the point of view of the Prosecution, you have
25 no problem with Mr. Pisarevic cross-examining these witnesses?
1 MR. DI FAZIO: May I just confer with my colleagues briefly?
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, because we want to discuss that fully so that
3 it doesn't arise in the future.
4 [Prosecution counsel confer]
5 MR. DI FAZIO: Obviously, the Prosecution is concerned that
6 because of the previous relationship on our case that existed between
7 Mr. Pisarevic and the Bicic brothers, there may well be some prejudice
8 caused to the Prosecution by the fact that Mr. Pisarevic has access to all
9 sorts of what normally would be privileged, I suppose, information.
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Were the proceedings on similar events?
11 MR. DI FAZIO: No. No, no. They're some sort of civil matter, I
12 understand -- business, some sort of business matter, Mr. Weiner tells me.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. Let me just be clear. These two witnesses
14 are not the ones who have allegations against some of the accused persons
15 where Mr. Pisarevic was allegedly present?
16 MR. DI FAZIO: No. No.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: They are not the ones?
18 MR. DI FAZIO: No. No. No. No. No. I see. Mr. Pisarevic
19 arises very briefly in the evidential scenario that these witnesses will
20 describe during the time of their incarceration, but not in a manner that
21 should cause the Prosecution any concern. And before I finally make my
22 position on that, may I just briefly confer with my colleagues, who have
23 been proofing these two witnesses --
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
25 MR. DI FAZIO: -- and who have more -- who have a clearer idea
1 about the significance of this encounter?
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. And while the Prosecution is doing that, I
3 would like Mr. Pisarevic to think about what was raised at the pre-trial
4 stage, and also Mr. Simo Zaric, because I'll come to you two later.
5 [Prosecution counsel confer]
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
7 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. I'm grateful for that indulgence. The
8 situation is this: Mr. Pisarevic, I understand, has recently represented
9 these two gentlemen, these two Bicic brothers, in proceedings to obtain
10 the return of a home or land or something in the former Yugoslavia.
11 That's one aspect. As far as the evidential scenario of events in 1992
12 are concerned, there will be evidence from these witnesses that they spoke
13 or attempted to speak with Mr. Pisarevic on the day of the takeover, what
14 the Prosecution says is the takeover. There will also be evidence from
15 one of them, one of the Bicic brothers, that they were temporarily
16 released, following a beating, and taken to their homes and at one stage
17 encountered Mr. Pisarevic outside of a pizza bar, a pizza bar I think that
18 they owned themselves. That's it.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: These are the two. Are there any others on the list
20 who appear to be concerned with --
21 MR. DI FAZIO: Any other witnesses?
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, who may be concerned with Mr. --
23 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, there are.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Who may be alleging that Mr. Pisarevic was present
25 when certain incidents were happening to them?
1 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Yes. I understand. Yes.
2 [Prosecution counsel confer]
3 MR. DI FAZIO: I can't give you an exhaustive list as I stand
4 here. However, I can tell you that one of the witnesses who apparently
5 speaks of contact with Mr. Pisarevic during events (redacted)
6 (redacted), and I know that other witnesses talk
7 about Mr. Pisarevic from time to time in their statements.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. Let's do it this way: Since the immediate
9 one and the following one you think are not going to make the allegations
10 like Mr. Pisarevic was there but they were represented by Mr. Pisarevic,
11 so that is not the point. These are the witnesses. So if you provide the
12 list of these witnesses whom, according to your case, make allegations
13 that when certain incidents, which are the basis of some of these crimes,
14 were happening, Mr. Pisarevic was there, in a situation where it would
15 mean that Mr. Pisarevic may be a witness, all right?
16 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. I understand.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. So when you have that list, give it to the
18 Defence, the whole team, and also make sure that -- okay. It's up to the
19 Defence counsels, really, to make sure that their clients get these
20 names. So that we know exactly when to ask co-counsel to cross-examine,
21 to avoid the conflict of interest and also to avoid possible intimidation
22 by the witnesses --
23 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: -- on their own.
25 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.
1 JUDGE MUMBA: Because they may be intimidated by the mere fact
2 that --
3 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes, I understand that.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: -- this is the counsel who --
5 MR. DI FAZIO: I understand that.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: -- was present at the time these incidents were
7 happening, not that Mr. Pisarevic will be intimidating them, but just the
8 presence --
9 MR. DI FAZIO: I understand that.
10 JUDGE MUMBA: -- yes, can affect the witnesses. And I want Mr.
11 Simo Zaric to understand these things, what I'm saying, correctly so that
12 when the time comes, we can deal with this matter. Because, as the Trial
13 Chamber, we have the duty to see to it that the trial is fair, is
14 dignified, the witnesses are not unduly intimidated, they are free to give
15 evidence as much as -- of the things that they know about, so that the
16 presence of anybody in the courtroom should not be used as having had an
17 undue influence on them, in which case, the accused in question who has
18 that particular counsel may raise the issue on appeal and apply to the
19 Appeal Chamber that the proceedings were not fair because he didn't -- he
20 does not think then that his counsel fully represented him because of the
21 possible conflict of interest. Because these things may not actually
22 happen, but the perception is important.
23 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: And it is the duty of the Trial Chamber to see to it
25 that that is avoided; if necessary, ask a co-counsel to do the
2 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Well, I understand that, and I, with respect,
3 entirely agree. The Prosecution will seek to guard against that
4 eventuality happening. We'll conduct a search of the statements, we'll
5 revise them, we will see where Mr. Pisarevic is mentioned --
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Appears to be --
7 MR. DI FAZIO: -- in the statements.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
9 MR. DI FAZIO: And we will provide a report to the Defence and, if
10 necessary, to the Chamber.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, to the Chamber as well.
12 MR. DI FAZIO: And we will also, in addition, when witnesses
13 arrive here and we proof them prior to their giving evidence --
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
15 MR. DI FAZIO: -- will be on guard and alive to that issue.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: So with respect, it's a good idea. It will be
18 done, and we'll cover those concerns.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. So the next witness we okay. Mr. Pisarevic
20 can cross-examine.
21 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because there's no allegation that he was
24 MR. DI FAZIO: No.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay.
1 MR. DI FAZIO: Other than --
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Other than having --
3 MR. DI FAZIO: Other than being --
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Represented.
5 MR. DI FAZIO: -- outside the pizza hut, pizza establishment --
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
7 MR. DI FAZIO: -- on an occasion when one of the Bicic brothers
8 was released temporarily.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: And a couple of -- yes, and a couple of telephone
11 calls on the day of the takeover.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Okay. Yes. So we can proceed. You can call
13 the witness.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. May I just say one more thing on that?
15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
16 MR. DI FAZIO: We have nothing to cause us any concern on the
17 instructions that we -- or the instructions that we --
18 JUDGE MUMBA: You have --
19 MR. DI FAZIO: -- found on the telephone calls. Now, I'm speaking
20 from the Prosecution's point of view.
21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes.
22 MR. DI FAZIO: The Defence know something that they -- or allege
23 that something happened during those telephone calls in particular.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: What's -- the telephone calls since they came into
25 the --
1 MR. DI FAZIO: On the --
2 JUDGE MUMBA: -- we started the trial, or when?
3 MR. DI FAZIO: No, no. This is on the day of the takeover, back
4 in 1992.
5 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, okay. On the events in 1992.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: The instructions we've taken on that don't cause
7 us, at this stage, any alarm. However, I can't speak for the Defence.
8 They may have all sorts of different versions of those phone calls, and
9 it's up to them to exercise their judgement and decide whether or not
10 their own instructions are such that will bring Mr. Pisarevic into some
11 sort of conflict --
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
13 MR. DI FAZIO: -- where he might be called upon to testify --
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
15 MR. DI FAZIO: -- or placed in that position. I can't speak for
16 them. That's their problem. But as far as the Prosecution is concerned,
17 and on the material that we have, we're not alarmed about that at this
19 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Yes.
20 Mr. Pantelic.
21 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. If I may, Madam President. According to our
22 well-established practice, prior to the witness will be brought in, we
23 have to change the positions of the --
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, I see.
25 MR. DI FAZIO: Mr. Milan Simic, just a few of them, just a matter
1 of principle, nothing more. Thank you.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We'll deal with that. I want Mr. Pisarevic to
3 be on inquiry that at one stage he will be called upon to deal with the
4 issues that have been discussed, and it may be necessary that his
5 co-counsel cross-examines the witness. I want you to understand clearly
6 that the Trial Chamber is not alleging that you are likely to conduct
7 yourself improperly; it is the perception, and also the protection of the
8 Prosecution witnesses. So when we reach that stage, we may have to ask
9 co-counsel to cross-examine those particular witnesses, all right? And I
10 want Mr. Simo Zaric to understand that so you can deal with that off the
11 Bench, when we come into Court, just before we deal with those witnesses
12 concerning these issues we have raised, we are all clear as to what is
13 happening, and also your co-counsel can be prepared if he is called upon.
14 And I want to make it clear that it is not according -- you know, it won't
15 be according to your decision; it will be the Trial Chamber's decision.
16 So maybe we can carry out the swap, asked by the Defence, as long
17 as the security officers are not interfered with.
18 MR. PANTELIC: Madam President, if I may, just a second, please.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
20 MR. PANTELIC: Do we have ten minutes prior to one hour to discuss
21 some procedural evidential issues or --
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Regarding this witness?
23 MR. PANTELIC: No. Regarding the other previous issues that we
24 raised several weeks ago, I mean videotapes, audiotapes, stuff like that.
25 I mean --
1 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes. In fact, I was just reminded by the
2 legal officer about that. About the requests on videotapes, the Trial
3 Chamber has looked into the matter and has found out that the correct
4 procedure is for the Defence counsel to ask for these videotapes from the
5 Registrar, in writing, putting across their reasons. Because this is not
6 the normal procedure, but if you put down your reasons why you are seeking
7 these videotapes for your use in the Defence case, then it will be up to
8 the Registrar to respond.
9 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you so much, Madam President. And also, I
10 would like to ask for your assistance with regard to the audiotapes,
11 because, as you well know, we have some problems, you know, with the exact
12 words in B/C/S language what was said or not of the witnesses. So we
13 would like to have, if it's possible, let's say one or two days after the
14 testimony, this copy of audiotape, so that we can check by ourselves, and
15 then in writing, in writing form, to inform the Trial Chamber or the
16 Registry about the annotations, you know, and stuff like that, you know.
17 Because you -- in some cases you cannot hear what the witness said in his
18 own native language, so --
19 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. What you do is you make separate
21 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: For the videotapes, a separate one, because the
23 reasons will be different; for the audiotapes, also a separate one, so
24 that the Registrar has these things on record. It is much easier to catch
25 anything once it's on record.
1 MR. PANTELIC: I understand.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, if you can do that, because you are asking that
3 you need the audiotapes every two days, so you deal with that in writing
4 so that we have a record.
5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Thank you, Madam President. And also, about
6 the issue of Mr. Donia's report in other case, which was under seal, we
7 obtained, according to the order of -- on Judge Rodrigues's Trial Chamber,
8 actually, he granted our request, subject to agreement between our Defence
9 teams and Defence team in that case, Prijedor case. So we filed that
10 yesterday, and actually, we completed everything, so we are waiting for
11 the development about that issue.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: What did you file yesterday?
13 MR. PANTELIC: We filed an agreement which was according to the
14 directions in Judge Rodrigues's decision.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
16 MR. PANTELIC: We filed an agreement between our Defence in our
17 case and the Defence in their case, in Mladjo Radic case, before Judge
19 JUDGE MUMBA: I see. Thank you.
20 MR. PANTELIC: So now we are at that stage and we would like to
21 know when this report can be handed to us, and then we shall decide
22 whether to proceed with the other --
23 JUDGE MUMBA: I see. Okay. Yes. The Trial Chamber will deal
24 with that as soon as we see copies of what you filed.
25 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.
1 JUDGE MUMBA: So possibly on Monday.
2 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you. Thank you very much.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: So the next witness can come.
4 [The witness entered court]
5 JUDGE MUMBA: Please make your solemn declaration.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
7 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Please sit down.
9 WITNESS: HASAN BICIC
10 [Witness answered through interpreter]
11 JUDGE MUMBA: The Prosecution.
12 MS. REIDY: Thank you, Your Honours.
13 Examined by Ms. Reidy:
14 Q. Could the witness please state your full name for the record?
15 A. My name is Hasan Bicic.
16 Q. Where were you born?
17 A. I was born in Bosanski Samac.
18 Q. And when was that?
19 A. On the 11th of June, 1960.
20 Q. Do you have -- did you have family at the time in Bosanski Samac?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Could you tell us who the family were, brothers, sisters, your
23 mother, your father?
24 A. It was my brother and his wife and daughter my mother.
25 Q. Had your family lived in Bosanski Samac for a long time?
1 A. Yes, I was born there. My father was also originally from Samac,
2 that is to say, my family is one of several families which formed Bosanski
4 Q. So is it accurate to say that generations of Bicics have lived in
5 Bosanski Samac?
6 A. Well, you could say from the founding of the town itself, that my
7 father's family on my father's side, the family lived in Samac, yes.
8 Q. Where do you live now?
9 A. I now live in Germany for the moment.
10 Q. In April 1992, where were you living?
11 A. In Bosanski Samac.
12 Q. Did you attend primary school in Bosanski Samac?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Mr. Bicic, are you -- I'm going to ask you about some of the
15 defendants in this case to which you're testifying. Are you familiar with
16 Milan Simic?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Have you known Milan Simic a long time?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Did you attend primary school with Milan Simic?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Do you know Blagoje Simic?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Did you attend primary school with Blagoje Simic?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Would you be able to indicate to the Trial Chamber today whether
2 you see Milan Simic and Blagoje Simic in this room?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. For the record, could you please indicate who you believe to be
5 Milan Simic and then after that who you -- where in this room you believe
6 Blagoje Simic to be sitting?
7 A. Yes. Milan Simic is to the left in a wheelchair. Blagoje Simic
8 is the third, moving from left to right, with a beard.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MS. REIDY: Can I just have the record reflect that both Milan
11 Simic and Blagoje Simic have been correctly identified by the witness.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
13 MS. REIDY:
14 Q. Mr. Bicic, are you aware whether Mr. Blagoje Simic and Mr. Milan
15 Simic are related in any way?
16 A. Yes, I am aware of that.
17 Q. Do you know the relationship between them?
18 A. I think they're cousins.
19 Q. Thank you. After you did primary school in Bosanski Samac, did
20 you remain in Bosanski Samac?
21 A. No. After primary school, I went to Sarajevo to attend secondary
22 school there.
23 Q. And after secondary school?
24 A. After secondary school I came back to Samac where I took over the
25 family restaurant.
1 Q. What is the nature of that restaurant?
2 A. How do you mean what is the nature of the restaurant was?
3 Q. Was it -- basically was -- was your restaurant a pizzeria?
4 A. No. It was a family restaurant where we served a la carte food, a
5 la carte menus. And later on I opened a pizza bar.
6 Q. I take it that you have more than one family business interest in
7 Bosanski Samac then?
8 A. Yes, later on. After the restaurant, that is. We had several
9 other catering establishments in town.
10 Q. In this latter period, was one of those catering establishments a
12 A. Yes.
13 MS. REIDY: Your Honours, I just wish to show the defendant [sic]
14 what's on the record as Exhibit P9. This is the map which has been
15 subject to various markings by previous witnesses, and I -- we have clean
16 copies of that map, and depending on what the Trial Chamber thinks is the
17 most appropriate way to proceed, I would propose to give a clean copy to
18 the witness and have it marked as P9B and then --
19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes. I just want to make sure that the clean
20 copies have also been given to the Defence counsel.
21 MS. REIDY: No. We just have -- well --
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Let me just ask the usher --
23 MS. REIDY: I didn't expect it.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Let me ask the usher to show it so we know it
25 is the exact copy of P9.
1 MS. REIDY: Of course, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Sometimes there can be -- yes, Mr. Pantelic?
3 MR. PANTELIC: Probably it is a mistake in 76 page, line 8. Our
4 learned colleague just mentioned "defendant." Probably she thought the
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh.
7 MR. PANTELIC: I just wish to show "defendant." So --
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
9 MS. REIDY: Thank you, Mr. Pantelic.
10 MR. PANTELIC: You're welcome.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Just to make sure that it's the replica of P9,
12 because we don't want one and the same copy to be marked by so many
13 witnesses, otherwise it will cause confusion when writing the judgement or
14 indeed on appeal, if the case goes to appeal. Can we get the number? We
15 would be grateful if it would be P9 something.
16 THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution Exhibit P9D.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you.
18 MS. REIDY: May I also ask the usher to give the witness a pen
19 or -- if he has one.
20 Q. Mr. Bicic, I think you can see in front of you a town plan of
21 Bosanski Samac. I'd ask you to indicate on it as best you can where your
22 pizzeria was and also where your home was.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: Can he do it with numbers, like 1, 2?
24 MS. REIDY: Certainly.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: So less confusion.
1 MS. REIDY:
2 Q. Mr. Bicic, can you mark on the map with a number 1 where your
3 house was.
4 A. I've marked it, roughly.
5 Q. May I suggest to -- may I just use a smaller pen?
6 A. As far as I'm able to find my way on the map. I've done it.
7 Q. Thank you. Could you now please mark on the same map with a
8 number 2 where you recall your pizzeria being located.
9 A. [Marks]
10 Q. Thank you very much.
11 MS. REIDY: At this stage I don't intend to ask the defendant --
12 the witness to mark anything else on the map, but if it could be
13 remained -- if it could remain with the witness so that we can cross-refer
14 to it should it be --
15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. That's all right.
16 MS. REIDY: Thank you.
17 Q. Mr. Bicic, this pizzeria which you've marked on the map, was it a
18 successful business?
19 A. Fairly successful, yes.
20 Q. And -- so that I take it you had many clientele?
21 A. Well, I had many, yes.
22 Q. What sort of people would come to your restaurant?
23 A. Could you clarify that? You mean ethnically speaking or social
24 strata? What do you mean by the sort of people?
25 Q. I'll limit it at this stage just to whether people of all ethnic
1 groups living in Bosanski Samac used to frequent your pizzeria.
2 A. Absolutely so, yes.
3 Q. May I ask whether any of the defendants in this case used to
4 frequent your pizzeria?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. For the record, could you state whether -- which of the defendants
7 used to frequent your pizzeria or whether all of them did?
8 A. Of those present here, I think the one who was our most frequent
9 guest was Milan Simic. And from time to time, I think that Miroslav Tadic
10 and Mr. Zaric would come by. Blagoje Simic wasn't in the establishment
11 even once ever, as far as I know.
12 Q. You've mentioned that Miroslav Tadic used to come by. Did you
13 have other contact with Miroslav Tadic apart from when he was a guest or a
14 client in your restaurant?
15 A. He wasn't a frequent guest, but he would drop by from time to
16 time. But we did have contacts. That is to say, we were members of an
17 organisation. It was called the Presidency of the Association for
18 Craftsmen of our municipality.
19 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Ms. Reidy, if I could ask you whether the witness
20 should be identifying that Mr. Tadic and Mr. Simic are actually present in
21 the room here as you did with Mr. Milan Simic and Mr. Blagoje Simic,
23 MS. REIDY: Yes, Your Honour, absolutely. I was just coming to
25 Q. Mr. Bicic, you've heard Judge Williams' directions. Can you
1 please identify whether you see Mr. Miroslav Tadic in this room and if so,
2 where he is?
3 A. I can see him, and he is second in order from left to right.
4 Q. Just to clarify, is that on the back row against the wall?
5 A. Yes.
6 MS. REIDY: I think the record can show that Mr. Miroslav Tadic is
7 being correctly identified.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
9 MS. REIDY:
10 Q. And finally, you said that occasionally Simo Zaric came to your
11 restaurant. Similarly, could you identify to the Chamber if he's in the
12 room, and if so, where he's located?
13 A. I also said that Mr. Zaric did come by but not frequently, and
14 he's sitting up in front.
15 MS. REIDY: I think the record can also reflect that Mr. Simo
16 Zaric has been correctly identified.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
18 MS. REIDY: Thank you.
19 Q. Mr. Bicic, I'd like to take you now just to the few months
20 directly before April 1992, and I would like to ask you some questions
21 about what your knowledge is of the events in Samac at that time.
22 MS. REIDY: At this stage could I ask for the Exhibit P14A, which
23 I believe is the clear copy or the unmarked copy of the photographs to be
24 presented to the witness. I don't know whether it's necessary for the --
25 well, my next question is not directly related to a photograph, but in
1 this line of questioning I will be referring to the exhibit. I don't know
2 whether the usher --
3 JUDGE MUMBA: What you do, if you just direct the usher, "Can you
4 prepare photograph number so-and-so, number so-and-so, number so-and-so,"
5 so that he can be putting them to the ELMO as your questions come.
6 MS. REIDY: If the usher could prepare photograph number 33.
7 Q. Mr. Bicic, can you tell me, in the months -- so we're talking
8 about February, March 1992. Would it be correct to say that there was an
9 increase in tensions in and around Bosnia Samac? And I mean ethnic
10 tensions or political tensions.
11 A. Yes, you could put it that way.
12 Q. Is it the case that there were checkpoints and barricades to be
13 found in various locations in Bosanski Samac?
14 A. Yes.
15 MS. REIDY: Could I ask the witness to look at what is now P1A/33,
16 which I believe is on the ELMO.
17 Q. Are you familiar with the scene or the area depicted in this
19 A. Not from this angle of vision, no.
20 Q. Are you saying that you don't know -- you don't know where that
21 place is?
22 A. From this angle, I couldn't say, but let me try. I think it could
23 be Crkvina Street. Crkvina, in fact, is a village some 5 kilometres away
24 from Samac in the direction of Gradacac and Modrica. I think I recognise
25 a detail here, that it is a kiosk, a police checkpoint or something like
1 that. I think that's it.
2 Q. Do you have any knowledge as to whether there was a checkpoint in
3 and around the road in Crkvina?
4 A. Yes, there was. I know that.
5 Q. Can I ask you who was in charge of that checkpoint?
6 A. Uniform -- people in uniform, wearing the uniform of the Yugoslav
7 People's Army.
8 Q. Were you yourself ever stopped at that checkpoint?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Can you tell me, when you were stopped, what took place?
11 A. Well, I was driving in the direction of Modrica when a group of
12 soldiers stopped me right there. Now I'm sure it was at this junction
13 here. And they told me to get out of the car. They searched the car, and
14 I had to lean up against the car and they frisked me. They searched me in
15 detail, probably looking for something, probably weapons.
16 Q. Do you have any reason to believe that members of the
17 4th Detachment may have been involved in manning the checkpoint?
18 A. Perhaps there's no reason for me to believe that they manned
19 [Realtime transcript read in error "not"] the checkpoint, but there is
20 reason for me to believe that I was searched following orders given by
21 someone from the 4th Detachment.
22 Q. And what is that reason?
23 A. Well, perhaps a week after the search and my car being stopped and
24 me in it, I received a piece of information from a young man, a Serb from
25 Crkvina, who at that particular moment or a little before they stopped me
1 was in a catering enterprise there which is located between Samac and
2 Crkvina, and the bar is Trile.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Before we proceed, Mr. Zecevic, there was --
4 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours. There's a certain problem
5 with the transcript. The question was -- it's at line -- it's at page 81,
6 line 25.
7 Q. Do you have any reason to believe that the members
8 of the 4th Detachment may have been involved in
9 manning the checkpoint?
11 A. Perhaps there is no reason for me to believe that
12 there may not the checkpoint.
13 Probably -- because the witness said they were -- "I have no
14 reason to believe that they were manning the checkpoint." Just that is
15 the objection. Thank you. Maybe my learned colleague can again put the
16 question to the witness. Thank you.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: I'm sure the Prosecution have picked the point
18 raised by Mr. Zecevic.
19 MS. REIDY: And I heard also in translation what Mr. Zecevic said,
20 it's just it didn't appear in the transcript.
21 Q. Mr. Bicic, this is just a technical issue with the transcript.
22 Could I ask you, do you think that the -- or do you have reason to believe
23 that the 4th Detachment were manning the checkpoint?
24 A. I have reason to believe that it was connected to the
25 4th Detachment.
1 Q. But if --
2 A. That there was a connection with the 4th Detachment.
3 Q. But is it also correct that previously you did say that you have
4 no reason to believe they might have actually been manning it, but that
5 then you were searched and stopped on directions of a member of the
6 4th Detachment?
7 A. Following orders or information which was given from that where
8 this young man was present, and he told me seven days later that some
9 people told them to stop me and search me, that they got in touch with
10 them somehow and told them to stop and search me.
11 MS. REIDY: I think that's --
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Counsel, our time is -- our clock says 1.00. We
13 will adjourn, and we will resume on Monday at 0930 hours.
14 Next week the schedules may continue in the afternoon if the
15 facilities will be provided. I'm sure the legal officer did inform
16 counsel on both sides. If the facilities we asked for will be provided,
17 then we will have afternoon sessions as well.
18 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you, Your Honours. Do we have any idea when
19 we'll know? Will we know that on Monday or ...
20 JUDGE MUMBA: On Monday, yes.
21 MR. DI FAZIO: Oh, I see.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because the arrangements, we have been
23 informed, have been made. But whether or not they will actually take
24 place, they will actually be there, we're not sure.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honour, concerning this arrangement for the
1 facilities, I assume there is facilities for my client Milan Simic.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, at the beginning of the trial, we were told
4 that we will be able to inspect this facilities.
5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yes.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: And we actually went over there but we inspected
7 actually the room only at that time.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. This is why I was saying we may, because I
9 know that is subject to your looking at the facilities and finding --
10 yes. Yes.
11 MR. ZECEVIC: And you understand, of course, our position that
12 after all we are not the ones who practically decide, but we have to
13 consult the medical specialist, the doctor as well.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, because the medical report which was -- which
15 suggested this bed arrangement is clear, and it was given to the people
16 responsible for making these arrangements so that we -- at least in our
17 minds, it's not an ordinary bed.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: So that's why I'm saying we may continue in the
20 afternoon if the facilities will be available.
21 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: That means if they will be available and if they are
23 properly available. Let me put it that way.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you so much.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Because as much as we are concerned, the
1 Prosecutor is really not a persecutor. Thank you. We'll adjourn.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.04 p.m.,
3 to be reconvened on Monday, the 22nd day
4 of October, 2001, at 9.30 a.m.