1 Wednesday, 17 December 2003
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.35 p.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Good afternoon to those in court. The -- yesterday
6 there were two objections made by counsel for the Defence, and I wonder
7 whether it would be convenient at this point, Mr. Weiner, for that to be
8 dealt with by you.
9 MR. WEINER: That would be fine. Would I still be allowed to
10 remain seated through the day, Your Honour?
11 JUDGE PARKER: You may accept that to be the position unless we
12 get ill of sorts and countermand that order.
13 MR. WEINER: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Your Honour, the Defence raised two issues yesterday. I'd like to
15 address the first one. They stated, it's indicated in the indictment,
16 that the Prosecution, and I'm now quoting, was "trying to extend the time
17 period in the indictment." They further stated that we were
18 "extending the indictment to contain omissions and events that are not
19 contained in the indictment"; and the third matter was that we were
20 bringing charges against the accused outside that specific time period --
21 no: "that charges against the accused outside that specific time period
22 should be excluded or their importance should be minimal." And those are
23 three quotes from yesterday's transcript.
24 First, we are not charging the accused with any activity outside
25 of the normal indictment period. Acts that are occurring prior to
1 December 6th are an integral part of the Prosecution's case and are
2 mentioned throughout the indictment. In count 6 of the indictment, there
3 is discussion of the independence of Croatia on or about October 8th. In
4 count 11 there is discussion of the attack that was launched against
5 Dubrovnik beginning on October 1st. In count 12, they have the history of
6 the JNA's attack, the one which began on October 1st. In count 13 there
7 is discussion of the shelling attacks on the Old Town from 23 October to 6
8 December. In count 22 there's discussion of shelling attacks on the Old
9 Town from 23 October to 6th December and that the Old Town was a UNESCO
10 protected site. In counts 29 and 30 of the indictment there is discussion
11 as to the extent of the damage. Thus we are not referring to matters
12 outside of the indictment.
13 In addition to that, the accused is being charged with liability
14 pursuant to Articles 7(1) and 7(3). As the Court knows, 7(3) requires
15 that a superior, or a commander have knowledge or have reason to know of
16 the acts of his subordinates and that he failed to take the necessary and
17 reasonable measures to prevent these acts.
18 The evidence that we wish to tender relates to this issue. From
19 the prior acts, the accused Strugar had reason to know of the
20 vulnerability of the Old Town, that even with standing orders from the
21 highest levels of the Yugoslav government not to attack the Old Town, the
22 Old Town was still shelled in October and shelled in November. The
23 defendant's, or the accused's, failure to take reasonable precautions or
24 punish those who acted resulted in the unlawful attack which occurred on
25 December 6th.
1 There is case law which supports our position that the evidence of
2 prior acts is admissible. In the Vasiljevic case, the trial judgement
3 dated 29 November 2002, it concerns two incidents which occurred in which
4 a number of persons were murdered.
5 In paragraph 46, which appears on page 18, they talk about the
6 knowledge of the defendant -- I'm sorry, of the accused. And they first
7 talk about these acts which were placed, which were introduced by the
8 Commonwealth prior to the dates of the actual indictment period, and it
9 says: "A particularly violent and feared group of paramilitaries, Serb
10 paramilitaries, was led by the co-accused Milan Lukic. In the course of a
11 few weeks, this group committed many crimes ranging from looting to
12 murders." And then three sentences later, it says --
13 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please slow down.
14 MR. WEINER: I'm very sorry. Three sentences later, it says:
15 "Despite that knowledge, the accused was seen together with these men on
16 several occasions during the period relevant to the indictment."
17 So they are talking about the defendant's knowledge based on acts
18 which were introduced prior to the period which the allegations concern.
19 Later, in another case, in the case of Prosecutor versus Kvocka,
20 the trial judgement is 2 November 2001. In paragraph 318, and I'll read
21 you part of it, which is on page 90: "Information that would make a
22 superior suspicious that crimes might be committed includes past behaviour
23 of subordinates or a history of mistreatment. For instance, a military
24 commander who has received information that some of the soldiers under his
25 command have a violent or unstable character or have been drinking prior
1 to being sent on mission may be considered as having the required
2 knowledge. Similarly, if a superior has prior knowledge that women
3 detained by male guards in detention facilities are likely to be subjected
4 to sexual violence, that would put him on sufficient notice that extra
5 measures are demanded in order to prevent such crimes." That is the same
6 theory that we're proceeding on here.
7 And further, in the -- sorry. One second. In the Prosecutor
8 versus Kupreskic appeal judgement, dated 23 October 2001, they also dealt
9 with prior uncharged crimes, and the Court, in allowing that evidence to
10 be used as corroborative evidence and to prove different issues, stated:
11 "Courts --" they referred to how other countries deal with evidence of
12 prior crimes or acts, and that could be prior or subsequent, and stated
13 that: "Courts in England and Wales, Australia and the United States admit
14 evidence of crimes or wrongful acts committed by the defendant other than
15 those charged in the indictment if the other crimes are introduced to
16 demonstrate a special knowledge, opportunity, or identification of the
17 defendant that would make it more likely that he committed the instant
18 crime as well."
19 The case law in this Tribunal has allowed the use of prior and
20 subsequent bad acts.
21 Finally, I would just like to point the Chamber's attention to
22 Rule 89(C), which states that a Chamber may admit any relevant evidence
23 which it deems to have probative value.
24 As we stated, this evidence constitutes an integral part of our
25 case, was mentioned in our pre-trial brief in several sections, in several
1 sections of the indictment. It is probative, it's highly relevant, and it
2 should be admitted into evidence. Thank you.
3 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Weiner. Does it perhaps, at bottom,
4 come down to this; that the physical acts that are the subject of the
5 charges relate to the 6th of December but that you are bringing your case
6 in part against the accused on the basis of his command responsibility and
7 his knowledge and anticipation of what forces under his command might do;
8 and in that regard, his mental state, that is, what he anticipated or
9 should have anticipated about the conduct of the forces under his command
10 on the 6th of December would be relevantly informed by conduct which
11 occurred at dates earlier than the 6th of December and could also be
12 informed by conduct that occurred later?
13 MR. WEINER: Yes. That is our view, Your Honour, said much more
14 eloquently and succinctly than I did. Yes.
15 JUDGE PARKER: [Microphone not activated] Although, I heard you
17 MR. WEINER: Yes. We would like to use the prior and subsequent
18 acts to prove his knowledge, mental state at the time.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
20 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, may I?
21 JUDGE PARKER: If would you like to add something, Mr. Petrovic.
22 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to
23 respond very briefly to my learned friend. I am very glad that he
24 mentioned the cases that were tried before this Tribunal before;
25 Vasiljevic, Kvocka, and Kupreskic. I would like to recall very briefly
1 certain relevant aspects of these cases, starting with the Kvocka and
2 Vasiljevic cases.
3 The first important difference and the first important reason why
4 the rationale underlying these cases cannot apply to our case is that in
5 neither of the aforementioned cases - Kvocka, Vasiljevic and others - were
6 not charged with command responsibility. They were charged under
7 Article 7(3), but the judgement did not find them guilty under
8 Article 7(3). That is the first important difference.
9 The second important difference has to do with what I mentioned
10 yesterday, and that is the time of the indictment. The time of the
11 indictment in Kvocka and the others is from the 30th of April, 1992 to the
12 31st of August, 1992. The prior conduct of soldiers, guards, et cetera,
13 from which the commanding officer could have perhaps drawn conclusions
14 falls within the time of the indictment. For instance, abuse of a
15 prisoner by a drunken guard happened at the time covered by the
16 indictment, from the 30th of April to the 31st of August, 1992.
17 Therefore, their situation does not apply to our case. Our period begins
18 with the 31st of December. This other conduct does not apply. In Kvocka
19 and Vasiljevic, it is the same case. All prior conduct in their cases
20 falls within the time of the indictment.
21 If in the judgement of the Trial Chamber in Kvocka and Vasiljevic
22 cases guilt has been found, it is certainly in relation to the conduct of
23 subordinates at the time covered by the indictment, which is not our case.
24 In our case, we have the 6th of December as the date of commencement of
25 the alleged crime, which is prosecution -- persecution - sorry - and in
1 their cases the alleged crime falls within the period of the entire
2 existence of the Omarska camp, in which certain conduct took place.
3 So the jurisprudence of this Tribunal does not point in the
4 direction quoted by my learned friend, and that is the essence of the
5 remarks we voiced yesterday; namely, the claim that the 6th of December is
6 a result or an outcome of something that happened prior to that is
7 untenable. The Prosecutor, if I try to explain it briefly, is trying to
8 say that the premises for the events of the 6th of December were created
9 outside of the indicted period. That is not allowed before our Tribunal.
10 It is not allowed to extend the period through the back door. This is too
11 important an issue for me to leave without remarks.
12 It is perhaps more fitting for me to put my remarks in writing and
13 address a motion to the Trial Chamber because it seems likely that this
14 will be a key issue in our case on which many things will be decided,
15 namely what happened before and what happened after the 6th of December.
16 JUDGE PARKER: Do I understand from your comments, Mr. Petrovic,
17 that you would propose to bring a formal written motion with supporting
18 submissions in writing on this point to the Trial Chamber?
19 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I only wish to
20 suggest and point out the importance of this issue.
21 As to the need for a written submission, I would follow your
22 instructions. Therefore, if the Trial Chamber believes that it is
23 necessary - and I think it is necessary - and if you share the opinion of
24 the Defence, so General Strugar, then of course we would be prepared to
25 treat the issue in writing and present you with a submission. Thank you.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE PARKER: We share your view, Mr. Petrovic, of the
3 fundamental importance of this issue to the conduct of this hearing. We
4 would, therefore, encourage you to bring your submissions forward in
5 writing so that you will have had an opportunity to consider them
6 carefully when you prepare them so that the Office of the Prosecutor will
7 have an opportunity to consider them in what we would propose should be a
8 written response, and we will then ourselves be able to look at this
9 matter thoroughly, because exactly as you say, the decision on this issue
10 will affect a great deal about the conduct of the hearing and the issues
11 to be considered, so that we would value your carefully prepared written
13 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE PARKER: Could I have from you an indication of when you
15 believe you would be able to bring those forward.
16 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe it could be
17 sometime in the beginning of January; in the first week of our sittings in
18 January we would be able to file our submission.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Very good.
20 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 JUDGE PARKER: What I would propose is that when those submissions
22 have been received -- you might need seven days, do you think, Mr. Weiner,
23 to respond, or is that being too ambitious for me?
24 MR. WEINER: No. We'll get it done as soon as possible. When
25 they file their motion in limine, we will respond to it. Seven days is
2 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. And we will then take the matter
3 formally under our consideration and deliver a decision so that that will
4 guide the parties through the balance of the hearing. Thank you for that.
5 Also raised yesterday, if I remember correctly, was the question
6 of the film that was shown. Do you wish to put any submissions about that
7 in response, Mr. Weiner?
8 MR. WEINER: Yes. They just raised a few questions. I'm not that
9 certain what the objection is, but with regard to who the producer is, if
10 you look at the credits at the end, it's the Institute for the Restoration
11 of Dubrovnik, and the producer is Orlando Films from Dubrovnik. We were
12 hoping to tender the film with some witness in the future. At that point,
13 we could accept whatever objections or we could meet with counsel, maybe
14 ahead of time, probably to save time here and see if we can resolve what
15 issues that they're not pleased with. Maybe we can come to some agreement
16 on the film. Whatever they please.
17 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Petrovic.
18 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if you allow me, I
19 would like only briefly to recall our objection of yesterday in two
21 In the hitherto practice of this Tribunal, as far as our Defence
22 team knows, during opening statements, even if there is a film to present
23 to the Trial Chamber, it can only be a film resulting from the work of
24 associates of the OTP or the OTP itself. It is highly unusual for the
25 Trial Chamber to present -- to be presented with, during opening
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 statements, with a film that was made for propaganda purposes by an
2 institution completely outside of this Tribunal. As far as we know, this
3 is simply not part of the Tribunal practice. The opening statement is a
4 work product of the OTP, not anyone outside it. That is my first point.
5 My second point is related to the first one. Namely, in the film
6 we saw yesterday, certain qualifications are made that are inconsistent
7 with the contents of the indictment. The armed conflict, which is the
8 subject of our interest in this case, is qualified as "the war for the
9 defence of Croatia" or "the homeland war" or something else. If it is the
10 position of the Prosecution that it was a homeland war and not an armed
11 conflict, as stated in the indictment, that considerably changes the
12 parameters of our hearings. It changes the qualification of events that
13 are the subject of our interest. This needs to be clarified.
14 Is the Prosecution holding the position that we are discussing
15 here the homeland war and the defence of Croatia or we are discussing an
16 armed conflict involving a third party in the role of aggressor, as is
17 usually claimed for propaganda purposes? That is our point. Thank you.
18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Can you assist us on that point,
19 Mr. Weiner?
20 MR. WEINER: With regard to the first point, I'm not aware of any
21 rule that indicates that films or photographs can only be produced if they
22 are -- if they were made or taken by the Office of the Prosecutor. In
23 other cases, films have been used. I believe in the Krstic case they
24 utilised a film in closing argument from the JNA. It was some sort of
25 publicity film of General Mladic. There is no requirements that I'm aware
1 of, and I am not aware of any case where requirements have been set as to
2 the use of film.
3 With regard to opening statements, though, an opening statement is
4 nothing more than a road map explaining what the Prosecutor's upcoming
5 case will be. An opening statement is not evidence. An opening statement
6 is simply a statement to the Court and to the Defence and to the public
7 exactly what the Prosecutor plans to introduce. The use of films,
8 photographs, documents, maps, plats are commonly used in jurisdictions
9 throughout the world. There is no requirement that only films or
10 documents or photographs made by one party may be introduced.
11 Once again, if they would also like to file a motion in limine
12 opposing the introduction of that film or if they would like to sit and
13 meet with us and discuss the matter with us outside of the courtroom, tell
14 us what objections they have, maybe we can come to some agreement in
15 relation to its admission; that's fine. But at this point, unless we're
16 viewing this as a motion in limine, I'm not really certain how they would
17 like us to respond. It's nothing more than a statement --
18 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner, I, for my part, I have not seen this to
19 be anything of a formal motion but one essentially in which counsel for
20 the Defence, quite reasonably, perhaps, ask is it the content of the film
21 which is the case you are making about the nature of the armed conflict or
22 is it some of the things that you yourself said earlier? Because there is
23 a difference that has been identified between the two.
24 Now, are you relying on the content of the film as demonstrating
25 the nature of the armed conflict?
1 MR. WEINER: No. Witnesses will testify as to the nature of the
2 armed conflict. The film is a view of the area of Dubrovnik from all
3 different angles. It's also -- we also have portions of the film which
4 show December 6th, and it shows the bombing which occurred during that
5 period. Also, the extent of the damage and the restoration work. That is
6 what the nature of the film is; basically scenes to be observed.
7 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that. I think it is made clear then
8 that those representing Mr. Strugar can accept that you are not relying on
9 what is said in the film as going to the nature of the armed conflict with
10 which we are concerned.
11 As to the balance of the matter, the question of whether or not
12 the film is properly admissible and will be admitted into evidence are
13 questions that will arise should you reach a point in your case when you
14 want to introduce that film into evidence, and I think probably at that
15 point, if Mr. Petrovic still has concerns, he would be able then to object
16 to that film coming into evidence and we can look at that question then.
17 I would, though, suggest, Mr. Petrovic, that it has been indicated
18 that Mr. Weiner would be ready and willing to talk to you about the film,
19 and I think it would be useful if that were followed up between you and
20 you did discuss the film. It may be that any difficulties you have can be
21 resolved between you before the point is reached later in the case when it
22 seems Mr. Weiner will try to formally introduce the film into evidence.
23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, your conclusion and
24 the statement of Mr. Weiner is satisfactory to us as it was phrased, and
25 we consider this clarified. As for the admissibility of the film itself,
1 we will certainly follow your advice and discuss this with our learned
2 friends when the time comes in order to try to minimise the number of
3 problems we bring to your attention to make our work as expedient as
5 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much, Mr. Petrovic and Mr. Weiner.
6 Well, I think we reach a point where we might hear your first
7 witness then, Mr. Weiner.
8 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
10 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] If you'd allow me just two minutes.
11 The Defence of General Strugar does not wish to go again into the
12 issue of the submission regarding the health examination of our client,
13 and we do not want to preempt your decision. We are expecting and hope
14 that it will be favourable to our submission. And without anticipating
15 either your decision or the outcome of the health examination, allow me to
16 ask you to put some time limits on our work for the couple of following
18 General Strugar has been complaining to us both yesterday and the
19 day before yesterday that the time he had to spend here was a great strain
20 on him. So I should like to ask, if I may, very kindly to limit the time
21 he has to spend here for the next couple of days to two hours.
22 Another thing I would like to bring to your notice is that
23 General Strugar arrived in the building of the Tribunal today already at
24 12.30, which is close to two hours before the sitting began, which makes
25 things more difficult for him, and that is another reason why we should
1 like the Trial Chamber to consider the issue, with the assistance of all
2 the supporting services, and see if it is possible to arrange things in
3 such a way as to minimise the time General Strugar has to spend in
4 transportation and waiting. Thank you.
5 JUDGE PARKER: We have given some preliminary consideration to the
6 hours that we will sit during the balance of this week, especially because
7 of the concerns that you, Mr. Rodic and Mr. Petrovic, have expressed about
8 the present general health of your client, and what we will attempt to do
9 this afternoon is to have just one break and then conclude the hearing
10 sometime between 5.30 and 6.00, rather than sitting on until 7.00. That
11 way may make the afternoons more manageable for your client and, I
12 understand, will not present any great inconvenience to your own
13 situation, Mr. Weiner, or that of the witness.
14 MR. WEINER: Yes. We would agree to any limitation of the
16 JUDGE PARKER: I won't fix an exact time at the moment. It will
17 just depend at what point the witness may be in evidence, but we will aim
18 to finish at a convenient time between 5.30 and 6.00.
19 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you for your understanding,
20 Your Honour.
21 JUDGE PARKER: The witness.
22 [The witness entered court]
23 JUDGE PARKER: If the witness could take the affirmation.
24 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
25 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
1 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much. If you would be seated.
2 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
3 WITNESS: ADRIEN STRINGER
4 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner.
5 MR. WEINER: Thank you.
6 Examined by Mr. Weiner:
7 Q. Good afternoon. Would you state your name, please.
8 A. Adrien Paul Stringer.
9 Q. Could you tell us where you live.
10 A. In Haslemere, near London.
11 Q. How old are you, sir?
12 A. Sixty-seven.
13 Q. Are you employed at this time?
14 A. No.
15 Q. What is your status?
16 A. I'm retired.
17 Q. How were you last employed, sir?
18 A. I was employed by the Ministry of Defence in London.
19 Q. And when you -- just before you retired, what position did you
20 serve in?
21 A. I was Director of Security for the Ministry of Defence.
22 Q. How long did you work for the Ministry of Defence?
23 A. Since 1962, retiring in 1995, at the end of 1995.
24 Q. Now, at the end of your tenure with the Ministry of Defence, you
25 said you --
1 THE INTERPRETER: Could you please slow down for the
3 MR. WEINER: Sorry.
4 Q. At the end of your tenure with the Ministry of Defence, you
5 indicated you severed as Director of Security. Could you tell us what
6 your responsibilities were.
7 A. Yes. They were responsibilities in respect of physical and
8 personnel security, personnel security for the civilian employees in the
9 Ministry of Defence and the physical security in respect of their
10 buildings and premises.
11 Q. How long did you hold that position?
12 A. Four years.
13 Q. Now, prior to that, did you ever serve in the military, sir?
14 A. Yes, I did.
15 Q. How long did you serve?
16 A. I served two years national service, followed by about 13 years in
17 the territorial army.
18 Q. And when you say "the territorial army," could that be
19 characterised as the reserves?
20 A. Yes, it could.
21 Q. And what position did you retire as from the reserves?
22 A. As a major.
23 Q. Sir, what we're going to do is slow down a bit because they have
24 to translate each of our answers into Bosnian/Serbian/Croatian.
25 So let us move to September of 1991. Could you tell us where you
2 A. I was in London, working at the Ministry of Defence.
3 Q. And did you receive some request?
4 A. I did.
5 Q. Could you tell us.
6 A. I was asked if I would be prepared to join the European Community
7 Monitoring Mission in the former -- in the former Yugoslavia.
8 Q. Now, when you were asked, how did you respond?
9 A. I agreed to take up this post.
10 Q. Did you receive some sort of briefing while in London?
11 A. I had a short briefing, yes.
12 Q. And who gave you this briefing?
13 A. Basically, the Defence intelligence staffs.
14 Q. What did they tell you at this briefing?
15 A. The general situation pertaining in Croatia and Yugoslavia at the
17 Q. Were you shown any photographs or maps?
18 A. We were shown maps, not photographs.
19 Q. Did they tell you where you would be heading?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Where?
22 A. Zagreb.
23 Q. Did you in fact go to Zagreb?
24 A. I did.
25 Q. When did you arrive?
1 A. On the 5th of September, 1991.
2 Q. Were you briefed when you arrived, when you arrived in Zagreb?
3 A. I was.
4 Q. By whom?
5 A. By the ambassador who was in charge of the mission.
6 Q. And where were you assigned?
7 A. I was assigned initially to the tasking cell of the mission.
8 Q. Please tell the Chamber, what is a tasking cell?
9 A. A tasking cell is that part of the mission which deals with
10 operational matters and prepares reports for onward transmission to the
11 Presidency at The Hague at the time.
12 Q. Are they also involved in assignments?
13 A. They do. They assign individuals to various mission activities.
14 Q. How many people serve in a tasking cell?
15 A. In the tasking cell, there are normally four people.
16 Q. Where were you initially assigned?
17 A. Well, in the cell itself. The duties of the officials in the cell
18 were interchangeable.
19 Q. How long did you serve in the tasking cell?
20 A. Initially for one week. This was the normal period for serving in
21 that cell.
22 Q. And after serving one week, what did you do?
23 A. I was then assigned to one of the mobile missions.
24 Q. And as part of that, what was your -- what were your
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. They were varied, but essentially it was going round Zagreb itself
2 to visit the Yugoslavian army, the JNA, who were in their barracks within
3 and around Zagreb.
4 Q. Why were you visiting the JNA troops in the barracks?
5 A. We were visiting the JNA troops because they were confined within
6 those barracks by the Croatian forces that had surrounded them, and we
7 needed to satisfy ourselves that they were being reasonably looked after
8 within the confines of their barracks. And also, of course, that they
9 were not going to try and attack and break out of those barracks.
10 Q. How often did you visit the JNA troops?
11 A. On a daily basis.
12 Q. How often did you perform -- I'm sorry. How long did you perform
13 this function?
14 A. I performed it for about a couple of weeks. A couple of weeks.
15 Q. And what was your next assignment?
16 A. Next assignment was to go to the town of Osijek where there had
17 been hostilities.
18 Q. And what were you -- what was your purpose in going there?
19 A. The purpose of going to Osijek was to establish a liaison with the
20 JNA forces that were facing Osijek at the time, but we were unable to do
22 Q. And what was your next assignment, sir?
23 A. The next assignment was to go to Dubrovnik.
24 Q. Had you ever heard of Dubrovnik?
25 A. I had indeed.
1 Q. Were you familiar with it?
2 A. I was not familiar with the city itself, but I had read all about
4 Q. What had you learned from your readings?
5 A. That it was a city in Yugoslavia, in Croatia, that was of
6 historical importance.
7 Q. Did your reading include any information about its economic value?
8 A. We believe that its economic value was extremely high in respect
9 of Croatia, because it was Croatia's main tourist attraction.
10 Q. Now, prior to going to Dubrovnik, did you receive any briefings?
11 A. We did receive briefings from within the tasking cell, because a
12 team had been sent to Dubrovnik -- do you want me to go on?
13 Q. Please continue.
14 A. A team had been sent into Dubrovnik prior to my going there
15 because there had been attacks around Dubrovnik at the time, and we were
16 very concerned that there might be an escalation of hostilities in the
17 area, and in particular against the old city of Dubrovnik itself.
18 Q. What had they told you when you were briefed in Zagreb about
19 Dubrovnik, about those attacks or the situation as it existed?
20 A. The situation as it existed was that Dubrovnik was in fact
21 blockaded so that supplies could not get through, that the water and
22 electricity was cut off partly by hostile activity.
23 Q. What was your purpose in going to Dubrovnik?
24 A. The purpose in going to Dubrovnik was to attempt to facilitate a
25 dialogue between the Croatian authorities in Dubrovnik and the JNA forces
1 that were in the area and causing hostilities.
2 Q. Did they tell you who you would be meeting?
3 A. Yes, they did.
4 Q. Who did they say you would be meeting with in Dubrovnik?
5 A. Arrangements had been made by the team that we were relieving for
6 us to meet General Ruzinovski.
7 Q. Why were you to meet with General Ruzinovski?
8 A. Because it was understood that he was in command of the JNA forces
9 in that area.
10 Q. Did they tell you what unit or group he commanded?
11 A. This was the 2nd Operational Group.
12 Q. Now, who else did they tell you he would be meeting, sir?
13 A. I had no specific names other than the general.
14 Q. With regard to the Croatian officials, did they give you any
15 information as to who you would be meeting?
16 A. They told us that we would be meeting with the Crisis Committee of
17 the Dubrovnik community which comprised the mayor, the president of the
18 assembly, and several other officials.
19 Q. Did they tell you why they wanted you to meet with the Crisis
20 Committee and General Ruzinovski, why those persons?
21 A. Because they were the people who were primarily involved on the
22 Croatian side. The Crisis Committee was managing effectively the affairs
23 of Dubrovnik, whilst on the JNA side General Ruzinovski was in charge of
24 the forces surrounding Dubrovnik at the time.
25 Q. Now, when they told you about this upcoming meeting, did they tell
1 you what sort of issues they wanted you to discuss with the two sides?
2 A. Yes. The Crisis Committee were particularly concerned about the
3 blockade of Dubrovnik and the restoration of the utilities, i.e., water
4 and electricity to the city.
5 Q. Were the names of any other JNA official mentioned that you should
6 be meeting?
7 A. Not at that stage.
8 Q. Did you leave for Dubrovnik?
9 A. I did.
10 Q. When did you leave?
11 A. I left on the 10th -- I believe it was the 10th of October.
12 Q. And how did you get there?
13 A. We drove by car to Rijeka, where we boarded a ferry called the
14 Slavija, and went by ferry to Dubrovnik.
15 Q. Why didn't you drive directly from Rijeka to Dubrovnik?
16 A. Because it was considered too dangerous at that time to proceed
17 over land.
18 Q. Why was it too dangerous?
19 A. Because there had been hostilities in the intervening area between
20 Zagreb and Dubrovnik.
21 Q. Now, when you took the ferry to Dubrovnik, was your trip
22 interrupted at any time?
23 A. Yes. We were stopped by a JNA naval vessel that wished to confirm
24 our bona fides and whether we had on board any unauthorised personnel.
25 Q. Did they allow you to pass?
1 A. They did.
2 Q. When did you arrive in Dubrovnik?
3 A. We arrived in Dubrovnik at about half past 6.00 that evening.
4 Q. On what date?
5 A. The 10th of October.
6 Q. Now, after you arrived, did you meet with anyone?
7 A. We met with the previous team, who again briefed us on the
8 situation pertaining in Dubrovnik and confirming that arrangements had
9 been made for us to meet General Ruzinovski and his staff in Montenegro
10 the following day.
11 Q. Now, where did this meeting or briefing take place?
12 A. On board the Slavija. It was a quick turnaround.
13 Q. When you say "the Slavija," that's the ferry?
14 A. Sorry. The ferry, yes.
15 Q. Did you receive a briefing -- more of an extensive briefing from
16 this team?
17 A. Not terribly extensive, no more than we had already been made
18 aware of in Zagreb.
19 Q. Did they tell you who the commander of the JNA forces in the area
21 A. Yes, General Ruzinovski.
22 Q. Were you shown any maps or photographs?
23 A. Not photographs. We had maps.
24 Q. And what did they show you on the maps?
25 A. The general area of the JNA forces and the front line as it
1 related to Dubrovnik and Cavtat.
2 Q. Let's move on to the next day, October 11th. Could you tell us
3 what happened?
4 A. Yes. On October the 11th, the following day, the team, including
5 myself, went by motor vessel to the Bay of Kotor, and we were escorted
6 into -- I think it was -- I can't remember the name, actually. Anyway, it
7 was the port on the Bay of Kotor, where we were escorted to the JNA
9 Q. And that was in Montenegro, sir?
10 A. In Montenegro.
11 Q. Does the name Zelenika --
12 A. Zelenika is the place, yes.
13 Q. Now, who was present with you?
14 A. On our side?
15 Q. Yes, with the ECMM team.
16 A. With the ECMM, myself; Mr. Zak, a Polish gentleman; and a
17 Mr. Nolan, an Irish gentleman.
18 Q. Now when, we say "ECMM," for the record, could you tell us what
19 we're referring to.
20 A. Yes, it's the European Economic Community's Monitoring Mission.
21 Q. Now, once you departed the boat, where did you go?
22 A. We went to -- we were escorted to what we understood to be the
23 military hospital there, where we were taken to a conference room to meet
24 the general and his staff.
25 Q. Who was with the general?
1 A. On the JNA side, there was Vice-Admiral Jokic, a Captain Svicevic
2 - excuse me if I must pronounce the names - and a Captain Jeremic
4 Q. And including General Ruzinovski?
5 A. Including General Ruzinovski, yes.
6 Q. Now, when you had this meeting, were you seated or were you
8 A. No. We were seated at a large conference table.
9 Q. And could you describe the seating arrangement to the Court.
10 A. On the JNA side, General Ruzinovski sat in the middle, and he was
11 flanked by the admiral, the captain, and the other -- the two captains,
12 Captain Sofronije.
13 Q. And who was on the other side of the table?
14 A. On the other side of the table was myself in the middle, flanked
15 by Mr. Nolan and Mr. Zak.
16 Q. Did someone run or lead the meeting?
17 A. General Ruzinovski ran the meeting.
18 Q. Who spoke on the JNA side?
19 A. General Ruzinovski.
20 Q. Did anyone else speak?
21 A. Not that I recall.
22 Q. Who spoke on the European Monitor side?
23 A. I did.
24 Q. How did the meeting begin?
25 A. The meeting began with introductions, with General Ruzinovski
1 outlining the area of his command, which I believe ran from the Bay of
2 Kotor to Mostar and to Slano.
3 Q. Do you know if that area includes the city of Dubrovnik?
4 A. Yes, it does.
5 Q. And did he tell you what his position was?
6 A. Commander of the 2nd Operational Group.
7 Q. What was the purpose of this meeting, sir?
8 A. The purpose of the meeting was to obtain agreement for the JNA
9 authorities and the Dubrovnik authorities to get together and also to
10 secure some agreement concerning the cease-fire around Dubrovnik and the
11 lifting of the blockades of Dubrovnik and the repair to the electricity
12 and water supplies of the city.
13 Q. After you discussed these issues, what happened?
14 A. After we discussed these issues, General Ruzinovski appointed a
15 liaison officer for us, which was Captain Jeremic Sofronije. He also
16 advised Vice-Admiral Jokic that we should meet on his ship with
17 representatives of the Dubrovnik Crisis Committee later that day to
18 commence these negotiations.
19 Q. Now, you indicated that you had been told that General Ruzinovski
20 was the commander. Had you ever been told about Admiral Jokic?
21 A. No.
22 Q. And did Admiral Jokic volunteer to meet with you?
23 A. Not that I'm aware of.
24 Q. Did he comply with the general's order?
25 A. Yes, he did.
1 Q. What branch of the service was General Ruzinovski?
2 A. Army.
3 Q. What branch was Admiral Jokic in?
4 A. Navy.
5 Q. The liaison officer, the Captain Jeremic, what branch of the
6 service was he in?
7 A. He was navy.
8 Q. After these appointments or assignments were made, did anything
9 else occur at the meeting?
10 A. The general expressed the fact that he -- there was no intention
11 of continuing on any attacks and that a cease-fire would be maintained
12 around Dubrovnik.
13 Q. Was there any discussion about any upcoming meetings?
14 A. The upcoming meetings were discussed in respect of General Jokic's
15 meeting on board his ship, that that should take place immediately.
16 Q. Who stated that the meeting should take place immediately?
17 A. General Ruzinovski.
18 Q. Did Admiral Jokic comply with that?
19 A. Yes, he did.
20 Q. Did the meeting end shortly after that or did it go on for a
22 A. The meeting ended shortly after that so that we could return to
23 Dubrovnik, pick up the Crisis Committee, and return to the Bay of Kotor to
24 meet with Admiral Jokic on his ship.
25 Q. All right. What did you do?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. After that, we returned to Dubrovnik. We picked up the Crisis
2 Committee, namely the mayor of Dubrovnik, the president of the Assembly of
3 Dubrovnik, an engineer because of the requirement to get agreement for the
4 repair of electricity and water supplies, plus, of course, our
6 Q. And what did you do once you met with these representatives from
8 A. We got on our little boat again and went down to the Bay of Kotor
9 about 3.00 in the afternoon and boarded the vessel on which Admiral Jokic
10 was located.
11 Q. Who else from the JNA was on that vessel?
12 A. The Captain Svicevic, if I can pronounce his name correctly. I do
13 apologise about this. He was one of the officers who was at the previous
14 meeting. Captain Jeremic Sofronije, our liaison officer, and there were
15 some other officers in attendance as well.
16 Q. So let me get this straight: In this meeting were the JNA
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. The local representatives from Dubrovnik?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And who from your team?
22 A. The same members that went to meet with General Ruzinovski;
23 Mr. Nolan, Mr. Zak, and myself.
24 Q. Did someone chair or run this meeting?
25 A. Vice-Admiral Jokic.
1 Q. And could you please tell us about the discussion that occurred at
2 that meeting.
3 A. The discussion at that meeting centred initially on the need for
4 the area around Komolac, where the electricity substation was located and
5 which had been damaged, to be secured from further attacks from the hills
6 surrounding it, and for agreement to be obtained from the JNA that repair
7 work to the electricity supply and water supply in the area could
9 Q. Why was there a need for security for the workers to commence the
11 A. Because a number of Croatian workers had been killed earlier in
12 that area of the water supply line and electricity substation.
13 Q. How had they been killed?
14 A. It was alleged that they had been killed by JNA sniper fire from
15 the hills surrounding that area.
16 Q. Did Admiral Jokic respond to the requests?
17 A. Yes, he did. He agreed that the area would be secured as quickly
18 as possible and that thereafter repair work could be undertaken by the
20 Q. Did he say how long it would be before the work could begin?
21 A. I can't recall whether there was a specific time frame for this,
22 but it was certainly a very short one.
23 Q. How long did this meeting last?
24 A. The meeting lasted about a couple of hours, I think.
25 Q. How would you describe the atmosphere?
1 A. The atmosphere was, I would say, professional, as was our previous
2 meeting with General Ruzinovski.
3 Q. Was any discussion made concerning any future meetings?
4 A. Yes, it was. It was agreed that there should be daily meetings
5 between the team and the JNA and also that the Crisis Committee would
6 attend some of these meetings.
7 Q. Did you have any other meetings on that date?
8 A. Not on that date.
9 Q. Now, sir, did you maintain a diary in relation to the meetings on
10 that date and others?
11 A. Yes, I did.
12 Q. And what did you place in the diary?
13 A. I placed a record of the -- of all the happenings of that day, in
14 respect of our meetings between the JNA and the Dubrovnik Crisis
15 Committee. It was a fairly detailed summary of what transpired.
16 Q. And how did you prepare this? Did you do it by yourself, with
18 A. This was prepared from notes we had taken at the actual meetings
19 themselves. It was prepared at our hotel that evening, between the three
20 of us. I actually acted as the scribe for this -- for the note-taking
22 Q. And when you say "the three of us," you're talking about the --
23 A. I'm talking about the three ECMM members.
24 Q. And would you prepare this diary at the end of each day?
25 A. Yes, we would.
1 Q. And was the information still fresh in your minds?
2 A. Yes. Yes, it was. And it was information which we conveyed to
3 Zagreb whenever possible through our car radio.
4 Q. Thank you. Now the ECMM, do they maintain any sort of reporting
6 A. Yes. There was a daily reporting structure for all teams to
7 report at the end of their task for the day. They would report to the
8 tasking cell, and each day there would be a meeting of the heads of the
9 various delegations which made up the ECMM in Zagreb, chaired by the
10 ambassador, so that reports of any significance could be forwarded to the
11 Presidency at The Hague. And it would also -- it would also determine any
12 future operational requirements.
13 Q. Now, was the reason that you maintained a daily diary, was that to
14 provide notes to the ECMM?
15 A. Yes, it was.
16 Q. And were those notes in fact provided to the ECMM?
17 A. Yes, they were.
18 Q. And having worked in the tasking cell, what happens when notes are
19 sent forward?
20 A. Well, when notes are sent forward, they are maintained in the
21 normal course of events in the ECMM filing system and, if necessary,
22 provided for the benefit of the heads of delegations' daily meetings with
23 the ambassador.
24 Q. Are these notes filed and kept and maintained in the ordinary
25 course of government business, sir?
1 A. Yes, they are, in the -- in the normal circumstances.
2 Q. All right. We'll get back to the records a little later, but
3 let's move on to the next day, October 12, 1991. Could you tell us what
5 A. We had made arrangements to meet with the JNA side at a place just
6 outside Cavtat on the borders of the airport.
7 Q. And how do you get to Cavtat?
8 A. We got to Cavtat by motor vessel because it was again considered
9 too dangerous to travel there by car at that time.
10 Q. And so where did you meet this vessel? Was this another ferry
11 or --
12 A. No. This was -- this varied, in fact, from occasion to occasion.
13 It was either a little fishing vessel or a small motor boat that had been
14 loaned by a local resident for this purpose, and we would then go to
15 Cavtat. At Cavtat, we would then board a white minibus, again provided by
16 the local authority at Cavtat, and drive to a pre-agreed rendezvous, where
17 we would be met by the JNA liaison officer, Captain Jeremic Sofronije.
18 Q. How long did this trip take going from Dubrovnik to arrival at the
19 JNA liaison point in Cavtat?
20 A. About a couple of hours. About a couple of hours, I would say.
21 Q. Now, how were you dressed, by the way? Were you dressed in a
22 uniform of some kind?
23 A. No, not a uniform. We were dressed in white as best as may be;
24 white cricket trousers for myself with a white jumper and a borrowed white
25 Italian army camouflage smock to keep us dry if it rained.
1 Q. And did you wear this set of clothing on a daily basis?
2 A. Yes, we did.
3 Q. Were you armed?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Now, when you arrived at the meeting point at Cavtat on that date,
6 did anything happen?
7 A. We arrived -- if my memory is correct, we arrived at the
8 rendezvous point and were met by a captain of the JNA navy, if I'm getting
9 my dates right.
10 Q. We're referring to October 12th.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Have you ever heard the name Captain Zec?
13 A. Yes, I have. We were met by this Captain Zec. Did I say Zak
14 before? I meant Zec.
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if I may interrupt
16 just for a second to say something that I would not like to become our
17 practice, and I hope you will share my opinion. The witness has come
18 before the Honourable Court to tell what he best remembers and what he
19 knows. With all due respect to the witness and to our learned friends, if
20 the witness is unable to remember something, I don't think it is
21 appropriate for the Prosecutor to suggest the name of the person he had
22 met with or to refresh his memory in the examination-in-chief in any way,
23 because, at least in my understanding, it is not acceptable.
24 Therefore, I would grateful to my colleague to simply ask the
25 question, see if the witness remembers, or maybe does not remember, and
1 leave it at that. I did not react the first time this happened, but I
2 would really like this not to become the practice in this case. Thank
4 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner, I don't think you really need me to
5 develop further what has been put by Mr. Petrovic. You did lead on that
6 matter quite obviously, and I can rely on you, I'm sure, to be more
7 careful in future.
8 MR. WEINER: Thank you, Your Honour. I would just like to state
9 that I was trying to save a little time in refreshing recollection, which
10 is authorised through the Appeals Court of this -- of the ICTY. Thank
12 Q. Let us continue. Now, you met with this captain. Of what branch
13 of the service did he belong?
14 A. Navy.
15 Q. Did he tell you what his position was?
16 A. He was acting on behalf of the Admiral Jokic at the time, also of
17 General Ruzinovski.
18 Q. Was he with anyone?
19 A. He was with the liaison officer and surrounded, in fact, by JNA
20 forces, all armed.
21 Q. And did you have any conversation with the captain?
22 A. Yes, we did. We were surprised to meet him in such circumstances,
23 because it was in fact quite intimidating.
24 Q. When you say "such circumstances," what do you mean?
25 A. To be surrounded by armed JNA forces.
1 Q. Were you in a building?
2 A. No, we weren't. This was before we got to any building. It was
3 at the rendezvous point where we met the liaison officer.
4 Q. And was there any conversation?
5 A. Yes, there was. He advised us that there had been an attack on
6 JNA forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and for that reason, because some
7 soldiers of the JNA had been killed, meeting would have to be -- that had
8 been arranged for that day would have to be postponed by 24 hours.
9 Q. Did he give you anything?
10 A. He gave us a letter from General Ruzinovski explaining the
11 position and saying that the meeting would have to be postponed for 24
13 Q. Sir, I would like to show you a letter. Would you look on the
14 monitor, please. It's letter that has a number on the top, 02191320.
15 That's on the English.
16 JUDGE PARKER: I think if you could give the number again, please.
17 MR. WEINER: I'm sorry. In the English, the number is 02191320.
18 In the B/C/S version --
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't read it. Yes, I see this
21 MR. WEINER:
22 Q. Sir, can you read the letter or --
23 A. Ah, that's better. Yes, I can read the letter now.
24 Q. Do you recognise it?
25 A. Yes, I do.
1 Q. How do you recognise it, sir?
2 A. I recognise it because I had that in my possession, and I think I
3 initialed it at the bottom.
4 Q. What did you do with the letter?
5 A. I kept the letter and eventually handed it in to the tasking cell
6 at Zagreb.
7 Q. Did you maintain a copy for yourself or --
8 A. Yes, I did, kept it secure.
9 MR. WEINER: One moment, please.
10 Q. Sir, I ask you to look to the bottom, say, three-quarters of the
11 way down the page to the right. There is some --
12 A. That's my initials.
13 Q. Thank you. And, sir, has this document been changed or altered
14 since you've last seen it?
15 A. No, it hasn't.
16 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, I'd like to tender this document as well
17 as the B/C/S version of the same.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, the document will be numbered
19 Prosecution Exhibit P1.
20 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. That may be a convenient time then,
21 Mr. Weiner, for the break.
22 We will at this time, Mr. Stringer, have a break to enable,
23 firstly, tapes to be changed; secondly, to enable Mr. Strugar and I
24 believe yourself to move around a little and have a rest.
25 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 JUDGE PARKER: We will resume in quarter of an hour.
2 --- Recess taken at 3.45 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 4.08 p.m.
4 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Weiner.
5 MR. WEINER: Thank you.
6 Q. Mr. Stringer, let us continue. We're outside of Cavtat on
7 October 12th, and you were handed a letter by Captain Zec from
8 General Ruzinovski.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. What, if anything else, happened?
11 A. Captain Zec also handed a letter to the mayor of Dubrovnik.
12 Q. And were you able to learn what that letter was?
13 A. The letter contained a number of conditions which were required
14 to be met by the authorities in Dubrovnik.
15 Q. And do you know who authored the letter or signed the letter?
16 A. It was signed on or on behalf of Vice-Admiral Jokic.
17 Q. Now, was there any discussion with you in relation to that
19 A. Not specifically.
20 Q. Were you given that same letter?
21 A. No.
22 Q. What happened next?
23 A. What happened next was that we had a brief discussion with
24 Captain Zec, who said that General Ruzinovski had agreed that the repairs
25 to the electricity and water supply should proceed and that there should
1 be a meeting continuing next day.
2 Q. Did you have any further discussion?
3 A. Only to express our concerns about the events, which we did not
4 feel merited a delay in having the meetings with the -- between the JNA
5 and the Dubrovnik Crisis Committee.
6 Q. Do you recall any statements made by Captain Zec?
7 A. I can't recall precisely.
8 Q. Sir, you indicated that you had -- you maintained a diary.
9 A. Yes, I did.
10 Q. Does your diary discuss the happenings and the meetings of 12
11 October 1991?
12 A. Yes, it does.
13 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, at this time I would like to show him a
14 page from his diary to see if it refreshes his recollection.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Yes. Thank you.
16 MR. WEINER: Actually, page 7 of the statement, which is the
17 typed version.
18 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Petrovic.
20 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] If you will bear with me, I would
21 only like clarification at this point. I hope I will not take up too much
22 of my learned friend's time.
23 I did not understand whether the witness will be shown his own
24 written statement that he had given to an investigator of the Prosecution
25 or some other document. If it concerns his written statement, then if I
1 understand things correctly, that is unacceptable. And if it is another
2 document, I would like to know which. But to refresh the witness's memory
3 using his witness statement given to the investigator is not admissible, I
5 JUDGE PARKER: I understood, Mr. Petrovic, that it was to be an
6 extract from his own diary, but if that's not the case, we will see.
7 MR. WEINER: I'm sorry, Your Honour. It is a copy of the extract
8 from his diary. It is in his witness statement, but it is a copy of the
9 extract. I can show him either one.
10 JUDGE PARKER: I think it would be good to go away from the
11 statement, Mr. Weiner. Mr. Petrovic's point is well made.
12 MR. WEINER:
13 Q. Sir, I invite your attention to the last sentence -- actually,
14 why don't you look at page 26. Could you read that to yourself, please --
15 I'm sorry, paragraph 26 from your diary.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Having looked at your diary and read that, does that refresh your
18 recollection as to the statement made by Captain Zec to you?
19 A. Yes. This was made to us not in the presence of the Dubrovnik
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. Where he said that in our informal discussions that it was the
23 intention of the JNA to complete their tactical successes and that they
24 had to capability to do so if they wished.
25 Q. Thank you. Now, was there any further conversation?
1 A. Only to the effect that Captain Zec confirmed that
2 General Ruzinovski had said that the repairs to the electricity substation
3 and water supply should proceed and that there should be a meeting
4 continuing next day.
5 Q. Now, let's go to the next day. Did they in fact hold a meeting?
6 A. Yes, we did.
7 Q. Where?
8 A. At a location just on the border of the airport, outside Cavtat.
9 I think the name of the location was Zvekovica.
10 Q. Now, who was present on this -- at this meeting of October 13th,
12 A. Well, at the Croatian side there was the deputy mayor, a member
13 of the Dubrovnik Assembly, and the engineer from Dubrovnik. On the JNA
14 side, there was Captain Svicevic, who had been present on the previous
15 occasions; the liaison officer, Captain Jeremic Sofronije; and another
16 lieutenant colonel of the JNA army. I think his name was
17 Colonel Sulejman. I can't remember his final name.
18 Q. Now, who chaired or ran this meeting?
19 A. Captain Svicevic.
20 Q. And what was discussed at this meeting?
21 A. Sorry, I thought the earphones had gone.
22 At that meeting, Captain Svicevic said that the area around
23 Komolac, the electricity substation, had been secured and that repairs
24 could be undertaken the following day. We also raised a number of other
25 matters concerning the blockade of Dubrovnik and, in particular, the need
1 for medical and food supplies to be allowed through. We also raised the
2 question of refugees.
3 Q. Had you seen any refugees up to that point?
4 A. We had seen refugees in the area of Cavtat.
5 Q. And what was the discussion in relation to refugees?
6 A. We wanted some assurance as to the refugees' well-being, but we
7 were advised that the refugees should be moved out of Dubrovnik to the
8 north and south.
9 Q. Was there any other discussion about Dubrovnik?
10 A. Captain Svicevic made it quite clear that it was not the JNA's
11 intention to attack Dubrovnik and stressed that they wanted Dubrovnik
12 preserved for its historical and cultural importance to Yugoslavia as a
14 Q. Was there any other discussion relating to Dubrovnik?
15 A. On that particular occasion, I can't recall.
16 Q. One moment, sir.
17 [Prosecution counsel confer]
18 MR. WEINER:
19 Q. Sir, in your diary, do you discuss your meetings of the 13th?
20 A. I do.
21 Q. And at the end of the day, did you take any notes in relation to
22 the 13th?
23 A. Yes, I did. I recorded it in my notes.
24 Q. Okay. One moment.
25 Sir, I'd like to direct your attention to paragraph 39 to see if
1 that refreshes your recollection. Just read it to yourself first.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And then also paragraph 40.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Okay. Now, what other conversation was occurring at the time?
6 A. Conversation then rested on the change of command between
7 General Ruzinovski.
8 Q. Tell us what happened.
9 A. We were advised by Svicevic that General Ruzinovski was changing
10 command, and he handed us a letter to this effect from General Ruzinovski
11 saying that General Strugar would be assuming command from him.
12 Q. Sir, I'd like you to look at the screen and look at this letter.
13 The ERN at the top should be 02191322 on the English translation and
14 01291321 on the B/C/S translation. Looking at the English translation, do
15 you recognise this letter?
16 A. Yes, I do. My initials are at the bottom.
17 Q. How do you recognise it?
18 A. Through my initials.
19 Q. What about the content?
20 A. I recognise -- I recall the content of it now, because it was
21 complimentary in tone.
22 Q. Now, was that the letter that you received on the 13th?
23 A. Yes, it was.
24 Q. And what did you do with that letter?
25 A. I took it back with me to Zagreb.
1 Q. And what did you do once you got to Zagreb with it?
2 A. Then it was presented again to the tasking cell and eventually
4 Q. And did you maintain a copy for yourself?
5 A. I did.
6 Q. And have any changes --
7 A. There have been no changes to that letter.
8 Q. So there have been no changes or alterations to it made since
9 you've last seen it?
10 A. None at all, no.
11 MR. WEINER: We would like to offer the English as well as the
12 B/C/S version.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
14 THE REGISTRAR: The document will be numbered Prosecution
15 Exhibit P2.
16 MR. WEINER:
17 Q. Now, sir, as part of the discussion concerning this change in
18 personnel, was there any discussion as to changes in scope of authority
19 or --
20 A. I understood that the scope of authority remained the same.
21 Q. And finally, was there any discussion about Croatian forces on
22 that date?
23 A. There were accusations that Croatian forces were using the Old
24 City of Dubrovnik as a, what I might say a hide.
25 Q. And what was the response?
1 A. We said that we had seen no Croatian forces within the Old City.
2 Q. Had you ever seen anyone that was armed in the city?
3 A. We'd seen the local police in normal police uniforms who were
4 lightly armed, but not military personnel.
5 Q. What colour uniforms?
6 A. Blue.
7 Q. And when you say "lightly armed," what do you mean?
8 A. Sidearms or rifles.
9 Q. How many had you seen?
10 A. Probably half a dozen. I can't be specific. Not very many.
11 Q. Sir, do you know what a -- or do you have any understanding to a
12 fixed military presence or fixed military position?
13 A. A fixed military position, to my mind, is a position which is
14 taken up on a more or less permanent basis to effect artillery or mortar
16 Q. Had you ever seen a fixed military position in the Old Town?
17 A. No, none at all.
18 Q. Do you know what trenches are?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Had you seen any trenches in the Old Town?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Do you know what bunkers are?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. What about bunkers? Had you seen any?
25 A. I'd seen no bunkers. Bunkers are reinforced emplacements, and I
1 had seen none of those.
2 Q. Had you seen any artillery in the Old Town?
3 A. No, none.
4 Q. Now, from the time you received the letter, through the rest of
5 the day, was there any perceptible change that accompanied General
6 Strugar's taking over or replacing General Ruzinovski?
7 A. For the rest of the day. Later that evening we were advised by
8 the Croatian authorities that the front line had been moved forward around
9 Cavtat by 800 metres.
10 Q. What did you do after receiving that news?
11 A. We contacted the JNA liaison officer, Captain Sofronije, who
12 confirmed that it had indeed been moved forward, and the reason given was
13 that there had been an attack on JNA soldiers at Gruda and one had been
15 Q. Was anyone captured or arrested?
16 A. A number of Croatians had been captured.
17 Q. Was there any discussion with regard to the meeting on the
18 following date?
19 A. We asked to be able to meet with the liaison officer and also
20 with Vice-Admiral Jokic on the following date.
21 Q. Now, let's move to the following date. October 14th, was a
22 meeting held?
23 A. Yes, it was.
24 Q. Where?
25 A. At the same place as the previous meetings; just outside Cavtat,
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 on the borders of the airport.
2 Q. When was it held?
3 A. It was held at lunchtime, about 12.00.
4 Q. And who was present?
5 A. Ourselves, the ECM Monitoring Team, and the liaison officer, with
6 his interpreter.
7 Q. And did you have any conversation with the JNA personnel on that
9 A. Yes, we did, with the liaison officer, where we registered our
10 complaint that we hadn't been informed of the attack which had caused the
11 death of a JNA soldier before.
12 Q. And at that time, did you make any requests?
13 A. We asked that we be able to go to Gruda, to see the site and to
14 see the people who had been allegedly arrested.
15 Q. How did they respond to your request?
16 A. The liaison officer said that he would refer the matter to
17 General Strugar.
18 Q. Did you make any other requests?
19 A. We asked for a meeting with General Strugar and also for him to
20 meet with the representatives of the Dubrovnik Community in a similar
21 manner to that which we had arranged with General Ruzinovski.
22 Q. Why did you want to meet with General Strugar?
23 A. Because he was the new commanding general.
24 Q. And what was the response to that?
25 A. Then the liaison officer said that he would put this to the
2 Q. Did you make any other requests?
3 A. We made a number of requests in relation to the blockade and
4 again the delivery of medical, et cetera, supplies to the community.
5 Q. Were there any other major requests made in addition to medical
7 A. Well, the major problem was, of course, the advancement of the
8 front line, which we asked should be withdrawn to the position that it had
9 been previously on the previous day, and that no patrols should be moved
10 forward because this might aggravate the delicate situation that had
12 Q. And how did the JNA officers or the liaison officers respond to
13 those requests of returning the front lines back to the older position or
14 having no patrols stray beyond the front line?
15 A. Well, again, this matter -- these matters, they said, would have
16 to be referred back to General Strugar, but General Strugar had in fact
17 said that patrols would not go forward without his permission. Any
18 patrols that would go forward would be only military police patrols,
19 because there was no intention of occupying Cavtat or indeed Dubrovnik.
20 Q. Was there any discussion with regard to the repairs of the
22 A. Yes. The general had agreed that these repairs should proceed.
23 Q. What general?
24 A. General Strugar.
25 Q. Was there any further discussion that you had?
1 A. We would meet the following day.
2 Q. Okay. So what time did the meeting end?
3 A. The meeting ended, I suppose, about 4.00. I can't recall the
4 precise time that the meeting ended.
5 Q. Before, just before the meeting ended, did the liaison officer
6 have any other conversation that you can recall?
7 A. I can't recall specifically at this point in time.
8 Q. I know it's been a while, so -- about 12 years, sir. So let us
9 look back to your diary. Did you, at the end of that day, write any notes
10 in your diary in relation to this meeting?
11 A. Yes, we did.
12 Q. I would like you to look at your diary and see if that refreshes
13 your recollection, sir.
14 One moment.
15 [Prosecution counsel confer]
16 MR. WEINER:
17 Q. Paragraph 61, please. Just read that to yourself, please.
18 A. Yes. I do recall that statement.
19 Q. And could you also look at paragraph 60, please.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. All right. Sir, could you tell us, having read those, what other
22 conversation occurred on that date?
23 A. Well, this related to the request for the movement of refugees
24 out of Dubrovnik to the north and south.
25 Q. And what other conversation did -- or what statement did the
1 liaison officer make before -- just before you had left or ended the
3 A. That all these matters were for General Strugar.
4 Q. Could you take a look at paragraph 61 again, sir.
5 A. Yes. These were General Strugar's comments that were conveyed to
6 us, saying that the people in command of the killers, of the JNA soldiers
7 that had been attacked, were in Dubrovnik, that there the JNA's goodwill
8 was being exploited. But again, he went on to say that they had to --
9 they still had a commitment in respect of Dubrovnik but the people of
10 Dubrovnik -- our further discussion should be directed towards the
11 evacuation of people from Dubrovnik to both north and south directions,
12 which was something that we'd been told before.
13 Q. Now, who conveyed this message to you on behalf of General
15 A. The liaison officer, Captain Sofronije.
16 Q. And what was -- what, if any, concerns did you have in relation
17 to the evacuation of people?
18 A. Our concerns were to consider whether the evacuation of people
19 from Dubrovnik was simply refugees being returned to their homes or
20 whether, as the people in Dubrovnik feared, that the city was going to be
21 taken over by JNA forces, and they wanted the civilians out.
22 Q. Now, you indicated that the liaison officer had made some comment
23 to you about the movement of refugees out of Dubrovnik to the north and
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. What, if any, concerns did you have at that time?
2 A. Our concerns were, you know, what this actually did mean; where
3 were they going to go?
4 Q. Now, what did you do after this conversation ended?
5 A. After this conversation ended, we returned back to Dubrovnik.
6 Q. Now, on the next day, on the 15th, could you tell us what
8 A. On the 15th, there was a slight delay in going to Cavtat, but we
9 went there again and met at the rendezvous point the JNA liaison officer,
10 Captain Sofronije.
11 Q. When you left, did you have anyone with you? Did you take anyone
12 with you, first thing in the morning?
13 A. Before we got -- sorry, before we actually went to this meeting,
14 we actually took the Croatian workers to Komolac to commence the repair of
15 the electricity substation there. After that, we went straight back to
16 Cavtat to meet with the liaison officer.
17 Q. Were these the repairs to the electrical system that had been
18 discussed over the past several days?
19 A. Yes, it was.
20 Q. Now, on the way to Cavtat, did you make any observations?
21 A. We saw that there were fresh troops in the area in new brown
23 Q. Okay. And when you got to the meeting place, who was present?
24 A. Present was the liaison officer, Captain Sofronije; and if I
25 recall correctly, also Colonel Svicevic, but I'd have to refresh my
1 memory, I think, on that.
2 Q. Okay. We'll get to that a little bit later, but did you meet
3 with the liaison officer first?
4 A. Yes, we did.
5 Q. And did you have any conversation with regard to your
7 A. Yes, we did. And we were told that the change of uniforms simply
8 indicated a handover of forces in the area, a change of units.
9 Q. What other conversation did you have?
10 A. We were again asked that the front line not be -- be brought back
11 and that no patrol go forward.
12 Q. And what was the response?
13 A. Again, the response was that the JNA felt that they had to
14 consolidate their lines in view of the attacks that had been made.
15 Q. And did they say whose decision it was in relation to front lines
16 or patrols?
17 A. The liaison officer confirmed that it was in fact General
18 Strugar's responsibility and that patrols would only go forward on his
20 Q. Was there any additional discussion that you had on that date?
21 A. I can't recall offhand.
22 Q. Were any decisions or any plans made for future meetings?
23 A. We had asked for -- again, for meetings with General Strugar so
24 that the team that would be taking over from us on the following day would
25 hopefully meet with him.
1 Q. What time did that meeting end?
2 A. At about 12.00.
3 Q. Where did you go from there?
4 A. We proceeded to return to our boat in Cavtat.
5 Q. And what happened along the way?
6 A. On the way towards Cavtat, after we passed through the front
7 line, we observed a patrol of JNA soldiers carrying an anti-tank gun with
8 them, proceeding towards Cavtat. We were briefly stopped. A little
9 further on we heard a loudspeaker announcement, which effectively said to
10 the citizens of Obod - which was the village just outside Cavtat - that
11 they were to return to their homes immediately or Cavtat would be
13 Q. Did you hear anything else at that time?
14 A. We heard gunfire behind us.
15 Q. What did you do?
16 A. We immediately went back to our boat. My Irish colleague stopped
17 off en route in Cavtat to try and make contact through a field telephone
18 system there. I, on getting back to the boat, arranged for a message to
19 be got through to General Strugar via the coastal radio system, which
20 operated from the boat, and this was our only means of communication with
21 him, requesting that the patrol be withdrawn immediately and that an
22 announcement -- a further announcement would be made withdrawing the
23 original statement that Cavtat would be flattened if the residents didn't
24 return to their -- to their houses.
25 Q. Do you know whether that message got through to the general at
1 that time that it was made?
2 A. At that time, it didn't get through. We were told that he was
3 not available but the message would be passed to his headquarters for
4 immediate attention.
5 Q. What about the -- your other colleague who tried to send a
6 message through Cavtat? Was he able to do anything?
7 A. Not as far as I'm aware, because at that time heavy machine-gun
8 fire came across Cavtat, directed, I think, towards the church. But it
9 went over our heads and over the boat at that time.
10 Q. What did you do?
11 A. Well, after -- lay flat on the ground to avoid the bullets. It
12 stopped after a short period of time, and our colleague, Nolan, came back
13 to the boat, having seen JNA forces enter Cavtat itself. We then
14 immediately got into the boat, the shooting having stopped, and proceeded
15 back to Cavtat -- back to Dubrovnik, I beg your pardon.
16 Q. Now, did you ever receive a response from General Strugar, a
17 response to the --
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. -- message that you had sent?
20 A. Yes, we did. We received a telephone communication from him at
21 about midnight or just after midnight that same day.
22 Q. Why had you contacted General Strugar?
23 A. Because we believed that he had the authority to take action, as
24 the commanding general of the forces in the area.
25 Q. And how did he respond to your request?
1 A. He responded by saying that he would send his liaison officer to
2 check what had happened in respect of the loudspeaker announcements to the
3 citizens at Obod and report back to us, but he also said that there had
4 been attacks on JNA forces in the area from positions around Dubrovnik,
5 and I believe these were attacks on naval vessels in the area, and that
6 they would have to respond with all necessary force.
7 Q. Now, sir, I would like to show you a document that has an ERN
8 number at the top 02191327. Would you look at it, please.
9 A. Yes. Oh, it's gone -- no.
10 Q. Are you familiar with that document?
11 A. Yes, I am.
12 Q. And could you tell us how that document came to be prepared.
13 A. I wrote this down at the time the message was received by our
14 interpreter at the Hotel Argentina.
15 Q. So what exactly is this document?
16 A. This is a transcript of the telephonic message from General
17 Strugar to me on that date.
18 Q. And have any changes or alterations been made to your handwritten
19 document, sir?
20 A. No, they haven't.
21 Q. Is this letter responsive to the request that you made?
22 A. Yes, it is.
23 Q. How is that so?
24 A. Because it indicates that he was aware of the allegation that we
25 had made in respect of the threats to Cavtat.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. And just to get this correct, you indicated that the interpreter
2 read it to you and you wrote it down in English?
3 A. That's right, yes.
4 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, I'd like to offer this as Prosecution's
5 Exhibit Number 3.
6 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
7 THE REGISTRAR: The document will be numbered Prosecution Exhibit
9 MR. WEINER:
10 Q. Now, sir, after you completed this letter, what did you do with
12 A. I took it back to Zagreb with me, because later that morning we
13 embarked again on the Slavija vessel to return to Zagreb, having been
14 relieved by the succeeding team.
15 Q. Why were you relieved after only approximately one week?
16 A. It was the policy at that time that teams should only stay for
17 about that period of time; in part, I think, because we had to take our
18 own water, et cetera, with us.
19 Q. Now, sir, what did you do with the letter once you got to Zagreb?
20 A. I handed that in to the tasking cell.
21 Q. Now, on the evening of the 16th -- sorry, of the 15th and also of
22 the 16th, did you continue to maintain a diary?
23 A. Yes, I did.
24 Q. And what did you do with that diary when you got to Zagreb?
25 A. I handed it in as part of our report on our activities in
1 Dubrovnik at the time, keeping a copy for myself as I had written it.
2 Q. And what happened to it after you handed it in?
3 A. To the best of my recollection, it was filed.
4 Q. Now, I'd like you to look at a document which begins with page
5 02191294. Do you recognise that document?
6 A. Yes, I do. It's in my handwriting and signed by me.
7 Q. What is it?
8 A. This is part of the report that I made, part of my diary report.
9 Q. Are these your diary notes?
10 A. Yes, they are.
11 Q. And what is included in this?
12 A. This includes the names of all the individuals that took part in
13 our negotiations, in our liaison meetings, and also details of what was
15 Q. And when you say "discussed," is that at the daily meetings?
16 A. At the daily meetings that we had with the various sides.
17 Q. And was this compiled when the information was fresh in your
19 A. Yes, it was.
20 Q. And who else was involved in preparing this diary?
21 A. My two colleagues, Mr. Zak and Mr. Nolan.
22 Q. And what did you use to prepare the diary each day, or these
23 notes each day?
24 A. Short notes that we had made at the meetings themselves.
25 Q. And what did you do with this document, report, diary, however
1 you would like to refer to it?
2 A. This was handed in to the mission at Zagreb at the end of the --
3 when we got back.
4 Q. And what did they do with it?
5 A. They filed it. I'm not sure whether any copies went to the
6 Presidency of The Hague. Probably not.
7 Q. Did you maintain a copy?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, I'd like to offer this at this time.
10 JUDGE PARKER: [Microphone not activated] This will be received.
11 THE REGISTRAR: The document will be numbered Prosecution Exhibit
13 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
14 MR. WEINER: May I proceed?
15 Q. Sir, you indicated you left Dubrovnik around October 16th. When
16 did you return to Zagreb?
17 A. On the -- we got back to Zagreb on the 18th of October.
18 Q. And what did you do or what assignments did you have when you
19 returned to Zagreb?
20 A. I went back into the tasking cell.
21 Q. And as part of that tasking cell, what assignments did you have?
22 A. My main assignments were making up reports for the ambassador,
23 for the head of mission, and also for tasking other missions.
24 Q. Now, the tasking cell, are they -- is that the group that
25 receives the communications?
1 A. Basically, yes.
2 Q. From the field.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And how long were you in that tasking cell?
5 A. At that period, a week; until I returned to England.
6 Q. Now, during that week, did you receive any documents from the
7 monitoring team?
8 A. Yes, we did.
9 Q. And that's the monitoring team in Dubrovnik?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Sir, I would like to show you four documents and have you look at
12 them. The first one would be 02191329.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Do you recognise that?
15 A. Yes, I do.
16 Q. What do you recognise that as?
17 A. I recognise that as one of the reports that came from the team
18 that relieved us at Dubrovnik. And my initial is, I think, at the bottom
19 of the page.
20 Q. And what happened to this document after you received it at the
21 tasking cell?
22 A. This would have been filed away.
23 Q. And have any changes or alterations been made to it since the
24 last time that you've seen this?
25 A. Not since I've seen this, no.
1 MR. WEINER: Excuse me, Your Honour. I would like to show him
2 the four ones and then have them marked for identification.
3 JUDGE PARKER: Yes.
4 MR. WEINER: Thank you.
5 Q. I would like to ask you to look at this next letter, numbered
6 02191330. Would you look at it, please.
7 A. Yes. I recognise that. My signature is at the bottom of the
8 page, again.
9 Q. And could you tell us what it is.
10 A. This again is another communication from the team that succeeded
11 us in Dubrovnik.
12 Q. And, sir, have any changes or alterations been made to this
13 letter since you've last seen it?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Thank you. I ask you to look at the next letter, with the number
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And what's the date of that letter, sir?
19 A. The 20th of October, 1991.
20 Q. And do you recognise that letter?
21 A. Yes, I do.
22 Q. And how do you recognise it?
23 A. I recognise it -- my signature, my initials are at the bottom of
24 the page.
25 Q. And what is it?
1 A. Again, it's another letter, another memorandum from the team that
2 succeeded us in Dubrovnik.
3 Q. And have any changes or alterations been made to this letter
4 since you've last seen it?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Finally, I ask you to look at the last letter, also dated October
7 20th, number 02191332. Would you look at that, please.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And could you tell us what it is.
10 A. Again, that is another letter coming from the team that succeeded
11 us in Dubrovnik.
12 Q. And how do you recognise it?
13 A. And my initials are at the bottom of the page.
14 Q. And do you recall receiving it while at the tasking unit, or the
15 tasking cell?
16 A. Yes, we received that.
17 Q. And have any changes or alterations been made to this letter
18 since you've last seen it?
19 A. No.
20 Q. And what happened to each of these four letters after they were
21 received at the tasking cell?
22 A. To the best of my recollection, they were filed.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, could these four letters be marked for
25 identification at this time.
1 JUDGE PARKER: The four letters will be marked separately for
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the first document, numbered
4 02191329, Prosecution Exhibit P5; the second document, numbered 02191330,
5 Prosecution Exhibit P6; the third document, numbered 02191331, Prosecution
6 Exhibit P7; the fourth document, numbered 02191332, Prosecution Exhibit
8 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
9 JUDGE PARKER: I have just had correction made with those four
10 documents. Instead of being Exhibits P4 to P7, they will be marked for
11 identification P4 to P7.
12 Now, did you have something, Mr. Petrovic?
13 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I just wanted to say
14 the same thing that you just remarked on. And, of course, the Defence
15 will object to the authenticity of these documents, because they are
16 obviously not written by the witness. When the time comes, of course.
17 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Petrovic, yes.
18 Although, correction has been made, I'm told.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, may I add one thing? For the
20 record, the documents will then be referred to as documents MFI5, MFI6,
21 MFI7, and MFI8.
22 JUDGE PARKER: Yes, Mr. Weiner.
23 MR. WEINER:
24 Q. Sir, when did you complete your tenure with the ECMM?
25 A. 25th of October.
1 Q. And during that time, after you came back from Dubrovnik, did you
2 have any other duties other than tasking cell?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Thank you very much. No further questions.
5 JUDGE PARKER: [Microphone not activated] Thank you very much.
6 Thank you, then.
7 Now, do you wish to commence your cross-examination now,
8 Mr. Rodic?
9 MR. RODIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, for the time being, I
10 can only announce that the cross-examination of Mr. Stringer will last a
11 little bit longer, and I don't know how purposeful it would be to begin
12 now, because you have earlier announced a break and shorter working hours.
13 I would not like our cross-examination to be interrupted, if at all
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE PARKER: We are of the view, Mr. Rodic, that in the present
17 unusual circumstances, that it would be reasonable to adjourn now, with a
18 view to cross-examination tomorrow, as you cannot finish in the time that
19 is available now. It will not be our usual practice to do this, though,
20 so I would advise both counsel that they should anticipate that they will
21 run to the end of the session with cross-examination and it will then be
22 interrupted and continue the next day. We don't want to lose too much
23 time by this process. But in the special circumstances that exist at this
24 moment, we will adjourn now to resume tomorrow at 2.15.
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 5.08 p.m.,
1 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 18th day of
2 December, 2003, at 2.15 p.m.