1 Tuesday, 27 November 2001

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.34 a.m.

5 JUDGE MUMBA: Please call the case.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Case number

7 IT-95-9-T, the Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Milan Simic, Miroslav

8 Tadic, and Simo Zaric.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Yesterday we were dealing with the motion in

10 limine raised by Mr. Zecevic, and we were about to hear the Prosecution's

11 response, or rather, reply. Yes.

12 MR. WEINER: Thank you. Good morning. Defence counsel has filed

13 what would appear to be a motion in limine, requesting that we omit

14 certain pieces of evidence of certain testimony before this Chamber.

15 Three areas of evidence: one, evidence concerning Milan Simic's activities

16 prior to assuming the position of executive -- of president of the

17 Executive Board, which was at the end of May he assumed that position.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: May 1992?

19 MR. WEINER: May 1992, I believe May 30th. Any activity they want

20 to have us be precluded from introducing. The second issue is evidence

21 concerning a rape or sexual assault committed by Milan Simic in late

22 August of 1992 in Bosanski Samac. The third issue is evidence of --

23 JUDGE MUMBA: [redacted]

24 MR. WEINER: [redacted]--

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Not the name, just the description.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 MR. WEINER: A Muslim female.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Not the next witness?

3 MR. WEINER: No.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: What were the circumstances, according to the

5 Prosecution case?

6 MR. WEINER: According to the Prosecution's case, the victim had

7 known the next witness. The next witness was a practicing attorney in

8 Bosanski Samac, a very well-respected resident of Bosanski Samac. The

9 victim and the next witness were both sent to Zasavica. One week after

10 the rape, the victim --

11 JUDGE MUMBA: When you say they were both sent to Zasavica, was

12 this a camp or was it as part of the -- what was happening?

13 MR. WEINER: Okay. Zasavica was kind of a -- I'd say a peninsula

14 or type area -- it was an area where there was one entrance. It was kind

15 of in the shape of a U, where there was one entrance to enter. The people

16 were told that it was mined all around the area, and you could not get out

17 of the entrance because there were guards. Women, elderly men, Croatian

18 men, who were younger, mostly elderly Muslim men, Croatian and Muslim

19 women, were held there as prisoners. The women whose husbands had

20 escaped, whose husbands were being imprisoned, whose husbands had escaped

21 and were fighting on the other side, were held. Women, children, elderly,

22 and there were a small number of younger men, mainly Croatian, that

23 were -- and a few younger Muslim men that were held there, for whatever

24 reasons. There were some farms there and they were required to maintain

25 the farms, and the rest of the people lived there, performed forced

1 labour, but they just took over other people's homes. It was a very

2 beautiful -- you'll hear testimony that it was a very beautiful little

3 village where there were farms and a church, and it was just taken over

4 and it was used as a prison camp.

5 During her first few days in Zasavica, this witness is approached

6 by the victim. The victim tells her about a rape that was committed a

7 week prior by Milan Simic. The victim was - I'm sorry - the witness was

8 kind of surprised, because the witness was kind of like a second mother,

9 was known as aunt to Milan, and she tells him the facts. What had

10 happened was, one week prior, 80 to 100 Muslim men had escaped the

11 Bosanski Samac area. They swam across the river. This was one of the

12 large escapes which occurred. The wives and families of all of those

13 people who escaped were imprisoned in Zasavica within the following week.

14 The night of the escape, Milan Simic visits this person, 2.30 in

15 the morning, with a friend. They get her out of her home. He's taken to

16 her friend's house -- I'm sorry, the friend of -- or the cohort of Milan

17 Simic, and the rape occurs. She is held for the night and she is returned

18 the next morning.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: To the camp.

20 MR. WEINER: No. That's to her house or her friend's house where

21 she was staying. Two days later, she's placed in Zasavica with all the

22 other families of the persons who escaped.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: So the rape occurred to the victim before she was

24 taken to the camp.

25 MR. WEINER: Two days prior being taken to the camp.

1 JUDGE MUMBA: But after her husband had escaped.

2 MR. WEINER: On the evening of the husband escaped in the late

3 evening, between 3.00 and 7.00 in the morning the rape occurred.

4 Now, what -- in addressing that issue, we are not addressing any

5 evidence of an extramarital affair. There's actually two pieces of

6 evidence, if I could go back to the facts. What then happens,

7 approximately three weeks later, a group of women are in the victim's

8 house in Zasavica. A car stops, the defendant and his friend exit the car

9 and walk right into the house. He's surprised to see his aunt there

10 basically, "What are you doing there?" "No, why don't you tell me what

11 you're doing here?" They have some conversation, they're there for 30

12 minutes and then they leave.

13 I would want to bring in certainly that conversation which

14 occurred. It doesn't involve the rape, but the fact that he's just

15 showing up inside of a prison camp in the evening in the victim's house

16 walking in just opening the door and walking in with his friend is

17 corroborative. But what I want to do here is introduce this evidence

18 for -- and I'm arguing that it is relevant for several areas for many

19 reasons.

20 One, this defendant has been charged with crimes against

21 humanity. As the Court knows for a crime against humanity, we have to

22 prove that the crimes were widespread and systematic, widespread and

23 systematic against civilians. These incidents, the incidents of rape,

24 torture, beatings, killings, which were committed by Milan Simic,

25 allegedly committed by Milan Simic and/or several other persons are all

1 evidence of the widespread nature of the attack which occurred against the

2 citizens of Bosanski Samac and Odzak.

3 These incidents are also proof of his power and authority in

4 Bosanski Samac. This is proof how he is able to enter a prison camp,

5 whether it's the prison camp where the Bicic brothers were or the

6 Zasavica. He had the power and authority to enter that camp. He's had

7 the power and authority to go into houses and remove people. He's had the

8 power to remove prisoners at later times and there will be other proof of

9 removing this same woman right after this witness leaves Zasavica and is

10 exchanged. Evidence that he goes back.

11 This evidence is also corroborative. It's corroborative of the

12 Bicic brothers, and it's corroborative in the area of Rule 93. Rule 93

13 allows us to introduce a pattern of conduct to prove an issue. What does

14 this show? Late night visit, just like with the Bicics; accompanied by

15 others, just like with the Bicics; removing prisoners or removing persons

16 from their temperate residence or some residence, just like the Bicics;

17 harming local people, just like the Bicics incident and other incidents.

18 There will be other testimony of late night visits, and harming local

19 people who were not Serbs, a discriminatory intent.

20 Now, we are going to hear evidence of June with the Bicics,

21 another witness will be the first witness after the break to testify,

22 Mr. Hadzialijagic, of a July incident. You're are going to hear about

23 this incident, which is an August incident, all of these late-night

24 incidents where the defendant enters a prison camp.

25 Now, in a recent decision, in the Kvocka decision, a recent issue

1 was raised at pages 155 and 156 in the Kvocka decision. One of the

2 co-defendants was charged with all sorts of actions and one witness

3 testifies apparently for the first time that she was raped at paragraph

4 554, 554. Witness AT testified that Radic called her out of her room

5 several times during her 23 days spent in Omarska camp like other women,

6 she was taken to a room at the end of the corridor where a sponge mattress

7 was on the floor. The witness described how, on one such occasion, Radic

8 told her to take her clothes off and forced her to have sexual intercourse

9 with him.

10 Now, on page 556, the Court notes that these were not -- this rape

11 was not indicted. This is not part of the amended indictment, but the

12 court says, "The testimony of Witness AT charging Radic with rape will

13 not, therefore, be considered in the determination of his guilt. However,

14 the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the testimony of this witness is

15 highly credible and can assist in establishing a consistent pattern of

16 conduct in conformity with Rule 93."

17 And that's what we're trying to do. One of the bases is to

18 establish this consistent pattern of conduct which bolsters the testimony

19 of other witnesses and corroborates the testimony of other witnesses.

20 In another way this evidence is admissible, under the Kordic

21 judgement, the recent Kordic judgement from February of this year. In

22 that case the Court mentions three levels of then mental state of mens

23 rea. One, the government must prove a discriminatory intent; two, there

24 must be an intent to commit the act, the criminal act; and three, a

25 general intent of knowledge of a widespread and systematic attack against

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 civilians.

2 These acts prove hostility towards non-Serb civilians. It shows

3 an intent to act, that these weren't accidental. The way I'm guessing

4 their Defence is going to be, the attack on the Bicic brothers and Perica

5 Mesic and Ibrahim Salkic was a situation when he was drunk. These

6 situations -- these pieces of evidence show that this was a persistent

7 type of conduct that was committed against the Bicics in June, against

8 Hadzialijagic in July, against this woman in August. That these were

9 intentional actions committed by this defendant.

10 And further, from his involvement in various types of crimes, from

11 his visits to prison camps including this act, his knowledge of the

12 widespread nature of the attack against civilians can be inferred. So

13 what we would like to do is not prove that he committed the rape. Rape is

14 not a charge here. We want to use this evidence to prove the widespread

15 and systematic attack against the civilians, his knowledge, his intent,

16 use it for corroboration, use it to show a certain pattern of conduct

17 which corroborates what the other witnesses will say. And for those

18 reasons, it is our argument based on the judgements of this Court and its

19 relevance that this evidence should be admitted. Thank you.

20 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you, Mr. Weiner.

21 Anything in response?

22 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honour.

23 First of all, we made the motion in limine yesterday, but we still

24 say that this evidence is not relevant because if it hasn't been alleged

25 in the indictment or if it had been alleged, actually, in the indictment,

1 it would be relevant, but there are no legal nor factual allegations of

2 sexual assault nor exchanges against Milan Simic.

3 The statement of the witness says "a sexual encounter," the

4 statement which was disclosed to us. The Rule 93(B) says, "Acts tending

5 to show such a pattern of conduct shall be disclosed by the Prosecutor to

6 the Defence pursuant to Rule 66."

7 Your Honours, the Defence and the defendant has been taken by

8 surprise just yesterday when we received this summary, and it is our

9 understanding that for the sake of the fairness in the trial, the surprise

10 should never work against the defendant. The surprise should never work

11 against the defendant. And what my learned colleague was alleging over

12 here during his speech just now is that he's trying to create the pattern

13 and then he is using some - I don't know - things which are really not a

14 part of the case. Actually, we have heard the Bicic brothers, and they

15 say that Milan Simic came only once and that Safet Hadzialijagic allegedly

16 was beaten the same night, and not in July, Your Honours, and that is why

17 we really think that this is completely unfair and we are still pursuing

18 our motion. Thank you.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Weiner, I think we heard from you.

20 MR. WEINER: Just one matter. Just one thing, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. One minute.

22 MR. WEINER: Not even one minute. I just want to read the line

23 from the initial discovery. Not the recent discovery yesterday; the

24 initial discovery: "From 3.00 a.m. until 7.00 a.m., she had to do all

25 kinds of sexual performance with Milan Simic." They've had discovery

1 about this sexual incident and other sexual incidents. I can read --

2 there are others here.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: When was that document?

4 [Prosecution counsel confer]

5 MR. WEINER: One moment, please. This is a 1998 statement, and

6 I'll give you the date of filing discovery.

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Whose statement is that?

8 MR. WEINER: It's the statement of this witness here, our next

9 witness.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: Witness K?

11 MR. WEINER: We believe it was filed in discovery in February of

12 1999. I can give you the exact date.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: I just want to be sure: That is the statement of

14 Witness K?

15 MR. WEINER: Yes. February 23rd, 1999, it was given to them in

16 discovery, over two years ago.

17 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours, but this statement --

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

19 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. This statement doesn't say anything

20 about the sexual assault. It does refer to the sexual encounter

21 between -- alleged sexual encounter between my client and the third party,

22 which is deleted altogether, her -- and he was never charged in the

23 indictment for the sexual assault, nor is there any allegation, factual or

24 legal, about the sexual assault, not even in a part of the article which

25 deals with the persecution. This was not mentioned in the indictment.

1 Therefore, we really believe that the motion in limine should be granted.

2 Thank you.

3 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. As this matter affects the next witness,

4 the Judges will retire to consider this matter so that it can be -- the

5 motion can be decided before the witness starts to give evidence. So the

6 Court will rise.

7 --- Break taken at 9.54 a.m.

8 --- On resuming at 10.11 a.m.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: The Trial Chamber has considered the motion in

10 limine raised by the Defence counsel for Mr. Milan Simic. It has also

11 considered the submissions by both parties, especially the submissions by

12 both the Prosecution and the Defence in that the statement of the witness

13 making sexual allegations was served on the Defence and therefore there is

14 no surprise element.

15 The Trial Chamber is of the view that there was sufficient

16 disclosure, especially the fact that rape is not charged -- is not being

17 charged as a separate charge against Mr. Milan Simic, and the Trial

18 Chamber finds that in the interests of justice, the evidence of this

19 witness along the lines mentioned by the Prosecution should be allowed.

20 Therefore, the motion in limine is denied.

21 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, could I have one minute just to confer

22 with my client and my co-counsel?

23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

24 [Defence counsel confer with accused]

25 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, if I may, just for the purposes of the

1 record.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

3 MR. ZECEVIC: It is for the position of the Defence that to allow

4 the Prosecution to present evidence regarding sexual assaults and

5 exchanges violates the defendant's right to due process of law. One of

6 the most fundamental rights of the defendant has to be is that the

7 defendant has to be given notice of the charges against him.

8 There are no allegations of sexual assault or deportation in the

9 indictment. These are both separate and distinct crimes under the Statute

10 of this Tribunal. If the Prosecution wants to present the evidence

11 against this defendant, they should have given the defendant notice in the

12 indictment. Rule 47(B) and (C) says that if there is a sufficient

13 evidence that a suspect committed a crime, the Prosecutor shall prepare an

14 indictment for confirmation along with supporting material. It shall set

15 forth a concise statement of the facts.

16 The defendant has not been presented with charges of these alleged

17 crimes and being denied the right to enter a plea on these charges. More

18 importantly, the defendant has not been -- has been denied the right to

19 defend against these charges because there was no notice of the

20 allegations. There are -- Your Honours, in our motion in limine, there

21 were three distinct matters.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Zecevic. You don't have to repeat that.

23 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, I know.

24 JUDGE MUMBA: We already heard that. I've given you leave to say

25 what you want to say for the sake of the record, fine. So you don't

1 have -- we are not going back.

2 MR. ZECEVIC: I know, Your Honours, we are not going back but I --

3 I --

4 JUDGE MUMBA: And there is no --

5 MR. ZECEVIC: I don't understand has this ruling been on all

6 three?

7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

8 MR. ZECEVIC: On all three.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

10 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, however, it is our position that the

11 Prosecutor is bringing new charges against our client and then we ask the

12 Prosecutor to amend the indictment.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: That's all?

14 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. There is nothing that the Defence counsel has

16 raised that will move the Trial Chamber to decide otherwise. The

17 Prosecution will call their witness and call the evidence.

18 MR. WEINER: Just one moment, Your Honour. There's another matter

19 Ms. Reidy, just a very brief matter.

20 MS. REIDY: Sorry, Your Honours, it's a very brief matter. In

21 fact, if the usher would like to get the witness in.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we go ahead, please?

23 MS. REIDY: Yes. It's just yesterday there was some discussion on

24 the record by Defence of Prosecution Exhibit P41 ter, and they said that

25 it had not been disclosed to them, and Mr. Zecevic said he knew it hadn't

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 been disclosed because that document had no ERN number.

2 It was disclosed on the 8th of February of this year. We have

3 signed receipts for that of which I have given copies to the Defence. It

4 was, in fact, put on the record at the Status Conference of the same date

5 of the 8th of February, 2001 that the disclosure had been made, and I just

6 put it on the record because again, Mr. Lukic, on behalf of his client,

7 had asked to re-examine on that document because he had no notice of it.

8 I know there was change of counsel. I'm not -- he himself personally

9 might not have seen it, but there are signed statements for the 8th of

10 February, and it was all part of the Status Conference that the

11 Prosecution had fully complied with their disclosure obligation.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you.

13 Can I have confirmation from the Defence counsel, please.

14 MR. PANTELIC: In fact, Madam President, yes, it is true that our

15 learned friends provided us with the sort of list of the documents, but

16 the problem is that --

17 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no, with that particular exhibit.

18 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, with this particular exhibit.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: When?

20 MR. PANTELIC: This morning.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, no, no. You heard what Ms. Reidy said.

22 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, I heard, and I just want to inform this Trial

23 Chamber that there was no specification of the actually contents of this

24 bunch of documents of 25 pages, and to the best of my knowledge, I'm

25 speaking, I think, on behalf of all my colleagues but specifically on

1 behalf of my client, there is no -- and acceptable evidence that all

2 these -- actually, the document in question was included in this bunch of

3 documents.

4 JUDGE MUMBA: So what you are saying, Mr. Pantelic, that that

5 particular document, it's Exhibit P41 ter, was not served on the Defence.

6 That is your position.

7 MR. PANTELIC: That is my position, yes.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: Is that the position, Mr. Zecevic?

9 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I stated yesterday that this is the

10 first time I have seen this document so ...

11 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Lukic, that is the position, it was not served

12 as alleged by the Prosecution?

13 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, before my

14 cross-examination, once I received the document from my colleague,

15 Mr. Pisarevic, and we are talking about documents which I presented during

16 the cross-examination, I discussed them with my colleague, Ms. Reidy, from

17 the Prosecution. At that moment, she, too, was unable to confirm that the

18 documents had been served and --

19 JUDGE MUMBA: No, the point is --

20 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] If we are talking about document P41.

21 I hadn't seen it and I talked to a representative of the OTP about

22 documents that I will show the witness. She confirmed that we had

23 received the documents but not the indictment. I hadn't seen document P41

24 until it was introduced in the redirect examination by the OTP.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pisarevic, is that the same with you that you

1 were never served with P41?

2 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my position is the

3 following: Basically, I support what my colleagues have said because I

4 did receive the documents that are mentioned but there was no

5 specification and document --

6 JUDGE MUMBA: So when you saw that document, your position is that

7 you've never received such a document. That is the question I'm asking.

8 Is that your position?

9 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] The indictment --

10 JUDGE MUMBA: P41.

11 MR. PISAREVIC: [Interpretation] -- under number P41 is a document

12 which I have never received.

13 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.

14 Call the witness, please.

15 [The witness entered court]

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Good morning, witness. Please make the solemn

17 declaration.

18 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the

19 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the witness, please.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Microphone for the witness.

22 WITNESS: WITNESS K

23 [Witness answered through interpreter]

24 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you, please sit on the chair provided.

25 Yes, the Prosecution can go ahead.

1 Examined by Mr. Weiner:

2 Q. Good morning. Would you look at this piece of paper in front of

3 you, please. We're going to be referring to you as Witness K for this

4 trial. You'll notice on that sheet of paper there are the letters A, B,

5 and C. Beside the letter A, there is a name. Is that your name?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Beside the letter B is a date of birth. Is that your date of

8 birth?

9 A. Yes, it's the correct date.

10 Q. And beside letter C is the name of a city or a municipality. Is

11 that the municipality where you were born?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Thank you very much.

14 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I'm sorry, we, again, have a problem.

15 The clients are not hearing anything in the -- in their earphones and

16 also, we never received this piece of paper, Your Honours.

17 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Can we check first with the channel for

18 the accused persons. But can counsel hear the witness? Can you hear --

19 with the Defence counsel, can you hear the witness?

20 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, I was listening without my earphones.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: On what channel are you?

22 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm on the English channel, number 4.

23 JUDGE MUMBA: So they are supposed to be on what channel?

24 MR. PANTELIC: Seven.

25 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreters also have troubles hearing the

1 witness.

2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The interpreters are also saying they have

3 trouble hearing the witness.

4 Let's wait -- I want to make sure that the accused persons can

5 hear the proceedings. Is it still the same problem, nothing? Still the

6 same problem, nothing?

7 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, what they are saying is that they

8 don't know until the witness starts talking, because the problem is they

9 don't hear the witness.

10 JUDGE MUMBA: It's the witness.

11 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes.

12 JUDGE MUMBA: Okay. Can we have the number of this document?

13 THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution document P42, and the document is

14 under seal.

15 JUDGE MUMBA: It will be under seal. Yes, under seal.

16 Can you just greet the witness until we get the confirmation from

17 the accused persons.

18 MR. WEINER:

19 Q. Can the witness count to 5?

20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

21 MR. WEINER:

22 Q. Could the witness please count to 5 to see if their microphones

23 are working.

24 A. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

25 JUDGE MUMBA: I see that it's not working. They can't get the

1 witness. We'll just wait for the technical people.

2 Can we test?

3 MR. WEINER:

4 Q. Could the witness please count to 5 again and we'll see if all of

5 the earphones are working.

6 A. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

7 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. It's on channel 7, yes.

8 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Thank you.

9 Yes, Mr. Weiner, you may proceed.

10 MR. WEINER: Thank you.

11 JUDGE MUMBA: And remember always to switch off your mike after

12 asking the question.

13 MR. WEINER: Thank you, Your Honour.

14 Q. Did you attend high school?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Where did you graduate high school?

17 A. In Samac, in Bosanski Samac.

18 Q. What type of high school was it?

19 A. It was the high school for economics.

20 Q. Did you go on for further education after you received your high

21 school degree?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Tell the --

24 A. The first level of law at university.

25 Q. Where did you attend law school?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 A. In Sarajevo.

2 Q. Did you practice law after graduation?

3 A. No, not as an attorney, but I did work as a lawyer.

4 Q. Tell the Court where you worked as a lawyer.

5 A. I worked in the organisation of eight associations of

6 self-interest communities in Bosanski Samac.

7 Q. Were these government agencies at the municipal level?

8 A. Yes, at the municipal level. I worked in an institution that was

9 at the regional level also.

10 Q. How long did you work as a lawyer for the government?

11 A. For four and a half years.

12 Q. Prior to that, what job did you have and where did you work?

13 A. I worked in the self -- in the interest community of health

14 insurance for 15 or 16 years, and I passed through all the various units

15 of this organisation, and for a little under a year I worked as a lawyer.

16 So I was a cashier, I was an officer in charge of insurance for people

17 working abroad, then of insurance for employees, and then self-management.

18 Q. During the 15 to 16 years that you worked in this government

19 agency, did you handle or prepare any sort of financial paperwork?

20 A. Well, yes. There was also a financial part of my work.

21 Q. Now, when you said you weren't an attorney, you were a lawyer, in

22 Bosnia an attorney is a private practicing person and a lawyer is the

23 attorney -- if you want to call it, the person who works for the

24 government?

25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Thank you. Did you own any property in Bosanski Samac?

2 A. Yes, I did.

3 Q. Did you own a business in Bosanski Samac?

4 A. Yes, I did.

5 Q. What type of business?

6 [redacted]

7 [redacted]

8 [redacted]

9 [redacted]

10 [redacted]

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Were you a member of any political party?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Were you ever a guest of honour at any political party?

15 A. Yes, I was.

16 Q. For which party?

17 A. The SDA.

18 Q. And when were you their guest of honour?

19 A. Before the party had formally been established, at the outset, I

20 didn't have a membership card or anything, because I gave up on it.

21 Q. After you were a guest of honour at a meeting of the SDA, did you

22 join that party?

23 A. No, I didn't.

24 Q. Or join any other party, political party?

25 A. No.

1 Q. Of what nationality are you?

2 A. I'm Bosniak by nationality.

3 Q. Of what religion?

4 A. By birth, I should belong to the Islamic faith, but I'm an

5 atheist.

6 Q. Have you ever owned a firearm?

7 A. No. I personally never owned one.

8 Q. Having lived in Bosanski Samac, I'm going to ask you to look

9 around the room and ask if you see anybody in this courtroom that you

10 might recognise. First, have you ever known a man by the name of Blagoje

11 Simic?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. How long had you known Blagoje Simic?

14 A. Well, before the war, Mr. Simic graduated from the medical school

15 and worked in our health centre. He was a charming and a nice man, very

16 dear to me, and when he became president of the Serbian Democratic Party,

17 I congratulated him on being elected to that function, with Mitar

18 Trifunovic. I hadn't known him for long, but my opinion of him was high.

19 Q. I'd ask you to look around the courtroom, and could you just tell

20 me, yes or no, is he in this courtroom?

21 A. He's in the courtroom, sitting next to Milan Simic. He has a

22 beard, his hair is receding. What else can I say?

23 Q. Do you know a man by the name of Miroslav Tadic?

24 A. Yes, I do. I've known Miroslav Tadic, if we take into account

25 these ten years that I've been away from Bosanski Samac, or Samac, as it

1 is called today, for 30 years.

2 Q. Could you please look around the courtroom and tell the Court

3 whether Miroslav Tadic is in this courtroom.

4 A. He is indeed. His hair is greying. He has spectacles.

5 Q. Does he have anything on his face?

6 A. He has a moustache. I don't see very well. I need eyeglasses to

7 see far. I can't see details.

8 Q. Do you know a man by the name of Simo Zaric?

9 A. Very well.

10 Q. And could you look around and tell us whether he is in this

11 courtroom at this time?

12 A. Yes, he is. On the left of Mr. Blagoje Simic. He is wearing

13 eyeglasses, he's wearing a tie and black shirt with a pepita jacket. I

14 think the shirt is black. I don't see that well.

15 Q. Finally, do you know a man by the name of Milan Simic?

16 A. Unfortunately, I know him very well. I used to love him more than

17 my own son.

18 Q. How did Milan Simic refer to you and your husband?

19 [redacted]

20 Q. How did he refer to you, did he address you in some way, you and

21 your husband?

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 Q. Is Milan Simic in the courtroom at this time?

25 A. Yes, he is.

1 Q. And could you tell us where he's seated?

2 A. He is the first in the row, the most handsome of them all. He's

3 wearing a jacket. I believe it's a sports jacket.

4 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, may the record reflect that all four

5 defendants have been identified by the witness.

6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

7 MR. WEINER:

8 Q. [redacted]

9 [redacted]

10 A. [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 [redacted]

15 [redacted]

16 [redacted]

17 [redacted]

18 [redacted]

19 [redacted]

20 [redacted]

21 husband was getting ready to go to work. He was doing the night shift in

22 the Energopetrol company and, panic stricken, he got into his car and

23 drove away [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]

1 [redacted]

2 [redacted]

3 [redacted]

4 [redacted]

5 [redacted]

6 [redacted]. When it was all over, we went back home

7 and the police remained to secure the building. Among them was the police

8 commander, Savo Cancarevic, until the morning when fire experts,

9 technicians from Doboj came.

10 [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 [redacted]

15 [redacted]

16 [redacted] Soldiers coming from Croatia

17 used this road and they often threw away, discarded their helmets, their

18 weapons, et cetera. My son brought it home and his father reprimanded him

19 for that.

20 [redacted]

21 [redacted]

22 [redacted]

23 Q. Thank you. Just very briefly, you had a problem in March of 1992

24 [redacted].

25 A. Yes.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 Q. On what date did you have that problem?

2 A. On the 9th, in the morning around 3.00, but before 4.00 in the

3 morning. I can't be more precise than that.

4 [redacted]

5 [redacted]

6 [redacted]

7 [redacted]

8 [redacted]

9 [redacted]. I put on a raincoat over my nightgown and went straight

10 there.

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted] the police

13 officers were extremely decent. They were waiting again for the fire

14 technicians from Doboj to arrive, and I have to say this about Mr. Savo

15 Cancarevic, he deserves a lot of credit as well as Djoko Mascic. They

16 were very sympathetic [redacted]

17 [redacted].

18 [redacted]

19 [redacted]

20 [redacted]

21 [redacted]

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]. I don't know how else to explain it.

1 That's how this episode ended to my great joy.

2 Q. Thank you. Let us just discuss a few things briefly. [redacted]

3 [redacted]

4 [redacted]

5 A. Yes.

6 [redacted]

7 [redacted]

8 [redacted]

9 Q. As a result of the information you received from the private

10 detective and [redacted] did you do something?

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 [redacted]

15 Anyway, I called him on the telephone to ask him for an interview

16 and we agreed to meet in a pizzeria owned by Hasan or Muhamed Bicic.

17 Sometime between 3.00 and 4.00 we, indeed, met up and we talked. I wanted

18 to remind Simo of who I was and why all that was happening to me --

19 Q. On what date did you meet with Simo Zaric?

20 A. That was the 9th of March, 1992.

21 Q. And what did you ask him?

22 A. I asked Simo Zaric to spare me for all the -- from all the

23 unpleasantness that was happening to me and to explain why it was going

24 on.

25 Q. Did you tell him the results of the investigation and who had

1 committed the [redacted]?

2 A. Yes, I did.

3 Q. And what did you ask him in specific -- as best as you can recall

4 the conversation?

5 A. I asked him to be spared from all the dirty business, as I saw

6 it. My husband was a member of the SDA, and when this [redacted]happened, I

7 didn't think it was a political incident, I thought it was inspired by

8 jealousy, rather.

9 I'm a very hard working woman, very hard working entrepreneur who

10 continued in a regular job while engaging in private business. And when I

11 talked to Bogolub, for instance, he said, "Do you know which nationality I

12 am?" I said, "I'm not interested in that. I got your name [redacted]

13 [redacted]. And we don't discriminate against

14 people according to their colour or race or ethnic background. In my

15 view, you are a good expert."

16 When he indicated that this might be a political incident, I

17 rejected that suggestion because I thought it was more likely to be

18 revenge. And while talking to that detective, I realised that political

19 games were going on all around me, although I was not part of them. And

20 when I talked to Simo, I asked him to remember what kind of family I come

21 from. I asked him to remember that Yugoslavia was created by families

22 like mine, and from my own family, 29 people gave their lives for our

23 country. And when I talked to Simo, I told him that I would get my own

24 weapon. Please allow me to say this. And on that occasion, Simo said

25 that was not necessary, that he would provide security [redacted],

1 and that it was not set to harm me [redacted].

2 Q. Would you please explain to me what you mean [redacted].

3 [redacted]

4 [redacted] -- the buildings

5 are not attached to each other. There is just a narrow space between our

6 respective premises, [redacted]

7 Q. [redacted]? Was he related to a certain individual from

8 the SDA?

9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.

10 MR. LAZAREVIC: I apologise, Your Honour. It is just for a matter

11 of clarification. The witness stated "spiceraj," and in the transcript we

12 see "pizzeria," and these are completely different kind of businesses. I

13 mean, maybe it's just a matter of translation.

14 JUDGE MUMBA: According to you, what should it have been?

15 MR. LAZAREVIC: Well, it is some sort of a store with mixed goods.

16 JUDGE MUMBA: Nothing to do with food?

17 MR. LAZAREVIC: Nothing to do with restaurants, pizzerias, or

18 anything.

19 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Can we have --

20 MR. WEINER: I'll clarify.

21 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.

22 MR. WEINER:

23 Q. What -- please continue. [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 A. I am sorry, but from childhood, I've known these stores as

1 mixed-goods shops where you find food, toiletries and various other

2 things. I will continue to call it a mixed-goods store rather than using

3 the local term.

4 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters apologise. They do not know

5 the exact English translation.

6 A. I can explain. You could find things like bacon, kajmak, sugar,

7 cigarettes.

8 MR. WEINER: I think we understand.

9 JUDGE MUMBA: I think it's general groceries.

10 MR. WEINER: A grocery store.

11 JUDGE SINGH: A sundry shop.

12 MR. WEINER:

13 [redacted]

14 [redacted]. He

15 worked for a while in the electrical company, and I think that before the

16 war -- I should say that his wife operated this sundries shop, as you

17 said. [redacted]

18 [redacted]

19 [redacted]. He was a member of the SDA.

20 Q. [redacted]?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. [redacted]

23 A. Yes, because Simo and I were good friends, fellow citizens on very

24 good terms with each other, and we had had no prior conflicts. And

25 probably out of compassion and knowing where I come from, he said on that

1 occasion, "You don't have to take special care of your shop. I'll take

2 care of that. I will guard it."

3 Q. Now, after Simo Zaric assured you that he would take care of your

4 property, up to the war, was [redacted] ever damaged or injured in any

5 way?

6 A. Not before the war. There was nothing left to damage or injure

7 [sic].

8 Q. Prior to the war, up to April 17th, was your property -- after

9 Simo Zaric indicated that your property would be protected, was it damaged

10 or harmed in any way, that piece of property or any other property that

11 you owned, prior to April 17th?

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 Q. [redacted].

15 A. -- managed to convert it later and repair it.

16 Q. No. Between the meeting with Simo Zaric on March 9th, when Simo

17 Zaric said he would protect your property, between that date and April

18 17th, the day of the -- that the war began, was your property harmed in

19 any way?

20 A. No.

21 Q. Now, after you had that conversation with Mr. Zaric about the

22 protection of your property, was there any conversation concerning the 4th

23 Detachment, what was it was and what it was planned to do?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Please tell the Court.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 A. Well, I talked to him. I was embittered [redacted], and knowing

2 that the two perpetrators belonged to the 4th Detachment, I asked Simo

3 what kind of organisation it was, to whom it belonged. He told me that it

4 was established as a multi-ethnic unit. He even quoted the percentages of

5 various ethnic groups in it. He said it was 60 per cent Serbs, 10 per

6 cent Croats, and 30 per cent Muslims. He said it was organised to protect

7 Bosanski Samac from all paramilitary units, and then he specified from the

8 Arkan men, the HOS, Green Berets, and I don't know any other paramilitary

9 formations. There were lots of them. And to that I replied, "Dear Simo,

10 if that is so, why did you bypass my son, my house and my son?" And he

11 said, "I bypassed you because you have only one son." And I asked him,

12 "Maybe the reason was that his father was in the SDA. I would be glad to

13 know that you were driven by compassion and wanted to spare my son, but I

14 suspect there may be other reasons." Unfortunately, the 4th Detachment

15 included many only sons who eventually got killed and whose mothers wear

16 black to this day. They died very young.

17 Q. Thank you.

18 JUDGE MUMBA: Can we have a break? Yes. We'll continue the

19 proceedings at 11.30 hours.

20 --- Recess taken at 11.03 a.m.

21 --- On resuming at 11.32 a.m.

22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, the Prosecution is continuing.

23 MR. WEINER: Thank you.

24 Q. Now, let us move to April 16th, 1992. Did you work that day?

25 A. I did not work that day.

1 Q. On the day of the attack, the attack was in the early morning

2 hours, the day preceding that, [redacted]?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Was it a busy day? It was just prior to Easter, I believe, wasn't

5 it?

6 A. No.

7 Q. When you say no, it wasn't a busy day or it wasn't just prior to

8 Easter?

9 A. It was before Easter, and people [redacted]

10 [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 Q. Did you do anything as a result of having few customers?

14 A. I don't understand you very, very well.

15 Q. [redacted]?

16 A. [redacted]

17 [redacted]

18 [redacted], and in the afternoon after 4.00 or 5.00 or 6.00

19 p.m., I saw many, many people leaving, getting into vehicles with bags and

20 there was something unusual going on so I closed the shop. Sometimes I

21 used to stay open late, but on that day, I locked up at 6.00, maybe ten

22 minutes past 6.00 and I went home.

23 Q. As you walked home, did you notice anything about the houses in

24 the area?

25 A. Yes. Samac was not lighted up and the weather was dark. There

1 were only a few lights here and there, so everything was wrapped in

2 darkness and even the sky was dark as if God was warning us that something

3 that is going to happen. There were birds flying around. There was

4 something in the atmosphere that suggested something bad was about to

5 happen. And my fellow citizens, those who were of Serb ethnicity were

6 moving out.

7 Q. When you got home, was anyone else in your house?

8 A. My husband was at home, and I told him everything. I told him

9 something was afoot in Samac, and when I told him that, he got dressed and

10 went to Rustica. There he found Izetbegovic, Lukac, Sulejman Tihic.

11 Q. And Rustica is a restaurant in the area?

12 A. Yes. It was owned by the late Mr. Ivo. It was a well-known

13 restaurant where those of us who were middle aged very often met.

14 Q. Now, when your husband met with them on that evening of the 16th,

15 did he tell them of your concerns?

16 A. Yes, he did. And then the people I have enumerated told him to go

17 home in peace. He said, "My wife is in a panic because she saw all this.

18 All I can see is that there are no lights. Well, there was some lights,

19 but my wife is sensitive and she looked at where the lights were on and

20 she made some telephone calls because there are buildings nearby where she

21 has many friends, and in the flats where the lights were on, nobody

22 answered the phone so this gave me a creepy feeling."

23 He told the people in Rustica about this, but Sulejman Tihic told

24 him that he had an agreement with Mr. Blagoje Simic and that nothing could

25 happen, nothing bad could happen in Samac.

1 Q. Now, later that night, did anyone visit your home?

2 A. Yes, [redacted]

3 [redacted] he said that he

4 had received information and it concerned paramilitary units, I am not

5 clear about which ones, was it Arkan's men or the Grey Wolves or whatever

6 they were called. I don't want to remember these units. He said they had

7 arrived and taken over the mill. That was the mill was a wheat-processing

8 plant on the other side of the railway tracks, and we refer to it as the

9 outskirts of Samac. It was two or three kilometres away from my house.

10 Q. Now, as a result of him saying that to you, did your husband do

11 anything?

12 A. My husband again went to Rustika. He was even more worried now,

13 and he told those people who were having dinner, and probably drinking

14 too, he told them what he had been told by [redacted]. But they said

15 to him again, "Go home and sleep quietly. We had a meeting with

16 Mr. Blagoje Simic, and he said everything was all right in Samac and that

17 nothing bad could happen."

18 Q. Now, did you go to bed that night?

19 A. Maybe my husband did. I didn't look at the clock, but about an

20 hour later my husband did go to bed. But I had a huge pile of laundry, so

21 I started ironing, and I listened to music, to the Nedaj se Bosna, the

22 Bosnian station.

23 Q. Now, did something happen in the early morning hours of April

24 17th?

25 A. Well, as soon as I went to bed, it was very, very late. It was

1 maybe 2.00 a.m. [redacted]

2 [redacted]

3 [redacted]

4 went out onto the terrace of my house and I saw that Samac was burning.

5 There were many explosions and many flames, and then I saw what sort of

6 trouble we were in. We were surprised. My husband took a rifle and went

7 out. He came back soon afterwards, in tears, and he said, "Samac has been

8 occupied." I replied to him, "By whom?" And he said, "Soldiers are in

9 here, the army." And I said, "Oh, that's wonderful, because they will

10 disarm all the paramilitaries who are walking around with weapons." And I

11 was very happy, because my uncle was in the JNA. It's true that he was a

12 retired colonel. And I also had a relative, actually, a brother-in-law.

13 I am the only member of my family who is married to a Muslim, and I have

14 two brothers-in-law who are Serbs and one who is a Croat. However, in the

15 morning I saw it was not just the JNA, and then things became very clear

16 to me.

17 Q. Now, did you try and use your telephone that evening, or during

18 those early-morning hours?

19 A. Yes. Yes. The telephones had been cut off, the lights had been

20 cut, water had been cut, and the phones had been cut. At around 11.00

21 a.m., my telephone line started operating again and the electricity came.

22 Q. Now, on the 17th, from, let's say, the morning on, did you do

23 anything that day?

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]

1 [redacted]

2 [redacted]

3 [redacted]

4 [redacted]

5 Q. Okay. So you didn't stay out on the balcony. Did you do anything

6 else on that day?

7 A. On that day I went out. Perhaps I was braver than my husband

8 was. He was trembling. My son came home only 20 minutes before Samac was

9 set on fire. He socialised with Goran Pisarevic, with Marinkovic. My son

10 did not have any friends who are Muslims, I think. He kept company with

11 Serbs and Croats. But that night the young Mesic, our next-door

12 neighbour, happened to be with them, and Goran Pisarevic and all of them

13 left Valentino, the establishment where young people went to have a

14 drink. My son came home drunk. I tried to wake him up. I tried to leave

15 Samac, but I at least was unable to leave Samac, because all around our

16 house there were snipers, on all the roofs, and every attempt of mine to

17 leave was met by a sniper shooter. I tried to go out to buy bread, more

18 out of curiosity, because I wanted to see what was going on, and I would

19 go back home.

20 Q. All right. Let's move to the next day, April 18th. Did something

21 happen on April 18th? Tell the Court, please.

22 A. On April the 18th, seven young men, and maybe two married men,

23 came to the front of my house. I knew some of them well and others I saw

24 for the first time. They --

25 Q. Prior to that, did something happen? Was there anyone running

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 around in a vehicle with a megaphone, or do you recall that incident?

2 A. Yes, yes. Yes, yes. The Serbian police went around. They were

3 driving around in a vehicle. It probably belonged to our SUP. I didn't

4 look at the licence plate. And they used a megaphone, saying that whoever

5 had weapons should hand them over and nothing bad would happen to them.

6 I went out and waved to the young man. He stopped. He was very

7 polite. He looked very neat, very decent, in a uniform. He was

8 clean-shaven. He didn't look like a paramilitary. He stopped the vehicle

9 and he said, "Madam, what do you want?" And I said, "My husband has a

10 rifle and I would like to hand it over." And he said, "Well, bring it

11 out." And I said, "No. I don't dare touch the weapon." I had really

12 never held it in my hands. So he got out of the car and he said, "Madam,

13 where is your husband?" And I said, "Well, there he is. He's at home.

14 He's terrified." And he said, "Well, what if your husband shoots at me?"

15 And I said to him, as I would address my own son, I said, "Honey, I'll go

16 first, and if my husband shoots, he'll shoot me. He has never fired

17 shots."

18 So he went behind me and he had his hand on my shoulder. I went

19 in first. The rifle was in the corridor and he collected it. He asked my

20 husband if he had any more weapons, and my husband said he didn't. The

21 young man said, "If you do, hand them over, because there will be other

22 people coming after me to search houses, so you'll be better off if you

23 give it to me." And I wanted to escort the young man back to the vehicle,

24 and he said, "No, madam." He looked up at the white building and he said,

25 "We do have security." He was really very polite. I don't know him, but

1 if anybody here does know him, he should convey my gratitude to him.

2 Not long after that, seven armed people came. I knew some of

3 them, others not. I knew Ljubo nicknamed Cigance, and I also know Dragan

4 Borojevic. They surrounded my front door. Cigance was hiding because he

5 was ashamed, and that Cera stood in front of my door and another man from

6 Skarici who knew me because my weekend cottage had been in Skarici Polje.

7 Cera was yelling and saying, "You have weapons. You have weapons." And I

8 opened the door and said, "It's because of people like you that I have

9 lost my weekend cottage. Come in. Search the house. If you find

10 anything, you can kill my husband, and my son, and me." And then the tall

11 man from Skaric, whom I didn't know, said to Cera, "Calm down, you can see

12 that the woman has opened the gate wide but they didn't enter the house,

13 they left."

14 JUDGE MUMBA: We are having problems with redactions. Can we move

15 into private session, it's much better, because the people in the gallery

16 can hear the witness directly. There is no time for the redaction to work

17 so it's safer to be in the private session.

18 MR. WEINER: Our request is to move into private session based on

19 the comments then.

20 [Private session]

21 [redacted]

22 [redacted]

23 [redacted]

24 [redacted]

25 [redacted]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 Page 4597 to 4665 – redacted – private session.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 [redacted]

2 [redacted]

3 [redacted]

4 [redacted]

5 [redacted]

6 [redacted]

7 [redacted]

8 [redacted]

9 [redacted]

10 [redacted]

11 [redacted]

12 [redacted]

13 [redacted]

14 [redacted]

15 [redacted]

16 [redacted]

17 [redacted]

18 [redacted]

19 [redacted]

20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 4.59 p.m.,

21 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 28th day of

22 November 2001, at 9.30 a.m.

23

24

25