1 Thursday, 18 July 2002
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 3.21 p.m.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case number
8 IT-95-9-T, the Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Miroslav Tadic, and Simo
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Having started at this time, our next break
11 will be -- our first break will be at 1640 hours, for half an hour.
12 Thereafter, we'll see how we go.
13 Yes. It's cross-examination. Mr. Lukic.
14 WITNESS: WITNESS A [Resumed]
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 Cross-examined by Mr. Lukic: [Continued]
17 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.
18 Good afternoon, Witness A. This is the third day that I'm
19 beginning the day by cross-examining you. I told the Trial Chamber that I
20 will continue to examine you on the same topic for not more than ten
21 minutes, and in order to accomplish that, I will ask that you give me very
22 specific and brief answers. But before we continue with the topic where
23 we left off, let me ask you a question that my client expressly wanted me
24 to ask you.
25 When you were in Sid, waiting to cross the exchange line, what
1 were you telling Mr. Tadic regarding Stevan Todorovic? If you remember,
2 please tell us.
3 A. I don't remember what I was telling him regarding Stevan
4 Todorovic. Whatever I might have been saying, if I was saying anything at
5 all, it certainly wasn't anything positive.
6 Q. Thank you. After you crossed into the territory controlled by the
7 HVO, did you see then, or later on, Pero Vicentic, who has a nickname
8 Konj? Do you know that man?
9 A. I know him, but not really well. I met him approximately one year
10 after my exchange.
11 Q. Thank you. And now I would like to go back to the last topic we
12 broached, concerning your conversation with Mr. Franjo Barukcic. You
13 testified to this before this Chamber on the 8th of July, on page 10759.
14 You gave a detailed interview to the investigators of the OTP which lasted
15 for ten days in 1994. You confirmed that during my last
16 cross-examination. Is that right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. During that interview, you repeated the name of Mr. Tadic several
19 times, just as you repeated the name of Mr. Barukcic several times. And
20 on page 10 of B/C/S version, and page 9 of English version, you mentioned
21 the same names mentioned in paragraph 47 of the statement that is in front
22 of you now, which is a 92 bis statement.
23 I will now read out to you what you said in that statement in 1994
24 regarding your transfer to the TO:
25 "When I arrived in there, there were 10 to 15 prisoners there,
1 including Luka Gregurevic, Ivica Evic, Mato Senic, and Cutura, who was on
2 duty with Luka during the first night of the attack. I saw that Luka's
3 pants were slit in the area of the hips and that his face was swollen.
4 Kemal Akic was there as well, Esad Cosic, Franjo Barukcic, Salko Hurtic
5 also wearing the uniform of a reserve policeman, Ibrahim Salkic, Ibela,
6 and Dzevad Jusufovic, Ilija Mandic and Anto Orsolic were in the room as
8 Do you remember stating that in 1994 and signing your statement
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. You never mentioned in that statement that Barukcic had allegedly
12 told you that Tadic arrested him in his house?
13 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I would like for the Prosecutor to
14 confirm to me whether in your 1994 statement this is mentioned anywhere,
15 namely, that this witness claimed that Barukcic had told him that he had
16 been arrested by Tadic in his own house.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: My learned friend did ask me to do this. I regret
18 that I haven't quite done it yet. I think Mr. Lukic is probably right.
19 Could I just be given a moment to quickly go through the statement?
20 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] I just wanted to speed up the
22 proceedings and not ask the witness to read his entire statement.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
24 MR. DI FAZIO: -- quite right. I think it's wise.
25 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation].
1 Q. Then, in your 1994 statement, when giving it, you talked to the
2 investigators for four full days, and your memory must have been more
3 fresh than it is now, and you mentioned Mr. Barukcic several times, and
4 Mr. Tadic, didn't you?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And then you talked again to the Prosecutor and the investigators
7 on the 12th of July, 2001, in Odzak. When we -- when I interrogated you
8 yesterday, you said that that was mostly an informative interview, but on
9 that occasion you also did not mention what Mr. Barukcic had told you.
10 Isn't that right?
11 A. I'm sorry. I didn't quite understand the question.
12 Q. In your second interview with the Prosecutor, which took place in
13 July of 2001, in Odzak, and you described this interview as an informative
14 one to me yesterday, did you on that occasion mention to them that
15 Barukcic had told you that he had been arrested by Tadic?
16 A. I don't remember.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: I think I could indicate that I've been through the
18 statement, and I can't find any reference by the witness to Mr. Tadic
19 arresting Mr. Barukcic, in the 1994 statement.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.
21 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Witness A, do you know what happened to Franjo Barukcic after you
23 were exchanged? Because you were exchanged before him. So do you know
24 what happened to him afterwards?
25 A. Mr. Barukcic was exchanged after me, and he came in a very bad
1 shape. I met him once or twice very briefly, because at that time I
2 myself spent most of my time at home and in hospitals. He lived somewhere
3 from Slavonia, near the Hungarian border, so that he was not near me. I
4 also know that he died some two or three years ago.
5 Q. Yes. That's what I know too. So at any rate, he died after you
6 were giving your statement in 1994; isn't that right?
7 A. Yes. He died after 1994. I don't know exactly when.
8 Q. In that room where you stayed with Barukcic, there were only the
9 two of you when he told you that; isn't that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Before you were transferred into that room, during your previous
12 incarceration, you were always in a larger group, where there were more
13 than one person with you; isn't that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And he never told you this story in the presence of another inmate
16 or another person?
17 A. We were not able and we did not dare discuss anything, let alone
18 this topic, and we only discussed it once there were only two of us in the
20 Q. Did he tell you that on that critical day when he was arrested, he
21 was in the house of his neighbour, where other neighbours from that
22 neighbourhood took shelter too? Did he tell you that?
23 A. I don't remember him saying that to me.
24 Q. Did he by any chance tell you that on that occasion his son Nikola
25 was also arrested?
1 A. No. He never told me anything about his son's, Nikola's, arrest.
2 Q. Did he perhaps, during your conversation, tell you that he had
3 known that his son Nikola was exchanged in the first exchange that took
4 place in Samac?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Witness A, you were arrested by the policemen and the specials
7 from Serbia; is that right?
8 A. I don't know what you mean by "arrest." Do you mean in my
9 apartment or what?
10 Q. Well, who took you to the police station?
11 A. I was taken in a Golf vehicle belonging to Josip Orsolic by
12 Miljkovic Slobodan, called Lugar, and Stankovic Nebojsa, called Cera.
13 These two people took me to the duty service of the MUP --
14 Q. You've already told us that. That's all I'm interested in. Do
15 you know whether these two persons that you mentioned were members of the
16 4th Detachment?
17 A. I can't claim with certainty. Miljkovic definitely was not. As
18 for Nebojsa Stankovic, called Cera, I'm not sure whether he was or was
20 Q. Thank you. Do you know that Sulejman Tihic was also arrested by
21 the policemen and specials from Serbia?
22 A. I don't know. All I know is what Sulejman Tihic told me at the
23 time, which is that at the time when he was arrested, he was with the
24 attorney Borislav Pisarevic.
25 Q. Thank you. Do you know that the specials from Serbia arrested
1 Izet Izetbegovic?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Do you know that the specials from Serbia and the policemen
4 arrested also Coner?
5 A. No.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, it's only a minor point.
7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: The way the question is framed and the answer comes
9 out, the way it's translated, you just don't know what the witness means.
10 The question: "Do you know that the specials from Serbia arrested
11 Izet Izetbegovic?" Answer: "No." Is that "no, they did not arrest him"
12 or "no, I don't know"? I don't want to split hairs, but if it ever
13 becomes important, you won't be able to tell from the transcript.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Mr. Lukic, perhaps that can be clarified.
15 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. You don't know who arrested Izet Izetbegovic. You don't know
17 about that, do you?
18 A. All I know is that they were arrested and brought in. I don't
19 know who brought them in.
20 Q. Will you agree with me that Tihic and Izetbegovic and Coner were
21 high officials of the SDA, as was Omer Nalic?
22 A. As for the first two ones, perhaps; and as for Coner and
23 Omer Nalic, I don't think that they were high officials.
24 Q. But you certainly know that Franjo Barukcic was a high official of
25 the HDZ. He was that party's secretary.
1 A. Mr. Barukcic was a member of the HDZ. I used to see him going to
2 the HDZ premises. Now as to his exact function, I don't know about that.
3 Q. So in 2001, you remembered and said to the Prosecution that the
4 man told you -- the man who had died in the meantime told you, when you
5 were alone, that he had been arrested by Miroslav Tadic?
6 A. He only told me that Brko came to get him and took him. He didn't
7 tell me how he got there or how was that done. He simply told me, "Miro,
8 Brko came to get me."
9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have no further
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.
12 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour.
13 Cross-examined by Mr. Pantelic:
14 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness A. I am Pantelic, an
15 attorney representing Blagoje Simic.
16 In view of your long experience as a security officer, and in view
17 of many functions you held in the past, and in view of the fact that you
18 discussed this with the Prosecution in 1994, would you agree with me that
19 in the time period before 1992, the public security station in Samac was
20 subordinated to an organisation above it? Can you tell us what
21 organisation was that in that police hierarchy? Was that regional, SUP,
22 or what was that higher office called?
23 A. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, there was the Ministry of the Interior
24 of Bosnia and Herzegovina; then the next level down was the centre of
25 public Security Services. There were several of them. Samac was in the
1 jurisdiction of the centre of the public security services of Doboj.
2 Q. And did a similar structure exist in the police organs after you
3 were exchanged and began working in Orasje, in the Federation of Bosnia
4 and Herzegovina? Was there a similar or identical organisational
5 structure there?
6 A. In 1993, when I crossed to the territory of Croatian Republic of
7 Herceg-Bosna, there was a different organisational structure. Conditions
8 were different. The war was going on.
9 Q. And since you were in Orasje, can you tell us whether there was a
10 higher police structure, a higher police instance in relation to that one
11 in Orasje?
12 A. There were police stations throughout that free territory, and
13 above them was the ministry of the canton -- or the ministry of the
14 county, that was in charge of that area, and then naturally there was the
15 government, which for a certain period of time had its seat in Mostar; and
16 then later on the Federation's government moved to Sarajevo.
17 Q. Do you have any personal knowledge about how the chain of command
18 functioned in Republika Srpska from 1992 through to 1995? Did they have
19 the same kind of hierarchy, if you know, in the police?
20 A. Well, I don't think that I know anything about that. I wouldn't
21 like to speculate and base my answers on what I have heard. I simply
22 don't know.
23 Q. Sir, could you tell us: When was the Croatian community of
24 Bosnian Posavina [Realtime transcript read in error"Bosnia and Posavina"]
1 A. I'm not sure what kind of community do you mean.
2 Q. You mentioned Herceg-Bosna, and it is a well-known fact that the
3 Croatian people in Bosnia had those communities. You said that you were
4 in Orasje, which was part of Herceg-Bosna, and now I'm asking you if you
5 know when the Croatian Community of Bosnian Posavina was established.
6 A. No.
7 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, just a small intervention, correction
8 in transcript. When I made the reference to Bosanski Posavina, it was two
9 times --
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Where?
11 MR. PANTELIC: Page 10, line 3, and page 9, line 23. In fact, it
12 was maybe an error in interpretation. It should read "Croatian Community
13 of Bosnian Posavina," not Bosnia and Posavina, but Bosnia --
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Bosnian Posavina, all right. It will be corrected.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. I just want to say that
16 there was no such thing. There was the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna,
17 and it lasted -- it was in existence in those places where the HVO members
18 were. I don't know about any other community.
19 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. In the area of Odzak, there was an HVO unit?
21 A. When I was exchanged, I don't know whether it was then or after a
22 certain period of time that Odzak was under the control of the Serb
23 forces. I don't know what was going on during the time while I was
24 detained, but it is probably not in dispute that at that time in Odzak
25 there were members of the Croatian Defence Council, the HVO.
1 Q. At any rate, when you were in Orasje discharging your functions,
2 the Croatian Defence Council was present there?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. You are aware of a military operation carried out by the
5 Republika Srpska army in Krajina in late June 1992, which was entitled
6 The Corridor. That was its name. Are you aware of it?
7 A. No. I did not cross from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina across
8 the River Sava. Perhaps only a year -- it was only after a year I was
9 exchanged that I did so.
10 Q. All right. But let's say from the time when you crossed and until
11 today, have you heard of that operation that was carried out in Posavina
12 by the Republika Srpska army?
13 A. Well, I did hear a thing or two. I know that there was this
14 corridor, and I know that some operations were conducted there. Some of
15 the territory was taken by the Serbs. Serbs did take some territory away
16 from the HVO. But as regards to the town itself, the military and the
17 HVO, really, I wasn't interested in it at all and I'm not at all familiar
18 with this whole issue.
19 Q. You do know of the village of Gornica, in the territory of the new
20 municipality of Bosanski Samac, do you?
21 A. Yes, I do.
22 Q. You probably know, so you can tell me whether it is a
23 predominant -- it is predominantly inhabited by Croats.
24 A. As far as I know, it did have a Croatian majority population.
25 Before the war, Croats lived there.
1 Q. Do you know that also in the territory of the municipality of
2 Bosanski Samac that there is this village called Srednja Slatina?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. The majority population in Srednja Slatina, was it also Croatian?
5 A. Well, in Srednja Slatina, the ratio may have been about 65 or
6 70 per cent of Croats and the rest were Serbs.
7 Q. While you were in Orasje, did you have any contacts with any
8 inhabitants of the villages Kornica and Srednja Slatina?
9 A. You mean while I was in Orasje?
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. You have some close relatives in Srednja Slatina, if I'm not
14 A. Well, it is quite clear. You know that I was born there, I grew
15 up there, and my parents were there, so I don't have some relatives; I do
16 have relatives there indeed. You're not mistaken.
17 Q. Did they go to Orasje at a certain time from Srednja Slatina?
18 Were you able to rejoin them?
19 A. No. None of my close relatives came to Orasje. They were all
20 either in Croatia or in Germany.
21 Q. Do you have any knowledge whether those relatives of yours -- or
22 when your relatives left Srednja Slatina? Was it perhaps in late
23 June 1992?
24 A. I don't remember, but it may have been in July. I don't know when
25 they left it. I do know that they did leave Slatina, then they spent some
1 time in a territory near Gradacac, and then they went out via Split. The
2 only thing I know, that when I was exchanged, my mother was still in the
3 territory of the then Bosnia and Herzegovina.
4 Q. You mean Gradacac? That would be the territory of the
5 Muslim-Croat Federation, because Gradacac was under their control.
6 A. She was in a village called Spionica. That's a village located
7 between Gradacac and Srebrenik, on the Tuzla-Orasje road, and some people
8 stayed there up until a year or two ago. That's a Croat village, and
9 that's where they stayed. As regards my close family and relatives, after
10 July 1992 nobody remained in those areas.
11 Q. Fine. Sir, let us move on to another topic. You do have
12 knowledge of a meeting that was held in Prud on the 23rd of March, 1992?
13 The meeting was attended by certain persons, certain officials of the HDZ
14 and the SDA.
15 A. I do have some knowledge of it.
16 Q. Did it take place on or about the 23rd of March, 1992?
17 A. As regards the date, I really don't know. I do know that a
18 meeting was held.
19 Q. Well, do you remember whether that was in late March 1992? The
20 exact date is not important. Let me -- if you know that, that would be
22 A. I really don't remember what month it was or what date. I just
23 know that it took place in the evening.
24 Q. Was it before the 17th of April, 1992?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Was Mr. Sulejman Tihic present at the meeting?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. He was the president of the municipal board of the SDA in Samac,
4 was he not?
5 A. Yes, he was.
6 Q. Was Alija Fitozovic present at the meeting?
7 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I don't object to the
8 question, but I think that what should be established first of all is
9 whether this witness was at the meeting, so that we know whether he's
10 talking -- using first-hand knowledge or whether he's telling us something
11 that was reported to him. Because it's not yet clear if this man was
12 actually there or not.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Mr. Pantelic, I think you can find out
14 that from the witness.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. Maybe it can be useful. But,
16 well, I think it's irrelevant. It's irrelevant for the following reasons:
17 Maybe this witness heard from someone --
18 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, let's not waste time.
19 MR. PANTELIC: I mean --
20 JUDGE MUMBA: Witness, were you present.
21 MR. PANTELIC: I have my line of questioning.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you stop talking?
23 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, of course.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Were you present at that meeting?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was in Prud at the time, but I
1 wasn't present at the meeting.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. You can proceed, Mr. Pantelic.
3 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Well, do you know whether Alija Fitozovic was at the meeting?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Do you know whether Izet Izetbegovic was present at the meeting?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Was Filip Evic present there? He was the president of the HDZ of
9 the Samac municipality.
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Was Mato Nujic present there? He was a Croat, president of the
12 Municipal Assembly of Bosanski Samac at the time.
13 A. I think he wasn't.
14 Q. Was Mato Madzuric [As interpreted] present at the meeting?
15 A. Do you mean Mato Madzarevic?
16 Q. Yes, that's right. There was a typing error. Mato Madzarevic.
17 Thank you for your correction.
18 A. No.
19 Q. Was Stjepan Blazanovic present at the meeting?
20 A. I'm sorry. I don't know who that person is.
21 Q. Let's go on. Was Marko Bozanovic at the meeting?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Was Vinko Dragicevic at the meeting?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Was Mijo Mijic at the meeting?
1 A. Do you perhaps mean the teacher from Grebnice?
2 Q. Yes.
3 A. No.
4 Q. Can you tell us briefly: What do you know about the purpose of
5 the meeting and what was going on at the meeting?
6 A. You want me to tell you, and I will. They were in a community
7 hall in Prud, upstairs. I saw Filip Evic, Izet Izetbegovic, and Sulejman
8 Tihic. Upstairs in that room there were some locals who played dominos
9 and watched TV. I was downstairs with some other people from Prud. I
10 can't recall their names now, who they were. And I think that this
11 meeting did not last long, and I will tell you why.
12 At that time, Izetbegovic - I mean Izet Izetbegovic - was quite
13 drunk at the time, and I know that down there, in front of the library or
14 the building, that he was discussing politics, so that I don't know
15 whether they did come to an agreement. I do know that at that time,
16 Sulejman Tihic held the function of the president of the party; Izet
17 Izetbegovic was the deputy of the chairman of the executive board of the
18 Samac municipality. He was there as a representative of the SDA --
19 JUDGE MUMBA: I think the question is not being answered. The
20 question was: "Do you know what the purpose of the meeting was?"
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
22 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Did you hear later on that the formation of the joint Crisis Staff
24 of the SDA and the HDZ was discussed at that meeting?
25 A. No. And as far as I know, while I was in Samac, no staff, no
1 joint staff of Croats and Muslims, was ever established in Samac.
2 Q. But was there an idea to establish a joint staff?
3 MR. DI FAZIO: The witness has said he doesn't know. He's asked
4 that question directly, very, very clearly by Mr. Pantelic: "Did you later
5 hear that the formation of the joint Crisis Staff of the SDA was discussed
6 at the meeting?" Answer: "No. And as far as I know, while I was in
7 Samac, no staff, no joint staff, was ever established." So no, he didn't
8 hear anything about it, and he said no, he doesn't know what the purpose
9 of the meeting is. End of story.
10 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. That's, I would say, two
11 actions. One action is whether this Crisis Staff was established, and the
12 other pair of shoes is whether this witness, up to this particular date,
13 heard something about the possible initiative to establish such a Crisis
14 Staff. Because he said that at that time he was not aware. Now I'm
15 asking him, up to this moment, whether he had certain personal knowledge
16 about the initiatives for that. So it's rather a different question that
17 my --
18 JUDGE MUMBA: You mean you're trying to find out from the witness
19 whether after the incident of the meeting, whether he heard later on that
20 there was such a plan to establish a joint Crisis Staff?
21 MR. PANTELIC: That is correct. And up until today, actually, in
22 various --
23 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Yes. You can --
24 MR. PANTELIC: -- opportunities.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. The witness can answer that.
1 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Witness A, I'm asking you: To this day, since you are moving
3 around in that area, you are talking about people, have you ever heard
4 about this initiative to set up this joint Crisis Staff of the SDA and the
6 A. No.
7 Q. Very well. Can you please tell us: Do you know, since you were a
8 member of the reserve police force in Bosanski Samac, about the arrival of
9 a unit of the special police from Sarajevo, from the BH MUP, before the
10 17th of April, 1992?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. When did that unit of the special police come to Samac from
14 A. First of all, it was not a special unit of the Ministry of the
15 Interior from Sarajevo. It was a certain number of police officers who
16 came from various places in what was then Bosnia and Herzegovina. Some
17 came from Tuzla, some came from Zenica, from Vitez, Travnik Sarajevo, I
18 think even from Vogosca.
19 Q. So it was a combined or a joint police force that was called "the
20 special police force"?
21 A. I don't know what this force was called. I do know, however, that
22 they arrived there on the orders of the Ministry of the Interior of Bosnia
23 and Herzegovina.
24 Q. What was their task?
25 A. They came there with the task to secure facilities of vital
2 Q. Did their equipment and weapons differ from those that the regular
3 police had?
4 A. They had nothing special. They had the regular uniforms, because
5 they were members of the police -- of the active police force. The only
6 thing that could be seen, that was noticeable, was that some of them had
7 flak jackets. I didn't notice anything out of the ordinary that they
8 had. And let me just say that their immediate superiors came together
9 with them. In that police formation, there were Croats, Muslims, and
11 Q. Were they armed with automatic rifles, Kalashnikov-type?
12 A. I don't remember. However, I think that all of them were armed
13 with automatic rifles manufactured by Crvene Zastava. They had the same
14 weapons that we members of Bosanski Samac police had.
15 Q. Did they have helmets?
16 A. I don't remember.
17 Q. Those rifles produced by Crvene Zastava were, in fact, domestic
18 versions of Kalashnikov; isn't that right?
19 MR. DI FAZIO: I object. What's the relevance of the question?
20 The witness has already said the only thing that was different about these
21 fellows was that they had flak jackets.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
23 MR. DI FAZIO: That's the end of it, and it matters not what sort
24 of -- whether they were the domestic version of a Kalashnikov or not. He
25 said the rifles were the same as the ones they carried.
1 MR. PANTELIC: If you look a little bit better, page 19, line 10,
2 11, and 12, he said that they were armed with these automatic rifles. So
3 my question is to clarify whether this type of automatic rifle was
4 actually the former Yugoslav version of Kalashnikov, simple as that. Just
5 for clarification of the transcript.
6 Q. [Interpretation] We just had to clarify some technical matters.
7 Since you just told us that you had an automatic rifle manufactured by
8 Crvene Zastava, and now I'm asking you about the weapons which these
9 special police force members had, are we, in fact, talking about the
10 automatic rifle produced by Crvene Zastava, which is identical to
12 A. I don't know. I know they had the same weapons as we did, and
13 Kalashnikov is something different. Let me tell you this as well: In
14 case you don't know, all members of police, during their service in the
15 police, had, in addition to small weapons, also rifles, which is what that
16 weapon was. This is how it was in all MUP stations in the territory of
17 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
18 Q. Now that you say "these rifles," you, in fact, are referring to
19 automatic rifles, aren't you?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Did that police unit have special Land Rover vehicles as part of
22 its equipment?
23 A. I can't remember very well now, but in addition to vehicles that
24 we had at our disposal - and we did not have many - this unit that came in
25 was brought to Samac in vehicles, and those who drove them to Samac went
1 back in their vehicles. I think that one or two Land Rovers remained and
2 were used to bring and drive away -- to drive the policemen from the place
3 where they were accommodated, to the police station. The same kind of
4 police vehicles were used in Samac and in Odzak, as well as in Orasje. So
5 this is what these vehicles were used for.
6 Q. Did they have also pinzgauer vehicles as part of their equipment?
7 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, perhaps to assist
8 Mr. Pantelic, perhaps the questions could be framed in a more collective
9 way: Did they have helmets, pinzgauers, automatic rifles, Land Rovers,
10 flak jackets, or whatever else he wants to mention, so we can get one
11 quick answer and solve the problem.
12 MR. PANTELIC: Just this question and I'm finished.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.
14 MR. PANTELIC: That's only one question and I've finished anyway
15 with this topic.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.
17 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. So, Witness, just answer me with a yes or no, please. Did they
19 have pinzgauers?
20 A. No.
21 Q. How many police units came to Samac? How many of those units were
23 A. I really don't remember what was their number, but they were
24 relieved every 15 days, if I'm not mistaken, and I think that there were
25 over 60 of them, approximately.
1 Q. Witness A, since you are an experienced policeman, can you tell
2 us: Who was the commander of those units? From whom did they receive
3 their orders?
4 A. The duty roster was made every day, and it specified which
5 policemen should go to secure which facility.
6 Q. I'm interested in finding out more details, Witness A. In view of
7 the nature of these units, will you agree with me if I say that they were
8 subordinated to the Ministry of the Interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
9 headquartered in Sarajevo?
10 A. The Minister of the Interior in Sarajevo dispatched them to Samac
11 with their immediate superiors, and they were put at the disposal of the
12 MUP Samac.
13 Q. You didn't really answer my question. Do you know who -- under
14 whose command these units were? Was it MUP in Sarajevo or the chief of
15 the public security station in Samac? Under whose command were they? Or
16 do you not know?
17 A. They were under the command of their immediate superior, who came
18 with them.
19 Q. Let's not waste time. I'm asking you once again, Witness A:
20 Under whose command their immediate superior was. Was it the chief of the
21 public security station in Sarajevo or was it the MUP - I'm sorry - the
22 head of the public security station in Samac or was it the MUP in
23 Sarajevo? Please give me a direct answer.
24 A. Well, I'm trying. I don't know under whose command they were.
25 There were inspectors there, policemen, and I don't know who was in
1 charge. I was a plain policeman there. And they remained in contact with
2 the MUP in Sarajevo. They sent them to Samac and then they ordered them
3 to go, to leave Samac.
4 Q. Let's turn to another topic, which is the organisation of the TO
5 staff in Samac. Do you know that this municipal TO staff was established
6 sometime before the 17th of April, 1992? Do you know the exact date when
7 that TO staff was established?
8 A. I know that the TO staff was established in Samac, and that was a
9 few days before the 17th of April.
10 Q. Do you know that the establishment of that staff did not pass
11 through the legal procedure, or rather, that there was not a decision of
12 the Municipal Assembly of Bosanski Samac specifying that that staff ought
13 to be established?
14 A. I don't know whether there was an assembly decision or not. I
15 think that at that time the assembly, in fact, did not function. All I
16 know is that the appointment or the establishment was ordered by the
17 government, or rather, by the presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
18 Q. Paragraph 27 of your statement of this year, given in July 2002,
19 you say that they were appointed by the Minister of Defence Jerko Doko;
20 isn't that right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And then I can tell from your statement that you had close ties to
23 the Minister of Defence, Jerko Doko, didn't you?
24 A. I knew Mr. Jerko Doko before the multiparty elections, because
25 both of us were soccer referees.
1 Q. You assisted with the establishment of the TO, and you practically
2 had this direct contact with Mr. Jerko Doko, didn't you?
3 A. Well, let me tell you exactly how it was so that we can cover this
4 as briefly as possible. Sulejman Tihic and some other people - I can't
5 remember their names - told me that there had been a proposal at the
6 municipal level to establish the TO staff in Sarajevo. They asked me
7 whether I could do something about expediting that, because they said I
8 had a colleague of mine there, Jerko Doko. Up until that time, I didn't
9 even know that he held that office. I made a telephone call and got his
10 number in Sarajevo, and I introduced myself to his secretary, asking her
11 whether I could talk to Mr. Doko. She told me that he was at a meeting.
12 I asked her to convey my greetings to him --
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Witness, can you spare us those details? Can we
14 come to the actual point, whether or not you eventually met with this man
15 and what transpired from there?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't meet that man, because he
17 was in Sarajevo. The secretary took my message.
18 JUDGE MUMBA: No, I mean eventually. Did you eventually come to
19 work with him?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
21 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Let's move on, Witness A. In your 1994 statement given to the
23 Prosecution, on page 6 of the B/C/S version, ERN number 00637833, you said
24 as follows:
25 "Alija Fitozovic was appointed there by the SDA party, whereas
1 Bozanovic was appointed by the HDZ party."
2 We are now referring to the leading people of this TO staff. Do
3 you remember saying this to the Prosecution?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Tell me, please: You were in Djakovo, which is in Croatia; isn't
6 that right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And you went there pursuant to the TO staff order to acquire or
9 purchase some uniforms; isn't that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. But you didn't find the appropriate uniforms, so you came back
12 without getting the job done; is that correct?
13 A. Well, I had some other tasks to accomplish, but I did not.
14 Q. What colour were those uniforms that you were supposed to procure?
15 A. They were of no colour.
16 Q. So you were in contact with some people there in order to procure
17 uniforms of the Croatian army; isn't that right?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Well, listen. Djakovo is in Croatia, so please explain to us:
20 What were you going to find in Djakovo? What kind of uniforms? Hunting,
21 fishing? What kind of uniforms?
22 A. I had a conversation there attended by Marko Bozanovic and some
23 other people, including Mr. Vidak Prusina. They asked me whether I could
24 do something about procuring uniforms in Croatia and how much they would
25 cost. They wanted me to find out where could those uniforms be sewn,
1 because he said that he had some money owed to him by the company where he
2 used to work, which was called Hranaprodukt.
3 Q. Can I ask you to be as brief as possible? Tell me, please: Did
4 you go to procure military uniforms, police uniforms, or uniforms for car
5 mechanics or uniforms for kitchen chefs? What kind of uniforms were you
6 supposed to procure?
7 A. I went to inquire about uniforms so that they could be procured
8 later on, and had I found the uniforms, I would have to report back to
10 JUDGE MUMBA: The question was -- yes. What type of uniforms?
11 That's the question.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The uniforms were intended for the
14 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Were those military uniforms? What colour were they?
16 A. They were military uniforms, and I don't know what colour they
17 would have been.
18 Q. Thank you. We finally established this, and it's quite -- it
19 turns out to be quite a simple answer.
20 Witness A, you were present at the meeting on the 13th and 14th of
21 March, when the TO was established, weren't you?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. In your 1994 statement, you said that you carried out certain
24 tasks, like a trip that you undertook to Bosanski Brod to procure
25 something. What were you procuring in Bosanski Brod before the 17th of
1 April, 1992?
2 A. I have never stated that I went to Bosanski Brod. It could have
3 only referred to that time when I once travelled to Djakovo.
4 Q. Let me read you out an excerpt from your 1994 statement, ERN
5 number 00637833, page 6 of the B/C/S version, where you say the following:
6 "I assisted a little bit with the Territorial Defence regarding
7 the establishment of the TO unit for Bosanski Samac. I carried out tasks,
8 such as travelling to Bosanski Brod to procure something, or I assisted
9 those who were supposed to establish contacts with the higher echelons in
11 This is something that you stated in 1994, when your memory was a
12 great deal fresher than it is now. Do you still maintain this?
13 A. As regards Bosanski Brod, in my interviews with the Prosecution, I
14 told them, both on the last occasion and the one before that, that this
15 did not pertain to Bosanski Brod but in fact it had to do with Djakovo.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Can we have our break?
17 Ms. Reidy, did you want to say anything?
18 MS. REIDY: Yes. I was going to object if Mr. Pantelic continued
19 on this, because the witness has said twice, and said quite clearly, that
20 the reference to Bosanski Brod was meant to be a reference to Djakovo.
21 That is indeed what he told me. It was in his draft statement. It's what
22 Mr. Pantelic has and was disclosed to him and the witness has reconfirmed
23 twice to Mr. Pantelic that whatever was put down in his 1994 statement as
24 Bosanski Brod should have read Djakovo. And that was made clear in the
25 draft statement disclosed to Mr. Pantelic after I spoke with this witness
1 and he had a chance to read his statement and correct that.
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. We shall take our break and continue the
3 proceedings at 1720.
4 --- Recess taken at 4.42 p.m.
5 --- On resuming at 5.20 p.m.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. We're continuing with the cross-examination.
7 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. Allow me first to express, on
8 behalf of all Defence teams, our gratitude to the efforts of the Office of
9 the Registrar, particularly Mr. Christian Rohde, and also chief of
10 security, allowing us access to the terrace.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. You finally got it. Very well.
12 MR. PANTELIC: Better than now than in December, but ... Thank
14 Q. [Interpretation] Witness A, you mentioned that there was an idea
15 about financing of the uniforms in Djakovo by a company called
16 Hranaprodukt from Djakovo; is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. In 1992, Hranaprodukt was a socially owned company; is that
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. However, the funding of the TO was a responsibility of the
22 Ministry of Defence; isn't that right?
23 A. I don't know.
24 Q. In your statement given to the Prosecution in July of 2002, in
25 paragraph 33, you stated that you had a flak jacket, a rifle, and a
1 pistol. What I would like to know is what type of a rifle you had.
2 A. I had an automatic rifle, manufactured by Crvene Zastava, which I
3 was issued with in MUP.
4 Q. In paragraph 40 of that same statement, you said that you had a
5 camouflage uniform that you left in the common room of your building. Is
6 that right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. In that same statement, in paragraph 39, you said that you had two
9 bombs. Is that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. I suppose they were hand grenades. Is that right?
12 A. Yes. They were called Kasikara.
13 Q. In your statement given to the OTP in 1994, last three -- last
14 three ERN numbers are 834. On page 7 of B/C/S version, you said that you
15 had a walkie-talkie. Is that right?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. In paragraph 40 of your July 2002 statement, you said that you
18 removed your uniform once you realised that there would be no resistance?
19 A. Yes.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Pantelic, for the sake of saving time, can --
21 avoid repeating what is in the statement. Simply go ahead with your
23 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. I will do that, of course.
24 Q. [Interpretation] In your 1994 statement to the OTP, you said the
25 following. You were discussing the Good Friday and the festivities, and
1 you said:
2 "I thought that I shouldn't leave until my sister, her husband and
3 children were in town because my goal was to provide resistance."
4 That's what you stated in 1994, didn't you?
5 A. If that's what I stated, then yes.
6 Q. Let me ask you, then: Were you a member of some organised unit
7 that was supposed to provide a joint resistance in case there were some
9 A. No.
10 Q. So what kind of resistance were you supposed to offer, then?
11 A. I was supposed to offer resistance in order to protect myself, my
12 apartment, and -- or the place where I am at the time.
13 Q. In your 1994 statement, on page 8 of the B/C/S version, last three
14 ERN numbers are 835, you said that on the 17th of April, you were together
15 with the Bicic brothers; is that right?
16 A. Yes, together with the Bicic brothers and some other people.
17 Q. And all of them were members of one other type of an armed
18 formation; is that right?
19 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, the way the question is
20 framed, it appears that that's -- Mr. Pantelic is putting to the witness
21 there that that was mentioned in the statement. It should be, if it's a
22 direct question, of course, he can ask it, but let's be clear that that's
23 what it is and it's not --
24 JUDGE MUMBA: I see.
25 MR. DI FAZIO: -- a quote from the statement.
1 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Do you have personal knowledge whether the Bicic brothers and the
3 other persons that you saw were in an armed formation, organised armed
5 A. Let me tell you: I was a reserve police officer. I was there as
6 a reserve police officer. The Bicic brothers and Muhamed and I don't know
7 on whose behalf they were there, but there was a person by the name of
8 Hare and another person on behalf of the 4th Detachment, and they also had
10 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters note that they didn't hear the
11 name of the person by the name of Darko. His last name wasn't heard by
12 the interpreters.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Can the full name be given, please.
14 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Could you please repeat the last name of the man called Darko.
16 A. Darko Dujminovic, Dzanko's son. The other one was Jasarevic,
17 nicknamed Hare. I don't know his -- I don't remember his first name. And
18 the Bicic brothers, Muhamed -- and what's the other one's name? Hasan.
19 Q. In your 1994 statement, on page 8 of the B/C/S version, you stated
20 the following:
21 "In the Bicic brothers' house, we stayed there for a few hours
22 had. I sent one of them to Prud across the Bosna River. In the meantime,
23 I called some Croats from Prud to check whether we can get these people
25 That's what you stated in 1994 to the OTP.
1 A. As regards this statement in 1994, I said regarding this statement
2 this year to the OTP that I didn't state that but that this was a wrong
3 translation. This is what this is all about. I was with the Bicic
4 brothers at home, at their home, in front of their home. I wasn't inside
5 their house, and one can see from my balcony their house and also a part
6 of the yard. Then Ivica Pranjic went to Prud, took his wife there and
7 came back, and said that it is possible to pass through Prud.
8 Q. What I'm interested in is what kind of relations did you have with
9 people in Prud and with what people in Prud did you communicate?
10 A. I can't really tell you now who is it that I talked to. All I
11 know is that I called somebody in Prud, because I know everybody in Prud.
12 Q. Were they members of the Prud Crisis Staff?
13 A. I don't know if there was a Crisis Staff in Prud, and even if it
14 was, who was its member.
15 Q. In your 1994 statement, on page 7 of the B/C/S version, you said
16 that you called your friend Ivan Nikolic, owner of a small cafe called
17 Rustika, and there, with Alija Fitozovic, Marko Bozanovic, and
18 Dragan Lukac, you met to talk. Do you remember stating that?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now I'm asking you: What was the topic of the conversation with
21 the high-ranking officials of the police and the party that you yourself
22 attended? What did you talk about?
23 A. I was there for a quite short time. I found Dragan there. I
24 don't know whether Alija was there too, and Marko Bozanovic was there. On
25 that day I was in Djakovo. And then I came there to report to Marko about
1 the uniforms, and quite soon it was 7.00 and Marko went to the meeting in
2 the local commune. He said that he was going there for the first time in
3 the capacity of the commander of the TO staff.
4 Q. So I conclude that you had close contacts with the high-ranking
5 party and police officials in Bosanski Samac. Is my conclusion correct?
6 A. I had contacts with all the people, from all the parties, not only
7 from the two parties.
8 Q. Again in 1994, on page 13 of the B/C/S version --
9 A. I don't have that statement before me. You've been reading from
10 that statement to me for the past hour and a half and I don't have it in
11 front of me.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
13 MR. PANTELIC: Copy of witness statement from 1994.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: That's the Serbo-Croat version.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, B/C/S version, yes.
16 Q. [Interpretation] On page 12 of that statement - I'm sorry - page
17 13 of that statement, you talk about the discussions with Inspector Milos
18 Savic. In your statement, you speak about the fact that he asked you
19 about who had weapons in Srednja Slatina, who was procuring weapons from
20 Croatia, and so on and so forth. You can see that in the first paragraph.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. You stated that to the OTP at that time; is that correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. As regards the question who was importing rifles from Croatia for
25 Bosnian Muslims, you said to Inspector Milos Savic that Namik Suljic and
1 Ragib Hodzic were organising those activities. They were police
2 inspectors from Sarajevo. Is that correct?
3 A. It's possible that it is so.
4 Q. What function did Namik Suljic have in the public security station
5 in Bosanski Samac?
6 MS. REIDY: Your Honour --
7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Ms. Reidy.
8 MS. REIDY: Just to ensure that the record is clear and there's no
9 misleading left on the record, could Mr. Pantelic please make clear that
10 when he then puts to him that the response to Mr. Savic, that it was Namik
11 Suljic and Mr. Hodzic, I don't believe that that is in the statement.
12 That's something else he's just putting to him that was his response.
13 It's not something that he says that this witness said in 1994. So again
14 we're getting -- he says, "you said this in your statement," and then
15 follows up with another question, creating the impression that he's asking
16 the witness to confirm an earlier statement, and that's not in fact the
17 case. So I'd just like again to be clear. If the witness said that it
18 was Namik Suljic and Hodzic, and the witness said it's possible, that is
19 not -- that is Mr. Pantelic's allegation and not a quotation from the
20 witness's 1994 statement, unless Mr. Pantelic can correct me and show me
21 where it is, because I don't see it there and I don't recall it being
23 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.
24 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. I will read from your statement, and please verify whether I'm
1 reading correctly. It's at the end of the first paragraph --
2 MR. DI FAZIO: The problem could be solved really quickly if my
3 learned friend could tell us where it is in the English, then we won't
4 object if we can see it. Is it just that we get directed to this and
5 we're desperately looking, scanning the pages trying to see where it is
6 and we can't see it. We may be wrong, but I don't think so.
7 JUDGE MUMBA: Which paragraph in the English version?
8 MR. PANTELIC: In fact, Your Honour, there is no numbering of
9 paragraphs. That might be a problem. I have only ERN number of B/C/S
10 version which last three digits are 840, and my learned friends just
11 advised me that it's page 13 of English version.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: The paragraph beginning --
13 MR. PANTELIC: In English version it should be paragraph 3, and I
14 will just read that to the witness and then he can confirm.
15 MS. REIDY: Then I can confirm that I see those two names
16 mentioned there, but it's not the same episode. The episode where he
17 said -- the episode that was -- the witness was quoted and it said, "You
18 were asked about who was being armed," et cetera, is one episode; and then
19 the whole thing about Namik Suljic is a separate episode.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, I see.
21 MS. REIDY: And the witness has testified that he was interrogated
22 at least on two occasions.
23 MR. DI FAZIO: It's the second interview, so ... Now I see it.
24 Thank you. And I'm grateful to my learned friend, but it's not the same
25 occasion. The witness said he was interviewed twice, and it's on the
1 second occasion that this business arises. So --
2 JUDGE MUMBA: The business dealing with --
3 MR. DI FAZIO: With Namik Suljic.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: I see.
5 MR. DI FAZIO: Just so we're clear, I'm not trying to interrupt
6 the flow of my friend's conversation, but if we can't see it, then we're
7 caught in a position of knowing whether to object or not because we can't
8 find it in the statement.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Maybe he can read the relevant paragraph so
10 we're all clear what the paragraph contains.
11 MR. PANTELIC: It's quite a longish paragraph, Your Honour, but I
12 will just read this particular part which is of my interest, and of course
13 my learned friends can examine that in re-direct.
14 Q. [Interpretation] So Witness A, I'm now reading from your
15 statement, your 1994 statement that you gave to the OTP, and you say, at
16 the end of the first paragraph in your version, and please check whether
17 I'm reading correctly, you said to the OTP the following pertaining to
18 this interview with inspector Milos Savic. You said the following:
19 "He asked me, in other words Milos Savic asked me, who was
20 importing rifles from Croatia for Bosnian Muslims? I told him that all
21 this was organised by Namik Suljic, Ragib Hodzic, and police inspectors
22 from Sarajevo."
23 Did I read correctly what is stated in your statement?
24 A. You did read it correctly.
25 Q. So my question now is -- well, there is a problem with the
1 transcript, and I apologise to the interpreters, and I will now repeat it
2 for the transcript:
3 "He asked me who was importing rifles for Bosnian Muslims from
4 Croatia. I told him that all that was organised by Namik Suljic and
5 Ragib Hodzic, police inspectors from Sarajevo."
6 And now my question to you is: Namik Suljic had some kind of a
7 function in the police station in Samac, did he not?
8 A. Let me tell you, sir: I today do not remember what Mr. Savic had
9 asked me in MUP. I was all swollen. I was beaten up. At that time I
10 would have told him that my father had brought that there and not these
11 two people. And I will tell you what Namik was and what Hodzic was, and I
12 stated in my statement - this is not translated correctly. I said it
13 because I knew that Hodzic was in Sarajevo. You have to take into
14 consideration the state that I was in. I think that I, as a witness, am
15 so fair and that I'm really saying things the way they were. You can see
16 yourself that I'm not going into details regarding some issues. And
17 please, if you continue asking such questions, I really will not be able
18 to control myself any more.
19 Q. Witness A, I personally have a lot of understanding for everything
20 that you have gone through. I'm not asking you about that. This is an
21 established fact here. I understand you fully. I understand the state
22 that you were in, all the things that you went through. Unfortunately,
23 this happened --
24 A. No. Yes, but it happened to me, not to you, so how can you then
25 act in this way towards me? This is really sad.
1 JUDGE MUMBA: Witness A, it's understandable that you went through
2 all the things that you have discussed in your statement, but counsel has
3 to cross-examine on behalf of his client. So please be patient and simply
4 answer the questions.
5 And Mr. Pantelic, perhaps you can reorganise your
6 cross-examination so that you wind up as quickly as possible. We are all
7 aware of the health condition of the witness.
8 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. I'm extremely mindful about
9 these conditions. No doubt about that.
10 Q. [Interpretation] Witness A --
11 A. Please, do not ask me any more questions.
12 Q. Yes, but you gave this statement to the OTP of the Tribunal. This
13 is not what you stated to Milos Savic. This is what you said in 1994, on
14 the 8th, 9th, and 10th of October, and the 6th of December, in the
15 presence of Ms. Nancy Paterson and Ms. Maria Velikonja. So this is part
16 of the statement that you gave to the Prosecution. We're not talking
17 about the statements that you gave to Milos Savic. I'm asking you a very
18 short and clear question: What function Namik Suljic had. Could you
19 please just tell me that? It's very simple.
20 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I've got the statement in
21 front of me and I've been hoping that I clarify this business in
22 re-examination so that you and the witness will know exactly in what
23 context this name of Namik Suljic was mentioned. Now, it's really quite
24 unfair to the witness to be focusing on that particular phrase and
25 sentence. Mr. Pantelic has failed to take the witness to what precedes
1 that particular phrase and sentence regarding Namik Suljic. He has failed
2 to mention that the witness has clearly stated in the statement just
3 above, just above, that Savic was insisting on a list of names of people
4 who possessed guns. He gave him a list of names of people who he was
5 certain was not there.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please slow down.
7 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: He put his brother Pero's name on the list because
9 he knew he wasn't there, and he was offering these names in order to
10 placate his interrogators, and it's obvious from reading the statement
11 that that's what he was doing, and that's how these names Suljic and
12 Hodzic arise. What Mr. Pantelic is doing is taking these names completely
13 out of context and failing to put the previous part. The witness was
14 feeding them false information to keep his torturers happy. That's what
15 you understand from reading the statement.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. Thank you for that explanation.
17 Yes, Mr. Pantelic.
18 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, maybe I'm wrong, but this is a
19 cross-examination based on adversarial system. I said, prior to this line
20 of questioning, that I'm focusing on the topics when this witness
21 discussed certain issues when he was being interrogated by the Inspector
22 Milos Savic. I'm not -- I don't have intention to read, because of the
23 problem of timing, to read all paragraphs. Sufficiently, I put him on
24 notice that we are speaking, first of all, about his conversation with
25 Inspector Milos Savic, about the topics, a gist from his statement to the
1 Prosecution, and then I'm going to explore certain particular question
2 which might be not in direct relation with this particular witness, but
3 since we have our defence case, we have to cover many areas, maybe I want
4 to clarify certain things with regard to the other witnesses and
5 testimony. This is a defence case and this is cross-examination. And I
6 really kindly ask --
7 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please slow down.
8 MR. PANTELIC: -- to relax and -- to relax and to wait his time
9 for re-direct for clarification, Your Honour. I don't see anything which
10 is not in accordance with the standards of cross-examination and with the
11 procedure before --
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. But the point explained by Mr. Di Fazio that
13 matters should not be taken out of context.
14 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, they're not.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: -- when read from the statement which the witness
16 made --
17 MR. PANTELIC: No, they are not.
18 JUDGE MUMBA: -- Is a correct one.
19 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, I just give introduction, as I said,
20 that is in transcript here a couple of pages ago. I said --
21 JUDGE MUMBA: All right.
22 MR. PANTELIC: We are speaking about the interrogation by Milos
23 Savic, inspector, we are speaking about the topics that he interrogated
24 this witness, and now a part of this statement which this witness gave to
25 the Prosecution, not to Milos Savic. And I tried to explore certain very,
1 very --
2 JUDGE MUMBA: So you are now asking him about the statement he
3 gave to the Prosecution.
4 MR. PANTELIC: To the Prosecutor, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Go ahead.
6 MR. PANTELIC: The whole time I'm doing that. I don't have any
7 references to any other statements that he gave to the police officer
8 Milos Savic.
9 Q. [Interpretation] So Witness A, what function did Namik Suljic have
10 in the Samac police station?
11 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat the answer. Due
12 to technical problems, we didn't hear it.
13 A. He was the deputy or the assistant, but at any rate, he was in the
14 regular police force.
15 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Let's just clear this up. He was in the active force. He was the
17 assistant to the commander. Is that correct?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Was he the commander of the reserve force in Bosanski Samac?
20 A. I don't know whether he was the deputy or the assistant to the
21 commander of the reserve police force.
22 Q. Do you know who was the commander of the reserve police force in
24 A. No.
25 Q. Namik Suljic is of Muslim ethnic origin; is that correct?
1 A. I don't know.
2 Q. Was he an SDA member?
3 A. I don't know.
4 Q. This police inspector from Sarajevo, Ragib Hodzic, he was an
5 instructor, he was the commander of the special units from Sarajevo; is
6 that correct?
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. When you answered Milos Savic about the arming of Croats, did you
9 provide him with information about who had weapons in Srednja Slatina,
10 which persons were armed?
11 A. I first mentioned my brother, and all the houses to the right and
12 to the left of the road, and I really don't know whether at that time they
13 had weapons or not. And let me tell you, sir: If you held 40- or 50-Kilo
14 stone on your knee and if you had to lift up that stone up with your hands
15 up in the air and if they were beating you up at the time you would tell
16 them everything, including the things you didn't know.
17 Before the interrogation conducted by Milos Savic, I had to give
18 the same kind of statements to all kinds of youngsters from Samac. I
19 could have been their father. They went to school with my children and
20 they forced me to do so in the courtyard of the TO building, and everybody
21 was able to see that. What would you say if something like that happened
22 to you? And if I knew for real who had something, I would have said that,
23 and I would have said that in front of this Tribunal in order for the
24 justice to be done, because those who are responsible should be convicted
25 and those who are not should be released.
1 I said voluntarily, told them about the two grenades that I had
2 and about the uniforms that I went for in Djakovo. I don't have to lie
3 about anything. That's how it was. And I really don't know anything
4 else. That's all I know.
5 Q. Just a very brief question. The Croats in the Croatian villages
6 in the municipality of Bosanski Samac, before the 17th of April, did they
7 get armed? Did the Croats in villages have weapons? Do you know anything
8 about that?
9 A. I don't know. And let me explain --
10 Q. Don't, please. It is, I think, in your own interests for us to
11 finish as soon as possible, so let's try to finish.
12 The Croats in the Croat villages in the Bosanski Samac
13 municipality, before the 17th of April, 1992, did they organise
14 checkpoints and guards, guard duty?
15 A. I don't know.
16 Q. Can you confirm the fact that in the house of Josip Orsolic, your
17 neighbour and friend, that the Crisis Staff for Domaljevac was located
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. Was the headquarters for the Croatian Crisis Staff in Domaljevac
21 in the vicinity of Josip Orsolic's house?
22 A. I don't know which house it was. I know approximately where it
23 was, but it wasn't in the vicinity of Josip's house.
24 Q. Where was it, then?
25 A. In another house.
1 Q. In which village?
2 A. Well, in that village that you asked me about, but it wasn't the
3 Crisis Staff. I'm saying just that in 1993, when I came to that area, it
4 was not the Crisis Staff. At that time a unit of the Croatian Defence
5 Council had already been established.
6 Q. I'm asking you about the period before the 17th of April, 1992.
7 Where was the headquarters of the Croatian Crisis Staff for Domaljevac?
8 A. I don't know.
9 Q. Please turn to page 9 of your 1994 statement given to the OTP. I
10 will read out the beginning of the third paragraph, and you can follow
11 it. You said to the Prosecutor in 1994 as follows:
12 "Stevo Todorovic extended his hand to me."
13 We are now referring to the episode when you were brought into the
14 MUP. So:
15 "Stevo Todorovic extended his hand to me. He greeted me and asked
16 me about my wife and children. He handed me the phone and told me to call
17 Djakovo, where, according to him, I shot at the barracks during the war in
18 Croatia. He told me to tell them" -- he's probably referring to your
19 family here -- "that I would stay there for some time. I told him that I
20 had nobody to call there, and he then sent me upstairs. He used Serb
21 phrases. He said he wouldn't let anybody touch me and that I was a
22 first-rate member of the HDZ. I thought that that was a sign that they
23 should start beating me. When I got into the building, Stevo Todorovic
24 was chewing the gum, based on which I concluded that he was the one who
25 had called me previously."
1 Is that what is stated in your 1994 statement to the OTP? Did I
2 read out well?
3 A. Well, the translation I think was not correct on line 7. He said,
4 "Don't let anybody beat him. He's a first or premier-league member of
5 the HDZ," based on which I got the impression that that was the sign that
6 they should start beating me. Prior to my arrest, I was in the corridor,
7 because there had been an announcement that nobody should move about, and
8 then the phone rang. I picked up the phone and I simply heard that
9 somebody was chewing gum. And then the person on the other side put the
10 receiver down. A few minutes later, these two guys came to fetch me.
11 Q. So basically what you stated in 1994 is correct. You maintain
12 what you said in your 1994 statement to the OTP; is that right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Will you agree with me, since you are an experienced policeman,
15 that there was reason to believe that you were linked to the armed
16 formations, that you were armed, that you had hand grenades, that there
17 was reason to suspect that you had shot at the barracks in Djakovo and
18 that you were a member of the armed formations of the SDA and HDZ? Do you
19 agree with this statement of mine?
20 A. No. I was not a member of the armed forces of Muslims and
21 Croats. I was a reserve policeman of the Bosanski Samac police station,
22 which represented legal authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
23 Q. Based on your knowledge and experience in the capacity of
24 professional policeman, I'm asking you whether, based on everything that I
25 just described to you, all the reasons to suspect you and all the
1 circumstances, do you believe that there was reason to arrest you and to
2 bring you in for interrogation? We have somebody who possesses hand
3 grenades, who has an automatic weapon, perhaps has been in contact with
4 enemy forces. Is that a reasonable grounds for arresting somebody?
5 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Di Fazio.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: I object. I object.
7 JUDGE MUMBA: Wait. Wait before you answer.
8 MR. DI FAZIO: I think what Mr. Pantelic is trying to establish is
9 whether or not Stiv Todorovic had reasonable cause to arrest this witness.
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
11 MR. DI FAZIO: If he wants to go down that road, let him. I have
12 no problem with that. But the last part of the question is that automatic
13 weapons, contact with enemy forces, and so on, and the witness hasn't said
14 anything. He says that Todorovic -- any of that. Todorovic merely said,
15 according to him -- accused him, that the witness is shooting at barracks,
16 where there was fighting in Djakovo. Now, that's the -- yes, that's --
17 Ms. Reidy points out in another country. So that's the -- that's all that
18 the witness said, and it's -- if Mr. Pantelic wants to explore whether or
19 not shooting at barracks in Djakovo is reasonable cause for Stevan
20 Todorovic to arrest him, well, perhaps that might in some vague,
21 indistinct way be relevant. I don't know. But there's nothing that the
22 witness said in his statement about automatic weapons, grenades, or
23 anything like that. It's a complicated issue and I really don't know why
24 the witness is being called upon to comment on Stiv Todorovic's mind or
25 what Stiv Todorovic thought was reasonable or not. It's very difficult to
1 know. So -- but to be fair to the witness, all he said is Todorovic
2 accused him of shooting at barracks. That's it.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic. You understand the objection of
4 the Prosecution?
5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour, I understand, but I disagree with
6 this approach, and I will --
7 JUDGE MUMBA: Perhaps you can rephrase your question to the
9 MR. PANTELIC: I think I was quite clear, because I tried to
10 establish the previous experience of this person, of Witness A, being
11 professional policeman, and then with several details. I'm not entering
12 into the discussion whether the certain allegations were truthful or not.
13 MR. DI FAZIO: Okay.
14 MR. PANTELIC: Not at all.
15 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, can't --
16 MR. PANTELIC: I'm not challenging that. I'm just asking from the
17 point of view -- can I finish, please? I'm just asking from the point of
18 view of one person who is a professional policeman whether, according to
19 his experience and knowledge, certain details, not to enter into the
20 validity of these events, will be sufficient for the police force to,
21 let's say, arrest someone or to conduct investigation, et cetera, et
22 cetera. Very --
23 JUDGE MUMBA: Oh, I see.
24 MR. PANTELIC: Very innocent, Your Honour. I'm not telling -- I'm
25 not putting to this witness that he's shooting on the barracks. I'm not
1 putting to this witness -- well, he confirmed that -- he confessed that he
2 got two grenades, one Kalashnikov, a pistol. Well, of course.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: So it's a general question.
4 MR. PANTELIC: It's a general question from his point of view, of
5 his experience.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: His experience.
7 MR. PANTELIC: Whether if someone is working on the street, you
8 know, especially in the wartime, or whether the police officer, knowing
9 that someone is in possession of the weapons or have some other -- I don't
10 know which kind of information of the organisation or stuff like that.
11 And then is that a sufficient ground to call someone -- prima facie case
12 to call someone to discuss that. Nothing more. Simple as that.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: I understand all of that and I've got no quarrel
15 with it. So why can't the question simply be dealt with quickly, perhaps
16 putting it along these lines: Did Stevan Todorovic, in your opinion, have
17 reasonable grounds for arresting you on the basis of an allegation that
18 you were shooting at barracks in Djakovo?
19 MR. PANTELIC: And I just said, Your Honour, in my question. It
20 was in my question in the transcript. I phrased the question on the same
21 way and same standard.
22 MR. DI FAZIO: But --
23 MR. PANTELIC: You can check.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Let's stop this.
25 MR. PANTELIC: Let's go --
1 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you ask the question?
2 MR. PANTELIC: Of course.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Can you rephrase it? Ask the question again to the
5 MR. PANTELIC: Of course.
6 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, so we are not here trying to establish
7 whether it is true whether you indeed did shoot and so on. We're not
8 interested in that at all. All I'm asking you is whether you, as an
9 experienced policeman, believe that if there are reasons to believe that
10 somebody has illegal weapons or has joined an illegal armed organisation
11 or has committed a crime, is that sufficient to bring in somebody for an
12 interrogation and to initiate certain investigative procedures? I'm
13 repeating, sir, that I fully understand that everything that happened to
14 you from that point on was beyond belief and beyond reason, but we're not
15 interested in that. All we're interested in is whether, in accordance
16 with the police standards, in accordance with your police experience, it
17 is acceptable to bring in somebody for interrogation if there are all of
18 these reasons to suspect that there was some wrongdoing.
19 A. I cannot give you a yes or no reply to this question. Let me tell
20 you this: At that time the weapons that I had at the time were legally
21 registered with MUP. I possessed legal weapons. I had a permit. I was a
22 member of police force. And Stevan Todorovic arrested us illegally. So
23 he was not authorised to bring me in for questioning. I will simply not
24 accept this.
25 Q. Let me ask you just one more question and then we will be finished
1 shortly thereafter. Please turn to page 10 of your 1994 statement. In
2 last paragraph, which will be paragraph 4 of that statement, you mentioned
3 certain inmates, such as Luka Gregurevic, Ivica Evic, Mato Senic, Cutura?
4 A. That's the same person.
5 Q. Okay. Kemal Atic, Barukcic, and so on. Let me ask you this: Was
6 Luka Gregurevic, who is a policeman, in prison together with you? Yes or
8 A. Yes. He was on duty that night.
9 Q. Is Mato Senic a policeman?
10 A. That night, in accordance with the duty roster, Mato was
11 securing --
12 Q. I'm not interested in that. Was he a member of police force or
14 A. He was a member of reserve police force.
15 Q. Can you go through that statement and tell me if any of these
16 other persons you mentioned were policemen?
17 A. Salko Hurtic, Cosic, Barukcic, Kemal Atic, Ibrahim Salkic, Ilija
18 Matic, Anto Orsolic were civilians.
19 Q. So let's just clarify this for the sake of the transcript.
20 Policemen who were arrested and imprisoned were Luka Gregurevic? Yes or
22 A. No. They were not arrested. I just want to clarify this for the
23 Trial Chamber. Luka Gregurevic was on duty that night, starting at 2200
24 hours until 6.00 a.m. He was securing -- or rather, securing the police
25 station from the outside, where the reserve policemen Seric, called
1 Cutura, from Zasavica, and Salko Hurtic from Samac. And when the
2 paramilitaries attacked Samac, they arrested them the first, on their
3 police duty posts. And the other individuals, the civilians, which are
4 Kemal Atic, Esad Cosic, Franjo Barukcic, Ibrahim Salkic, Dzevad Jusufovic,
5 Anto Orsolic, and Ilija Matic, were arrested as civilians.
6 Q. Now please turn to page 12 of your 1994 statement, paragraph 3
7 counting from above, in which you mention Dikan Brandic.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. It's a tragic event and we don't need to go into details. It's
10 been covered sufficiently here, but I found something quite interesting,
11 something that you stated in 1994 to the Prosecution.
12 Namely, you said that Dikan was not physically strong, but he was
13 insolent a bit, and he would retort. So you go on to say, in the
14 beginning of your paragraph, that the only prisoner who talked back to
15 them was Dikan Brandic, who was later killed.
16 What I'm interested in is this, and please correct me if I'm
17 wrong: The late Dikan, was he brave and provocative and did he offer
18 resistance to the paramilitaries in the TO building? Did he talk back to
19 them? Did he act in a different manner from the rest of you? Did I
20 understand the description of this person well?
21 A. Yes.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: That question -- okay.
23 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Would you then agree with me, based on your personal knowledge,
25 that this behaviour of his in fact provoked the paramilitaries, or rather,
1 Lugar and the others, into beating and killing him in the end?
2 JUDGE MUMBA: [Previous translation continues] ... won't be
3 allowed. This witness can't answer that, and it's of no consequence
4 whether he provoked anybody, really.
5 MR. PANTELIC: I've almost finished with the questioning. Just a
6 couple of questions of the personal profile and credibility of this
8 Q. [Interpretation] Witness A, you stated that you were an agent of
9 Croatia, insurance agency in Samac. Is that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Before April 17th, 1992, in view of the fact that your company had
12 a good business, as did the insurance agency, you had quite a lot of money
13 on your company's account, because the business was good?
14 A. Yes, there was money on the account, but it disappeared.
15 Q. Based on the business policy of your company, you gave loans,
16 short-term loans, to various companies and individuals, didn't you?
17 A. I was not involved in business policy of Croatia insurance
18 agency. I was simply their representative selling insurance policies, and
19 I don't know about the rest.
20 JUDGE MUMBA: And what's the relevance of this, Mr. Pantelic? I
21 think you are finished with your cross-examination.
22 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, yes. Just one question.
23 Q. [Interpretation] Witness A, did you, through your agency in
24 Bosanski Samac, give short-term loans to individuals and companies?
25 Please reply briefly, with a yes or no.
1 A. I, as an insurance salesman, somebody who insured vehicles,
2 property, and so on, was in charge of selling insurance policies,
3 collecting money for that --
4 Q. Let me interrupt you. Let me rephrase the question.
5 Did your head office perhaps issue loans, short-term loans, to
6 companies and individuals in Samac before 1992? It's a simple question.
7 Please give me a straight answer.
8 A. I don't know.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: That was the last question, Mr. Pantelic. That was
10 the last question. Please sit down.
11 MR. PANTELIC: Now it's last, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Sit down.
13 MR. PANTELIC: It's a very important question.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Sit down.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Related to the credibility of this witness, Your
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Sit down, Mr. Pantelic. You've been given enough
20 MR. DI FAZIO: Let's clear up this Namik Suljic business.
21 Re-examined by Mr. Di Fazio:
22 Q. Have you still got the 1994 statement there, Witness? You have
23 your 1994 statement? Do you still have it before you?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Okay. Now, let's go back to the portion of the statement that
1 Mr. Pantelic took you to, where you were discussing the second
2 interrogation that you had with Milos Savic. I'll read out to you the
3 portion of the statement to you, and I'll read it out slowly, and listen
4 to me carefully, please.
5 A. Can you give me the number of the page, please?
6 Q. I'm afraid I can't, but I have your English statement, which is
7 your signed statement, the statement that you gave. That is only a
8 translation. So please listen to what I've got to say. Listen through
9 the earphones and you'll be able to hear -- you may find it around
10 page 13, but in any event --
11 MR. PANTELIC: Yes. Can I help the witness?
12 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Thank you.
13 MR. PANTELIC: Because I have copy of B/C/S version.
14 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
15 MR. PANTELIC: I'm not asking anything, Your Honours; just to
16 help. [Interpretation] Page 13, end of paragraph 1.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 MR. DI FAZIO: Okay.
19 Q. Somewhere in that paragraph, no doubt, your statement commences in
20 this fashion, and I'll quote it to you:
21 "The first time he was questioning me and taking notes, the second
22 time his objective was to take a full statement from me. I was also asked
23 to talk about anything I may have remembered in the meantime. He asked
24 whether I had any insurance money for the kiosk that was demolished in the
25 bombing. I told him I did not, that I did not apply for money. Since he
1 insisted on a list of names of people in Slatina who possessed guns, I
2 gave him a list of names of people who I was certain were not there. I
3 put my brother Pero's name on the list because I knew he was not there,
4 and I thought it would be proof to him that I was on the level and was
5 telling the truth.
6 I memorised the list of names and gave the same list again at
7 Batajnica. Then he wanted to know what I knew about Muslims trafficking
8 weapons across the Sava River. I asked what he wanted from me, why
9 couldn't he see that I had been beaten and didn't know anything. He went
10 to consult with Simo Zaric and returned with a piece of paper with
11 questions he was supposed to ask me. He asked who was importing the guns
12 from Croatia for Bosnian Muslims. I said all this was organised by
13 Namik Suljic and Ragib Hodzic, a police detective from Sarajevo. I
14 mentioned their names because I knew they could never reach them. I knew
15 a lot about what the people in power in the SDA and HDZ were doing, but I
16 never said anything about it."
17 Now, is that what you said in your statement of 1994?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Thank you. Were you there providing and feeding information to
20 Savic in order to placate him, to keep him happy?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Does that apply to the names Namik Suljic and Ragib Hodzic that
23 you gave to him?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Thank you. You were also asked questions this afternoon by
1 Mr. Pantelic regarding a portion of your statement from 1994.
2 MR. DI FAZIO: Sorry. Will Your Honours just bear with me for a
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
5 [Prosecution counsel confer]
6 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
7 Q. And Mr. Pantelic directed you to a portion of the statement in
8 which you mention that Alija Fitozovic was dedicated to -- delegated to
9 his position in the TO by the SDA, and Bozanovic by the HDZ. He did not
10 read the next sentence to you, which I now do:
11 "The Serbs did not want to delegate their own member of the
12 Territorial Defence leadership."
13 Is that in fact the position, that the Serbs did not want to
14 delegate their own member to the TO?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you. You were asked questions by another Defence counsel,
17 Mr. Lukic, regarding mention of Franjo Barukcic in your various
18 statements, and he directed your attention to your statement in 1994, and
19 I think you recall that I conceded that, on your behalf, that the arrest
20 by Mr. Tadic of Barukcic was not mentioned in that statement. And he also
21 asked you questions on that topic and whether you mentioned
22 Franjo Barukcic's arrest by Tadic last year, when Prosecutors came down to
23 Odzak and asked you questions. Do you recall that portion of your
25 A. I know that he told me that he had been arrested by Miro Brko.
1 Now, whether I stated this in my last year's statement, I really don't
3 Q. Fine. Okay. All I want to know is this: In the statement that
4 you gave in 1994 to investigators, and last year, when you were spoken to
5 by the Prosecutors in Odzak, did you decide what topics you would speak
6 about or were you directed by investigators or Prosecutors to topics that
7 they were interested in?
8 A. There were some corrections and the translation wasn't that good.
9 Remember that example with Bosanski Brod and also in another place it said
10 that I was employed as a soccer referee and so on. So there were some
11 clarifications given, and I don't remember whether they asked me, and if
12 they did, whether I replied, but I know for a fact that Mr. Barukcic told
13 me that.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Just an intervention to the transcript. The
16 witness just said, in page 57, line 4, clarification given by the
18 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes.
19 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. Thank you. I'm grateful to my learned
20 friend. Thank you.
21 Q. And in May of this year, did my colleague Ms. Reidy, who is
22 sitting next to me, come and speak to you in Bosnia and take a further
23 statement from you?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And again on that occasion did she direct your attention to areas
1 that she was interested in?
2 A. Well, she had the statement before her, and some things weren't
3 clear to her had, and then she asked. Some parts of the translation were
4 not very good, but she avoided bringing me back to the things that I had
5 been through. Again they asked me to talk about the things that I saw and
6 the things that I heard, and the things that I didn't see myself were
7 deleted. I see here in some translations Barukcic is mentioned as being
8 65, and on another occasion he is mentioned as being 85. There was a
9 young lad doing it. He may be not so good. But I have to note that she
10 never once asked me to say things that were not true.
11 Q. Yes. Thank you. Glad to hear that. But my question is really
12 very simple: When she came down and saw you in May, did she direct your
13 attention to matters that she was interested in and she was seeking
14 clarification of? That's all. That's all I want to know.
15 A. Well, some things were not in good order, chronological order, and
16 then we agreed about that and about who was with me and so on. But this
17 was not in the way in which I gave the statement in 1994. That was more
18 like a conversation. I was just saying things. But the things that I
19 said to Ms. Aisling Reidy, I said it in my own words, without any
20 premeditation, any pressure. She just asked me: Tell us the way it was.
21 Q. Thank you very much.
22 MR. DI FAZIO: I have no further questions.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you very much, Witness A. We have completed
24 your evidence and you are free to leave.
25 Can the witness be led out of the courtroom.
1 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, may I ask the witness to
2 remain in the precincts of the Court? I want to discuss something with
3 him following -- and I'm concerned that he'll be taken away.
4 JUDGE MUMBA: Perhaps you may -- the usher, when he escorts him
5 out, yes, he can make sure that he waits for you.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. Because I understand that Defence
7 counsel want to briefly raise something now, so I won't be able to
8 immediately exit the courtroom. Thank you.
9 [The witness withdrew]
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lukic. We are in open session, of course.
11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I will try to be brief,
12 but we sit until 1900 hours, in light of our today's schedule. I think I
13 will need ten minutes. I have two things, two motions that I would like
14 to address to this Trial Chamber. One I will discuss at length and the
15 other one I will just touch upon briefly. So I just want to clarify
16 whether there will be a break or not.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: It's not possible to have a break and then come back
18 before 1900 hours. In any case, we've been going on -- we're supposed to
19 break off at 1840, because that would have been one and a half hours,
20 because the interpreters will be overworked. But you can go ahead and see
21 how far we shall go.
22 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm addressing you on
23 behalf of the three Defence counsel. As regards the first motion and the
24 second motion, I'm addressing you only on behalf of the Tadic and Zaric
25 Defence, because this concerns the issue of reciprocal disclosure.
1 In light of the testimony by witness Hasan Subasic and the
2 allegations he made on the 17th of July, that is yesterday, 17th of July,
3 2002, about the fact that he watched this trial over the Internet, in
4 response to questions asked by attorney Lazarevic and the previous day to
5 questions asked by attorney Pantelic, the Defence asked that his testimony
6 be stricken off the record for the following reasons:
7 The principle of fair trial is one of the basic norms stemming
8 from Article 21(2) of the Statute. We heard from this witness, on page
9 94/14 of the draft transcript, that he didn't follow all the trials but
10 that he did follow quite a few of them. And when prompted by my colleague
11 Mr. Lazarevic whether by that he meant the Samac case, he confirmed it.
12 Then he explained that he followed the trial with a 30-minute delay, which
13 means that by watching the image broadcast live from this courtroom, he
14 was able to follow the course of the proceedings before he testified. He
15 also confirmed that, among other things, he watched the testimony of
16 witness Dragan Delic, Nusret Hadzijusufovic, Safet Dagovic. So he watched
17 the testimony of witnesses that he was asked questions about in the course
18 of the examination-in-chief, his examination-in-chief.
19 Your Honours, the provision contained in the Rules of Procedure
20 and Evidence, which is in force in all the legal systems throughout the
21 world, that the witness must not communicate with other witnesses before
22 his testimony, with other witnesses who had already testified, and in
23 particular, that the witness, such a witness, is not allowed to follow the
24 trial, is there to ensure a fair trial. It is quite clear that everybody
25 can watch the course of the trial when it is conducted in open session
1 over the Internet. We have an absolutely -- it's the same situation as if
2 we had that person sitting here in the public gallery. I believe that if
3 you watch it over the Internet, it's even better, because you get a much
4 better picture with all the camera angles than if you were sitting in the
5 public gallery.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Lukic --
7 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] If you allow this, Your Honours --
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Lukic, the Trial Chamber is of the view that
9 this is an important motion. Can the parties make it in writing?
10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] By all means, Your Honours. If you
11 can set a deadline for us now, we will be submitting this motion in
12 writing. We are quite prepared to do so.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: Perhaps by 4.00 p.m. Wednesday next week.
14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: [Previous translation continues] ... sufficient time
16 to putting in writing. And then the Prosecution would be required to
17 respond, perhaps by Friday. If you receive it on Wednesday afternoon next
19 MS. REIDY: Yes, Your Honour. If we receive -- if it's filed by
20 4.00 on Wednesday, we normally get it sometime on Thursday. I think the
21 Rules do allow us seven days, and --
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, I know, but we are looking at how much time we
23 have, and since you --
24 MS. REIDY: Effectively be 24 hours and --
25 JUDGE MUMBA: Since you've heard part of it so you know where it
1 is going.
2 MS. REIDY: Well, perhaps --
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Monday?
4 MS. REIDY: Monday or -- I don't know if Defence already know what
5 they have to say. Perhaps they could file it by close of Tuesday and then
6 we could try to file it by close of Friday. If you prefer to have it
7 filed by the time the Court goes into recess.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Mr. Lukic, we go back a day. By Tuesday 4.00 p.m.?
9 Okay. We'll leave it on Wednesday.
10 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Well, I can make a commitment, since
11 we already have some written notes, I believe that we will be able to
12 comply with the Tuesday evening deadline.
13 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. In which case the Prosecution will have
14 it by Wednesday morning.
15 MS. REIDY: That's correct.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: And then you would be able to file by 4.00 p.m.
18 MS. REIDY: Sure.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. The other point, Mr. Lukic?
20 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] The second motion is much shorter, but
21 I think that I really have to speak about it at length. Perhaps it would
22 be better to do so on Tuesday morning. It's about our motion for the
23 Prosecution to disclose to us the documents that Ewa Tabeau used during
24 her cross-examination pertaining to the documents that their statistics
25 service has. It is obvious that these are very important documents,
1 containing important statistical data that she used when making her
2 report. These are documents that, pursuant to Rule 66, are subject to
3 reciprocal disclosure because they're important for the Defence. I did
4 not address this motion directly to the Prosecution. Perhaps I may
5 approach the Prosecution directly with this motion. But I believe that it
6 is important for the Trial Chamber to be seized of this, because our
7 statistics expert does not have the documents at our disposal and the
8 Prosecution is under the obligation to provide us with the documents which
9 would enable us to check all the facts and all the data contained therein.
10 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm sure that can be arranged.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. Perhaps the parties can deal with that.
12 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. In fact, I think Ms. Tabeau is in fact
13 interested in the topic herself as well, so she can easily get together
14 the stuff that she relied on in producing her report.
15 JUDGE MUMBA: Her report, yes.
16 MR. DI FAZIO: So let me suggest that we deal with this privately,
17 and if we can't sort it out amongst ourselves, then we'll come back to the
18 Chamber, but I'm sure we will.
19 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. I'll leave it to the parties to sort out this,
20 and then if there is any problem, the matter can always be raised with the
21 Trial Chamber.
22 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: We shall adjourn. Next week we are sitting in the
24 morning, from 0900 hours. And on the 22nd it's the case of Mr. Milan
25 Simic. We don't know how long it will take, but probably the other
1 parties in this case will be notified as soon as possible when it will be
2 possible to resume this particular case.
3 The Court will rise.
4 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.44 p.m.,
5 to be reconvened on Monday, the 22nd day of
6 July 2002, at 9.00 a.m.