1 Monday, 3 May 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good afternoon to everybody in the courtroom.
6 Before the witness is being brought in, the Chamber would like to
7 raise two matters. The first is related to a problem we have dealt with
8 last week already. That was the issue concerning the tendering of
9 unofficial and uncorrected transcripts by the Prosecution. This matter
10 was raised by the Chamber during the proceedings on Monday, the 26th of
12 The Chamber has recently been informed that the Registry had --
13 in fact, all the transcripts tendered so far during the trial sessions
14 are, in fact, unofficial and uncorrected. Therefore, the Chamber would
15 like to ask you, Mr. Tolimir, whether you have any submissions in this
16 regard before the Chamber is inclined to deal with it further.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
18 I'd like to greet everybody present and all those following the
19 trial. May there be peace among us, and with God's will let these
20 proceedings pass smoothly.
21 Now, Mr. President, just those who -- the ones that are
22 corrected, not the ones that somebody is going to brush up. Thank you.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In fact, I didn't understand your position,
24 Mr. Tolimir. Do you have any submissions with regard to receiving of
25 transcripts of previous trials with some witnesses we are hearing here,
1 the corrected or the uncorrected and unofficial versions? The previous
2 versions were all uncorrected and unofficial, and, therefore, the Chamber
3 addressed this problem to the Prosecution to replace them by the official
4 and corrected versions. Do you have any comments to that?
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
6 When I said "corrected," I meant those that have been verified
7 and corrected and looked through officially, not those with mistakes that
8 have not been verified. Thank you.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
10 The Chamber, by this oral decision, instructs the Prosecution to
11 replace the unofficial and uncorrected transcripts that have been
12 admitted so far with the official and corrected versions. These
13 concerned Exhibits P29, P36, P37, P49, P60, P69, P97, P98, and P102.
14 The other matter the Chamber would like to raise is the
15 following: The Chamber has received an e-mail from the Defence, dated
16 27th of April, whereby the Defence seeks admission of a number of
17 exhibits used with Witness 53, that is, PW-015, during the
18 cross-examination on the 26th of April. The Chamber notes, firstly, that
19 two of the exhibits mentioned in the e-mail have, in fact, already been
20 admitted into evidence as D26 and D27. These are the 65 ter numbers 1D47
21 and 1D48 on the list attached to this e-mail by the Defence.
22 Secondly, the Chamber notes that seeking admission of exhibits
23 used with the witnesses in court by way of an e-mail, after the witness's
24 evidence has already concluded, is not the appropriate course of action.
25 The Defence had ample opportunity to seek admission of these exhibits in
1 the course of cross-examination on the 26th of April. This would have
2 provided the Prosecution the opportunity to raise objections, if any, to
3 the admission of these exhibits. As this is the first instance where the
4 Chamber has received a request of this nature from the Defence by way of
5 an e-mail, the Chamber proposes to do the following: Provided that the
6 Prosecution does not have objections to the admission of the exhibits
7 listed in the e-mail, all of which were used extensively with the
8 Witness PW-015, the Chamber is inclined to admit into evidence the
9 exhibits listed in the Defence e-mail which are not already in evidence.
10 This concerns the 65 ter numbers 1D81, 1D82, 1D50, and 1D52.
11 Mr. McCloskey, is the Prosecution in a position to state whether
12 it has objections to the admission of these exhibits?
13 MR. McCLOSKEY: Good afternoon, Mr. President, Your Honours. If
14 I could have one second.
15 Mr. President, the Prosecution has no objection to what are noted
16 as images 50 and 52. However, 81 and 82 are witness statements, and
17 unless there's some special reason for a witness statement to come in in
18 its entirety, I think it was used fairly on cross-examination, but unless
19 there's something special or a special reason, we would object to the
20 statements coming in in their entirety. Otherwise, witnesses will be
21 followed by their statements, and there's many, many statements.
22 Anything that's used in cross-examination, I don't think, is, by itself,
23 a reason for a statement to come in, unless, of course, the Chamber
24 wishes to see all these statements, which some Trial Chambers do, and
25 that's fine. But it was not my understanding that you wanted to see all
1 the witness statements. And, of course, the relevant portions were read
2 to the witness.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you, Mr. McCloskey.
4 First of all, the Chamber will receive the photographs, 65 ter
5 1D50 and 65 ter 1D52, as an exhibit.
6 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 1D50 will be Exhibit D29. 65 ter 1D52
7 will be Exhibit D30, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Taking into account your objection to the other
9 two documents, the Chamber will consider the matter further during the
10 next break, and we'll inform the parties on its decision later.
11 The witness should be brought in.
12 Mr. Tolimir.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, 81 and 82, you don't
14 have to admit into evidence, and that's not something we requested
15 either. Thank you.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, I'm surprised.
17 [The witness takes the stand]
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: If I understood the e-mail by the Defence
19 correctly, that you were tendering them by e-mail. We will deal with
20 that later. Thank you.
21 Good afternoon, Mr. Ruez.
22 THE WITNESS: Good afternoon.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Welcome back to the Tribunal for continuing the
25 First of all, I would like to remind you that the affirmation you
1 made at the beginning of your examination still applies.
2 WITNESS: JEAN-RENE RUEZ [Resumed]
3 THE WITNESS: I understand.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please sit down.
5 Mr. Gajic.
6 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.
7 Let me introduce myself. My name is Aleksandar Gajic. I am
8 legal assistant for Zdravko Tolimir. I'd like to raise an administrative
10 The Court Officer was sent an e-mail linked to certain problems
11 linked to e-court and not for the documents, part 81 and 82, to be
12 admitted into evidence. Namely, the problem was with the photographs
13 that were admitted into evidence, but were not within the system the
14 following day. So that was the problem.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
16 As I indicated just now, we will deal with that later and check
18 Mr. Tolimir, you are now in the position to continue your
20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone for the
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You need the microphone.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you, Mr. President.
24 Cross-examination by Mr. Tolimir: [Continued]
25 Q. Mr. Ruez, good afternoon, and welcome.
1 I'd like to remind you of this. On page 16268, lines 18 and 20
2 of the transcript, you said:
3 "The object of the investigation was not to establish how many
4 people managed to live and leave the security zone of Srebrenica, but to
5 determine the destiny of those who were proclaimed missing."
6 Are those your words?
7 A. Yes, these are my words, and I confirm what I previously said.
8 Q. Thank you. Now, at the end of your cross-examination, and I'd
9 like to remind you of this because of continuity, you said -- 10766 page,
10 lines 12 to 25, and 1077 [as interpreted], lines 1 and 2 of the
11 transcript you said, and I quote:
12 "Already in July or August 1995, while we were in Tuzla
13 the summer, we had access to several hundred statements from the
14 Commission for War Crimes, and as I've already said, from the Ministry of
15 the Interior as well -- similarly, from the United Nations Sector for
16 Civilian Affairs. We also handed out questionnaires to the refugees
17 camps and non-government organisations so as to --" or, rather, "which
18 would have anything with any relevant information, to contact us. Now,
19 on the basis of that, we drew up several packages, if I could put it that
20 way. One package of measures were those -- were people who had
21 information. The second group were people who had something important to
22 tell us about the deportation route from Potocari to Kladanj, and the
23 main statements, those that were most important, were from the last
24 group, which claimed that the witnesses either saw the killings or were
1 So I think that's what we were discussing the last time. Did I
2 quote you correctly? Thank you.
3 A. Yes, absolutely. We have rough packages in which we separated
4 potential witnesses. It could be more detailed, but this was, indeed,
5 the situation at the time.
6 Q. Thank you. Mr. Ruez, my next question is this, the first
7 question: Did you look at the reasons for which Srebrenica -- people
8 left Srebrenica, because you referred to deportation here, so did you
9 look into the reasons, and the Defence talks about the Muslims leaving
10 Srebrenica? Thank you.
11 A. It's not really up to me, I think, to answer the question,
12 because the transport of a population, for me, it's, let's say, the
13 people, as you say, who evacuated the enclave. But when there can be
14 some legal considerations to look into, this is not part of my work, but
15 the work of Prosecution to determine if this transfer of population is a
16 foreseeable transfer or deportation whatsoever. So I confirm, indeed, we
17 looked into the aspect of the evacuation of a population who was inside
18 the enclave.
19 Now, you also asked me, I think, if we looked into the reason why
20 these people left. The conclusion of the investigation, as you most
21 certainly know, is that in Potocari the behaviour of the Bosnian Army was
22 designed to inflict such terror to these people that they would leave on
23 their own will this area. That was planned by those who decided to take
24 it over at that time, and this is the reason why these people voluntarily
25 tried to get on board of the buses before being separated by this
1 squadron of Bosnian Serb soldiers.
2 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Thank you. Now, my second question is
3 this: Did you, as an investigator, deal with the question of who took
4 the decision to leave Srebrenica? Thank you. May I ask for shorter
5 answers adjusted to the question I asked, please.
6 A. To make it, in that case, very short: As far as I know, the
7 decision to leave was made individually by all those who had the feeling
8 that had they not left, they would have been captured and subsequently
9 killed. This is the main reason why these people left.
10 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. My question was: Did you investigate it or
11 not? Thank you.
12 A. It was not a precise point of investigation, but any witness with
13 whom myself or other investigators took interviews from raised this
15 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now, my next question is this: In
16 categorising the witnesses, when you categorise them - you mentioned that
17 on the 30th of March and I read through it a moment ago - you mentioned a
18 number of categories of witnesses, but no mention is made of witnesses
19 about the events in the column. Did you interview witnesses like that,
20 too, and did you attach importance to them in order to determine the
21 destiny of those who were proclaimed missing? Thank you.
22 A. Yes, absolutely, for the main reason that among those who ended
23 up prisoners under the control of the Bosnian Serb Army, you have two
24 main groups. The group 1 is those who got separated when trying to get
25 on board of buses during the evacuation of the Srebrenica enclave, and
1 the second much larger group is those who were among this column who had
2 been trapped between Srebrenica and Konjevic Polje, and when adopting a
3 massive surrender process at the 13, in the morning, it is among this
4 group that you find the most future survivors of the executions that were
5 done the two following days -- on the three, four following day in the
6 area north.
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Perhaps you didn't understand me properly.
8 What I meant was those who were in the column and left and went to Tuzla
9 that is to say, those who passed through the line and the route from
10 Srebrenica to Baljkovica to Tuzla
11 following: Did you have an occasion to receive statements from the
12 Bosnian authorities about this category of persons, those who managed to
13 break through and left, and did they give statements of that kind to the
14 police and the army, and did you have any special instructions for taking
15 statements from people who transferred from Srebrenica to BH territory?
16 Thank you.
17 A. I understand the question, General. Yes, it is a group in which
18 we initially looked into. The goal was not to reconstruct the military
19 adventure between Konjevic Polje and Nezuk, but to find out if in that
20 military action in process there had also been some crimes that would
21 have to be dealt with by this investigation. The reality is the few
22 people we wished to interview were put up front by the BiH Army. They
23 had very little to say. At least they had nothing to say about any kind
24 of atrocity during this military operation, which was battle. And since
25 it was battle, it was very quickly taken out of our screen of what was
1 the main purpose of the investigation, which was to find out what
2 happened to the missing people.
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Since you're talking about the destiny of
4 those who went missing, and those left in Nezuk, in the column, they knew
5 about a large number of people who disappeared, the whole front of the
6 column. That's why I'm interested in whether you had statements of that
7 kind at all. Thank you.
8 A. On the total amount of this column that left Srebrenica on the
9 evening of the 11 and the 12, we already talked about it, with an
10 estimate with around 15.000, what is official from the BiH side is that
11 6.000 members of the 28th Division managed to cross the lines in the area
12 of Nezuk, so indeed there will always be a question mark about those who,
13 in that process, missed -- in combat missed by crossing the lines in
14 minefields or in any other combat operation. This is the reason why
15 the -- I already talked about this. The only number the criminal
16 investigation takes into account is the number of people who have been
17 found in the primary mass graves that we connect with execution sites and
18 regroupment [sic] points, and later on scientifically connect with those
19 found in the secondary graves and who are coming from these primary
20 graves. And this is the only number that the criminal investigation
21 takes into account, because this is the number of those we can prove have
22 been under the control of those who had taken them prisoners, the
23 Bosnian Serb Army.
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. We'll come back to that later on, but let's
25 go back to my next question, whether in the graves there were those who
1 were killed in battle and those who were killed otherwise. We'll come
2 back to that. But this is my question: May we have 1D63 displayed on
3 our screens, please? It's a document from the army, BH Army, the Command
4 of the 2nd Corps, the Security Department, confidential 06101-160-8/95 of
5 the 10th of August, 1995, and it refers to the assignments.
6 We still haven't got it up on our screens. May we have it called
7 up on e-court, please.
8 It's come up on our screens in Serbian, but not in English. And
9 since I don't have the translation, I'm going to quote:
10 "The statements you sent us --"
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It always takes a certain time that these are
12 brought up on the screen. Just be a little bit more patient. You must
13 not quote everything. It's not necessary. We have it now on the screen.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
15 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
16 Q. "The statements you sent us," that's what it says in this
17 document, "attached to the above reference letter contain information
18 relating, for the most part, to the transit of the group of combatants
19 and civilians to from Srebrenica to the free territory, and very few or
20 no facts at all about war crimes and the crime of genocide. According to
21 the guide-lines we have given you, as well as the instructions you
22 received during the lecture delivered on the 3rd of August, 1995, at the
23 Veterans Centre of the 2nd Corps Command, you should have taken
24 statements on the circumstances surrounding the war crimes and crime of
1 And that's the end of my quotation from the document.
2 But he goes on to say:
3 "In the handouts you received," that is to say, at the lectures,
4 "contain detailed and easily understandable descriptions of what a
5 statement relating to these specific circumstances should contain,
6 starting from personal details of the interviewee, to other intrinsic and
7 essential elements. The statements you supplied do not follow these
9 In this statement, it goes on to say:
10 "Act in the following sense and carry out the instructions
12 Now, my question to you is this: When you looked at the
13 statements, were you aware that there was special requirements for those
14 taking statements from the interviewees and the elements that each
15 statement must contain, having to do with the circumstances of war crimes
16 and crimes against humanity? Thank you.
17 A. I understand very well the point. Be certain of one thing. The
18 only statements that we've ended up taking into consideration are
19 statements of people who were interviewed by ICTY personnel, not by
20 BiH Army, BiH police, or BiH War Crime Commission. These statements were
21 the basis of identification of persons who we would have an interest to
22 talk with. And, indeed, the way these statements were taken probably
23 needed some improvement by those who conducted the interview, since they
24 were very short and didn't necessarily enter into details. The reason
25 why: These people were systematically re-interviewed by ICTY personnel,
1 and the information inside the statements was then later the topic of a
2 focus of the following steps of investigation. That was to identify the
3 places where they reported events and analyse these spots in order to
4 confirm or infirm the credibility of these witnesses.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now I have to put another question that
6 will contain your answer to the first question, because you gave a rather
7 lengthy answer.
8 Since you had certain contacts with representatives of the
9 28th Division, are you aware that on the 3rd of August, 1995, they held
10 this lecture where they issued the instructions on the way to collect
11 information from members of the 28th Division? In other words, do you
12 know of this, and do you know that there were special instructions given
13 to these people? Thank you.
14 A. We had extremely little contact with members of the
15 28th Division, since, as I told you, we probably interviewed two soldiers
16 who made the spear-head and arrived in Tuzla. For the rest, I didn't
17 know anything about whatever instructions could be given by the 2nd Corps
18 to its members in August. No, I didn't know.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Tell me, please, as you were in a position
20 to review a large number of statements, almost all of them, as you said,
21 and you even interviewed some of the Muslims who managed to pull out, in
22 this document it says:
23 "The statements provided do not contain or contain very few facts
24 related to war crimes and the crime of genocide."
25 My question is this: Are you sure that you actually reviewed a
1 large number of such statements, and can you recall the date of these
2 statements referring to the executions? Thank you.
3 A. No short answer possible on this.
4 The first point: What is in this letter is a reality, since
5 those who were at the spear-head of a column could not witness any war
6 crime because they were in the battle situation, all these crimes
7 happened in their back, to those who were left behind. So -- but first
9 When -- the second part of your question, please remind me.
10 There was something else.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, the microphone.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] My apologies.
14 Q. When did you observe that statements do contain information about
15 executions, and up until when were there statements when no such
16 information appeared? I am referring to the time-frame. Thank you.
17 MR. McCLOSKEY: Objection to compound questions --
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
19 MR. McCLOSKEY: Sorry. The compound questions are very difficult
20 for even a witness of this calibre.
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, could you please always wait until
22 you get the floor.
23 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Now you may make your comment.
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: Objection to the compound nature of the question.
1 It's very difficult to pick out the different questions, even for a
2 witness as experienced as Mr. Ruez. If we could not put multi-questions
3 to the witness.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, I think this witness is capable to
5 deal with difficult questions as well. And if there are any problems,
6 you should raise them in cross-examination.
7 Mr. Tolimir, please carry on.
8 THE WITNESS: Okay, I understand your question, General.
9 Most of the statements we had access to, this was during the
10 period between 20 July, the date of the arrival of our tiny little team
11 in the Tuzla area, so interview process started some three or four days
12 later. And we continued this process until, more or less, the 20th of
13 August. In that time-frame, the police and the War Crime Commission were
14 continuing to take statements, so the main phase was to quickly run
15 through these, indeed, hundreds of pieces of information and extract from
16 them those that we intended to interview as priority witnesses, in order
17 then later, but this was in September, take all this information and try
18 to draw a story through time, what I call the first criminal analysis of
19 the situation. So most of the key witnesses, indeed - I'm talking about
20 the survivors - were identified and interviewed during that summer, at
21 the exception of one of them, who was one of the survivors of the Kravica
22 warehouse, who could only be interviewed, if I recall well, in April 1996
23 because he was among one of the last groups, part of a prisoner exchange
24 that happened, I think, in February or March 1996. And I understand
25 also, but this happened after I had left the Tribunal in 2001, that one
1 additional survivor for the Orahovac site had been identified much later,
2 and as far as I know he testified in this courtroom a few days ago.
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. McCloskey [as interpreted]. I would like to say
4 this: The document that I have read out from that you have before you on
5 the screens was produced on the 10th of August, and you say that you have
6 completed your interviews by the 28th of August. Does that mean that all
7 the statements that you consider relevant were actually compiled between
8 the 20th of July, up until the 28th of August, as stated here, or did you
9 obtain them later on from BH organs? Thank you.
10 A. No, again I have to insist that the only information we got from
11 BiH authorities were the primary information that they could collect, but
12 our only source -- real source of information, which then we used in
13 order to orientate the investigation on the material aspect, that is,
14 finding crime scenes, is based on the interviews that we took -- we, ICTY
15 investigators, took during that summer.
16 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Does that relate to the period between the
17 20th of July and the 20th of August? Thank you.
18 A. No. This was, in fact, the first round of interviews that we
19 took, because this interview process lasted during the six years I was at
20 the head of this investigation. In terms of victims, it lasted until at
21 least the end of 1997, since each time we could come across useful
22 information, we investigated this information if it was worth the effort,
23 and after that the interview process slipped more on to interviewing
24 BiH police and military personnel.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. As I've said, this document was produced on
1 the 10th of August, 1995. And judging by the statements that we have
2 received, I see that the statements -- only the statements written after
3 that time, the word "war crimes" and "genocide" is mentioned that was
4 contained in the statement. Was it commonplace for individuals who are
5 not educated and who do not have any experience with international
6 criminal law to use such terms, because they always indicate whether some
7 act was a war crime or a crime of genocide? Thank you.
8 If the question is not clear, I can repeat it.
9 A. I think it's clear. I mean, what is clear to me is that this
10 document is probably written by the legal officer of the 2nd Corps, so
11 this man has some notions of legal qualifications, so war crimes,
12 genocide, things like this. I did not see this type of rhetoric in the
13 statements of those that we have personally interviewed, though at that
14 time genocide was a quite common notion, since everyone was throwing it
15 in the face of the other one that genocide had been committed against
16 him. So it was a very common rhetoric even at that time, and it had
17 become even worse in the years following the end of this conflict.
18 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. We have heard evidence and have seen
19 statements from that period, and we see that from the 10th of August, the
20 word "genocide" is used by the individuals who provided the statements.
21 If necessary, I will show it to the -- I will point it out to the
22 Trial Chamber, based on the statements that we've heard and evidence that
23 we've heard from witnesses who appeared so far.
24 Now, tell us, please, what are the -- we see that various organs
25 of the BH government sought this information. What are those organs?
1 Could you tell us, please?
2 A. Again, I have to insist that the only investigation and the only
3 witness statements we have relied on were those of people we have
4 interviewed ourselves, meaning members of the Office of the Prosecutor.
5 And to repeat again, the providers of witness statements that we used in
6 order to fine-tune who would be the most interesting ones, they were two
7 main sort of information; BiH police and mostly the War Crime Commission.
8 We had a few -- a handful of statements of BiH soldiers, a handful, and
9 who had nothing to report because they were at the head of a column that
10 went through Nezuk. So since they never ended up prisoner, they had
11 nothing to say about any war crimes.
12 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. My question related to the time-frame and
13 the pace at which you received these. And you said that you did not
14 receive them for the security organs, but rather from the MUP and the
15 commission, but here we can see that the security organs were the ones
16 who actually determined how this whole process was going to go on.
17 A. This is your conclusion, General. I cannot comment this. Again,
18 the 2nd Corps was not our point of contact at that time. The first
19 contact with them was at least two and a half years after that.
20 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. You've stated here that 6.000 fighters
21 managed to cross over from Srebrenica to Tuzla, and probably that was a
22 significant pool from which you tried to obtain information, which would
23 mean that the security organs had to assist in that work because that was
24 the largest number of people that you referred to that you interviewed,
25 or do you also refer to the ones who did not actually manage to break
1 through? Thank you.
2 A. No, the first part of your statement is totally incorrect. This
3 was not the main pool of information. This was the most microscopic pool
4 of information, since, I repeat, those who have managed to went through
5 the lines are those who have nothing to say to people investigating the
6 fate of the missing. The military operation -- the small military
7 operation part of this case is, again, not the focus of investigation and
8 these people who are not, far from it, among the interesting witnesses
9 for this case.
10 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. We've seen a video here shown by
11 Mr. McCloskey when he said that you would actually comment on the video,
12 and on it we could see a fighter who had managed to break through and who
13 said that he had run into four different ambushes. And how is it that
14 there is no mention of that here, since you say that there were 3.000
15 individuals involved?
16 THE INTERPRETER: Could the accused please repeat the last part
17 of his question.
18 THE WITNESS: Yeah, again, reconstructing the military history
19 of --
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Ruez, could you please pause a moment.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The last part of the question was not interpreted
23 properly. Mr. Tolimir, could you please repeat the last part of your
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I will try to
1 reconstruct my question.
2 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
3 Q. So we've seen a video here --
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, only the last part, only the last
6 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
7 Q. -- showing a soldier, who said that he had run into four
8 ambushes, and that there were 3.000 killed. Were you interested in the
9 number of missing persons, because these 3.000 would be missing people?
10 Thank you.
11 A. Okay. Again, I repeat that the military history of what happened
12 between -- during the breakthrough of an armed part of a column is not
13 the goal of the investigation, of the criminal investigation. But,
14 indeed, this soldier is certainly right. They went through several
15 ambushes, military operations, not in the frame of investigation, and
16 that, indeed, I concede that among the 8.000 missing people, those who
17 will not be found in the graves will be considered as missing in action.
18 So, again, I attract your attention on the number of those who are found
19 inside the graves, who are identified by DNA, and subtracting this final
20 number to the total number of missing people registered in the ICRC book,
21 will give you an approximate of those who have to be considered missing
22 in action.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Was the purpose of the investigation to
24 determine what happened with these 3.000 men who were killed in ambushes?
25 Thank you.
1 A. The assessment of this soldier on tape saying it's 3.000 people
2 killed is more or less to be taken with the same caution than when the
3 Bosnian Serb soldier, at the bottom of a hill, says that they captured
4 5.000 on that spot that day. It's impossible to know if these people
5 have a real precise assessment of these numbers. This is why, again, I
6 will repeat it probably every half an hour during two days, the important
7 number in this case is the people who have been found in the mass graves
8 and that we can prove they have gone through a cold-blooded execution
9 process, organised and systematic. And at this point, if my information
10 is correct, I think we arrive at something like 6.400.
11 Q. Mr. Ruez, my question is: Was it in the interest of the
12 investigation to determine what happened with the bodies of those who had
13 been killed in ambushes? Thank you.
14 A. The places we have found and in which the victims have been found
15 buried are locations very nearby concentration spots of prisoners, and we
16 also know from the engineer records the pace at which these people have
17 been buried. So if you look more in detail the situation, you could
18 imply that in these mass graves, we have found, in fact, people who have
19 been killed in action. In that case, indeed, the events at Nezuk,
20 ongoing combat or little time of no combat, doesn't make it credible that
21 these people are in the graves we have opened.
22 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Tell us, please, where, then, were those
23 people who were killed in ambush, in combat, on minefields, where were
24 they buried? They were not buried in the territory of the BH Army, not
25 in Republika Srpska, you say they were not found in the mass graves.
1 Tell us and tell this Court, where are they? Thank you.
2 A. You say that the graves are not in the Republika Srpska. I
3 cannot confirm that. Either they have left -- been left on the surface,
4 and this the Commission for Missing People and Exhumation of
5 Bosniak Government could probably give some answers on this. But the
6 fact is that finding graves whereof cleaning of the terrain has taken in
7 the place following the 16 of July, has not been, indeed, a point of
8 research for this case. We were focusing finding mass graves with
9 victims of execution, not with victims of combat operations.
10 And I will also have to add that all questions regarding the
11 detailed findings inside the graves, I won't be the relevant person to be
12 asked about this, since there are two other experts who testify about the
13 mass grave findings; Professor Richard Wright for all what is the
14 pathology aspects and also my colleague Dean Manning for all what is the
15 results of police labs on the findings.
16 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. I read out a portion where you talked about
17 the missing persons, and now all of a sudden you are not interested in
18 the missing persons unless they were in mass graves or murdered in some
19 kind of mass crime. In the same way, this statement of the security
20 organs only focus on war crimes and crime of genocide. They do not try
21 to establish the people who were killed in combat operations. So now
22 tell us, please, how is this Court and how are we to determine what
23 happened with the bodies of those who were killed in action? Thank you.
24 A. I think it's the responsibility of every government to try to
25 find the bodies of his own soldiers killed in any military operation, but
1 I can confirm that it is not the purpose and not the goal of a criminal
2 investigation team to try to identify people who are missing in action.
3 Our goal is to try to find out if victims say the truth, reconstruct a
4 chronology of events, prove what has happened, and try to identify the
5 perpetrators to bring them to a courtroom, not identifying missing
6 soldiers killed in action.
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. You say that as an investigator. Security
8 organs also say that they're only interested in war crimes and genocide.
9 Does that mean that nobody actually investigated how those who went
10 missing in action were killed and that the large number of them actually
11 were killed there, rather than what you're doing, placing them in mass
12 graves in large numbers? Thank you.
13 A. It is not a question for me, General. It's a question for the
14 BiH authorities, who try to find out the fate of their own missing
16 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. It's not a question for you; right. Now,
17 would this be a question for you: Along with the communication route, in
18 your statement you say from Konjevic Polje part of the people were killed
19 not in fighting and not in executions. So you don't know where to put
20 them, which group. Where did you find them, in mass graves, and which
21 number -- which group did you assigned them to, and how many of them were
22 there? If you can tell me that. Thank you.
23 A. It might be a little bug in the translation, because I read that
24 it had said that at Konjevic Polje, part of the people were killed not in
25 fighting and not in execution. I don't understand. It's either one or
1 the other one. If not, it's a natural cause of death. There might be a
2 little translation problem, I would believe.
3 Q. Mr. Ruez, it's not a problem of the translation. The problem is
4 that in the interview that you gave to "The Monitor," you said that you
5 don't know where to place part of the people who were neither executed,
6 nor, in your opinion, were killed in battle; how to classify them, you
7 didn't know. Can you explain where we can classify them, then? And it's
8 document 1D60, so may we have called up 1D60.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
10 MR. McCLOSKEY: I'm just going to object. May the witness be
11 allowed -- when something that specific is referred to, if the witness
12 could have a chance to look at -- and I think he's caught that, so
13 I think I can withdraw my objection.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. May we have page 25
16 displayed, please, from "The Monitor," and I'm going to quote part of the
17 statement, as requested by the Prosecution. Thank you.
18 We see the statement on our screens. It was given to
19 "The Monitor," and the Prosecutor disclosed it to us. And in the second
20 column, paragraph 2, it says, and I quote --
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, may I ask you, is there an English
22 translation? Do you know that?
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
24 We submitted this for translation a long time ago. It's with the
25 Interpretation Service, but we haven't received the translation of it
1 yet. So I don't know. Thank you.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In that case, you should read out the relevant
3 portion, but please indicate very precisely which part you are reading.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
5 I'm reading the portion of the text marked on page 0603-8344,
6 lines 2 -- or, rather, the second column, second paragraph, and I'm going
7 to quote that and read it out:
8 "There is a specific feature. One of the graves in Glogova
9 contains the bodies of people who were killed along the road from
10 Konjevic Polje to Kravica. The Serbs will say that they were killed in
11 battle, whereas, in fact, they were killed as soon as they set foot on
12 the asphalt road. This was not a combat situation, and neither were they
13 prisoners. Quite simply, they killed them as soon as they set foot on
14 the road, and we're going to add them to the find number."
15 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Now, my question to you is this: Since these people were buried
17 in the Glogova grave, how many of them are there? Thank you?
18 A. Glogova is the most difficult crime scene in terms of mass graves
19 because, indeed, the persons buried at Glogova have three origins. One
20 origin of them is the burial spot of most of those who have been killed
21 in Kravica. I say "most" because initially the first truck-loads were
22 taken to a little hill nearby and dumped alongside the edge of this hill.
23 So most of the people killed in Kravica were shifted towards Glogova.
24 Unfortunately, also at Glogova were buried bodies of those who were
25 killed once they had reached the asphalt road, an unknown number of
1 people. And the third origin, unfortunately, is also those who have been
2 killed in Bratunac town. So there is a mixture of origins of bodies in
3 this grave that make it, for example, in the future impossible to know
4 very precisely how many people have been killed in Kravica, because the
5 transfer of the bodies of Glogova we know is south of Srebrenica, but
6 even once all the exhumations would have been finalised, it would not be
7 able to provide the number of those killed in Kravica because of these
8 various origin of bodies that cannot be separated each from another.
9 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. And did you count them -- or, rather, did
10 you add them to the number and include them in the number of those who
11 were killed?
12 A. Yes, all those who have been found at Glogova were included in
13 the final number, indeed.
14 Q. Thank you. And for their killing, is it those who should be --
15 who stand accused here or those who actually killed them? Who should be
16 held responsible? Thank you.
17 A. As you know, General, the only people siting in this courtroom
18 are those who are considered the utmost responsible. The other ones,
19 they have to be sent to the State Court in Sarajevo.
20 Q. Thank you. I just asked you: Who should be tried for their
21 death, those who are accused of having conducting the execution or those
22 who took part in battle pursuant to commands from their superior
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, this is not an appropriate question.
25 THE WITNESS: It's a question of command responsibility. I'm not
1 tasked to deal with command responsibility.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Carry on, please.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, since the witness
4 does not want to give us the number of those killed or who died, whereas
5 I am being accused of those killings, and that's why I am asking what the
6 number of those killed was and who should be held responsible for those
7 killings. Thank you.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think you know very well that at the end of the
9 day, this Chamber will consider that question, and not the witness. The
10 witness may answer your questions about the number of missing or killed
11 people, but not the personal responsibility. This is not a question to
12 deal with during the cross-examination.
13 Please carry on.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
15 And thank you, Mr. Ruez. I'm not holding it against you. I am
16 grateful to you and thanking you, and I'm not angry because you put
17 forward this dilemma, because it is really -- it really is a dilemma. So
18 thank you for raising it. And I would like to ask you a question which
19 is of vital interest to the Defence.
20 For example, in the Krstic trial, in your testimony you put
21 forward a number of interesting pieces of information which were not
22 presented here by the Prosecution at this particular trial, and the
23 Defence considers that they are of great importance to establishing the
24 relevant facts in this trial.
25 Now may we have 1D100 called up, please, and shown to the
1 witness. Thank you.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, to avoid further problems, are you
3 tendering this document, the interview in "The Monitor," as an exhibit?
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, we are
5 tendering this document into evidence, and we shall be discussing it
6 further. I just asked a question linked to the problem that we're
7 discussing now.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
9 MR. McCLOSKEY: Objection to this coming in. It looks like it's
10 a question-and-answer -- it looks like a statement and should not -- I'm
11 not aware of any rules that allow such a statement or even a newspaper
12 article to come in as evidence. He's used -- the party's used that, and
13 that is part of the record.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: This interview in "The Monitor" without English
15 translation will be marked for identification so that if it will be used
16 during this cross-examination or with other witnesses, we know what was
17 it about.
18 Mr. McCloskey.
19 MR. McCLOSKEY: Ms. Stewart was able to find an English version
20 of that and has sent it to the Defence. So if it's necessary, we can get
21 it up on the screen again.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I appreciate that.
23 Just a moment. We would like to have the English version on the
25 We have this "Monitor" article on the screen in the English
2 MR. McCLOSKEY: Ms. Stewart reminded me that I was being a bit
3 optimistic. It's got to get in the e-court system. Apparently she
4 pulled it off our system. And we can get one down here very quickly and
5 get it on the old-fashioned ELMO, but it will be just a few minutes.
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
7 Mr. McCloskey, then the Chamber will mark that for
8 identification, pending translation, and then we will deal with that
10 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit D31, marked for
11 identification, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
13 In the meantime, we have another document on the screen. Please
14 carry on, Mr. Tolimir.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
16 I'd like the statement that was on e-court, 1D63, to be tendered
17 into evidence, please. Thank you. I mean the statement given by the
18 security organs that I quoted from earlier on.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes. We were very busy with "The Monitor"
20 interview, we didn't realise that you had put any question to this
21 witness related to this transcript on the screen.
22 Mr. McCloskey.
23 MR. McCLOSKEY: I think he's asked for the BiH document into
24 evidence, and we have no objection to that, if that's what he was talking
25 about, the document that wanted a little more detail in the reports of
1 the people coming through the column.
2 And Ms. Stewart's figured out a way to show us the English
3 version of "Monitor" as well, if that is needed.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
5 Any further comment, Mr. Tolimir?
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
7 I've already asked for the next document, the one from the Krstic
8 trial, and it is 1D100. May that be called up, please, several pages
9 from the Krstic trial related to --
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, you are ahead of the proceedings.
11 The statement of the transcript we have on the screen at the moment, you
12 have tendered that, and the Chamber will receive it.
13 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think we have figured out the situation. The
15 document we saw first was the document of the 10th of August, 1995,
16 Command of the 2nd Corps of the BH Army. That will be received.
17 THE REGISTRAR: It will be D32, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
19 Mr. Tolimir, please carry on.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
21 We have before us 1D100. It is the transcript from the Krstic
22 trial, relating to the events and investigation linked to Bare and
23 Kamenica, those two places.
24 Now, first, on page 589, you say the following:
25 "I would also like to mark the village of Bare which many people
1 have been pointing to who had knowledge of the area, know a little bit
2 where they were going, and not only following the person in front of
4 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Now, my question to you is this. I quoted what you said, and now
6 here is my question: Can you, on the one of the previous maps, draw in
7 the village of Bare, the location of the village of Bare? And perhaps
8 the best map would be the map on page 23 of your book, which is 65 ter
9 01450, page 23. It's a Prosecution exhibit. Thank you.
10 Thank you. Here we have the map on our screens. It's 65 ter
11 01450, a Prosecution exhibit, and the page is 23.
12 Mr. Ruez, would you please mark the position of Bare, the Bare
14 A. To point precisely, Bare, as understand on such map, would be
15 difficult. But, nevertheless, as we said, area of regroupment [sic] was
16 the area of [indiscernible] Jaglici, then the escape route was going,
17 let's say, roughly north in the direction of Kravica, and behind the
18 hills in the area of Kravica is the area of Bare and Kamenica. And,
19 indeed, these are locations where ambushes took place, at 12.00 in the
20 evening -- afternoon/evening.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Would you mark that?
23 THE WITNESS: You want me to mark it? Okay.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: As accurately as possible.
25 THE WITNESS: Roughly, the escape route [marks]. And the area we
1 are talking about would be somewhere in this area here [marks].
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You mean by that the location of Bare?
3 THE WITNESS: It's the rough area that I circled, Bare/Kamenica.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
5 Mr. Tolimir.
6 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Would you mark in Bare again and put "B" or
8 "Bare." Write in "Bare" or the letter B on this map, too, please.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before we go on, are you tendering for marking
10 the first one? It will be received.
11 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit D33, Your Honour.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Will that include the marking by
13 Mr. Ruez of the place and the route?
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The original map was already received. The map
15 with the markings is now an exhibit.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. It didn't say "Bare" on
17 it, but the transcript explains it all.
18 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Now, on page 589, lines 22 and 23, and I'm referring to the
20 transcript from the Krstic trial - may we go back to that, please - you
21 state, and I quote, these are your words:
22 "Bare was also a place where there were ambushes and where there
23 was shelling. Many people were wounded on this territory."
24 My question to you now is this: Can you tell us, roughly
25 speaking, how many witnesses linked to the -- that were linked to the
1 event around Bare village? Thank you.
2 A. I could not answer precisely, because this is part of
3 reconstruction to understand the chronology of events. But since it is
4 ambush/shelling on a column with mixed civilian and military, it is
5 considered by the investigation as a military operation. This is why
6 there was no specific focus assigned this one, but the situation it
7 generated is still interesting for the continuity of what happened after
8 that because it is these ambushes that also demoralised the people who
9 were left behind. And in the process of all these calls to surrender,
10 that happened from the asphalt road at 13, in the morning, most of the
11 people who were on the hills decided to surrender.
12 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Can you tell us where these people were
13 buried, the ones who were killed in the ambushes in the general area
14 around Bare? Thank you.
15 A. As far as we know, these people were not buried; they were left
16 as surface remains. There was a Norwegian team in 1996 who, under the
17 umbrella of Ms. Elizabeth Rainer [phoen], went to this area in order to
18 locate and start picking up these surface remains. I don't remember how
19 many they did collect. The process, anyhow, were continued much later,
20 and this area -- in this area the surface remains were -- I mean, I don't
21 know if all of them were taken for sure, but some of them were found and
22 taken by the BiH commission. But there was left there surface remains,
23 as far as we know.
24 Q. Thank you. You didn't answer my first question. How many
25 witnesses were there testifying about this event? Thank you.
1 A. None of these people, as far as I know, has been called as a
2 witness, at least not on this point, in this Tribunal. On top of my
3 head, I would say that the spotting of these ambushes came through
4 summary testimonies of maybe 10 people in a bunch of these few hundreds
5 that we analysed during the summer, I mean, 10 who gave detailed and who
6 focused on this because they experienced the events. It started with a
7 tree that exploded. That was the start of the ambush, the signal point.
8 Q. Thank you. And did anybody testify in the Krstic trial?
9 A. Specifically on this aspect, I have no idea. I don't know.
10 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now, in the Krstic trial, on page 590, on
11 line 3, you speak about a precise period of time, and you say at noon the
12 head of the column was cut at Konjevic Polje and the entire area blocked.
13 Can you tell us what date that is, and describe the area on that day at
14 precisely that hour, 12.00, because you weren't there yourself? So at
15 12.00 in the evening the head of the column was already passing through
16 the intersection of Konjevic Polje, et cetera?
17 A. The spear-head of the column passed Konjevic Polje during the
18 night between the 12 and the 13. The very specific hour, I don't remind
19 where I got it from, and I don't know if this would be 12/13 which would
20 not be the case or 12.00 meaning midnight, so somewhere during that
22 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. And is what I quoted correct, from the
23 point of view of transcript 590, line 3, you referred to 12.00 in the
24 afternoon, at noon, and the head of the column being at Konjevic Polje?
25 A. Yeah, the head of the column probably arrived around noon, since
1 they passed in the evening, so they probably scrambled in that place at
2 12.00 in the evening. I mean, again, this is more part of the fate of
3 the front of a column, who suffered no specific problems when they
4 crossed; rather, those who were left behind are the ones who became then
5 the focus of investigation.
6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. On page 590, on lines 10 to 14, you talk
7 about night fighting, and I quote you:
8 "Some managed to break through during the night, but as you will
9 later see on photographs of this area, this is open ground and it is very
10 difficult to cross because it had been blocked by soldiers."
11 Thank you. So my question is: Could you show us where the
12 blocking forces were, relating to the locality in Bare where you found
13 those bodies? Thank you.
14 A. It's two different areas. In the area south, General, the
15 blocking position, that was at Konjevic Polje, where the
16 5th Engineer Unit is, where you have the line between Konjevic Polje and
17 South Nova Kasaba, where the 65th Protection Regiment was. I mean, this
18 is a different area than Bare. The problem that faced the people at 13,
19 in the morning, who were in this area of Konjevic Polje -- east of
20 Konjevic Polje is, indeed, having soldiers along this road made it
21 impossible for them to try to attempt any crossing. The reason why,
22 there was the surrender process at 13, in the morning.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Ruez, could you please clarify. On page 35,
24 line 12, at the end, you were quoted as "... faced the people at 13, in
25 the morning."
1 THE WITNESS: Yes. Yes, after the night of 12 or the 13, once
2 the spear-head had gone through this area.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That means you were talking about the 13th day of
4 that month and not 13 hours?
5 THE WITNESS: Sorry, 13 July, 13 July, in the morning,
6 absolutely, yes, yes.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
8 I think, Mr. Tolimir, this is the appropriate time for the first
10 We adjourn now for half an hour and resume quarter past 4.00.
11 --- Recess taken at 3.49 p.m.
12 --- On resuming at 4.18 p.m.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, continue, please.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Q. We left off with the question -- or request from Mr. Ruez to draw
16 the area where the blocking was, the blocking forces were.
17 Could we please see document 651402, so -- that that's a page
18 from that book that we mentioned earlier, so that the witness can draw or
19 indicate on the map where that area which was blocked in Bare was.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Could the accused please repeat the document
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you please repeat the number of that
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 65 ter 1450, page 23 of the book,
25 the book of maps.
1 MR. McCLOSKEY: Just to clarify, this is the -- you may remember,
2 the big book of documents and maps -- or, actually, pictures and maps
3 that Mr. Ruez had. Yes, you've got it. Thank you.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: We are very well prepared, Mr. McCloskey.
5 MR. McCLOSKEY: I thought he was talking about the map book. It
6 was my problem.
7 THE WITNESS: So two different things, if I understand well.
8 Again, I'm going to mark the location -- the rough location of the ambush
9 of the 12 in the area of Bare/Kamenica, which is, in fact, an area south
10 of Kravica. So roughly -- roughly, I would spot it in this area [marks].
11 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
12 Q. Would you please now use a different colour pen to indicate the
13 blocking forces and which direction they were advancing from? Could you
14 just indicate, in a different colour and indicating with arrows, the
15 direction of their movement?
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The pen will now have a different colour.
17 THE WITNESS: So also rough position, because this is part of a
18 military analysis and there is another person who will come and testify
19 about that part. But roughly the blocking position is along the road
20 Bratunac-Konjevic Polje [marks] and going south towards Nova Kasaba.
21 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 Q. While we still have the map, could you tell us, was it possible
23 to observe the sector of Bare from all those positions along the blue
24 line that you indicated, and could they actually fire? Was there direct
25 fire vision, as it were, from all of these positions, or did they have to
1 use some indirect way of shooting, firing?
2 A. I understand your point. Again, this is a military aspect in
3 which we didn't enter in depth. What the people say was that there were
4 some forces in the area, indeed, who could observe and fire at them,
5 though certainly not from the asphalt road, because the asphalt road is
6 located behind the -- behind the hill, so impossible to see. Then the
7 fact is that it's up to a more military person to talk about this, but
8 once an area is spotted, artillery can shoot behind hills. But, again,
9 this is part of the military aspect of the events in that place.
10 Q. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. On page 594 --
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you switch on your microphone.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I apologise. I would like to
14 tender this map into evidence. Thank you.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
16 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D34, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. Please carry on.
18 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 Q. Mr. Ruez, on page 594 of your testimony in the Krstic case, lines
20 18 through 24, you say:
21 "Here we will be shown some video footage which begins from the
22 spot where the ambush was."
23 Had we had occasion to see this video footage during your
24 testimony on the 29th and 30th of March in this courtroom, perhaps some
25 clarifications would not be necessary. But in this way, we would have to
1 refer to relevant pages in the Krstic testimony. That's on page 599,
2 lines 8 through 17, and I will read now.
3 Could we pull it up on the screens?
4 You said the following:
5 "This area was processed in 1996 by a team of experts from
6 Finland who worked there in the area in 1996, completely independent of
7 our own activities. They collected the human remains, but it is
8 important to mention that 600 bodies were found in this area. These were
9 bodies of victims who had been killed in combat during -- in ambushes,
10 during shellings, or in other -- under other circumstances that are
11 impossible to determine in view of the information that we have, and
12 I think that for us it is impossible to determine whether they were
13 killed in battle or in some other way."
14 My question for you is: Do you still maintain today what you
15 said then?
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The problem, Mr. Tolimir, we don't have this
17 portion of the transcript on the screen, and there is some doubt if there
18 is a page 599 in the English version. Could you clarify that?
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
20 You have before you the English version, and I read out a portion
21 of the B/C/S version, 599, lines 8 through 17, and I quoted the relevant
22 parts from the Krstic trial. Thank you. If he can recall, and if not,
23 we can try and see it again.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: There is no page 599, and we don't have this
25 portion on the screen in the English version.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: It could be page 594 in
2 the English, the last answer on the page.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I will
4 check now why you do not have the right page, because this is in e-court
5 because this was a transcript from the Krstic trial.
6 I apologise. It should be page 596 and not 599. Thank you. 596
7 of the transcript.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Lines 8 through 17.
10 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Could the witness read this out in English and answer my
12 question? Does he still -- would he still claim the same thing today?
13 That's -- in English, that's pages 23 through 25 -- lines 23 through 25.
14 A. Yes, and --
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You have it in front of you.
16 THE WITNESS: Okay. I will just rely on, anyhow, the summary the
17 general made. And, yes, indeed, I fully confirm what I said at that
18 time. The only thing is that I do not have a recollection now of a
19 precise number of surface remains that were collected by this, indeed,
20 Finnish team. I thought I said "Norwegian" sometime ago. It was a
21 mistake. It was, indeed, a Finnish team. Yes, indeed, they were totally
22 independent of our work. And in addition, I have to say that the number
23 of bodies that they have collected doesn't figure in the body count that
24 we make, because, indeed, I confirm that these are surface remains, so we
25 cannot know in what conditions they have died. So we consider them as
1 war casualties, so they don't enter in a criminal case. And these bodies
2 have been left there. There was no cleaning of the terrain. They have
3 not been buried in any other spot. They have been left on the ground.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could we turn to the next page in English,
6 Carry on, please.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
8 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Ruez, would you agree with me that I quoted your words
10 correctly, as recorded in the transcript in the Krstic case? You said
12 "It is important to stress that 600 bodies were collected here."
13 Thank you.
14 A. Yes, absolutely. Yes, sure.
15 Q. You also said in the next sentence:
16 "These were the bodies of the victims who were killed in combat"?
17 A. Yes, since we again -- since we do not prove they have been
18 murdered, we have to consider they were killed in combat.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. These 600 bodies that were collected by
20 this Finnish team, were they the total number of those who are frequently
21 mentioned, in the context of Srebrenica, as those who were missing?
22 A. These people most certainly are part of those who are on the
23 missing list of approximately 8.000 people, most probably, yes, and this
24 is the reason why I always insist, by -- when we give figures, only
25 talking about the people whose fate we can reconstruct and have been put
1 in a detention centre, executed on a nearby execution field, buried in a
2 primary grave, unburied and taken to a secondary grave. The only figure
3 we rely on is this figure of people we can prove have been assassinated.
4 All the others, even though we also know that during the cleaning of a
5 terrain operation, probably some people were also executed on the spot,
6 but these ones, we don't count them.
7 Q. Thank you. You said, in the Krstic transcript, these were the
8 bodies of the victims -- of people who were killed in combat, in ambush
9 operations, or shelling operations. Do you still stand by what you said
11 A. Absolutely, because again people on which we have any doubt on
12 the cause of death, we will consider them as having been killed in
14 Q. Thank you. Should these people who were killed in action be on
15 the list of those for which the accused before this Tribunal are charged,
16 or should that number be decreased by 600? Thank you.
17 A. Again, I insist on the fact that the only number that we should
18 use is the number of people we have determined their fate. So people
19 that ultimately -- if you would add those found in primary mass graves
20 and who have been left there, in addition to all those who have been
21 exhumed from the secondary site that we can connect to these primary
22 sites, this gives a figure. This is still not the total figure, because
23 there are still secondary graves that we know are linked to this case and
24 the bodies have still not yet been exhumed, so it is still not a final
25 number. But for sure from the missing -- from a total list of the
1 missing, those who have to be considered killed in action have to be
2 retrieved from the total list. Yes, these are the math [Realtime
3 transcript read in error "on maps"].
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. I wanted to hear your opinion about the
5 transcript. So these people should be removed from the total number of
6 victims and from -- and they should not be the victims for which the
7 accused are charged before this Tribunal.
8 Now, could we please see 1D60, page 2 of this interview that you
9 gave to "The Monitor." And in the B/C/S version, that's on page 3.
10 A. I would just need to correct in the transcript, line 17. It's
11 not: "Yes, they are on the maps," I said: "Yes, these are the math,"
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In fact, line 19.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Page 25 of "The Monitor," which is
15 page 3 in e-court.
16 Thank you. Could we now take a look at the third column,
17 paragraph 2, where Mr. Rene's words are quoted, and you say the
18 following, I quote:
19 "For those victims in the woods, we have to count that they were
20 killed in action. We know that there were clean-up operations or mop-up
21 operations, and each group -- and every group that was taken prisoner up
22 until after July 18th was systematically executed on the spot. For this,
23 we have to rely only on witnesses, without any forensic findings. We --
24 for the most part, we believe witnesses, but if we cannot prove what they
25 say, we do not use their testimony. That is why we consider that the
1 large number of those deaths in the woods is actually lost for us."
2 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
3 Q. So when you say it's lost for you, what, specifically, do you
4 mean by that?
5 A. I cannot certify these were my precise words, but what it means
6 is that if we do an honest assessment of the situation, I repeat that
7 those who we cannot prove that have been plugged in the organised
8 extermination process, they are, in bracket, "lost for the case," since
9 we cannot count these people as having been assassinated. This is in
10 bracket what the expression "lost" means. They are lost for the
11 Prosecution, let's say.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Could you tell me this, then: In the area of responsibility of
15 the Zvornik Brigade, were there combat operations or was there any
16 fighting between the brigade units and the column that was trying to
17 break through towards Baljkovica and Tuzla, and did you investigate that?
18 That's my second question. Thank you.
19 A. Though this is in the area of knowledge of another expert of the
20 Prosecution, Mr. Butler, yes, I can confirm, indeed, that I have
21 knowledge that around 15 and 16 mainly, maybe also maybe 17, there were
22 combat operations in that area, because this is in the vicinity of a
23 location, Nezuk, where the column crossed the lines towards
24 Bosniak-Muslim-held territory.
25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Judge Mindua has a question for the witness.
1 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed, I have a question on
2 this matter.
3 The bodies of people who were -- who died during military
4 operations, during combat, and persons who would have been killed later
5 on, my question is this: Do you have any form of certainty concerning
6 the fact that during the burial in graves, in the first primary ones and
7 then in the secondary ones, wasn't there also -- weren't there also some
8 bodies of combat operations which would also have been buried there?
9 Combat remains, I think, is -- are you absolutely certain that only the
10 people who were killed after combat were buried in the primary and
11 secondary graves?
12 THE WITNESS: When you look at the dates of the organised killing
13 process, you can observe that it starts the 14. Burial at the first
14 execution site starts at 13, in the evening. Burial there is finalised
15 the 15. Then the burial process goes on towards the north, continues
16 with 16, and the final stage is after the execution the 16 at the
17 Branjevo Farm and the Pilica Dom, where the exhumation work is finalised
18 with 17. So, indeed, as all this happens as even the Zvornik Brigade
19 commander says and wrote, that he had to deal with two situations at
20 once, one is combat operation, second is dealing with all these
21 prisoners. It would be extremely hard to imagine that at the same time
22 the Bosnian Serb Army is confronting this column, they also go on the
23 battle-field to collect dead enemy soldiers and then ship them to these
24 execution sites.
25 As an example, very close to the Orahovac site there is a little
1 path going towards some fields, and approximately at 150 metres away from
2 the execution site, when we arrived there, there was a dead body. In
3 fact, there was a skeleton. And this skeleton, though it was very close
4 to the initial burial site, has not been picked up, and the local farmer
5 drove on these bones probably twice a day. So my assumption is that no
6 dead body was collected in that vicinity to be put in the graves during
7 the material time-frame, that makes it extremely difficult to think that
8 it happened. And in relation to that, I think that the records of the
9 Engineering Unit of the Zvornik Brigade, there is absolutely no record of
10 collecting bodies in this area away from the execution sites.
11 I hope my answer is clear enough. I don't know.
12 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, absolutely, your answer is
13 very clear. We're just waiting for the end of the translation. Thank
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Now Judge Nyambe has a question for you.
16 JUDGE NYAMBE: Right. I just need some clarification. I think
17 it's page 45. In your response to Judge Mindua, you say:
18 "And this skeleton, although it was very close to the initial
19 burial site, has not been picked up, and the local farmer drove on these
20 bones probably twice a day."
21 You say that as a fact or you are presuming that this happened?
22 THE WITNESS: We found this body when we did the first survey of
23 this area. That was in April 1996. With a little team who was present
24 with me was Professor [indiscernible], a pathologist, and he's the one
25 who looked at these bones who, indeed, were -- I mean, I think we have a
1 photograph of that, but who was lying on this path, and you had the
2 traces of a little vehicle who was probably going back and forth along
3 this little path to go to some field, and no one ever even thought
4 picking up these bones and pushing them aside, even without talking about
6 JUDGE NYAMBE: Then how do you link what you have just said with
7 the continuation of your statement:
8 "... so my assumption is that the dead body was collected in that
9 vicinity to be put in the graves during the material time-frame"?
10 THE WITNESS: No, I said exactly the opposite. I said that my
11 assumption is that no dead body was collected in this area to be put in
12 this grave where only those who have been executed on the spot have been
14 JUDGE NYAMBE: Okay, thanks.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir.
16 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
17 Q. Mr. Ruez, the victims from the combat in the area of
18 responsibility of the Zvornik Brigade, do you count them as those killed,
19 the ones that you found in primary and secondary graves, or do you
20 subtract them from the total number of killed because they were killed in
21 combat? Thank you.
22 A. Definitely, yes. Again and again, I can only repeat that the
23 figure that we can take into consideration to have the assessment of a
24 total number of people who went through this organised killing process
25 are the ones that we can make the addition from grave after grave.
1 Q. Thank you. Mr. Ruez, can you then tell me, how many were there
2 killed in combat while a column was breaking through from Srebrenica to
3 Kladanj, through the area of responsibility of the Zvornik Brigade?
4 Thank you.
5 A. No, I can't, for the simple reason that the exhumation process of
6 some of these graves that we know are linked with the execution process
7 are not exhumed yet, so we cannot say how many people in total have been
8 assassinated since we have not finalised the exhumation process at this
9 point still in 2010.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Judge Nyambe.
11 JUDGE NYAMBE: Yes. When you say -- thank you, Judge. When you
12 say the exhumation has not been finalised, do you mean it is continuing?
13 THE WITNESS: I hope it is. Since 2001, this process is under
14 the responsibility of BiH, and it goes at a very, very slow pace since
15 nine years, though all the sites had been handed over, with all the
16 necessary details, to the Bosnian authorities in 2001.
17 JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir.
19 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
20 Q. Mr. Ruez, as you arrived at information about these places,
21 ambushes and so on, generally through witnesses, can you tell us what
22 those witnesses said, and how many they say were killed in the ambushes,
23 so that we at least have a figure if we don't have the exhumations,
24 themselves? Thank you.
25 A. No, I won't be able to do that because, again, whatever numbers
1 these witnesses would talk about have no scientific basis, since these
2 are people who were in very stressful situations, and the instinct in
3 that case when people recall the event is to inflate numbers. So I won't
4 be able to give you any precise number about this, and this is probably a
5 number that anyone will have a hard time to figure out extremely
7 Q. Mr. Ruez, you investigated this matter, so can you tell this
8 Trial Chamber what the number is, what the figure is? And then they can
9 assess whether the number has been increased due to the psychological
10 weakness of individuals or something else. And if you can't tell me,
11 perhaps you can tell them. Thank you.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
13 MR. McCLOSKEY: I object. This has been asked and answered
14 several times. It's an area that's really not in contest. The
15 Prosecution's case has been the same since the Krstic matter, and we have
16 barely scratched the surface, and we have a lot of time left.
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. --
18 THE WITNESS: I confirm that I can only repeat, hour after hour,
19 that the only data we rely on is the number of people who we find in the
20 graves. We give a courtesy to the Defence to consider that any other
21 body found on the surface died in a combat situation.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think, Mr. Tolimir, the witness has given you
23 this answer several times, and you perhaps should consider to move to
24 another topic.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, in my indictment
1 there is a figure there, the number of people that I'm being accused of.
2 Now, how am I going to deal with this if the investigators who took the
3 statements from these people and took part in the events can't tell me?
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, you got the relevant answers by this
5 witness. You can deal with this with several witnesses in this trial.
6 Wait for those who are able to answer these questions.
7 Please carry on.
8 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
9 Q. Now, Mr. Ruez, I'm interested in whether there are any
10 forensic -- there is any forensic evidence about these victims of combat,
11 that is to say, those people who were killed in combat. Thank you.
12 A. I will have to leave this part of the cross-examination to the
13 pathologist who dealt with the analysis and examination of these bodies.
14 This was not part of my duties.
15 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now, let's move on from this interview and
16 go on to the statement you gave to the French Parliamentary Commission on
17 the 22nd of February, 2001.
18 And for that, may we call up 1D59, please. Thank you.
19 We have the document on our screens now. May we turn to page 2,
20 please. It is the penultimate paragraph on page 2 in the English, and
21 it's also on page 2 of the Serbian. Thank you. The one-but-last
23 In this statement, you say as follows, and I'm quoting:
24 "During that time, the line of people continued. There was
25 extremely violent fighting with the Serbian forces who tried to ambush
1 them along the way. At one point, part of the line left to make believe
2 that there was an attack on Zvornik expressly to ease the pressure on the
3 rest of the line. The greatest number of prisoners were taken during the
4 day of the 13th of July."
5 Now, my question to you is this: In your statement before the
6 French Parliament, you talk about fierce clashes. Unfortunately, when
7 there are fierce clashes, there are a lot of dead and wounded. Now, can
8 you tell me, since you have been dealing with people on the list of
9 killed, how many people were killed during these fierce clashes, thank
10 you, or violent fighting?
11 A. Okay, two things on this. First, about the clashes, again, since
12 the military operation was not the aim of the testimony, this paragraph
13 is to indicate the context. So, in fact, the context, if you break down
14 this little paragraph, would be the ambushes at the start of a column.
15 And then, indeed, once the column arrived in the area of Zvornik, as you
16 know, there was intensive fighting, the column could even have stormed
17 into Zvornik. A lot of people were called back from their activities to
18 go on the front-line. The Zvornik Brigade was stripped of most of its
19 numbers because they were going down to Zepa, and, indeed, we learned
20 later on that a little part of the main column made a fake move towards
21 Zvornik in order to distract the Serb forces from the point where they
22 intended to exit. So, again, this is a small paragraph to indicate the
23 context, but it's not the heart of the -- I hate calling this "the
24 story." I mean, the concern of this case.
25 And, again, I repeat, no way for me to give any figure regarding
1 those killed in action. I cannot do that.
2 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. And do you know the number of people killed
3 in action? I know you can't give us a number, but do you know it, did
4 you investigate?
5 A. I'm sorry, I think I have answered this question maybe probably
6 more than 10 times since the beginning of this afternoon. No, I don't
7 know. No, I cannot say. Until we have not finalised the entire
8 exhumation process, no one will ever be able to say.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, if the witness knew he had to tell
10 that in court, and he says he doesn't know. Please, don't repeat again
11 this question.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. But
13 those who survived state this in their statements.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Ruez, could you tell me whether a military operation was one
16 where part of the forces, as you say, tried to simulate an attack on
17 Zvornik and changed direction?
18 A. Yes. Though it is not part of the investigation, this is
19 something that we learned had happened, yes, indeed.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Ruez.
21 Now, may we have onto our screens 1D600 back again, please, or,
22 rather, 1D60. 1D60 and page 3 of that document, please. Thank you.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, the document we just had on the
24 screen, do you tender that?
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Yes, I'd like to tender
1 it, but we're going to use it some more. Thank you.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Then we can deal with that later.
3 Mr. McCloskey.
4 MR. McCLOSKEY: I'm not sure. Is he offering the entire
5 testimony in front of the French Parliamentary? That's quite a bit. I
6 would object to that. I'm not sure if that's necessary. For the same
7 reasons as I've said before, if statements such as this come in, 92 bis
8 or other -- there are other ways of bringing it in, but not the entire
9 parliamentary statement just based on some short cross-examination
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir indicated that he will use this
12 document later with this witness, and we will wait for having seen the
13 relevant parts and then we will deal with that.
14 Please carry on, Mr. Tolimir.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. That's
16 right, we will be dealing with it some more.
17 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
18 Q. I'd like to dwell now for a moment on that same page. It's
19 page 3, actually. I said 1D60, page 3 in Serbian.
20 The last sentence in the middle column, paragraph 1, and I quote:
21 "When we complete all the exhumations, we'll have, more or less,
22 the number of those killed."
23 And then in the next paragraph, you refer to one of the graves
24 that we mentioned here, the Glogova grave, and you say, and I quote:
25 "There is a specific feature. One of the graves in Glogova
1 contains the bodies of people who were killed along the
2 Konjevic Polje-Kravica road. The Serbs will say of them that they were
3 killed in battle, whereas they were killed as soon as they set foot on
4 the asphalt road."
5 End of quotation, and we will add that to the total number.
6 Now, what date are you talking about here?
7 A. I'm talking about 13 July.
8 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now, can you tell us how many bodies were
9 buried in Glogova? Thank you.
10 A. That will be a question to address to Professor Richard Wright,
11 who has all the figures, in terms of numbers. But, again, for Glogova,
12 there will be a need first to exhume all the sites who are south of
13 Srebrenica. And as far as I know, aside the one that was exhumed by the
14 ICTY probably in 2000, or latest in 1999, I don't think any of the sites
15 that we have spotted south of Srebrenica have been exhumed so far.
16 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. I'm not asking about other ones. I'm
17 asking you specifically about Glogova. Can you tell us something and
18 answer my question just with respect to Glogova, what the number was? I
19 didn't ask you how many there were in the primary and secondary graves,
20 but what the number was here, Glogova.
21 A. No, General, I did answer your question. I said that I cannot
22 answer it. This one will be answered by Professor Richard Wright.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Can you tell me, if one group is armed and
24 is breaking through the encirclement and refuses to surrender, does that
25 group then represent a legitimate target to attack or not? Thank you.
1 A. It is a legitimate target. This is the reason why we have not
2 taken into account any testimony of a person who would say that before
3 being shot, they had not surrendered, had not handed over their weapons
4 or threw them away. We consider these situations as combat situations.
5 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Could you tell me whether all the ambushes
6 for the opposite side, the combatants of the opposite side, was that
7 legitimate too, a legitimate object and target of the two warring
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, please.
10 MR. McCLOSKEY: Objection. This is both asked and answered, and
11 it's really calling for legal opinion, as well as we get into what's
12 legitimate and what's not legitimate, which this witness has also
13 indicated he's not prepared to be able to answer.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think, Mr. McCloskey, you are absolutely right.
15 The witness is not here to answer legal questions.
16 Please take that into account and carry on.
17 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 Q. Mr. Ruez, do you consider that a knowledge of combat theory is
19 indispensable for one to conclude whether something is a combat situation
20 or not? Thank you.
21 A. I feel so incompetent in that matter that this is the reason why
22 we focused only to determine the fate of people who had surrendered or
23 had been captured and were under detention under the control of the
24 security branch of the Bosnian Serb Army. These are the only ones this
25 investigation had the duty to determine what happened to them, where they
1 had been killed, where they had been buried, and later on where their
2 bodies had been transported to in order to hide the evidence of that
4 Q. Thank you. Yes, I asked you that so that I could see on the
5 basis of what parameters you identified whether somebody in a mass
6 grave -- whether people in a mass grave were killed through combat or
7 not, and whether they had taken to the woods, and so on. And you took
8 statements from people, and you judged by the locations, themselves?
9 Thank you.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, the witness has indicated several
11 times in which way he was able to investigate the facts, and you should
12 proceed with questions related to the facts the witness can testify
13 about. Please ask questions.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Q. Mr. Ruez, it is not my intention to take away or add anything to
16 your testimony. My only aim is to arrive at the truth before this
17 Trial Chamber about the events which you investigated. So, if possible,
18 could you please answer my next question bearing that in mind.
19 Let's stay with page 2 -- or, rather, it's page 3 of 1D60, where
20 you state the following: You say that you relied on a list supplied by
21 the ICRC, and add:
22 "The number of dead remains, now we know, after so many years,
23 that all of them are missing and dead. That is not contentious anymore."
24 Now, in another place of that same document, 1D60, the first part
25 of your interview you say as follows:
1 "The figure that we give is a minimum of the minimum. And
2 whenever we quote figures, we know that hundreds are missing, but we
3 would rather err on the side of caution and quote a lower number than a
4 higher number."
5 Now, my question to you is this: Can you tell us where -- well,
6 we had the opportunity of reading in many places, in many reports
7 provided to us by the Prosecution, this conservative attitude to numbers.
8 How is it in evidence? Can you tell us whether you know that a number of
9 Muslims from Srebrenica, after the fall of Srebrenica, crossed illegally
10 to territory outside Bosnia-Herzegovina - Germany, Holland, and other
11 third countries - and did you register them and strike them from the list
12 of missing persons? Thank you.
13 A. On this, there is the testimony of an expert who testified on
14 this demography aspect during the Krstic trial, so I won't enter in that
15 field. But, again, all this is right. The figure that we bring up is
16 very conservative. When, in any other press statement, you always read
17 this figure of 8.000 as having been killed, we always say, no, the real
18 number that we take in account is the number that will be known when the
19 exhumation process is finished, and for sure this figure will be lower
20 than the number of missing since we consider that a part of these have
21 been killed, let's say, in combat.
22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
23 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Can you tell us, Mr. Ruez, whether your investigative team or you
25 knew that a number of men had left Srebrenica and Bosnia and Herzegovina
1 to third countries in Western Europe and that they are still listed under
2 missing persons and those killed?
3 A. No, I don't know about that. Again, the expert, the demographer,
4 would be able to give more details on this. What we knew at that time is
5 that, indeed, one group of an unknown number crossed the Drina to try to
6 find shelter in Serbia, but -- according to the information we received,
7 was that there was nothing, let's say, ugly to report about their fates.
8 The reason why, these people again are not -- were not part of the
9 investigation. But I have no idea if some of them are not on the missing
10 list, still on the list of missing, and if they are ever been reported as
11 missing, since they were not missing.
12 Q. Thank you. Tell us, then, if you did know, by any chance, would
13 then their names have to be struck off this list of missing persons of
14 Srebrenica? Thank you.
15 A. I think it is the responsibility of the ICRC, who drafted this
16 list, to then continue to deal with this list and update the list if
17 someone shows up alive somewhere. But I cannot answer in the name of
19 Q. Thank you. I'm not asking you to answer on behalf of the ICRC.
20 I'm just asking you this: If, as an investigator, you learned that some
21 of these people were registered in third foreign countries, would you
22 then request that their names be taken off the missing persons list for
23 Srebrenica? Thank you.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, the witness has just answered this
25 question. It's not necessary to repeat that.
1 Carry on, please.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, but I wasn't asking
3 about whether the ICRC had to strike these names off the list, but rather
4 whether the investigators would have to do it. Thank you, but I did not
5 get an answer.
6 THE WITNESS: Yes, the answer is always the same. The answer is
7 that -- I mean, I have not read your indictment, General, but I don't
8 believe that the Prosecution charges you with any missing person.
9 I think the indictment, like it has always been, is focused only on the
10 fact that several thousand persons who were prisoners have been murdered.
11 The final number, again, today is still unknown, since we have still
12 several secondary sites containing an unknown number of bodies that can
13 be connected with the primary sites needs to be exhumed. So I cannot
14 enter a debate about this missing list.
15 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. For your information, I am charged with
16 genocide as well, and I have to try and shed light from every angle
17 regarding -- including the things that you investigated. Thank you.
18 Could the witness now please be shown 1D102. We can wait for it
19 to come up on the monitors.
20 In the meantime, let me just say that this is a newspaper report
21 that caused a lot of excitement, and it was a statement by Mr. Tokaca,
22 the director of the investigative centre, who, on the 21st of March,
23 2010, only a day after your evidence in this case, made public the
24 following information. And I will just read the relevant portions.
25 This report was published in all the daily papers and many weekly
1 magazines in Republika Srpska and the Federation of Bosnia and
2 Herzegovina. We don't have the document before us yet. I can't see the
3 first page. We can only see here where it says the director of the
4 Investigating Centre from Sarajevo, Mr. Mirsad Tokaca, said "yesterday"
5 in Banja Luka, that in the course of the investigation of war crimes, he
6 learned that about 500 people from Srebrenica were still alive, and yet
7 their names are on the list of those missing in Srebrenica in July 1995.
8 So he said that in the course of the investigation that he conducted, he
9 learned that 500 people who were on the missing persons list for
10 Srebrenica were still alive, and he also says:
11 "We learned that about 70 persons who were buried at the
12 Memorial Centre in Potocari were not in Srebrenica at the time at all."
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I received information that this is the only page
14 of this document, and I'm not sure if you have up-loaded this document in
15 e-court. We have nothing except this page, and, therefore, you should be
16 careful with that. You're not giving evidence.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I will
18 read what you can see on the screen, and you will see that everything I
19 have said is contained in there. I only mention this for the witness by
20 way of introduction. It says the following, I quote:
21 "Over 500 allegedly killed in Srebrenica still living."
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think there is a long quotation already in the
23 transcript. I think you should now put a question to the witness. It's
24 more appropriate to get information from this witness that's not just
25 repetitive --
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
2 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
3 Q. Mr. Ruez, can you tell us, please, whether in the meantime you
4 have been informed of this, as reported by Mr. Tokaca in several press
5 conferences that he gave both in Sarajevo and in Tuzla?
6 A. The answer is, no, I was not aware that Mr. Tokaca gave these
8 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Can you tell us now, please, whether you
9 know and whether the Prosecution knows that 500 people who are still
10 living are listed as missing or killed in Srebrenica? Thank you.
11 A. I can only answer for myself, and my answer is I discover these
12 statements that were made by Mr. Tokaca. I cannot say for anyone other
13 than myself.
14 Q. Thank you. Mr. Ruez, can you then tell us if this is the first
15 time that you hear of this, that Mr. Tokaca, who is a Muslim and lives in
16 Sarajevo, and who is officially the director of that centre, and whose
17 claim has not been disproved by anyone, can you tell us whether you are
18 going to request these 500 individuals that he is mentioning here will be
19 taken off the list? Thank you.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I'd like to hear the answer of the witness. He
21 will be able to do that.
22 THE WITNESS: Well, the answer is very simple. I left the
23 Tribunal in 2001. I have absolutely no authority -- for sure, I would
24 not have the authority to retrieve anything from the records, and I have
25 no authority to influence anyone to further investigate this matter. I'm
1 no more part of the investigation team since nine years now.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
3 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes. Mr. President, I object to the last
4 question because he states that it's not this -- something to the effect
5 that there's been nothing to dispute that, when I'm sure the general
6 knows in the press there has been, and I won't get into the details of
7 it, but something that's absolutely contrary to that by the very person
8 that's supposedly quoted. And by asking a question in this way, he is,
9 out of the press or deliberately misleading the Court, and he shouldn't
10 be doing either.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: We don't have any document on the screen or in
12 e-court, and, therefore, I think your position is quite clear.
13 Mr. Tolimir, please carry on.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
15 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Mr. Ruez, is it true that almost no one, except partially this
17 Centre for Documentation and Investigation, no one is really
18 investigating whether persons who are on the missing persons list are
19 still living and perhaps living somewhere in the West, Western Europe or
20 the United States? Thank you.
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, I think it is not necessary to
22 repeat and repeat and repeat. Otherwise, will you get always the same
23 answers. The witness made very clear that he is no longer -- for many
24 years no longer an employee of the OTP. He is not investigating anything
25 further, so that you shouldn't continue putting these kind of questions
1 to this witness.
2 I think we must have the second break now.
3 You should think about that, consider the guidance of the
4 Chamber, and perhaps you can discuss it with your legal assistant.
5 We adjourn and resume at 6.00.
6 --- Recess taken at 5.30 p.m.
7 --- On resuming at 6.04 p.m.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The Chamber was not aware -- before the break was
9 not aware of the fact that the Defence notified this afternoon the
10 document 1D00102, but only one page. This is perhaps one of the -- one
11 reason for the confusion which took place before the break. The Chamber
12 is of the view that if you want to have this page again on the screen and
13 to read this portion - we can follow on the screen - in B/C/S into the
14 transcript and put a question to that, you should do that, Mr. Tolimir.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
16 Could we then please see on the screens that document that you
17 just mentioned, the statement by Mr. Tokaca.
18 Thank you. For the transcript, would you allow me to read the
19 statement, because we will seek to tender it. Thank you.
20 I'm reading a statement by Mirsad Tokaca, the director of the
21 Research and Documentation Centre from Sarajevo:
22 "Director of the Investigation and Research Centre from Sarajevo
23 said yesterday in Banja Luka that in the course of the investigations
24 into war crimes, he received information about 500 men from Srebrenica
25 who are still living and who are on the list of those killed in
1 Srebrenica in July of 1995."
2 Thank you.
3 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Mr. Ruez, do you know that this statement was -- or gave rise to
5 a debate in a session of the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina?
6 A. I have absolutely no clue about this.
7 Q. Thank you. Could you answer one more question. Do you know that
8 the president of Republika Srpska - and tomorrow I will provide his
9 statement - asked that this number be deducted from the number of the
10 total -- from the total number of victims of Srebrenica? Thank you.
11 A. I have no information about such a request.
12 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us whether the person who now does the
13 work that you did, investigating Srebrenica, should he seek to obtain
14 these documents from the Centre for Investigating War Crimes in Sarajevo?
15 A. I have no word to say about an investigation I am no longer a
16 part of since nine years now.
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. My question is: Would it be necessary to
18 obtain this statement given by an official organ for the cases still
19 being tried here before this Tribunal? Thank you.
20 A. As a private person, and for the sake of historical purposes, I
21 could just invite you to ask Mr. Tokaca to come to The Hague as a Defence
22 witness. More than that I cannot say.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. I was only asking whether the person who
24 came to do your job, once you left, is that person capable of obtaining
25 those documents or not? In other words, can an investigator have access
1 to the documents possessed by the sides that are investigating these
3 A. Unfortunately, I'm no longer in a position to provide an answer
4 on this. I have to say that this is no longer my business, and I have no
5 idea on the current investigative powers of the Office of the Prosecutor,
6 and I have no word to say on this.
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Can you tell us, then, while you were still
8 in this job, were you able to co-operate with the investigating organs of
9 Bosnia and Herzegovina?
10 A. I could have done it. I didn't do it on purpose, aside of a
11 statement analysis that we did based on these compilations obtained by
12 the MUP and the Bosniak commission. In order to keep our independence,
13 we had absolutely no longer contacts with them, aside for the police to
14 organise materially some interview places and have maybe sometimes police
15 vehicles to bring these people to -- for our interview process. But we,
16 on purpose, disconnected from the work of this commission.
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. The individuals concerned that are on the
18 list provided by the ICRC as missing persons, would it be normal, once
19 one learned that they were still living, that this information be made
20 public? Thank you.
21 A. I leave to Mr. Tokaca the responsibility of what he says to the
22 press. The only thing I can say is that at least if this is correct,
23 these people will not be identified through their DNA as being found in
24 the mass graves we are concerned with. That's the only thing I can say.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. I understand what you're saying. In order
1 not to dwell on this anymore and not to waste any time, we will provide
2 and present to you tomorrow some documents, such as, for instance, a
3 statement by the prime minister. But for now, we'll move on to another
5 Your book contains a large number of aerial photos that you were
6 given by the American intelligence services. That's what you said here.
7 Before I put a question to you, I would like to show you the statement
8 that you provided to the French media.
9 Could we please see 1D0159. This is an interview with the
10 commissioner, Jean-Rene Ruez, leader of the investigating team into
11 Srebrenica, provided in 2001. Could we please see page 11 of this
12 document, a report to the Parliamentary Committee of France. Thank you.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please give us the number again. This can't be
14 the correct number, 1D0159.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 1D059. I apologise if I misspoke
16 the first time. Thank you. 1D059.
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
18 MR. McCLOSKEY: To clarify, Mr. Ruez never said that this was
19 provided by the intelligence services. He said the State Department, and
20 there's a big difference.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. McCloskey. We'll
22 take a look at the text now and see what was said, and the witness can
23 answer the question and take into account your remarks too.
24 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Now, we have page 11 -- can we have page 11, because I'd like to
1 quote from that page. What paragraph is it? It's the third paragraph in
2 the Serbian, and paragraph 5 in the English. With respect to the
3 photograph which the USA sent you, you state, among other things:
4 "We don't possess photographs at all showing the execution taking
5 [Realtime transcript read in error "took"] place, if that is what you
6 wish to know. We always have photographs showing before and after."
7 Did I quote that correctly, and did you say that before the
8 French Parliamentary Committee?
9 A. Yes, I did.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 Now may we show one of those photographs to the witness, which is
12 65 ter 01450, page 31, a Prosecution document. It's a photograph showing
13 buses by the Nova Kasaba. Thank you.
14 We haven't got the photograph -- yes, we have. It's just
16 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Now, you say that this was taken on the 13th of July, 1995. Tell
18 us how you established the date at which the photograph was taken. It
19 even says "1400 hours" there, "the 13th of July, 1995, 1400 hours." How
20 did you establish the date and the time? Thank you.
21 A. I just want to point a mistake in the transcript of my previous
22 answer, when I said: "Yes, correct," but there was something
23 mis-written. What I said is we never got a photograph of ongoing
24 execution, not execution locations. It's an ongoing execution. The
25 photos are before and after.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
2 THE WITNESS: On this one and on your question, the markings that
3 are on the picture, the yellow markings are my markings. The markings in
4 the white boxes are original markings that were on the photograph, as
5 provided by the State Department. So these dates are the dates these
6 pictures were officially taken.
7 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Thank you. Can you tell me on what basis you were able to
9 establish that, or were you told that that was the date and time that the
10 photograph was taken? Thank you.
11 A. I have -- I have no mean to control the origin of the markings.
12 The interesting point for me, as an investigator, with this photograph is
13 to confirm the statements of those who have been on this field, of those
14 who were passing by by bus, and this matches the date of the picture.
15 And probably even with the shadows of the buses, you could probably have
16 a correct assessment of the hour.
17 Q. So that means you can't tell the Trial Chamber how the date and
18 time came to be written there of this photograph? You can or you cannot
19 ? You cannot.
20 Now let's look at photograph 31, please, 30 and 31. 30 and 31
21 next, please, from that same set.
22 Could you tell the Trial Chamber how you were able to establish
23 the date and time here too? Thank you.
24 A. Exactly the same answer. All what is in the white boxes has been
25 put on it by the providers.
1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Can you tell me whether the photographs
2 were in colour or black and white, the ones you received? Thank you.
3 A. In black and white.
4 Q. Now, these photographs, are they the only ones of Nova Kasaba or
5 were you offered some others, too, depicting Nova Kasaba?
6 A. All the photographs that have been shown so far during the
7 various trials are photographs that we have obtained on request. They
8 have never been provided, without a previous request, from us. And,
9 indeed, in the area of Nova Kasaba, since we were also looking for one
10 execution site and mass graves, we received additional pictures connected
11 with Nova Kasaba.
12 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now, can you tell us whether these
13 photographs, the ones you've just shown us of this field, are identical
14 to the situation as it was then, and were there any changes that were
15 made compared to 2001, when you were the investigator?
16 A. These are exactly the pictures that I got through the
17 State Department at the time we requested for them.
18 Q. Thank you. Could you indicate to us where you see the convoy
19 here, when this is a column, a mixed column of vehicles, small and large
20 vehicles? Thank you.
21 A. Now, in this picture, which is an instantaneous picture, the only
22 thing you can see on the road is four buses driving in the direction --
23 or opposite the direction of this soccer field.
24 Q. Thank you. Can you see some small cars next to the buses as
25 well? Thank you.
1 A. Yes, indeed. At the bottom right of the picture, there is one on
2 the road. There is also one parked alongside of the road when you go up,
3 behind the -- at the corner behind one of the buses. And at the top left
4 of the picture, you also have one vehicle on the road.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 Now, may we have on e-court -- well, can we have the left of the
7 photograph, where it says "Nova Kasaba, the 13th of July, 1995," can we
8 show that on the left-hand side, and on the right-hand side can we have
9 D28? And it's an exhibit introduced into evidence during witness
10 testimony. It also shows Nova Kasaba the 13th of July, 1995, at 1400
11 hours. Thank you. It was testimony of the 26th of April.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Tolimir repeat the numbers, please.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] -- with the witness statement. He
14 confirmed having given the statement, and he drew this in. He drew the
15 markings by his own hand, the one we can see on the right-hand side of
16 the page. And I'd like to quote from his statement, and then I'll ask
17 you the question:
18 "I sat together --"
19 And the transcript page is 1383, lines 19 to 25 of the
20 transcript. He says:
21 "I sat together with other prisoners for some 20 minutes, and
22 then I saw Ratko Mladic coming out of a combat vehicle. That was on the
23 13th of July, sometime between 1400 hours and 1445 hours."
24 On page 1384, lines 4 to 6, he says the following: The witness
25 said that that was correct, as shown here, and that the stadium was full.
1 Now, I don't want to go through the whole statement, but at 1387 of the
2 transcript, the witness marked the positions where the prisoners were.
3 Now, in your testimony, Mr. Ruez, you said the following: You
4 said that you're 100 per cent certain that with respect to this
5 photograph, that the prisoners were in this field. And on page 930,
6 lines 9 to 12, you said, and I quote:
7 "For me, this is 100 per cent certain, because I can even see the
8 guards here."
9 Now, the witness marked the photograph and the place where the
10 prisoners were located. He used a red pen to mark in that area, because
11 we asked him whether there were a lot of them and he marked the area
12 where the prisoners were located in red. And also with a red pen, he
13 circled almost the entire stadium. According to him, General Mladic and
14 the place where the guards were was in the upper left-hand corner, and he
15 put a number 2 where that was.
16 Q. My question reads as follows: Can you explain to us whether,
17 through witness testimony, you checked out the authenticity of the
18 photographs sent you by the US authorities? You said the
19 State Department, I believe. And how do you explain the fact that -- or,
20 rather, the difference in the witness statement and what we see on the
21 photograph? Because on the photograph we see, on the left-hand side of
22 the football field, there's a group of prisoners, and in front of that
23 group there's another group of persons, allegedly, whereas the witness
24 drew this red area and said that the prisoners were in that whole area.
25 A. Yes, I understand your question. To me, there were two
1 informations. The one that can be seen on the picture and the testimony
2 of the witness are not necessarily in conflict for a simple reason. It
3 is that the picture -- the aerial imagery is an instant moment, at that
4 moment pinpointed at 1400, but this is a situation of evolution. Maybe
5 before 1400 there were more people on this field, but, anyhow, after 1400
6 there were suddenly more people because this place was getting more and
7 more crowded during the surrender process. So the timing given by the
8 witness said it was between -- [Overlapping speakers]
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You should switch off the microphone for any
11 THE WITNESS: I think I remember having read that he described
12 the situation that was around this hour. He says 1445. I'm not certain
13 he was watching his watch at that moment that day, but again the
14 situation in this location, that is, one main regroupment [sic] spot for
15 captured prisoners and those who were surrendering, it was an evolution,
16 so we only have one picture.
17 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Could you tell us now -- well, the witness
19 said that at 1400 hours he saw General Mladic and that the stadium was
20 full. Now --
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: Could we get a citation of where that's being
22 said so we can check it?
23 Thank you, I've found it. It's in a witness statement.
24 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I said that that was page 1383,
1 lines 19 to 25. The witness said:
2 "I was sitting together with some other prisoners for some 20
4 It was on the 13th of July, between 1400 hours and 1430 hours.
5 I think that you have now been able to find that in English. Have you?
6 The witness confirms his statement at transcript page 1384,
7 line 4. Thank you.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: What is your question?
9 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
10 Q. My question is this: Is it possible to have this difference;
11 that is to say, to have this difference between the photograph on the
12 left and the photograph on the right, which the witness has drawn in red,
13 whereas the photograph on the left just shows a small amount of people to
14 the left of the football field compared to those sitting in front? Thank
16 A. I could not say for sure, since I was not an eye-witness that day
17 at that hour. But one thing is sure, that it is that within half an hour
18 or one hour, the situation can change a lot. We don't even need to bring
19 in between the moment this witness describes the situation. And the
20 timing of the aerial imagery, if a group of a few hundred people are
21 brought to that field, the situation then looks significantly different.
22 Again, this is an instant shot. Half an hour before, half an hour later,
23 the situation can be different.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, to be very correct, you said, on
25 page 72, line 7:
1 "The witness said that at 1400 hours, he saw General Mladic."
2 You know, the correct quotation would be page 70, line 9:
3 "I saw Ratko Mladic coming out of a combat vehicle. That was on
4 the 13th of July, sometime between 1400 hours and 1445 hours."
5 That's slightly different. Be careful if you are quoting
7 Please carry on.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We quoted the portion of the
9 statement on page 1383 correctly. The lines were 19 to 25 of that page.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, please don't argue again. When you
11 put your question to the witness, then you made a wrong reference, only
12 to 1400 hours and not 1400 to 1445 hours. This is slightly different,
13 and, therefore, be very correct, please.
14 And now carry on. No discussion.
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
17 It says here "at 1400 hours and 1430 hours," thank you, and
18 that's how I read it out. Thank you.
19 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Now, Mr. Ruez, I asked you a moment ago whether these are the
21 only photographs that you received and whether the State Department would
22 give you photographs showing just one small group, not even several
23 hundred people -- not even 200 people, judging by the surface area, and
24 not provide you with photographs where the stadium is full. Thank you.
25 I don't assume that they stopped filming. Thank you.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: What is your question, Mr. Tolimir?
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The question is whether there are
3 any more photographs on which he can confirm what he's saying, that later
4 on there were more people, because the witness is claiming here that the
5 stadium was full, whereas Mr. Ruez says that there were as many as are
6 shown on the left-hand photograph in dotted form and they don't take up
7 even one-tenth of the football field, if you look at the scale of the
8 field and the people there. Thank you.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, your question was whether there are
10 any more photographs, and all the other things in the sentences were
11 again a debate.
12 Could you answer that question?
13 THE WITNESS: Yes. The answer is simple, is that General Tolimir
14 is wrong when he assumes that the people who took the photograph stopped
15 filming. Again, this is an instant shot. It is not a film. So I am not
16 in a position to discuss the aerial means that enabled the US to take
17 these pictures, but this is, as far as I know, not an extract from a
18 video, it's an instant shot, and that day, in that area, that we only --
19 material available.
20 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now, is it your assessment -- or, rather,
22 how many people would you say there were on the photograph provided to
23 you by the United States of America, the one on the left? Thank you.
24 A. No, I will not risk to make an assessment just at the top of my
25 head. Trying to do one will require to take very precise measurements,
1 go back to the ground and try to frame precisely the position of these
2 people. And then you have the additional question to know if they are
3 sitting, if they are standing. So I would not be in a position, anyhow,
4 to make a very precise assessment of how many they are at this precise
5 moment on this field.
6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now, the rectangle on the US photograph on
7 the left is not a larger surface area than two centimetres' length and
8 one centimetre wide; would that be right? Would you agree?
9 A. No, I would totally disagree, since two centimetres is very far
10 away from the resolution of this picture.
11 Q. Thank you. Can you tell me how many little squares you can fit
12 into the football field? On the empty space of the football field, how
13 many more little squares could you fit in?
14 A. I would not make this estimate also on top of my head. I would
15 leave it to you to do it. But this is not part of my concern on this
16 picture. The interest here is to confirm witness testimonies with a
17 photograph that we believe is genuine, and these two things match
18 together. Again, if there is a difference, in terms of numbers that can
19 be seen, the explanation can be that at this day -- moment of that day,
20 the flow of prisoners was continuous, as we could see it on another video
21 on another situation along the asphalt road. So this is again an instant
22 shot. Maybe the field was empty one hour before and full one hour later.
23 This, I cannot say.
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Tell us now, please, on what basis do you
25 believe that the situation on the 13th of July, at 1400 hours, on the
1 left-hand side is correct, the one shown by the satellite photograph, the
2 aerial photograph? Why would you say that was correct? Thank you.
3 A. For the reason that it matches the parts of the statement of this
4 witness who came here to testify, even though the situation he describes
5 is not exactly the one on the picture, but for the reasons that I already
6 talked about. But it also matches other witness testimonies who might
7 probably not be called just to talk about this, but who were on board of
8 the buses and who could see people getting -- being scrambled on this
9 field, and also due to other informations that we didn't use since they
10 were not on record, but off record.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now, can this Trial Chamber and this
12 Defence know who those witnesses were? Could we know who those witnesses
13 were, and can we see their statements? Thank you.
14 A. Is it a question for me or for the Prosecution?
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: There's only one witness present.
16 THE WITNESS: Yeah. In that case, it would need to retake the
17 witness statements and re-identify people who were on board of buses and
18 who we don't necessary interview and even less necessary brought to the
19 Court by the Prosecution.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: And we remain open for any such requests, and we
22 will, in fact, look for such requests for the Defence.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you for that offer.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, if we are presenting
25 evidence here and witness statements, then those witnesses have to be
1 named and they should be accessible to the Defence, because we have to
2 check their authenticity. And that is why I put this question to the
3 witness; namely, who those witnesses were and whether we can obtain that
4 information, whether the Trial Chamber can have that information.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Perhaps you didn't listen to the comment of
6 Mr. McCloskey. He said:
7 "We remain open for any such requests, and we will, in fact, look
8 for such requests for the Defence."
9 This is the normal obligation of the OTP, and you may deal in
10 direct contact with the Prosecution. The witness is not in the position
11 to provide you with these documents.
12 Please carry on with your cross-examination.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 Q. Now, Mr. Ruez, could you tell us whether there is a big
15 discrepancy in the photograph where the witness indicated and drew what
16 the situation was like at 1400 up until 1430 and the satellite shot that
17 we see of the 13th of July at 1400 hours? Is there a big difference in
18 terms of the surface area that is depicted in one and the other photo?
19 Thank you.
20 A. In terms of numbers, there is certainly a significant difference.
21 But in terms of spotting this place as a regroupment [sic] place for
22 captured prisoners or surrendered people, there is no discrepancy.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Does this satellite shot actually fix the
24 situation as it was at 1400 hours on the 13th of July, 1995, on this
25 football field? Thank you.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before you object, Mr. McCloskey, I would like --
2 it's not necessary to object to these questions because the question is
3 already answered, quite clear of the source and the information the
4 witness got from the provider of this aerial photo. Please take into
5 account that the photo on the right side was not taken at the same moment
6 as the photo of the left side. There may be some discrepancies.
7 Mr. McCloskey.
8 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, the objection is based on the
9 assumption in his question that this is a satellite photo, and the record
10 should reflect in no way his speculations on the platform by which this
11 was taken. That would potentially harm the Rule 70 situation that we
12 have here, and it's my duty, under our Rule 70, to make sure that there
13 aren't speculations or such false issues in the record, is merely what
14 that objection is about.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
16 Mr. Tolimir, continue.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President, and thank
18 you, Mr. McCloskey.
19 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
20 Q. My question was, for the witness, whether he could observe a
21 discrepancy between the left-hand photo that was taken from a satellite
22 or in some other way - I don't know what, but it's an aerial photo - and
23 the photograph that was marked by a Prosecution witness who was
24 questioned here on the 26th of April. Thank you.
25 A. I have already answered that question before.
1 Q. Thank you. Could you please repeat it for the transcript? Could
2 you just give us a brief answer, yes or no? Can you observe a
3 discrepancy or not? I didn't really get a precise and accurate answer.
4 You tried to explain something, but you didn't actually answer whether
5 you see that there is a discrepancy or a difference between these two
7 A. One is in black and white. The other one is in colour. One is
8 seen from an angle roughly west-east. The right one is from an angle
9 north-south. These are differences. Then the other difference, as you
10 already pointed, is the size on this field that was occupied by
11 prisoners. Yes, there is a discrepancy. Where there is no discrepancy
12 is that the witness spots the soccer field of Nova Kasaba as being a
13 regroupment [sic] point for prisoners. He had no photo camera at that
14 time, but the imagery provided by State Department spots prisoners on
15 this soccer field as well. This is the interest of connecting witness
16 testimony with this aerial imagery. But, again, it's an instant shot, so
17 with a little time difference due to the movements of surrendering people
18 that day, within half an hour you can have a very different situation on
19 one spot. It is true here in Nova Kasaba. It is also true for Sandici,
20 exactly for the same reasons.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez. Now, tell us just one more thing: Is there
22 a big difference in the surface area depicting prisoners in the photo as
23 drawn by the witness and the aerial photo, and where can we observe a
24 greater number of prisoners? Thank you.
25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, I think the witness has answered
1 that question several times. You should be a little bit aware on the
2 time you have left today and tomorrow. These are the only days this
3 witness will be present for your cross-examination. Just carry on with
4 other questions.
5 Mr. McCloskey.
6 MR. McCLOSKEY: And on that same subject, Mr. President, I -- as
7 you know, I haven't been doing much redirect, but could I reserve
8 30 minutes, if possible, for redirect for tomorrow in that same regard?
9 Thank you.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I'm sure this is appropriate.
11 Mr. Tolimir, please carry on.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I would just
13 appreciate it if you take into consideration the fact that the time that
14 was allotted to me was also spent for objections by the Prosecution, and
15 I don't have a problem with objections being made, but I'm just putting
16 questions about the obvious. I haven't put any questions regarding
17 things that are not obvious. Thank you.
18 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Mr. Ruez, could you tell us, how far is Sandici from Kasaba or,
20 rather, from this football pitch? Thank you.
21 A. This football pitch is on the line Konjevic Polje at the north
22 and Nova Kasaba at the south. Sandici is on the line that goes from
23 Konjevic Polje towards Bratunac. These are two different areas. If you
24 want a rough estimate of the distance between the two, I would say 13
1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Ruez.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we now please show the
3 witness 65 ter 01450, page 46, and could we at the same time
4 show page 48. Could we have a split screen with the two pages on it?
5 Thank you.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, I think you need your microphone.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
9 We see this field in Sandici, this meadow, and we see Kasaba
10 depicted. The date is 13 July 1995, 1400 hours.
11 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
12 Q. And you said on the transcript that this photograph, where we see
13 a group of people, was taken at the same time, on the 13th of July at
14 1400 hours. Did I quote you correctly? Thank you.
15 A. These two pictures are pictures of Sandici. The picture on the
16 left is, indeed, a picture taken of Sandici precisely the same day and
17 the same hour than the aerial imagery that was taken from Nova Kasaba.
18 But these two spots are the two main regroupment [sic] spots of
19 prisoners, but prisoners who were not in the same area. They were at a
20 distance. Nova Kasaba was the regroupment [sic] spot for the prisoners
21 who had reached this big hill that is just above Konjevic Polje. Sandici
22 is much more towards the east and was the main regroupment [sic] spot for
23 those who had stayed in this area which is nearby Kravica. It's two
24 different spots. But, indeed, the picture of Nova Kasaba and the picture
25 of Sandici, they are from, in fact, the same picture, from the picture of
1 that entire area that day at that hour.
2 Q. Is this an aerial photo made by the United States?
3 A. Yes, it is.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Now a question by Judge Nyambe.
5 JUDGE NYAMBE: Okay. On page 82, line 10 to 12, you state:
6 "Indeed, the picture of Nova Kasaba and the picture of Sandici,
7 they are from, in fact, the same picture, from the picture that entire
8 area that day at that hour."
9 Are you suggesting that the pictures were taken at the same time
10 in Sandici as well as in Nova Kasaba.
11 THE WITNESS: It is exactly the same picture, but in such a
12 picture you can go into different areas. This picture covers a very
13 large area, and then you can focus -- if you know where to look into, you
14 can focus on various spots on the same picture. So, in fact, these two
15 pictures are coming from the same picture, the same original picture.
16 JUDGE NYAMBE: Okay.
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. I think we are at the end of today's
18 hearing. We have to adjourn. Before we do that, let me make two
20 But, first of all, I would like to thank you, Mr. Ruez. You have
21 to come back tomorrow for a continuation of your examination. And the
22 same advice I gave you the last time; no contact, please, with the
23 Prosecution about this evidence.
24 THE WITNESS: Absolutely.
25 Also, just in case, since anyhow Wednesday is a general strike in
1 the country I need to return to, I will have no plane. So if there is
2 absolutely a need for me to testify again on Wednesday, I'm fully at the
3 disposal of the general and the Chamber.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That's extremely nice. But, on the other hand,
5 I think there are other witnesses scheduled. No, on Wednesday, we are
6 not sitting. No, no, no, there is no hearing on Wednesday. Next week,
7 and I hope for you there is no strike.
8 Before we adjourn, let me mention the following.
9 Mr. Tolimir, you always have to be aware of the possibility that
10 the Prosecution makes objections. That will be your right as well if the
11 Prosecution is examining any witness. But this is part of the time under
12 your disposal. You should take that into account, and we should try to
13 proceed a little bit faster tomorrow than we did today.
14 The second remark, very shortly. I take it that you withdrew the
15 written motion for receiving two documents; that is, on page 4, line 13
16 to 15 of today's transcript, the 65 ter 1D81 and 1D82. This motion is
17 withdrawn, and, therefore, there's no need for any decision on that.
18 Thank you very much, and we adjourn until tomorrow at 2.15 in the
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please just -- I'd like to
21 tender this into evidence. I would just like to have the maps that we
22 just saw tendered into evidence.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: We'll deal with that tomorrow.
24 [The witness stands down]
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.04 p.m.,
1 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 4th day of May,
2 2010, at 2.15 p.m.