1 Thursday, 27 May 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good morning to everybody in the courtroom.
6 Before the next witness is being brought in, I would like to
7 raise some matters. Again, one decision -- one guidance related to
8 exhibits pursuant to Rule 92 ter.
9 In connection with a large number of exhibits tendered in
10 association with Mr. Erdemovic's testimony last week, you will recall,
11 Mr. McCloskey, the Chamber would like to further clarify the procedure to
12 be followed when tendering exhibits associated with prior testimony under
13 Rule 92 ter.
14 In the original Rule 92 ter decision of the 3rd of November last
15 year, again on 18th of March this year, and again on the 22nd of April,
16 2010, the Chamber has emphasised to the parties that the Chamber draws a
17 distinction between the exhibits submitted with Rule 92 ter motion which
18 were first admitted through the relevant witness in the prior proceeding,
19 secondly used with the relevant witness, but admitted through a different
20 witness in the prior proceeding, and, thirdly, used with the relevant
21 witness, but ultimately not admitted in the prior proceeding. Because
22 the Chamber employs a different approach with respect to each of these
23 categories of proposed exhibits, it is imperative that the parties
24 indicate on the list of exhibits, which is circulated prior to the
25 witness appearance, to which category each proposed exhibit belongs. For
1 those exhibits which are admitted through the witness in the prior
2 proceeding, the Chamber considers that they are necessarily associated
3 with the prior testimony, forming an integral part thereof, and will not
4 require an additional showing from the tendering party. Where there are
5 more than five such exhibits, in order to save court time, the Chamber
6 would like the tendering party to liaise with the Registry rather than
7 reading each exhibit into the record individually.
8 And, Mr. McCloskey, I'm sure you will appreciate this approach.
9 The Registry will then create an internal memorandum indicating
10 which exhibit numbers will be assigned to each of these proposed exhibits
11 once the witness appears in court and attests that the transcript
12 accurately reflects the witness declaration and what the witness would
13 say if examined pursuant to the terms of Rule 92 ter.
14 Once the witness makes this attestation, and assuming there were
15 no objections from the opposing party at that time, all exhibits admitted
16 through the witness during his or her testimony in the prior proceeding
17 will be admitted in the current case, and the Court Officer will file the
18 memorandum in the case record. For those exhibits which were not
19 admitted through the witness in the prior proceeding, the Chamber will
20 require an additional showing of relevance in relation to the present
21 case prior to admitting such exhibits.
22 Accordingly, it is imperative that the list circulated by the
23 tendering party prior to the witness's appearance in court clearly
24 indicate to which category the proposed exhibits belong.
25 Additionally, by creating a procedure to deal with large numbers
1 of exhibits associated with prior testimony by liaising with the
2 Registry, it is hoped that less time will need to be devoted to dealing
3 with such administrative issues during court.
4 I hope this guidance clarifies the situation for our future
6 Mr. McCloskey.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: I was just going to say, yes, I think it does.
8 And for Mr. Erdemovic, the ones I read, those had been admitted through
9 him in his previous testimony. That's why I didn't ask him about it, but
10 that's -- all of those fit that category, just so you know, and we will,
11 of course, tell you from now on.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
13 I would like to deal with one exhibit we have discussed last
14 week. It is D42, marked for identification.
15 On the 17th of March, 2010, the Defence tendered the document
16 1D00119 as an exhibit. After having received the Prosecution's
17 objection, the Chamber postponed the decision thereon. The document was
18 marked for identification as D42, marked MFI. It is an interview with a
19 person named Pelemis, published in a newspaper. The witness
20 Drazen Erdemovic is mentioned in this interview and testified about the
21 content of the interview and the person in question.
22 The Chamber will receive the document, which becomes now
23 Exhibit D42. In connection with the evidence of Witness Erdemovic, the
24 interview has probative value. However, the Chamber is not admitting it
25 for the truth of its content.
1 The third matter I would like to raise is the following: The
2 Chamber would like to provide the parties with a short explanation with
3 respect to their positions which we have received informally on the
4 public redacted version of our decision that was filed confidentially on
5 the 28th of April, 2010. This decision concerned the role of Mr. Gajic
6 in the courtroom.
7 Having considered these positions, the Chamber has decided to
8 redact only paragraphs 13, 14, and 15, as well as footnote 50 of the
9 decision, on the basis that they reveal what may be considered private or
10 personal information concerning Mr. Gajic. Having carefully reviewed the
11 remainder of the decision, the Chamber is not of the position that there
12 is a legitimate reason for the redaction of any further paragraphs.
13 Paragraph 30, which the Defence submits should be redacted, does
14 not contain any information not already contained in other portions of
15 the decision which the Defence does not seek to have redacted. It also
16 does not contain either private or personal information which would
17 justify such a redaction. The public redacted version of the decision
18 will be issued shortly.
19 The last matter is the following: Next Monday, the 7th of June,
20 2010, a plenary meeting of the Judges of this Tribunal is scheduled for
21 1.00 p.m.
22 to delay the start of our hearing that day for one hour, and will
23 commence at 3.15 p.m.
24 These were the preliminary matters the Chamber wanted to raise.
25 Is there anything else?
1 Mr. McCloskey.
2 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President. Your Honours, good morning.
3 We now have a B/C/S translation for the Erdemovic plea agreement,
4 which was P00219, and that's in e-court, so it should be okay to offer
5 into evidence now.
6 And Mr. Gajic just reminded us of the US letter about aerial
7 imagery, 65 ter 6277, P214, did not have a B/C/S translation, so we are
8 sending that for translation immediately.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before you continue, we will receive the -- just
10 a moment. P219 is already an exhibit, or was it marked for
12 MR. McCLOSKEY: It was marked for identification because it did
13 not have a B/C/S translation.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. It will now be received as an
15 exhibit, P219.
16 And the other -- the letter of the United States is already
17 marked for identification? I'm not sure about that.
18 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, it is, and we should have a translation for
19 you tomorrow.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: And, Mr. President, as you're aware, we are now
22 beginning the process of -- we have 19 intercept operators that we'll be
23 calling over the next weeks. The first one is ready to go, and he is
24 still a -- well, if we could go into private session briefly.
25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before we do that, I would like to mention
1 something else.
2 I can't see her because she's hiding from my position. I would
3 like to indicate that the Chamber has no objection against the presence
4 of Ms. Djordjevic here in the courtroom. Welcome to this trial, and we
5 wish you good co-operation with everybody.
6 MS. DJORDJEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Private.
8 [Private session]
9 [Open session]
10 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
12 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes.
13 Mr. President, naturally there was intercepting going on all
14 sides during the war. The Bosnian Muslim army and the Bosnian Muslim
15 state security forces both were engaged in intercept operations, both
16 wire-tapping and intercepting the radio waves. We do not have any
17 wire-taps in this case, so you will be hearing evidence on radio
18 intercepts that they're getting over the airwaves with radio equipment.
19 And you will be hearing from mostly army intercept people, with a few
20 state Security people, and you'll be hearing the evidence about the size
21 of those two groups.
22 Of the many, many thousands of intercepts in the war that may be
23 relevant, we have chosen about 300 to offer into evidence that are
24 relevant. And a certain number of those are, of course, more relevant,
25 but 300 will be offered. We have offered 27 operators in evidence, 19
1 that we will bring here as either full witnesses or 92 ter witnesses.
2 The others, we've offered 92 bis.
3 The reason we have chosen to bring some people to court was
4 partly based on the importance of those intercepts, but also largely
5 based on the Rules, in that those intercepts either go to the acts or
6 conducts of the accused, mentioning him, or sometimes his subordinates,
7 or actually important intercepts in the case against him, so we have
8 endeavoured to call these 19 operators so that they could be fully
9 cross-examined because their intercepts have a certain importance to the
10 accused and to the Prosecution, though there is no firm and fast rule why
11 we have chosen some and not others, but it is mostly because of our value
12 judgement that those intercepts were either acts or conduct, which is
13 easy to determine because his name is mentioned or something like that,
14 or other important intercepts.
15 You will find that the intercept operators don't really remember
16 the intercepts, there's just too many, and so we don't generally ask them
17 questions about the substance and the meaning of intercepts because they
18 just don't remember, but the process is what we mostly will talk about.
19 It gets rather repetitive because it's mostly the same process without
20 the topic, but we've done this in the past and we've done it now because
21 we believe, because of the subject matter of the intercepts, the law
22 requires us to do that, because process is very important.
23 And that's fundamentally what I wanted to start you out with so
24 you had the -- just the basic outline of why we're calling so many of
25 these folks, and so you'll be able to distinguish this is a State
1 Security person, this person that we begin with, but it will be mostly
2 army intercept people that you'll be hearing from. And that's all I
3 wanted to say to start out.
4 I have a packet of the intercepts that this particular witness
5 noted down himself. You've got a brief primer when Mr. Kweku Vanderpuye
6 responded to your questions and he explained briefly how the intercepts
7 were listened to and transcribed, and so we have called the intercept
8 operators who were involved in the listening or transcribing of
9 particular intercepts. This witness has 12 such intercepts that we have
10 put in an outline format. There's an outline in the front, and then the
11 intercepts, both English and B/C/S, are in little packets that we have
12 for everyone for your convenience. And I think we have been developing
13 this for each of the intercept operators, if you would so like.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: If I understand you correctly, we will have
15 different versions of the original and the translation, and then in that
16 case we should -- you should follow the guide-line of the Chamber related
17 to exhibit numbers, with the number and A, B, C, so that we can identify
18 the version -- the original version and the transcript and the
20 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, we understood that, and Ms. Stewart is -- we
21 are in the process of doing that, and I think we're squared away for
22 these first.
23 In addition, this is -- this is not a 92 ter witness, but he does
24 have 12 intercepts. I don't intend -- but we'll see how we do with this.
25 I don't feel, from the Prosecution's perspective or the Court's, that we
1 need to go over each one of them, so I have sort of a shorthand way for
2 him to identify that all of these are his, and I will ask him to talk
3 about one or two of them so you can see -- get an example of it, and that
4 way I may not need to read out all 12 and the numbers associated with
5 them. But we can play it by ear and, of course, see how you feel about
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
8 And I would like to mention that the Chamber is seized of your
9 submission to change some of the witnesses from 92 bis to 92 ter, and we
10 received yesterday the response by the Defence, and we hope that we will
11 be able to issue a decision as soon as possible.
12 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 We are ready to call the first witness.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: If there is nothing further, the witness should
15 be brought in.
16 Mr. Tolimir.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the accused, please.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Since preliminary matters were
19 raised here, and Mr. McCloskey wanted to go straight through to the
20 witness, I would have an administrative matter to raise, by your leave.
21 Thank you.
22 May there be peace in this house, and may God's will be done in
23 these proceedings, and may the outcome be as God wishes.
24 As I was informed by my legal advisor, Mr. Gajic, our submission
25 to have two working days a week was denied and that we should continue by
1 working three days a week up until the summer recess, whereupon the
2 workload would increase. May I give my submissions on the matter?
3 Working more than two days a week will create enormous problems
4 for us, and that's primarily due to the way the transcripts are produced.
5 The transcript of the proceedings is only done in English and French, and
6 that causes a problem for me. When we have a 92 ter witness, there, the
7 normal rules do not apply whereby I should be given all the documentation
8 in both English and B/C/S. In such cases, the transcripts are available
9 only in English and French, whereas for the B/C/S version I can only be
10 given audiotapes. And, of course, you will imagine that I need as many
11 days as I spend in the courtroom here to go through all these audiotapes.
12 Therefore, in keeping with the relevant Articles of the Statute,
13 every accused is entitled to adequate time and resources for the
14 preparation of his defence, and the accused is also entitled to the
15 free-of-charge assistance of an interpreter if he's not able to use the
16 official language of the Tribunal.
17 Therefore, in view of the fact that I need to go through the
18 audio and videotapes to acquaint myself with the earlier testimonies of
19 these witnesses, and since I would require as much time for that as I do
20 for spending in the courtroom, and sometimes even more, I need to be
21 provided with adequate time. Otherwise, I'm only given transcripts. And
22 I need to receive exact references in the transcript that will be used in
23 order for me to ask for their translation into B/C/S. In other words, I
24 need the relevant portions of the transcript translated into B/C/S, and I
25 need them in a timely fashion. The Defence does not have the resources
1 to do this itself.
2 And let me recall that the language assistant --
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, we have listened carefully to your
4 words, but you know the Chamber has ruled on this already. We have taken
5 into account the position of the Prosecution and your submission to this
6 question. We have ruled on that. There is no reason to change our
7 decision at this time. We have taken into account your position, as an
8 accused who is representing himself. This might cause a problem for you
9 in some respects, but, on the other hand, we have to be aware of a very
10 expeditious trial and at the same time a fair trial for you. But we
11 shouldn't continue a discussion about that because we have ruled on that,
12 and you are aware of our decision, and we should use the court time for
13 evidence, hearing the witness.
14 Do you have any other matter, despite this --
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
16 I'm not talking about your decision at all. I'm talking about my
17 need to have transcripts, and that may be the subject of your next
18 decision to allocate an interpreter to me and resources to pay that
19 interpreter or to have transcripts given to me in the Serbian language.
20 I'm not talking about the decision you have already made, or maybe I did
21 not make myself clear. But if Article 21 of the Statute applies to me as
22 well in its point 4, stipulating that I should have adequate time and
23 resources to prepare, then provisions should be made for that. And I'm
24 not talking about the decision you have already made. I'm talking about
25 something that needs to be done. And I suggest that you allocate to me
1 an interpreter and adequate resources and transcripts in the language I
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I stop you here. I think if there is any
4 argument, any need for that, you should do that in writing and submit
5 that to the Chamber in writing. I think it's a more appropriate way to
6 deal with your problem you have raised here. I hope that is the best way
7 to deal with this problem.
8 If there are no other matters --
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I will submit that
10 to you. But do you really need it in writing that I need transcripts and
11 that I need to refer to transcripts as an exhibit? It is up to you to
12 decide how these transcripts will be made available to me. If we have
13 trials three or four days a week, I have no time for that. I have no
14 time to listen to an interpreter translating to me what's written in the
15 transcripts or to study that. Of course, if you need a written
16 submission, I will make it, but we've been here for three years, and I
17 still haven't got the transcripts of the pre-trial conferences.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, we have now your position on the
19 record. The Chamber will consider your submission in due course, and now
20 we should stop the discussion about this topic here in the courtroom. We
21 want to use the court time for evidence. But we will consider your
23 The witness should be --
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President, but I
25 have not finished with the problems that I need to notify you of. I have
1 more problems, if you allow me.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, in this case it would be more
3 appropriate if you could do that in writing so that we have all your
4 arguments in front of us and the Prosecution could respond to that.
5 I think if this is a real serious problem, you should raise it in writing
6 in order to avoid to waste court time.
7 THE ACCUSED: [No interpretation]
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: We don't have translation.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I already told you of another of my
10 problem, that I'm being woken up every 10 or 20 minutes, which is many
11 times a night. I haven't seen it in the practice of any kind of
12 medicine, that waking a person up can be beneficial, medically. And I've
13 been here for three years, and this has been going on. I've already made
14 a written submission of that. I don't know how I can stand trial if I'm
15 allowed no rest.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, you are aware of the fact that the
17 Chamber has asked the Registry to provide us with a new status of your
18 health situation. And we will receive a report by the medical doctor of
19 the UNDU and an independent medical doctor, and I think then at that time
20 we should come back to this problem again. You see, the Chamber always
21 considers your concerns to every respect and what you are raising, but
22 I think you should stop this discussion. And when you say you need more
23 time to explain something, please do it in writing. It's better for
24 finding a proper decision.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, until now
1 20 submissions have been written about the problem of the satanic methods
2 used against me in the Detention Unit and the fact that I'm being woken
3 up every now and then, and the Trial Chamber has already ruled that it is
4 all right. Now you need more time for consideration. By the time you
5 decide to deal with it, half of the trial will be over. I don't see what
6 more you need.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, this is not a correct statement.
8 You will be aware of the fact that the Pre-Trial Chamber was dealing with
9 this problem. Since the trial has started, this problem was not notified
10 to the Chamber. It was now notified. You mentioned this problem in your
11 response dealing with the scheduling order of the Chamber, and this is
12 the reason - you know that - why we asked the Registry to provide us with
13 a new medical report of the relevant medical doctors.
14 I think we should stop the discussion here. It is not very
15 sufficient to go on, on this topic, before we receive the medical report,
16 and then we will be able to deal with this.
17 The witness should be brought in now.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
19 You mind that I'm talking for five minutes. Can you imagine how
20 much I mind that this issue is being considered for three years now by
21 the Pre-Trial Chamber or the Trial Chamber. It's about my sleep, my
22 rest, my state of health. Thank you.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I understand your position, Mr. Tolimir. We are
24 aware of that. And it is raised for the first time with this
25 Trial Chamber, and we are taking the necessary steps to inquire into the
1 situation. You are aware of that.
2 [The witness entered court]
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good morning, sir.
4 We apologise for the late start of your evidence because of
5 several procedural matters. They have to be discussed here in the
7 Would you please read aloud the affirmation on the card which is
8 shown to you now.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
10 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
11 WITNESS: PW-024
12 [The witness answered through interpreter]
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. Please sit down.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think you are aware of the fact that the
16 protective measures are still in place for you.
17 Mr. McCloskey has some questions for you, and I would like to
18 remind the parties to switch off the microphones during the answers of
19 the witness.
20 Mr. McCloskey.
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you.
22 Examination by Mr. McCloskey:
23 Q. Good morning.
24 First, could we pull up on the screen what we call the pseudonym
25 sheet, which is 65 ter 6278. And we need to do this in open session, but
1 this should not, of course, be broadcast. And hopefully you will see
2 something on the sheet that you will recognise.
3 And, sir, do you see your name on this sheet?
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. If we could offer that into evidence,
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
8 MR. McCLOSKEY: And if we could go into private --
9 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P237, under seal.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Private session?
11 MR. McCLOSKEY: Private session, please, for personal details.
12 Thank you.
13 [Private session]
11 Page 2048 redacted. Private session.
18 [Open session]
19 THE REGISTRAR: We're now in open session, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Now carry on, please.
21 MR. McCLOSKEY:
22 Q. Sir, when the war broke out in Bosnia in the spring of 1992, what
23 job did you hold?
24 A. When the war broke out, I was working with the State Security
25 Service in communications.
1 Q. And at some point did you become the chief of a small unit to
2 intercept radio communications near the end of the war?
3 A. Yes. That clearly became a necessary activity towards the end of
4 1994. There was a real need for such a unit, because we were able to
5 engage only a limited number of staff on that job to obtain the
6 information necessary to the service.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. And could we go into private session
8 just very briefly.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Private.
10 [Private session]
11 Page 2051 redacted. Private session.
11 [Open session]
12 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honour.
13 MR. McCLOSKEY:
14 Q. Now, sir, you've described that there was an army unit there.
15 Can you describe what kind of terrain feature this northern site is?
16 A. It's a rather well-known elevation in the army, at least because
17 it's very favourable for this purpose. And as far as I know, the army
18 had its own listening equipment there. And in 1992, I believe this
19 location was taken up by the 2nd Corps of the BH Army, or, rather, they
20 detached a section. What is it called? It was one anti-electronic
21 security company of the 2nd Corps. I don't know how many men there were
22 in that company, but they had their own security people and operators who
23 were doing the listening and intercepting. It was a fully-equipped
24 installation with all the infrastructure, and we realised it was a good
25 location with very amenable conditions for our own work with our own
2 Q. And can you very briefly describe what was it about this location
3 that made it a good location to intercept?
4 A. Well, it was located in the north, at a good altitude that
5 offered a range of possibilities. At least I had the information that
6 according to previous analysis, it was found to be a very good location
7 for intercepting. Its size and altitude and location made it very good
8 for that purpose. Perhaps there were better locations, but, as I said,
9 we had to use the infrastructure of the army or some other agency in
10 order to be able to do our work with the limited number of personnel we
11 had. It was open towards the north and the east, and it even had the
12 possibility, by the reflection of airwaves against mountains, of giving
13 us some signals that were important to us.
14 Q. Do you recall roughly what the elevation above sea level was of
15 this elevation?
16 A. Around 800, 815 metres, thereabouts.
17 Q. Now, in 1995, can you describe the size of your unit and what
18 your position was regarding that unit as it worked up at the northern
20 A. Yes. Back in 1992, I was with a unit that was involved in
21 similar work, and this unit grew out of that previous one. So in 1994 I
22 was appointed chief of that section, and in 1995 we came to that
23 location, we installed equipment that had been already prepared. And
24 throughout our work, this section had only four men. Two men worked per
25 shift, and they had a clearly-identified assignment to collect as much
1 information as two men could get. In addition, I was also in charge of
2 another section at the base, and because the connection between these two
3 units were very close, I served them both. And in 1995, because of the
4 events that occurred, I was at the location myself very often.
5 Q. Okay. You've described the four-people unit that does
6 intercepting. And what is this other unit that you were also part of
7 that you just mentioned?
8 A. It was a communications and crypto-protection squad. It is very
9 similar work that it did.
10 Q. All right. Now, let's start in a description of the process with
11 the equipment.
12 What is the -- what is the first thing you need to actually
13 intercept radio waves?
14 A. The work that we did was not represented in my service. It was
15 something new. And because that was so, we had to consult experts who
16 were in the 2nd Corps PBA unit at the time. They were familiar with the
17 equipment that the VRS had and which it had inherited from the JNA. They
18 knew what communications equipment it was, what were the waves and the
19 frequencies, and they had already adapted a new technique and a new set
20 of equipment that they could use in order to intercept this kind of
21 military equipment used by the other side. So with their assistance, we
22 also adapted several radio sets, which we then brought to this location.
23 We also had professional-type antenna, the so-called Top antenna, which
24 is directional.
25 So with these several machines that we had for recording
1 communication, and with two men, we went up to the said location.
2 We also had a computer at the beginning in which we would type
3 the information that we obtained. Initially, we also could not send the
4 information to our base. We did not have the technical ability for that,
5 but we managed to enable that later on. At the beginning, we would use
6 the PEB
7 information, and they would use floppy discs and then submit them to my
9 So in order to monitor and intercept radio waves, we had
10 monitors, we had an antenna and an amplifier, an antenna input connector,
11 because each frequency had 24 channels in the radio relay systems. We
12 also had UHERs, that is to say, reel-to-reel tape recorders that we used
13 to record conversations.
14 Q. Okay. Let me just have you go through that piece by piece very
16 You mention that you had antennas. Can you describe where those
17 antennas were and who built those antennas?
18 A. We received the first antenna. It was issued to me I don't
19 remember where, but my service had one antenna of the kind, so it was
20 given to me for use. It was the so-called Top antenna. It was part of
21 the communications equipment of the former JNA, and it was painted
22 olive-drab. We also used several other directional antennae for the
23 ultra-short range of frequencies. The antennae were then taken from a
24 radio club in Tuzla
25 cables and connectors, that we used in order to set all this up.
1 We also had a so-called stick antenna with which we should also
2 listen to certain frequencies. There were several spectrums that we
3 could monitor from the ultra-short, two-metre-range radio telephones.
4 They were open and not coded at the time, so one could listen to them
5 directly. Also, RRU 100 and RRU 800 were the radio relay frequencies
6 that we could listen to.
7 After that, in 1995, when there was a need for better-quality
8 antennae, as there were some signals that we could only get a glimpse of,
9 we could not really hear them well, then we received a parabolic antenna.
10 I cannot remember exactly, but it was about two metres in diametre, and
11 we set it up on a street light pole that was maybe eight metres tall at
12 that time. We attached it with steel ropes because it was at the top of
13 the mountain, so it had to withstand the strong winds that were blowing
15 Q. Were all these mounted at the top of the mountain at the site?
16 A. Yes, yes, I'm talking about the same location, and all the
17 antennae were placed at this location.
18 Q. All right. So after the antenna -- basically, tell us, very
19 simply, what does the antenna do?
20 A. The antenna is a piece of equipment which receives electronic
21 waves and brings them to a radio receiver, so that's the simplest way to
22 put it.
23 Q. All right. And you've mentioned that you had radio sets, and you
24 mentioned that you amplified the waves, and now you've said the waves
25 come to the radio receiver. And how -- what does the operator do? What
1 equipment does the operator that's at the site have in front of him? Can
2 you describe that process for us.
3 A. Yes. We had several devices for listening and for monitoring a
4 range of frequencies, as I mentioned earlier. Over time, by listening,
5 we would single out what may be interesting, and the operator who is
6 sitting there at his work-place already had certain ranges of frequencies
7 or channels that he was supposed to monitor, because we had already
8 decided on these ranges of frequencies earlier. So he would scan these
9 channels or ranges of frequencies, and at the moment when he would listen
10 and hear a conversation, then we would stop the device and then turn on
11 the recording device. That's one possibility.
12 Another one is once we had determined certain priorities, we
13 would have a device that would only monitor one particular channel, so we
14 would wait for someone to pick up the telephone receiver and the device
15 would begin to record at the very same instant. Once a conversation had
16 been recorded, as there were two men working there, one of them or both
17 would continue listening, but one would begin to produce a transcript of
18 the conversation. So after it was transcribed on paper, he would sit
19 down in front of a computer and he would type it up and turn it into an
20 electronic form, into a file, that would be sent to the seat of our
22 Q. Okay. I understand that the radio waves come in, the different
23 channels are scanned. When the operator hears a conversation, he may,
24 you said, depress something and begin to record that conversation. Is
25 that correct?
1 A. Yes, that's correct. This is a device, the UHER reel-to-reel
2 tape-recorder, with big tapes, which also has the possibility of pause.
3 If there is a conversation, there is a pause button, so you just press
4 the pause button and the device begins to record. It's a reel-to-reel
6 Q. So you used this -- called UHER, U-H-E-R, UHER tape -- just a
7 regular reel-to-reel tape-recorder that used to be used quite a bit more
8 than it is used now?
9 A. Yes, yes.
10 Q. And at what point in this process did the other operator start
11 transcribing the conversation that had been heard and then started to be
13 A. Well, I'm trying to think back to the time. As I said, very
14 often I was present at the site myself, and depending on the urgency of
15 the information, it might happen that we would have two consecutive
16 conversations, and so the time of recording and sending the conversation
17 to the base could be a bit late. But if there was something that we
18 called very urgent at the time, then we would separate this conversation
19 from the others, and it would immediately be transcribed and sent to the
20 base. It also sometimes happened that if a conversation was very
21 interesting or if it was carried out in another language, because we
22 didn't have interpreters with us, then we would have to bring these
23 recordings on tape to the seat of our service. And then if the
24 conversation was, for example, in English, it would be translated. And
25 if it was very urgent, then it would be re-recorded into another medium
1 and then brought to a higher level, that is to say, to our superiors in
2 the service.
3 Q. Can you describe the typical process by which one operator would
4 take this UHER machine, as you've described it, and listen to a taped
5 conversation and transcribe it? How did that work? First of all, where
6 did that happen? Did it happen right there, where the other person was
7 listening, or somewhere else?
8 A. Everything was taking place in one-and-the-same room, absolutely
9 everything. We had a big desk on which one person would listen, and
10 there was a separate place for transcription. So once we recorded
11 something, when it was on tape, recorded by the UHER device, then the
12 other operator would take that, he would sit down, put it in his own UHER
13 for transcription, and he would transcribe the conversation. Once they
14 were transcribed, they would also include the time when it was
15 intercepted, then also the channel, the frequency, and possibly the
16 persons who were the participants in the conversation. And then he would
17 begin to transcribe the conversation on the reel-to-reel tape-recorder
18 which he had in front of him.
19 Q. Did the UHER reel-to-reel tape-recorder have the ability to have
21 A. Yes, we had earphones on all devices that we used; however,
22 depending on the need. Whenever we were transcribing, one had to put on
23 the earphones, but if during the transcribing process the other operator
24 was listening, then he would also put on the earphones so that he would
25 not cause any trouble for the one who was transcribing the conversation.
1 Once transcribed, the conversation would be typed out into the
2 computer, and it would be placed in the then improvised log-book, where
3 we would have the ordinal number for the transcribed information, then
4 also the time when it was sent, the number assigned by the computer
5 during the encoding before it was sent to our central. It had to be
6 crypto-protected because it was sent by the wireless method and later on
7 also through telephone wires. But, in any case, the rules were such that
8 every file had to be crypto-protected. So in the log-book there would
9 also be the number assigned by the computer to the crypto-protected file,
10 and that was it.
11 Q. And how simple or difficult was it to transcribe these
12 intercepted conversations? How hard was that process, normally? How
13 long would it take a typical -- an operator to transcribe something like
15 A. It all depended. It depended on the quality of the signal, on
16 the quality of audibility. Sometimes it happened that the signal was
17 exceptionally good, and then transcription was very easy and very quick.
18 However, there were also instances when the signal was of poor quality,
19 and, therefore, in our transcripts, in places when we couldn't hear
20 something well, you will see dots. That means that we could not hear the
21 participants in the conversation and did not transcribe anything. If we
22 didn't hear the name of the participant, then we would put an X or a Y to
23 denote these people.
24 And how long did it last? Well, that depended on the length of
25 the conversation and the audibility. However, we always tried to
1 transcribe a conversation as quickly as possible and then send it to our
2 seat. Sometimes we could make a selection of the information that we
3 received, and then we could say, Well, for these conversations we can
4 wait until the afternoon, when we may have more time, or until any moment
5 when we have more free time. And then we would select some as priority
6 conversations because they were urgent. That's how we would do that.
7 Q. Would the transcriber ever listen to the tape more than once in
8 his attempt to transcribe it?
9 A. Yes. Once again, it depended on the quality. It happened often
10 that there were three of us. We would all take earphones and listen to
11 something so that we would be certain about what we were transcribing,
12 because it was in no one's interest that the information that might be
13 incorrect would eventually be used. That would be a scandal for us, in
14 the first place. So very often all three of us would listen to
15 something, and if we were not certain, we would just put three dots,
16 because we would then denote that we couldn't really hear that part of
17 the conversation.
18 Later on, when this was listened to at the seat, I would
19 sometimes hear that the operator who was working on a conversation might
20 hear something, but nothing changed in the transcription. In terms of
21 operative use, they might use the information if they wanted to.
22 Q. Well, on that topic, can you describe how important an object it
23 was for you, if at all, to make this accurate?
24 A. That was of utmost importance, because this was information that
25 was so significant that it simply couldn't be allowed to happen that we
1 would transcribe something that we didn't hear. That was in nobody's
2 interest, and particularly at the time when the information was used on
3 an hour-to-hour basis. Can you just imagine what would happen if we
4 would transmit false information? Nobody needed that. That was
5 operative information to be used during the day for all kinds of needs.
6 I don't really know what all the needs could have been, because we were
7 only in charge of the work that I described, but I know that the rule was
8 to mark with dots something that we could not hear or to denote the
9 participants in a conversation with an X or a Y.
10 Sometimes it happened that a man would introduce himself, but we
11 didn't know who that was. In such cases, we would say, One so-and-so,
12 or, A certain so-and-so, because we were not certain if this was really
13 that particular person.
14 Q. Were you ever able to identify anybody in these conversations by
15 recognising their voice?
16 A. Certainly. There were public figures, military or political
17 ones, whose voice would be recognised by any citizen, not just us. There
18 were also those that we identified because they introduced themselves.
19 They would say, So-and-so is speaking. Can I please speak with
20 so-and-so? So we always used that as well.
21 There were also instances, I just remember now, when there would
22 be a new person who introduced himself by first and last name. Then we
23 would keep the recording so that if there was the same person speaking
24 later on in another conversation, we would compare the voice to make sure
25 if it was really that person or not. It was really a very serious and
1 responsible approach that we used, and of course not with the
2 consequences that we are seeing now in mind. We never thought that that
3 would be used for needs such as the current ones.
4 Q. And you'd mentioned that the three of you would all listen. Were
5 you saying that you would all listen -- that sometimes all three of you
6 would listen to the same conversation, or were you talking about all
7 three of you listening to separate conversations when doing the
8 transcribing process?
9 A. No, no. When the operator is transcribing a conversation and
10 something is hard to understand, he would ask us, Please tell me, what do
11 you hear? It depends on a certain person, what one hears or not. So
12 perhaps we might reach an agreement, and we would say, Yes, that's what
13 he says. If we were not certain, we would place the dots. So it was the
14 only situation in which we would not listen on three separate channels,
15 because we would try to help and create a real picture of what was
17 Q. When the transcriber is listening to the UHER, what is he -- what
18 is he doing? Is he writing, or typing, or how is he actually
19 transcribing what he's hearing, and what's he transcribing it onto?
20 A. Once the tape with the recording is in place in the UHER, the
21 operator plays it. Then he listens to one part of it. Then he presses
22 the pause button, and then he writes that section on paper. Then again
23 he presses the pause button. Then he plays it back, if he needs to, so
24 that he would connect everything with the previous part of the
25 conversation, and then he writes again and writes again, and this is what
1 he does. And in the end, he plays once again the entire conversation, he
2 has the paper in front of him, and then he can check if everything is
3 correct or not. So that was how a conversation would be transcribed.
4 The operator has in front of him the UHER device and the tape, which he
5 can play back to the previous section of the conversation. He notes
6 everything on paper, and then he types it out into the computer from the
7 paper. And then every day we would destroy these papers because that was
8 the rule. Sometimes we would do it more frequently if we had a number
9 collected already. I mean the papers that we used to write in hand the
10 transcript of the conversation that was intercepted.
11 Q. All right. So you destroy the paper used to transcribe. What
12 about the tapes, themselves, that you've now taped a conversation that
13 you've heard? What was done with those tapes?
14 A. Well, first of all, I have to admit we had a very limited number
15 of tapes. We did not have a sufficient number of tapes, so we used the
16 available tapes for recordings. Once the conversations were transcribed,
17 we would bring all the papers together, and we would burn them, because
18 we already had it in electronic form then. If we estimated that certain
19 conversations were exceptionally interesting and that they needed special
20 attention, then we would re-record them onto a big tape and we would mark
21 on the UHER that the conversation between X and Y was recorded from a
22 certain number, 123 to 360 on the tape counter, an exceptionally
23 interesting conversation between X and Y. So we would re-record such
24 conversations to such tapes. These tapes we would bring to the seat, and
25 we would submit them to those who would then use the information that we
1 received at our location in any way in which that was necessary.
2 Q. And have many such transcripts of intercepted conversations and
3 some actual tapes that you had saved been provided to the ICTY for
4 these -- for this Tribunal's use?
5 A. I know that some had been provided. When the request arrived
6 from the ICTY, somebody gave me a call and asked me to re-record certain
7 recordings to a different medium so that they might be forwarded, so I
8 know that some were provided. But other than that, I'm not aware of it,
9 since it wasn't part of my job.
10 Q. And you've mentioned briefly that the transcribed conversation
11 got typed into a computer, encrypted, and then sent, via computer secure
12 means, somewhere. Where did the computer send this material?
13 A. The material, that's to say the file in the electronic form,
14 would be sent to the communications centre of my service. It would be
15 recorded in the log-book that they used there, in other words filed, and
16 sent to the head of service that was in charge of this sort of work. The
17 files would be sent through communications equipment, and for a while
18 these were two radio sets that were directed one toward the other, with
19 the help of antenna, and they used ultra-short waves. This was the way
20 in which these files were transmitted. Later on, we had the telephone
21 line, which was a more secure way of transmitting information. There
22 were also special cases when, and I believe I've already mentioned this,
23 files would be taken personally since that location wasn't that far
24 removed. These were special events involving specific information. When
25 speed was required, then these files would be taken by individuals, who
1 would use their cars to reach the head office, the seat.
2 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, I believe it's break time.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Very well.
4 We must have the first break now. The Court Officer will assist
5 you during the break, and we will resume at 11.00.
6 --- Recess taken at 10.35 a.m.
7 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes, Mr. McCloskey.
9 MR. McCLOSKEY: All right.
10 Q. Sir, what I was getting at is, at some point after you transmit
11 these intercepts, do they go for analysis somewhere?
12 A. After they reach the communications centre in an encrypted form,
13 the operators at the operations centre would decipher the conversation,
14 print it out, and take it to the head of the relevant organisational
15 unit, who would, in turn, pass them on to operatives or otherwise
16 employees of the service who were charged with doing precisely that sort
17 of work. In other words, they would be using the information thus
19 Q. Did you share any of your intercepts that you received with the
20 army that you were working with up there?
21 A. Let me just briefly go back to one point.
22 Every intercept would be signed by the individual who taped the
23 intercept and who transcribed it. This is something that I omitted to
24 say earlier on. Once the intercept has been transcribed, it would be
25 signed. You saw that there was a combination of numbers and letters
1 which denoted individuals. The first number, combined with -- the first,
2 that's to say, letter combined with numbers would denote the individual
3 who taped the conversation, then you would have a dash and a different
4 combination of letter and numbers denoting another operator, the one who
5 transcribed the conversation.
6 Now, what was your conversation again? My apologies.
7 Q. And we will get to a couple of examples so you can point out the
8 numbers and what they mean, so that can be easily understood.
9 And the translation I got is that the operator actually signed an
10 intercept, and the way it's translated to me, as if somebody did a
11 handwritten signature. What do you mean when an intercept operator
12 signed these intercepts? Because you're talking about just destroying
13 the transcription version and then typing in, in an electronic version,
14 so what do you precisely mean when you say "signed"?
15 A. What I meant to say was that every transcription, once it was
16 completed and in an electronic form, at the bottom of it there had to be
17 written who the recording and who the transcribing operator was. If
18 there was only one such combination of codes, it would mean that the same
19 operator recorded and transcribed the intercept, although in the majority
20 of cases we would have one recording operator and another transcribing
21 operator. And by having this information on the intercept, you would
22 know that there were two operators who did the job.
23 Q. And so my original question was: Did you share any of your
24 intercepts with the army, and vice versa?
25 A. At a certain stage, and I can't recall exactly the time-period
1 this was, we made an arrangement. In view of the assessed needs and the
2 use of the information we came by at these sites, we made an arrangement
3 with the army, that's to say, representatives of the 2nd Corps, the PEB
4 of the 2nd Corps, that whatever information we come by, we should convey
5 to them, and they should do likewise. The practical reason behind this
6 was to ensure proper and full use of information at different levels,
7 though my assumption is that the information converged anyhow from both
8 these entities, and this would ultimately mean that both entities would
9 have the same set of information. We thought it was justified, and
10 that's how we did the work for a certain period of time.
11 I can also explain it to you in the following manner: Our
12 primary objective was to monitor civilian structures, yet there were
13 cases where we would intercept conversations that were of a military
14 nature, and it would be a pity if we did not convey this sort of
15 information to the military structures in addition to our own service.
16 So that was the practicality of the work.
17 Q. And you've partly answered my next question, and that was: Did
18 you have a -- what was your focus, as opposed to your knowledge of what
19 the military focus was, as you were out there listening over the
20 airwaves? Was it the same or different?
21 A. It was different. I explained that oftentimes quite the opposite
22 would happen. Our goal was to collect information from civilian
23 structures present in an area of interest to us. The objective was also
24 to monitor and obtain information about the civilian authorities of the
25 opposite side. As you will know, oftentimes the two overlap, and the
1 intercepts testify to the fact that this, indeed, happened. Whenever we
2 intercepted this sort of information, we felt the need to convey it to
3 the army in order that the army may be able to adequately respond and in
4 order that the information may be put to full use by the army.
5 Specifically, we had information about the movements of troops and their
6 intentions, et cetera.
7 There were cases where specific routes or links that we
8 monitored, which were set aside for specific individuals, did not result
9 in any specific information because these individuals would not engage in
10 conversation. In such cases, we would turn to different channels that we
11 would listen to, and this would sometimes overlap with what the army was
12 doing, and they would be able to come by the same information that we
13 did. I did not necessarily check whether this was the case or whether
14 they did, indeed, receive the same information as we did, but the
15 possibility was there.
16 Q. All right. I'd like to now go -- well, first of all, let me ask
17 you, as you first -- you've testified in several cases, and when you were
18 first, many years ago, coming to The Hague and beginning your testifying,
19 did you or your colleagues remember much about the actual substance of
20 any of these intercepts, what they said, what they meant?
21 A. Yes. At the time, we were able to -- we were able to recall a
22 great deal of these intercepts. Some of them were very important and
23 remained etched in our memory, but in retrospect, after a number of years
24 where I was occupied on a different sort of work, I can conclude that the
25 memories have faded and the years have left their mark. Now, when I look
1 at some of these intercepts, some of them do bring back memories, and
2 vivid ones.
3 Q. All right. Well, we'll go over a few of those intercepts to help
4 explain what you have been talking about.
5 And if we could start with 65 ter 2923, and this is number 3 in
6 the little booklet. And I would like us to try to focus, if we could,
7 Mr. President, on the B/C/S version because, as you'll see, it's a little
8 different than the English translation, and there's a specific reason for
9 that which we will get to.
10 All right. If we could just -- that looks good.
11 So looking at this intercept, the B/C/S typed version, we see the
12 beginning says -- we need the top part. You had it just right. Okay,
13 that's fine.
14 First of all, before I get into the detail of what "CSB" and that
15 means, can you tell us what this is? Where does this fit into the
16 process of intercepts that you've described? We see here, actually,
17 multiple intercepts with different "Broj"s, with different numbers. The
18 first one we see, 556 and then 557. So what is this list that we see
19 of -- the total, I think, is three intercepts, 556, 557, and 558. What
20 is this sheet of paper we're looking at? Where does it fit into what
21 you've been testifying about?
22 A. This is a report, and I believe that it can be found in one of
23 the encrypted files that we talked about. At any rate, what this means
24 is that several intercepts were recorded on one reel, on one tape, and
25 they had to be transcribed. As soon as the operator had time available
1 to start transcribing the recordings, he transcribed two, three, or more
2 intercepts, depending on how many had been recorded in the meantime.
3 Sometimes there would only be one intercept. It depended.
4 We can see here that these conversations were short. It all
5 depended on the situation and on how much time the transcribing operator
6 had. In this particular instance, several intercepts were incorporated
7 into one report. We were under the obligation to record every particular
8 intercept under a different number.
9 MR. McCLOSKEY: And, Mr. President, we see the English on the
10 other side. It's only a translation of intercept 557, which is the only
11 intercept that we're offering from this individual report. We have not
12 put a date above it, because that would not have been an appropriate
13 translation, because you can see that the date is above the main report.
14 So in order to get the date of the English, you need to go to the B/C/S.
15 You see where it is in the overall report. You go to the top of the
16 page, and you'll see the date. So that's why the English translation is
17 only the intercept we are looking at, but to understand how it fits in,
18 as he's just testified about it. So I hope that makes sense.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: To clarify the situation, there's only one
20 original version in B/C/S?
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes. As you will recall, the transcripted
22 versions that the witness talked about, as the State Security -- after
23 they typed it into the computer, they destroyed their handwritten
24 versions. The next witness you'll hear from the army, and that's where
25 it gets more complicated, because we have those handwritten transcripted
1 versions, and that's where this complication arrives. This is less
2 complicated for our purposes.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
4 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you.
5 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 2923 will be Exhibit P239.
6 MR. McCLOSKEY:
7 Q. So let's focus on the top of the page. It says "CSB - SDB
9 A. Yes. "CSB
10 Security Services Centre, there existed the Public Security Sector and
11 State Security Sector. So within this particular CSB, Security Services
12 Centre, we were the state -- within the Security Centre, we were the
13 State Security Service, if that's clear enough.
14 Q. So that means the SDB is the State Security Service?
15 A. Yes, that's right.
16 Q. And then the next line we see "Dana" or "Date," and then "12 July
17 1995, and a "G." What does that date have to do with these intercepts?
18 A. This document was produced on this date, and then what follows
19 next is a link between the date and what follows next, because it is
20 stated that on the said date, whilst monitoring the radio relay route,
21 et cetera, the following conversation was captured, and, of course, as a
22 follow-up that's how this document came about.
23 Q. Okay. And we did not translate that, so can you please read that
24 statement for us slowly so we can see what it is, that one that begins
25 with "Navedenog"?
1 A. Yes. On the said date, whilst monitoring the RR radio relay
2 route, quote/unquote, "Zvornik - Vlasenica," on the frequency of
3 785.000 megahertz, at 0822 hours, on channel 11, we have registered a
4 conversation between one Miro, who would be hereinafter referred to as
5 "M," and an unknown, unidentified male, who would be referred to in the
6 text as "X."
7 Q. Now, in your testimony you've mentioned many kinds of equipment
8 you were able to -- or many kinds of radio waves you were able to
9 intercept. One of those things you mentioned was radio relay waves, and
10 since that is most of the intercepts you will be talking about, can you
11 describe to us briefly, when you're intercepting radio relay waves, what
12 is this radio relay, and especially as opposed to people talking on what
13 we know as a hand-held walkie-talkie in the woods to each other?
14 A. Let me first note that I did not have specialised training in
15 this field when I first took up this work. All the technical knowledge
16 and the knowledge concerning the equipment used by the other side was
17 something that I received from the PEB of -- that's to say the
18 Counter-Electronic Protection of the 2nd Corps, and it was in this way
19 that I learned which frequency ranges were used by the other side and
20 what sort of equipment the military on the other side had.
21 I know that this specific frequency was connected to the radio
22 sets RRU 800. This was a telephone communication taking place between
23 interlocutors who could have a complete network along these routes
24 without using lines or wires. Through certain switch boards, town
25 telephone lines could be connected to them as well. What mattered to us
1 was to come by information as to what the frequency range used by the
2 other side was in order for us to be able to listen in. As far as I
3 remember now, and I can't state this with certainty, this frequency range
4 was between 600-and-something megahertz up to 900-odd megahertz.
5 With the help of specialists from the PEB of the 2nd Corps, and
6 with the help of digital equipment that was available and which could
7 define the range, we did the scanning. And on the basis of this, we were
8 able to select the frequency that we would listen in to, and we could
9 proceed intercepting conversations on these frequencies.
10 Q. All right. And I don't want to take you into that very
11 complicated area. There will be -- the army experts will talk about it.
12 But just very simply, what is a radio relay?
13 A. [No interpretation]
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: We don't have interpretation.
15 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's apologies.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A radio relay route is, to put it
17 simply, a route where we have a device and an antenna on one end and a
18 device and an antenna on the other end; that is to say, the same
19 equipment on both ends of the route. And when a person picks up a
20 telephone receiver on one end, through these devices and this antenna
21 they can emit a signal to the other end, to be captured by the other
22 device and antenna.
23 Since we are talking about radio waves, normally the rule is that
24 these signals should be as distant from the other side as possible so as
25 to prevent the monitoring and listening and interception. However, there
1 are also other rules in emitting waves which tell us that waves reflect
2 from mountains, obstacles, and structures, and that makes communication
3 porous and susceptible to interception.
4 MR. McCLOSKEY: All right. Let's go back to this intercept and
5 the B/C/S one. And if we could scroll down towards the bottom, through
6 the various intercepts. And I think we have to go to the next page.
7 Q. And can you just tell us, "Tona Benzina," is that part of the
8 intercept? What does that mean?
9 A. That's part of the text.
10 Q. All right. And then can you tell us what "JN160/JD065" is, those
11 letters and numbers?
12 A. This is what I mentioned earlier. These are designations of the
13 names of the operators who did this at the time. I said this first
14 number, JN160, is the operator who recorded the conversations, and this
15 other initial and number is the person who transcribed.
16 Q. And is one of those numbers your number?
17 A. Yes, it is.
18 Q. And which one?
19 A. JN160.
20 Q. All right. I want to ask you about one more intercept, and that
21 is 65 ter 2932.
22 And if we could get both of them up on the screen. If we can
23 blow the B/C/S up, we see that same heading, the date of 12 July.
24 We see two intercepts here, and again we see your number down at
25 the bottom; is that correct?
1 A. Yes, that's correct.
2 Q. And I am interested in intercept number 570, which is what we
3 have the English. And let me just read it out. It says:
4 "On the above-mentioned day, intercepting the Zvornik-Vlasenica
5 radio-relay route frequency 785.000, channel 5, we registered at 1250
6 hours a conversation between General Mladic, (M), and an unidentified
7 male person, (X). The conversation proceeded as follows:
8 "X: Go ahead, General.
9 "M" for Mladic: "Have these buses and trucks left?
10 "X: They have.
11 "M: When?
12 "X: 10 minutes ago.
13 "M: Good, excellent. Continue to monitor the situation. Don't
14 let small groups of them sneak in. They've all capitulated and
15 surrendered, and we'll evacuate them all - those who want to and those
16 who don't want to.
17 "X: I understand, General.
18 "M: Don't issue any statements and don't interrupt them over
19 the," question mark, "radio."
20 That's our -- I'm sorry, the double slash is the translation
21 people, Your Honours:
22 "We'll open a corridor towards Kladanj.
23 "X: ....
24 "M: Indeed, let it pass there. Take a patrol of ours to wait on
25 the road and remove the mines and obstacles ... leave the territory.
1 "X: Yes, General."
2 Now, in the heading of this intercept, it says that this is a
3 conversation with General Mladic. In the substance of the intercept, we
4 don't hear General Mladic introduce himself or anyone refer to him as
5 General Mladic. And, as you said, that was one way that people could be
6 identified. So how, if you know, can this intercept conclude in its
7 heading that General Mladic is, in fact, the "M" in this conversation?
8 A. There are several ways here. One of the ways is that before this
9 conversation was intercepted, we had heard Mladic loads of times, we
10 played back and transcribed his conversations, we watched him on
11 television, and since we are talking here about two people who are doing
12 this job and this job only, they simply can't be mistaken.
13 Another way is that at the beginning of the conversation, the
14 operator heard a reference to General Mladic, but did not have time to
15 switch in and start the recording at that moment. By the time recording
16 started, that part of the conversation was already gone, and he then
17 transcribed only the recorded part, indicating that it was a conversation
18 involving General Mladic. We were quite certain, when Mladic was
19 concerned and many other people were monitored, that this was, indeed,
20 the person in question because the voice was quite recognisable.
21 Q. All right. And near the end of the conversation, we see, after
22 "X," a series of dots. Can you describe to us what that means, if you
24 A. Yes. I think I've already said a few words about this. These
25 are the passages when the other side was not very well heard. It's about
1 a technical problem.
2 With these relay communications on RRU 800, there are two
3 frequencies on which a conversation develops. The speaking of one person
4 is on one frequency. The other person speaks on another frequency. Now,
5 with the headphones we are using, when playing back one, we also hear the
6 other. Later on, we managed to locate the other frequency of the other
7 speaker, so we managed to get better-quality intercepts involving both.
8 In such passages, when we were not quite certain what the person on the
9 other end was saying, we put a number of dots.
10 Q. If the speaker's on one frequency and the other speaker is on
11 another, how is it that an operator, having tapped into one frequency,
12 can hear two at the same time?
13 A. I said a moment ago that when audibility is good, when we have a
14 good signal on one frequency, then it happens that we are able to hear
15 the other end as well through a micro-telephone combination. We hear the
16 other person in a more muffled way, less distinctly than the person we
17 are monitoring, but we still hear them. Later on, we identify the other
18 frequency as well so we get both ends of the conversation, but very often
19 we are able to hear the other speaker as well.
20 It happens sometimes that people blurt out things very fast and
21 we can't be sure what they actually said, and we put dots, or perhaps a
22 person uses a word or a term unfamiliar to us, and then we do the same.
23 Q. This particular intercept with Mladic, have you had any
24 independent recollection of this intercept over the years?
25 A. There were many, many conversations relating to the organisation
1 of transports. There were many bus transports to be organised, including
2 Holijas [phoen] from Serbia
3 one, but I remember that there were many conversations similar to this.
4 I can't remember this particular one, but, generally speaking, I remember
5 conversations regarding evacuations, organising vehicles and fuel for
6 buses and trucks, et cetera.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: Can we go to 65 ter 6287 now.
8 Q. And, Witness, you will recognise a scanned version of a document,
9 I believe, and it will come up in a minute.
10 That's not the -- I'm sorry, that's not the document I'm looking
11 for. Yes, 65 ter 1680. I apologise.
12 Could we just blow this up. I don't need anything in particular
13 about this. I would just like a general explanation of what this is.
14 Can you tell us what this is, Witness?
15 A. Yes. This is a copy of one page from the log-book into which we
16 entered the information we had forwarded to the communications centre of
17 the State Security Service in Tuzla
18 columns, and on this sheet we see the following, if you want me to
19 explain what is in which column.
20 Q. Yes, if you can, briefly, especially as they relate to the
21 intercepts we just saw, but just generally.
22 A. The first column is the sequential number. The second column is
23 the number of the report. Column 3 is the file created in the computer.
24 Column 4 is the time when the operator forwarded this information to the
25 communications centre. And then the same range of columns repeats
2 Q. All right. And does this have anything to do with you? Whose
3 notes are these?
4 A. Yes, it does relate to me. These are entries that I started. I
5 defined the format. Some of the entries may have been made by me, but
6 perhaps not. I would have to refresh my memory.
7 Q. Was that the log-book you referred to earlier in your testimony,
8 when you were describing the process?
9 A. Yes, that's the log-book. It was a black agenda book that we
10 used as a log-book. And there is other content from that period in the
11 log-book which does not concern this type of information and the
13 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, I would offer this exhibit into
14 evidence at this time.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
16 MR. McCLOSKEY: And now could we go to the -- when we get a
17 number --
18 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 1680 is now Exhibit P240.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And, Mr. McCloskey, what about the previous
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: Ms. Stewart asked me the same question. I will
22 have 12 intercepts which I have -- I was going to try to offer in a
23 format in a minute or two, as opposed to calling out each individual one
24 of them, but I'm just trying to meet what you might want to do in this
25 situation. I can, of course, offer them individually as well.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That would be appreciated.
2 MR. McCLOSKEY: Okay. Well, let's just offer the previous one
3 into evidence right now, and I'll show -- and that's 2932, and then we'll
4 get to these others.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
6 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P241.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: Now could we have Exhibit 6287.
8 Q. Now, Witness, you recognise your initials or your handwriting on
9 this document?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And we see that there are references to 12 intercepts. Did you
12 have a chance to look at the print-outs of all of those 12 intercepts and
13 confirm that you were involved either in the transcription or the
14 recording of all 12 of them?
15 A. Yes, I reviewed all of them. I compared to this list and
16 confirmed it was correct.
17 Q. And the note-book that we saw the five pages from previously,
18 have we -- and you requested that the original come up in the next --
19 hopefully the next few days so that we have access to the original
21 A. I expect that we will receive that note-book.
22 Q. And if we look at each of these intercepts, and can we find their
23 numbers in the note-book?
24 A. Yes.
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: I would offer this exhibit into evidence.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
2 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P242.
3 MR. McCLOSKEY: Now, Mr. President, that finishes my direct, but
4 that does leave 11 other intercepts that I would like to offer into
5 evidence. I can go over them individually, or they are all on that last
6 exhibit by our numbers. However you would like to do it.
7 I also have -- we, of course, have what Ms. Stewart typed out
8 that has all the exhibits, the map, the five pages out of his note-book,
9 and the 12 intercepts and the pseudonym sheet all on one thing, so I'm at
10 your service to do however you would like to do it. I can read them all
11 out and get all numbers for them right now, if you wish.
12 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, I think the most sufficient way is
14 that you just give the number of the 65 ter document, and the Registrar
15 will give an exhibit number.
16 MR. McCLOSKEY: Thank you.
17 The first one is 2909.
18 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P243.
19 MR. McCLOSKEY: Then 2920.
20 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P244.
21 MR. McCLOSKEY: The next one is already in. Then 2930.
22 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P245.
23 MR. McCLOSKEY: The next one is already in. Then 2968.
24 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P246.
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: Then 2971.
1 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P247.
2 MR. McCLOSKEY: 2972.
3 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P248.
4 MR. McCLOSKEY: 2973.
5 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P249.
6 MR. McCLOSKEY: 2994.
7 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P250.
8 MR. McCLOSKEY: 3000.
9 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P251.
10 MR. McCLOSKEY: 3488.
11 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit P252.
12 MR. McCLOSKEY: So I offer all of those exhibits. Those have
13 been identified by him as ones that he took part in and that are part of
14 our larger group that we will be offering as we go along.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: They are received and have an exhibit number.
16 That concludes your examination-in-chief?
17 MR. McCLOSKEY: I believe so, yes, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you, Mr. McCloskey.
19 Mr. Tolimir, do you have questions for this witness?
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Cross-examination by Mr. Tolimir:
22 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
23 Q. I would like to welcome and greet this witness and everyone in
24 the courtroom, and I wish that his testimony be completed in keeping with
25 God's will, as everything in this trial.
1 Witness, I will be careful not to mention your name. But if you
2 notice that I have said anything identifying, you can alert us
3 immediately, because the broadcasting of your testimony -- the
4 broadcasting of these intercepts is not allowed.
5 Will you please watch the transcript, and when you see that the
6 typing has finished, then start your answer so we don't overlap.
7 I will now start the questioning.
8 A moment ago during examination-in-chief, you told Mr. McCloskey
9 that you were a radio amateur in 1994 and 1995. Is that true?
10 A. I was a radio amateur from - let me think - 1977, and I still
12 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter cannot hear the accused.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't hear you.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
15 Q. What kind of certificate did you have at that time?
16 A. B category.
17 Q. Can you explain what that means, a B-category certificate?
18 A. You're obviously familiar with these things, and you know that
19 there is A, B, C, and D categories in radio amateur activity, and they
20 reflect the speed of receipt and writing down of signals, as well as
21 familiarity with the rules of radio traffic and the radio amateur
22 movement. You have to pass exams to get a different -- a higher class,
23 and I had a B category.
24 Q. What is your current category?
25 A. I have the B category, but I've said that for a while now. I
1 haven't had the time to work as a radio amateur.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I'm grateful that you gave some guidance to the
3 witness to pause before starting the answer, but you should pause as
4 well. It's a big problem for the interpreters.
5 Please carry on.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
7 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Mr. Witness, you said during the examination-in-chief that it was
9 only 1994 when you set up an intercept unit. Did I understand that
10 correctly or not? Thank you.
11 A. Yes, in 1994 it was officially set up, this group or unit.
12 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us, by whose decision was the group
13 formed? Was it your personal decision or a decision of one of your
14 superiors? Thank you.
15 A. You know very well that such decisions cannot be made by any
16 leader at a lower level. It was decided at the highest level of the
18 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us why, during the remaining part of the
19 war, until 1994, such an intercept group was not set up? Why was it only
20 set up in late 1994 and early 1995? Thank you.
21 A. I couldn't give you an answer to that question because that would
22 be discussion on a topic which has to do with certain duties and
23 decisions, which I do not think are the reason why I am here.
24 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us, what was the month in the year 1994
25 when the intercept group was set up? Thank you.
1 A. As far as I remember, our first duty which was specific was given
2 to us in December 1994. That means that we had the resources, the people
3 were assigned, and we had premises.
4 Q. Thank you. As it was in December 1994, and that was towards the
5 end of the war, can you tell me who was giving you instructions for your
6 work and for setting up the intercept group? Thank you.
7 A. That was not the end of the war. It was December 1994, which
8 means that the war lasted for another year. And as for instructions, I
9 rather wouldn't talk about that unless the Trial Chamber decides that I
10 have to. After all, I think I have said a lot about the entire
11 organisation and the way we operated, and the conclusion might be drawn
12 from that.
13 Q. All right. If you do not wish to talk about that, then the
14 Trial Chamber might ask for a closed or private session, and then you
15 might say who was giving you instructions, because that's important for
16 my next question. Thank you.
17 A. In what sense of the word do you mean "instructions"?
18 Q. I mean the instructions to set up the intercept group at the
19 northern location and for it to begin working, because at that time the
20 work in all locations around the Eagle Base was prohibited by the USA,
21 and you were not allowed to locate units there unless they agreed or
22 approved of that. Thank you.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
24 MR. McCLOSKEY: If we could go into private session, if there's
25 going to be any names of the people mentioned.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think that is appropriate. We go into private
3 [Private session]
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Now we all would be pleased if you answered the
10 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness come closer to the
11 microphones, please. Thank you.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You probably know from all this
13 that we were so short of troops and so short of resources that it never
14 occurred to us to listen to the conversations that you just mentioned.
15 That is to say, we couldn't properly control what was the subject of
16 wartime conflict and what was really the subject of our interest. I
17 already talked earlier today about the subject of our interest.
18 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 Q. Do you know that on the Serbian side, such a location in the
20 so-called place Vis
21 activities that you were engaging in? Thank you.
22 A. No, I don't know anything about that.
23 Q. Thank you. Please tell me, then, what you do know. Were you
24 allowed to record activities and intercept conversations of the BH Army?
25 Thank you.
1 A. We were not doing that. Let me just recall very briefly that we
2 only had two men in one shift. If you take that into account and see how
3 much work we did, you will see that these two men couldn't do anything
4 more than what they did do.
5 Q. Thank you. Were you ever requested to record a unit that was in
6 your surrounding area or in enemy territory that had nothing to do with
7 your corps, so that you would provide information to the corps about the
8 location of this unit and whether they were all safe and sound, or did
9 you ever establish connection with that unit? Thank you.
10 A. You have asked me many questions.
11 Q. Please answer just one question.
12 A. I never received any instructions or orders from the corps
13 because I was not a part of any military unit.
14 Q. Thank you. Can you tell me whether the Ministry of Defence was
15 part of the Ministry of the Interior and the Armed Forces of the BH Army?
16 A. Yes, it did.
17 Q. Were you obliged to carry out all orders that you received from
18 the Supreme Command or the chief of Supreme Command, because he was
19 military personnel, he was a member of the armed forces?
20 A. Well, you're asking me, but you are very well familiar with the
21 organisation. So this is civilian military service. I could only be
22 issued orders by my direct superior.
23 Q. Can you please say, for the needs of the Trial Chamber and the
24 transcript, whether your ministry was part of the Armed Forces of Bosnia
25 and Herzegovina
1 A. Yes, it was so. I already said that.
2 Q. All right, thank you. But I had to ask you that because you keep
3 talking about the civilian service, civilian intelligence service. I had
4 to know if this was a civilian service or if it was an integral part of
5 the armed forces.
6 I apologise once again, and I thank you.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I ask a question at this point in time,
8 Mr. Tolimir.
9 I think to clarify this structure, I would like to know if the
10 State Security Service you were talking about was part of the Ministry of
11 Interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, at the time it was an integral
13 part of the Ministry of Interior, which had the Public Security Sector
14 and the State Security Sector or Department, so it had two sectors or
15 departments, and we were the State Security Department.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. And the Ministry of Defence was a
17 separate ministry, is that correct, or was there a link to the Ministry
18 of Interior?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] During the war, we all were
20 considered members of the army, regardless of the structure to which we
21 belonged. We are recording as having been members of the armed forces
22 during the war, but we were the service that we were. How that was
23 decided, I wouldn't know. And we were not uniformed members of the army,
24 and our duties were civilian ones, so in that sense we were not members
25 of the army.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That was not my question. I would like to know
2 the relation between the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of
3 Defence. Are they separate ministries, or was one of these ministries
4 part of the other?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I know, these were
6 separate ministries within one single government, the Ministry of the
7 Interior, on the one hand, and the Ministry of Defence, on the other.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I understand. I did ask this question because on
9 page 59, lines 5 through 7, you were asked by Mr. Tolimir:
10 "Can you tell me whether the Ministry of Defence was part of the
11 Ministry of the Interior and the Armed Forces of the BH Army?"
12 And then you answered:
13 "Yes, it did."
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, he made the question
15 complicated. What I said later is true. During the war, the Ministry of
16 the Interior was an integral part of the armed forces and not an integral
17 part of the Ministry of Defence. So the Ministry of Defence and the
18 Ministry of the Interior had two ministers, and these were two separate
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
21 There's another question by Judge Nyambe.
22 JUDGE NYAMBE: At page 59, lines 3 and 4, you've stated that:
23 "I never received any instructions or orders from the corps
24 because I was not a part of the military unit."
25 Can you explain exactly how you fit into the structure and from
1 whom you got your orders.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I received all orders from the
3 chief of the State Security Service and its department in Tuzla. The
4 facilities where I were [as interpreted] were assigned to us for
5 practical reasons, because during one shift I only had two men at my
6 disposal. It was at a distant location, at an elevation. For two men to
7 work, they need security, they need other elements of logistics as well.
8 That was why we asked for one room to be assigned to us, where we could
9 work independently, and there were no uniformed people there except at
10 the moment when information was exchanged. We used floppy discs at the
11 time. So apart from us, the facilities were used by the PEB of the
12 2nd Corps, but we were independent of them.
13 JUDGE NYAMBE: How independent were you within this unit? For
14 example, how would you decide -- maybe let me rephrase my question. How
15 were your assignments given to you? How did you decide what to pass on
16 to the military or to whoever among the intercepts that you handled,
17 since you say you were an independent structure within the military?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wouldn't say we were an
19 independent structure. We are now talking only about the facility in
20 this location and about us. When we began to receive information from
21 intercepts, we realised that it was very practical to pass on the
22 information that had to do with military operations to the army, and they
23 also had information that we could use. So we reached an internal
24 agreement to exchange all information, because in this way we wouldn't
25 cause any harm to anyone.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Another question by Judge Mindua.
2 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Witness, you said earlier, but I
3 can't find the page right now, that when you would receive military --
4 very important military information, you would, of course, send this
5 information to the military personnel, but that your work consisted in
6 getting information and sending that information to the civil, civilian
7 structures. Could you please give me some examples of information that
8 were more civilian information?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can give you such
10 information. For example, most of the conversations in which
11 Mr. Krajisnik or Mr. Karadzic or Mr. Koljevic participated were such.
12 I think that is sufficient, but there was quite a lot of other
13 information as well.
14 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] So when you talk about civilian
15 information, you talk about political information; is that right?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Civilian authorities, civilian
17 structures, relation to certain events, and other things that might be
18 interesting; also, what was the atmosphere among the people, the
20 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you very much.
21 I understand better.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please carry on, Mr. Tolimir. Apologies for
23 these interruptions.
24 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Q. Can you please tell me whether intercepting the enemy army and
1 wire-tapping the enemy army is a civilian duty, as you just described
2 these activities to us? Thank you.
3 A. We intercepted everything, anything that we could hear. There
4 could be no selection, because that was information that you received in
5 your ear. So we could not skip information that told us that a certain
6 area would be shelled, even though it was military information.
7 Therefore -- please let me finish. At the same time, if shells were
8 fired on a certain area, we would be interested in learning whether the
9 population in your area reacted; when they received information in the
10 media that a certain number of people were killed, just as an example.
11 Q. I would ask you that later and I would ask for additional time,
12 because I only have a little time left. So if you want to continue, then
13 you would have an opportunity.
14 A. No, I have finished. Thank you.
15 Q. Thank you. I only wish to ask you this: Were you assigned a
16 room because of civilian -- even though these were military facilities,
17 did you receive that as civilians?
18 A. Well, we were allowed to receive what was important for us, but I
19 also added just a little while ago that we couldn't skip over the
20 information that were important for the army and then pass on to the
21 army. That was quite normal, just like the army, if it got hold of
22 information that were important for the work of the State Security
23 Service, it would submit the information to us. You know that it's
24 normal work, especially in wartime conditions.
25 Q. All right, thank you. Can you please tell me, when you
1 registered a conversation by foreign people, how did you know that these
2 were not military activities? Because you told us that you would take
3 this to be translated. Were there any such conversations that you
4 registered? Because an intercept device has to register all the
5 conversations that are received.
6 A. We were listening to your radio-relay communication channels, we
7 were listening to you, and in these channels, very often -- I'm not sure
8 how many times, but very often we heard conversations of your officials
9 who were using interpreters because they were talking with
10 English-speaking persons, for example.
11 Q. Thank you. You don't have to explain. Can you just answer the
12 question. I'm asking short questions, and there will be questions to
13 which you will be able to answer as you wish. Thank you.
14 Now please tell me, as you said in examination-in-chief that
15 there were communications problems and that you would use dots, which you
16 also said during your earlier testimony in the Popovic case, can you then
17 tell me, please, if you were using an adequate antenna or whether you had
18 to adapt it so that your reception would be better?
19 A. We were using an adequate antenna, but there were some signals
20 that we could not hear well at all. So when we could just hear a little
21 bit from these signals with a professional military antenna, we tried to
22 find a better solution, and so we set up the parabolic antenna so that we
23 would receive maximum audibility.
24 Q. Thank you. Could this parabolic antenna record conversations
25 lower than 1 gigahertz? Because you said during your
1 examination-in-chief that it was meant to be used for the range of
2 frequencies between 600 and 900 megahertz. Please answer briefly.
3 A. We were using the antenna which we received for the radio-relay
4 channel and for the range of frequencies that we could listen to.
5 Q. Are you saying that a parabolic antenna was able to receive
6 signals lower than 1 gigahertz? Thank you.
7 A. In this specific case, I was not trying to do calculations about
8 the antenna. But when I was requesting assistance to resolve the issue,
9 I received an antenna for which I was told that it had been used for a
10 specific radio-relay channel that had been inactive, so they took off
11 this antenna and then they set it up.
12 Q. Thank you. I understand everything now.
13 Can you tell me who was the chief of the centre that your group
14 was part of?
15 A. You want me to mention the name?
16 Q. If the person's name is secret, you don't have to. Thank you.
17 A. It's not secret, but I'm not sure, because a name occurs now --
18 it's not secret. It's something that is general knowledge.
19 Q. Please ask the Prosecutor. Thank you.
20 A. Well, can the Prosecutor please state what I should do? I don't
21 know. I think that it wouldn't be good if I was to mention names in open
22 session. That's it.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
24 MR. McCLOSKEY: I can assist by -- these issues, as you can
25 imagine, are very sensitive to the governments involved. And I would
1 appreciate it, and as I think the general has understood, that anybody's
2 name in these services should be mentioned in private session. You will
3 be hearing from -- other intercepts from other countries where we will
4 get the briefest of information, for security reasons. So we're getting
5 quite a bit of information, but if we could, just out of an abundance of
6 caution, have the supervisors' and the other people's names under seal,
7 that would be a very good idea. This war is still an issue in the
8 country, as you know.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. We'll go into private session.
10 [Private session]
20 [Open session]
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we are in open session.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Now we are in open session, but you should
23 continue after the second break. This is, I think, the convenient time
24 for everybody to have the second break, and then you may continue your
1 We will resume at 1.00.
2 --- Recess taken at 12.32 p.m.
3 --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, you may carry on.
5 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 Q. Witness, a moment ago you said that you belonged to the security
7 and intelligence structure and that you gathered intelligence; is that
9 A. That's right.
10 Q. Do security and intelligence matters fall under civilian or
11 military activities?
12 A. Well, they can be both.
13 Q. You said that you intercepted other matters as well. Can you
14 tell us, what are these other matters? Thank you.
15 A. We intercepted all the conversations that we assessed as possibly
16 useful in our work. The extent to which information could be used and
17 their actual value was not something that we assessed. This was assessed
18 by the individuals who received the information from us.
19 Q. Thank you. I only wanted to know what these other matters were,
20 and not what their value was. Can you tell us, did you keep in touch
21 with the radio amateurs in Srebrenica and the troops there?
22 A. As far as that location is concerned, we only intercepted the
23 waves transmitted along the radio-relay route, and in general terms we
24 intercepted the communications of the Army of Republika Srpska.
25 Q. Thank you. And which other sites or stations of yours kept in
1 touch with Srebrenica?
2 A. It was a different location in a different period of time. It
3 was, in fact, a detached communications centre of this service, and it
4 has nothing to do with the matters we are discussing now.
5 Q. Can you tell us, did you at any point in time record any sort of
6 information related to the forces of the BH Army in the enclaves of
7 Srebrenica and Zepa? Thank you.
8 A. No.
9 Q. Can you tell us, is it possible to adjust the equipment so as to
10 intercept only the information related to the adversary and not the
11 BH Army?
12 A. Yes, it is possible to do so. You know that this was the sole
13 subject of our interest. I know that you have a great deal of knowledge
14 on this issue. You will, therefore, understand why I accept these
15 questions of yours in this way. We scanned the entire frequency range,
16 and the specialist told us which of these frequencies were used by both
17 the army and some of the civilian telephone lines, and we did this as
18 well. You have to keep in mind the fact that we were short of staff. We
19 only had two individuals doing the job, and you will realise that it was
20 impossible for them to do all the matters that you refer to.
21 Q. Thank you. As a follow-up to my earlier question, did the device
22 have the possibility to make a selection and distinguish between the
23 conversations taking place on the opposite side and the conversations
24 taking place on your side?
25 A. Yes, it could. The radio-relay link that we listened in to was
1 the one that was solely used by the Army of Republika Srpska.
2 Q. Thank you. Did this device automatically exclude all other
3 participants in conversations, or was this something that had to be done
5 A. I don't know if we understand each other correctly. If we are
6 listening to the frequency, say, 785, this is a frequency solely used by
7 you, and therefore it would not have any other conversations taking part
8 there, like conversations, for instance, of the BH Army.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please pause. You are overlapping, both of you,
10 at the moment. Please pause and then continue.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the accused.
12 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Please answer this question of mine. Was it possible to have a
14 conversation taking place on the frequency that you were listening to
15 which involved members of the BH Army from the Srebrenica enclave?
16 A. I think that it was impossible.
17 Q. Thank you. When you intercepted conversations, the participants
18 of which were only members of the VRS, did you also intercept
19 conversations that they had with UNPROFOR troops?
20 A. I do recall one, two, three, or five - I don't know how many -
21 conversations where an interpreter was used. Now, who was at the other
22 end, well, I know of this one case, and I can't recall others. But I do
23 know there were conversations taking place in the English language.
24 Q. Thank you. Tell me, did you enter these conversations into your
25 log-book, the one that was showed to you a moment ago when the OTP
1 representative asked you of the meaning of the various columns there?
2 A. I think that this is a good question. Since the assistance of an
3 interpreter was required, I do recall this one occasion when we took
4 along an interpreter to the location where we worked. There was a
5 possibility, however, that a tape containing such a recording of such a
6 conversation would be taken to the head office of the service, where it
7 would be translated. In that case, the intercept would be entered into
8 the log-book of the head office. But I'm talking about exceptions, of
9 course. I do recall one intercept having been translated up there, and
10 then there was one other case where either the translator was absent or
11 unable to come, so it was translated elsewhere.
12 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us, does the log-book contain intercepts
13 of conversations between representatives of the Serb side and
14 English-speaking interlocutors?
15 A. As far as I remember, it does.
16 Q. Are we going to be able to recognise it? Will you be able to
17 recognise it in the log-book by looking at the numbers?
18 A. I can't recognise a single intercept in the log-book.
19 Q. Thank you. A moment ago, you said that sometimes you had to
20 reconstruct portions of conversations and that sometimes you would also
21 call an interpreter to come to your location in order to help you. Was
22 the selection done by you, by your better judgement, as to what it is
23 that should be forwarded to your superior and what shouldn't? Because,
24 of course, first of all, you had to understand what it was about.
25 A. Again, you've put several questions to me.
1 First of all, we did not reconstruct conversations in any way. I
2 explained that if we heard a conversation taking place in English, we
3 would not try and grasp the meaning. We would rather call for an
5 Q. A moment ago, during the examination-in-chief, you said that you
6 produced a note or a transcription of the intercept on paper, which would
7 be typed up in a computer and then the paper would be destroyed. Is this
9 A. You didn't put the question to me correctly.
10 Q. Can you then tell me what the procedure was?
11 A. Can you please put shorter questions to me?
12 We didn't create a note. It was a transcription of the
13 conversation which contained everything that I mentioned; participants,
14 time, frequency, channel.
15 Q. You also said that the operator would note it down on paper and
16 that there were some portions of the conversation that he wouldn't be
17 able to hear, or that the recording wouldn't start in time, that the
18 conversation was already ongoing when the recording started, and then
19 parts of the conversation would be missed; is that right?
20 A. Yes, there were such cases where you would hear, for instance,
21 you picking up a receiver and saying, Tolimir speaking. Can I talk to
22 Marko? And by the time the operator heard this, he would switch the
23 button on for recording, but by that time he would have missed -- he
24 wouldn't be able to record the beginning. But the operator would,
25 nevertheless, use the information in writing down that the conversation
1 was taking place between Tolimir and Marko.
2 Q. Thank you. Can this be a document used before a court of law if
3 the document indicates that the person intercepting the conversation had
4 a clear idea of who the interlocutors were, but that it doesn't transpire
5 from the transcription?
6 A. Well, it's up to the Trial Chamber to decide this.
7 And I can't hear you.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I stopped you because again it is impossible for
9 the interpreters to catch what you are talking about. Look at the
10 transcript and wait that the sentence is recorded to the end.
11 And now continue, please.
12 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 The transcript is in English, and we are both of us speaking
14 Serbian, but we will try to comply.
15 Q. Please answer this question briefly, if you remember it. If not,
16 I'll repeat it.
17 A. Repeat it, please.
18 Q. Were there any cases where the operators, the listeners,
19 arbitrarily interpret some content or part of content which is not
20 distinctly audible and cannot be transcribed on paper?
21 A. There were cases where, from one voice content, you are able to
22 understand the meaning of what is said. It was not a form of
23 transcription. It is written down precisely as I'm trying to explain;
24 namely, that in a part of the conversation, there was reference to
25 shelling. What was being shelled and where could not be heard, but the
1 gist of the reference was clear, and that's the way the operator would
2 note it down. He would not try to put it in the mouth of any of the
4 Q. Were those intercepts that you recorded kept safeguarded, where
5 are they kept, and where can we find these recordings that you recorded
6 on the UHER device?
7 A. If you listened to me carefully, I have spoken in my evidence
8 about this.
9 I meant to continue. I'm trying to follow the typing.
10 Our job was to finish this technical work. We would then hand it
11 over to other people who are in charge, as operative officers, of the
12 rest of the work.
13 Q. Thank you. But tell me, did you, and I mean you personally,
14 have, in safekeeping, any of this material on site at the location where
15 you were working, or did you have it kept elsewhere?
16 A. In that period, among other things, in a safe box at the
17 communications centre, the transcripts were kept. Now, it has all been
18 handed over further on by the communications centre, so there's nothing
19 there anymore.
20 Now, when the -- let me try to explain. When the communication
21 centre receives this and they print it out, they pass it on to the chief,
22 and the transcripts were recorded on floppy discs and they were kept for
23 a while in the safe box. I know this for a fact. Now, when this was
24 transferred to the people who were responsible for that work, I don't
25 know exactly, but it was towards the end of the war.
1 Q. So you were not sure. You don't know whether it has been kept to
2 date, I mean, the magnetic tapes?
3 A. At this moment, I don't know where they are or how many they are.
4 Q. Can you answer this question: If you listened to a communication
5 in a network and there was several conversations, did you select
6 conversations to intercept, or did you record all of them and then later
7 transcribe them?
8 A. There were persons -- there were personalities, rather, whose all
9 conversations we recorded, and there were other communication lines that
10 we monitored. And occasionally we would come upon a conversation that we
11 would later find irrelevant, and then we would tape it over --
12 Q. Thank you. Tell us, please, how much time passed between your
13 receipt of information on your devices and the time when it was received
14 by the end user.
15 A. That depended. If something was very important, it would be
16 transcribed immediately and passed on immediately. And you can see that
17 from these reports, and I can show you in my log-book, the log-book of
18 files sent. You will see that there are, for instance, conversations
19 recorded at 8.20 and passed on at 9.15.
20 Q. You said something very important. Concerning such very
21 important things, did you preserve the recording of the conversation, and
22 where would it be?
23 A. Again, I've said this in my previous evidence. If we estimated
24 that something was very important, there was one tape on which we
25 recorded or dubbed these very important conversations, but we didn't have
1 the time or the men to do all this. But I know there are recordings for
2 everything. Once something is evaluated as very important, we would dub
3 it on that special tape, and we would mark the time, and we would mark
4 the participants in the conversation.
5 Q. We discussed a very important conversation in the past exchange.
6 Tell us, what is the purpose of intercepting conversations in a certain
7 radio network, and why is this information important?
8 A. Simply, it's important because it's gathering intelligence.
9 Q. Thank you. Is it possible -- is the possibility of quick
10 conveyance of information very important in interception?
11 A. Could you repeat?
12 Q. Is the speed with which you forward information from your
13 interception centre to the user an important factor in your work?
14 A. Depending on the content of information, the speed is sometimes
15 very important. Other types of information can wait a little.
16 Q. In the Popovic trial, page 6124, lines 3 through 6, you said:
17 "We did not keep the papers on which we transcribed
18 conversations. We burnt them as soon as we have passed on our messages
19 to the centre office."
20 So you decided yourself what you would keep, what you would not,
21 what would be documented, what would not?
22 A. We did not decide that. After we transcribed a conversation and
23 after we re-typed it into the computer, we thought this paper was
24 superfluous and dangerous to keep on the intercepting site, and that's
25 why we destroyed it.
1 Q. I asked you this because you said this note-book would soon be
2 received by us. I'm interested, is it possible to find this note-book
3 where you actually transcribed conversations? Because in another trial,
4 you said, We burnt papers as soon as we sent our information to the head
5 office. That's written on the page I indicated, 6124, lines 3 to 6.
6 A. I will try to explain this distinction.
7 The papers on which we wrote down the conversations, after they
8 were typed on the computer and passed on to the centre, we disposed of
9 the paper and burnt it. Now, this agenda book where we recorded all the
10 files sent to the centre is something different. We don't have it here
11 right now, but we could have it.
12 Q. Thank you. Did the intercepts that you wrote down in hand get
13 burned as soon as you received feedback that they had been received at
14 your head office?
15 A. That's not right. The device we used to transmit these files
16 always gave a confirmation of receipt, and we were always sure that
17 everything was received. So it had nothing to do with the destruction of
18 paper. We had electronic confirmation that messages were received.
19 People down there would type it out or, rather, print it out and pass it
20 on. And after that, we destroyed our papers.
21 Q. I'm not asking anything for my own benefit. I know very well how
22 it works. But you said in the Popovic transcript, page 6124, I quote:
23 "We did not keep the papers on which we transcribed
24 conversations. We burnt them as soon as we have sent messages to our
25 head office."
1 Did I quote this correctly?
2 A. Quite possibly I put it that way, but whether I burnt it that
3 same second or I waited a day or two is not important, in my mind.
4 Q. Thank you. You also said in examination-in-chief here, and in
5 the Popovic case as well, that sometimes, and I quote document 1D160,
6 page 3, para 3, lines 9 to 12; in English, it's page 3, para 3, lines 9
7 through 11 -- while we're waiting for that to appear on the screen, I'll
8 quote to you what you said, because we have no time. I quote:
9 "Sometimes we paraphrased the conversation, but we did that in
10 peculiar, particular circumstances. For instance, if a reporter from
11 Republika Srpska was passing on this information, we usually did not
12 transcribe such conversations, but would summarise them."
13 Did I quote you correctly?
14 A. You did, you did.
15 Q. Is that authentic, this paraphrasing you engaged in sometimes?
16 Would your summaries also be authentic, based on your listening to
18 A. If you just remember what you said, a reporter -- a radio
19 reporter, we heard a radio reporter who was reporting radio news that
20 would be broadcast the same evening, and the piece of news was full of
21 false information, and that was two full pages. So we thought that we
22 could summarise it so that we wouldn't transcribe it in full, as it did
23 not have any special weight. These were radio reporters of
24 Republika Srpska.
25 Q. Thank you. I have understood you very well, because
1 conversations from the media are sometimes quoted here in the trials.
2 This is my following question: Who in your group was the one
3 whose duty was to paraphrase such intercepted conversations? Thank you.
4 A. If you allow me to say something briefly.
5 This was intelligence information. The same information was
6 broadcast on the TV news of Republika Srpska from Pale. It is something
7 that the Court and everyone else can find, and then you can compare how
8 we paraphrased the information. You know that better than I do, if I may
9 say so. You know that such news, such information in the war, does not
10 have the weight of information as spoken by Karadzic, Mladic, or someone
11 else. This is the way the journalists would formulate it in the media.
12 We would assess that we should our superiors about it and that it had
13 that particular content, but we just wouldn't want to type out two full
14 pages because it would be broadcast the same evening.
15 Q. All right, thank you. Who would paraphrase and adapt such
16 intercepts so that they would be such news so that you would send them to
17 the final users?
18 A. Please don't say that they were adapted. The truth is the only
19 important thing here. No one had the right to -- no one had the right to
20 spin such news, because we didn't try to paint a nice picture of
22 Q. All right. Then can you tell me who paraphrased what you heard
23 in the intercepted conversation and that you then forwarded to your head
24 office as information or as your report? Thank you.
25 A. It was suggested to all operators that when they heard media
1 reports or information, something that was unimportant or that the
2 context was such that because of poor audibility, one might only conclude
3 what the context was, that that should be noted, but everything else is
4 explained in the transcript; when persons are called X or Y instead of
5 with their name, when there were dots, and so on. But what you want to
6 tell me now was that I was sending this information to my own superiors,
7 and that was not so.
8 Q. All right. I have listened to you, but please be even more brief
9 in your answers because we only have 20 minutes left.
10 I just wanted to ask you whether the meaning of the message would
11 disappear because of the paraphrasing that you used. And were you only
12 talking about media reports or about the sources that you were
13 intercepting? Thank you.
14 A. I think that you are wasting your time. These were media
15 reporters whom we managed to hear when they were conveying information.
16 That is what we paraphrased, or, rather, not paraphrased, but we would
17 just make a note saying that the reporter was reporting about such and
18 such matters.
19 Q. Thank you. Will you please tell the Court what was the frequency
20 83600, what radio network was that, and what could you hear from it, if
21 you remember? If you don't, please just say so. Thank you.
22 A. I remember. That was the frequency on which we had 24 channels.
23 Of the 24 channels, I remember well that channel number 13 was the
24 channel used by General Mladic. As for the others, there were others
25 where we could hear Mr. Koljevic or Mr. Krajisnik. This is what I know
1 for certain.
2 Q. Thank you. Does that mean that General Mladic was on that
3 channel all the time? Was it a channel that belonged to him and that he
4 was using? Thank you.
5 A. That is not correct. He was not in his office all the time, and
6 the evidence of that is the earlier transcript, because he appeared on
7 frequency 785 during the incidents in Srebrenica. So he left his office,
8 and he now communicated through another radio-relay communications.
9 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us, what was the frequency between
10 Vlasenica and Zvornik, which you have mentioned? Can you tell us where
11 and how it worked, if you know?
12 A. I talked about that. It was a radio-relay communication.
13 I think it was 785.00 megahertz. But it was a long time ago, and please
14 don't get me wrong if I don't remember something.
15 Q. Thank you. Can you answer my next question?
16 A. Yes, yes.
17 Q. Did you know what were the locations of these radio-relay
18 stations of the Army of Republika Srpska that you were monitoring? Thank
20 A. I didn't know that. However, I received a map from the army on
21 which they showed me and said, Look, here is Han Pijesak, here is Cer,
22 here are Duge Njive, because I am not educated in this field, but I could
23 understand it and I could use it. It was the army that dealt with this.
24 I cannot hear you.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
1 Can we please show 65 ter 2923. It's a prosecution document.
2 Thank you. 65 ter 2923, please. Thank you.
3 THE REGISTRAR: That is Exhibit P239.
4 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 Q. In this document, when you analysed it during
6 examination-in-chief, you talked about what it stood for. If we look at
7 the transcript now, in line 24 and onwards, was it recorded directly or
8 was it paraphrased? I will quote what it says here:
9 "We did not target civilians, but armed terrorists who had to be
10 disarmed in accordance with our agreement which we signed in the presence
11 of UN, and this was not done."
12 Thank you.
13 A. I cannot see that.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, he may be referring to one of the
16 conversations that's not been translated because it was not one of the
17 ones that we were interested in. I don't know, but that is my likely
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think, Mr. Tolimir, you were referring to a
20 part of the transcript of today or another day or another trial. I'm not
21 sure about that. What do you mean by "the transcript now, in line 24 and
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, it's not a problem.
24 Could we just show the documents from the note-book which was
25 presented today during examination-in-chief. If we can show the
1 documents one by one. Thank you. That is the document P239, or
2 65 ter 2923, and onwards.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: This document is on the screen in front of you.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
5 We can see one such document now. It's the first one.
6 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
7 Q. And you talk about communication between Zvornik and Vlasenica,
8 and the frequency is 785. At 0822 hours, you registered a conversation
9 between one Miro and an unidentified male person; is that correct?
10 A. That is correct.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: This is the portion at the top of this page which
12 is not translated into English, but continue, please.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] Thank you.
14 Q. Was it generally known that on that day, at this time, civilians
15 were being transported from Srebrenica, through Potocari, and into
16 Kladanj in the vehicles that are mentioned here? Thank you.
17 A. Are you asking me whether that was really carried out on that
19 Q. That's right, because the first part of the conversation mentions
20 a vehicle which is towing a tank. Is that normal during armed conflict?
21 A. I don't know. I cannot answer any of that. I don't know what
22 was happening in the field. I did not see a tank during the war in any
23 of the operations.
24 Q. All right. If you did not see a tank, and you don't think a tank
25 can be used in conflict --
1 A. No, no, I just didn't see one during the war.
2 Q. All right. Then please answer another question.
3 During examination-in-chief, you said that your signature on this
4 document is marked with "1160" [as interpreted]; is that correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And then later you said that you did not register the names of
7 other participants in the next conversation. That's number 557 which you
8 can see on the screen, that you did not -- so you did not record the
9 names of the participants, because the operator heard it, but by the time
10 he could write it down and turn on the device, then the conversation
11 could no longer be heard; is that correct? Thank you.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: The beginning could
13 not be heard anymore when they introduced themselves.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I talk about that, I'm talking
15 in general terms. Whether it was me or somebody else --
16 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Please answer with yes or no, and then you might comment on that.
18 A. I cannot do it without the comment.
19 I said that this was happening. I was one of the operators at
20 the moment, but I didn't remember every conversation, nor could I do
22 Q. So you could not identify the participants in the conversations.
23 When you recorded it, you couldn't say who it was. Thank you.
24 We're reading the conversation number 557 which you transcribed
25 in the computer. Thank you.
1 A. Are you going to read it or what? I'm not sure what you're
2 asking me.
3 Q. Just for the Court, only one of the participants is named here,
4 and that's Mr. Ognjenovic. The other one is not identified, so one can
5 just suppose who it was. Is that correct or not? Thank you.
6 A. You can see for yourself that he's not identified, but he is
7 addressed as a general here. But which general it was, it never says.
8 Q. All right. Now I'm asking you this: Can it be an authentic
9 document if someone is to be charged or believed to be responsible when
10 there are so many generals in any given army? Thank you.
11 A. Do you really think that I can answer such a question? In the
12 context of a series of other reports, can this be something you can be
13 charged with or not, how could I say that?
14 Q. I'm just asking you, because you said that you personally
15 registered this conversation and entered it into the computer. Did you
16 also burn the notes, on the basis of which you determined that such and
17 such a conversation was conducted at such and such a time and on the
18 basis of which you entered that into the computer from the handwritten
19 notes? Thank you.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I would like to indicate that this is the last
21 question for today, but we would like to listen to the answer.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know who burned this piece
23 of paper. It was not important for us at all. I did register this, I
24 did record it, I did say that this was a general, but not
25 General so-and-so, because I did not hear the name, and I think that
1 everything is clear about that. No one had the right to say,
2 General so-and-so, even though it could happen that according to some
3 other information, one might conclude that only General Krstic was in
4 this particular area. But one couldn't record that because he was not
5 addressed by his name.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right.
7 Thank you, Witness. If you appear in the courtroom again, I will
8 ask you to be more brief in your answers so that we could finish as
9 quickly as possible.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you could also try to ask simple
11 questions and try not to ask three questions within one.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right, thank you.
13 I wish to thank the Presiding Judge, and the interpreters, and
14 everyone else who participated in this process. And I thank you once
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
17 I think we are really running out of time. If I understood the
18 scheduling list, this witness will be available tomorrow for continuation
19 of the cross-examination. Is that correct, Mr. McCloskey?
20 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, Mr. President, and there is an army witness
21 after that.
22 Could we get an estimate so that the witness people could start
23 planning for that and we can plan?
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That would be helpful, Mr. Tolimir. What is the
25 estimation of time you need?
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
2 I have another 30 questions. I can read out the 30 questions.
3 If I read them, I need 15 minutes, but it depends on the answers given by
4 the witness. Thank you.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: What is your time estimation?
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My estimate, considering, though,
7 the length of answers, is that I would need approximately one session.
8 Thank you.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: That would be much more than you indicated
10 earlier, that you would need one hour and thirty minutes. That is
11 perhaps a little bit too long, and you should discuss it with your legal
12 advisor if you can perhaps shorten this time.
13 We have to adjourn now. But before we do that, I have to let you
14 know that we have a change in the sitting time for tomorrow.
15 This courtroom -- there's a need for another Trial Chamber to use
16 this courtroom in the early morning, until 10.00, so that we have to
17 start a little bit later, at 10.30, until 3.15 in the afternoon. This is
18 the normal time, but postponed for one and a half hours.
19 We adjourn now and resume tomorrow at 10.30 in this courtroom.
20 [The witness stands down]
21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.53 p.m.
22 to be reconvened on Friday, the 28th day of May,
23 2010, at 10.30 a.m.