1 Tuesday, 8 April 2003
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Good morning. Please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning. Case Number IT-95-9-T, the
8 Prosecutor versus Blagoje Simic, Miroslav Tadic, and Simo Zaric.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Lazarevic.
10 MR. LAZAREVIC: May I address the Trial Chamber. Your Honours,
11 yesterday in the afternoon we were informed by our client that he had a
12 small accident during his walk, usual walk that all the detainees had.
13 Some other detainees were playing football, soccer actually, and a ball
14 came towards Mr. Zaric. At one moment, he kicked it and fell down,
15 suffering terrible pains. We didn't know how serious it is, but this
16 morning when Mr. Zaric came here, he informed us that he's suffering
17 terrible pains from that moment, and he's suffering pains now. It seems
18 that there are some visible changes right now. He received painkillers
19 yesterday, but they didn't help him. He didn't sleep all night, and he's
20 in pains. At this very moment, he asked for some medical assistance, and
21 I'm afraid that he's not capable of following the proceedings in this
22 stage because he can't even sit now. The guards literally carried him
23 through the corridors and placed him here. His condition is very serious
24 at the moment and he cannot follow the proceedings.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE MUMBA: The Trial Chamber is of the view that we shall rise
2 to allow Mr. Simo Zaric to be taken for treatment. We shall reassemble to
3 reorganise the rest of the programme in -- around 9.30, at about 9.30
5 --- Break taken at 9.09 a.m.
6 --- On resuming at 11.02 a.m.
7 JUDGE MUMBA: I take it that we haven't got any further
8 information about Mr. Simo Zaric.
9 MR. LAZAREVIC: Nothing so far, Your Honour. We will call the
10 Detention Unit again. Allegedly a medical doctor is examining Mr. Zaric
11 right now.
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.
13 The Trial Chamber has some rulings on the rest of the Rule 92
14 statements for Dr. Blagoje Simic. First of all, the application by
15 Mr. Pantelic regarding Mr. Cedomir Simic, the Trial Chamber has decided to
16 allow that, and simply reinstate the alia ruling that paragraph 20 will be
17 struck out and he will be allowed viva voce for one hour, and
18 cross-examination will be allowed by the Prosecution for one and a half
20 Regarding the other statements, D171/1 ID by Pelka Andric -- I
21 just wanted to confirm with Mr. Pantelic, we haven't made a ruling in
22 connection with Pelka Andric, have we?
23 MR. PANTELIC: No, Your Honour. No, not to my --
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, yes. Very well. That is the statement 171/1
25 by Pelka Andric. This statement will be admitted in its entirety, and
1 there will be no cross-examination. Regarding the statement 173 by Simo
2 Jovanovic and the statement 172/1 by Aleksandar Jankovic , the Trial
3 Chamber is of the view that the two witnesses, Simo Jovanovic and
4 Aleksandar Jankovic, belong to a unit within the 17th Tactical Group and
5 they discuss issues which are very similar. However, the Trial Chamber
6 has decided that Simo Jovanovic will come for cross-examination by the
7 Prosecution -- yes, and the time that is limited for the Prosecution is
8 one and a half hours. However, the last sentences of paragraph 7 and
9 paragraph 18 are struck out, and the sentence -- the middle sentence in
10 paragraph 18 which reads "the responsibilities of the civilian authorities
11 were always strictly separated from those of the army," that sentence is
12 also struck out.
13 Regarding the statement of Aleksandar Jankovic, paragraph 12 is
14 struck out, and the last sentence of paragraph 18 is struck out. The rest
15 of the statement is admitted into evidence. And he will not come for
17 The last three statements for Dr. Blagoje Simic, the statement
18 D141/1 [sic] by Lazar Mekic [phoen], the Trial Chamber has noted the
19 submissions of the Prosecution. Paragraph 18 and 19 is struck out as it
20 discusses the activities and the status of the Crisis Staff, and therefore
21 touches on the acts and conduct of the accused as charged in the
22 indictment. The rest of the submissions by the Prosecution are matters
23 for cross-examination. The statement is admitted, and the witness is
24 allowed one hour viva voce. The Prosecution is allowed one and a half
25 hours cross-examination. The statement by Desanka Cvijetic, D175/1, is
1 allowed into evidence, and she is the witness -- the character witness
2 replacing Jusuf Jusufovic as applied for by Mr. Pantelic. However,
3 paragraph 2 in its entirety is struck out as it is not discussing the
4 character of the accused.
5 The statement D176/1 by Branislav Marusic, the Prosecution
6 submission is accepted in that the activities of the accused Blagoje Simic
7 in the various institutions discusses activities and conduct as charged in
8 the indictment. So paragraph 5, 6, 7, 8 inclusive are struck out.
9 The rest of the Prosecution submissions on the other paragraphs
10 are matters for cross-examination. The witness who -- will give oral
11 evidence for hour and the Prosecution is allowed to cross-examination for
12 one and a half hours. On the request by the Prosecution to be consulted
13 on the time required for cross-examination, the Trial Chamber is of the
14 view that issues for cross-examination are usually the guiding factor when
15 the Trial Chamber has set the time. Under the provisions of Rule 90(F)
16 the Trial Chamber is of the view -- the Trial Chamber has the obligation
17 to control the proceedings to ensure a fair and expeditious trial.
18 However, if the Prosecution show good cause on their request for extension
19 of time, the Trial Chamber can obviously consider the request.
20 Yesterday, we did raise... I'm just reminded that regarding the
21 statement of -- the statement of Simo Jovanovic, that is where the last
22 sentence of paragraph 18 is struck out, because the note I got is
23 Aleksandar Jovanovic, which is a confusion of the name.
24 Yes. Mr. Pantelic, we did raise the query regarding the three
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, I'm reminded that in the statement of
3 Aleksandar Jankovic, 172/1, the last sentence of paragraph 18 is also
4 struck out.
5 Yes, Mr. Pantelic.
6 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. I just -- it's a correction in
7 the transcript where the statement of Mr. Lazar Mekic is mentioned, it
8 should be D174/1, clarification for the transcript. Nothing more.
9 Your Honour, with regard to the statement of Mr. Simo Jovanovic,
10 D173/1, I respectfully ask this Trial Chamber to allow the Defence for
11 Mr. Blagoje Simic to have 45, 50 minutes for examination-in-chief, and I
12 can assure this Trial Chamber that it will be even less than the granted
13 time because in the interests of justice, we have to cover certain issues
14 with regard to this witness. So I kindly for this Trial Chamber to allow
15 me this time.
16 JUDGE MUMBA: But for Simo Jovanovic, Mr. Pantelic, we had given
17 one hour.
18 MR. PANTELIC: That's my mistake. I do apologise, because I
19 didn't hear. I do apologise, Your Honour. Okay, Simo Jovanovic one
20 hour --
21 JUDGE MUMBA: For viva voce, and then cross-examination, one and a
22 half hours.
23 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, that's my mistake, okay. Thank you.
24 Your Honour, with regard to the three other witnesses mentioned
25 yesterday, on yesterday's hearing, I am in a situation to inform this
1 Trial Chamber of the following: First of all, Mr. Sego Drago was
2 previously on our list for 92 bis statements. After analysing the scope
3 of his testimony, the Defence would like to withdraw this witness from the
4 list, from our list. That's the first matter.
5 Second matter is with regard to Mr. Momcilo Krajisnik. The
6 Defence filed official request to the registry, and the registry will take
7 care about this request with the officials from UNDU in order for the
8 Defence of Mr. Blagoje Simic to visit Mr. Krajisnik to discuss with him
9 maybe one hour, hour and a half this matter, and then to proceed with the
10 92 bis statement certification, et cetera. Also, in accordance with the
11 instructions and position of the Defence of Mr. Krajisnik, because he's
12 entitled to the Defence counsel advices with regard to his rights, et
13 cetera. So it will be synchronised. And I believe that during this week,
14 we shall resolve that matter and accordingly inform the Trial Chamber.
15 The advantage, so to say, of this particular issue that Mr. Krajisnik is
16 at the UNDU, so it will not be some big problem, you know, to arrange a
17 presiding officer to visit him there. In that sense, we could be
18 officious as much as possible.
19 With regard to the next witness from our list, General Momir
20 Talic, I'm informed in the last couple of weeks that due to his serious
21 health condition, we all know that he's in really serious condition, that
22 practically it wasn't possible to make any contact with regard to his
23 statement. I believe -- I believe that also in a couple of days, maybe
24 one week maximum, we shall have the position -- with regard to his health
25 condition, the position of his Defence, and personal position of General
1 Talic. However, it is unofficially -- I was informed by his Defence that
2 they will not be in favour to permit, to allow, General Talic to give 92
3 bis statement in a form that we know. Rather, they are of the opinion to
4 use -- to use a certain provisions -- if you'll allow me, Your Honour,
5 just to find the rules here, certain provisions of the 92 bis statement,
6 particularly it's a provision of Rule 92 bis. 92 bis subrule (C) where
7 due to the reasons that a person who is by reason of bodily or mental
8 condition unable to testify orally, he might give this statement. And
9 then I think that the Defence for General Talic is not in favour to --
10 probably they will limit -- they will limit possibility for General Talic
11 to testify in this serious -- in such serious health conditions. So we
12 are facing certain procedural issues, but we shall resolve that in due
14 So that concludes, I believe, the situation with these matters,
15 these issues with regard to the three witnesses, 92 bis statements, Your
16 Honour, if it satisfies this Trial Chamber.
17 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic. The only query the Trial Chamber
18 has is: Why you haven't brought these matters to the attention of the
19 Trial Chamber all along, because for instance the 92 bis statements were
20 supposed to be completed in February.
21 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour --
22 JUDGE MUMBA: And the Trial Chamber has been informed by the
23 registry officer that attempts have been made to have these statements
24 recorded all along, but you haven't been forthcoming.
25 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely, Your Honour. I can give you
1 explanations. With regard to Mr. Momcilo Krajisnik, Defence for
2 Mr. Blagoje Simic since November last year, on many occasions orally
3 during the presence of his lawyers here in The Hague, lawyers of
4 Mr. Krajisnik, attempt to bring that issue to them and to raise that
5 issue, to see how we can handle that matter. So we really worked very
6 hard on that issue. And up to now, I'm not entering and I'm not asking
7 for the reasons of Defence of Mr. Krajisnik why they postponed this
8 matter, why they -- because always they made me a promise that they will
9 speak with their client, they will see the form, how it can affect a
10 position of Mr. Krajisnik in terms of procedural issues, in terms of his
11 trial, et cetera, et cetera. It's quite reasonable approach, but
12 unfortunately it was of certain significant impact for the delay in our
13 particular proceedings with regard to 92 bis. So I did my best, and I
14 contact them by phone and here in The Hague, and finally send e-mail one
15 of these days, and I will do my best in the next couple of days to see
16 what are their final position. In the meantime, I will try to arrange
17 this meeting with Mr. Krajisnik at UNDU.
18 With regard to General Talic situation, I was always informed
19 since January, because General Talic was in situation to be in proceedings
20 due to his health condition, the provisional release, he physically was
21 not even able to be interviewed all these months due to therapy that he's
22 receiving, chemotherapy and all these medical things. So up until now, it
23 was impossible to arrange this contact. And I believe that now with his
24 Defence, I could find the solution.
25 If in due course, during a reasonable period of time, the Defence
1 of Blagoje Simic will not be able to fulfill their obligations, the only
2 situation that we can have is to withdraw these two witnesses on the basis
3 of problems and difficulties that we have. But we are very mindful and we
4 shall do our best and inform the Trial Chamber accordingly of the results
5 of our efforts.
6 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well, Mr. Pantelic.
7 MR. PANTELIC: I have some other matters if you'll allow me, but I
8 see my learned friend on his feet.
9 JUDGE MUMBA: All right. Mr. Re.
10 MR. RE: Your Honours, just in relation to General Talic, there's
11 one thing, the Prosecution just observed at this point that an application
12 under 92 bis (c) is obviously premature until we've seen a statement under
13 92 bis from which a judgement could be made as to whether it falls within
14 that category. That's one observation. Secondly, in relation to the
15 statement my learned friend Mr. Pantelic just told us about of Sego Drago,
16 we can't find that as an exhibit. Has that been given an ID number yet?
17 I've heard the name. We just can't find it in our list. The Registrar is
18 shaking her head.
19 MR. PANTELIC: If I may help, it is not an exhibit, my learned
20 friend. He was on the list in December as potential for 92 bis, and he
21 never signed or gave the statement. So therefore, it's not an exhibit.
22 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, there is nothing on record.
23 MR. RE: That corresponds. The third issue I wanted to raise and
24 clarify was Your Honours' ruling on D173/1, which is the statement of Simo
25 Jovanovic. Your Honour earlier said is striking off the last line in I
1 think paragraph 7 and the last line in paragraph 18, and there was a bit
2 of confusion about Jankovic which is the next statement. I take it that
3 that is the ruling. I'm just trying to clarify that it is the last line
4 of paragraph 7 and the last line of paragraph 18.
5 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, it's the last line in paragraph 7 and the last
6 line in paragraph 18.
7 MR. RE: Yes, thank you, Your Honour. Now, in relation to that,
8 in Your Honours' original ruling this morning, you said an hour and a half
9 cross-examination. Your Honour didn't mention any examination-in-chief
10 for the defendant. Now I'm not in any way -- then Mr. Pantelic raised it
11 and you said one hour. I'm just querying in the light of the two
12 sentences which have been struck off which relate only to conclusions
13 whether the hour is, in fact, in relation confined to those matters. The
14 Prosecution in no way wishes to inhibit Mr. Pantelic from calling evidence
15 relative to his client's Defence and would not object to him calling
16 evidence outside the matters in the statement. However, if he were to do
17 so within that hour, because the Prosecution at the moment can't see how
18 he could spend an hour on those two discrete lines, all we would ask for
19 is we have a proper summary of facts under Rule 65 provided to us.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE MUMBA: The Trial Chamber is of the view that the matters
22 discussing the training of the persons who are sent for training in Ilok
23 and their organisation on their return would be discussed in the viva voce
24 by the witness.
25 MR. RE: Yes, thank you, Your Honour. All I'm asking is that Your
1 Honour has given an hour for that, we just have some difficulty seeing if
2 that would take an hour at the moment. If Mr. Pantelic wishes to lead
3 additional evidence which is relevant to his client's Defence, we just
4 request the Trial Chamber to issue an order under Rule 65 ter (g) (i) that
5 the defendant provide us with a summary of the facts rather than the --
6 someone testifies to something upon which we -- about which we have no
8 JUDGE MUMBA: No, no, those are the only matters which he'll be
10 MR. RE: May it please the Court.
11 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes. And when we say one hour, if he can conclude
12 in less than an hour, then that's fine.
13 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, thank you. That was also my understanding.
14 This is not a fixed rate, I would say. We shall do our best to be as
15 efficient as possible -- as much as possible.
16 Your Honour, I would like to raise another issue before this
17 Honourable Trial Chamber. In our case, on many occasions, although the
18 Defence is very aware and mindful of the position of the Trial Chamber
19 with regard to the agreement of facts between Ms. Biljana Plavsic and the
20 Prosecution, we have some submissions here during our case. In light of
21 the fact that the other Trial Chamber, Honourable Judge Schomburg in the
22 case of Prosecution versus Milomir Stakic actually withdrew his order to
23 summon Ms. Plavsic in Stakic case for cross-examination, as a Trial
24 Chamber's witness. In light of that fact, since the position of the
25 Defence of Blagoje Simic was to challenge certain submissions of our
1 learned friend from the Prosecution in our case, waiting for possible
2 testimony in Stakic case and then maybe to use this transcript or other
3 methods or other instruments that we have at our disposition, so in light
4 of the fact that she will not come in Stakic case before Judge Schomburg
5 Trial Chamber and in light of the fact that the Defence is in possession
6 of information that in Stakic case, certain number of exhibits and
7 materials in the possession of Prosecution were provided to the Defence;
8 namely, videotapes of Ms. Plavsic interviews and relevant transcripts of
9 her cooperation with the Prosecution Office, and on the basis that the
10 Defence is of the opinion that certain exhibits should be on the
11 disposition of Defence in order to challenge the agreement between
12 Ms. Plavsic and Prosecution, this is an -- with your permission, Your
13 Honour, an oral motion to grant this motion in order to obtain these
14 documents in possession of Prosecution, namely, the transcripts and all
15 video or audiotapes in possession of Ms. Plavsic. After reviewing these
16 materials, the Defence will decide whether it will be introduced into
17 evidence in this case since Ms. Plavsic's agreement with Prosecution and
18 of course judgement was tendered here into evidence and it's a matter of
19 permanent discussion and cross-examination of all coming witnesses.
20 After reviewing all these materials, the Defence will decide
21 whether Ms. Plavsic will be called as a witness here in this case for
22 cross-examination and for clarification of significant number of matters.
23 So it's potentially a situation that she might be called, and the Defence
24 will, of course, ask for the assistance of this Trial Chamber. But at
25 this moment, we don't want to raise this issue. At this moment, what is
1 important is to be in possession of all relevant materials and documents
2 regarding the factual plea between Ms. Plavsic and Prosecution, because we
3 think it's relevant to our case to challenge Prosecution submissions and
4 finally document which is also tendered.
5 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. That's all?
6 MR. PANTELIC: That is one matter.
7 Another matter, Your Honour --
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Perhaps before you go to another matter, perhaps
9 I'll ask the Prosecution if they can respond or they need time.
10 MR. RE: I'm not sure what my learned friend's motion is. It
11 seems to be for the Trial Chamber to order the Prosecution to produce
12 certain material to the Defence. All I can say at the moment is
13 reciprocal discovery hasn't been invoked in this case. This Prosecution
14 team is unaware of the material to which Mr. Pantelic refers. He
15 obviously knows far more about it than we do. We have relied upon the
16 public material, being the sentence and the factual basis for the plea of
17 guilty. If Mr. Pantelic speaks to us afterwards, we may be able to come
18 to some sort of arrangement in relation to the material. I don't know. I
19 have to speak to some other people. So we can't respond to -- what I'm
20 not even sure -- I'm not even sure of the ambit of the motion at the
21 moment, but maybe if we can have some time to speak to him, we might be
22 able to resolve it.
23 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.
24 Yes, what is the other matter, Mr. Pantelic.
25 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, Your Honours, but
1 Miroslav Tadic's Defence, I would suggest that the decision on the request
2 of Blagoje Simic's Defence not to allow the tendering of an agreement on
3 facts made between Biljana Plavsic and the Prosecutor's Office and not to
4 show this document to the witnesses who are to be cross-examined here.
5 Because the facts that were disclosed by Biljana Plavsic and agreed by the
6 OTP are not known to the Defence in this case because Biljana Plavsic was
7 not cross-examined. And we believe that until this material is disclosed
8 to the Defence, so that we can learn about the reasons for which Biljana
9 Plavsic struck this agreement, then that statement of facts should not be
10 used in the cross-examination of the witnesses.
11 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Excuse me, Mr. Krgovic, maybe it's the
12 translation, maybe not, but if you take a look at page 13, line 19 and 20,
13 is it correct where you say "I would suggest that the decision on the
14 request of Blagoje Simic's Defence not to allow the tendering of an
15 agreement, et cetera, and not to show this document to the witnesses who
16 are to be cross-examined here." Is that what you intended to say?
17 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours. Our submission
18 was that until the Trial Chamber decides to -- until the Trial Chamber
19 rules on Blagoje Simic's Defence application not to use the agreement in
20 the cross-examination of witnesses and the judgement pronounced on
21 Mrs. Plavsic.
22 JUDGE WILLIAMS: Okay, thank you. That clarifies --
23 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] By the Prosecutor's Office.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: We'll adjourn now and --
25 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, I do apologise. I have another matter
1 briefly, because I said -- I finished with that issue. Can I address the
2 Chamber, please, with the other issue, please.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, what is it?
4 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, in light of the situation and the fact
5 that the Defence, Defence motion for assignment of the new military expert
6 is denied by this Trial Chamber, the only way in order to protect the
7 interests of our clients at this stage, we think, is -- and it's just a
8 proposition, a position of Defence, to tender into evidence an expert
9 opinion, military expert opinion, in Case IT-97-24-T, Prosecution versus
10 Milomir Stakic. This is General Wilmot expert opinion dealing with to
11 some extent similar situations because in Prijedor, Mr. Stakic was
12 president of the Crisis Staff, and this expert opinion is dealing with the
13 relations between civilian authorities, military authorities, and police
14 authorities. It might be of significant importance for this Trial Chamber
15 in the search for truth in order to have a precise picture about these
16 relations, there are significant, I believe, bases specially -- I'm
17 speaking on behalf of all Defence teams, but of course they will give
18 their personal position with regard to this matter. But speaking on
19 behalf of my client, Dr. Blagoje Simic, we think that it can be of great
20 importance for his Defence that this expert opinion of General Wilmot will
21 be accepted as the evidence, as an exhibit in this case. Because as I
22 said, there are many issues covered in this military expert opinion. So
23 if my learned friend from the Prosecution can -- maybe they can also have
24 their position, too.
25 JUDGE MUMBA: I just want to clarify with you, what you are asking
1 for, is it the transcript?
2 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, in fact --
3 JUDGE MUMBA: In the proceedings against Stakic?
4 MR. PANTELIC: No, it's not the transcript, Your Honour. It's
5 just expert opinion on -- there are 50 pages -- it's a report. It's a
7 JUDGE MUMBA: The report itself, that was tendered into evidence
8 in that case.
9 MR. PANTELIC: That's correct, yes, yes, Your Honour. It's a
10 report, military expert report.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, the Trial Chamber would like to find out from
13 the Prosecution whether they are ready to respond or they need some time.
14 MR. RE: Well, the first we saw of it was at 11.00, just before
15 Your Honours walked on the Bench. It's a 52-page report. I flicked
16 through it sitting here. It doesn't seem that objectionable at the
17 moment. However, it appears just to be a report -- an analysis of the VRS
18 and the JNA. On its face, it doesn't seem something we would probably
19 object to, however we obviously need to speak to the Stakic trial team and
20 find out the status of the report in that case. So if we could have a few
21 days to do that, I'd be in a position -- we would be in a position to
22 respond, probably by Friday. That is realistically how long it will take
23 us to make those inquiries.
24 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well. Then the Trial Chamber will be expecting
25 a response from the Prosecution on Friday.
1 MR. PANTELIC: And Your Honour, in order to maybe facil --
2 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, Mr. Pantelic.
3 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, if you think that it will be useful, I
4 have copies for the bench. I have three copies for the bench. Maybe we
5 could get -- I'm not asking for ID number or whatever. Just informally
6 maybe I can deliver that so the Bench can be familiarised with this
7 material, trial officer, legal officer also. I have enough copies, so in
8 the meantime, if you think that it will be useful, I can deliver that.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, very well, Mr. Pantelic.
11 MR. PANTELIC: So I have three copies for the Bench and one copy
12 for the legal officer. At this stage, Ms. Registrar you will need copy,
13 or what is your position because it's no problem?
14 The Prosecution already -- Mr. Usher, the Prosecution is already
15 in possession of this document. So it's for the court -- legal officer,
16 yes, senior legal officer. Thank you.
17 Another matter, Your Honour, which is also of importance for the
18 Defence of Mr. Blagoje Simic is that I would like to tender into evidence
19 one official document which is the part of the Official Gazette of SFRY
20 from December 1991. During the cross-examination of last couple of weeks
21 or months, that matter was raised. And immediately after receiving
22 official translation, I'm in a situation to tender that into evidence. It
23 is the order on the engagement of volunteers in the armed forces of the
24 SFRY during imminent threat of war issued on December 1991. And simply,
25 this is an official translation of that order of Presidency of SFRY. And
1 I would like to tender that into evidence because I think that it's of
2 importance for the Defence of Mr. Blagoje Simic, if there is no objections
3 or there are any other submission of the Prosecution. I would be happy to
4 hear that.
5 JUDGE MUMBA: The Prosecution.
6 MR. RE: Could we possibly have until tomorrow morning to read the
7 document which was handed to us at 11.00.
8 JUDGE MUMBA: Very well.
9 MR. PANTELIC: And finally, Your Honour, if you allow me, I
10 already gave one copy to my learned friend from the Prosecution, it's a
11 part of the book of Colonel Stublincevic. The name of the book is "That's
12 How They Want." That's the title of the book. Colonel Stublincevic
13 discusses in the part of his book and official translation is here,
14 discusses the strategy of JNA and tactical groups in the region of Samac
15 and Odzak and Doboj area and Posavina area, and we think also that this
16 part of this book might be of importance for the Defence of Mr. Blagoje
17 Simic and also to clarify certain roles of certain forces in that region.
18 And I already gave one copy to my learned friends of the Prosecution. I
19 have these three copies for the Bench and one for the Registry and for the
20 legal officer.
21 And that concludes my submissions for today. Thank you, Your
23 MR. RE: Your Honour, the Prosecution hasn't actually seen this
24 material. Mr. Pantelic handed it to us at 11.00. Obviously it requires
25 some thought. There are six pages by someone about facts in issue in the
1 case. We would just like to have a look at it before we indicate our
2 position, if Your Honour could give us until tomorrow.
3 JUDGE MUMBA: Yes, we will just have the numbers for
4 identification purposes.
5 THE REGISTRAR: The document which is entitled "Order on the
6 Engagement of Volunteers," it will be treated as Document D177/1 ID. And
7 D177/1 ter ID for the B/C/S version. The second document handed in, part
8 of the book entitled "The First Fighting in Bosanska Posavina" will be
9 treated as document D178/1 ID and D178/1 ter ID.
10 JUDGE MUMBA: Thank you. I think that's all we have for the rest
11 of today. Our proceedings will continue tomorrow at 9 hours.
12 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
13 at 11.59 a.m., to be reconvened on Wednesday,
14 the 9th day of April, 2003,
15 at 9.00 a.m.