1 Friday, 16 September 2005
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice. Will you be concluding today?
7 MR. NICE: I certainly hope so. The position is that the answers
8 of the witness have taken, of course, a great deal of time, and despite
9 efforts to restrict them they've gone on longer than in some cases I would
10 have liked. In the circumstances, I will inevitably be just necessarily
11 selective about the topics I cover, but if I fail to cover every topic
12 it's not on the basis that I accept the accuracy of what the witness says
13 however I should point to most significant challenges.
14 WITNESS: VOJISLAV SESELJ [Resumed]
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 Cross-examined by Mr. Nice: [Continued]
17 Q. Mr. Seselj, following yesterday's questions about Srebrenica, can
18 you now please tell us in simple, short, clear terms what is the evidence
19 that goes to show that the video we looked at one still from is a forgery?
20 A. The first evidence is the fact that it was carried out in Trnovo,
21 200 kilometres away from Srebrenica. Now, why did a group of
22 paramilitaries --
23 Q. What evidence have you --
24 A. But it is evidence.
25 Q. What evidence have you got that this is a forgery?
1 A. It is the members of the expert team from my Defence who have the
2 evidence, and I will bring it when my trial is on, and I don't have any
3 evidence in my cell.
4 Q. Can you tell us what the evidence is? Is it a witness? Is it a
5 document? What is it?
6 A. Judging by the content of that text, it's a complete videotape.
7 Q. Of what?
8 A. Well, it says there on that piece of paper. Videotape of the
9 staged execution.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Do you actually say that these apparent victims
11 were not executed as shown on the video?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The members of my expert team, to
13 assist my Defence, have information at their disposal that the victims
14 were not killed on that occasion. This was all acting for the purpose
15 filming an alleged execution.
16 JUDGE BONOMY: You see, the answer to that question was yes,
17 wasn't it, because it was carefully phrased. But you've got to give us
18 about two or three sentences to use up the time apparently.
19 MR. NICE:
20 Q. You see, --
21 A. No, I'm not trying to use up the time, Mr. Bonomy. I'm only
22 trying to give a exhaustive and reliable response.
23 Q. Mr. Seselj, you see, evidence exists of DNA matching, statements
24 from parents and loved ones whose young male relations have been killed,
25 sightings of them in Srebrenica shortly before they were taken away, going
1 to show and the evidence may come before this Trial Chamber before the end
2 of the trial, and if you're really saying this is a forgery this may go
3 deeply to your credit. The options are -- not options, just think. Are
4 you actually saying that you have evidence to show that this is a forgery
5 in the form of some other videotape?
6 A. I told you what I have at my disposal. The key issue is where
7 their bodies were found. If so, were they found in Trnovo? Were they
8 taken somewhere else after the filming of the execution? If you say that
9 the corpses were found in Trnovo and you can prove that, then I will
10 accept that that's where they were shot, which doesn't mean that they were
11 shot at that point of time.
12 Q. Please stop shouting. Let me just tell you this: People have
13 been back to Trnovo. They have photographed and have filmed the precise
14 location which matches exactly with what can be seen -- can be shown to be
15 seen on the film. Now you raise the issue about why Trnovo and I'll ask
16 you a question since you've apparently made inquiries.
17 The significance of this film as you and this accused must know is
18 that it reveals taking bodies from Srebrenica -- sorry, taking -- taking
19 Muslims from Srebrenica to comparatively distant locations which may be
20 termed hubs, from which they were then parcelled out to be killed in small
21 numbers. Now, that, you see, I'm going to suggest to you, is what your
22 inquiries must have revealed and that shows a high level of prolonged
23 organisation in the killing of the victims of Srebrenica.
24 Do you know about, and I repeat the way I've expressed it, a high
25 level of prolonged organisation of the killing of victims from Srebrenica?
1 A. You're making this up. You're making up the killing of victims
2 from Srebrenica. This was not organised by the Serbian authorities,
3 whether civilian or the killing of the victims in Srebrenica was organised
4 by Western intelligence agencies. The purpose was to achieve something
5 that would upset the world public --
6 Q. Mr. Seselj, stop. The people who are filmed and who are now of
7 course detained in Belgrade were people filmed killing come from the
8 Skorpions which was a unit subordinated within Serbia, and you and the
9 accused know that.
10 Now, tell us this: Do you accept that the people like
11 Slobodan Medic shown on that film, members of the Skorpions, are
12 subordinated within Serbia to the SAJ?
13 A. No. That is your fabrication. The Skorpions have nothing to do
14 with Serbia. They were acting warriors who for your purposes shot
15 propaganda material with horrific scenes of crimes so that this could be
16 used against the Serbian state and the Serbian people. That's what I'm
18 Q. Let me understand your state of mind in light of that last answer
19 and your use of the word "your." Are you now suggesting that the film
20 that's been screened, and incidentally for the sake of the record the
21 assertion that it was provided to the Tribunal by Natasa Kandic is not, of
22 course, one that is adopted by the Prosecution and the matter will be
23 shown to the Chamber through other routes. For the sake of the record,
24 are you saying that in 1995, in July, for the purposes of this Tribunal,
25 Skorpions engaged in a propaganda exercise shooting or appearing to shoot
1 victims? Is that really what you're saying so we can judge your
3 A. I am convinced of this, that this was done for your purposes and
4 for anti-Serb purposes, because what madman would agree to kill? Anyone
5 who did crimes in this war knows -- knew he was committing a crime. There
6 is no one who committed a crime who can say he didn't know that this was
7 prohibited and that it was a crime. All the crimes contained in the
8 Statute of this Tribunal existed in the legislation of the former
10 Q. No. Pause, please. Your maintaining that it would be appropriate
11 at any cost to recover the territory of the Serbs, your rivers of blood
12 speeches? How does that fit with your assertion here that everybody knows
13 what they would be doing would be a crime if they killed someone?
14 A. First of all, these are two absolutely different matters. Rivers
15 of blood were already spilt, had already been spilt on several occasions
16 for Kosovo and Metohija, and what I said was that we would defend Kosovo
17 and Metohija again even if it meant spilling rivers of blood. But I was
18 referring to fighting on the battlefield. From 1382 until today many
19 rivers of blood have flown because of Kosovo.
20 Q. Why do you say, then, that this -- you say these killings filmed
21 would be a crime, yes, and how does that lead to your conviction that this
22 film is not genuine? Please tell us.
23 A. First of all, it's evident that those who actually did the
24 shooting or acted shooting were doing this because they were paid by
25 whoever was filming. Since this could not have been done in Srebrenica or
1 nearby, they collected a group of Muslims and drove them off 200
2 kilometres away. You have no other case of Muslim prisoners being taken
3 far away from Srebrenica. They were taken to Bratunac and other nearby
4 areas. This is 200 kilometres away. You have to go through Bratunac,
5 Vlasenica, Han Pijesak, Sokolac, Pale, all of Mount Trbevic, Vukovica and
6 then arrive in Trnovo.
7 Q. As you know, the evidence in this case shows at least 4.000 dead,
8 that's on the most conservative estimate, and we all know that the public
9 assessments include seven and 8.000 dead of whom only a limited number, a
10 couple of thousand, may so far have been exhumed. Come back. Is the
11 reality that you with your access through government when you were a
12 deputy Prime Minister and through your contact with this accused know that
13 the organisation to kill the victims of Srebrenica was both wider and
14 longer in duration than might originally have been thought reflecting high
15 levels of government organisation within Bosnia and maybe within Serbia?
16 Is that what you've now discovered?
17 A. That is not true. You're fabricating this. You're falsifying the
18 information about the number of people who were executed. It's not true
19 that there were 4.000 of them. You don't have that number of bodies.
20 Among the bodies found were also bodies of Muslims killed three years
21 previously. I assert that.
22 According to information from Dutch officers, a thousand or maybe
23 1.200 were killed, maybe a little more. I assert categorically the number
24 was not 4.000. I also assert categorically that all this was organised by
25 Western intelligence agencies, primarily the French agency, because
1 Clinton needed --
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: We have heard that already, Mr. Seselj.
3 MR. NICE: Incidentally, Your Honours, in the documents he
4 provided yesterday, his later publications, he does at certain places - I
5 haven't got them available - refer to the French intelligence account on
6 earlier occasions. I've got something else to say about that document
7 when I've got more detail to hand. Very well.
8 Q. I'm going to move on from that. The only -- the only -- the only
9 body you refer to as being involved is the 10th Sabotage Detachment and
10 you've suggested in some way that this was acting independently. Just
11 might like to have a look briefly at this, please.
12 And it's a Sanction for the booth, please.
13 I want to take it very briefly. You'll see what's going on here.
14 [Videotape played]
15 THE INTERPRETER: [Voiceover] "Fighters of the Sabotage Detachment,
16 Serbian heroes, allow me to greet you on behalf of the Knin Corps and the
17 Main Staff and to congratulate you on the day of the formation of the
19 "Thank you.
20 "Through your activities so far you have shown how a soldier of
21 the army of Republika Srpska should fight. Up to now you have completed
22 your assignments with great success, without any losses, which is to be
23 commended. We are in a situation when the actions you are taking in the
24 future have to be planned as operations of wider proportions. From this
25 arises the need that units at the corps level within the army of Republika
1 Srpska, similar units be formed. Right at this moment, we are working on
2 forming a sabotage unit within the Drina Corps. We have just discussed
3 this in your commander's office, and he said, 'Great, now we can have a
4 competition.' I told him, 'I accept the challenge and may we end up at
5 Bratilo as soon as possible and you know where that is.'"
6 MR. NICE:
7 Q. Now, this is Krstic. It's October 1985 [sic]. It's after the
8 atrocities of Srebrenica and he's treating them, is he not, as a formal
9 unit, not as a mercenary unit. Can you explain that?
10 A. First of all, mercenaries fighting for money were also in a unit.
11 I never said that that the 10th Sabotage Detachment was an informal unit.
12 This was a detachment in the structure of the army of Republika Srpska.
13 It was made up of mercenaries. Secondly, you are giving me a speech made
14 by General Krstic. What have I to do with this? I have only met General
15 Krstic once in my life and that was here in the detention unit and that
16 was by accident.
17 Q. [Previous translation continues]...
18 A. The essence of response to your question is the following.
19 Q. [Previous translation continues]... you do understand what a
20 response is, don't you? Let's have it.
21 A. Why are you so nervous, Mr. Nice?
22 Q. [Previous translation continues]... don't credit me with qualities
23 that I don't have but answer the question, Mr. Seselj.
24 A. The main people in this detachment are Dominik Petrusic and
25 Milorad Pelemis. For your interests, they abducted Stevan Todorovic at
1 Zlatibor and transferred him to Bosnia in order to hand him over to the
2 Americans. You never issued an arrest warrant for Milorad Pelemis and
3 Dominik Petrusic, nor are you requesting that the national courts
4 prosecute them.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: I'm not clear about the answer at all. Did you say
6 at the beginning of that answer that you accepted that the 10th Sabotage
7 Detachment was formally a part of the army?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know. I can't prove
9 that now but I assume that formally it was part of the army. It was part
10 of the structure.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues]... did you say,
12 that it was formally part of the army?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I assume it was formally. I don't
14 have any evidence for that.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
16 MR. NICE: As a relevant part of the evidence, please.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
18 THE REGISTRAR: That will be 917.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The question was not clear of what
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The army of Republika Srpska. That
24 was its official title. The 10th Sabotage Detachment of the army of
25 Republika Srpska. It was not part of any corps.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: The answer was clear to me. Thank you.
2 MR. NICE:
3 Q. All right. Let's just move on. I've given you many opportunities
4 and I'm going to give you a last one to tell us of anything you know, not
5 guess or work out, anything you know in evidence that you've seen or
6 indeed people you've spoken to that reveals concern by the Serb
7 authorities, inquiries by the Serb authorities between July 1995 and
8 February and March of 1996. Any document, any report showing an inquiry
9 into Srebrenica?
10 A. You don't have any evidence that the authorities in Serbia at that
11 time even knew about the shootings in Srebrenica.
12 Q. [Previous translation continues]...
13 A. Information about that execution arrived later on, but I don't
14 know where or to whom.
15 Q. You really saying that you -- were you unaware of the degree to
16 which Srebrenica was publicised in the United Nations? Were you unaware
17 of the indictment against Mladic? Are you seriously saying that?
18 A. Well, we heard about indictments against Mladic and Karadzic.
19 When the indictment was issued, I was convinced that anything that was
20 being ascribed to them in the indictment was fabricated, and I abide by
21 that today. The reasons for the indictment were political, but some kind
22 of grounds had to be constructed, and this was done artificially --
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Seselj.
24 MR. NICE:
25 Q. You see, before I move on very briefly to Erdemovic again just to
1 tidy that up, and of course though you were not in Srebrenica at the time,
2 and although, of course, Mr. Seselj, you're not charged in relation to
3 Srebrenica which makes your bringing the film about the Skorpions a little
4 hard to understand, you know that the environment in which these crimes
5 were committed was an environment you had created in part by your
6 engagement of innocent civilians in hate. You knew that, didn't you?
7 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Nice, what's the --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's not true. You're making that
10 JUDGE BONOMY: What's to be gained by that question at this stage
11 in this cross-examination when we know exactly what the answer will be?
12 MR. NICE: Well, Your Honour, I wish to establish why he's -- oh,
13 very well. If Your Honour doesn't find it helpful, I'm going to move on.
14 JUDGE BONOMY: It may just be me, but I -- [Microphone not
15 activated]. It may just be me, but I feel we've been over and over it so
16 often that it's pointless going over it again.
17 MR. NICE: Let me just make it plain, because I don't wish to fall
18 out with the Court. The significance for the Prosecution of the mechanics
19 whereby these crimes were committed, mechanics that included the
20 environment created by people like this witness with the consent or
21 without the resistance of the accused is something that is of central
22 importance. That's why I've concentrated on it. I've -- and I wanted to
23 give this witness the opportunity in relation to this most serious crime
24 where I will be asking the Court to say in due course that his answers are
25 not only nonsensical but wickedly dishonest. I want him to have an
1 opportunity to know exactly the basis upon which I'm putting it to him.
2 But I will move on. And my last questions in relation to
3 Srebrenica are rounding up what I've said before and that is that the
4 account of the inquiry -- or not the inquiry, the proceedings that were
5 launched in the spring of 1996 are, I suggest to you, an account that
6 reflects -- doesn't reflect but if the inquiry was more deep, Mr. Seselj,
7 would have shown or would show that the authorities only acted because
8 journalists were about to reveal what Erdemovic had told them. Can you
9 counter that? Can you say that's incorrect?
10 A. As everything we have been hearing from you for days, years, and
11 months is untrue, Mr. Nice, I'm convinced that this, too, is untrue. But
12 you're asking me to talk in detail about something in which I did not
13 participate because I was not in the government in 1996. All I know is
14 that our police immediately arrested Erdemovic as soon as they heard that
15 he was involved in the execution, as soon as that came to light. How it
16 came to light, that is something that has to do with the methodology of
18 You are now insinuating and asking me to confirm your
20 Q. [Previous translation continues]... in any sense counter to the
21 proposition that I made. Let's move on, then, to Kosovo.
22 A. As for your assertion, I'll respond at once, Mr. Nice. As for
23 your assertion, it is also a pure fabrication, because neither I nor any
24 other politician from Serbia ever advocated the killing of prisoners of
25 war, the killing of civilians, looting, robbing, and all the rest.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. The --
2 A. And anyone who committed crimes in this war knew he was committing
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Seselj, can you comment on Mr. Nice's
5 suggestion that the authorities only acted because they knew that
6 journalists were about to reveal what Erdemovic had told them?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't believe that assertion of
8 Mr. Nice's. I think the authorities responded because they came by
9 information that one man was involved in a mass execution, and they
10 responded immediately.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thanks. We have your response.
12 Mr. Nice.
13 MR. NICE:
14 Q. Staying briefly with the Skorpions, the Skorpions were based, by
15 the time of the start of the Kosovo conflict, in Sid, were they not?
16 A. That's the first time I hear that, that the Skorpions had a base
17 anywhere in Serbia. I don't believe they did. And the Skorpions in
18 Kosovo did not take part as the Skorpions but they came forward as
19 volunteers in regular units. Some of them, not all of them.
20 Q. See, and I only wanted your help with this because there is an
21 entry in Stevanovic's diary dealing with the men from Sid are coming in
22 PJP uniforms, and I want you to confirm if you can that the men from Sid
23 is and must be known to be the Skorpions. You say you don't know that?
24 A. No. And I don't believe it either.
25 Q. Don't you? Very well. Next thing, then.
1 A. I really don't believe that.
2 Q. So far as Kosovo is concerned, how intimate with all government
3 matters were you as a deputy Prime Minister? Do you say you would have
4 known everything that happened concerning Kosovo or did you only get
5 privilege to learn of certain things?
6 A. In principle, I knew everything that was essential. I received
7 daily reports, special daily reports, in fact, about the war actions as
8 deputy Prime Minister, which means every day in the government of Serbia I
9 would receive such information, where combat operations took place, what
10 the results of combat operations were for our side and the adversary.
11 Q. Racak, then. One of the things the Court has been looking for, or
12 at least the Prosecution has been looking for, is a comprehensive account
13 in written form from those who went into Racak and who, as you would have
14 it, killed terrorists. Where is there such a report?
15 A. Well, the report on the operation in Racak must be in existence in
16 the MUP, because the report was tabled, filed, and on the day that this
17 battle in Racak took place, I was in Pristina attending a meeting of the
18 government of Serbia.
19 Q. I just want to know where the report is. Tell us, please, since
20 you're so intimate with all these matters, for an event like Racak,
21 properly conducted, would you expect to find the commanding officer or the
22 officer in charge producing a detailed report where 30 or so KLA activists
23 have been killed?
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, you already have the answer that there was a
25 report tabled and filed. That's what the witness has said. So it's
1 finding it that's the thing. It's -- we're already past the stage of
2 establishing it exists.
3 MR. NICE:
4 Q. Where is it, then, Mr. Seselj? Can you help us? Who wrote it and
5 have you seen it?
6 A. Perhaps at my cell at the Scheveningen prison. I can't imagine a
7 more nonsensical question, asking me where the report is. The way the
8 police worked it was quite normal that after every operation a report was
9 compiled. Now, as this was an operation of the greatest importance, that
10 report must have been sent up to the minister. As far as us members of
11 the government are concerned, while we were at Pristina we were informed
12 of that orally.
13 Q. [Previous translation continues]... Pavlovic on the same "Death of
14 Yugoslavia" programme in which you participated says in terms to the
15 camera that it was a joint action in involving the military as well as the
16 police. Can you tell us, please, about the police involvement -- about
17 the army involvement. I beg your pardon.
18 A. As far as I know, in the operation itself it was just the police
19 that took part. Now, that the army was close by and that it assumed
20 certain tactical positions in the rear, to the rear of the police, that is
21 quite probable but I can't tell you anything more precise on that score.
22 But to the best of my information, it was the police that engaged in that
24 Q. [Previous translation continues]... shells into Racak?
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Will you repeat --
1 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters did not hear you.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Repeat the question. We didn't --
3 MR. NICE:
4 Q. Did they fire shells into Racak, the army?
5 A. This is the first time that I hear of any such thing. I don't
6 think so, no.
7 Q. You haven't seen a report from the army?
8 A. No. I hear that for the first time and I don't believe it.
9 Q. Is there any reason that you can think of for the representatives
10 of the military or the police on the ground on the day to deny the
11 involvement of the army in a joint exercise of this kind?
12 A. There's no reason. Had there been a necessity for the army, the
13 army would have been deployed. According to our constitutional system,
14 the army can be deployed against an outside enemy and against internal
15 rebels and terrorists. That is without any doubt. So any use of the army
16 in that sense would have been legal and lawful. But I'm hearing from you
17 for the first time that there was -- there were suspicions that the army
18 took part.
19 Q. Moving on after the bombing began, we've had great deal of
20 evidence - so I'm not going to go through it with you in any detail - from
21 people who give accounts of being driven from their homes, people being
22 killed, people being expelled by military and police forces. Do you say
23 all that evidence is false, or do you say there was some driving of people
24 from their homes by the processing of killing them, or killing some of
25 them first, and then driving the others out? What do you say?
1 A. The witnesses which you produced are more or less all false
2 witnesses. There was no systematic expulsion of the Albanian population
3 by the authorities, and I state that quite categorically. There were
4 individual crimes, individual killings, beatings, and looting. And our
5 military and police forces had strict orders to take the necessary steps
6 in cases of that kind and prosecute the perpetrators of such crimes, and
7 that is what I state.
8 Q. Sorry, go on, yes. The --
9 A. And that was the policy of the republican government of Serbia as
10 indeed the federal government.
11 Q. Whether accounts of really substantial killings these must be all
12 entirely fabricated, must they? Suva Reka, all that sort of stuff, just
13 entirely made up?
14 A. There were no really substantial killings. If you look at the
15 overall number of victims of casualties in the three months of bombing,
16 for example, and if you were to compare how many people -- how many
17 Albanian died and how many Serbs died and members of other ethnic groups,
18 you will actually see that the real killing in the form of repressive
19 measures did not exist.
20 Q. [Previous translation continues]... being organised to take people
21 across the border into Albania or Macedonia, all false, is it? No such
22 trains were organised? What was your take on that as the deputy Prime
24 A. I have information as vice-Premier that our authorities in a
25 local -- at a local and regional level tried to convince the Albanians not
1 to leave. When it was not able to convince them not to leave, then it
2 may -- it facilitated their departure by supplying them with water, bread,
3 some more basics, possibly medical material and sometimes transport. I
4 can't go into the details. I don't know them all now.
5 Q. So as the Prime Minister you might know this. Special trains were
6 laid on, were they, to take them out because they wanted to go?
7 A. I don't believe there were special trains laid on, but that the
8 authorities did make an effort to facilitate their departure and their
9 position generally; that is true. But no trains which would force them to
10 leave. And there was no forcible expulsion. That's what I'm claiming.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Seselj, I take it that you were against this
12 policy of trying to convince the Albanians not to leave.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, that was the uniform,
14 united policy of the government. You're now bringing, linking up one of
15 my speeches dating back to 1991 which could be called in a sense
16 anti-Albanian in character with my conduct in the government of Serbia in
17 1999. The government was united. All three parties in the government as
18 coalition partners were united in their positions on all key issues, and
19 we were united in being against the Albanians leaving Kosovo. What we
20 wanted to do was to ensure protection for them to stay on.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: So your policy had changed.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I told you what the policy was
23 of the Serbian Radical Party in 1991 as well. One of my excursions caused
24 by certain events which had happened prior to that did not mean even in
25 1991 that the general orientation of the party stand had been changed, but
1 here we paid particular attention to the fact that the mass exodus of
2 Albanians would be made use of by the Western powers against Serbia. It
3 would be used as a pretext for aggression and justification for
4 aggression, and that is why we did everything in your power to prevent a
5 mass exodus, not to give the Western powers an ace up their sleeves. I
6 don't want to say that I like Albanians, but I want to convince you that
7 our behaviour and conduct was rational from the aspects of national
8 interests and from the aspects of state interests of Serbia. It was in
9 Serbia's interest that the Albanian population remain in Kosovo and
10 Metohija, to thwart the terrorists and to stand up to the aggression.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Does that mean that at heart your policy remained
12 the same, your view remained the same that the Albanians should leave but
13 for pragmatic political reasons you supported the idea that they should
14 stay just in case the West made use of their departure for propaganda
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My permanent idea and desire is that
17 the Albanian immigrants should leave, those of them who do not have our
18 citizenship and who caused the worst ills to befall Kosovo and Metohija.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: I see. Thanks.
20 MR. NICE:
21 Q. But just to follow on from His Honour Judge Bonomy's point. In
22 the short time, you would have even preferred the illegal immigrants
23 dating back to the Second World War to stay; is that right?
24 A. Yes. Because the situation had not been settled and ordered. It
25 was difficult to identify who was a citizen and who was not. It was our
1 aim to have the peaceful Albanians to stay in Kosovo, in peace, not to
2 rise in rebellion, to convince them to stay, to remain, so as to avoid
3 having two wars, because NATO used the Albanian terrorists as their
4 infantrymen. So we prevailed upon the Albanians and wanted to convince
5 them. We even gave out weapons to certain Albanians in villages that were
6 not in favour of the terrorists to be able to defend themselves. You had
7 talks with people like that who took part in things like that.
8 So what we wanted to do was to get the Albanians on our side and
9 to convince them that the Western powers were not their friends and that
10 they were just going to use them and abuse them for their own purposes
11 which were anti-Serb.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: It seems to follow from what you've said that if
13 there hadn't been the threat of war, you would actually now, 1999, have
14 got to the position that you wanted Albanians to stay. I'm now confused.
15 You seem to describe them all as peaceful Albanians apart from the
16 terrorists, and we know that they are a fairly small proportion. How do
17 you distinguish?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, the overall policy of the
19 government throughout 1998, which was prior to the bombing, was that we
20 should find a peaceful, democratic solution together with the Albanians,
21 to reach an agreement, and thence we had this initiative on the part of
22 Serbia for talks, and in these talks and agreements I would even give up
23 my stand for the immigrants to return to Albanian if that would have meant
24 a peaceful, democratic solution could be found in which the interests of
25 other ethnic groups in Kosovo would be protected. And in your system,
1 too, for example, a politician, once he's in the opposition, can support
2 certain stands, but when he gets into power he behaves far more
3 realistically. So what I was preoccupied at the time as vice-Premier was
4 a peaceful solution for the Kosovo issue and a normalisation of the
5 situation, that is, to bring life back to normal.
6 MR. NICE:
7 Q. What you're telling us is not --
8 A. And of course to avoid interference on the part of the Western
10 Q. What you're telling us is not true. You all knew from 1998 at the
11 very latest with things like Lord Ashdown catching you, the army out
12 shelling houses, that you descended into a gross illegality in your
13 treatment of Kosovar Albanians and that with the bombing there was a
14 chance to kick them out in huge numbers, and that's exactly what you went
15 about and did, isn't it?
16 A. Lord Paddy Ashdown is an ordinary liar, and recently information
17 was -- has been published that he worked as an agent of the British
18 intelligence service throughout. And he showed himself to be a liar in
19 Bosnia-Herzegovina. He was an anti-Serb politician who tried in all ways
20 to abolish Republika Srpska. And that Lord Paddy Ashdown of yours as a
21 liar and as a criminal does not deserve any confidence to be placed in
23 Q. You see, we note your observations about Lord Ashdown, but we
24 still have to come through Racak which predates the bombing. Now, you've
25 given a generalised account. I wasn't going to descend into particulars,
1 but apart from the military involvement, just help us with this in respect
2 of Racak: You suggested that bodies were repositioned so as to make it
3 look like a massacre. Do you have any evidence, Mr. Seselj, do you have
4 your hands on a piece of paper, a document, a film, that can explain how
5 it was in respect of the largest number of people killed there that where
6 they died there were bullets in and around them but on the banks
7 surrounding where they died there were the shell casings consistent with
8 them simply being mowed down in a prepared way? Can you point us to any
9 evidence you've got that explains that forensic, scientific fact?
10 A. All that was extremely well explained by the prominent Austrian
11 publicist, Austrian marquis, who lives in Vienna, and his name is Malte
12 Olsevski, in his book "The War for Kosovo." And in that book he explains
13 that Racak was supposed to be a trigger event, too, to justify the
14 intervention. And those things have been cleared up in world -- by the
15 world publicist. Look at Olsevski's book, "The War for Kosovo." Well,
16 you're asking me about the traces of shells.
17 Q. Come on, descend to details, because this Court will not be making
18 its decision on generalities but on evidence. Help us with the details.
19 How can it be that all these bodies are lined up with bullets where they
20 died -- or where they lay, sometimes under their bodies, sometimes under
21 the ground with teeth and all sorts of things like that, and the shell
22 casings are at the placements round about where they died consistent with
23 them having been mowed down in an execution? Tell us, please. Or if this
24 is something on which you don't have evidence, you can always say so.
25 A. Neither the team of Finnish pathologists could have confirmed that
1 lie of yours.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute. Mr. Milosevic has a point, I
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, Mr. Nice is
5 consciously and intentionally asking a question that is not truthful and
6 correct, because we heard one of the best forensic experts here, Professor
7 Slavisa Dobricanin was his name, and he precisely proved through material
8 fact that what Mr. Nice is claiming could never have happened. So
9 Mr. Nice is once again asking the question in this way and asking it of a
10 witness who is not placed to answer that question.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I must say that I don't see that this
12 witness is in a position to help very much with these matters.
13 MR. NICE: Very detailed accounts on general information and I
14 think the position is clear. My last question to him on this topic at
15 this stage is this:
16 Q. Have you seen or read either of these books "Under Orders" or "As
17 Seen, As Told"? We certainly know that one of them is in Serbian or
18 B/C/S or however we should describe it.
19 A. First of all, there is no language which is called B/C/S. There
20 is no such language. And in that language, B/C/S, I have never read
21 anything nor do I understand that language.
22 Secondly, if you're asking me about some books, you have to tell
23 me the authors.
24 Q. Have you read these books? If not, I'm going to move on.
25 A. Which books?
1 Q. OSCE "As Seen, As Told." Human Rights Watch, "Under Orders."
2 Have you read them?
3 A. I absolutely place no confidence in the OSCE or that so-called
4 non-governmental organisation Human Rights Watch.
5 Mr. Bonomy asked me earlier on whether I have any evidence and
6 proof that non-governmental organisations, NGOs of a humanitarian nature,
7 took part in spy and subversive operations. At that time I wasn't able to
8 tell you something specific, but I am able to do so now, Mr. Bonomy, if
9 you're interested in hearing it. The non-governmental organisation
10 Medecins sans Frontieres took an old Albanian man - his name was Osman -
11 and instructed him in how to provide false statements for the Paris
12 Le Monde to the effect that the Serbs were slaughtering Albanians.
13 Secondly, Natasa Kandic who was mentioned here bandied about a
14 conjured up diary of a conjured up colonel, Vojislav Antic of Yugoslavia,
15 and gave false information to a journalist the US Today paper and he
16 published that. The editorial offices launched an investigation. The
17 evidence was seen to be false and that journalist was dismissed. And I
18 sent in a report on the work of Natasa Kandic to the OTP waging their case
19 against me.
20 The OSCE mission was William Walker, missionary was William
21 Walker. William Walker was trained in intelligence, spy business, dirty
22 business, subversive business, and was shown to have his hands involved in
23 dirty business in South America, Salvador, et cetera, and what he did
24 there he repeated in Kosovo.
25 Q. The question on details in respect of Kosovo concerns Dubrava
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
2 THE INTERPRETER: And Nicaragua, the interpreter adds.
3 MR. NICE:
4 Q. You as deputy Prime Minister owe a special -- well, not
5 particularly you but a government generally of course owes a special duty
6 to those it detains to care for them and to look after their safety. As
7 you know, many men died at Dubrava prison. You haven't told us about
8 that. Just tell us, what do you know about that?
9 A. You never asked me about that. The Dubrava prison was attacked by
10 NATO planes. The prison was hit and a certain number of people were
11 killed as a result. I don't know how many. Some of the detainees stayed,
12 some used this NATO targeting of the prison to escape. That is what I
13 know about that.
14 Q. And that's all you know, is it?
15 A. That's what I know.
16 Q. Never seen any reports coming to government of any detail of what
17 happened? You see, we've got evidence in written form from documents
18 provided in part by the accused's own witnesses that a special group of
19 police went in at 5.15 in the morning of the 22nd of May, and according to
20 evidence before this Court, which had no knowledge that this material,
21 this written material existed, it was at half past 5.00 that the bulk of
22 the prisoners were subject to attempts to execute them and many were
23 executed. What do you know as a government official about sending in a
24 special group of police at 5.15 on the morning of the 22nd to Dubrava
25 prison? You seem to know a great deal about other things. Tell us about
2 A. This is the first time that I hear --
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If the witness who was vice-Premier
6 at that time is asked by Mr. Nice mentioning a government document, then
7 he is duty-bound to show him that document and not to construct things on
8 the basis of that document, to construe things that cannot be deduced from
9 the actual document. Let him show the witness the document and ask the
10 witness to explain, to say whether he's seen the document, what he knows
11 about what it says in the document, but he has to show the witness the
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, I think you should reconsider this --
14 this line of questioning. You don't have to put the length and breadth of
15 the Prosecution's case to this witness.
16 MR. NICE: I don't. I have a particular reason for putting this
17 part of the case and it will become clear in my next question.
18 Q. You see, at the moment, Mr. Seselj, we have evidence going to show
19 what I've just suggested to you and it came in several documents from the
20 accused. There may be evidence to show that this -- and this has been
21 raised before, that this deployment was known to the assistant minister
22 Stevanovic. That's not Obrad Stevanovic, it's the other assistant
23 minister, on the 21st. Do you know anything about the deployment of these
24 police being dealt with at the level of ministers on the 21st?
25 A. This is the first time that I'm hearing of something like that.
1 And bearing in mind just how many lies you have uttered over the past few
2 days, I don't believe any of that either.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Seselj, that is not an appropriate response.
4 You must respond to the Prosecutor's question in a manner other than
5 suggesting that he's lying, and we have been through that before. He is
6 putting his case to you.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, he has responded. He knows nothing about it.
8 MR. NICE: Very well. Let's move on. Your Honours, I make it
9 clear from the questions I've asked that this is a matter I will be
10 pursuing wherever possible, and it will become clear why I give everyone a
11 chance to deal with it a little later.
12 To help the Chamber a little bit with the issue of Greater Serbia,
13 we've touched on it. Let's touch on it briefly again.
14 Q. And I want brief answers if possible. The terminology or the
15 term "Greater Serbia" applied in the way that you apply it, can be traced
16 back at least to the middle of the 19th century; correct?
17 A. Even before that. But the first time it was explicitly registered
18 as a term was in 1803. It was written by or Arsenije Gagovic to the
19 Russian emperor. Stevan Stratimirevic from Srem also mentions a Greater
20 Serbia in his memorandum to the Russian emperor, later on.
21 Q. The development of the notion of Greater Serbia, this is the
22 formal use of the word "Greater Serbia," can be traced through various
23 events and movements. The term changes from time to time in detail, but
24 one could track it through Nacertanije, is that right, in the mid-19th
1 A. No. The term Greater Serbia is not mentioned in Nacertanije.
2 Nacertanije is a document that primarily pertains to the liberation of the
3 southern Serb lands. There is no mention of the northern Serb lands.
4 Garasanin wrote it under the influence of a Czech called Zha [phoen], as
5 far as I remember, and he lived as an immigrant in Belgrade.
6 Q. Nacertanije of Greater Serbia find itself reflected in Nacertanije
7 or not? Just yes or no.
8 A. Not in the exact sense of the word.
9 Q. The concept then in the 20th century finds itself expressed does
10 it, through the Black Hand? Would that be right? Perhaps through the
11 Balkan wars? What do you say?
12 A. No. You've skipped the most important by the from the 19th
13 century, and that is the great Serbian poet, Stevan Knicanin, and the
14 association called Greater Serbia. This association called Greater Serbia
15 explained in detail what the concept itself meant. In the 19th century,
16 from 1888 until 1893, a weekly paper was published entitled "Greater
17 Serbia." We, the Serb Radicals, have collected all the copies of that
18 newspaper, and we published it as a reprint edition. You can get a copy
19 if you want.
20 Q. Then before the Second World War, moving very quickly --
21 A. As for the Black Hand organisation, there is no reference
22 whatsoever to a Greater Serbia, not in a single one of their documents.
23 This is a secret organisation of military officers that led to the top
24 link of the Obrenovic dynasty in 1903, and there is no reference to a
25 Greater Serbia in their documents.
1 Regent Aleksandar Karadjordjevic in 1914 at the beginning of the
2 First World War refers to a Greater Serbia. After that comes the
3 declaration of Nis. The National Assembly of Serbia met in Nis and
4 proclaimed that the objective of the struggle of the Serb people was the
5 liberation of all our Slav brothers and --
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, in a sense you have set yourself up for
7 a lecture from the witness.
8 MR. NICE: I'm trying to --
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: This is his favourite topic.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Before you -- can you help me because --
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My most favourite subject. I do not
12 have a subject that I like better, Mr. Robinson.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Nice, can you help me, what is the point of
15 MR. NICE: The Court was concerned about the terminology "Greater
16 Serbia." It is actually quite important, and I'm desiring through this
17 witness to put in a very succinct way what our position is reflected in
18 the pleadings and in the evidence we've led. If the Court doesn't --
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, so for most of the questions have got the
20 answer that you were wrong, but if you think it's going somewhere useful,
21 then please carry on.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: But, Mr. Nice, do you accept the more
23 pragmatic -- suggested a more pragmatic term extended Serbia, I think.
24 "Expanded Serbia"?
25 MR. NICE: Our pleadings, our filings make the position clear and
1 my questions make the position clear, but it may be that I can make things
2 helpfully clearer for the Chamber now in a few minutes. But if I can't,
3 then it's unfortunate. But I'd like to just ask a couple more questions
4 because I'm interested in the development of the concept until it comes to
5 the time when, as you say, you and the accused were at ideological
6 opposite ends, as you've said that, you were ideologically different. So
7 that other events we've heard, which I am going to ask of you very shortly
8 as to whether they encompass in some way the Greater Serbia notion, the
9 writings of Cubrilovic in -- shortly before the second war, and then the
10 maps of Moljevic at and after the Second World War. Do those writings and
11 those maps and so on reflect the Greater Serbia concept of which you were
12 now the inheritor, as you would have it?
13 A. No. First of all, the answer has to be an exhaustive one. Vasa
14 Cubrilovic held a lecture at the Serbian cultural club before the Second
15 World War about the Albanians moving out. This was a wondrous
16 intellectual speech and it was referred to very often after that. There
17 was a great deal of mystification involved, but we in our newspaper,
18 Greater Serbia, actually published the text of that lecture. Vasa
19 Cubrilovic is one of the few Serbian academicians who at the Assembly of
20 the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts that was devoted to the famous
21 memorandum opposed the writers of the memorandum. It was only him and
22 Pale Savic and perhaps only another person or two.
23 So a Greater Serbia cannot be linked to Vasa Cubrilovic in any
25 As for Stevan Moljevic, he did not belong to the Serbian
1 intellectual elite. I know a lot about him. I can't say that I know
2 everything about anybody, but I know a lot about him. Stevan Moljevic,
3 though, was not among the top officials of the Ravno Gora movement of
4 General Draza Mihajlovic. He had some ideas that proceeded from the
5 concept of Greater Serbia, but he also gave these ideas a personal touch
6 which we found unacceptable.
7 After the Second World War, Stevan Moljevic was sentenced to a
8 prison term and perhaps even died in the Sremska Mitrovica prison.
9 However, the main ideologist of Draza Mihajlovic's movement was Dragica
10 Vasic. The Ravno Gora movement included Catholics and Muslims too.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: [Previous translation continues]...
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Obviously you find this subject
13 boring but --
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Seselj, regrettably we cannot allow you to
15 give an exhaustive an answer as you would wish.
16 Mr. Nice.
17 MR. NICE:
18 Q. Yes. Now, there are a few points that I want -- you've given your
19 account as to whether the Greater Serbia concept exists in these various
20 events of which we've heard largely through witnesses of the accused but
21 sometimes through the evidence of the Prosecution expert, are
22 characteristic of some of the things I've mentioned, for example,
23 Nacertanije and Cubrilovic, and even the Black Hand is that they were
24 secret either documents or ideas or movements because whatever concept
25 they reflected it was known that it could only be reflected by violence,
1 by killing, and that's why these -- I'm not suggesting Nacertanije itself
2 was a proposer of violence, but to adhere to the ideas of Nacertanije and
3 the Black Hand or the ideas of Cubrilovic they were known to be violent in
4 their consequences, yes?
5 A. That's not the true. In the 19th century, the association Greater
6 Serbia functioned publicly and legally. For five years a newspaper called
7 "Greater Serbia" was published.
8 At the beginning of the 20th century, in 1903, Dragutin Ilic, a
9 writer again started this newspaper. In 1914, there were two different
10 editions of Greater Serbia, one in Valjevo, the other one in Nis. At the
11 Salonica front, where the Serbian army was getting ready for its
12 victorious break through, it was published as a daily newspaper in 1916,
13 1917, and 1918. In the 1920s the newspaper Velika Srbija, Greater Serbia
14 was published two times in Belgrade. So the concept of a Greater Serbia
15 was never a secret project. And what are you doing? Secret organisations
16 that were never explicitly in favour of a Greater Serbia. You're trying
17 to say that they were an advocate of a Greater Serbia. You cannot find a
18 Greater Serbia anywhere in Nacertanije, in Garasanin's writings, or in the
19 Black Hand organisation and its documents.
20 Q. [Previous translation continues]... is this: After the Second
21 World War and under communism, espousing Greater Serbia would have been
22 almost unlawful. It would have been unacceptable. And the reason it
23 would have been unacceptable is, amongst other things, because I must
24 suggest to you, it would be known to be something that would bring
25 violence. Is that right?
1 A. No. That was unacceptable as they opposed the communist ideology
2 and communism could not tolerate any other view of the world. Every other
3 ideology was banned. Every attempt to advocate a multi-party system took
4 people to prison. Every attempt to advocate the freedom of speech and
5 thought took people directly to prison. Communists executed tens of
6 thousands of intellectuals when they took over in order to establish their
7 ideological monopoly. And what are you saying here? You are speaking of
8 the categories of the Communist Party which was totalitarian by its very
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Seselj, you seem to agree with Mr. Nice's
11 proposition that after the Second World War any idea of a Greater Serbia
12 would have been unacceptable, or perhaps for different reasons.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes. It was based on violence, the question.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All ideas that competed or, rather,
15 those that were rivals of the Communist Party were banned regardless of
16 whether they would generate violence or not. I have another piece of
18 After the Second World War, a group of Serb intellectuals,
19 including the late academician Miodrag Jovicic, illegally published a
20 paper called Greater Serbia but only on a Xerox. This was after the
21 Second World War. It was only 18 copies but they could go to prison for
22 that. Even Freemasons were involved, but they were all of a democratic
23 orientation. So it's not true that the communists, because of this threat
24 of violence --
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Nice.
1 MR. NICE:
2 Q. Now, separately, and this is why the background is important or
3 may be important, but separately from those who carried in their hearts
4 and minds the idea of Greater Serbia, there was from, say, 1966 at least
5 with the removal of Rankovic, there was in the former Yugoslavia a
6 movement of Serbs who were concerned to achieve certain things for Serbs
7 but different from that which was reflected in the motion of the Greater
8 Serbia; correct?
9 A. No, that's not correct. There was no Serbian movement after
10 Rankovic fell. And Rankovic could not have been a symbol of Serbian
11 nationalism in any way. There were only individual Serb dissidents who
12 were arrested by the regime. Some were tolerated a bit, others were used
13 to treading gently. They didn't dare overstep and go to prison. But I
14 claim that there was no organisation all the way until the end of 1989 or
15 1990. Under communism there was no Serbian movement in Serbia, because
16 the repressive measures of the regime were such that it was absolutely
17 impossible. There could not have been even a trade unions movement
18 outside the regime's control.
19 Q. [Previous translation continues]... and tendencies don't have to
20 be fully organised, but I'm going to suggest to you that the movement that
21 the accused came to manage or maybe to lead in 1987, more particularly in
22 1989, is the movement that can be traced, and it's separate from a Greater
23 Serbia movement, starting perhaps in 1966 going through 1968 to 1971 and
24 1974, the constitutional changes which made Yugoslavia much more
25 confederal, going through the blue book, coming to Tito's death when
1 things were more easily spoken about, and then coming in 1986 to the
2 memorandum which had features of the SANU memorandum. That's the sort of
3 movement -- that's, I'm suggesting to you, separate from the Greater
4 Serbia movement or tendency. Do you accept that?
5 A. It's not true that anything such thing existed. The blue book was
6 made within the leadership of the Communist Party of Serbia. It had
7 nothing to do with any kind of opposition or a dissident movement. You
8 cannot artificially link up such things. The initiative of the Academy of
9 Sciences and Arts was derived from the academy itself. The academicians
10 were concerned over the situation in the state. They were trying to
11 formulate their own opinions. I have a great deal of criticism as far as
12 the memorandum is concerned, but it wasn't even completed, that text. The
13 police got hold of it, they published it in a Belgrade daily newspaper,
14 and it was never completed. The unfinished version was published, and I
15 have a great deal of criticism with regard to that text.
16 You know, many of the authors spoke from the positions of a
17 communist ideology, even in that text, that there was a great deal of
18 dissatisfaction in Serbia because of Serbia's constitutional position,
19 that is true. I can agree with that. But that something was organised
20 formally or informally by way of opposition, that is not correct.
21 There was a circle of dissidents in Belgrade and for a while I
22 belonged to it too. It had contacts with the dissidents in Zagreb and
23 Ljubljana. However, these people had completely different ideologies.
24 There was just one single thing that in a way brought us together, the
25 fact that we were all opposed to the regime and nothing else. As soon as
1 a multi-party system was established, everyone was dispersed in different
3 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speaker please be asked to spoke
4 slower. Thank you.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: I have to ask you to speak more slowly. The
6 interpreters are asking you to speak more slowly.
7 Mr. Nice, I think I see where you are going and you consider it to
8 be necessary for your case.
9 MR. NICE: I think it may be helpful, as a matter of fact, for the
10 Chamber because it has had all this material in bits and pieces, and it
11 hasn't had an opportunity of seeing it together. Now, the witness doesn't
12 accept the propositions I'm putting but I've come nearly to the point
13 where I can start to draw some conclusions.
14 Q. We're having to move very fast, Mr. Seselj, because of the time
15 that questioning and answer takes, but before we look at the difference in
16 practical terms between your concept of Greater Serbia and whatever if was
17 the accused was aiming at, we can certainly identify these essential
18 matters of difference between the Greater Serbia concept and his thinking.
19 He, for example, never claimed a connection between his politics and the
20 Greater Serbian history, did he?
21 A. It's not only that he claimed that it never existed. It actually
22 did not. I think that in those 1980s Mr. Milosevic did not even know what
23 this concept actually meant. He was not involved in that at all. He was
24 dealing with other things. I don't want to offend him in any way, but I
25 assumed that he had other things on his mind and that he didn't even know
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 what this was.
2 Q. And the movement he managed or led starting in 1960 -- 1987, 8, 9,
3 was concerned at those stages to centralise power within Serbia initially
4 by taking away the autonomy of Kosovo and Vojvodina. Would that be right?
5 A. No. Regrettably Mr. Milosevic's government never took away the
6 autonomy of Kosovo and Vojvodina. Had I come to power then, we, the Serb
7 Radicals, would have abolished both provinces, because we oppose that
8 concept of breaking up of a state. The Serb Radical Party is a centralist
9 and unitarian party from that point of view. Regrettably Mr. Milosevic
10 was not and perhaps that created additional difficulties for us later on.
11 Had I been in his position and my party in 1990 when the new
12 constitution was adopted, we would have completely done away with the
13 autonomous provinces because there was no point in having them exist.
14 However, we would have given a high degree of national rights to the
15 national minorities.
16 Q. He never pursued the line that you pursue and pursued here of
17 asserting that everyone who spoke the Shtokavian dialect, one of the three
18 or four dialects in the region with which we might be concerned, was a
19 Serb. He never took that position. He accepted that Croats existed
20 separately from Serbs, didn't he?
21 A. First of all, towards the end of the 1980s Mr. Milosevic was not
22 only a communist but the president of the League of Communists of Serbia.
23 As far as I can remember, he even recognised the Montenegrin nation as a
24 separate nation. He recognised the Muslim nation. He recognised that
25 Shtokavians were Catholic Croats. He never brought that into question.
1 Absolutely. I'm not even sure that to this day he's given up on this idea
2 that all of them are different nations, but I didn't really have the time
3 to discuss that matter with him.
4 Q. And you see, and I'm going to go very quickly because at one stage
5 His Honour Judge Bonomy was interested to know whether the geographical
6 aspirations of those of Greater Serbia were identical with or similar to
7 those of the accused or whether they were different. The aspirations were
8 always different because your aspirations, the Greater Serbia aspirations,
9 are rigidly fixed at the Karlobag-Virovitica line at one end and rigidly
10 and still envisaging encompassing parts of Macedonia at the other. And
11 that has not been the accused's position at all times, has it?
12 A. No. First of all, it does not mean that parts of Macedonia would
13 be included. All of Macedonia would be included. You see, the present
14 day Macedonians have nothing to do with the Macedonians of Alexander the
16 Q. Stick with the last point we can do it with a map, if necessary,
17 but I'll try and do it by words. The nearest that the accused's
18 aspirations in territorial terms ever reached to the territorial
19 aspirations of the Greater Serbians was probably when he launched the
20 Belgrade initiative in the summer of 1991, it eventually failing by the
21 beginning of 1992. But to remind the Court, Mr. Seselj, the Belgrade
22 initiative was a plan whereby there would be a unit that encompassed
23 Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia by consent, and the territories taken in
24 Croatia, Knin, Vukovar, and it was hoped Dubrovnik.
25 Now, that part of the Belgrade initiative plan of the accused was
1 as near as geographical aspirations he had would have matched the
2 Karlobag-Virovitica line that you planned. Would that be about right?
3 A. That's not true. The Belgrade initiative was based on the
4 following: If the secession of Slovenia and Croatia cannot be prevented,
5 then the remaining four federal units should remain in a different
6 Yugoslavia. Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Macedonia; that was the
7 essence of the Belgrade initiative. As for the Serbs, they would not
8 opposed to having the Serb Krajina join in as well, but Izetbegovic didn't
9 like that idea. And the authorities in Serbia thought that the Western
10 powers would oppose that.
11 Therefore, the governments -- the government in Serbia helped the
12 Serbs in Krajina to establish a certain degree of autonomy either in
13 Croatia, if it were to secede, or in Yugoslavia in order to have their
14 rights protected. That is the essence of the Belgrade initiative.
15 Izetbegovic would never agree to a Greater Serbia, but he did agree to a
16 smaller version of Yugoslavia, and then the Americans later on persuaded
17 him to break up this project and to declare independence and that is what
18 caused a civil war.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The document of the Belgrade
22 initiative was admitted into evidence here. I can't remember now whether
23 it was me or Mr. Nice who did it, but I think it would be a good thing if
24 it could be shown to the witness.
25 Mr. Nice is asking something about the Belgrade initiative that is
1 a total fabrication.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: The witness seems to be very familiar with the
3 document. If he needs it, it can be shown to him.
4 MR. NICE: We can find it --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm not sure that I'm familiar with
6 it. I'm presenting my opinion. I do not know anything about a particular
7 paper. I am speaking from memory about things that happened in 1991 and
8 1992. So please bear that in mind, Mr. Robinson.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: If you're going to pursue this, then, Mr. Nice,
10 it may be as well to have the document shown to them.
11 MR. NICE: There's only one more question I want to ask because
12 I'm trying to clarify through the witness, although he don't necessarily
13 accept the propositions, the reason for the approach that the Prosecution
14 has taken throughout.
15 Q. And I think your last answer, Mr. Seselj, does actually to some
16 degree confirm what I'm saying, if Bosnia by consent stayed with Serbia
17 and the other countries, so that's a large chunk, and if the Serbs in
18 Krajina and indeed the Serbs in Vukovar and in Dubrovnik had been
19 established as Serbian territories, then although not everything of --
20 south and east of the Karlobag-Virovitica line would have been
21 incorporated in that state, a lot of it would have been, and it would have
22 been, comparatively speaking, similar to your Greater Serbia.
23 A. That is not true. Several times the Serbs from the Serb Krajina
24 and Slavonia, Baranja, and eastern Srem and from Baranja in general
25 adopted resolutions, documents, laws, to join Serbia to remain in
1 Yugoslavia, et cetera. Mr. Milosevic's government kept refusing all of
2 that. In the National Assembly when I spoke from the rostrum I asked to
3 have these initiatives accepted, but the authorities in Serbia did not
4 want to accept that, and Mr. Milosevic's party had an absolute majority in
5 the Assembly and they were not in favour of that. The Western Serbs
6 wanted that. Mr. Milosevic did not agree. Mr. Milosevic did support the
7 Serbs in Krajina from the point of view of protecting their existential
8 rights, including their right to be a constituent people. However, he did
9 not accept their initiatives that the Krajina be annexed to Serbia.
10 Q. [Previous translation continues]... will grant me that before it
11 takes the course it often takes at half past 10.00.
12 Once it became clear in 1992 that there was no prospect of Bosnia
13 linking up with Serbia consensually, then the plan of the accused changed,
14 I must suggest, moving from just support for the regions in Croatia to
15 support for the regions that could be Serb-dominated in Bosnia, and from
16 that moment on, going back to the inquiry that had come from the Court at
17 an earlier stage in these proceedings, from that moment on there was no
18 chance of the state that the accused wanted to match in any particular --
19 in any way the Greater Serbia map because it couldn't include all of
20 Bosnia. It could only ever include part of Bosnia. Would that be right?
21 A. No, that's not true either. You're fabricating again. The plan
22 was not to link up Bosnia with Serbia but for Bosnia to remain within
23 Yugoslavia as an equal federal unit, and Alija Izetbegovic was even
24 supposed to be the first president of this Rump Yugoslavia. It's one
25 thing to link up with Serbia and another to remain within Yugoslavia. At
1 that point, Yugoslavia was the only legal internationally recognised state
2 in the whole area. That is the essence of the matter. And those who
3 wanted to separate Bosnia and Herzegovina from Yugoslavia must have known
4 in advance that this could not be done without a war. That's a fact too.
5 Q. Finally I want you to listen to two sentences in which the words
6 "Greater Serbia" are not used in the way you used them but just in a
7 factual way for a larger or an enlarged Serbia but I'll quote
8 specifically, is this the truth: "As the accused never used words to the
9 effect of conducting the policy of Greater Serbia, what he did between
10 1987 and 1999, 1999, amounted de facto to planning for a Greater Serbia,"
11 an enlarged Serbia, I paraphrase. "There was not a single fully
12 articulated plan from the outset, and the plan changed with changing
13 circumstances, mostly responding to external forces."
14 Now, in summary and looking at the influence of Greater Serbia,
15 does that accord with your understanding of events? He never used the
16 words. What he did amounted to planning for an enlarged or a Greater
17 Serbia, and he was conditioned by external events.
18 A. Never did Mr. Milosevic have any kind of plan, either for a
19 Greater Serbia or an enlarged Serbia. Absolutely never.
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Nice, what's the source of these sentences?
21 MR. NICE: That's the 98 bis submission that I was putting to the
22 witness because it was one of the documents on which the Court had relied.
23 And, Your Honour -- sorry. I may have other questions to ask about it,
24 but I've probably come to the end of this, but I wanted the Court to have,
25 first of all --
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Whose statement is that? Why don't
2 you tell me.
3 MR. NICE: I am addressing the Court.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: No, Mr. Nice, the question is an appropriate one.
5 You mean the statement which Mr. Nice just read to you?
6 MR. NICE: Yes, he is entitled to the answer to that.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He read something. I don't know
8 what it was.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, he told the Court what it was. It was part
10 of the submission of the Prosecution under Rule 98 bis.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, Mr. Robinson,
12 under Rule 98 bis it is statements that are not directly charging the
13 accused. Am I mixing this up with another Rule?
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, you're mixing it up. It's the Rule 98 bis,
15 the motion for acquittal by the accused at the end of the Prosecution's
16 case, and this would have been part of the Prosecution's response.
17 MR. NICE: Your Honours, if that's a convenient moment, may I
18 conclude in this way, I have a few more questions but I hope very few, in
19 light of this witness being the present-day --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't hear the interpreters.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just let --
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't hear anything.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, let us take -- Mr. Nice, are you going to
25 MR. NICE: No. I was just going to explain things then move on
1 possibly to something else after the break and very shortly. I was simply
2 saying that in light of the interests of the Court --
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: The witness is not hearing so --
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can hear now, yes.
5 MR. NICE: In light of the interest the Court has shown in the
6 Greater Serbia issue, in light of the fact that you haven't had these
7 matters put together before in any comprehensive way, and in light of fact
8 that this is the witness who would claim to know all about Greater Serbia,
9 it seemed appropriate ahead of the submissions you'll receive of course in
10 writing or maybe orally at the end of the case to give him an opportunity
11 to comment on the main themes that I will be eliciting from the evidence
12 and that's one of the ways for dealing with this.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Nice.
14 We'll take the break for 20 minutes.
15 --- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.
16 --- On resuming at 11.01 a.m.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Nice.
18 MR. NICE:
19 Q. Just one matter of detail about Kosovo that I wanted assistance
20 on, Mr. Seselj, because I found your answers hard to follow. The movement
21 of bodies to Batajnica. Now, please, first of all, tell us what you are
22 saying as a basis -- on the basis of your investigations happened. What
24 A. Based on the efforts I made to get information, on orders from
25 Western intelligence agencies, certain political factors in Serbia
1 collected a number of Albanian bodies, transported them to Batajnica,
2 buried them there so that at a suitable moment they might be discovered so
3 that the public might be horrified and thus accept more easily first the
4 arrest and then the extradition of Mr. Milosevic to The Hague Tribunal.
5 So everything was calculated to achieve that end.
6 Q. Just a bit more detail. Which were the political factors in
8 A. I said police factors.
9 Q. Sorry. The transcript. Certain police factors.
10 A. Those were -- I cannot name them, but they were among the people
11 who took part in the 5th of October Mafia putsch and whom the new
12 authorities retained at high-ranking positions in the police. I could
13 give you a lot of names of police functionaries who retained their high
14 positions because they were trusted by the new government, but I could not
15 tell you which of them in particular organised the transfer of bodies.
16 Q. I wanted to know if you're saying you can't name the policemen or
17 you won't name them. Are you -- can you -- do you know the name of the
18 policemen who engaged in this scheme?
19 A. I cannot specify any particular policemen because I am not certain
20 of their names. I have never yet said, Mr. Nice, that I refuse to answer
21 any question of yours, but in this case I cannot be sure that it's
22 so-and-so precisely.
23 Among the people who remained at high-ranking positions in the
24 police after the change of government certainly some of them organised the
25 transport of bodies. Nobody else could have done it.
1 Q. Which were the Western intelligence agencies involved?
2 A. I told you what I know in general. I cannot tell you specifically
3 which intelligence agencies, but the Americans used AWACS to follow and
4 film every event on every square foot of Serbia, and they can tell you who
5 did this and how.
6 Q. Finally on this part of this questioning, what was the source of
7 your information about this plan or scheme?
8 A. Well, I made inquiries. I'm a very communicative man. After the
9 putsch of the 5th of October, I was both a federal and a republican
10 deputy. I was in the centre of political life.
11 Q. Mr. Seselj, if you spoke to Mr. X and Mr. X told us, please say
12 so. If you read a document in an archive, please tell us. What were your
13 sources of information about this scheme?
14 A. I couldn't tell you precisely. Not because I don't want to but
15 because I truly cannot. But as soon as the news was published that the
16 bodies had been found, I started dealing with this matter intensively. At
17 first I didn't believe it. I thought maybe they had unearthed some bodies
18 from World War II. I thought maybe -- jokingly I said maybe even from the
19 time of Attila the Hun.
20 Q. So you made some inquiries. You're a man who has been educated,
21 and you've written a lot of books. You must have made some notes about
22 these inquiries. Where are the notes?
23 A. No, I didn't make any notes.
24 Q. Forgive my suggesting, but it would be a little surprising that
25 this is something you haven't published or have you published it?
1 A. It's not impossible that some details could be found in my books
2 which were published after my arrival in The Hague where I published some
3 police or semi-police information. You know, on two occasions I formed a
4 certain kind of intelligence service. The first time in 1993, if you want
5 a detailed response to that question. I don't want to take up your time.
6 Q. [Previous translation continues]... you published anything about
7 this ever so that we can go to that and find out, trigger your memory or
8 read what triggered your memory if you can't point me to a publication.
9 A. Not as a reliable document, but I spoke about this in public more
10 than once.
11 Q. Next question --
12 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Seselj, if that had been done by some police
13 factor, as you put it, then Mr. Radomir Markovic should have known about
14 the fact, shouldn't he?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether he would have
16 known about it or not. He was not trusted by the new government. He was
17 retained at his post for a while, but had he done this, he would not have
18 gone to prison. This was done by someone whom the new government in
19 Serbia trusted. I assume he must have had the rank of general. But
20 because I don't have any reliable facts, I cannot identify the person. I
21 may have named some people in public, maybe Goran Radosavljevic or Sreten
22 Lukic or somebody else. It's possible I named them in public, but my
23 public suspicions are one thing and testimony in court is another. So I
24 cannot assert that I know who in particular did this. Perhaps Mr. Nice
25 has a public speech of mine where I do name names, but that was simply
1 guesswork really.
2 MR. NICE:
3 Q. Can you tell us, please, when your inquiries revealed that these
4 bodies had been removed?
5 A. Well, you know, to begin with, I doubt it that they had been moved
6 at all. I thought these were old bodies from a previous time. When it
7 was confirmed that they really were the bodies of Albanians, when their
8 identification started, well, I can't be precise about the time when. The
9 government changed on the 5th of October, 2000. I arrived here in 2003.
10 Q. Mr. Seselj, you made some inquiries of either a human resource or
11 a documentary resource. Now, one or other of those or both is going to
12 reveal that the bodies were moved either, A, in the course of the bombing
13 and before Kosovo was the subject of international military oversight, or
14 after the time when it was the subject of international oversight. Tell
15 us, please, which it was. Were the bodies moved before or after the end
16 of hostilities?
17 A. It's much more probable that they were moved after the 5th of
18 October, 2000. Much more probable, but this is not reliable information.
19 I can't tell you exactly when.
20 Q. Mr. Seselj --
21 A. How can I tell you that?
22 Q. Let's -- if you've got the picture clearly, the whole plan,
23 probably, was to move the bodies after the end of hostilities. So there
24 can be simply no significance whatsoever in the evidence you gave about
25 the bombing or non-bombing of Batajnica, can there? I just wanted to know
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 with you'd mentioned it.
2 A. I said that Batajnica was bombed every night, but the location
3 where the special anti-terrorist unit was, the so-called SAJ, in the yard
4 of which the bodies were buried, was never targeted during the war.
5 That's what I said.
6 Q. [Previous translation continues]... this to be very significant or
7 are you saying that the international community had already targeted its
8 grave site so that it was leaving it unbombed? You do understand the
9 illogicality of your own evidence on this, don't you? If their bodies
10 are moved after the bomb, then unless they -- unless they planned to use
11 Batajnica --
12 A. First of all, it wasn't the international community who bombed, it
13 was NATO. NATO is not equal to the international community, although it
14 often has the international community under it's control. Secondly, what
15 I presented were indicia. I didn't say that's the reason they didn't want
16 to bomb. I was just pointing out something that's very impressive and
17 serves as indicia.
18 Q. You see, we've had evidence here in open court about the
19 refrigerator truck and about the inquiries that were made by Mr. Karleusa.
20 We've seen statements that were produced by Rade Markovic, by Slobodan
21 Borisavljevic. We've seen the notebook of Obrad Stevanovic which will
22 fall for determination whatever interpretation he puts on it. We've heard
23 of statements made by Ilic. All going to show that there was a plan
24 launched in March of 1999 by this accused to move the bodies. Are you
25 saying that all those pieces of evidence are just made up? Or may it be,
1 Mr. Seselj, that the accused didn't inform you of this part of his
2 planning? Which is it?
3 A. Anyone who claims that Mr. Milosevic had a plan to transfer
4 Albanian bodies from Kosovo to the interior of Serbia is lying. I'm
5 absolutely sure of that. I can guarantee that with my life. I gave you
6 the example of an Albanian called Dibran Dibrani who was killed in Kosovo
7 and was given a proper burial there. His grave was marked. And then
8 somebody dug up his body so that it could be found in a place on the
9 Danube. What it's name? The Mackov Kamen, I think. So what I assert is
10 that Mr. Milosevic had no reason to order the transfer of Albanian corpses
11 from Kosovo to the interior of Serbia. It's completely irrational to even
12 think such a thing. Why?
13 Q. Finally you do understand this, don't you, that on your evidence
14 everything that happened, apart from a limited number of random and
15 independent crimes, everything that happened in Kosovo was lawful at the
16 hands of the Serbs, and I am going to suggest to you that you are lying
17 throughout your evidence on this and many other topics, because you know
18 that there were civilians killed in Kosovo and you know that the accused
19 organised a no bodies-no crimes cover-up, and that's why you're giving the
20 utterly ridiculous account you've treated us to.
21 A. That is absolutely not true. As evidence to support my thesis, I
22 say that today's government certainly had the possibility of investigating
23 exactly which police officer organised the transfer of bodies and today's
24 pro-Western government of Serbia has never done this. Had they wanted the
25 truth to come to light, it would have come to light, but it's not in their
1 interest for the truth to come to light, which is why it's all being swept
2 up the carpet. These bodies were sent there during Mr. Milosevic's time,
3 then they were sent back, but the investigation never discovered the names
4 of the people who participated in the transport. So it's your case that's
5 incorrect, not my testimony.
6 Q. The last matters of detail concern one but only one --
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, that's a proper way of putting it. His
8 case is incorrect.
9 Yes, Mr. Nice.
10 MR. NICE:
11 Q. My last matters of detail concern, I think, three questions in
12 respect of one only of the many people who you have said adverse things
13 about, and I've dealt with the generality of that, but for just one of
14 them I'm going to deal with the detail, a little bit of detail, and that's
15 General Vasiljevic who gave evidence here. You said an enormous number of
16 things, or a large number of things about him, one of which was about the
17 theft of money there Vukovar.
18 Now, of course Vasiljevic was investigated and indeed detained for
19 a time.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. In respect of that investigation, the question of money from
22 Vukovar was never raise the at all, was it?
23 A. The proceedings against General Vasiljevic have been suppressed by
24 the highest command structures of the General Staff. It's been covered
1 Q. This was in -- this was in rather earlier days, wasn't it, that he
2 was dealt with for Vukovar? At the time --
3 A. I can't remember exactly when he was in prison, whether it was
4 1992 or 1993. I know he was in prison under investigation for a time, but
5 I know that after that nothing came of it, and he was given a symbolic
6 sentence or no sentence at all. I can't remember the details in order to
7 account for the time he spent in prison, and he was rehabilitated in a
8 while after a time.
9 Q. And indeed, he was reappointed by this accused at one stage. But
10 still, at the time it was established that the money from Vukovar had gone
11 into the Serbian public auditing service, and that was a source of money
12 available to this accused, and there was no question of investigating
13 money that landed up there. Would that be right on your experience of
15 A. That case is false. The money could not have been taken to the
16 SDK because the SDK had nothing to do with the financial affairs of the
17 JNA. The money had to be handed over to the military service of the
18 National Bank of Yugoslavia. Afterwards, General Vasiljevic's crimes were
19 covered up. Previously, he had been the chief of the military security
20 service. I don't know who he had information against to get him to
21 participate in the cover-up. I don't know. But General Vasiljevic stole
22 the money from the Vukovar bank.
23 Q. Your suggestion that he was involved in some way in crimes
24 committed at Vukovar, do you have any piece of evidence to show that he
25 was present at any of the places where crimes were committed at Vukovar?
1 A piece of evidence, someone who has spoken to you, statement, document?
2 It's very easy to say -- do you?
3 A. You're asking for a document. It's impossible to find a document
4 of that kind. I know for certain that he was in Vukovar during the crime
5 in Ovcara and that he was in Western Slavonia when Western Slavonia fell.
6 Q. You see, you make these terrible allegations against people,
7 Mr. Seselj, in the same way as you lied as a propagandist. Now, you tell
8 us where the evidence is. Will you do that? Will you?
9 A. That is my information and I'm -- it is not I who is lying. It is
10 you who are lying, Mr. Nice. Why didn't you investigate the question of
11 the mining of the Jewish cemetery in Zagreb, for instance, and the
12 municipal -- the Jewish municipal building in Zagreb. Do you have any
13 evidence there that the main organiser was General Vasiljevic perhaps?
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Seselj, you have demonstrated that you know
15 how to speak properly to the Prosecutor when you said his case was
17 MR. NICE:
18 Q. I'll give you one last chance --
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, a moment ago the
20 Prosecutor's conduct was very proper. It is one thing when the Prosecutor
21 says that my testimony was not correct and it's quite another thing when
22 he tells me that I'm lying.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: That's not for you to determine.
24 Mr. Nice.
25 MR. NICE:
1 Q. Mr. Seselj, you give rise to two questions where there was going
2 to be one. But the first one is this: This is one example, you see, of
3 many terrible things you've said about witnesses who gave evidence against
4 this accused, and I'm asking you simply to point us to the evidence on the
5 basis of which you tried to implicate General Vasiljevic in crimes against
6 Vukovar. Can you tell us what the evidence is?
7 A. You should ask General Mrksic. You should ask General Nedjo
8 Boskovic who came to head the military security service after Vasiljevic
9 and so on. Whereas my knowledge and information is based on talks with a
10 large number of competent individuals as opposed to your witnesses who 15
11 years on can remember every single conversation in detail. I can't
12 remember any conversation in detail after all that time.
13 Q. Please, then, name us one person, will you do that, one person who
14 for this one allegation against one of the many people you've said adverse
15 things about, just give us the name of one person who named General
16 Vasiljevic on this topic, please.
17 A. I cannot name names now, because they were conversations that took
18 place 10 and 15 years ago. But the overall knowledge on the basis of a
19 number of conversations, and I did talk to General Mrksic, and I did talk
20 to General Nedjo Boskovic, I even had quite close relations with General
21 Boskovic at a time, in 1992 for example, we were on close terms. But I
22 cannot say -- tell you now so-and-so told you that. It is only your
23 witnesses that can do that, the ones you instruct about how they are to
24 testify, and now you expect me to remember exactly who told me what. How
25 can anybody do that, any human being.
1 MR. NICE: Yes. I don't think I need trouble this witness any
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Nice.
4 Mr. Milosevic, how long will you been in re-examination?
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I don't think I'll be able to
6 complete it today, the re-examination today. I see that we have about two
7 more hours left to go, which won't suffice, I'm afraid.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: I am very disappointed to hear that,
9 Mr. Milosevic, but commence.
10 Re-examined by Mr. Milosevic:
11 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Seselj, I'm going to try to save as time as
12 possible, yours and mine. I'm going to ask you just those questions which
13 have to do with the cross-examination conducted by Mr. Nice. I'm not
14 going to open up any new topics.
15 Somewhere at the beginning, I can't say whether it was one of the
16 first questions or not, but amongst the first questions anyway, Mr. Nice
17 asked you whether you recognised this Tribunal. To tell me now, please,
18 whether you explain the reasons for which your answer to that question was
20 A. Well, I didn't explain my reasons in full. When the so-called
21 Hague Tribunal was first established for dealing with the crimes committed
22 in the former Yugoslavia, the Secretary-General himself of the United
23 Nations, in his address to the Security Council, in writing recognised the
24 fact that this court and Tribunal was not being formed pursuant to
25 international law, that it was -- had it been formed pursuant to
1 international law, then it would have been formed and established in the
2 same way in which the permanent criminal Tribunal was formed with its
3 so-called statute of Rome. So there the establishment procedure was fully
4 followed. This Tribunal has not followed it. It was set up as an ad hoc
5 Tribunal, which is contrary to the basic principles of criminal law.
6 Third, this court was given the authority to prosecute crimes
7 which took place before its establishment, which is also unlawful.
8 Fourthly, this Tribunal, at the very outset, began to violate one
9 of the elemental legal principles which reads as follows: Nullum crimen
10 sine lege, that is to say, there is no crime and punishment provided for
11 by the law as such and in the quantity it is provided for. Now what does
12 that mean? Every perpetrator of a crime, of a war crime in fact --
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: You have given the explanation. Next question.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I haven't stayed this and it's an
15 important point and that will be my final explanation.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: We have had the explanation.
17 Next question, Mr. Milosevic.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. Robinson.
19 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Mr. Seselj, in answering questions put to you by Mr. Nice, you
21 spoke about false witnesses. On the basis of what knowledge were you able
22 to speak about false witnesses? And I set aside at this moment the series
23 of witnesses which I quoted during the examination-in-chief, my
24 examination-in-chief of you, for whom you testified and said that they
25 were not telling the truth. So how were you able to speak about false
1 witnesses in general?
2 A. On the basis of my own personal knowledge, when those false
3 witnesses happened to mention my own name, for example. For example,
4 Milan Babic, during his testimony mentioned my name on several occasions
5 in a completely false context. And I'm conscious of it being a false
6 context. For example, that he -- that the minister of defence of --
7 General Marko Negovanovic provided me with helicopter, whereas I know for
8 certain that he wasn't the defence minister of the republic at that time.
9 So that was my own experience that was highly valuable to me in assessing
11 Secondly, I was an eyewitness in the prison of The Hague Tribunal
12 as to how Miroslav Deronjic was broken down by The Hague Tribunal, how
13 they blackmailed him and the process of breaking him down. I was on good
14 terms with him to begin with. He told me how he was arrested, how he was
15 beaten, how they put him in a barrel of water and so on and so forth. He
16 confided in me, and they -- it took months to break him down. And they
17 didn't succeed in breaking him down until Momir Nikolic, in his testimony
18 before the Prosecution said that Deronjic was present at a conversation
19 where an execution was agreed.
20 Well, then Deronjic broke down completely and agreed to testify on
21 any subject whatsoever and against anybody whatsoever. He agreed to
22 falsely testify against Karadzic. It was then that he said that Karadzic
23 spoke about the execution of prisoners, that at Pale he called him aside
24 to whisper that to him in his ear. He said you know those people should
25 be executed and things like that. And at the beginning -- Miroslav
1 Deronjic told me that they were asking him to give false testimony. He
2 confided that in me and said that he would not agree to testify falsely.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: You will not be allowed to answer ad infinitum.
4 So next question, Mr. --
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Could I just ask one thing. Where was it these
6 various things were done it him?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] While he was arrested. He was
8 arrested somewhere in Bratunac. Although previously he had contacts with
9 The Hague investigators. He had talked with them on several occasions,
10 and he promised that if they called him he would be ready to come at all
11 times. Despite that, they beat him up when -- in the process of arresting
12 him to expert pressure and to exert fear and they immersed him in a barrel
13 full of water apparently.
14 JUDGE BONOMY: And that all happened where?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Bratunac, I assume. He was
16 arrested by members of the international force.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: And can you specify who -- so you say this was
18 soldiers who do this to him?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. That's how I understood the
20 gist of his story.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
22 MR. NICE: Your Honours, for the record, the question that gave
23 rise to this answer was general. I don't think I asked a question about
24 Deronjic myself in the course of cross-examination.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Next question, Mr. Milosevic.
1 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. In answering Mr. Nice's questions, you mentioned bargaining [no
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: We're not having any translation, any
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Shall I repeat my question?
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
8 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Seselj, in response to Mr. Nice's questions, you mentioned
10 plea agreements. Can you tell us something about your knowledge with
11 respect to the plea agreements and what you base them on?
12 A. Yes. Up till now, I have read almost all the judgements passed by
13 The Hague Tribunal. I just did not read the Prijedor group second
14 instance judgement and the Kordic one, perhaps one or two others, but
15 otherwise I've read all the other judgements and I learnt a lot from
16 them. And I read some of the plea agreements that people happened to show
17 me. And from reading that, I gained the knowledge that most often the
18 Prosecution looked at notorious criminals, that is to say, people who were
19 undoubtedly criminals --
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, this line of questioning is not
21 helpful. His view of the plea agreements is neither here nor there. Move
22 on to another question.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I'm not asking the
24 witness's his position on the issue but his knowledge of it, and my
25 question is quite legitimate because it emerges from the cross-examination
1 conducted by Mr. Nice.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: What aspects of his knowledge are you seeking to
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I wish to hear from him how he
5 is able to speak about plea agreements, what the basis and knowledge of
6 that is. He said he read a lot of material on the subject.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the relevance to this case?
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the relevance is in view of
9 the overall credibility of the other side and the way in which the
10 opposite side works and construes indictments and charges. That is highly
11 relevant because the question of credibility arises in that kind of work.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: The credibility of the Prosecution? That's not
13 an issue --
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Of course.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: The credibility of the Prosecution is not an
16 issue in the case. Ask another question, Mr. Milosevic.
17 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Very well, Mr. Seselj. So in answering the initial questions put
19 to you by Mr. Nice, you indicated that this particular institution here,
20 in addition to being an illegal and unlawful one, has an expressly
21 anti-Serb character. What were the grounds for you to say that?
22 A. Because of two Serbs brought to trial --
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Please stop.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please stop. When I start speaking you must
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 stop. I'm not allowing that question. It's not relevant. And,
2 Mr. Milosevic, you very well know if you are going to use your time in
3 re-examination in this way I will terminate it. The line of questioning
4 is improper. You're using it for non-forensic purposes, and I will not
5 allow that. So you determine whether you wish to continue or not. You
6 have a number of matters on which you can re-examine properly. So far you
7 have wasted the time of the Court.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, Mr. Robinson. Fine.
9 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Mr. Seselj, let's now deal with questions put to you by Mr. Nice
11 by placing before you certain documents. You expressed the wish when you
12 were shown a document from your book the Serbian Chetnik Movement, the
13 title of that is, Mr. Nice asked you to read out one sentence from
14 page 346. I hope you have that. Do you?
15 A. Page 346?
16 Q. Yes, the Serbian Chetnik Movement, page 346. He asked you to read
17 out one particular sentence from that page --
18 JUDGE KWON: You should give us the --
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: What's the number, Mr. Milosevic, the exhibit
20 number, so we can find it?
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't have the tab number here
22 unfortunately. I'm looking at the English translation of it as well and
23 the Serbian original. But it is 03482217, the ERN number.
24 MR. NICE: 882.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: 882.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Have you found it, Mr. Seselj?
2 A. Unfortunately not yet.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Just before going on to that, if I can go back to a
4 matter that was dealt with earlier in this -- at the start of this
5 re-examination in relation to the reasons given by Mr. Seselj for not
6 recognising the Tribunal, and I'm looking at the moment at the
7 Secretary-General's report prior to its establishment in which he says
8 that the appointment by a decision of the Security Council would be
9 legally justified.
10 You suggested to us that the Secretary-General had reported in
11 writing that it was contrary to international law. Can you tell me where
12 that -- where I will find that written statement by the Secretary-General?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You will find it in the UN
14 Secretary-General's address to the Security Council, perhaps in that same
15 text where he says that it would be best if the Tribunal were to be
16 established by first --
17 JUDGE BONOMY: That's not my question. My question is where would
18 you find this straightforward statement that would assert the
19 establishment was contrary to international law?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You will find that in the material
21 of the UN Secretary-General where he explains how that ought to be done
22 under normal conditions, and then ultimately he interprets it as being
23 reliant on Article 7 of the UN charter. You have that in the UN
24 Secretary-General's address. And he goes into the political reasons why
25 the following steps should be taken rather than something which would be
1 most align with international law. I read that personally, and I'm sure
2 he has that. It is contained in his address.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, your answer is certainly not consistent with
4 what I've read, and if Mr. Milosevic wants to explore it further, he may
5 wish to consider the position for that.
6 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Have you found the page, Mr. Seselj? 346.
8 A. Yes, I have it here before me on the monitor, but I haven't taken
9 all the documents with me, but I've got it on the monitor anyway now.
10 Q. Mr. Nice quoted one sentence, and you asked to read the whole
11 speech. Mr. Robinson then said that this could be done in the
12 re-examination. So you can do that now. Because on page 346, it is very
13 brief, can you read it and explain to us why you insisted on reading the
14 entire paragraph and not just the paragraph that Mr. Nice wanted?
15 A. Because from my whole speech held at the funeral of Radomir
16 Stojakovic, the first volunteer to be killed of the Serb Radical Party,
17 you can see the sense of it and not only on the basis of what was
18 highlighted and emphasised here by Mr. Nice. So that I would like to read
19 out the portions which Mr. Nice didn't read out here.
20 Q. Yes, please go ahead.
21 A. It says: "Serbian brothers and sisters --"
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute. Let us look at the speech that
23 you are planning to read. How long is this? This is one page?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Less. Just half a page. Just a
25 little more than half page, on 3 -- page 346.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do you wish me to read the
2 introductory part and then the highlighted part highlighted by Mr. Nice?
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That was what Mr. Robinson's
4 instructions were when you asked to read the whole passage out.
5 A. Yes, I see. So just the portion above the highlighted portion.
6 Q. Yes. It's a third of the page.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: I will allow you to read just the portion above
8 the highlighted portion.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. That will be sufficient,
10 I hope.
11 "Serbian brothers and sisters, today we take our leave of our
12 brother, Gradimir Pesic, who died a hero's death defending Serbia and
13 Slavonia. Many other Serbian sons have fallen. Serbia today laments its
14 dead. Serbia today is once again in flames, and our brother Gradimir left
15 his village and went off to distant Slavonia to defend Serbian homes,
16 Serbian women, and Serbian children there, and he died a hero, victim of
17 the treacherous Ustasha hand while taking down the Ustasha flag that had
18 been stuck up in a Serbian village."
19 And this is how he died: The Ustashas stormed the village by
20 night and set up their own flag on a silo which was located in the
21 village, and the next day when he saw the flag he got up to take the flag
22 down and a Ustasha sniper hit him. So there was no fighting. It was a
23 sniper hit that hit him while he was trying to take down the flag.
24 "Yet another of our bravest sons have fallen. The bravest always
25 fall. The bravest always die. Those who are worth the most always die.
1 Gradimir waited 15 days in Belgrade before being sent to Slavonia. He was
2 waiting for his group, waiting for his journey without return.
3 Serbian brothers and sisters, Serb fell during centuries past,
4 always dying like men, always heroically, and today our brother Gradimir
5 has shown through his death that Serbian mothers have not ceased to bear
7 So that is a farewell at the graveside of the fallen hero.
8 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Seselj, is the point of all this, of what you have been
10 saying --
11 JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues]... question
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, reformulate.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Okay, I'll reformulate.
15 Q. What is the significance of the fact that you say here, "Our
16 brother Gradimir went to defend Serb houses, Serb families, Serb
17 children," and so on and so forth? He went to defend, Serb women,
18 children, and so on.
19 A. The point is that Gradimir and the other volunteers did not go out
20 there to attack. They did not go to loot other people's homes, to
21 jeopardise other people's children. They went there to defend Serb homes,
22 Serb women, Serb children. That is the core of the matter. He went there
23 to defend his brothers who were imperiled. He Did not go there to
24 jeopardise others, and he did not go because he simply felt like it.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Seselj.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Can I ask, how on earth does that alter the context
2 of the statement that follows: "You will not remain unavenged"?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When it says "unavenged," or when
4 one says unavenged, that means that there will be enemies who will fall in
5 battle with Serb soldiers. There is no reference to any kind of vengeance
6 against other people's prisoners of war or whatever. In many of my
7 speeches, and Mr. Nice can find that, too, how many times I spoke of
8 chivalry, that is to say, an honourable attitude towards civilians,
9 prisoners of war, et cetera.
10 You know, in a war when you talk about revenge and avenging
11 people, in our literature that is the usual term. The enemy dealt us a
12 grave blow in the battlefield, and we will avenge that by a blow of our
13 own against the enemy.
14 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, that depends on whether there's a conflict
15 actually ongoing at the time. But you have said here: "You will not
16 remain unavenged. Our enemies will feel the punishment of the Serbian
17 people. The time has come to settle old scores. The time has come to
18 avenge all Serbian victims."
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And who are the enemies, Mr. Bonomy.
20 This is quite clear, isn't it. The enemies are the Croatian fascists, the
22 JUDGE BONOMY: What this sounds like to me know is taking
23 vengeance for the death of this young man, now that you've put it in its
24 complete context.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. But look, now, why shy away
1 from revenge? What does revenge mean? If Gradimir got killed, tomorrow
2 three or four Ustashas will get killed in a conflict with the Serb
3 defenders. That is the revenge for his death, not against civilians or
4 prisoners of war. You cannot find that anywhere that I ever said any such
5 thing. That is why I thought that it was important to read out the whole
7 JUDGE BONOMY: What you seem to be failing to understand is that
8 what we then do is look at what happens on the ground following statements
9 like this to see what the effect has been and what the relevance of the
10 statement actually is.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, you have to narrow down
12 the effects of these statements to the conduct of the volunteers of the
13 Serb Radical Party, and I'm convinced that you will not find a single
14 volunteer who perpetrated crimes. That is my superiority over this Office
15 of the Prosecutor. I am truly convinced of this because I have knowledge
16 to that effect that they had the highest morality and integrity in this
17 war. And that is why I'm so proud of that. And that is why I personally
18 identify myself with the struggle of the volunteers of the Serb Radical
20 And now if a crime was committed out there by someone else, you
21 cannot ascribe it to me as an effect of a speech that I made. Well, that
22 is impossible, Mr. Bonomy. Instigation to crime has to be direct. Some
23 tried to accuse Schelling and Nietzsche of Hitler's crimes. However, that
24 was untenable in philosophy. If you look at Schelling, Schopenhauer and
25 Nietzsche, you can certainly find things that --
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Seselj, thank you.
2 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Since Mr. Bonomy raised this question of vengeance, does it relate
4 to what it says here and does it have any significance what I already
5 quoted, that he was a victim of the treacherous Ustasha hand?
6 A. Yes, of course, everything is aimed against the Ustashas. The
7 Ustashas are the symbol of all evil in the entire Serb consciousness.
8 There is no greater evil than the Ustashas. The Serbian people clearly
9 identified the Ustashas. They are Croatian fascists that are carrying out
10 a genocide against the Serbs. The definition of Ustashas is perfectly
11 clear, like that of the Nazis in Germany.
12 Q. All right.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Next question, please.
14 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Let's just deal with this briefly. I'll take it more or less in
16 the order in which I took notes while Mr. Nice was examining you.
17 Several times he went back to this unit that was popularly called
18 the Red Berets. Mr. Seselj, our state, and when I say our state I'm
19 referring to the Republic of Serbia in this context, did our state have
20 any paramilitary unit during any period while the war conflict was on,
21 that is to say, from 1991 until the end of all conflicts? Did our state
22 have any paramilitary unit?
23 A. The Republic of Serbia never had any paramilitary units. I state
24 that categorically. However, there is a great deal of confusion that is
25 being introduced, sometimes intentionally and sometimes unintentionally,
1 due to the fact that there were several units that were popularly known as
2 the Red Berets. I'm going to give you yet another example that I haven't
3 mentioned before because my memories are coming back.
4 Sometime when the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina had just started, the
5 local followers of Vuk Draskovic took all of Sipovo, and they established
6 their own arbitrary government there. It's somewhere between Central
7 Bosnia and the Krajina. It's a town where the Serb majority -- where
8 there was always a Serb majority among the population.
9 The 1st Krajina Corps had to intervene in order to disarm these
10 people, Draskovic's followers, who were behaving in a very unruly way.
11 That Krajina Corps had as a unit of the military police a unit called the
12 Red Berets. I know that for sure. After the war the unit was disbanded
13 or transformed or whatever, but at that time they had a military police
14 unit under that name. So it could have been an intervention platoon, like
15 in the Bratunac Brigade or a reconnaissance platoon, it could have been a
16 military police unit or whatever. It's the caps that the soldiers wore
17 that create all this confusion.
18 Q. Mr. Seselj, to the guess of all your knowledge, the state security
19 service, which is sometimes called the secret police and so on, do they
20 also have their own rules, their own very precise norms and their records?
21 A. Yes, and that is very strictly elaborated. Even during the
22 communist period that was very strictly done and also afterwards when
23 communism fell.
24 Q. The existence of that kind of unit that Mr. Nice ascribes to the
25 state security service, would that have to exist in the documents of the
1 state security service?
2 A. I categorically state that it would have to be in the documents.
3 It would be impossible for it not to be in the documents.
4 Q. Have you heard of any evidence or document concerning the
5 existence of such a unit apart from what Mr. Nice presented here, namely a
6 speech made by Franki Simatovic in 1997 at the celebration of the
7 anniversary of the JSO?
8 A. I tried to make a joke the other day, and I remembered the old
9 scholastic debate on the number of teeth a donkey has. If you ever
10 studied philosophy, that is a very characteristic example. For days and
11 months they were debating the issue, and then one of them remembered and
12 said, "Well, let's open the donkey's mouth and count his teeth."
13 Franki Simatovic was here for months. He was accessible to the
14 OTP. Instead of asking him, they asked people who haven't got the
15 faintest idea perhaps.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the answer to the question.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The answer is that Frenki Simatovic,
18 Frenki, was perhaps bragging a bit, speaking of his own merits during the
19 war and defending the Serb people, and he talked of his comrades in arms
20 who became members of the unit for special operations of the State
21 Security Service of Serbia. He was proud of his participation in the
22 war. And he is entitled to feel that way and who can stop him from
23 feeling that way? Frenki's participation in the war is one thing, whereas
24 the formal establishment of a unit of the State Security Service of Serbia
25 is completely different thing. These are two completely separate matters.
1 But you see, although the Serb Radical Party was officially
2 registered in 1991, I sometimes --
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Seselj. Mr. Seselj, thank you.
4 We're digressing.
5 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Seselj, a well-known Serbian and European historian testified
7 here, the academician Cedomir Popov, and at one moment he indicated that
8 historical phenomena can only be interpreted in the time and circumstances
9 when they actually occurred. I assume that you as an intellectual and a
10 university professor are well aware of that rule.
11 A. I absolutely agree with that. Every fact, every act, and every
12 speech, for that matter, has to be interpreted from the point of view of
13 the context in which it took place. You cannot look at a particular act
14 individually disregarding all other acts in time and space. You cannot
15 look just at one speech that was made 15 years ago without looking at
16 other speeches that --
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, what is your question arising from
19 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Well, quite a number of questions will arise, but I'm certainly
21 not going to use as much time as Mr. Nice did. I'm just going to look at
22 a general definition of the questions raised by Mr. Nice. Namely,
23 Mr. Seselj, Mr. Nice presented a heap, or, say, a large number, let's not
24 exaggerate, of quotations from different speeches in which you attack me.
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Do you remember that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Not to waste any time, I'm not going to repeat those quotes and
4 I'm not going to present them to you document by document as Mr. Nice did.
5 You responded to that by giving explanations that have to do with the time
6 involved and the conflict that you had at the time with the authorities,
7 and I was at that time head of those authorities.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Mr. Nice asked you to show certain texts from your books because,
10 inter alia, you looked at that as evidence where you said that earlier,
11 that is to say before this testimony.
12 A. I gave him seven or eight concrete examples.
13 Q. As you and I saw and everybody else who is following these
14 proceedings, Mr. Nice himself asked for these examples during the
15 cross-examination, but he did not quote them at all. He did not want to
16 quote them obviously. And Mr. Bonomy put some questions, too, in relation
17 to that.
18 So now I'm going to make up for what Mr. Nice omitted to do,
19 namely in relation to this --
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Before you do that, I thought we were to get copies
21 of these.
22 MR. NICE: Your Honour, if you haven't got copies of them, I'm
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Which I haven't seen.
25 MR. NICE: I've been pursuing them --
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Only if you have able to get them translated. Now
2 it may be that that hasn't happened.
3 MR. NICE: That hadn't happened.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: All right.
5 MR. NICE: Indeed, I was going to inform you that my information
6 is that one of them uses the word exaggeration, but I've been trying to
7 get context for that. And I put, as you will recall, a reference to the
8 effect of those that there are some of them that deal with the French
9 intelligence allegation, but I haven't been able to deal with them
10 exhaustively simply for want of time and absence of translation.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic. Mr. Milosevic, I'm trying to
12 determine how to manage this. I think it will have been put on the ELMO.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it's very simple to resolve
14 this. Like you, Mr. Robinson, and like all the rest, I got this through
15 the kindness of Mr. Nice, who took it upon himself to look at Mr. Seselj's
16 seven books and have the marked sections photocopied. So I got these
17 examples when you did. I assume that your service has them, too, because
18 I would like to keep this, and could the service give it to Mr. Seselj?
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: The problem is that we don't have copies.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. Then I'm going to give
21 this to the usher so that Mr. Seselj can quote these sections from his
22 books by himself. I don't know whether --
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Do you have a copy for me? I cannot
24 carry seven books around every day.
25 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. This is from the book "Serbia Under American Bombs." That is one
2 of the books you brought here?
3 A. Yes.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic --
5 JUDGE KWON: Would the usher give the documents to the witness so
6 that he can sort out the relevant documents.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: And I presume, Mr. Milosevic, these are short or
8 relatively short passages.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Robinson.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Now we have excerpts from the
11 book "Serbia Under American Bombs."
12 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Could you please have a look at this. You marked it yourself.
14 Let me just look at the page number. The copy is not a very good one.
15 118 is the page number.
16 A. Yes. But, Mr. Milosevic, I have to tell you something. You have
17 the contents at the end, and you can see that these are my public speeches
18 from 1998. All of these TV interviews are from 1998. So I'm saying this
19 for the benefit of the Trial Chamber so they would know when this
21 Q. Mr. Seselj, I am particularly grateful for the fact that you've
22 indicated the time, because in presenting evidence it's very important
23 when something was said. So can you follow this on page 118, in the
24 second paragraph, where the journalist is asking you something. I'm not
25 going to read all of this.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Could the interpreters please have a copy on
2 the ELMO. We don't have the document.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute, Mr. Milosevic.
4 JUDGE KWON: It's on the ELMO.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: The interpreters are asking for a copy, but it's
6 on the ELMO. It's on the ELMO.
7 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. So the host of the TV show is putting a question to you in 1998.
9 It has to do with your joining the government and the coalition with the
10 SPS and the Yugoslav left.
11 "Do you remember what you said about Slobodan Milosevic and Mira
12 Markovic? You called them thieves and traitors. What are the names of
13 peoples who associate with them? Let us clear this up once."
14 "Dr. Seselj: I remember everything. This was a fierce political
15 battle. I was responding, attacking. They were attacking. They
16 responded in kind. Sometimes it was hard for me. I was in prison several
17 times. This political battle, especially in the Balkans, was always
18 linked to such versions of conflict too."
19 So is that linked to what you were saying over these past several
21 A. Would you look at the rest of the text.
22 Q. There is another part that is marked in the one but last
23 paragraph: "As for political conflicts, we haven't forgotten any of
24 that," et cetera, et cetera. I think that we don't have to go through all
25 of this, but please look at the next page now. If you look at the next
1 page now. At the beginning of the second half.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Even years are referred to here. What does is say: Dr. Seselj:
4 Throughout 1993." You read it out.
5 A. "In all of 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996, there was a fierce clash
6 between the Serb Radical Party and the SPS, the Yugoslav left, previously
7 the legal of communist movement for Yugoslavia. This was a fierce
8 political conflict. In that clash there was only words, strong words that
9 were our only weapon and they arrested us, persecuted us, mistreated us,
10 and I was sentenced to prison several times," et cetera. This is an
11 indicator of how fierce the clash was, and every time when they took any
12 repressive measure again us, we made even more forceful statements. Every
13 time when I made a speech when exiting prison, I would always speak in
14 stronger terms than I did in the speech when I went to prison.
15 Q. Mr. Seselj, please look at the next page, at the very beginning.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: All of this, Mr. Seselj and Mr. Milosevic, is to
17 show that Mr. Seselj's relationship with the accused at this time was one
18 of conflict, bitter conflict?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It does show that. But the short
20 passage on the following page is also very significant, Mr. Robinson. I
21 think it would be very interesting for you.
22 I'm explaining here again. First I spoke about that clash
23 between us and the socialists, the previous clash. "Just remember who
24 started attacking whom first with these terrible words. The socialists
25 attacked us. Remember September 1993, on the eve of our toppling of
1 Sainovic's government. The statement made by the Main Board of the SPS
2 where I was said to be a war criminal, a criminal, that I was this and
3 that, isn't that right? That's when it started. And then, you know,
4 insult follows insult, and then you start competing. So I gave them tit
5 for tat. But all these are facts. None of us are hiding from it. We
6 cannot now go and say what said what to whom, who was exaggerating in
7 their insults and who was more vehement. I said I go to prison. I get
8 out and hold a speech at the very exit of the prison and say even worse
9 insults. People a rally round, come and meet me. I don't know whether
10 you have seen it on TV. I'm holding a new speech. I didn't like
11 Draskovic write letters showing remorse in prison. Whenever I came out of
12 prison, I was even more defiant than I had been before. That was just
13 another stage in our mutual political conflicts."
14 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Seselj, you say here: "We can't now look at who was
16 exaggerating how much in their insults."
17 Mr. Nice has quoted to you many of your statements made against me
18 where you explained why you made those statements. He even said that you
19 had been lying and you were explaining that this was not lying, that this
20 was simply a political struggle where if various untruths are spoken and
21 everybody knows they're untruths, this is only a part of the political
22 struggle. Did you explain this in the same way here in this book as you
23 did during your testimony?
24 A. Yes, in exactly the same way. That's the truth. I took an oath
25 here to speak only the truth and that's what I'm doing.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Are you going to point us to a passage that does
2 explain it that way? Because the ones we've read certainly don't.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know what else there is to
4 explain, Mr. Bonomy. If he says that exaggerated insults were bandied
5 about, each one more vehement than the previous one, and that's in
6 response to a question about his attacks on me. Because the question
7 before that was about how he attacked me, saying I was a criminal and so
8 on and so forth. So these are the same questions as the questions that
9 Mr. Nice put here practically, not in so many words but the gist is the
10 same, and he is here explaining why he said those things at the time. Not
11 because they were true but because he was in a conflict with me and he was
12 trying to sling mud at me.
13 I'm trying to save time, but these questions are more or less the
14 same as the questions put by Mr. Nice.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: The evidence on this will obviously require careful
16 analysis, but there is a difference between expressing opinions strongly
17 about whether someone's a criminal or not and issuing misinformation or
18 misleading inaccurate statements for political purposes.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, the spreading of
20 disinformation has always been a means of a propaganda war ever since the
21 concept of propaganda war came into existence. Propaganda wars are always
22 based on disinformation.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: I'm not here to debate that with you at the moment.
24 The question is let's look at the facts and that's what we're doing, and
25 Mr. Milosevic then tends to make speeches after he's referred to come of
1 the facts, and he ought to be under no misunderstanding about the view
2 initially formed of the facts that he's presenting.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
4 JUDGE KWON: By the way, Mr. Seselj, what were the charges you
5 were prosecuted at that time? You were punished for misinformation at
6 that time?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I wanted to be tried for these
8 insults and this disinformation in order to create a show, a spectacle of
9 the trial. However, the government used other means. So first in 1994 I
10 was sentenced to a month for insulting the Speaker of the Federal
11 Assembly, but this was because some MPs from rival parties falsely
12 testified that I had physically assaulted him. One of these witnesses was
13 from Mr. Milosevic's party and the other one was from the ruling party of
14 Montenegro, and they testified that I had physically assaulted him, which
15 was a lie. That's why I was sentenced to a month in prison.
16 Then after that, the Speaker prevented me from speaking in the
17 Assembly. One of the MPs from my party threw water at him. He was
18 ordered to leave the room. He refused. The police came to throw him out.
19 We protected him with our bodies, so we started wrestling with the police,
20 and that's why I was sentenced to three months.
21 Mr. Milosevic did not want to go to court because he knew what I
22 wanted, but the people from his party found roundabout ways to get me in
23 prison. Mr. Milosevic quite correctly guessed that I actually wanted a
24 trial where I could make a big show so he avoided it.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, we're going to take the break
1 now. It's 12.15. I am to say that the Chamber will admit the two
2 Prosecution documents, requests for assistance from the Office of the
3 Prosecutor and the response from the Serbian and Montenegrin Ministry of
4 Foreign Affairs.
5 MR. NICE: May they be appropriately numbered.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
7 JUDGE KWON: Microphone is not on. 918 and 919.
8 THE REGISTRAR: [Microphone not activated]. And 919 is the
9 response from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Serbia Montenegro.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. We are adjourned.
11 --- Recess taken at 12.17 p.m.
12 --- On resuming at 12.41 p.m.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
14 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Seselj, the reply you quoted on page 173 is much clearer when
16 you also read the question that precedes it, because the viewer -- a
17 viewer who called in said: "I wanted to ask a question of Mr. Seselj. I
18 remember when he came to Smederevska Palanka. He said that Slobodan
19 Milosevic was the greatest criminal," and so on and so forth. And then
20 you say what you read out in 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996. You say that
21 there was a vehement political conflict, a clash, and so on. Is this what
22 you were explaining to Mr. Nice here? Is this consistent with your
23 explanations as to why you said this?
24 A. Yes. And my reply to Mr. Nice, to everything he brought up from
25 those attacks of mine against you, is that everything I said then was
1 incorrect. It wasn't correct. It done mean that I made it all up myself,
2 Mr. Milosevic, because many journalists in the pro-Western media were
3 saying the same things, accusing you for this and that, of this and that,
4 and it wasn't just my imagination. I gathered and combined this from
5 their attacks, and perhaps I was the most skilful of all in construing
6 these attacks on you.
7 Q. You have a brief excerpt from the book "The Power of Argument." I
8 hope you have it before you. It's on page 347. You say: "As soon as he
9 changed his policies in mid-1993," you're speaking about me, you have
10 this answer.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. "We set out to settle accounts vehemently with Slobodan
13 Milosevic, and this settling of accounts is still going on, although in
14 the past few years it has become somewhat milder because the repressive
15 measures of the regime in Serbia have been mitigated."
16 A. Yes, I think this is important. As soon as the repressive
17 measures grow milder, our rhetoric changes. We deal in arguments more
18 than strong words or slogans. We attack people directly.
19 So what I'm highlighting here is that the regime was -- was
20 implementing repressive measures against us and arresting volunteers. The
21 arrest of volunteers in 1993 was something that I found harder to bear
22 than when I myself was arrested. It was harder for me to bear having
23 others arrested because of me than being arrested myself.
24 Mr. Milosevic, we even made up verses mocking you at the time.
25 When I was in prison, I provoked the guards, singing every day "Slobo is
1 hanging from a lamppost in Terazija and the police are weeping over him."
2 This is something someone in our party wrote as a little voice to jeer at
3 Slobodan Milosevic. And we were in a situation where the regime was
4 acting improperly towards us. I know you don't like the little poem. I
5 don't like it either, but at that time it seemed like a good way of
6 defying you.
7 Q. Well, your defiance is well known. Try to remind me. I don't
8 know that you were ever in prison for insulting me or my wife.
9 A. That's what I explain. You don't want to give me -- you didn't
10 want to give me a chance to go to prison for that, but then your people
11 would put me in prison for other reasons, very often fabricated ones. For
12 example, General Badza, Radovan Stojicic, staged an attack on me in
13 Gnjilane. We were attacked by the police for no reason at all. And there
14 was even shooting. A policeman shot towards another policeman and hit
15 him. This other one was wearing a flak jacket and he had bruises. And
16 then Badza decided to ascribe this to me and my men, but none of us had
17 weapons, so it fell through. They thought that as we were going to
18 Gnjilane in Kosovo we would be armed to the teeth because we'd be in
19 danger, but we -- as if we knew what was going to happen. We were all
20 unarmed or who knows what might have happened in this construction of
21 theirs. So I cannot justify what the police did in those years against
22 us, either Badza or Jovica Stanisic or anyone else.
23 The conflict that arose between Jovica Stanisic and us in those
24 first years was even continued in the Detention Unit in Scheveningen so
25 that the warden had to intervene. And later it died down a little and
1 relations became more normal. But the first time I saw him I met with
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: If you're going to exhibit these documents, the
4 time to do that is now, Mr. Milosevic, so we can just deal with them.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. I wanted to go through these
6 books of Mr. Seselj's and then tender them all in a bundle so as not to
7 waste a lot of time.
8 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Seselj, look at this book now, "The Government of National
10 Unity." I won't even quote everything you marked. On page 146, towards
11 the end you say: "I thank Mr. Dretsen [phoen] for corroborating what I
12 previously said, that no one attacked Slobodan Milosevic and the regime in
13 Belgrade more vehemently than I did, and it's quite natural for members of
14 opposition parties to attack and criticise the regime. And when the
15 regime implements repressive measures that they should be as critical as
16 is possible to be and to not choose words when attack being the regime.
17 That's very natural."
18 A. Another thing is important, Mr. Milosevic. I am saying this on
19 television in Montenegro, for Montenegrin television. So there is no need
20 for me to explain this to the Serbian public. I'm saying this in
21 Montenegro and everywhere else.
22 Q. Well, then, on page 1 -- no, 351, you're asked: "Do you still
23 think that Milosevic is the biggest criminal?" And you don't answer
24 this. And then he says: "You haven't answered my question. Do you still
25 think that?" That's on page 351. And you say: "Seselj: That was
1 defiance to the regime and a vehement attack on the repressive policies of
2 the regime. If you remember when in late 1993 we entered into a conflict
3 with the socialists and the parliament met for days."
4 A. We were attacking the government of Nikola Sainovic for days with
5 arguments vehemently, but none of us mentioned Slobodan Milosevic, even
6 when the Socialists mentioned him. Sometimes Tomislav Nikolic would take
7 the floor and say, "Don't touch the president." This is a showdown
8 between our two parliamentary groups, our two parties, the government and
9 the opposition. That was the first stage of the conflict when we spared
10 you. But then our members were arrested, our volunteers in Srem, Sombor
11 and some other places, and then they said the radicals were found with
12 weapons. And various footage was shown on state-run television, even
13 footage of weapons confiscated who knows where and ascribed to us. That
14 was when we set out vehemently not choosing our words, and the more
15 repressive the regime was towards us, the more brutal we were towards the
16 regime. And the quotations from my speeches mirror this, the ones Mr.
17 Nice referred to. I admit I was brutal in my showdown with you. Of
18 course you personally did not appear on the other side, but it was your
19 people who were also brutal in their showdown with us from your party and
20 from the government structures.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Could there be a pause between question and
23 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. And then --
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic. Mr. Milosevic, the interpreters
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 are asking for a pause between question and answer. And for you also
2 Mr. Seselj.
3 THE INTERPRETER: And could Mr. Milosevic's microphone be adjusted
4 also, please.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a second. Mr. Milosevic, sorry to interrupt
6 you. The interpreters are asking for your microphone to be adjusted.
7 THE ACCUSED: Okay, okay. Thank you.
8 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Well, the presenter was saying: "Does that mean you didn't mean
10 it seriously?" And you said: "It means that we wanted to insult and defy
11 and annoy and provoke the other side. That's what we did."
12 A. Yes. We provoked the regime so much that at the end of the 1994
13 they even arrested me. And in 1995, at any rate, when they mounted the
14 event in Mjlani [phoen], if you remember I mentioned that. The regime
15 applied repressive measures towards us, and we were brutal towards the
16 regime. And this defiance showed our resolve and strength. And then the
17 regime at one point came to understand that it was no use fighting the
18 radicals in that way. With Vuk Draskovic they could do that. All they
19 had to do was arrest him, and the first time he was arrested in 1991 he
20 peed on the spot, wet his pants. And he would write apologetic letters of
21 remorse asking for mercy. So they had achieved their effect. And I'm
22 referring to Draskovic's case.
23 With the radicals there was no effect. They could kill us.
24 That's all they could do, otherwise nothing would have any effect. And as
25 they couldn't use those tools with the radicals, then they had to act
1 normally towards us and we would act normally too, because it wasn't -- we
2 didn't want to insult them at all costs, but when they get us into a
3 corner we won't relent. So that's the sense of it. It -- our conduct
4 depended on the repressive measures resorted to by the regime, but we did
5 the same after the 5th of October when the authorities changed. The
6 regime was repressive towards us. We staged parliamentary obstructions,
7 they would expel us from the Assembly, and so and so forth.
8 Now the situation has normalised somewhat in the parliament of
9 Serbia, and the radicals behave in quite a different manner. When they're
10 brutal towards us in parliament and they stifle our rights, then we
11 respond in like kind. There is nothing else that we can do. So under
12 those authorities, we had -- we wore yellow bands on our sleeves for a
13 week because the -- their persecution of us we linked to the Nazi
14 persecution of the Jews in their day.
15 So you should understand that that was -- that Serbian political
16 folklore. Perhaps you can't find something like that in other countries,
17 but we do have this political folklore and we are quite proud of it in
18 actual fact.
19 Q. And then you have here on page 352. You say: "Do you still tell
20 tales about the Milosevic family or was that a pre-electoral campaign?"
21 And you say: "I never talked about the Milosevic family. I attacked the
22 president of the Socialist Party of Serbia and the president of the
23 direction of the Yugoslav left as political personages."
24 A. Yes, that's right. I never mentioned your son, for instance,
25 because he didn't delve in politics. I never mentioned your daughter
1 because she never dealt in politics. But your wife was the president of a
2 political party. Previously she was a high-ranking official of the party
3 and later the president of the party, and that is why she was the subject
4 of my attacks as a political personage, not because she was your wife. So
5 the fact that those two facts coincided is how this arose. But I also say
6 afterwards that they were insulting terms that we used. They used insults
7 to hurl at me. Milan Markovic called me a Turk and so on and so forth.
8 You know, your wife had -- had an article in a magazine, so she
9 would attack me fiercely. But all that was in the heat of the political
10 debate and argument. You were intelligent enough to avoid or, rather, not
11 to enter into these disputes personally, and I have to pay tribute to you
12 for that, because had you delved in those political debates, you would
13 have fared worse.
14 Q. Mr. Seselj, in all those ten years, was I attacked fiercely, not
15 only by you but by all other opposition politicians and their media?
16 A. Absolutely. They attacked you with all the tools they had at
17 their disposal.
18 And let me give you an example. When we were in the government of
19 Serbia in the year 2000, after the crime at the Ibarska road, Vuk
20 Draskovic held Studio B under his control because he had authority in
21 Belgrade, and from one day to the next they kept repeating accusations
22 against you for having been -- for having organised the crime only the
23 Ibar road motorway and that I drove a red Golf and took the perpetrator of
24 the crime away from the scene of the crime, and this was so important that
25 Aleksandar Vucic had to enforce rule in studio B to stop them emitting --
1 broadcasting news like that. So us radicals were more prone to actions of
2 that kind. We --
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- were in charge of Studio B after
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
8 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Seselj, you said here what you mentioned a moment ago, and it
10 says that here too. You say the following: "But I never touched their
11 children, attacked their children." And then the presenter says: "Nor
12 did they harm you." And you say: "No, they didn't, and I didn't harm
13 them. Some other people do attack them," et cetera. We're not going to
14 enter into that now. But in -- over the past ten years, that is to say,
15 from 1990 to 2000, in that ten-year period, was that a time when I was
16 attacked and my wife was attacked with all possible instruments and tools
17 by the entire media and the opposition?
18 A. My attacks on you were far weaker and milder than the attacks
19 hurled against you by the pro-Western politicians later on. And here is
20 an example in point. Just these days I've been reading in the Belgrade
21 press that the former minister of the interior in Djindjic's government,
22 Dusan Mihajlovic, said the following. This appeared in the papers just a
23 few days ago. That you were not involved in the crime on the Ibarska
24 Magistrala motorway.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Once a party --
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What did you say?
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: A party is on his feet, you have to stop. Let us
3 here what he has to say.
4 Mr. Nice.
5 MR. NICE: The --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't do it intentionally. I
7 Just didn't notice that he was on his feet.
8 MR. NICE: The question was out. It was almost too late to
9 challenge it. But nevertheless, it is a leading question, and I don't
10 know what the answer has that's relevant to these proceedings in any
11 event. And we have to be careful that there aren't oblique purposes being
12 served outside the objectives of this Court by what's being said by this
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
15 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Mr. Seselj, those ten years when I was under fervent attack, me
17 and my wife together, did I ever in those ten years deny any of those
18 attacks or refute them?
19 A. No, never. Not once.
20 Q. Did I deal with the attacks at all that were hurled at me
21 practically daily?
22 A. No, not you personally. You never responded to any of the attacks
23 hurled against you. However -- well, I have something important to say,
24 Mr. Bonomy, and I think you'll wish to hear it. You were always tolerant
25 here, and if Mr. Robinson and Mr. Kwon agree, I have two very important
1 sentences to say with your permission. If not, I won't.
2 May I go ahead, Mr. Robinson, please?
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Two sentences, yes.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Several days ago, the Belgrade
5 press, the papers, published a statement by the former minister of the
6 interior, Dusan Mihajlovic is his name, and he was in Djindjic's
7 government to the effect that Mr. Milosevic had nothing to do with the
8 crime committed on the Ibarska motorway and the killing of Ivan Stambolic.
9 And before that - this is the second sentence - all the officials
10 of pro-Western parties, including that man Mihajlovic, strongly accused
11 Mr. Milosevic precisely for those crimes for which it turned out that they
12 had been commissioned by somebody else, the same people who had Milosevic
13 toppled from power.
14 Well, maybe a little longer than two sentences, but anyway it was
15 two sentences.
16 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Mr. Seselj, I'm not going to deal with your books anymore from
18 which we can see the attacks and how you explained the attacks hurled
19 there. But let me ask you one question: Is any of what -- of the things
20 that you uttered against me and my wife, was any of that correct?
21 A. All the things that Mr. Nice mentioned, none of that was correct.
22 Q. All right. Thank you. That's the only reason I asked you,
23 because my question refers to Mr. Nice's cross-examination.
24 Take a look at your book now, please, and could those three
25 excerpts, the excerpts from three books be tendered into evidence as
1 exhibits, please?
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
3 THE REGISTRAR: That will be under one number, D309 MFI.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: They will be under one number.
5 THE REGISTRAR: D309.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: D309 and marked for identification since they are
7 not translated.
8 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. You have it in this book "Not Mincing Words" and it's on page
10 800 -- 684 -- 864.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Milosevic please slow down.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, just look at the transcript. The
13 interpreters are asking you to slow down.
14 JUDGE KWON: And identify the book.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: And please identify the book.
16 THE WITNESS: Last document which you had here. [Interpretation]
17 We have the book and we have the excerpt.
18 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. The portion where you say there are certain situations in life
20 where a politician especially must resort to such qualifications. What
21 else can I say? When Milosevic's police arrest me, and so on and so
22 forth. And then our resolute defiance and our courage and bravery we
23 prove by resorting to the worst possible expressions and insults that we
24 utter at that point in time.
25 Not to dwell on that any further, but that's all along the same
1 lines of the explanations you've already given us.
2 Now, with respect to these seven books that you referred to and
3 from which Mr. Nice drew the extracts and the photocopies were made of
4 them, there were a number of quotations which relate to Srebrenica,
5 because that's one of the questions you were asked. However, he didn't
6 want to ask you certain aspects of that. As far as I can see, one is the
7 Fifth Fatherland Congress.
8 JUDGE KWON: It is for the accused to identify the passage. The
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They are photocopies made by
11 Mr. Nice.
12 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Yes, and I received them from him. But they are taken from your
14 book entitled the Fifth Fatherland Congress or Homeland Congress. Just
15 let me see if I have the contents of that here.
16 JUDGE KWON: Is it one of the seven books, Mr. Milosevic?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. However, we only have four
18 here and we're lacking three. Your usher only has four of them, and I
19 handed over all seven at the same time.
20 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. I have them here, and I'll provide them to Mr. Seselj to save time
22 so that it can be placed on the overhead projector.
23 Here we have it, Mr. Seselj. From this entire book entitled, "The
24 Fifth Fatherland Congress" I'm going to ask you to look at the passage
25 highlighted in blue. You highlighted that portion, too, but just read
1 that out for us, please, would you?
2 A. It says here, and this is my speech, in fact, I think it's my
3 speech at Fifth fatherland Congress of the Serb Radical Party held on the
4 23rd of January, 2000: "It is difficult to resist Western lies that are
5 being launched via the instrumentalised media. They are lying that the
6 Serbs attacked the Markale marketplace in Sarajevo and then one month
7 later we learned that it was one great lie. However, in the meantime they
8 introduced criminal sanctions against us and they have lied about many
9 other things. They organised through their friends from the French
10 intelligence service the killing, the murder, of about 1.000 Muslims in
11 Srebrenica in order to ascribe that to the Serbs. And now we know that
12 they tried to recruit some Serb criminals as well, Serb criminals in order
13 to do their dirty work for them so that everything could come down on the
14 shoulders of the Serb people to proclaim the Serb nation as a genocide
15 nation by the world press and world media."
16 This, then, is my speech before the information minister --
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, what is the question --
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- spoke.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: -- that arises from that passage?
20 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Mr. Seselj, Mr. Nice asked you whether you had previously spoken
22 about the background to the crime in Srebrenica, and I'm presenting you
23 here with the book written by yourself and presented here. That is to
24 say, that what you testified a bit -- about here you spoke about earlier
25 on and that it was introduced into your books, that they were published,
1 printed, and so on and so forth. So is that material evidence? I assume
2 that a book is public property?
3 A. Yes. And all that took place before the Pauk or Spider group was
5 Q. Now, in this other book of yours, the next book that was provided
6 amongst those seven books that you handed over, which is entitled "While
7 Patriots are Reconstructing, Traitors are Destroying." The page is 294
8 and 295. I have highlighted the portion. And then I'm going to ask you
9 the question of how far this differs from what you said a moment ago --
10 not a moment ago during your testimony, but what you said during the past
11 few days about those events and the way in which the Pauk group or Spider
12 group was arrested and the documents that were presented.
13 A. This is way it was. This was a group of spies of the French
14 intelligence service that was arrested. An investigation is going on.
15 Different things are being revealed, including that intended
16 assassination. Now the investigation is supposed to reveal how far the
17 preparations for the assassination had gone, to what extent it was just an
18 intention, plan, or whether it was a premeditated action. We will see
19 these details in court. The investigation continues intensively, and
20 every day more and more facts are emerging. However, it is very dirty
21 work involved and that is more than obvious. These are people who have
22 blood on their hands, the blood of thousands of victims, and that's a
23 fact. And that Western intelligence services, in this case France, the
24 French service, and many others tried to blame us for things in Bosnia, in
25 Kosovo, to blame us for war crimes, genocide, and other things. That is
1 more than obvious.
2 Look at the case of Srebrenica. The Serb army started out towards
3 Srebrenica and Srebrenica was liberated. Several thousand Muslims were
4 taken prisoner, and Ratko Mladic came to Srebrenica and promised all
5 Muslims that they would be escorted towards Tuzla, that all their lives
6 would be guaranteed. He gives children chocolate, et cetera. In whose
7 interest was it to single out a couple of hundred Muslims and execute
8 them? Was it in the interest of us Serbs? No. Our interest was to have
9 these Muslims treated in the nicest possible way, even those who we knew
10 were criminals, and to give them safe passage to Tuzla. Many left. Many
11 went and several hundred --
12 Q. Mr. Seselj, I see that the transcript is somewhat delayed, so
13 could you please slow down so that we would have an exact interpretation
14 of what you're saying.
15 A. I am going to slow down. "It was in our interest for all to
16 leave, and then Zepa fell, and the same kind of action was taken in Zepa.
17 Then Gorazde would surrender, and the Muslims themselves would see how
18 well the Serbs behaved. Why would they shed any more blood? In the
19 surrounds of Gorazde there was no bread, no water, nothing. They would
20 surrender nicely. They would be escorted towards Sarajevo and that would
21 be it. The objective of the Western intelligence service was a double
22 one, first to kill as many Muslims as possible in order to indicate to the
23 Muslims in Gorazde what the situation would be like for them if they
24 surrendered to the Serb army, and then the Muslims from Gorazde were
25 prepared to fight to the last man. Why would someone do that if he knew
1 what awaited him was certain death? Then he fights to the bitter end.
2 Their objective was to stage an example of genocide, a war crime in order
3 to accuse the entire Serb people and Serb leadership. Imagine now that is
4 a small -- that is a group, a small group of people, the so-called
5 10th Sabotage Detachment."
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Seselj, I think you have read enough.
7 Please ask a question arising from that, Mr. Milosevic.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let him finish just the quotation,
9 please, Mr. Robinson. This is a very important quotation. I would like
10 Mr. Seselj to compare what he said then to what he testified about here on
11 the basis of facts. He himself said that at that time he did learn of
12 those facts, that he received this information.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: It is rather long.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But there's very little left,
15 Mr. Robinson.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Go ahead.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "The so-called 10th Sabotage Squad.
18 That is what it was called, where there were both Muslims and Croats.
19 This Drazen Erdemovic was also in that group. Now, what happened to him?
20 He was in that group here. Our police revealed that, arrested him, and
21 then he asked to go before The Hague Tribunal, and our people let him go
22 there, and there he was sentenced to five years. He executed so many
23 people and he was sentenced to five years only. What does that mean? And
24 how much money did they promise him? They told him he would spend a few
25 years in prison. They -- we are giving you this money but we need you now
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 in order to use you against the Serb people and Serb leaders. That's the
2 core of the matter. That's the same thing they tried to do in Kosovo.
3 They accused us. They said 100.000 Siptars were killed, and then later on
4 they reduced the figure. They said 10.000. Now they cannot find even
5 1.000 corpses. Where are they, then, if these people were killed? There
6 aren't any. A person is not a fly and cannot just disappear. You know,
7 that cannot be hidden. There were Siptars who got killed but they got
8 killed in battle. What did our army and police do? Sometimes they would
9 bury them in collective graves, but they marked them properly, according
10 to regulations. Then there were Siptars who got killed during the
11 bombing, several thousands of them. More Serbs got killed in Kosovo since
12 NATO troops entered the area than the number of Siptars killed in
13 battle --"
14 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not see the end of the
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think it's very important to give
17 the date. That's my interview given to TV Knjazevac in Serbia. The 8th
18 of December, 1999.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. What is the question, Mr. Milosevic?
20 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Mr. Seselj, Mr. Nice asked you what kind of investigation we
22 carried out. Did we know anything about the crime in Srebrenica until
23 Erdemovic was arrested and generally speaking until those first events at
24 that took place then?
25 A. Before the Erdemovic arrest, I don't think that the authorities
1 had any kind of reliable information, and that's a very short period from
2 July 1995 until, when was it?, February 1996 when Erdemovic was arrested?
3 Some things were learned but I cannot say how much.
4 Q. Tell me, Mr. Seselj, do you know when the Dayton agreement was
5 signed in?
6 A. November 1995 as far as I can remember.
7 Q. Saint Archangel's Day, the 21st of November, 1995.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Do you know that IFOR entered the entire territory of
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina only a month after that?
11 A. Yes, immediately.
12 Q. Was it not the duty of those forces and the authorities in
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina to investigate that in their territory? What was it
14 that Yugoslavia was supposed to investigate unless some of its citizens
15 participated in something?
16 A. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia did not have any legal
17 jurisdiction to investigate the crime in Srebrenica. That became the
18 jurisdiction of international forces and of the occupation governor of
19 Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was Westendorp then or whoever. However, it was
20 the obligation of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, if it found out that
21 a citizen of Yugoslavia took part in such a crime, to start an
22 investigation and to bring him before a court of law. If also Yugoslavia
23 learns that a foreign citizen did that and that person is in its
24 territory, then they should do that too.
25 So that is -- those are the only two cases when Yugoslavia should
1 have investigated such a crime.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Could the speakers please be asked to slow down.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: I have to stop you. I have to stop you again.
4 The interpreters are asking you to slow down. You must observe a pause
5 between question and answer.
6 Mr. Nice, did you lead any evidence as to the constitutional
7 authority to carry out investigations in Srebrenica?
8 MR. NICE: If you mean did I lead any, I'm not sure. I simply
9 couldn't say whether any evidence was given one way or another. But of
10 course the questions that I asked which this examination should, it might
11 be thought, be reactive to are questions that arose from the witness's own
12 volunteered account in examination-in-chief of his knowledge of these
13 matters, my inquiring into what -- what inquiries, if any, existed and
14 what documents existed, if any, upon which he based his conclusions.
15 As to the question currently being dealt with, of course the body
16 or one of the bodies in any event with jurisdiction was this body in 1995,
17 and indeed we know about the indictments that were issued. That doesn't
18 stop other bodies having either a duty or an interest in conducting
19 inquiries themselves, especially given in the circumstances the person who
20 had been charged so far as this court was concerned and his known -- as we
21 now know his known employed or retained status within the forces of Serbia
22 via the 30th and 40th personnel centres. So there was a range of issues
23 that might have been explored, but of course the ones I explored were very
24 limited, and I'm not sure this re-examination is reactive to those.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice, the line of questioning is that it was
2 neither the function of Serbia or the FRY to carry out investigations in
3 1995 into crimes such as Srebrenica, then that belonged to an
4 international force.
5 MR. NICE: Yes. Well, Your Honour, the points I've made I can
6 simply repeat. First of all, he gave an account of Srebrenica based on
7 information and I wanted to know what reports, if any, existed and what
8 information, if any, existed on the basis of that.
9 Second, not asked but nevertheless relevant to this topic here, as
10 the Court knows, via the 30th and 40th personnel centre, Serbia had an
11 established continuing interest in the criminality of those like Mladic
12 who feature in that chain of payment and it may be of command, he having
13 been indicted, it would have plainly fell on Serbia to get on and conduct
14 an investigation into him. And, indeed, at a later stage, we will be
15 looking at the absence of any reference to that from the documentation.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, first of all, I have
18 to object to what Mr. Nice has been claiming, because that is totally
19 untrue. The then president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Zoran
20 Lilic testified here, and I think that some other witnesses also clearly
21 explained what the 30th and 40th personnel centres were and that this had
22 to do with giving assistance in terms of the salaries to the officers of
23 Republika Srpska, that it had nothing to do with command, and that was
24 proven a million times.
25 The fact that somebody gave assistance, material assistance, which
1 was explained very nicely here, well, that would mean that everybody who
2 received assistance and committed a crime somewhere was actually linked to
3 the person who had given the material aid. That is total nonsense.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is it your case, Mr. Milosevic, that Serbia did
5 not have the constitutional authority to carry out an investigation
6 into -- into crimes such as those allegedly committed in Srebrenica and
7 that that jurisdiction rested with some other body?
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, what you are saying is
9 partly true. However, at that time in 1995 --
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: I'm asking you a question.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, why would Serbia, if it does
12 not have concrete information about a citizen of its own, interfere in
13 what happened in the territory of another state after Dayton international
14 forces came there, not forces from Serbia. Before Dayton there weren't
15 any force there is from Serbia. I'm going to put the question to
16 Mr. Seselj.
17 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. To date has it been established that any citizen of Srebrenica --
19 of Serbia took part in what happened in Srebrenica?
20 A. No, not for a single citizen of the Federal Republic of
21 Yugoslavia, that is to say Serbia, Montenegro. No citizens of Serbia and
22 Montenegro took part in the execution of Muslim prisoners of war in
23 Srebrenica. There has not been a single case of this kind.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I wish to draw your
25 attention to the following, that at the time when the international forces
1 came in after the Dayton agreement, it was still totally unclear what had
2 happened in Srebrenica. That was not mentioned at all in Dayton. What
3 was discussed in Dayton was the peace agreement. This question simply was
4 not brought up because no one knew about it. And then the international
5 forces came in. That was under their jurisdiction.
6 Now, what did Serbia have to do in that context? Why would Serbia
7 deal with this? The first person that came onto Serbian soil --
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic. Please move on.
9 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. I have just another book provided by Mr. Milosevic [as
11 interpreted], and that is the "Dosmanli Evil Committed Against Serbia."
12 That is one of the books that you gave here, Mr. Seselj. Please find a
13 page --
14 A. Unfortunately I haven't got it in front of me.
15 Q. I'll give it to you then. It is page 3 -- or, rather, 434,
16 that's the page number. And I would like you to quote what you said
17 yourself. Again, this is a talk show on television, you and a talk show
18 host. It starts with Srebrenica. Have you found it?
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the title of the book?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is page 435 maybe.
21 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Yes, it is.
23 A. I found it.
24 Q. The Dosmanli evil committed against Serbia.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the title of the book?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Dosmanli Evil Committed Against
2 Serbia"? "Evil" is a word I used. "Zulum" [phoen] means "evil." It's an
3 archaic word. Perhaps it's even from the Turkish language. And now why I
4 do I use the word "Dosmanli" --
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: You have a natural pedagogic tendency which you
6 should seek to curtail, Mr. Seselj. I don't need to know. I just wanted
7 to have the title.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very briefly, I am mocking the
9 current authorities in Serbia. That's the Dosmanli.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. And what is the passage now?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "As for Srebrenica, first light
12 should be shed on all the circumstances involved. There is no doubt that
13 a large number of Muslims were killed. That is a fact. Why? I don't
14 know how many. I know that the number was exaggerated, and I know that
15 some who were on the list previously later even appeared in lists of
16 voters and voted in the elections. But whether 1.000, 2.000, or 3.000
17 people were killed, I cannot just bid like that. It would be unfair of me
18 to engage in this kind of guesswork.
19 The first question that comes to my mind is who issued the order
20 to execute those Muslim prisoners?"
21 I am omitting the question, and my answer that follows is:
22 "First, I don't know who gave the order, but those who gave the orders
23 greatly harmed Serb national interests. If a Serb did that, he was either
24 a total madman and psychopath or he worked on instructions from Serb
25 enemies. Why? Serb -- Srebrenica fell practically without any fighting,
1 isn't that right? What was the basic Serb interest then? That all
2 Muslims be safely taken to Tuzla, that all Muslim lives be saved both of
3 civilians and soldiers and women and children. Why? Because then Gorazde
4 would certainly have fallen too. Had the Muslims from Gorazde found out
5 how fairly the Serbs had treated the Muslims from Srebrenica and Zepa,
6 they would have no further motive to defend Gorazde at all costs, although
7 for Muslims it does not have any strategic interest any longer. It will
8 always be a dead end. It is impossible for it to develop economically.
9 It is impossible to live there normally, isn't that right."
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Do we need any more of this? Just a minute. Do
11 we need any more of this, Mr. Milosevic? You should ask a question now.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well.
13 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation].
14 Q. Mr. Seselj, are you speaking here about who issued the order for
15 the execution of Muslims and then mentioning the military police platoon
16 among whose members was the Croat Erdemovic directly subordinated to the
17 French intelligence service?
18 A. Mr. Milosevic, there are two very brief passages that follow and
19 then everything becomes clear. By your leave.
20 Q. Well, then go on and read them.
21 A. "Well, now, he who was in charge of Serb policies and military
22 strategy had this in mind. Who could have ordered the liquidation of
23 Muslims? He who wanted the Muslims in Gorazde to defend themselves until
24 the last man at all costs. Our government had indicia that the French
25 intelligence service was involved in this. This military police platoon
1 which participated in the liquidations, among whose members was a Croat
2 called Erdemovic, was directly subordinated to the French intelligence
3 service. Our investigation arrived at this result, and I hope that one
4 day all the circumstances surrounding the Srebrenica tragedy will be
5 clarified, that light will be cast upon them. You know, I cannot deny
6 that war crimes were committed in Srebrenica."
7 Only two more sentences: "But let us see who ordered those
8 crimes, who organised them, and in whose interest they were committed. He
9 who do this was --"
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Seselj, yes.
11 What's the question now?
12 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Mr. Seselj, you quoted a brief sentence here, inter alia, which I
14 will repeat. "Our investigation arrived at this result." That means that
15 you were familiar with the result of the investigation of the Spider
17 A. Yes. Because this interview took place after the arrest of the
18 Pauk group, the Spider group.
19 Q. I was about to ask you whether you were referring to that
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. We can establish the date, only tell me what the book was.
23 A. "The Dosmanli Evil Committed Against Serbia." I'll tell you right
24 away. This is a statement I made for the Muslim television OBN from
25 Sarajevo. A team of journalists, on the 25th of June, 19 -- 2001, came to
1 Belgrade to interview me. That was in 2001.
2 Q. Mr. Seselj, Mr. Nice has put forward the case on more than one
3 occasion that our government was trying to cover up the crime in
4 Srebrenica. We have submitted here public documents referring to
5 statements made by the federal government about the crime in Srebrenica
6 which correspond to that investigation.
7 Tell me now, as you, not you personally but your party --
8 A. Yes, Tomislav Nikolic was the deputy Prime Minister.
9 Q. Yes, your deputy Tomislav Nikolic was the deputy Prime Minister of
10 the federal government. Was there any public way for the federal
11 government to issue a statement about the results of the investigation of
12 the Pauk group, the Spider group, and its links with Srebrenica apart from
13 the method that was used, and that was for the spokesperson of the federal
14 government to hold a press conference on behalf of the federal government
15 and state all this?
16 A. No. They could only accuse us from a counter-position. Why are
17 we giving out this information before a court judgement was reached? That
18 was the only way they could have objected to what we were doing if they
19 were going to nitpick.
20 The crime in Srebrenica horrified all of Serbia, and there was not
21 a single person in Serbia who justified that crime or tried to cover it
22 up. At least not in public.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Seselj. And that was what was contained in these
24 seven books that you brought in response to Mr. Nice's question that you
25 should say when, on what occasion you spoke about this.
1 We will now move on to a completely different topic. At the
2 outset --
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Nice.
4 MR. NICE: Your Honours, if we're moving to a new topic there's an
5 administrative matter in relation to this witness who it appears now will
6 be coming back next week and a similar administrative matter in relation
7 to a future witness that I'd like to raise, and I note the time and I can
8 raise it very briefly now.
9 In relation to this witness, he has suggested as possible that
10 there exists in his cell at Scheveningen a report on the incident about
11 Racak. Our interests in having the completest documentation for Racak is
12 such that I invite the Court, if he's going to be here next week, to bring
13 such a document with him if he has it.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, let's me ask you, Mr. Seselj. Do you have
16 documentation in your cell --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I was speaking
18 ironically. It should have been clear to everyone. I think it was clear
19 to you and your colleagues. It was only not clear to Mr. Nice. How could
20 I have that in my cell? I don't even have enough oxygen in my cell.
21 MR. NICE: Very well. Then the second point relates not to this
22 witness but to the next fresh witness to come who is presumably -- if he
23 hasn't travelled already will be travelling soon, Janicevic, and he is a
24 witness who could clearly assist in relation to documentation on the topic
25 of Racak. We've been able now to review the exhibits that the accused has
1 provided. They seem to be rather spare.
2 We would like to invite the accused, through the Court, to
3 arrange, because we don't have, otherwise, direct relationships with him,
4 to arrange for that witness, if he so chooses, to bring with him, and then
5 there's a list of about eight topics which we'd like the accused to have
6 in mind, he can have them in mind off the transcript, and in particular
7 for the witness to bring all orders, plans and minutes of the SUP
8 concerning Racak, all orders from the MUP to the -- MUP to the MUP staff
9 and the SUP staff about Racak, all orders from the SUP to the units
10 conducting the operation in Racak, all post-operation reports from the SUP
11 to the MUP staff and to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. And then
12 because we've been provided with a selection of daily reports from the
13 Urosevac police station, we would ask for the witness to bring the
14 balance, which would be for the relevant period the following dates in
15 January of 1999, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24, 27, and 28th of January. We'd ask
16 him to bring orders from the PJP unit commander about the operation, and
17 post-operation reports issued by the PJP. And we'd invite him to bring
18 daily reports from Stimlje police station from the 13th to the January --
19 to the 19th of January.
20 Now, this material, if this witness brings them next week, should
21 enable us to go -- to have a more complete collection of documents in
22 relation to this event, and I'm grateful for you allowing me the time to
23 make that request.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, Mr. Milosevic has heard it. It's an
25 unusual request, Mr. Nice, but the case itself is unusual for a Prosecutor
1 to request a Defence witness to bring certain documents, but it would
2 expedite matters, and as I said, that is unusual case.
3 Mr. Milosevic would have heard the request, and to the extent that
4 he can accede to it, the Court would appreciate it if he would do so.
5 Mr. Milosevic, very quickly, because we will now have to adjourn.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I hope that this
7 witness will bring all the documents he has available, but this
8 anti-terrorist operation in Racak was not the battle of Stalingrad, so it
9 didn't have all those documents and reports that Mr. Nice mentioned. I
10 think not even D-Day has all those documents that Mr. Nice mentioned.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, do you wish to have exhibited the
12 remainder of those books?
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, all of them.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. Yes, in one exhibit number.
15 THE REGISTRAR: That will be D309, consist of seven tabs. All the
16 excerpts will be into the D309.
17 JUDGE KWON: I'm not sure that you used six excerpts or seven
18 excerpts. You cited only six from them. Yes. Only those six excerpts
19 will be admitted.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We are adjourned until next Tuesday
21 at 9.00 a.m.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.,
23 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 20th day
24 of September, 2005, at 9.00 a.m.