1 Wednesday, 28 January 2004
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning. I see you already half to your feet,
6 Ms. Somers.
7 MS. SOMERS: Thank you, Your Honour. Good morning. Yes, Your
8 Honour. I wanted to report back as a housekeeping or perhaps more an
9 administrative matter, some of the issues and concerns raised at a meeting
10 with the Victims and Witnesses Unit, and I think that I would -- what I
11 would ask is some guidance from the Chamber as to how we can have perhaps
12 an approach that will facilitate the smooth bringing, assisting, and
13 sending back of witnesses while they're here. The concern arises from the
14 fact that witnesses have had to come and then return, without having taken
15 the stand necessarily, perhaps because of time limitations that we believe
16 to be given under of one set of guidelines from the Pre-Trial Conference
17 and were not met, and accordingly, the witness either had been here too
18 long or the order was required that another witness proceed, because if
19 other prearranged commitments. And the result is that witnesses are
20 coming, staying long, and then it appears that principally because of
21 length of cross-examination, we're not able to move on the orderly method
22 that we had anticipated, based on the factors which I have just mentioned.
23 The two avenues of possible solution that were discussed would be
24 either -- I guess the most obvious is try to get an understanding of what
25 the time frame would be for cross, so that we can estimate more
1 appropriately who should be brought up and who can be on the runway
2 waiting to take off, so to speak, or, the other alternative would seem to
3 be bringing fewer witnesses with, running the risk, of course, that the
4 time frame could change and we might have a gap, where there's no one here
5 and we'd have to try to have people on standby. The very reality -- the
6 very real issue is that everyone has a life and needs to have enough
7 notice to put his or her affairs in order so that he or she can get here
8 and be here without terrible concern about having left things last minute.
9 I don't know how the Chamber with want -- or if the Chamber wants
10 any further input from the parties on this, but I wanted to make sure that
11 it was relayed, that the concern is very real, and that the effect on a
12 witness, I am -- I know this, but it was confirmed, that it is
13 demoralising, can be, and it also renders a witness less effective if a
14 witness has to wait extra long and perhaps ends up going back and has to
15 return. We of course understand that there are times when the witnesses
16 do have to leave because of their own commitments. We raise these to the
17 Chamber. But it is the other instances that are now becoming the gravamen
18 of this particular, as it were, complaint.
19 If I can answer anything further or relay anything back or if
20 perhaps a conference of a different nature is required, but I felt it
21 obligatory to inform the Chamber and of course the Defence.
22 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Ms. Somers.
23 Mr. Petrovic.
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.
25 I would just briefly like to put forward our position concerning this
1 problem put forward by Ms. Somers.
2 First thing is essential for this trial. The rights of the
3 accused in this trial, the rights of Pavle Strugar, must never and in no
4 way be prejudiced on account of procedural problems that the OTP is
6 Secondly, as to the reason why this has occurred on a number of
7 occasions, that witnesses come here and do not manage to make it to the
8 witness stand, as far as I understand, the OTP believes that this is for
9 the best part the responsibility of the Defence team. We take the
10 strongest possible exception to this. We are certainly not a source of
11 difficulty during this trial. We must inform the Trial Chamber that we
12 shall have no such insinuations, and we deem them unacceptable. We
13 believe the main problem is that the OTP has been doing poorly as far as
14 assessing the length of individual witness testimonies is concerned. They
15 draw up new lists every week, containing up to seven or even ten witnesses
16 per week. And by now, they should know what the average speed is of
17 interviewing a single witness.
18 I would just give you the most recent example of this, of a
19 misjudgement on the part of the OTP, in terms of both the entire length of
20 the examination of a witness, as well as the examination-in-chief by the
21 OTP. We were given a list yesterday. We were all given a list. There is
22 a witness who awaits continuation of our cross-examination, Mr. Grbic.
23 The estimated length of the examination-in-chief was one hour. We all
24 witnessed the examination-in-chief yesterday, and it went on for one hour
25 and 48 minutes, which is 80 per cent longer than originally planned. So
1 we believe it's a problem of planning on the part of the OTP, and by
2 misjudging the length of their own examination, they lead to further
3 problems, to further expenses, by having to keep the witness here in
4 The Hague.
5 Therefore, we would kindly ask the Trial Chamber to take no
6 further measures that would affect the Defence, while the responsibility
7 clearly remains with the OTP and their inability to correctly estimate the
8 length of their own examination of witnesses. This must in no way
9 prejudice the rights of Mr. Strugar. Thank you very much.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE PARKER: It has been of concern to the Chamber since this
12 trial commenced that the progress of hearing evidence has been slower than
13 we anticipated and is slower than is normal in the conduct of business of
14 the Tribunal. There has not been just one cause of this; there have been
15 a number. And it's, I don't think, to any great advantage for each side
16 to be pointing the finger at the other side and saying they've caused it
17 all. It is fair to say that some problems have not been the fault of
18 either side, but some problems have been created by each side. And the
19 result of those is that we are well behind where we ought to have been by
20 this time.
21 The delay in the start of the trial had itself a very significant
22 effect on the ordering of witnesses and disrupted considerably the initial
23 schedules that had been put in place, both for our progress and,
24 obviously, for those responsible for ensuring that witnesses are here.
25 That has directly led, in at least two cases, to the need to interrupt the
1 evidence of witnesses because they could no longer stay because of
2 important long-term commitments to be somewhere else. We were slow in
3 reaching them, and the time they had made available to us had elapsed
4 before their evidence had concluded. The interruption of the evidence of
5 a witness, for the witness to return at a later time, is of no help to
6 anyone. It is a considerable difficulty, and we hope that can be avoided
7 in the future.
8 It is clear that some Prosecution witnesses have taken longer in
9 giving their evidence in chief than was anticipated. More than one have
10 taken something approaching double the estimated time. But what is a very
11 significant and ongoing problem is that cross-examination has taken far
12 longer than anticipated and has taken far longer than is normal in
13 proceedings in the Tribunal. Both parties are aware that at the
14 pre-trial, a very experienced Judge of the Tribunal took the view that an
15 approximate estimate would be to allow to the Defence 60 per cent of the
16 time that had been taken by the Prosecution in evidence in chief, that
17 representing what, in the experience of the Tribunal, was a fair, average
18 time to enable the cross-examination of most witnesses to be properly
19 concluded, with all important issues dealt with but with counsel having to
20 be very disciplined so as to not to spend time on matters that were not of
22 Now, our average has been between two and a half and three times,
23 not 60 per cent, but getting between 200 and 300 per cent, 250 and 300 per
24 cent of the length of time taken by witnesses in their evidence in chief.
25 I do appreciate that with a few witnesses the cross-examination has been
1 at about or within the 60 per cent, but so far, for the majority, the
2 cross-examination has been very prolonged.
3 I have made observations in the past to Mr. Rodic and Mr. Petrovic
4 that some of the issues being pursued in cross-examination were matters
5 that appeared not to be material, and on most occasions, that has been
6 agreed and the cross-examination has moved on to another subject. What
7 should be obvious is that the matter needn't have been dealt with in the
8 first place, if it wasn't important.
9 We cannot continue to have the length of time spent on each
10 witness that is presently occurring. There have been some important
11 witnesses so far, but there have been a number of others whose evidence
12 is, by and large, routine. And in a very short time, issues of the
13 reliability of their evidence and of whether or not they are biased can be
14 dealt with, and for the most other part, the cross-examination has been
15 largely simply going over their evidence and confirming it. So we will
16 say very directly that we expect that the course of cross-examination will
17 come to be more closely directed to the important issues, and there'll be
18 a considerable shortening of the time spent in dealing with most of the
20 The Chamber made clear at the beginning, and it still holds to the
21 view, that on important issues with an important witness, we would not
22 curtail cross-examination. We want to ensure that the accused has every
23 proper opportunity to test the Prosecution case, and nothing we're
24 presently saying will change that. But unfortunately, that approach has
25 led to time being taken on less important witnesses and less important
1 issues that need not be spent, and in that area, the length of the hearing
2 and the length of the cross-examination will simply have to be reduced.
3 Once again, I invite Defence counsel to give serious consideration
4 when they are preparing their cross-examination to whether each matter
5 really needs to be dealt with, because if it doesn't, it should be passed
6 over entirely or dealt with quickly, with one or two questions. The
7 Chamber is well able to pick up the drift and significance of your
8 questioning, as I think has been apparent on a number of occasions
9 already. So you don't need to dwell on it, on and on on the topic, once
10 you've got your message home. That way, I hope we can see a considerable
11 reduction in the length of cross-examination. If that does not eventuate,
12 the Chamber will have to start the prospect or consider the prospect of
13 imposing time limitations to be normally observed unless the Chamber
14 specifically in a case allows some greater time. So we invite counsel for
15 the Defence to give very close attention to the time being spent on
16 cross-examination, because we simply cannot afford the time that is being
17 spent to this stage of the trial. If that continues, the length of this
18 trial will just go out to a totally unnecessary and undesirable length.
19 It is also apparent to the Chamber that the Prosecution is too
20 eager in its estimate of the time a witness will take. This has been so
21 from the early stages. We have detected a slight easing of that eagerness
22 and a slightly more realistic spacing in the latest lists, but even so,
23 they may still be a little too eager. You will appreciate that from the
24 outset we have made it clear that we are not applying any sort of 60 per
25 cent cross rule, and therefore, estimates based on that will not hold and
1 are not holding, and you need to lengthen out with a relatively simple
2 monitoring. We ought not reach the stage where we simply lose a day
3 because there's no witness here. We may well find that we finish half an
4 hour or an hour early in one session before the next witness is available,
5 but that should be all. If the two important measures that we have
6 indicated are observed in the future, that is, that the Defence take a
7 more realistic time in cross-examination and the Prosecution allows a more
8 realistic estimate of the time each witness will take, I think the
9 problems of which we're conscious that are being experienced by the
10 witness unit will be greatly diminished, and they will be able to manage
11 things in a way which they are more comfortable with.
12 With those observations, thank you for bringing the matter to our
13 attention at this point, Ms. Somers, and we hope that there will be a
14 significant improvement from all viewpoints in the future.
15 MS. SOMERS: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I will of course
16 take all of this discussion back to the liaison person from the
17 investigative team and to the victim witness liaison person, and we will,
18 based on, as always happens in trial, issues arise which perhaps make us
19 readjust what might be asked of witnesses and have to readjust timing.
20 But we accept certainly that it is incumbent on us to be as crisp and
21 narrow as possible, and where we can trim sufficiently, we will do so.
22 Some witnesses really are so restricted in the questioning; for
23 example, death issues, did someone die there or not. I think these are
24 issues that we can try to keep very, very narrow and I hope we will get
25 the cooperation, I'm sure that we will get the cooperation of my learned
1 friends opposite. And if there are any issues on perhaps scaling back of
2 how many people are physically present in The Hague with the idea of
3 having persons from the region on standby then we'll report back through
4 the legal officer of this proposal as well. This may well be one possible
5 solution until we get a rhythm that is more realistic.
6 Thank you very much. With your indulgence, I would leave the
7 Prosecution table to my very able colleague, Mr. Weiner. Thank you.
8 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, and perhaps we might bring Mr. Grbic in
9 now. Thank you.
10 Mr. Petrovic.
11 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour -- [In English] May I
12 ask you just for a second. I have only a sentence to say.
13 [Interpretation] The first thing that I would like to point out is
14 to actually confirm something that Ms. Somers said. As far as I can tell
15 by looking at the lists, very soon witnesses will be coming that the
16 Defence team will have no questions at all to ask of, except to thank them
17 for being here and expressing our deepest regret at the loss that they
18 suffered. Some of these witness will take maybe up to five minutes in
19 cross-examination, no more.
20 [The witness entered court]
21 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Another thing that we wish to say
22 is of a more practical nature. There is --
23 [The witness stands down]
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] There is a practical problem which
25 we will be facing before the end of this week. Today we must complete our
1 cross-examination of the witness who has just been brought into the
2 courtroom, and we have two other witnesses that may take up to three hours
3 each on examination-in-chief. This in itself is not realistic. I'm not
4 sure how we can deal with this over the following two days, in view of the
5 fact that Mr. Pringle has to meet his schedule and complete his testimony
6 by Friday. Lucijana Peko of the OTP claims up to three hours; Pringle up
7 to three hours; Witness Mustac, one hour. We are just looking at the
8 examination-in-chief, so in this way we would only be having
9 examination-in-chief until the end of this week. I have expressed this
10 concern to my learned friends and colleagues from the OTP on Monday when
11 we talked. I'm not sure what solution they have managed to come up with.
12 If you like, I can show you the schedule again.
13 JUDGE PARKER: No. No need, Mr. Petrovic. We've got it right
14 here. It will be for counsel to discuss the order of witnesses. There
15 are two types of problem that can be encountered, of course. One is where
16 a witness comes without notice, something that can cause particular
17 problem for the Defence. That isn't the issue here. The issue here is
18 whether you have notice of too many witnesses. The solution there is that
19 the Office of the Prosecutor will have to decide which witnesses they are
20 going to call of those that are on the list, and will tell you, I am sure,
21 the moment decisions have been made, which witnesses are going to be
22 called for the balance of this week. But I agree with you; all that are
23 on the list cannot be dealt with during the remaining part of this week.
24 We will have Mr. Grbic in.
25 [The witness entered court
1 JUDGE PARKER: Good morning, Mr. Grbic. And I'm sorry you came in
2 and went out and came in again. We got the timing wrong. May I remind
3 you of the affirmation you took to tell the truth at the beginning.
4 That's still effective.
5 Cross-examination, Mr. Petrovic, continuing.
6 WITNESS: IVO GRBIC [Resumed]
7 [Witness answered through interpreter]
8 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I will try
9 to fully comply with everything that the Chamber has just said.
10 Cross-examined by Mr. Petrovic: [Continued]
11 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Grbic. I will ask you some
12 more questions now, questions about issues that were, for the main part,
13 brought up yesterday.
14 The last thing we talked about was Srdj, the hill, and Croatian
15 defenders on top of the hill. Tell me, please: Between the Old Town
16 itself and Srdj, what is the distance between the edge of the Old Town and
17 where the slopes start rising towards Srdj?
18 A. Srdj itself, the height is approximately 450 metres, plus the 50
19 metres from the sea, so all in all, maybe about 400 metres.
20 Q. Between the eastern town walls and Srdj?
21 A. I think about 400 metres, perhaps a little more, since it is
23 Q. Do you know where the INA oil company building is located in
25 A. I don't know that.
1 Q. Do you know where the police headquarters are?
2 A. I do.
3 Q. Where? Can you tell us, please?
4 A. It's midway between Dubrovnik, the Old Town, and Gruz, to the left
5 of the road.
6 Q. Between Dubrovnik and Gruz, you mean between the Old Town and
8 A. Yes, yes.
9 Q. What's the distance between Pile and Gruz?
10 A. Two kilometres.
11 Q. Did you see any uniformed persons inside the Old Town of Dubrovnik
12 in October, November, and December, the time period we're talking about?
13 A. No.
14 Q. My apologies. Your answer was no?
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. In those three months did you ever see in Dubrovnik any members of
17 the Croatian army?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Did you see any members of the Croatian army outside the Old Town?
20 A. No.
21 Q. You said yesterday, or you repeated on a number of different
22 occasions, that -- or rather, my apologies. Did you hear about any
23 members of the Croatian army being inside the Old Town of Dubrovnik?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Did you hear exactly where they were located?
1 A. We could only make an assumption that they were on Srdj and in the
2 surroundings, but we couldn't actually see them.
3 Q. Can you please specify where in the surroundings? On Srdj and
4 which surroundings are you referring to? The surroundings of what?
5 A. Later on, we realised, while watching video footage, that they
6 were in the Gradac park, in the Bogisicevo [phoen] park near Glavica, and
7 people also said that they were up near St. Blaise, Gorica, where the
8 meteorological service is based, in Lapad.
9 Q. Can you please explain where this park -- Gradac Park is?
10 A. It's just opposite the way from the Lovrijenac fort, to the west.
11 The distance to the town itself is about 800 metres, I'd say.
12 Q. Can you please tell the Chamber what is the difference distance
13 between the park and the Lovrijenac fort?
14 A. I think about 30 or 40 metres.
15 Q. Can you please tell the Chamber what is the distance between the
16 Gradac park and the old hospital at Boninovo?
17 A. The Gradac park borders on the green belt which surrounds the old
18 hospital at Boninovo.
19 Q. And where is the Bogisic [phoen] park in relation to the old
21 A. It's to the north, on an elevation behind the hospital.
22 Q. In terms of metres, how far do you think it is from the old
23 hospital at Boninovo?
24 A. The distance might be about five or six hundred metres.
25 Q. The Gradac park, from the Boninovo hospital?
1 A. No, no. I had the Bogisic park in mind.
2 Q. It may have been my mistake, please. The Bogisic park and the old
4 A. Between five and six hundred metres.
5 Q. And where is the Glavica in relation to the Bogisic park?
6 A. It's part of the park. It's just that Ilijina Glavica is both the
7 park and the surrounding area.
8 Q. What did you see in the Gradac park?
9 A. I didn't see anything at the time. It was only later that I had
10 occasion to see what had been recorded on a videotape.
11 Q. Is this a videotape from the period of time that we are referring
12 to, October, November, and December 1991?
13 A. Yes, that's correct. But I didn't have the tape at the time. I
14 brought it with me here to The Hague.
15 Q. Did you hand the tape over to my learned friends from the OTP?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. You handed it over to them upon your arrival here several days
19 A. Correct.
20 Q. Can you tell us, please, what exactly can you see on that tape?
21 A. There is a civilian putting a small mortar shell into a barrel.
22 Q. Can you actually see this mortar shell being fired from this
23 barrel of a gun?
24 A. I think you can see him firing the first shell and then he kisses
25 the second shell and places it in the barrel.
1 Q. Can you see the civilian moving around with this mortar in the
3 A. Just for a brief while, because he had to swerve to avoid the
5 Q. Can you just tell us what this mortar looked like? You're no
6 expert in the field, but you are an expert in visual recollection of
7 things. So can you tell us what it looks like?
8 A. I don't think it's the 120-millimetre one. I think it's the 80 or
9 85-millimetre one. It's the smaller mortar, not the bigger one.
10 Q. How does it look? Just briefly.
11 A. There is a long barrel with some sort of a pedestal and two pegs
12 in front that keep it pinned to the ground.
13 Q. You say that a civilian fired a shell and kissed another?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Your conclusion that he was a civilian because he was wearing
16 plain clothes [As interpreted]?
17 A. That was the only conclusion that I could draw.
18 Q. Were there other people there?
19 A. No, no. You can't see anyone else in the footage.
20 Q. How long is this footage?
21 A. It's very short.
22 Q. Do you have any other recordings from the time?
23 A. There is footage from the Gradac Park.
24 Q. Let us first distinguish between these two. The footage that
25 we've been talking about so far, that's the Bogisic park?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. What can you see in the footage from the Gradac park?
3 A. There is a pine tree, a very large pine tree. There is a round
4 fish pond. And just by looking at it in a cursory manner, I think there
5 is the ZIS gun lying next to it, Russian production, I believe. I'm not
6 sure about this, though.
7 Q. Can you please give us a description of that weapon, what you saw
8 in the footage, at least? I'm not asking you for an expert opinion or
9 description, but I know that you are -- you must be very good at visual
10 recollection of things.
11 A. The barrel is slightly long and reinforced and tapering towards
12 the end. It was fortified at the back too, to keep it firm, to keep it
13 stable. And the colour was SMB or olive-green.
14 Q. You said it was placed near a tree?
15 A. Yes. You can see that clearly in the footage.
16 Q. Were there people around the weapon?
17 A. There's a young man wearing civilian clothes. I think he was
18 carrying a camera or something. He ran from the weapon to the person who
19 was recording the scene.
20 Q. Can you explain why he ran in this direction?
21 A. I'm not sure how the young man got to be there in the first place.
22 But then he took a path to the left, an asphalt path leading down into
23 town, and that's where the recording ends.
24 Q. How long is this footage?
25 A. This one's a bit longer than the one that was taken in the Bogisic
2 Q. Can you see anyone else in this footage aside from this young man?
3 A. No, no one. Well, now that I think about it, there's a man
4 holding a tree branch, trying to put out a fire.
5 Q. In addition to the weapon, is there any other piece of military
6 equipment to be seen in the footage, maybe a box with ammunition or
7 something like that?
8 A. No, you can't see anything else.
9 Q. This young man standing near the weapon, is he also wearing
10 civilian clothes?
11 A. You can only see him moving away from the weapon in the footage.
12 I don't know where he had come from.
13 Q. But he's also wearing civilian clothes?
14 A. Yes, he is.
15 Q. Do you have any other footage from that period?
16 A. We do have a tape of a small lorry where a three-barreled
17 machine-gun was mounted, and I suppose that's an anti-aircraft gun.
18 Q. Is that a three-barreled anti-aircraft gun?
19 A. I wouldn't know whether it's anti-aircraft, but I think that such
20 kind of weapon is used for those purposes.
21 Q. Can you describe this vehicle to us? Do you know what the make of
22 it was?
23 A. I think that was a civilian vehicle, and the footage is a very
24 short one, and it's on the same tape.
25 Q. Are there any persons in the footage?
1 A. Probably, but right now I cannot remember.
2 Q. Is there anyone who is part of the crew with this weapon?
3 A. I didn't notice any such person.
4 Q. Could you recognise part of the town where the videotape was shot?
5 A. Apparently, outside the town, because there are some houses uphill
6 and there's a road. It's a close-up footage, so you couldn't see any
8 Q. I understand that it was not taken inside the Old Town. Is it
9 taken -- was it taken in Dubrovnik at all?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. What exactly can you see? What kind of buildings can you see?
12 A. Modern buildings and some shrubbery, probably cypress trees. I
13 can't remember.
14 Q. Do you know what colour is this civilian vehicle?
15 A. It's not olive-drab. Only the weapon was of that colour.
16 Q. What was the colour of the lorry?
17 A. Most certainly not military one. If it had been of the same
18 colour as the weapon, then you might say that it belonged to the military,
19 but apparently it was different. So you can see that on the tape.
20 Q. Can you tell me how big is this lorry?
21 A. We couldn't see the whole of the lorry. We just saw pieces of the
22 image with those barrels.
23 Q. If I understood you correctly, when you say -- when we both use
24 the word "lorry," it's not a big truck; it's something smaller than a big
1 A. Yes, that was my impression.
2 Q. Can you tell me, please: How long were those three barrels that
3 you can see on the tape?
4 A. Approximately two metres.
5 Q. Please tell me: Looking from Ploce towards the town, the passage
6 that leads from Ploce to town, was it possible before the war for delivery
7 vans or pick-up trucks to pass through this passage?
8 A. Yes, they were allowed.
9 Q. Does that refer the same to the gate on the Pile? There is a ramp
10 there that can allow the passage of some smaller vehicles? Is that
12 A. Only ambulances were allowed to go through that passage, but at a
13 slow pace, because this passage is at a right -- at 90-degrees angle, and
14 for that reason it had never been used for delivery vehicles.
15 Q. So if I remember correctly, an ambulance could pass easily by
16 turning to the left and then to the right?
17 A. That is the same situation now.
18 Q. How did you obtain these videotapes that you are now discussing?
19 A. It's a compilation of video footage made by some 15 domestic and
20 foreign photographers, and it has been compiled by Mr. Benic [phoen], who
21 is a TV journalist from the Dubrovnik television.
22 Q. What is the total duration of the tape?
23 A. Maybe even 90 minutes, but certainly more than one hour. I'm not
24 sure. But it's a long tape.
25 Q. Did you hand over this whole videotape to the OTP?
1 A. Yes, I did.
2 Q. Have you reviewed the whole tape?
3 A. Yes, I have.
4 Q. Was it broadcast anywhere publicly? Can you remember, was it
5 broadcast on any of the TV channels or in any other way?
6 A. Only pieces from that tape were broadcast, but I don't know
7 whether the entire tape has ever been broadcast.
8 Q. I apologise that I'm using a different word for "broadcast" than
9 the one that you use.
10 What else can one see on that tape?
11 A. There are lots of things, including the footage made by the
12 Belgrade television and the Montenegrin television, in addition to the
13 footage made by foreign photographers. Because when you look on the
14 credits at the end of the tape, you can see the names of the people who
15 were involved in the making of this tape. They were lodged in the
16 Argentina hotel and from there they could shoot the town area.
17 Q. Let us just briefly tackle another subject. Several times you
18 said yesterday that on the slope of Srdj, as you say, between Zarkovica
19 and Srdj, you could see the silhouettes.
20 A. Of soldiers.
21 Q. Can you please describe for me once again how they looked like?
22 A. We know how the olive-drab uniform looks like. It's dark green.
23 And given the fact that the backdrop were white rocks, without any
24 shrubbery on it, you could very clearly distinguish them against this
25 backdrop. Being a painter, I'm very good at perceiving these things.
1 Q. From your window, as it was -- the window facing the west; am I
2 right [As interpreted]?
3 A. Yes, you are right.
4 Q. So in your estimate, how far is your window to the Srdj slopes?
5 A. The 400 metres that I already mentioned, plus another 150 or so.
6 So if the width of the town is 300 metres, my house is situated somewhere
7 in the middle.
8 Q. So that's the total of some 600 or 700 metres in a straight line.
9 How do you know -- or did you know who those silhouettes were?
10 A. But they were not on this position that was in my view. They were
11 more to the east.
12 Q. Okay. You could see silhouettes from the town?
13 A. I didn't see the silhouettes from my window. I said yesterday
14 that we could see them from the town harbour. These silhouettes were
15 visible to the east from the town between Srdj and Grabovica, and that's
16 Zarkovica, and that's a totally different area which I cannot see from my
18 Q. If you were on Porporela, how long is the distance?
19 A. Much longer.
20 Q. Between 700 or 800 metres?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. Tell me: Who were those people, those silhouettes?
23 A. So if you see that they are all uniformly dressed in dark-green
24 clothes and with dark-green hats, hats on their heads, you just wouldn't
25 assume that those were civilians. And I'm quite sure that Croatian forces
1 were not at this position, because that is to the east from the Srdj peak,
2 towards Zarkovica. You have bare rocks there, and in the middle there is
3 the village of Bosanka. It's a very steep slope.
4 Q. Could you say exactly at what of these features the Croatian
5 forces were deployed and where the forces of the opposite side were
7 A. It's quite clear, because our forces only held the very peak of
8 Srdj. Everything outside that area were not our forces.
9 Q. You said in your statement, or in the addendum to your statement
10 that you submitted to Mr. Weiner upon your arrival here in The Hague, you
11 could see that those silhouettes were moving from Zarkovica towards Srdj.
12 You didn't explain who those people were who were deployed or moving
13 between Zarkovica and Srdj. In which direction were they moving? What
14 did they do?
15 A. You can see quite clearly from the tape that there was a
16 silhouette of a tank moving towards the fortress. So you can see it
17 intermittently in the tape. You can see the barrel of the tank. And it
18 was moving much faster than the silhouettes were moving, the ones that we
19 had previously seen on the rocks.
20 Q. So since you knew the deployment of the defenders and of the other
21 forces, you could draw a conclusion who was who. Therefore, I may
22 conclude that you precisely know where the Croatian defenders were located
23 and where the JNA was.
24 A. If everybody said -- everybody said that our defenders were only
25 on Srdj.
1 Q. If we try to -- if we look at your statement made in the year
2 2000, plus your additional explanation, and when you add to that what we
3 heard from you yesterday, when you discussed or explained to this Chamber
4 what was happening, could you make a distinction between what you saw on
5 the tape and what you saw yourself? So can you clearly distinguish
6 between the two?
7 A. I specifically pointed out this to Mr. Weiner, by saying that what
8 I saw on the tape was not possible for me to see personally.
9 Q. Did you tell us specifically yesterday: This is what I saw in the
10 tape, this is what I experienced personally, and this is what I heard from
11 third persons? Or you didn't make this distinction at all?
12 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner.
13 MR. WEINER: There was no discussion in the examination-in-chief
14 of the tapes, which are just public broadcasts that he's copied, which are
15 just news broadcasts from Belgrade, Sarajevo, Montenegro, wherever,
16 Zagreb. There was no discussion of the tapes. He was asked yesterday
17 about his own observations, and also what he had heard, period. There was
18 no discussion of the tapes. I just want to make that very clear.
19 JUDGE PARKER: That may help you, Mr. Petrovic.
20 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, although I
21 beg to differ, I wouldn't dwell on this matter any longer.
22 Q. What you just described you saw on the tape?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Through your three-month experience, and you know which three
25 months I'm referring to, did you ever hear any -- from the place where you
1 were located, did you hear any operation or any shooting or firing from
2 these parks that we mentioned? Had you ever heard any shooting coming
3 from the town into any direction?
4 A. No, not during those three months.
5 Q. So you have no experience of that?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Could you distinguish, then, between the sound coming from
8 Zarkovica, for example, or the sound coming from Babin Kuk, for instance?
9 Were you able to distinguish between the sound heard coming from Bosanka
10 or, for example, from Lapad?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Tell me, please: You told us yesterday that due to all those
13 circumstances in which you lived at the time during those three months in
14 Dubrovnik in the Old Town, you walked around very often in order to ease
15 the pressure that you had to endure. Can you tell us which routes you
16 took in your walks? Please don't repeat what you already said yesterday.
17 You told us that you walked on Porporela, through the Old Town.
18 A. I didn't go up to Porporela, but I went to the city harbour.
19 Q. So you walked down your street, Od Puca, you walked on Stradun.
20 During those walks, and during those three months, did you ever leave the
21 perimeter of the Old Town?
22 A. Yes, I did.
23 Q. Can you tell me: Where did you go and how many times you went
25 A. I first went towards the west, because the eastern part of the
1 town, facing Ploce, was very much open to the positions on Zarkovica.
2 Q. So you went through the Pile gate on Ante Starcevic Street?
3 A. We went to Persijane. I told you yesterday this is a plateau on
4 Pile where there's a fountain and from where you can see the Lovrijenac
5 fortress and the sea.
6 Q. How many times did you leave the Old Town? Did you do that on a
7 daily basis or once a week?
8 A. We left the Old Town in November, after those three horrible days
9 on the 10th, 11th, and the 12th, when the town was shelled.
10 Q. Can you tell me: How far did you go? Did you go just as far as
11 Pile or did you go further to the west?
12 A. We went past the Imperijal hotel, whose roof was burned. Then we
13 took the street Petra Zrinskoga, which is north towards the Srdj, because
14 there are three so-called corners, in fact, three parallel streets, and we
15 went as far as the farthest third street, with the intention of looking
16 for some edible plants in order to enrich our diet.
17 Q. On this walk, did you go behind the hotel or you just went as far
18 as the entrance?
19 A. We went only as far as the entrance to the hotel.
20 Q. When you walked down this route, did you see any members of the
21 Croatian army?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Did you always go through the eastern gate on Ploce?
24 THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry. I don't hear the witness.
25 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. During all these three months, did you see any armed individuals
2 carrying gun or rifle [As interpreted] in the town?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Have you seen any policemen?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Have you seen any members of the civilian protection?
7 A. I only saw civilians.
8 Q. Did you see any civilians carrying pistols? Did you see any
9 civilian carrying guns?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did you know anyone who was a member of the Croatian army?
12 A. Not at that time.
13 Q. As someone who has been living in Dubrovnik for a long time, did
14 you know a lot of people at all?
15 A. Yes, I did.
16 Q. How is it possible, then -- or did you hear that anyone was a
17 member of these forces?
18 A. Yes, I did.
19 Q. You mean in 1992?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. If I understand you properly, in 1991, you've never heard of
22 anyone being a member of the Croatian army?
23 A. We were prisoners there. We didn't have much contacts. I told
24 you that we left the town very rarely.
25 Q. There were many people from outside of town, many refugees.
1 People were telling about what was going on and discussing whether the JNA
2 was going to enter the town, whether Dubrovnik would manage to defend
3 itself. Were you not interested to know if there was anyone prepared to
4 defend the town?
5 A. Of course I was interested.
6 Q. Did you get any answer to these questions that you would like to
8 A. The answer was that we were surrounded by major armed forces.
9 Q. I will ask you about three names now. For example, General Nojko
11 A. We'd heard about him being a commander.
12 Q. Please tell me precisely what you heard. The commander of what?
13 A. I think the commander of a more general military nature.
14 Q. Where was he commander? The defence of Dubrovnik or the general
15 area? What did he do?
16 A. I think he commanded the defence of Dubrovnik.
17 Q. Well, didn't you wonder if there was a commander? Probably this
18 commander led some forces, some soldiers. Wasn't that a logical question
19 to ask? Wasn't that a logical thing to wonder?
20 A. Yes. It strikes me as logical.
21 Q. So what was the answer?
22 A. We were prisoners inside the town, we civilians. We had no
23 contact with this gentleman you've referred to, or anyone else, for that
25 Q. So you knew there was a commander, you knew there was a unit, but
1 you never wanted to know, you never wondered whether the unit had any
2 soldiers, whether it in fact existed. You learned that there was a
3 commander. You seem a man of broad interests and an educated man. It
4 strikes me as strange that you didn't ask yourself any questions about
5 that at the time. I find that difficult to believe.
6 A. Well, do your best. Try to believe what I'm telling you.
7 Q. Did you listen to Radio Dubrovnik?
8 A. Yes. We all did. That was our only link with the outside world.
9 Q. Did Radio Dubrovnik cover the activities of the Croatian army in
10 the area of Dubrovnik town, or rather, the activities of the Croatian army
11 in terms of defending the town, in the general town area?
12 A. They mostly talked about victims, water, food, electricity supply,
13 how refugees travelled, when a ship would arrive. They mostly covered the
14 essentials, what was really important for the life of those civilians
15 imprisoned inside the town.
16 Q. Did Radio Dubrovnik cover JNA attacks on Dubrovnik?
17 A. I think they did.
18 Q. Did Radio Dubrovnik cover the resistance of the town to JNA units?
19 Did they try to soothe the population? Did they try to provide some
20 explanation of what was going on?
21 A. Yes. They wanted to soothe people's minds, but if they had said
22 anything publicly about the Croatian units, they would have been
23 disclosing military secrets.
24 Q. Did they, for example, say: The Croatian defenders repelled an
25 attack from this or that position? Did you hear anything like that?
1 A. No, never. As I said, Radio Dubrovnik mostly covered issues to do
2 with the civilian population.
3 Q. Can you distinguish between an incendiary shell and one that is
4 not an incendiary shell?
5 A. The incendiary shell leaves an orange trail where it explodes.
6 Q. Is there a peculiar smell that you associate with an incendiary
8 A. I think the smell only lasts very briefly.
9 MR. WEINER: I object to this. Your Honour, we have military
10 experts who are going to testify. I assume they will be bringing military
11 experts that will testify. This man is an artist. He is not an expert in
12 projectiles, and he should not be offering opinions in this area.
13 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, please. First of all,
14 I am really quite surprised that Mr. Weiner should try to interrupt me
15 with a remark of this nature. The witness testified for the whole day
16 yesterday that unfortunately what happened at his home was that a
17 projectile had exploded, an incendiary projectile, he said explicitly.
18 I'm not asking him about the specifics of a mortar shell. I'm just asking
19 him about what he experienced, what he felt. He described for us the kind
20 of flame and the effect that the shell had. I just want to know whether
21 he noticed a peculiar smell by which this incendiary shell would have been
22 different from any other shell. I think my questions address directly
23 issues elicited by Mr. Weiner during his examination-in-chief yesterday,
24 and the witness did, after all, provide a very specific description of the
1 JUDGE PARKER: Carry on, Mr. Petrovic.
2 Thank you, Mr. Weiner.
3 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Did you sense any peculiar smell after this incendiary shell
6 A. As I said, we had taken shelter in a room that was between the
7 kitchen and the living room. We were ten steps away from the attic where
8 the shell exploded. If it's a phosphorescence shell, then obviously
9 there's a hideous smell spreading. And the smoke itself from the burning.
10 It depends on where exactly the shell lands. It landed on wood and the
11 wood caught fire in this case.
12 Q. You provide very detailed and specific accounts of things that
13 happened. That, after all, is your trait. As for sensory perception,
14 what sort of a smell was it?
15 A. It was a bitter smell. It makes you choke.
16 Q. The Lovrijenac fort, the fortress that we referred to yesterday,
17 is it part of the historical heritage of the Old Town of Dubrovnik?
18 A. It is not located within the town walls. It is about 50 metres
19 from the town walls, on an isolated rock. It sits on top of an isolated
21 Q. But it is part of the historical heritage of the town itself?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You noticed that the fort had been damaged. You said there was
24 damage to the stones or the rocks.
25 A. Yes. The rocks just underneath the fort.
1 Q. What about the other side, the north-west? Now we're talking
2 about the south-west. There's the Old Town to the south-west -- to the
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. To the north-west, there is the Gradac Park; isn't that correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. How far from the north-western face of the fort itself in terms of
9 A. Roughly 40 metres, I would say.
10 Q. You said that you saw an armoured vehicle, a homemade, a hand-made
11 armoured vehicle moving. What did it look like?
12 A. I only saw it on the tape that I brought with me.
13 Q. Where did you see it? Did you manage to identify the vehicle's
14 route when you saw the tape?
15 A. I think the people that were there were bringing a wounded man
16 into the vehicle. He had a cast around his right leg. The leg must have
17 been broken. And they took great care in placing the person inside the
18 vehicle. Someone is talking to the driver, and from this conversation you
19 can gather that this vehicle was only used to transport the wounded and
21 Q. You said they were bringing a wounded person inside the vehicle.
22 Where was the door of this vehicle?
23 A. This was a hand-made, a homemade vehicle, made from sheets of iron
24 welded together, roughly speaking, an armoured vehicle.
25 Q. On the upper side of this vehicle, did you see a weapon mounted
2 A. No. It had sloping sides, a protected lorry, a rather small one,
3 covered in iron sheets to protect the inside of the vehicle from being
5 Q. You saw that they were putting a wounded man inside?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Could they, for example, be placing inside the vehicle crates
8 containing food or anything like that, ammunition perhaps?
9 A. I believe this would have been possible, yes, but in this footage
10 you can hear them say: Watch out. Watch out for the tree. Because the
11 man had a plaster cast, so they wanted to avoid further damage.
12 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown
13 Prosecution document number P24, just to verify if it's the same vehicle
14 that the witness has now been telling us about.
15 [In English] Can you put that on the ELMO, please.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Can you please have a look. This photograph
17 that's displayed on your monitor, is this the vehicle we're talking about?
18 A. I'm not sure if this still was taken from the video footage or if
19 this is a special photograph.
20 Q. This is a different photograph. It's not from the footage.
21 A. In that case, I'm not familiar with this image.
22 Q. So that's not the same vehicle?
23 A. I've never seen this particular photo. I only saw the video
25 Q. So would you say that this vehicle - please look carefully - that
1 this vehicle is different from the one that you saw?
2 A. I only saw part of that vehicle, some footage from inside the
3 vehicle when they were bringing the wounded man.
4 Q. Can you please have a careful look. This part of town, where was
5 this recorded? We are in Dubrovnik, but where precisely? Can you
6 identify the exact spot?
7 A. You can see palm trees. I can't see a single detail that would
8 betray the exact location.
9 Q. Can you look at the building in the background.
10 A. The building, four windows, a small roof.
11 MR. PETROVIC: [Previous translation continues]... [In English]
12 the witness. Can he take a look directly at the photo, please.
13 Q. [Interpretation] Do you find it easier now that you have the photo
14 in your hands?
15 A. I can't identify the house in the background. There's a small
16 roof, four windows.
17 Q. Very well. You can't identify it. That's fair enough.
18 A. I can see civilian cars, buses, in the background, but I don't
19 think I can identify the location.
20 Q. We'll no longer be requiring this photograph. Thank you very
22 Yesterday you described for us, on several occasions when you
23 spoke about what happened in October, what you called the first attack, in
24 the month of October, you described for us the peculiar sound. You
25 described for us the situation. A shell, as you said, had hit the Rupe
1 Museum, and then the next shell came. You heard the peculiar whizzing
2 sound, very striking.
3 A. Yes, that's correct.
4 Q. It must have left a very strong impression on you from that period
5 of time?
6 A. Yes, because those were the first shells to land on Dubrovnik.
7 Q. Did you not find it important, as something to point out to the
8 investigators when you talked to them in September 2000?
9 A. They did not lead me there with their questions.
10 Q. You did tell them about the Rupe Museum. That was probably the
11 strongest impression you had on that day. How come you didn't tell the
12 investigator about your strongest impression?
13 A. Because the investigator wanted us to just go through it very
14 quickly and to move on. As we had not been briefed for this interview, we
15 had not been prepared, it was easy to leave things out, to pass things
17 Q. Let's try to do it this way.
18 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] May I just have a moment, please.
19 Q. You told us yesterday about the bullet. You were moving along,
20 and the bullet ricochetted against the bishop's palace. Where was this?
21 A. That was at Count Damjan and Junje [phoen] Street.
22 Q. Your conclusion was that the bullet came from a sniper?
23 A. It was a rifle bullet. That was obvious.
24 Q. A little later, you entered the town and another bullet hit a
1 A. My sister and I had just turned the corner and a bullet rang out
2 against a metal piece of the scaffolding.
3 Q. Was that also a sniper?
4 A. I assume it was from the same position, the bullet had been fired
5 from the same position when it ricochetted, and it flew back in the same
7 Q. Your impression was that someone was targeting you specifically?
8 A. I was not the only person in that area, so they may as well have
9 been targeting someone else.
10 Q. Was it your impression that any of the people surrounding you were
11 being specifically targeted, people in the area? You can answer my
12 question now.
13 A. It was evident that human beings were being targeted. If you fire
14 a bullet at a town wall, that obviously doesn't make much sense.
15 Q. So they were targeting you, or some of the people in the area?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. That must be a dreadful experience.
18 A. Yes, quite inconvenient.
19 Q. Can you please tell us why you didn't tell the investigator about
20 this horrible experience when you talked to them in September.
21 A. I must repeat myself: I was not able to recollect all the details
22 at that time. He didn't even insist on asking these same questions that
23 you're asking me now.
24 Q. However, on that occasion you told the investigator, for example,
25 the following -- that's exactly what your statement says. You told him
1 about something that was outside your own experience, something that was
2 hearsay. You said that Mr. Toni Kalcic had been shot. You told the
3 investigators about this. You believed it was important, even though you
4 didn't personally witness this or were in any other way involved to what
5 happened to Mr. Kalcic. But you left out the fact that you yourself had
6 been sniped at. Why was that?
7 A. Because my neighbour, Mr. Kalcic, is a well-known person, so I
8 thought it was important to mention that.
9 Q. Don't you think that recounting your horrible personal experiences
10 was more important?
11 A. Because we personally were not hit.
12 Q. As I understand, you are a well-known person there, and if you
13 had been a target of the sniper, I don't see that there is anything more
14 important to tell the investigator than that.
15 A. Obviously, he didn't ask me to provide details in terms that --
16 whether there was any similar case than the one with Mr. Kalcic.
17 Q. So the first thing that comes into your mind is Mr. Kalcic and
18 then yourself?
19 A. Right. Because Mr. Kalcic was hit in his lower leg, and I think
20 that was a serious wound.
21 Q. So why didn't you tell to the investigator about the incident
22 when you were standing at the door facing the aquarium, when another man
23 standing next to you was shot in the palm of his hand? You were
24 personally witnessing the whole incident, and that's what you told us
25 yesterday. So you personally saw a person standing 50 centimetres away
1 from you being shot by a sniper.
2 A. I didn't tell the investigator about this incident because it was
3 impossible to cover all the horrendous things that happened in Dubrovnik.
4 Q. The Chamber, quite justifiably, warned me not to ask you about any
5 events that took place in the nineteenth century, in the twentieth
6 century, which took more than two pages in your statement. However, your
7 personal experience of seeing a man being shot next to you was never
8 mentioned in your statement.
9 A. The issue is that this statement contains what the translator said
10 and what the investigator wrote down.
11 Q. Are you telling me, then, that the investigator was more
12 interested to hear about the Serbian nineteenth-century poets than about
13 your experience when you were a target of a sniper?
14 MR. WEINER: Objection. He can't answer what the investigator was
15 interested in. It's outside the scope of his knowledge, as is the
16 investigator's decisions to ask certain questions.
17 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Petrovic, there's a lot in what Mr. Weiner is
18 putting in that objection. I think you must accept the evidence of the
19 witness when he says: Well, I answered what I was asked by the
21 You've already got from him that he didn't volunteer the personal
22 attack on himself, if that's what it was. That's clear already. And he's
23 saying he wasn't asked about this by the investigator.
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, let me rephrase the
1 Q. Did the investigator ask you to tell him about the Serbian
2 nineteenth-century poets?
3 A. He asked me about the development and the political situation that
4 prevailed and which resulted eventually in this attack.
5 Q. Did the investigator ask you about Josip Broz Tito and about what
6 happened after his death?
7 A. About general political situation.
8 Q. Did he ask you about the Serbian church on Gunduliceva Poljana?
9 A. This church is not on Gunduliceva Poljana.
10 Q. Did he ask you about the Serbian church?
11 A. He asked me about many things. Therefore, what I replied was
12 apparently in answer to the investigator's question.
13 Q. Therefore, he did ask you when the Serbian church was built?
14 A. Otherwise, I wouldn't have any specific reason to speak about this
16 Q. Did he ask you about sniper-shooting incidents in Dubrovnik?
17 A. Obviously, since I mentioned Mr. Kalcic, and it's apparent that
18 that was being discussed.
19 Q. So in conclusion, he asked you about the sniper-shooting incident,
20 you told about the experience of Mr. Kalcic, but you didn't tell him about
21 your personal experience; am I right?
22 A. It wasn't recorded in writing, and I would like to reiterate here
23 that I didn't have an opportunity then to look at this text, which was
24 made from the translation done by the interpreter and written down by the
25 investigator and which I only saw now in The Hague.
1 Q. Yesterday you told us that you had been read this statement.
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. So you were able to hear what the statement was about?
4 A. What was read to me and what is written is quite different.
5 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] I would ask the witness a couple of
6 questions more, but I would like to do it, with your permission, after a
7 15-minute break.
8 JUDGE PARKER: We will have the first break, then, now,
9 Mr. Petrovic. It will be for 20 minutes.
10 --- Recess taken at 10.31 a.m.
11 --- On resuming at 10.57 a.m.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Petrovic.
13 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Before I begin with the questioning of the witness, I would first
15 like to inform you that I had a discussion with my learned colleague
16 Weiner over the break and that we agreed that in one or two days,
17 Mr. Weiner will tender this video cassette that had been handed to him by
18 the witness. Therefore, we managed to resolve one important issue in this
20 If I may, now I would pose a couple of more questions to the
21 witness, and with that, I would conclude and not waste any more time of
22 the Chamber and of the witness.
23 Q. Mr. Grbic, I would like to take you back to the 6th of December,
24 1991. Could you kindly tell me: When was the first time that you heard
1 A. That was at 10 minutes to 6.00 a.m.
2 Q. Were these explosions distant?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. I suppose you were asleep, so maybe my question is superfluous.
5 Could you locate where the explosions were coming?
6 A. Yes, that's right. We were woken up by the explosions, and we
7 understood that they were coming from the eastern parts.
8 Q. How long did those distant detonations last?
9 A. Those explosions were continuous and lasted until the moment that
10 I went to my window at 7.00 a.m.
11 Q. So you want to say that these explosions lasted between 10 to
12 6.00, when you woke up, until 7.00 a.m.?
13 A. Yes, and they were getting closer and closer.
14 Q. You mentioned that you had seen what had been happening on Srdj.
15 A. At 7.00.
16 Q. What did you see? I heard about the cross and it's part of your
17 evidence, but what else did you see?
18 A. The shells were being exploded around the fort, within my vision.
19 Q. Are you -- which side of the fort. Are you referring towards
21 A. No, no, no. I couldn't see that part.
22 Q. You also said that there was a very strong wind on that day.
23 A. Yes, an easterly wind, which we called Levanat.
24 Q. How could you tell that?
25 A. Because those -- the smoke was very swiftly moved towards the
2 Q. So the smoke was swiftly dispersed, and therefore, that was a very
3 strong wind?
4 A. Yes, that's correct.
5 Q. When did the shelling exactly stop?
6 A. The shelling subsided at around 1.00 p.m., when three of my
7 acquaintances took my paintings from my gallery on the ground floor of my
9 Q. Did you again -- did you still hear those distant detonations?
10 A. Yes. But we could tell that they were not so very near, and
11 therefore, they decided to go to my gallery and take my paintings to
12 Mr. Obad's house.
13 Q. On that day, could you tell from which direction, judging by the
14 sound, did the explosions come?
15 A. They always came from the east.
16 Q. On that day, did you hear any sound of explosion coming from the
17 north or west?
18 A. No, I didn't.
19 Q. Between October and late December, you mentioned yesterday that
20 these events took place on one day in October. Can you please remind me?
21 Because you said the whole event started on the 1st of October.
22 A. Then the Rupe Museum, Museum Rupe.
23 Q. Sorry. We are overlapping, so I will try to phrase the question
24 in a manner that you can directly respond to. Therefore, the event that
25 you describe in October took place on the 25th October and involved the
1 Rupe Museum?
2 A. On or about the 25th of October.
3 Q. There were three days --
4 A. We didn't mention the Pecar house.
5 Q. It all happened on the same day?
6 A. Yes, or thereabouts. My memory may not be quite accurate, but
7 that was certainly towards the end of that month.
8 Q. Just let me remind you that you very decisively said that this
9 event happened on the same day, but these events were a couple of minutes
11 A. I had different views, one from my west window and one from the
12 east window.
13 Q. Yesterday you said that the events involving the Pecar house and
14 the museum Rupe were minutes apart.
15 A. No, no, no, not minutes. As I told you, my sister and I were in
16 the street. She was looking at the shop window. And it took some time
17 for us to go back home. So these two events were not minutes apart.
18 Q. Are you quite sure that that was on that same day or are you not
20 A. I can tell you now that you have made me wonder now and doubtful.
21 But these events were very close to each other.
22 Q. Let's move now to November, the three days in November and one day
23 in December.
24 A. Yes. That was the most horrible day.
25 Q. Thank you. So all these incidents in fact happened within the
1 total of five days; am I right? One day in October, three days in
2 November, and one in December?
3 A. That was what I have the strongest impression of and that I and my
4 family felt the most.
5 Q. Tell me, please: On the 6th of December, when you left your
6 house, you said yesterday that at that very moment, shells were landing
7 nearby; is that correct?
8 A. Yes, that's correct.
9 Q. Were they landing on some buildings or on streets?
10 A. On both.
11 Q. That is also, I presume, a very terrible and strong experience.
12 So tell me, please: Why there's no mention at all about this experience
13 in your statement given in September 2000. You didn't mention it with one
14 word, that while you were leaving your house and headed for your
15 neighbour's house, all this was happening. Did you also consider this not
16 to be important?
17 A. Obviously, the investigator didn't ask me such a detailed
19 Q. Is that, then, correct, that the investigator never asked you
20 anything about the events that took place on the 6th of December?
21 A. Well, he did ask me about some incidents, but he didn't go in so
22 much detail as you are doing now.
23 Q. But you gave a very elaborate description of everything that was
24 happening in your flat, in your neighbour's houses, but this particular
25 event that there were shellings -- there was intense shelling while you
1 were going to your neighbour's house?
2 A. Not in so many details, but since I made a solemn oath, I confirm
3 now that that is the truth.
4 Q. Did you think it wasn't important to mention?
5 A. I was not asked in so many details by the investigator.
6 Q. Mr. Grbic, I have no further questions for you. I would like, at
7 the end of this examination, to tell you, on behalf of my client, that he
8 is very sorry about everything that you and your family had to endure in
9 terms of psychological and material losses. Thank you.
10 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with this, I have
11 concluded my cross-examination. Thank you.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Petrovic.
13 Mr. Weiner.
14 MR. WEINER: Just a few matters, Your Honour.
15 Re-examined by Mr. Weiner:
16 Q. Sir, during your testimony, they asked you if you heard about
17 members of the Croatian army being in the Old Town, and you said: Yes, on
18 Srdj, St. Blaise, and Lapad." Actually -- and you also said Gradac park
19 and Bogisic park. Are any of those places you mentioned in the Old Town?
20 Srdj, those parks, or those places?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Had you ever seen Croatian troops in the Old Town?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Had you ever heard of Croatian troops in the Old Town?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Those places that you described that you heard where the Croatian
2 troops were, let's take the two parks. Gradac park. How far is Gradac
3 park from the Old Town?
4 A. Gradac Park is approximately 700 metres or 800 metres from the Old
6 Q. And Bogisic park? I don't think I have the right pronunciation.
7 But something like Bogisic park?
8 A. Bogisic park. Bogisic park is even further away, between 800 and
9 900 metres.
10 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, I would like to show this witness a copy
11 of map P12.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
13 MR. WEINER: And if they could place this on the ELMO, please.
14 Q. Do you recognise that map, sir, that area depicted on that map?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Could you --
17 A. This is the layout of the Old Town of Dubrovnik and some of the
18 suburbs around the town.
19 Q. Could you please show us where Gradac Park is.
20 A. You can't see on this map, because it is somewhere here. Because
21 this is the Lovrijenac fortress, from which, as I said, the edge of the
22 park is some 40 metres away, and this park covers this whole area, and
23 this distance across the sea, about 40 metres. So if you add another --
24 the width of the fort times three, then we can reach the distance which I
25 just said. That is all together more than 700 metres. So if you add
1 these two distances, you will get the distance from the town to the Gradac
3 Q. Sir, could you please, with a marking pen, place a 1 -- could you
4 please place a 1, the number 1, in the area where the Gradac park is.
5 A. [Marks]
6 Q. Now, could you show us first where --
7 JUDGE PARKER: Before we leave that, could the record disclose
8 that a mark has been placed actually in the margin around the map, not on
9 the map itself, because the park the witness indicates is not actually
10 depicted on the map itself.
11 MR. WEINER: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Q. Could you now place -- first show us where the other park is,
13 Bogisic park.
14 A. Bogisic park. Which number shall I use? Number 2?
15 Q. The number 2, please.
16 A. [Marks]
17 Q. Thank you.
18 JUDGE PARKER: A further mark made by the witness, again in the
19 margin, because it is his evidence that both parks are beyond the area
20 depicted on the map.
21 MR. WEINER: The Prosecution would like to offer that map, Your
23 JUDGE PARKER: Is it not already an exhibit?
24 MR. WEINER: It's already Exhibit 12, but since 12 has already
25 been marked, or 12 is being used as kind of a plat, we'd like to offer
1 that as a new exhibit.
2 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Petrovic.
3 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, allow me, please. We
4 object to this item being entered into the files because there's actually
5 nothing that you can see. You have just two marks on the margin that
6 don't signify anything. And another thing: If we are to proceed in this
7 manner, then we should see a bigger map and have the witness indicate
8 these locations on the map. Otherwise, I don't see any point in doing
9 this in this way. Maybe this is not the right moment, but I would also
10 like to pose one more question after Mr. Weiner has finished, and it
11 concerns exactly what he is asking the witness now.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner, I'm inclined to agree with
13 Mr. Petrovic. It seems to me that you have from the witness his evidence
14 that the parks are at the distances he's given from the Old Town, that
15 they are not depicted on the map because they are beyond the margin of the
16 map. And is that not enough for your purposes?
17 MR. WEINER: That's enough for the record. However, Your Honour,
18 I think the record should be clear, because this witness was asked several
19 questions about Croatian troops, and the record should be absolutely clear
20 that the Croatian troops and the mortars that he mentioned and those items
21 or those things that he saw on those public-domain videos, which are
22 public-domain news broadcasts which he videotaped or had a friend
23 videotape and give him a copy were not in the Old Town.
24 JUDGE PARKER: You're in the process of identifying that with him,
25 and you have dealt with the area of the two parks, and he has made clear
1 that neither of those are within the Old Town. I think that evidence and
2 the transcript of it is clear. I don't think that the matter is going to
3 be assisted by receiving that plan as an exhibit.
4 MR. WEINER: That's fine.
5 JUDGE PARKER: Now, Mr. Petrovic, you had something else you
6 wished to raise?
7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yes. I'm not sure if
8 Mr. Weiner has completed his examination.
9 JUDGE PARKER: Oh, I thought you wanted to raise something before
10 he went on.
11 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] No. No. I merely wish to ask the
12 witness two additional questions later.
13 JUDGE PARKER: Carry on, Mr. Weiner. I'm sorry.
14 MR. WEINER:
15 Q. Counsel asked you about a - thank you - about an armoured vehicle.
16 Did you ever see that armoured vehicle depicted on the video in the Old
17 Town, sir?
18 A. No, never.
19 Q. He also asked you about this three-barreled machine-gun or
20 anti-aircraft gun. Did you ever see that in the Old Town?
21 A. Never.
22 Q. Sir, you're a noted figure within the Old Town of Dubrovnik. Did
23 you get a chance to speak with a lot of people during the fall of 1991,
24 fellow Old Town residents?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And did people pass information and gossip about what was
3 A. Yes. People talked about ferocious attacks in the surroundings of
4 Dubrovnik, in Dubrovnik municipality.
5 Q. If a vehicle, an anti- -- a vehicle with an anti-aircraft gun was
6 driving through the Old Town, would you have heard about it?
7 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner, that's stretching admissibility.
8 Don't answer that question.
9 MR. WEINER: They asked you about certain military commanders.
10 Did you see -- ever see any Croatian military commanders walking through
11 the Old Town in October, November, or December 1991?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Now, you testified yesterday that you were out with your sister
14 when an explosion occurred, and this is in October of 1991. And you
15 returned to your house after that explosion?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And when you looked out the window, you saw the Rupe Museum had
18 been damaged?
19 A. There was a hole in the roof of the museum, caused by a shell.
20 Q. Now, sometime after that, did you hear some sort of whizzing
22 A. From the other side of the house, the one facing east, on
23 Siroka Street.
24 Q. And what did you do after you heard the whizzing sound?
25 A. I threw myself on the floor of my own room, backwards. I fell
2 Q. And did you hear any noise after that?
3 A. Well, yes. Immediately after the whirring sound of the shell, I
4 heard an explosion.
5 Q. And did you look out the window to see what damage was caused by
6 that explosion?
7 A. I saw pieces of roof tiles outside on the street, but I couldn't
8 see more damage, because that was behind me, on the roof. I could only
9 see that once I came out into the street.
10 Q. And whose house was damaged, the roof tiles and the roof?
11 A. That was Mr. Pecar's house.
12 Q. And do you know who was living in that house?
13 A. His relatives.
14 Q. And you knew them?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MR. WEINER: No further questions.
18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Mr. Weiner.
19 Mr. Petrovic.
20 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I have your
21 patience for two or three minutes, by your leave, of course?
22 JUDGE PARKER: You wish to ask more questions?
23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Just two other questions, in
24 connection with the map that has just been shown.
25 JUDGE PARKER: Very well.
1 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Two minutes, not more.
2 JUDGE PARKER: I'll start my stop watch now, Mr. Petrovic.
3 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Please take my word for it, Your
5 Can the witness please be shown Exhibit P --
6 JUDGE PARKER: 12.
7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can the -- P12.
8 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Petrovic:
9 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Grbic, do you know about maps?
10 A. Yes, I do, quite well.
11 Q. Can you see the proportions indicated, the scale indicated in the
12 lower left corner of the map?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Can you point out the Bokar tower on the map for the Chamber? Can
15 you point out where the Lovrijenac fort is on the map? By using this
16 scale from 0 to 200 metres, from the western corner of the Bokar tower and
17 the eastern corner of the Lovrijenac fort, what is the distance?
18 A. About a hundred metres.
19 Q. Very well. The Bokar tower, is it in the Old Town?
20 A. It's part of the town wall, as you can tell by looking at the map.
21 Q. The Lovrijenac tower, is it part of the cultural and historical
22 heritage of the Old Town?
23 A. It's not part of the wall, but it is part of the town's cultural
25 Q. So that should amount to about 140 metres between the Bokar tower
1 and the Lovrijenac fort?
2 A. When I look at it now, it seems even more.
3 Q. Thank you very much. Just another question. Can you please have
4 a look at the upper left corner, Anice Boskovic Street, this small green
5 area indicated on the map.
6 A. Yes, I can see it.
7 Q. Is that the Bogisic park?
8 A. No. That's just one section of the Bogisic park.
9 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may we please have the
10 record reflect the following: The document P12 was shown. In the upper
11 left corner of the document there's a green area. The witness indicated
12 that this green area next to Anice Boskovic Street is a section, in fact,
13 of the Bogisic park.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But it goes on.
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you very much,
16 Your Honours. No further questions.
17 JUDGE PARKER: Is there anything further, Mr. Weiner?
18 MR. WEINER: No, nothing further.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
20 Mr. Grbic, I'm pleased to be able to tell you that that's the end
21 of your evidence. Thank you very much for coming and for the assistance
22 that you've given to us, and you are now free to go and do whatever you
23 wish. Thank you.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.
25 [The witness withdrew]
1 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Weiner.
2 MR. WEINER: Yes. Before the next witness is called, I would like
3 to introduce a member of our staff, a new member of our staff, from the
4 Sydney Australia bar, barrister David Re is with us. The next witness
5 will be called, Mr. Mustac, and Ms. Gina Butler will be handling that
7 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Butler.
8 If the witness could be called.
9 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
10 [The witness entered court]
11 JUDGE PARKER: If you would please take the affirmation now,
12 Mr. Mustac.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Certainly, Your Honour.
14 WITNESS: IVAN MUSTAC
15 [Witness answered through interpreter]
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
17 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
18 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you very much. If you'd be seated.
19 Ms. Butler.
20 MR. RE: Before Ms. Butler starts, Your Honour, could I just
21 inform Your Honours that the Prosecution has in Court with us today,
22 seated on the side, a legal intern working with us from Australia,
23 Ms. Yasmine Ahmed, A-h-m-e-d. Ms. Butler will take the witness.
24 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you.
25 Examined by Ms. Butler:
1 Q. Good morning, Witness. Would you please state your name.
2 A. Ivan Mustac.
3 Q. And what is your date of birth?
4 A. The 17th of December, 1935.
5 Q. And what is your ethnic background?
6 A. I'm a Croat.
7 Q. Could you tell us where you lived in 1991?
8 A. In 1991, I lived in the town of Dubrovnik.
9 Q. Is this in the area of the Old Town? Did you live in the area of
10 the Old Town?
11 A. In the Old Town, that's where I worked. On the 14th of October,
12 as of the 14th of October, I also resided within the Old Town.
13 Q. Okay. We'll talk about that. What is your -- what was your
14 occupation in 1991?
15 A. I was the head of the state archive at the Sponza Palace.
16 Q. And what was your title?
17 A. I was the head.
18 Q. Okay. And how long did you hold this position as the head of the
19 historical archives of the Sponza Palace?
20 A. From 1991 to 2000.
21 Q. And were you the director before the shelling in 1991?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And what were your qualifications for that position?
24 A. According to the law governing the rules and archives, I had taken
25 a state exam and I had an MA degree as a librarian and expert in archives.
1 Q. As the director, could you also tell the Court what your
2 responsibilities were.
3 A. My responsibilities were governed by the law on archives. I would
4 draw up a programme, a yearly programme, and I would see it through, make
5 sure that it was carried out. I would inform the ministry of culture, the
6 central authority on the progress of this programme.
7 Q. And who did you report to?
8 A. Directly to the ministry of culture, to the minister.
9 Q. Let me ask you, sir: Were you required to work at the palace on a
10 daily basis?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And have you ever held any political appointments?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. What appointment did you hold? What position did you hold?
15 A. I was a member of the Croatian parliament.
16 Q. And when were you -- were you elected into the parliament?
17 A. I was elected on the first democratic elections.
18 Q. And when was that, sir?
19 A. 1990.
20 Q. Excuse me, sir. I need to consult.
21 [Prosecution counsel confer]
22 MS. BUTLER:
23 Q. I'm sorry, sir. Let's go back. When were you elected?
24 A. In May, early May, 1990.
25 Q. If you were elected in 1990, how long did you hold this position
1 in the parliament?
2 A. A full term of office, until 1993.
3 Q. Sir, before --
4 MS. BUTLER: Your Honours, before I turn to my next section of
5 questions, I'd like to ask permission from the Chamber to present the
6 witness with the previous Prosecution Exhibit P13. I understand that the
7 reintroduction of this exhibit will require a new exhibit number.
8 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you. Yes.
9 MS. BUTLER:
10 Q. Sir, I'd like to discuss the Sponza Palace, where you were the
11 director of the historical archives. Using the map, can you tell us where
12 the palace is located, giving us the street address and maybe circling it
13 on the map? Sir, you might want to use the map itself, to your left --
14 I'm sorry, to your right. Sir, can you put a number 1 inside of that
15 circle, annotating the Sponza Palace.
16 A. [Marks]
17 MS. BUTLER: For the record, please note that the witness has
18 circled and put a number 1 by the location of the Sponza Palace.
19 Q. Thank you. Sir, how old is this building, the Sponza Palace?
20 A. The Sponza Palace was built in 1520.
21 Q. And what is the architectural features of the building?
22 A. It's a mixture between Renaissance and Gothic. It was built by
23 native architects and sculptors or carvers from Dubrovnik, Pasoje
24 Milicevic and the Andrici brothers.
25 Q. And can you please describe for the Trial Chamber the function of
1 the Sponza Palace in 1991.
2 A. In 1991, the Sponza Palace housed the state archives. It was
3 referred to as the historical archives at that time.
4 Q. And what is the significance of the archives?
5 A. The archives represent a memory of a nation, of a town, of a
6 country, its roots. All civilised countries hold their archives in high
7 esteem and hold it dearly. This is also a UNESCO World Heritage.
8 Q. And can you describe the specific contents of the archives, some
9 of the contents of the archives?
10 A. The peculiar nature of the Dubrovnik archives was their
11 continuity, meaning that all the documents had been preserved, even in
12 their entirety. The first document dates back to 1022. The archives of
13 the Dubrovnik Republic, obviously, are also there, everything that was
14 relevant for the work of an independent country like that, until the
15 country ceased to exist, in 1815.
16 Q. Let me ask you: How important is the Sponza Palace to the Old
18 A. The Sponza Palace is the second building of the Dubrovnik
19 Republic, in terms of its administration, in terms of its architectural
20 style, in terms of its official rank, it ranks among the most eminent
21 buildings in the Old Town. I would say the rector's palace was the most
22 important one, and the Sponza Palace comes a close second.
23 Q. Was there or has there ever been a military function associated
24 with the palace?
25 A. No, never, never.
1 Q. I'd like to spend some time with 1991. Specifically, what
2 precautions did you take when the war began in 1991 to protect the
4 A. We received assistance from the ministry of culture to protect the
5 windows with sandbags. In the cellar of the palace itself, we put away
6 the most valuable documents from the archives.
7 Q. And when did you first start taking these precautions?
8 A. Immediately, in October, after some parts of the town had been
9 attacked, such parts as Mokosica, Brgat, and Ploce, these sections of the
10 town. However, these are not within the Old Town.
11 Q. Thank you. Did you actually move the archives? Did you ever move
12 the archives from the Sponza Palace?
13 A. No, never.
14 Q. All right. Thank you. Let me ask you: Were you in the Old Town,
15 sir, on the 23rd of October?
16 A. I was at work, yes.
17 Q. And can you describe what happened that day?
18 A. The first attack took place on that day, the first attack on the
19 Old Town. I heard sounds of explosions, and I didn't expect that the Old
20 Town would be attacked, the historical town centre. Therefore, I was
21 quite surprised.
22 Q. Why were you surprised that the Old Town would not be attacked?
23 A. The Old Town, in its entirety, is a UNESCO World Heritage site. It
24 became a UNESCO World Heritage site back in 1989. There were plenty of
25 refugees all over the town. At that time, people who had fled Konavle,
1 more than 6.000; at least that's what people said. And everyone believed
2 that the Old Town itself would be spared, the Old Town.
3 Q. You've told us that you were at work when the shelling began.
4 Were you inside or outside your office, or the building?
5 A. I was in my office.
6 Q. And what time was this when the shelling began?
7 A. I think it was between 11.00 and 12.00 o'clock. I can't be
8 certain, however, that this is the exact time. It may have been a little
9 earlier or a little later.
10 Q. And how long did it last? How long did the shelling last?
11 A. It didn't last long. If I have to specify this in terms of time,
12 I cannot be quite sure that I'm able to say that. But it seems to me that
13 I heard a series of explosions, a sequence of explosions, and then it was
14 all over, perhaps within two minutes.
15 Q. And how do you know there was shelling?
16 A. We heard a tremendous explosion, and in the atrium of the palace
17 we found a large number of shrapnels. After a while, I went out of Sponza
18 and I had been told that the shell landed to a nearby street, towards
19 west, and that was Boskovic Street, which was rather near. I went there
20 to see for myself, and I saw that it was true, and I saw the damage
21 inflicted by the shell.
22 Q. Thank you, sir. Approximately how many shells did you hear?
23 A. It's difficult to say now how many there were. Quite some time
24 has elapsed since then. But I think that that was a series of linked
25 explosions, and I had a feeling that there were more than one of them.
1 Whether two or three, I cannot say now for sure.
2 Q. Thank you, sir. Was there any damage to the archives?
3 A. At that time, only parts of the shells, meaning shrapnels, damaged
4 the roof, and we found pieces of the shell in the courtyard of the palace.
5 But the palace itself did not sustain any considerable damage.
6 Q. Did you personally walk around the building and inspect the
8 A. Yes, I did. That is why I said that the only damage was caused to
9 the roof and the roof tiles. But other than that, no other major damage
10 was caused.
11 Q. Thank you, sir. Did anything significant happen the following
12 day, say the 24th of October?
13 A. That was on the 23rd of October, and the following day was the
14 24th of October. And there was also shelling on the 24th, but I myself
15 didn't hear the explosions close to the very core, centre of the town.
16 Yes, we did hear explosions, and I know that one shell landed in the Old
17 Town port, but I honestly cannot tell you how many of them were fired, and
18 I even didn't know then, because I never asked.
19 Q. Sir, do you know about what time that shelling began?
20 A. I can't remember precisely now, but it seems to me that it
21 occurred approximately at the same time, at or thereabout, at noon or
22 thereabout, one hour, plus or minus. Please allow for this tolerance.
23 Q. Thank you, sir. Sir, let me ask you: Do you know a
24 Mr. Marinovic?
25 A. Yes, I know Mr. Marinovic.
1 Q. Who was he, sir? Who was he?
2 A. He was a JNA colonel and a commander of the Trebinje garrison.
3 Trebinje is a town close to Dubrovnik. And he had undertaken the task of
4 organising the defence of Dubrovnik.
5 Q. And sir, what is his first name?
6 A. His first name is Nojko, Nojko Marinovic.
7 Q. And did you have any communications with Mr. -- I'm sorry, with
8 Colonel Marinovic?
9 A. I knew him well, and we met on occasions and talked to each other.
10 Q. Did you have talks with him in November? Did you speak to him in
12 A. Yes, I did.
13 Q. And what was the nature of those communications?
14 A. The 1st of November, I was preparing myself to go and attend the
15 session of the Croatian parliament, and I wanted to take the opportunity
16 to travel on the so-called Libertas Convoy, from Dubrovnik, which was
17 under the blockade at the time, to Rijeka, and then onwards to Zagreb.
18 And Colonel Marinovic then told me that he had a very important message
19 for General Tus, for me to convey to him.
20 Q. What was that message?
21 A. He virtually told me the following: "Please tell Mr. -- General
22 Tus that Dubrovnik has no ammunition, no weapons. Tell him that we have
23 one recoilless gun. And with that, Dubrovnik is unable to defend itself."
24 Q. And were you able to deliver this message to the General?
25 A. Yes, I was.
1 Q. And what was the General's response?
2 A. I met with the General in Zagreb, in Tkalciceva Street. Before
3 that, his headquarters had been shelled. It was -- it used to be situated
4 on Dubravkin Put in Zagreb. The General received me. He didn't have any
5 insignia upon him. I knew him from photographs. He put his hand on my
6 shoulder and told me the following: "Sir, whatever Croatia has at its
7 disposal at the moment, if we were to transfer that to the Dubrovnik
8 theatre of battle, that would be too little, because that is incomparable
9 to the power and force that the Yugoslav army surrounding Dubrovnik has."
10 Then I asked him: "What are our prospects, our chances? What do
11 you think?"
12 He looked at me and said: "I truly don't know."
13 Q. Sir, did you attend a parliament meeting in November?
14 A. Yes. The session was held on the 8th of November, and I attended
15 this session.
16 Q. And how did you get there?
17 A. I sailed on a ship from Dubrovnik to Rijeka, and then in a car
18 from Rijeka via Slovenia, to Zagreb, and this car belonged to the deputies
19 of the Croatian parliament who resided in Rijeka.
20 Q. So I understand that the parliament met in Zagreb. What was
21 discussed at that meeting?
22 A. The only and the most important item on the agenda was the
23 declaration of independence of a sovereign state of Croatia and the
24 severance of all relations with the then-Yugoslavia.
25 Q. Thank you, sir. And where did you go after the meeting in Zagreb?
1 A. I sought a possibility to transport humanitarian aid that had
2 already been collected in Rijeka through the offices of the Red Cross and
3 the Caritas charitable organisation, and for that purpose I asked the
4 ministry of the maritime to place a ship at my disposal. They said that
5 they could do that but that they couldn't issue me a permit for that.
6 Then I sought assistance everywhere. I asked the bishop, Koksa, that --
7 but he also replied that he was unable to provide this kind of permit for
9 Since at the time an international acumen congress of religious
10 organisations was taking place in Zagreb, a friend of mine, Zdravko Mrsic,
11 drew that to my attention. The venue of the congress was the
12 Intercontinental Hotel. I went there, and I was -- I was told that there
13 I could find the president of the All European Jewish Community, Mr. Jean
14 Cahn. I asked him directly if we could sail under the Jewish flag and to
15 ask them to request this on our behalf from the Jewish community and
16 thereby allow us to transport the humanitarian aid from Rijeka to
18 Q. Were you able to get this aid back to Dubrovnik?
19 A. Yes, we were. The Jewish community charged Mr. Jakov Bienenfeld,
20 member of the Jewish community, with the task of providing this permit
21 without me being involved in that. He got the permit through General
22 Raseta, and it was signed by Admiral Brovet. The permit provided that
23 only a five-member crew could be on board the ship, not more than that.
24 Q. Can you tell us, sir: Who was General Raseta?
25 A. General Raseta was at the time the commander of the 5th Military
1 District, if I remember correctly. I cannot say for sure whether he was
2 the commander or the deputy commander. And he was a liaison officer
3 through whom we managed to obtain this permit.
4 Q. Thank you, sir. When did you return to Dubrovnik?
5 A. We set sail on or about the 15th of November, and we reached
6 Dubrovnik on the night between the 17th and 18th of November. Usually,
7 journalists reported that it took place on the 18th, because that was the
8 day when they arrived and saw this ship.
9 Q. And did you remain in Dubrovnik in November?
10 A. After we took the humanitarian aid to the shore - and the name of
11 the ship was "ILIRIJA" - I took the next ship, which was "LIBURNIJA" and I
12 returned to Rijeka.
13 Q. And when did you return back to Dubrovnik?
14 A. I returned to Dubrovnik on the 26th or 27th. It was night again.
15 But I arrived there after terrible difficulties.
16 Q. [Previous translation continues]... difficulties, sir?
17 A. On board the ship, I had fallen ill. According to the doctor's
18 diagnosis, it was salmonella, and the ambulance was waiting for me on the
19 dock because the captain sent the word to the shore, and I was taken to
20 the hospital, where I stayed until the 4th of December.
21 Q. After you -- you told us that you reached -- I'm sorry. You told
22 us that you contracted salmonella, you were in the hospital, you came out
23 on the 4th of December. Did you hear anything significant that may have
24 happened in the Old Town in November?
25 A. While I was in hospital, my friends came to see me and told me
1 that, on the 13th of November, a major attack was launched on Dubrovnik
2 and that many buildings, many landmarks were damaged during the attack.
3 Of course, I was most interested to hear what happened with the Sponza.
4 They told me that its roof had been hit in several places, that the wall
5 carvings were damaged, that the Franciscan, the Dominican monasteries were
6 also damaged, including the cathedral, and other palaces.
7 Q. Sir, after you were released from the hospital, did you personally
8 inspect any of the damage to the Sponza Palace?
9 A. Yes, although my health condition was not exactly good. I went
10 there and I saw not all the details, but on the following day I
11 scrutinised it more carefully and realised that the Sponza Palace -- that
12 the roof of the Sponza Palace had been hit on the east side, on the south
13 side, and on the west side. But those surfaces had already been covered
14 with PVC sheets, due to which the palace was protected from the rain. But
15 there were no roof tiles replaced as yet.
16 Q. Thank you, sir. And during the October and November shelling
17 incidents, did you file any official reports?
18 A. My duty was, because as the head I bear both moral and material
19 responsibility for whatever is housed inside the archive building, not the
20 building itself only. So I duly filed a report to the minister. But the
21 same report had already been submitted by other institutions that were
22 responsible for this kind of reporting, and by that I mean to the
23 Institute for Protection of Monuments. And there was another institution
24 of the Association of Friends of Dubrovnik, who were engaged in the
25 reconstruction of Dubrovnik. However, the most official report went from
1 the Institute for Protection of Historical Monuments.
2 Q. Thank you, sir. Sir, were you aware of any communications between
3 the Croatian authorities and the Yugoslavian authorities regarding the
5 A. A commission was established in the town of Dubrovnik, an official
6 commission, which communicated with representatives of the Yugoslav army.
7 Secondly, there were European observers in the town, who also communicated
8 with the JNA. And thirdly, cultural institutions, such as the office of
9 Mr. Federico Mayo [phoen] was operating in the town. Mr. Mayo was the
10 UNESCO director. For several months, Mr. Bruno Carnez and Mr. Kaiser were
11 in the town, and I also had communications with them. These two gentlemen
12 sent their reports to UNESCO about the damage that Dubrovnik had incurred.
13 Q. Did you participate in any of the official communications?
14 A. I only participated in the work of the commission, which just
15 recorded the damage sustained by the palace. It was my duty to open the
16 door for them, and they were not allowed to do an inspection in my
17 absence. Other than that, I had no other communications.
18 Q. Thank you, sir. Were you aware of any letters of protest sent to
19 the Yugoslavian authorities?
20 A. The mayor of Dubrovnik, and other cultural institutions, including
21 the bishop of the town, sent daily letters to all renowned personalities,
22 whether it be politicians, artists, and other known figures all over the
23 world. And I knew everything about this campaign, because I was at such a
24 place where I could be at the source of all these events. Anyway, all
25 these letters have been published in a book entitled "Dubrovnik in the
1 War, Between 1992 and 1993."
2 Q. Thank you, sir. Let us turn to the 6th of December. You told us
3 you were in the hospital when you returned from Rijeka, until the 4th of
4 December. Where were you on the 6th of December?
5 A. On the 6th of December, I was in my flat - sorry - in my friend's
6 flat, in Zamanjina Street number 7.
7 Q. What happened that day?
8 A. That is the day which left a terrible impression on me, and I may
9 say that ever since then I have become a different person emotionally. As
10 far as I can remember, the shelling started before 6.00 a.m. Shells were
11 falling on the town, and all of that woke me up. I instinctively, because
12 I was living on the worst position floor. It's a house with three floors
13 and I was on the third floor. I went down to the ground floor. All the
14 old Dubrovnik houses have a kind of arch on the ground floor. Usually the
15 floors are made of wood. And in this vault, in fact, I found a family
16 with two children and two elderly -- and an elderly couple, and I was a
17 seventh individual in this space which we may call a kind of shelter.
18 Q. And how long did you stay in that shelter?
19 A. I must say that it seemed to me an eternity while the shelling was
20 going on. The time virtually stopped for me. Because I thought myself to
21 be outside any time or space. My only thought was when I'm going to die.
22 But I did feel that the shelling became intermittent, and it happened at
23 around 11.00 o'clock, when I noticed that the shelling was landing apart
24 from one another.
25 I ran out, and I wanted to reach the Sponza Palace because I knew
1 that I had a safe shelter there.
2 Q. Sir, from where you were staying, how far away was the Sponza
4 A. About 40 metres. It depends from which direction you look at the
5 palace. The west side was closest to me, and it was about 40 metres away.
6 If we talk about the eastern or southern side, then it's further away. So
7 I can say that it was 40 metres away.
8 Q. Sir, can we use the map. And I'd like to ask you to circle the
9 street that your residence was on. Can you use the letter "A", showing
10 your residence.
11 A. [Marks]
12 Q. Thank you, sir. And sir, did you eventually reach the Sponza
14 A. Yes, I did.
15 Q. What did you notice on your way to the palace?
16 A. In this spooky space, I met a young man on the corner of Dropceva
17 Street, who told me that -- in fact, he asked me: "Where are you going?
18 You're going to get killed." I didn't say anything to him. I just
19 turned away. But I recognised the young man as Pavo Urban. He was the
20 son of a colleague of mine. She was the chief librarian and I was the
21 head of the archive.
22 Q. Did you ever see Mr. Urban again?
23 A. No, I never saw him again.
24 Q. Did you come to learn anything about Mr. Urban?
25 A. This horror and hell of shelling stopped at about 4.00 p.m., if
1 I'm not wrong. But I can't tell you exactly. I didn't look at my watch.
2 Most probably I never looked at my watch. But I do remember that it was
3 still daylight. I went out. There were people already in the streets.
4 And the first -- my encounter with those people was horror and fear on
5 their faces, and some of them told me that Pavo Urban had been killed.
6 That happened on the south side of the palace, and there's an arch there.
7 Looking from the east, from the direction of Ploce, there is in fact a
8 niche and a jeweller's store and he probably sought shelter there, and
9 that is the place he was found dead. That was the first information I
10 heard about Pavo Urban.
11 Q. Sir, thank you. Did you observe any damage to the Sponza Palace
12 when you came out?
13 A. It's difficult to say what I observed. It's a horrendous
14 situation when your reason cannot function, especially in people who are
15 not skillful in wars and waging wars. I only saw the smoke on the main
16 street, which is called Stradun, and I saw fire at the end of the street,
17 where there's a square. The whole town was shrouded in smoke. One could
18 feel a very strange odour. It's difficult to explain. And the wind was
19 terribly strong. It was cold. So that would be generally, if we are
20 going to put this into Judo-Christian terms, an apocalypse. And something
21 had fallen from the skies, and you never knew whether it was going to hit
22 on your head or not.
23 Q. Thank you, sir. Sir, were the archives damaged?
24 A. I only saw that the next day. I had a more careful look. That
25 evening, all my attention was on the fire that was raging through the
1 town. The next day I realised that there was major damage too. The worst
2 damage was to the roof. The side of the roof facing west, about 30 square
3 metres. The side facing south, about 12; and the side facing east,
4 about 10. The side facing south has a supporting beam, and this beam was
5 blown to smithereens. This is built in wood. The Sponza Palace has an
6 axis which stretches in a north/south direction, and the side facing south
7 is entirely made of wood, whereas the side facing north is made of
8 reinforced concrete, due to various problems related to landslides. But I
9 don't think we should go any further into this now. The reinforced
10 concrete plate supporting the wall to the west was severely damaged, and
11 the supporting wooden beam broke. The cement coating displayed cracks.
12 The archives themselves, however, the files, were not damaged.
13 There was more damage in the courtyard. The plastic sheeting, the
14 architectural ornaments, especially on the side of the courtyard facing
15 north, the monogram of Christ, or a eulogy to Dubrovnik measures, which is
16 a text that is carved into the wall of the courtyard. The capitals too
17 were damaged, the Acanthus leaves and so on and so forth.
18 Q. Did you notice any other damage to other buildings or palaces in
19 the Old Town?
20 A. Yes. As I said, there were palaces across the town that were
21 ablaze. It was there for all to see. It was only later that you could
22 realise that more damage had been done.
23 Q. Sir, can I ask you to mark these buildings on the map in
24 alphabetical order, the buildings that you saw damaged and the palaces
25 that you saw. Can you also tell us the name of the street?
1 A. Yes, I'll do my best.
2 A. Here we have the street known as Od Sigurate.
3 Q. Okay. Can you circle that street and use the letter "B."
4 A. [Marks]
5 Q. Take us to the next street, sir.
6 A. [Marks]
7 Q. Okay, sir. Can you walk us through this map that you've made for
8 us. You started off with Od Sigurate Street. How many buildings or
9 palaces were damaged, did you see?
10 A. Two palaces. One is the Festival Palace, and the other one is the
11 adjacent one that had caught fire after the Festival Palace had been hit.
12 So it just caught fire. I believe that the fire did not break out because
13 it received a direct hit, but it caught fire from the other building.
14 Q. Can you take us to the next street.
15 A. The next street is between the palaces. This is a residential
16 building and cannot be placed in the same category as the palaces. This
17 would not be the highest category. It would not be classified as A, but
18 rather, as B, in terms of cultural heritage.
19 Q. What was the name of the street or the area?
20 A. The name of the street is Izmedju Polaca.
21 Q. Okay. Thank you. And the next street?
22 A. The next street is Miha Pracata. There's another palace there. I
23 think it's at number 6.
24 The next street is Od Puca, number 11 and number 16, I believe.
25 The next street is at the corner of Siroka, number 6.
1 And the next one is St. Joseph's Street. Also Od Puca, and the
2 last one is Zlatariceva Street, but this is another residential building,
3 so I don't think it would be given top priority, such as a proper
4 architectural palace, a monument of culture, would be. It's not equally
6 So seven palaces, all in all, and two residential buildings, as I
7 would call them.
8 Q. Thank you, sir. Now, as you walked -- as you did a walk-about
9 throughout the town, did you find any fragments or shells or any shrapnel?
10 A. At the Sponza Palace, my palace, I found shells, which I picked up
11 and stored away in the cellar. I retired in 2000. I believe that those
12 shells are still there as some sort of testimony to something which I
13 never want to see happening again. There was also a lot of shrapnel that
14 we didn't pick up. In addition to those palaces, I saw many other damaged
15 buildings, such as, for example, the monastery of the Little Brethren, the
16 Franciscan monastery, St. Blaise cathedral, St. Blaise and the cathedral,
17 the pavement of the main street, which also has a great historical
18 significance. There were craters drilled by shells, and they stayed there
19 for a long time before the street was re-paved. The general idea -- and
20 of course, I'm speaking after seeing the reports, being no expert myself.
21 It is generally believed that over 50 per cent of the buildings
22 inside the Old Town were damaged, over 50 per cent, that is. I believe
23 that is the figure. The figure was 58 per cent, I believe, but certainly
24 it was over 50 per cent.
25 Q. Sir, do you have any idea of the monetary costs for the repairs to
1 the Sponza Palace?
2 A. Each and every report of the special commission contained all the
3 costs specified. I remember that the figure was over $100.000 at the
4 time, or 100.000 German marks. I can't be sure now, however. I do
5 believe that the sum was expressed in dollars, and it was an amount over
6 100.000. 107.000 or 108.000, I believe. That's only the damage to the
7 Sponza Palace.
8 Q. Thank you, sir. Sir, I just have a few more questions for you.
9 Did you see any military presence in the Old Town during October,
10 November, or December of 1991?
11 A. The Old Town was a civilised place with a lot of history, and
12 always in the town there were police officers upholding law and order, and
13 obviously there was a police presence in the town. I saw two funny
14 individuals carrying rifles of sorts, funny-looking rifles, at the Pile
15 gate, on the western approach to town. And at the other gate, the Ploce
16 gate, to the east. I used to visit often, even later, because a curfew
17 had been imposed. Someone told me to stop right where I was. I looked at
18 that funny-looking man and I smiled. I said to myself: My God, what is
19 this? Are these supposed to be our defenders, with weapons like that? At
20 any rate, that's what I saw.
21 Furthermore, I saw uniformed people moving about town, but those
22 were locals. But they didn't reside there, nor was there any kind of
23 barracks in the town itself. They just came and left. So in answer to
24 your question, that would be about it.
25 Q. Thank you, sir. Did you see any outgoing fire from the Old Town
1 on the 6th of December, 1991?
2 A. No, no. No, I didn't. Not only did I not see anything like that,
3 but by virtue of my position in my official capacity, I would have known
4 had anything like that happened. But I was simply not aware of anything
5 like that.
6 MS. BUTLER: Your Honour, I notice the time is 12.30. Would you
7 like for us to take a break? I just have a few more questions.
8 JUDGE PARKER: All right. I was waiting. I thought you were able
9 to finish. But we'll have the break and then finish after the break.
10 MS. BUTLER: Thank you, sir.
11 JUDGE PARKER: There will be a break of 20 minutes, Mr. Mustac,
12 and if you could continue then.
13 --- Recess taken at 12.31 p.m.
14 --- On resuming at 12.58 p.m.
15 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Butler.
16 MS. BUTLER: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Your Honours, I want to remain within my time, but I just want to
18 clarify a few points with the witness.
19 Q. Sir, I notice that you made reference to buildings being
20 classified as A or B. Can you tell us what these classifications refer
22 A. It is generally known that monuments of culture are classified in
23 categories starting with 0, which is World Heritage; A is National
24 Heritage; B is Environmental Heritage; and C is a lower category. You
25 might say that peculiar features of a certain region are classified as
1 monument C.
2 Q. Is a UNESCO classification or a local classification?
3 A. I'm not sure about this being official UNESCO classification, but
4 that's all I know about it. Regarding the distinctions between various
5 monuments of culture. The Old Town itself, the historical Old Town
6 centre, referred in Latin as Intra Muros has been classed as UNESCO World
7 Heritage since 1979. Therefore, each individual part of this heritage is
8 under special protection.
9 Q. Sir, speaking of UNESCO, were there any UNESCO flags flying in the
10 Old Town?
11 A. Yes. Yes, there were UNESCO flags inside the Old Town, as well as
12 the official UNESCO emblem, a well-known one, which was all over these
13 buildings that I spoke about, those classified as A monuments. The Sponza
14 Palace, certain monasteries, the cathedral, St. Blaise. Not each and
15 every building bore this sign.
16 Q. Do you know when they were put up, the flags were first put up?
17 A. I can't remember specifically when, but I can say that when I
18 arrived in town in mid-October, the flags were already there.
19 Q. Okay, sir. Just a few more questions. I'd like to clarify the
20 map that we've annotated with the different buildings that you saw
21 damaged. Can we go back to the map? What I'd like to do is take another
22 walk through the map. I'd like for you to put on the record the street
23 names. I'd like you also to think about what these buildings were used
24 for. Were they religious, were they residential, were they cultural, or
25 were they works of art and science. If you can help me with that, I would
1 appreciate it.
2 Okay. Let's start with building -- the first building that we
4 A. The first two buildings are on Od Sigurate Street. One was the
5 headquarters of the Dubrovnik Summer Festival, and the other was a
6 residential building, locally referred to as a palace. It was not a
7 public building. It was privately used.
8 Q. As a residence?
9 A. All the other buildings -- yes. All the remaining buildings were
10 residential buildings, just that in the ground floor there's usually a
11 shop or a bar.
12 MS. BUTLER: Okay. For the record, we've marked Od Sigurate
13 Street, with the - I'm sorry - with the letter A.
14 Q. Is that correct?
15 A. Yes, that's correct.
16 JUDGE PARKER: I thought the witness was referring to the
17 buildings marked B and C. Am I wrong? Each of the buildings are marked
18 alphabetically from B to I. The building A was where Mr. Mustac was
19 sleeping --
20 MS. BUTLER: I'm sorry, sir. You're right.
21 JUDGE PARKER: -- on the night.
22 MS. BUTLER: Thank you for that correction. Okay.
23 Q. Let's go back to building A. Building A is the building that you
24 were sleeping in?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And the name of the street?
2 A. Zamanjina Street. That is by and large a residential street, or
3 rather, residential building, with family flats, and that's where I lived.
4 It did not have any public use.
5 Q. Okay. Let's go to letter B.
6 A. That's Od Sigurate Street, which is where the headquarters of the
7 Dubrovnik Summer Festival were located. This building had an official
8 use, a public use, a cultural institution. The building next to it was
9 another residential building which did not have any public use.
10 Q. Thank you, sir. Let's go to letter C.
11 A. This was a residential building, or palace, between -- or rather,
12 in Izmedja Polaca Street.
13 Q. Sir, can you tell us whether this building was dedicated to
14 religion, charity, and education, the arts and science, or historic
15 monument or work of art and science?
16 A. You mean the building marked as C?
17 Q. Yes, sir.
18 A. It was a residential building. As far as I know, at least.
19 Q. Thank you, sir. Let's go to building D.
20 A. This was also a palace with its own features, architectural
21 features, of course, and that's why it was classified as a palace, but it
22 was used for residential purposes.
23 Q. Thank you, sir. And the name of that street?
24 A. Miha Pracata Street.
25 Q. Thank you, sir. Let's go to letter E.
1 A. Yes. This was also a residential building in Od Puca Street, or
2 rather, this is the corner of Od Puca Street and Siroka Street. It's a
3 residential building.
4 Q. Thank you, sir. Let's go to the letter F.
5 A. This is also a residential building. The street is Od Puca.
6 Q. Thank you, sir. Let's go to the letter G.
7 A. This is also Od Puca Street. I think the number is 11. This is a
8 residential building. It didn't have any public use.
9 Q. Continue on to the letter H.
10 A. This is also a residential building on Zlatariceva Street. It's
11 not a public building.
12 Q. Following on with the letter I.
13 A. This is what we refer to as St. Joseph's Street. This is also a
14 residential building, with shops on the ground floor. These shops were
15 well known, the shops on this street.
16 Q. Sir, you've given us some additional buildings that were damaged,
17 particularly the monastery. Was that used as a religious function?
18 A. Yes. The Franciscan monastery and the Dominican monastery are
19 famous monasteries in Dubrovnik. They have very famous libraries, where
20 many manuscripts are kept, as well as valuable old books.
21 Q. How about the Franciscan monastery? Was it active, an active
23 A. Yes. Yes. The monastery is adjacent to the church, which was a
24 place of worship and used as such. Mass was celebrated there. That's the
25 church of the Little Brethren, as it was known. And the monastery also
1 houses a library, a world-famous library, that was unfortunately damaged.
2 It was early this month that the reconstruction was completed and the
3 books were returned to their place.
4 Q. And, sir, the St. Blaise cathedral, was that an active church?
5 A. St. Blaise is not the cathedral. That's a different church. It's
6 a church the patron saint of which is St. Blaise. The cathedral is
7 another church, as I said, and both churches were hit, but mass was
8 celebrated throughout.
9 Q. Sir, to make the record clear, would you mind changing the
10 number 1 on the Sponza Palace to a letter S, for clarification.
11 A. [Marks]
12 Q. Thank you, sir. And sir, I also note that we have not marked the
13 place where you saw Pavo Urban at his last time [sic]. Can you mark that
14 with the letter X.
15 A. [Marks]
16 Q. Thank you, sir. Sir, when you finished walking around the Old
17 Town on the 6th of December, what time did you return to your home?
18 A. I had no home to go to, to begin with, because on the bed where I
19 slept there was a shell lying on the bed itself. It had fallen through
20 the roof. And I was put up by the other residents in the house, so I
21 stayed with them. I returned. If I can have the Honourable Chamber's
22 understanding on this. I was not exactly looking at my watch. This was
23 the furthest thing from my mind. I was quite shocked overall, and I felt
24 as someone who was about to get killed himself. I returned in the
25 evening. It may have been about 7.00 o'clock in the evening, when all
1 other people went home.
2 Q. Just two questions, sir. Going back to the UNESCO flags: Were
3 they also flying in November and in December? I think you said you may
4 have saw them in October. But when -- were they also flying in November
5 and December?
6 A. Yes, throughout, throughout the entire time, the flags were there,
7 in October, in November, December, and January. They were never removed.
8 Q. Thank you, sir. My last question for you: Looking back at this
9 shelling in October, November, and December, how did it really make you
10 feel? How did you feel?
11 A. This is very difficult for me. I felt desperation, hopelessness.
12 I felt as if I would never see my nearest and dearest again. I was not
13 aware of their fate at the time. I cried. But not only I cried, everyone
14 cried, everyone I came across. If you ask me what my thoughts were at the
15 time, I prayed, and prayed. Being a believer, all I could do was pray.
16 But I refused to hate. I refused to hate even those who, God knows why,
17 had fired the shell that fell on my bed while I was away. It was a
18 dreadful moment in life, but I have since become a different person, and I
19 view the world in a different manner now. It was some sort of catharsis
20 for me, a cleansing experience. I wish this had never happened, and I
21 wish this never happens again to anyone.
22 I wish it were possible for everyone to live in peace, in love.
23 We are all human. The race doesn't matter. I don't think I am alone in
24 believing this. I am certain that there are many people who share this
25 belief of mine. So this, for me, is one of the results of the war. In
1 this case, it is a positive, desirable result.
2 MS. BUTLER: Thank you, sir, for your testimony. Sir, I would ask
3 you to sign the map, put your name on the map, give your signature and
4 today's date.
5 And then, Your Honours, I'd like to offer this map into evidence.
6 THE WITNESS: [Marks]
7 JUDGE PARKER: It will be received when the witness has completed
8 his signature.
9 THE REGISTRAR: It will be Prosecution Exhibit P39.
10 MS. BUTLER: Your Honours, that concludes my testimony -- I mean,
11 my examination.
12 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you, Ms. Butler.
13 Mr. Petrovic.
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
15 May I please have the Court's indulgence? Can I have the lectern
16 please. It would make my cross-examination a lot easier. As
17 unfortunately we only seems to have this one lectern in the courtroom to
18 go around.
19 Cross-examined by Mr. Petrovic:
20 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Mustac. My name is Vladimir
21 Petrovic. I represent General Strugar before this Tribunal.
22 A. Good afternoon.
23 Q. Mr. Mustac, please tell me: Have you ever set eyes on a document
24 known as preliminary report on the damage to buildings in the Old Town of
25 Dubrovnik, dated the 6th of January, 1992? This document provides a
1 detailed account of all the damage caused to the Old Town in October,
2 November, and December 1991.
3 A. I believe I saw this document, if that is the document signed by
4 architect Matko Vetma.
5 Q. Can you please tell me: When was the last time you saw this
7 A. I saw it before I arrived in The Hague.
8 Q. Did you perhaps see it during your stay in The Hague?
9 A. I have a copy of the document on me. I've had occasion to look at
10 that document.
11 Q. Is this the document that was signed by Ms. Paula Kolic and Ivica
13 A. Yes, that's correct.
14 Q. When you reviewed this document, did you see exactly -- what does
15 it say? When was an on-site investigation conducted, precisely, if you
17 A. I didn't pay attention to that particular detail, but I will agree
18 with whatever you say.
19 Q. It says that an on-site investigation was carried out on the 10th
20 of December, 1999 [As interpreted], giving the exact time of day. Is that
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. I believe that on examination-in-chief you said today that there
24 had been an earlier on-site investigation. Am I right?
25 A. I don't know that I said that. What I said is the following:
1 There were commissions that arrived, whether officially or not, on a daily
2 basis, and every day we would have a look. This institute for the
3 protection of monuments of culture and nature and the state archives were
4 under the same roof.
5 Q. This report dated the 10th of December, 1991, signed by Ms. Kolic
6 and Mr. Zila, as the title of this extensive document would seem to
7 indicate, damage caused in the time period of October, November, and
8 December 1991?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. This report, does it also indicate which damage was caused in
11 October, which was caused in November, and which in December? Does it
12 distinguish between the three different months?
13 A. Yes, there is a certain amount of distinction, but not a very
14 detailed list. As far as I remember, the focus was on the destruction of
15 the 6th of December, and there are also photographs of destruction that
16 occurred on the same day.
17 Q. Are these photos that were made after the 6th of December, later
18 on, in other words?
19 A. Yes, they were. Perhaps a day or two later, on the 7th, for
21 Q. That's all right. It doesn't make any difference.
22 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can we have the usher's assistance,
23 please? I would like to show the witness a photograph. This photograph
24 is from a 65 ter Rule exhibit, Exhibit 35. This is the east wing of the
25 Sponza Palace. Can you please place this in front of the witness.
1 Q. Can you have a look and tell me if this is the photograph we're
2 talking about.
3 A. Yes, it is.
4 Q. Can you tell me whether what we're looking at here, at the top of
5 the photograph, is this the damage you're referring to?
6 A. Yes. The white bits where the roof tiles are missing, this is
7 merely a photocopy, so the white areas would be the holes that were
8 covered over with nylon sheeting of some sort.
9 Q. Thank you very much.
10 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Can I have the usher's assistance
12 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for counsel, please.
13 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] This is the photograph from the
14 same document.
15 Q. Can you please tell us: What can we see on this photo?
16 A. This is also the left side, and there is some kind of hole in the
17 middle and on the end. So one may conclude that this could have been some
18 kind of damage.
19 Q. Was there any other damage on this part of the building, or is
20 that all, what we have seen on these two photos?
21 A. If I compare this photograph with the first one, then I couldn't
22 say that these holes are identical. So I couldn't say that this is an
23 identical photograph, whether it was made before the 6th, or on the 13th
24 of November, now I cannot say exactly, but I must say that they were not
1 Q. Have you noticed on the previous photograph, and on this
2 photograph as well, a difference that I'm sure you must have noticed it --
3 JUDGE PARKER: Ms. Butler.
4 MS. BUTLER: Yes. Sir, I'd just like to ask Defence if you can
5 give us a reference or page number or ERN number that you're referring to
6 these photographs so that we can look at them as well.
7 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Of course. As I said, it's 65 ter
8 document, marked 35, ERN, for the first photograph, was 10169839. And
9 this one, this photograph, is 01069838.
10 Q. Do you notice that this damage here on this photograph, this hole,
11 is not covered with plastic?
12 A. Yes, I do.
13 Q. Whereas the previous two holes were covered with the plastic sheet
14 as a sort of protection?
15 A. I fully agree.
16 Q. Do you know why one part of the roof was protected while the other
17 wasn't? Was there any reason for that?
18 A. The reason was - and I do notice that - this is a report which
19 refers on the 6th of December, but also for the period between the 8th and
20 the 13th of November, and also 23rd and 24th October. Therefore, there
21 could be a confusion. Because in the legend, it does not say that this
22 particular damage was caused on a particular date. This is my
23 interpretation of that. So I stand by my statement that on the 6th of
24 December, the damage which I described was caused.
25 Q. Would you agree with me if I said that the first two holes were
1 probably inflicted earlier, in November or even back in October, and that
2 this last damage was probably caused in December?
3 A. I categorically deny that. Why I say no? Because I was an
4 eyewitness. Latin proverb: I saw it myself and heard many things. I
5 said that the south wing, or rather, its supporting beam, was smashed on
6 the 6th of December.
7 Q. Please let's not go back to this. Let us try and be as concise as
8 possible. If you think I'm wrong, just say that I'm wrong so that we can
9 proceed. So how do you explain that some of the damage was not protected
10 and the other was protected?
11 A. I construe this by assumption that this photograph was not -- it
12 was not dated the 6th of December.
13 MR. PETROVIC: Thank you, Mr. Usher.
14 Q. [Interpretation] Can you tell me, or do you remember --
15 MS. BUTLER: [Previous translation continues]... document for
17 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] No. No, thank you. I just wanted
18 to hear whether the witness knows anything about this. Otherwise, it's
19 not necessary.
20 Q. Were you present during the on-site investigation?
21 A. No. I was present -- I have to clarify this. I was present when
22 the commission visited the scene, but I did not -- I was not present there
23 while they described the situation. There was no need for that. I had
24 other commitments of my own. It took a long time. They took measures and
25 performed other acts.
1 Q. How long did it take?
2 A. I don't know. But one may assume that it takes some time to do
3 all the measuring, sketching, and writing a report.
4 Q. So they also photographed the damage on that same day?
5 A. Yes, they did.
6 Q. And these photographs were attached to their report, I presume,
7 some of the photographs, at least.
8 A. Most certainly, some of them were certainly attached to the report
9 as evidence.
10 Q. Since you have seen this document, can you tell me: What was the
11 reason that this report on the damage inflicted on the Sponza Palace is
12 never mentioned that this damage was caused either in October or November,
13 but exclusively and explicitly on the 6th of December?
14 A. I have no explanation for that. One should indeed ask the authors
15 of this report. However, I can ascertain and confirm what I have seen.
16 Q. Sir, I'm not disputing that. I'm asking you some of the things
17 which are important for my case. My desire is not to try and say that you
18 didn't see something that you claim you had seen.
19 Therefore, as you just said, this report encompasses all the
20 damage caused in October, November, and December; is that correct?
21 A. Yes, it is.
22 Q. And this report is dated 6th of December, 1991, or rather,
23 precisely, damaged caused on the 6th of December, 1991?
24 A. This document is self-explanatory. We cannot either add anything
25 or take away from it. It is as it is.
1 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] May I ask the usher please to show
2 the document to the witness.
3 Q. Is that a document that you read prior to coming to The Hague and
4 that the -- the copy of which you have in your possession? Have you read
5 this document?
6 A. Yes, I have.
7 Q. So this is the document that we are discussing now?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Can you please read for the Chamber just a few first lines:
10 Location, date, and type of projectiles. Could you please oblige me and
11 do that, because I don't have an English translation.
12 A. Location, Sveto Dominika Jedan [phoen] Sponza.
13 Q. Type?
14 A. Cultural.
15 THE INTERPRETER: Can the speakers please slow down. There's too
16 much information.
17 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. So this is the document that encompasses, as you just said, the
19 damage caused in October, November, and December 1991?
20 A. Forgive me. I have to repeat. The document is as it is. If
21 that's what is written there, then that's what it is. I cannot change it.
22 I wasn't the one who wrote it. If you have it before you, then it is as
23 it is. Even if I wanted to add something, then this original document
24 will only be valid.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] We don't need this document any
2 more. Please return it.
3 MS. BUTLER: Your Honour, I believe these documents should at
4 least be marked for identification, or identified for the record.
5 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I may do that.
6 However, I avoid doing that in order to reduce the volume of work. In
7 this instance, I agree to have this document marked. You can see
8 the ERN --
9 JUDGE PARKER: Do you want it as an exhibit?
10 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] -- 01069835. Your Honour, this
11 entire document will probably be tendered by the OTP. If I am now to
12 propose individual pieces of evidence, that would maybe create confusion
13 for all of this involved in this trial. However, if you instruct me to do
14 that and if that is going to facilitate primarily your work, then I am in
16 MS. BUTLER: Your Honour, we would be comfortable if he would just
17 identify the document on the record, if he would just give the document a
18 name, even if he doesn't tender it into evidence.
19 JUDGE PARKER: Could you please give the full and correct name of
20 the document, Mr. Petrovic, and that will overcome our concerns.
21 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it's entitled the
22 "Preliminary Report of the Institute for Protection of Culture and Nature
23 of Dubrovnik," compiled on the 6th of January, 1992. The number from the
24 report is 17-5, and it refers to the Sponza Palace. And the ERN number is
25 01069835. So I kindly ask that this document be marked for
1 identification. I would also kindly ask that these two photographs be
2 marked for identification, the ones that I had shown to the witness. They
3 were also part of the same document as the previous one. The photographs
4 were attached to this written report, and their ERN numbers were 01069838
5 and 01069839.
6 JUDGE PARKER: Thank you for that, Mr. Petrovic. My impression is
7 that with those two photographs, and with this report having been now
8 fully identified, they don't need to be separately marked for
9 identification. So if you would carry on.
10 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
11 Q. Tell me, please, Mr. Mustac: When did you join the Croatian
12 Democratic Union?
13 A. On the 11th of November, 1989.
14 Q. Was there any independent candidate who won the 1990 elections in
15 Dubrovnik, given the fact that you were one of the deputies elected at the
17 A. Yes. That was Dr. Hrvoje Kacic.
18 Q. Tell me: Did you take part in parliamentary discussions about the
19 changes of the Croatian constitution in 1990?
20 A. Yes, I did. I was a member of the constitutional commission.
21 Q. Can you tell me: What was the reason -- for what reason was the
22 Serbian people, according to these amendments to the constitution, removed
23 as a constitutive nation and proclaimed a national minority in Croatia?
24 A. At the time, we followed this logic: that each people have their
25 homeland and that the peoples living in other states are, in cultural
1 terms, in other aspects, that link them to their home country. Therefore,
2 they are a national minority of the people from the home country.
3 Therefore, we concluded that in the future constitution, the Serbian
4 people should be treated as a national minority.
5 Q. With hindsight, do you believe that that was a correct
6 political move?
7 A. Well, each time has its own requirements. Whether that was the
8 correct move or not ... At this moment, I still stick to the vote that I
9 gave to that constitution at the time. However, a future within the
10 European Union of all the peoples is for them to be Europeans and not to
11 be divided by borders.
12 Q. Tell me, please: Do you know when the parliament established the
13 National Guard Corps?
14 A. I can't remember the exact date, but most certainly it took place
15 in August or September 1991.
16 Q. Can you tell me: Since you joined the HDZ, the Croatian
17 Democratic Union, did their programme envisage the creation of an
18 independent state of Croatia?
19 A. Initially, our commitment was to a confederation of Yugoslavia.
20 Q. When did you receive instruction from the Ministry of Culture in
21 Zagreb to prepare your institution that you were head of for potential war
23 A. That took place immediately after parts of Dubrovnik came under
24 attack, such as Kosica [phoen], Prgat, Ploce, and others. Already on the
25 5th of October, one man was killed.
1 Q. I understand what you're saying very well. Did you receive any
2 such instruction in July, August, or September concerning potential war
3 operations in this area?
4 A. Of course we had instructions. We knew what was going on already
5 on the 23rd of September. The first attacks on Konavle took place, so we
6 knew what was going on. In September already, refugees from Konavle
7 started coming to Dubrovnik, so we knew that we had to be cautious.
8 Q. At the time already, you had all these instructions how to act
9 under such circumstances?
10 A. No, no, no. Not at that time. It came only later.
11 Q. Who was the chief administrator in Dubrovnik in October, November,
12 December 1991?
13 A. We had the mayor, who was called at the time the president of the
14 Municipal Assembly, the president of the Executive Council, the so-called
15 Crisis Staff, and that was the civilian administration in the town.
16 Q. What was the role of the Crisis Staff vis-a-vis the authorities
17 elected at local elections?
18 A. The Crisis Staff was a staff which took care of all the
19 requirements and needs of the town under extraordinary circumstances.
20 Therefore, one should take care of water supply, of town hygiene,
21 sanitation, health services, et cetera; in one word, everything that was
22 required for a town to function properly under extraordinary
24 Q. What was the relation between the Crisis Staff and the command of
25 the defence of Dubrovnik?
1 A. I couldn't say that honestly, because I wasn't a member of the
2 Crisis Staff or of the defence of the town of Dubrovnik. Whether they
3 communicated with each other, and to what extent, I cannot say.
4 JUDGE PARKER: Mr. Petrovic, is that a convenient time?
5 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
6 JUDGE PARKER: We will adjourn now for the day. I must ask you to
7 return tomorrow morning, Mr. Mustac, at 9.00.
8 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.46 p.m.,
9 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 29th day of
10 January 2004, at 9.00 a.m.