1 Wednesday, 23 February 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.08 a.m.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good morning to everybody. Our apologies for the
6 delayed start. The Chamber was occupied by another matter, and we should
7 now call the witness into the courtroom.
8 [The witness takes the stand]
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good morning, Mr. Manning. Welcome back to the
10 courtroom. Make yourself comfortable. Please be reminded that the
11 affirmation to tell the truth you made at the beginning of your testimony
12 yesterday still applies.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And Mr. Tolimir has more questions for you during
15 his cross-examination.
16 Mr. Tolimir.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May there be peace unto this house
18 and may God's will be done in these proceedings, and may the outcome be
19 as God wishes and not as I wish.
20 WITNESS: DEAN MANNING [Resumed]
21 Cross-examination by Mr. Tolimir: [Continued]
22 Q. Greetings to Mr. Manning. May we resume where we stopped
23 yesterday than was the issue of the transfer of authority from the OTP to
24 the Bosnian -- or, rather, Federal Commission for Missing Persons.
25 This is my question: Did you perhaps remember based on which
1 document it was that you participated in the transfer of authority over
2 exhumations to the Commission for Missing Persons? Thank you.
3 A. Good morning, Mr. Tolimir.
4 No, I did not remember anything more about that document, and I
5 have not seep a copy of that document.
6 Q. Thank you. In that case, if you will allow me to, I'll remind
7 you of your statement in the Popovic case on this score.
8 On page 18913 of the transcript, you said, and I'm quoting,
9 explaining your role in the process of the transfer of authority to the
10 Bosnian Commission for Missing Persons, you said:
11 "At the time, we created a small ICTY team to follow the
12 exhumations conducted by the Bosnians. I was responsible for the team
13 and was there to assist the team out in the field?"
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: This is the document, 65 ter 0675. It should be
15 displayed on the screen to enable the witness to see it in front of him.
16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
18 Can document 65 ter 0675 be shown in e-court for the witness.
19 Thank you.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic.
21 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Good morning to everyone.
22 Mr. President, I -- if I may be of assistance, it's document
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
25 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Page 18913.
1 THE REGISTRAR: And the document should not be broadcast because
2 it's confidential. Thank you.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I don't think so. We should have the public
4 redacted version of this transcript on the screen and not the -- that
5 part under seal. That might be another number. I don't have the numbers
6 yet, the P numbers.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the public version of that document
8 is P1819. Thank you.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
10 We need page 18913. There we have it on the screen.
11 Mr. Tolimir.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Sir, you've had an opportunity to read now what your testimony in
15 the Popovic case was. This is my question: When you refer to the
16 Bosnian commission in your testimony here, are you referring to the
17 Federal Commission for Missing Persons? Thank you.
18 A. Your Honours, I know the body to be Bosnian Commission for
19 Missing Persons. From memory, it was a triumvirate, if you like, from
20 the three parties involved, so it was a Bosnian Muslim, the Serbs, and
21 the Croat entities which were looking at human remains all across Bosnia.
22 But it was the Bosnian Commission for Missing Persons that I dealt with.
23 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
24 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
25 Q. All right. Tell us, then, at the exhumations in Srebrenica in
1 all the Srebrenica-related cases, did the Muslims, the Croats, and the
2 Serbs participate in them, or was it only the Muslims?
3 A. Your Honours, prior to the hand-over in 2001, the exhumations
4 were conducted by the ICTY, except for 2006, when it was the ICTY and
5 PHR, Physicians for Human Rights. To the point of hand-over, no other
6 entities from the former Yugoslavia were involved in that process. In
7 fact, they were excluded from entry to the sites, and they were not
8 involved in that process, whatsoever.
9 Following the hand-over to the Bosnian government, they were
10 responsible for the exhumations. Initially, we monitored in 2001 those
11 exhumations, and thereafter it was ICMP who monitored the work of the
12 Bosnian Commission for Missing Persons in exhuming the graves.
13 Q. Thank you. Did the Serbs and Croats participate together with
14 the Muslims in the exhumations of the victims related to Srebrenica?
15 Thank you.
16 A. I don't know if there were any Serbs or Croats involved in the
17 team. I think I recall a Croat archaeologist. But as far as I recall,
18 it was a team predominantly controlled and made up of Bosnian Muslims
19 from the Sarajevo and Tuzla area, and ICMP was an international body made
20 up of many nationalities.
21 Q. Thank you. You say that you don't know, but here we can read
22 from your testimony, "I was responsible for the organisation of the team
23 and to assist the team out in the field."
24 We don't want it to appear here that the team was a
25 multi-national one. Can you tell us the Bosnian commission, did it
1 involve the participation of the Serbs?
2 A. Your Honours, my coordination was of the ICTY team who monitored
3 the Bosnian commission team, so, effectively, they were ICTY employees.
4 An archaeologist, crime scene officer and a photographer. They were the
5 team that I was referring to. But as far as I know, the exhumations
6 following 2001 were conducted by a Bosnian team, a Bosnian Muslim team.
7 I don't recall there being a representative from one of the other
8 entities. I believe it was just a Bosnian Muslim commission who were
9 exhuming the Srebrenica bodies in the Srebrenica area. But that should
10 be put to the Bosnian commission.
11 And if I may, the team in 2001 that we monitored, was
12 Mr. Murat Hurtic [realtime transcript read in error "Hutic"], and his
13 team were effectively recovering the bodies. They were taking the bodies
14 from the ground and taking them to Tuzla, to the mortuary, to be examined
15 or -- or for a time to the ICTY mortuary to be examined. And from my
16 recollection, they were all Bosnian Muslims employed by Mr. Hurtic and
17 the Bosnian commission.
18 Q. Thank you. Do you know what Mr. Hurtic did during the war and
19 whether he was a member of the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina? Thank you.
20 A. I think he probably was. I can't recall. He -- he was, I'm
21 sure, a member of the military. I can't recall.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic.
23 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, can the witness state
24 the name of the gentleman clearly? Can he spell it out perhaps because I
25 as I heard it, it sounded different from what we have now in the
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In the transcript we have, sir, "Murat Hutic".
3 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, his first name was Murat M-U-R-A-T.
4 His family name was H-U-R-T-I-C. Or ch, I apologise for my
5 pronunciation. Murat Hurtic. Hurtic.
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In fact there was only the R missing in the
7 family name.
8 Mr. Tolimir, please continue.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you, witness, and
10 Mr. Gajic.
11 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Did the commission led by Mr. Hurtic include also the president
13 of the commission for missing persons, Mr. Amor Masic -- Masovic? Thank
15 Let me shorten my question, was Amor Masovic a member of
16 Mr. Hurtic's team? Thank you.
17 A. No, I think Mr. Masovic was, if you like, his supervisor, based
18 in Sarajevo. I dealt with Mr. Masovic over a number of years. I believe
19 he would have supervised Mr. Hurtic's work but during that period I dealt
20 with Mr. Hurtic.
21 Your Honours, I believe yesterday Mr. Tolimir asked me a question
22 about allegations against Mr. Masovic and I did recall an allegation that
23 I was aware of from conversations. Without casting any aspersions on
24 Mr. Masovic, the allegations that I recall was that he had sold bodies
25 during the war to the opposite side, but it struck me that I recalled
1 that, and I should relay that to the Court. And I have no more
2 information about that allegation.
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. Tell us, why did the OTP and you
4 personally entrust Mr. Hurtic with this work, as well as his supervisor,
5 Amor Masovic, as they were a party to the conflict? Why were they
6 entrusted with the entire effort of the exhumations and search for the
7 victims of Srebrenica?
8 A. Ultimately the responsibility for recovering the bodies was
9 handed to the Bosnian government. They chose the mechanism to do that.
10 Mr. Hurtic was involved in that process for many years. I have no doubt
11 as to Mr. Hurtic's integrity and his honesty. I didn't choose to work
12 with him, but I was pleased to do so. Mr. Masovic, I had less to do
13 with. The decision as to who within the Bosnian government or what
14 agency within the Bosnian government exhumed those bodies was, I assume,
15 a decision by that government. We, as a Tribunal, handed over
16 responsibility for the recovery of the bodies and we sought to monitor
17 that process, and when we stopped monitoring that process, it was
18 monitored by an international commission, the ICMP, who, to my knowledge,
19 were present at all the exhumations and during the autopsy process and
20 were in charge, effectively, of the DNA project.
21 Q. Thank you. Mr. Manning, can you tell us when was it that you
22 personally, as well as the ICTY, turned over the work to a mono-ethnic
23 agency that was a party to the conflict whilst you distanced yourself
24 from it all? Thank you.
25 A. Your Honours, the question involves some issues but when I handed
1 over -- we handed over responsibility to the Bosnian commission, it was
2 in 2001, I think early in the year. I would have to check the document.
3 To characterise us handing it to mono-ethnic agencies, that's correct.
4 It was monitored by an international agency. I don't know that the
5 Bosnian commission was party to the conflict. I can't answer that part
6 of the question.
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. Can you tell us when was it that you, as
8 the ICTY, stopped following their work? And when did the representatives
9 of the International Commission for Missing Persons take them over, as it
10 were? Thank you.
11 A. Your Honours, from memory, we continued monitoring during 2001,
12 and then we withdrew that team and it was monitored by ICMP. I believe
13 that ICMP were involved with the Bosnian Commission for Missing Persons
14 well before that. I can't give you specifics, but they were involved
15 with the Bosnian commission for some years prior to 2001.
16 And following this -- the cessation of our monitoring, we still
17 regularly visited the grave-sites, we still reviewed the material and the
18 information that was coming from the Bosnian commission and ICMP for many
19 years thereafter, and I would suggest we still do so, in seeking DNA data
20 from ICMP and updates to reports.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. Why did the ICTY withdraw from the
22 monitoring process in 2001; and why did it hand over the work to an
23 entity that wasn't a component part of the ICTY? Because the ICMP is
24 just that. Thank you.
25 A. I don't remember all the specific reasons, but effectively we had
1 reached a point where we could no longer sustain that level of work.
2 There were other trials and other investigations within the Tribunal. It
3 was several million dollars each year. It was a massive project. I'm
4 not saying that it simply came down to cost, but as the investigation
5 matured, as the information that we had was collated, I believe that we
6 reached a point where we couldn't sustain that level of work for the
8 We also had several trials that were running, and eventually it
9 reaches a point where you have to concentrate on other matters, and our
10 work in the exhumations takes a very long time, and I think we would
11 still be exhuming graves now if the ICTY continued with that work. To
12 hand it over to the Bosnian commission meant that the bodies could be
13 recovered, the work of identifications would continue at a much greater
14 pace, and the families could have their loved ones' bodies returned to
16 So it was a combination of all those aspects, but I can't
17 remember a specific driver that -- that made us decide, or made the
18 Tribunal decide that, as of now, we will cease doing exhumations.
19 Q. Thank you. Could you tell us whether the International
20 Commission for Missing Persons is a non-governmental organisation? Thank
22 A. I understood the ICMP to be a non-governmental organisation.
23 It's an international organisation which I think was sponsored or created
24 by a former US politician. I understand that Queen Noor of Jordan was
25 heavily involved in the funding and processing, and that it's an
1 international organisation which is -- which -- whose mandate is to
2 assist in identifying those killed in -- in wars and returning the
3 remains to the family. Commission for Missing Persons is trying to
4 establish what happened to the missing persons and assist the families.
5 But it's best to ask that of ICMP.
6 Q. Thank you. I didn't ask you to explain who they were, just
7 whether they were a non-governmental organisation.
8 Please tell me, if you can, whether this non-governmental
9 organisation and the State Commission of Bosnia and Herzegovina have the
10 responsibility to disclose to me, as an accused, both things that are
11 damaging to me and things that are mitigating for me?
12 THE INTERPRETER: Could the accused please repeat the last
13 sentence of his question.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, the interpreters ask you to repeat
15 the last question.
16 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Do they have the responsibility towards this Court, as do
18 representatives of the Tribunal? Thank you.
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. Thank you. Is a consequence of what happened and the fact that
21 you transferred authority to them the fact that people who died before
22 1995 are also on the list, as well as those who were killed after the
23 events in Srebrenica in 1996 or 1998? Thank you.
24 A. ICMP's work extends right across the former Yugoslavia, as I
25 understand it. It includes prior to Srebrenica and -- and events later
1 than Srebrenica. So the list you refer to, if that's with ICMP, they
2 have the responsibility for all the missing people.
3 Q. Thank you. Since they're responsible for all the missing people,
4 is it also their responsibility to list everybody who went missing in the
5 area of the former Yugoslavia on the list relating to Srebrenica? Thank
7 A. I'm not sure if I -- if I completely understand. But if they
8 listed the people missing from Srebrenica, they would not list the people
9 who were missing prior to or after the fall of Srebrenica, because it
10 would not be the Srebrenica list. When I reviewed their material, I
11 sought the data from ICMP which related solely to Srebrenica. They hold
12 data for other events at other times, but if you -- if you say, a
13 Srebrenica list, then that should reflect the identifications related to
15 Q. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Manning.
16 We are here only because of Srebrenica and not the former
17 Yugoslavia, so please tell me why these commissions, and you personally,
18 didn't participate in the discovery of surface remains in Srebrenica in
19 July of 1995 -- of the fighting that took place in July of 1995.
20 A. I've explained before I wasn't involved in the recovery of
21 surface remains, I believe the Bosnian commission were. I know the
22 Bosnian commission were, and I know that ICMP were involved in the
23 collection of surface remains.
24 Q. Thank you for this piece of information. Do you know whether
25 anyone that they collected on the surface, that any body that was found
1 was shown to have been killed during fighting and not during the
2 executions? Thank you.
3 A. Again, I wasn't involved in that process. I didn't see the
4 bodies. I did read some autopsy reports related to surface remains, but
5 I can't remember the details, as I was concentrating on the Srebrenica
6 mass graves. But I wasn't involved in that process.
7 Q. Thank you. Let's look at something that you recall and we talked
8 about yesterday. On page 10181, Mr. McCloskey asked you: "Is there any
9 evidence that victims of the fighting were left in surface areas and then
10 put into any of the mass graves?"
11 And on the same page, 10181, you said: "No. There was no talk
12 of that," et cetera.
13 And then Mr. McCloskey, on page 10182 asked you whether it was
14 possible that the bodies found along the road were buried together with
15 these. And then you replied, also on page 10182, that it's possible.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
17 MR. McCLOSKEY: That's -- that is not correct. But I think, if I
18 can add, my question was, is it possible that bodies along the road were
19 buried at Glogova. Then I think it's largely correct without having to
20 go through all the transcript. But not these, meaning all the mass
21 graves. It was Glogova that was left out of that question.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
23 Mr. Manning, are you able to answer the question.
24 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. If the question was, is that
25 correct? Yes, again referring to Glogova and the possibility that bodies
1 in that area may have been put into that grave.
2 I believe I also said that I would have thought if that happened,
3 that it would be very few bodies, and that we would see a difference.
4 But, yes, I accept that.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir.
6 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. You gave your reply. And now my
8 question is this: Was anyone killed in fighting during the events in
9 Srebrenica, and are they on the lists of those men who were killed in
11 A. Yes. People were killed in fighting during the Srebrenica
12 incidents. You've no doubt heard evidence of the column, and I accept
13 that men were killed in fighting following the fall of Srebrenica.
14 The question about the list, I am afraid you're going to have to
15 repeat. Which list are you referring to?
16 Q. The list of the OTP regarding the victims of Srebrenica. Are any
17 people, any bodies that were found on the surface, on that list?
18 A. If you're referring to my reports, as I said yesterday, in my
19 count of the DNA evidence and information from ICMP, I counted -- I said
20 12. I believe it's 14 bodies from Kozluk mass grave area, which were
21 surface remains, and I did not count any other surface remains. I was
22 not part of the recovery of the surface remains, but I included the 14
23 individuals from the Kozluk area for a number of reasons, which I've
24 given in previous testimony.
25 Q. Thank you. You also replied to Judge Mindua yesterday, on page
1 10191 when he asked you: "Did you also find bodies that were on the
3 And then on page 10191, you replied: "We did not, because the
4 bodies were one metre deep inside the ground."
5 Please don't give me the same reply you gave to Judge Mindua.
6 Did the Prosecution team examine graves on the surface at all?
7 A. We examined the mass graves that I've described, and I indicated
8 that at two locations there were surface remains, but those surface
9 remains were part of the mass graves. The one at Orahovac, I indicated
10 had been pushed by a machine from the grave to an area outside the grave.
11 The body parts at Kozluk were part of the mass grave. You could see them
12 on the surface.
13 So you could describe them as surface remains in that they were
14 partly visible on the surface, but they were part of the mass grave. We
15 did not collect surface remains from areas. We did not travel through
16 the woods collecting body parts. We exhumed large mass graves.
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning, I understood your reply. And my next
18 question is this: Since a moment ago, and yesterday during the
19 cross-examination, you heard that there were thousands of bodies found
20 in -- as surface remains and they were not inside the mass graves, can
21 you tell me -- and yesterday we're listening to Ruez's report on Bare.
22 Can you tell me why the OTP did not represent these 600 bodies in Bare as
23 bodies of people killed in combat? Thank you.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
25 MR. McCLOSKEY: Perhaps it's a translation issue, but
1 "thousands," of course, is not correct. I think 600 is the correct
2 figure that's been used before. So I don't know what the glitch is
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Manning.
5 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, the OTP examined the mass graves. We
6 didn't collect the surface remains. We didn't conduct autopsies on them.
7 We weren't part of that process. So for my reporting, and I assume for
8 other reporting from the Tribunal, we reported on matters that we were
9 aware of. Mr. -- sorry, the OTP have also produced additional reports
10 based on ICMP data, which I understand includes surface remains. I
11 wasn't part of that.
12 But in answer to your question, I didn't include it because we
13 weren't involved in that process.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Thank you. But since you were a representative of the OTP, by
16 now has the OTP published any reports on the surface remains that were
17 found, the 600 that were found in an ambush and the others that Ruez is
18 talking about, as well as those that you talk about who were killed in
19 Baljkovica, where are those, as Mr. McCloskey says, hundreds of victims?
20 Are they in any reports of the Prosecution? Thank you.
21 A. I don't know about the most recent reports. I haven't read
22 Mr. Janc's report, I haven't read the recent reports. That's a question
23 you will have to ask the OTP.
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. Can you tell us, and you mentioned
25 Baljkovica a moment ago and the victims in that column. Can you tell us
1 whether you collected information on how many people were killed in
2 combat during the breakthrough of the column on both sides, in the
3 Baljkovica region along the confrontation line? Thank you.
4 A. The team examined statements, interviewed witnesses, and
5 interviewed suspects, partly about those numbers, about how the people
6 were killed, how the attacks happened. Information and evidence was
7 collected, but, again, I'm not -- I'm not in a position to advise whether
8 that has been reported on since.
9 Q. Thank you. But did the Prosecution ask the Muslim side, Did you
10 have a single man who was killed during the breakthrough in Baljkovica?
11 And did they ask the Serbian side, Did you have a single man killed when
12 the Muslim convoy came, et cetera?
13 Did you, as an investigator, know whether the OTP did any of
14 this, whether they collected any such information?
15 A. When I took statements from witnesses, and when I interviewed
16 suspects, part of that process was certainly to talk about the column,
17 who was killed, how they were killed. That was part of the process, and
18 that work was continued by the Tribunal and other investigators.
19 Q. Thank you. Mr. Manning, let's now look at 1D1 -- 373 in e-court,
20 please. 1D373.
21 And while we're waiting for e-court, the OTP is familiar with
22 this document. It's a document from the Republic of Bosnia and
23 Herzegovina dated 16 July when the breakthrough happened at the
24 confrontation line and it was signed by the commander of the Bosnian
25 army, Rasim Delic. I would like you to look at the date, it's the 16th
1 of July. And then I would like to have the last page so that can you see
2 that he it was signed by the army commander, Rasim Delic. That's page 4,
3 so could we --
4 THE REGISTRAR: [Previous translation continues] ... Just for the
5 record, this document has been admitted into evidence as D155, marked for
6 identification, pending translation. Thank you.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could we please look at
9 page 4 so that the witness could see who signed the document.
10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
11 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Can you see that this was written by the commander, Rasim Delic,
13 and that the accuracy of the information was certified.
14 Could the witness please be shown page 3 of the document now.
15 And the final item 3 on page 3, that's all we're interested in. There we
16 go. You can see item 3. Please zoom in so the witness could read it.
17 In English, it's page 2. Thank you.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: We have to wait for the English translation. I
19 think it's a very experienced witness, but I don't know if he has the
20 skills to read the B/C/S text.
21 I think we should zoom in on the top --
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: On the top of the English page. There's the item
24 number 3.
25 Mr. Tolimir.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I will
2 read item 3 on this page, both in the English and the B/C/S.
3 "Units of the 28th Division of the ground forces are pulling out
4 of Srebrenica while still fighting. They have remained compact. In the
5 temporarily occupied Territorial Defence, they have scored success after
6 success. They have inflicted great losses on the aggressor. So far,
7 they have eight Chetniks alive in captivity. Units of the 28th Division
8 of the KoV have linked up with the infiltrated units of the 2nd Corps.
9 Their joint forces have continued fighting in the temporarily occupied
10 territory. It is expected that they will fully link up with these units.
11 Activities are under way to exploit the success of units carrying out the
13 Thank you.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
15 Q. We have seen army general, Rasim Delic, taking about this break
16 through and he sent this report to Alija Izetbegovic. So he wrote this
17 under full responsibility. Please tell us, whether the OTP knew at all
18 that there was combat in the sector where the Tuzla Corps infiltrated the
19 territory of the RS and the column that was trying to break through from
20 Srebrenica to Tuzla? Thank you.
21 A. Your Honours, I think I have already indicated that I accept that
22 there was fighting. There's details that the column was armed at the
23 front of the column, and I've certainly read and spoken to people who
24 indicated there was combat. I accept that there was combat.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. Were there any victims in this fighting
1 on either side? And should they be recorded as victims related to
2 Srebrenica? Thank you.
3 A. I don't know enough about how those people died, the ones that
4 died in combat or the ones that were killed. I do know of accounts where
5 men surrendered and were executed. I have seen that within the mass
6 graves. Where -- where I could report on that, such as the contents of a
7 mass grave where people have been bound and blindfolded and shot, I have
8 reported on. I can't report on material that I didn't examine, and I
9 didn't examine the battle-fields or the route of the column. Whether
10 they're victims of Srebrenica, I can't say.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. Let us now look at -- I'm sorry. Page
12 931004/12 --
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Tolimir.
14 Mr. Tolimir, before we leave this document on the screen, I would like to
15 ask the Defence for an update about translations. I -- we noted that the
16 Registry told us this document on the screen is D155, marked for
17 identification, pending translation. To my surprise, there is a
18 translation. We would appreciate if the Defence, like the Prosecution,
19 would update us in a timely manner about uploading of translations.
20 Mr. Gajic.
21 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the translation was
22 updated into e-court very recently. Our practice is that we tender
23 documents only after we've checked the translation. As for this
24 document, the translation has been uploaded and we would like to tender
25 it and have the marked for identification lifted.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic, I'm not sure if you are correct. You
2 tendered it. The Defence tendered it. It wouldn't have a D number.
3 D155. It was marked for identification, pending translation, because the
4 Defence tendered it.
5 Now it will be D155, no longer pending translation.
6 Mr. Tolimir, please continue.
7 Mr. Gajic. I think you agree.
8 Mr. Tolimir.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. The
10 Defence would like to apologise for not seeking to tender the document.
11 Can we look at transcript page 93100, lines 4 to 12 of this trial, where
12 a witness was talking about this conflict. That's the transcript of
13 2 February 2011. Thank you.
14 We can't see it yet, so I don't want to ask my question until the
15 transcript is on the screen.
16 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
17 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Before this appears on the screen, tell us, did the OTP talk to
19 the eye-witnesses of the conflict at the separation line, at the point
20 when the 3rd Corps entered the territory of Republika Srpska to meet the
21 column moving from Srebrenica toward Nezuk? Thank you.
22 A. We spoke to witnesses. I can't say if those witnesses were in
23 that specific area. We sought statements from the women who were
24 transported from Tuzla, the children, the men who survived, the men who
25 trekked to Tuzla. We took statements from Serbian soldiers, Bosnian Serb
1 soldiers, my apologies, and we interviewed suspects about those matters.
2 Specifically in that area, I don't know. We spoke to witnesses and
3 people and sought the story from when they went to Srebrenica to when
4 they left, or when they dealt with the column or the survivors, or the
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, now we have page 9300, lines 4 to
7 12, on the screen.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
9 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Since we have the relevant portion on our screen, you can see
11 that the witness says that the Army of Republika Srpska, that's to say,
12 his brigade --
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] What we need is page 9310; our
14 apologies. Thank you.
15 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
16 Q. In line 4, the witness says that there were some 40 or 42
17 fatalities in answer to my question and these were victims on the side of
18 the Republika Srpska army.
19 My question is this: If an army --
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Tolimir.
21 Mr. Tolimir, it is always helpful to be very correct. This is line 8,
22 not line 4. Line 4 is your question, and the answer is at line 8. At a
23 later stage of the trial, the parties and the Chamber must find the
24 relevant portions, and therefore I always have to correct that.
25 Please continue.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
2 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
3 Q. I can see it also mentioned here in line 12 where it says that
4 there were 40 or 42 dead on the side of the VRS and that's why I'm
5 putting the question to the witness in this way to save time.
6 If the Army of Republika Srpska, who was located in trenches and
7 was covered in that way, had 40 to 42 dead, can it then be presumed that
8 the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina should have had at least three times the
9 number of victims, since they were not in any sort of shelter. They were
10 out in the open. Did you collect any sort of information and have any
11 knowledge about the numbers of casualties they had? Thank you.
12 A. Your Honours, the short answer is no, I did not. That would be
13 something that could be dealt with perhaps by the military analysts. I
14 didn't deal with that issue, and I can't comment on the relevant ratios.
15 Q. Thank you. Let's have a look at what military analysts had to
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we show up 1D00596. 1D00596.
18 In other words, 1D596. This is the testimony by Richard Butler in the
19 Popovic case.
20 Thank you, Aleksander.
21 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
22 Q. In answer to the question whether you knew that there were
23 witnesses saying that there were a thousand to 2.000 individuals killed
24 from the column as a result of combat, were you aware of this?
25 "A. In the period between 18 and 20 July.
1 "Q. Correct.
2 "A. I am not -- not aware of the specific number but that
3 particular number of 1.000 to 2.000 sounds reasonable, given the context
4 of the combat that I'm aware of.
5 "Q. And you're saying that, including all of the combat
6 engagements, correct, as opposed to one isolated combat engagement?
7 Would that be fair if I can understand what you are saying?
8 "A. Yes. I think the 1.000 to 2.000 number would be reasonable
9 with respect to the combat casualties starting from 12 July through to,
10 effectively, 18 July."
11 You just mentioned military experts. Mr. Butler is one. So my
12 question is this: Do you know if the OTP's list refers to individuals
13 referred to by Mr. Butler, namely 2.000 individuals killed in combat?
14 Were they included, as such, in the list? Thank you.
15 A. Your Honours, I think I have already answered the question. In
16 my list, in the list that I prepared, it related to the bodies recovered
17 from the mass graves. It did not relate to surface remains or
18 individuals involved in combat. And I'm not a military analyst and I'm
19 not a military expert.
20 Q. Thank you. Were you a representative of the OTP at the time, the
21 OTP being responsible for investigating into the cause of death of all
22 the victims related to Srebrenica? Thank you.
23 A. I was a member of the OTP. I was involved in the investigation
24 of the allegations arising from the fall of Srebrenica, and I examined
25 specifically the details in relation to the exhumation of mass graves.
1 Q. Thank you. Can you tell the Trial Chamber which representative
2 of the OTP was charged with the victims referred to by the OTP expert
3 witness, Mr. Butler? And I'm referring to the portion of the transcript
4 we've just been looking at. Thank you.
5 A. I -- I can't answer that question. I don't know whether you're
6 referring to allegations of crimes committed at that time. We did
7 examine the incidents, the whole picture of the Srebrenica -- the fall of
8 Srebrenica, and part of that was an examination of the military aspects.
9 I wasn't involved in that. I'm not a military expert. I examined and
10 was part of the exhumation process, as well as taking statements and
11 interviews from witnesses and suspects, which certainly touched on those
12 elements, but I don't know who specifically investigated the numbers that
13 Mr. Butler was talking about, and Mr. Butler was saying 1.000 to 2.000 as
14 an estimate, I understand. I don't know if you're saying that there was
15 a specific allegation about a thousand individuals. I can't help you
16 with that.
17 Q. Can you tell Their Honours who the military expert was in the OTP
18 team and can you tell us what your field of expertise was as a member of
19 that team. What I mean is your professional background. Are you an
20 anthropologist, a pathologist? Thank you.
21 A. Your Honours, the military analyst team from the OTP, I think
22 were all heavily involved in the investigation at some stage. Mr. Butler
23 was certainly involved. Ms. Brettell was a significant part of that
24 team. My expertise, as I've indicated to the Chamber and in my CV, I'm a
25 police officer. I have been since 1983. I have been involved in police
1 operations, investigations. Apart from two years of conducting senior
2 management training, I have been an operational police officer in four,
3 five countries, plus Australia, and I'm currently a representative of the
4 Australia law enforcement agencies in the Middle East.
5 I can provide further details, but I believe I have provided a
6 curriculum vitae previously to the Court.
7 Q. Thank you. We are not interested in that, since it is not
8 related to Srebrenica.
9 This is what I'm interested in. What was the basis on which all
10 the victims that were listed as victims of the mass graves were tied in
11 with the events at Srebrenica and the related executions? Thank you.
12 A. The mass graves that I've spoken about contain the remains of
13 people, men and boys from Srebrenica, from the area of Srebrenica, who
14 were killed, who -- who predominantly surrendered and were executed and
15 placed there mass graves. The link to Srebrenica, I gave evidence
16 previously. Those bodies and those individuals were linked to
17 Srebrenica, and they have been identified since, particularly via DNA, as
18 having been reported missing following the fall of Srebrenica. Also
19 linked from survivor and witness accounts, the accounts of Mr. Erdemovic,
20 and the analysis of all the forensics for the exhumation/autopsy process.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. Were bodies also buried in the mass
22 graves which were surface remains collected from the locations where
23 there was combat? Thank you.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In my understanding, the witness has answered
25 this question already several times, yesterday and today. It's not
1 helpful for anybody, especially not for the Defence case, just to repeat
2 several times the same question.
3 Please carry on, Mr. Tolimir.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. What
5 matters to me is that you, as the Trial Chamber, understand what I'm
7 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Why do you frequently in your report refer to the "Srebrenica
9 victim"? In selecting that term, do you mean it to refer only to those
10 who were killed in Srebrenica in 1995, regardless of whether they were
11 killed in combat or in any other way? Thank you.
12 A. In my reports, I refer to the individuals located in the mass
13 graves. I say a victim of the massacres following Srebrenica, the
14 genocide from Srebrenica, the killings, the executions. I'm referring to
15 individuals who were killed, who were murdered following the fall of
16 Srebrenica, who were Muslims who were from Srebrenica and who were
17 predominantly captured, or surrendered, by the VRS forces in the area and
18 who were systematically killed. They were victims of what happened
19 following the fall of Srebrenica.
20 Q. Thank you. How many were there of such victims? And who was not
21 deemed to belong to that category of victims? Thank you.
22 A. I would have to check my 2007 report, but since that time the DNA
23 results have increased the number, I'm sure, significantly. But my
24 reports provide a count of the number of victims found in the mass graves
25 who were killed following the fall of Srebrenica, who were murdered.
1 That number has -- as I say, has increased. I think -- if I could check
2 my reports, but I think it more appropriate to have the most updated
3 number which has been presented to the Chamber. But we -- my reports
4 were dealing with 4.000 individuals, and they are the identified victims
5 of Srebrenica located in the mass graves exhumed by the ICTY, and also,
6 in some cases, by the Bosnian Commission for Missing Persons.
7 Q. Thank you. The victims you're referring to, were traces found on
8 them of artillery weapons or only gun-shot wounds? Thank you.
9 A. Again, without checking the reports, a significant number were
10 assigned a cause of death from gun-shot injury, gun-shot wounds. There
11 were blast injuries which would be consistent with either explosives,
12 such as hand grenades, or RPGs. Some who simply were described as blunt
13 force trauma, as in a crushing injury. And others who were assigned a
14 cause of death of unknown.
15 Q. Thank you. Did you place all of the victims that you exhumed
16 from mass graves on the list of those killed, as you put it, in genocide?
17 Thank you.
18 A. The list of people exhumed from the Srebrenica mass graves -- I'm
19 sorry, I'm not quite sure if I understand the question. Again, the lists
20 and the numbers that I reported on are individuals who have been removed
21 from mass graves connected to the fall of Srebrenica.
22 Q. Thank you. You said that in the mass graves, you found victims
23 who died as a result of hand grenades and other assets, not just gun-shot
25 Now, those victims which had gun-shot wounds on them, did you
1 consider them to be the victims of executions and, as a consequence, were
2 they put on a list of those killed in -- as part of a genocide? Thank
4 A. Yes, they were. Where the pathologist or anthropologist could
5 determine that the gun-shot injuries were consistent with, say, being
6 shot in the back, or being shot through the blindfold, or being shot, in
7 once instances, the feet, the knees, the hips, the elbows, the shoulder
8 and the head, or the individuals who were shot at Glogova, those
9 instances where they could definitively say that those individuals were
10 shot in that manner, they included that in the autopsy reports.
11 In relation to the blast injuries, I recall that many of those
12 were associated with the Kravica warehouse, where the survivors indicated
13 grenades were thrown into the warehouse and also a rocket-propelled
14 grenade was fired through the warehouse. We, in fact, found parts of
15 that rocket-propelled grenade in the grave at Glogova.
16 Q. Thank you. We heard from pathologists in this case that shrapnel
17 from artillery weapons was found as well. Did you list victims that had
18 shrapnel in them among the victims of genocide? Thank you.
19 A. Your Honours, I'm not sure that I can comment on the evidence of
20 the pathologists about shrapnel from artillery weapons. I recall
21 shrapnel injuries associated with hand grenades because we found parts of
22 hand grenades, of a rocket-propelled grenade. I can't recall finding a
23 piece of an artillery shell or establishing that that -- that shrapnel
24 was from an artillery shell, but I would have to check through the
25 pathology reports and the expert reports.
1 Q. Thank you. The Court is aware of that.
2 Did you list all the victims related to Srebrenica as victims of
3 genocide? No, no, as -- by the same token were all those victims wearing
4 civilian clothes listed as civilians?
5 A. Your Honours, we didn't list the victims as civilians or make a
6 particular definition. Some of the victims had military clothing or
7 pieces of military clothing. I don't recall ever seeing a victim in a
8 complete uniform. The majority of the victims wore normal clothing, but
9 I certainly accept some of those individuals had some items of military
10 clothing. And statements from the survivors and the column members
11 indicate that some of the members of the column who surrendered were
12 members of the Bosnian Muslim army. I accept that a significant number,
13 perhaps, of the people in the graves were members of the Bosnian military
14 who surrendered and were killed.
15 Q. Thank you. Did you know that members of the BH Army who were
16 present in the demilitarised zone of Srebrenica wore civilian clothes, in
17 order to pass unnoticed or pass off as civilians, in the presence of
18 UNPROFOR forces patrolling the area? Thank you.
19 A. No.
20 Q. Thank you. Did you know that there were witnesses interviewed by
21 OTP investigators who said that they had worn civilian clothes in order
22 that our activities may not be observed by UNPROFOR? Were you aware of
23 these witness statements? Thank you.
24 A. I was not.
25 Q. In your reports, did you state that you did not find any
1 indications that would point to the presence of military personnel among
2 the victims in mass graves? Thank you.
3 A. No, to the contrary. Where we found something that indicated a
4 military personnel, we would report it. It would be in the autopsy
5 report. I think I have mentioned in evidence that one individual had a
6 pistol in his belt. I recounted a story, which I wasn't part of, where a
7 grenades was found within a uniform shirt at the mortuary. I saw, as I
8 said before, some items of a military uniform on some of the bodies.
9 Q. Thank you. Did you find in the graves military documents
10 indicating that at the time of the individual's death, they were members
11 of the BH Army? Thank you.
12 A. I would have to check, but perhaps within the identifications you
13 would have found a military identification. But witness accounts and
14 survivor accounts indicated that -- that the -- that victims were members
15 of the BiH military, some of them. I can't recall specific military
16 documents. Certainly there weren't orders or any detailed military
17 documents that we found, but we may have found military IDs. I would
18 have to check.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, it's now the time for the first
20 break. It's 10.30.
21 We must have our first break now, and we will resume at 11.00.
22 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, may I ask you, if you are tendering
25 the documents you used. I'm referring to 1D596. This is part of the
1 transcript, I hope only a part of the transcript with the testimony of
2 Mr. Butler.
3 Mr. Gajic.
4 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, yes, we would like to
5 tender that document. It is only one page from the testimony of
6 Mr. Butler in the Popovic case.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received as an exhibit.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document shall be assigned
9 exhibit number D168. Thank you.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, please continue your
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
14 Q. We talked about, before the break, and my question would relate
15 to that, during the exhumations that the teams were doing at the
16 locations that you listed, did you come across any military documents,
17 such as, for example, military orders and others, which would show from
18 where they originated?
19 A. No, we did not, to my memory. As I said before, we may have
20 found military identification documents. I don't recall specifically,
21 but no orders.
22 Q. Thank you. Could we show the witness Exhibit P1071, 1071. It is
23 a report by Dr. Haglund on the exhumations that was carried out at
24 Cerska. It's page 65 in the English, and page 70 in the B/C/S.
25 We will see a table, which lists the artefacts that were used and
1 that were buried in this mass grave under CSK-42. Once we zoom in, we
2 will see Mujo Omanovic under this number. And military orders were found
3 on him?
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: These tables are so small -- Mr. Tolimir, these
5 tables are so small. Perhaps it's for the benefit of the witness only
6 necessary to have it in English on the screen. Would that be sufficient
7 for your purpose?
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, you can show it for the
9 witness. It's important for the witness to see it. Thank you.
10 Thank you. I apologise, if we look from underneath you will see
11 a name, Osmo Muminovic. Military orders were found on Osmo Muminovic and
12 we can also see in this table that a military identification card was
13 found on Ajisa Memisevic. He is number 6 on this list.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Based on what I just read from this report by Mr. Haglund, can
16 you tell us, whether you, as an investigator, were familiar with these
17 military documents and that some of the bodies found in the mass graves
18 had military identity card and other documents that would show their
19 affiliations? Thank you.
20 A. Your Honour, as I said, I would have to check the reports.
21 If you look at my report from 2000, I would have listed the
22 artefacts recovered from Cerska 142, which is Mr. Muminovic. I can't
23 recall now the condition of the document. It may be that it was
24 unreadable, but we could certainly find a photograph of that item.
25 And, as I say, I examined those artefacts which were located in
1 the -- the graves, and I believe I would have recorded details of those
2 documents in my 2000/2001 report. And as I said before, I did recall
3 military identification cards. I don't recall that particular military
4 order, in which -- if it was readable, would have been translated.
5 Q. Thank you. Now we'll show you your report from 2000, which is
6 P1825. That's your report from 2000.
7 But before that, let me ask you one question. Since this is
8 Cerska, and since there was combat in Cerska before, is it possible that
9 these documents indicate that these victims died in an earlier period or
10 in the period when Srebrenica fell in July of 1995? Thank you.
11 A. The -- I think 150 individuals in the Cerska grave were -- the
12 majority of them were bound, and they were shot at Cerska and buried on
13 the side of the road at Cerska. So the individuals at Cerska,
14 undisturbed primary mass grave, were executed.
15 Q. Thank you. Now we have your report. It's P1825. Could we have
16 page 35 in B/C/S and page 38 in English. It is a summary that relates to
17 Cerska, and the title is: Identifications.
18 First of all, tell us, why did you compile this report? Before
19 we look at its contents.
20 A. I was asked to prepare this report by Senior Trial Attorney
21 Mark Harmon. It was a report as a summary of the forensic evidence to be
22 presented, then, in the Krstic case, and thereafter, in other cases. And
23 I produced it as a summary, as a link, as an encompassing document, in
24 relation to the exhumations and autopsy reports -- autopsy examinations.
25 Q. Thank you. Would it have been better for the Court if you -- if
1 this report had been compiled by expert pathologists or anthropologists
2 instead of policemen? Thank you.
3 A. I don't believe so. The pathologist, anthropologists,
4 archeologists, other forensic experts prepared detailed reports, as
5 experts. That group of reports was at least 50 reports, multi-volume
6 reports. I was asked to review all that documentation, all those
7 reports, all the photographs, more than 60.000 colour photographs, more
8 than 10.000 physical artefacts, all the written documentation spanning
9 the entire project and link those reports and the artefacts, photographs,
10 items, and documentation in a summary. It is that, a summary, and the
11 underlying reports, the pathology report, the archaeological reports, the
12 forensic reports can all be examined. I took the information from those
13 reports, or I physically examined the material in the report, the
14 documentation, the bodies, the photographs and produced this report and
15 other similar reports.
16 Q. Thank you. Could you tell us during the trial of Mr. Krstic was
17 your report used or were reports written by pathologists and
18 anthropologists as well that you talked about, based on which then the
19 summary was compiled?
20 A. Yes. Both were used. The experts were called to give evidence
21 in person. Their reports were tendered, and I presented my report and
22 tendered into evidence, from memory, about 40 Lever arch files of
23 supporting material, including the reports of the experts, photographs,
24 documentation, pathology, anthropology reports, and individual autopsy
25 reports. So both the experts gave their evidence and I gave evidence
1 based on that report.
2 Q. Thank you. Now could we look at a part of this report that
3 relates to identification. We should look at the second paragraph from
4 the bottom under the heading: Identification. Both in the Serbian and in
5 the English. I will read the paragraph because I consider it to be
6 relevant and I quote:
7 "During the exhumation and autopsy process, 22 useable
8 identification documents, items were located. This included identity
9 documents, official court documents, personal papers and a cigarette
10 tin ... these items are further detailed in Annex C," which is on page 98
11 in e-court, both in the Serbian and the English.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please turn to page 98.
13 Thank you. Thank you, Aleksander. I'd like to show it to the witness.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
15 Q. You can see it, and as for Osmo Muminovic. You are only listing
16 a driver's licence. Do you not mention the military orders and you're
17 not mentioning his identity card. And the identity card is a basic
18 identification document.
19 So my question is: How do you explain this discrepancy between
20 what is in your report and what's in Dr. Haglund's report that we quoted
21 a moment ago? Thank you.
22 A. Your Honour, again, without physically going and checking the
23 items, the photographs of the items, I indicate in the report, useable
24 identification documents. It was the case in almost every grave that
25 documents were found on the -- on the bodies. Photographs, driver's
1 licence. As part of the removal process, we tried to protect those
2 documents. I saw photographs come out of the grave where you could see
3 the face of an individual and as it was exposed to air that image
4 disappeared, you had a blank photograph. When you opened a piece of
5 paper that had been in a -- in the ground for several years amongst
6 rotting corpses, amongst body fluids, amongst ground water, the documents
7 were very often destroyed and even when opening the documents you would
8 lose the image, the writing immediately. And if they were stored for a
9 lengthy period they would deteriorate.
10 Now, in my report, I said useable identification documents. It
11 may be that that particular document, by the time I examined it, and,
12 remember, this is 1998, 2000, and this grave was exhumed in 1996, the
13 document had deteriorated to a point where it could not be used. It
14 could be, and I would need to check, that the reference from
15 Dr. Haglund's report, his notes, were taken from a body which was removed
16 from the ground in the field and was covered in mud and dirt and they
17 opened the document and they said it was a driver's licence and a
18 military order. It was then examined at the mortuary in better
19 conditions. They might have then discovered that, in fact, it was a
20 military driver's licence, or it was a driver's licence that indicated
21 his occupation was a military officer. Without checking, I can't tell
22 you what that particular document was. But there's a photograph of that
23 document, there's a photograph of the -- of the remains identified as
24 Cerska 142, and can you see what was recovered from the body. And in
25 this instance, I've referred to a useable identification document,
1 something capable of assisting in identifying that individual.
2 Q. Thank you. Would you please look at Table 1, the -- on the
3 right-hand side of the screen, the second name from the top where it says
4 CSK-142, Osmo Muminovic. I said that Dr. Haglund said CSK-142, military
5 orders were found on Osmo Muminovic and we can also see in this table
6 that a military identity card was found on Ajisa Memisevic, and instead
7 of military, you say identification card. Did these mistakes happen by
8 accident in your report and the entries by the anthropologist, and are
9 you allowed to change the name -- names of the artefacts found?
10 A. I haven't changed the artefacts found. I have listed the useable
11 identification documents. And I said that in my report, which was these
12 documents may assist in identifying these victims. And that material
13 would have been used by PHR, at that time, to identify the victims. I've
14 indicated in here that the driver's licence on CSK-142, Mr. Muminovic
15 would be capable of assisting in identifying him.
16 The military identification document may have been in such poor
17 condition that you could not read it. It would therefore not assist in
18 identifying that individual. I've listed here the item that I thought
19 would assist in identifying him. If you look at the autopsy report for
20 body 142, will you see listed the items that were located on that body.
21 You will see photographs of those items. We could examine those items
22 and see whether you can read them. In my recollection, is that we
23 couldn't read those documents; otherwise, I would have listed them here.
24 And if you remember, very much a part of our work was to try and identify
25 these people, so it was very important for me to find material who that
1 identify these people. That, A, would show who they were, that they were
2 from Srebrenica; B, that we could seek to interview people who knew them
3 and could explain to us why they were found in a mass grave in the area
4 of Srebrenica; and also return those human remains to the families.
5 So if I could find an identification document that would assist
6 in identifying that person, I would list it here. If it wasn't of use, I
7 didn't list it. But it is recorded in the Tribunal documentation.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I add a question to that.
9 In fact, what was the purpose to create this list and Annex C,
10 especially with the headline: Identification items. What was the purpose
11 of it?
12 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, in my summary, I sought to give an
13 overview of the graves and the execution points, so I, along with
14 Mr. Harmon, said what would be important, details of when the grave was
15 exhumed; who exhumed it; how many bodies; the sex; the age determination;
16 the cause of death; religious affinity, were they Muslims, were they
17 another religious group, another ethnic group and, of course,
19 So if you see at the bottom of that table is religious items.
20 Again, I was summarizing what was located which could support or refute
21 that these were Muslims. So I have listed there items of a religious
22 nature. In other parts of the report, I've listed the cause of death or
23 the age determination or the sex determination. So it was to assist,
24 hopefully, the Court in seeing the information in those aspects that we
25 found amongst the bodies.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Do I understand you correctly, that in these
2 lists you didn't include all items found with a specific body but only
3 those who have -- yeah. A purpose for identification or for determining
4 the religious situation of the person.
5 THE WITNESS: Very much, Your Honour. In relation to, say,
6 Cerska 128, there may have been a comb, a flint, a house key, a cigarette
7 lighter, photographs that had faded. Now I didn't list all those items
8 because the list would have been tremendously long and it was already
9 listed in the autopsy report and in the photographic logs and in other
10 reports. So what I did was say, it's very important that we identify
11 these people. Here is a list of things located within those bodies, or
12 with those bodies which might assist in that. So I didn't -- I didn't
13 list in this report all the other items. And if there was a document
14 that was in such poor condition that you couldn't read it, then I
15 wouldn't highlight it here, because it wouldn't be of use in identifying
16 the person, or in the next section showing what religious affinity they
17 may have. So this is a summary of what was available. But those are the
18 reports, those are the details I presented into evidence in -- in those
19 40-odd folders.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I understand. Thank you very much.
21 Mr. Tolimir.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
23 Since this is very important to the Court, because in 1993 some
24 people were killed in Cerska who might have been killed by other
25 perpetrators and the military documents would show this. So it's not by
1 accident that the identity card on person CSK-144 and on the person above
2 him, CSK-142, the driver's licence and the ID card are listed as
3 identification documents, there must a reason for that.
4 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
5 Q. So I would like to ask the witness to look at P10781 in English,
6 page 65. I would like him to look at only the title so we wouldn't waste
7 any time.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So could we look at P10171, page 65
9 in the English -- in the English language. Could the witness please look
10 at that.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, that can't be the right number.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. My legal
13 advisor warned me. It's P1071.
14 Could we please zoom in on the title and then read it.
15 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Actually, I would like to ask the witness to read the title since
17 he speaks English. Could he read it out loud for the transcript.
18 A. Your Honours, the top much the document says: "Table 6,
19 documents providing leads to tentative identification and results of DNA
20 analysis for Cerska grave-sites, footnote 4."
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think -- perhaps, you misspoke. There's a
22 problem. The last word is "site" and not "sites," in plural.
23 THE WITNESS: Sorry, "site."
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: "Site." Thank you.
25 I see there is -- I read Table 8. Is that correct?
1 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, Your Honour, I -- I can't -- perhaps it
2 is Table 8.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Perhaps we can zoom in on the headline.
4 THE WITNESS: Table 8. My apologies.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
6 Mr. Tolimir.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. As we
8 saw, Mr. Haglund, and if you look at number -- name number 4 from below,
9 he lists the documents that are used for identification. Military
10 documents and a military card. And this is not mentioned by the
11 investigator, so that's what I'm asking.
12 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Is it because these came from 1993 or from 1995? Thank you.
14 A. Your Honours, there was -- these documents aren't from 1993. The
15 reason I didn't include those documents is because, as I said, they were
16 not useable. They were available. They were presented into evidence.
17 They were part of the supporting material for my report. If there was a
18 document that indicated that individual was from 1993, I would have made
19 a note of that. It would have been important.
20 The individuals in Cerska were executed in July of 1995. If we
21 had found a document on a body from that grave which said 1993, that
22 would simply have indicated that he had a document from 1993 in his
23 pocket. He was killed in 1995 and -- and covered with soil in the Cerska
24 valley. Those individuals, the majority of whom were tied up, who were
25 bound, were killed then and not in -- in previous battles, and not in
1 another area and conveyed to that grave-site. And the suggestion that I
2 would change the evidence and hide the evidence is completely wrong.
3 Q. Thank you. I'm not trying to impute anything to you here. Can
4 you tell the Trial Chamber what was the procedure for filing the objects
5 found in the graves and how can we find the military orders found during
6 the exhumation of the Cerska grave-site so that the Trial Chamber itself
7 can see whether these military orders were damaged or whether they were
8 used in any way? Thank you.
9 A. The process changed from 1996 to 2001, that effectively a record
10 was made at the grave-site of the body and of the identification if it
11 was found then. A record was made at the mortuary, I think in Kladanj at
12 that time. There was a -- and I believe there would be more than one
13 photograph of that item, and that photograph would be linked to Cerska
14 142. So within the records of the exhumation of that grave would be an
15 autopsy report be detailing body 142, what was found on body 142, that
16 would have been signed by the pathologist, anthropologist. It would have
17 included links to the photograph of those items. There would be a
18 photographic log which said, On such and such a date, a photo was taken
19 of the items recovered from Cerska 142. And there would also be a brief
20 description of that item, which may say, "identity card" or it may say,
21 "military identity card". But those records are available, and, indeed,
22 as I said, the autopsy reports from body 142 from Cerska was presented
23 into evidence in Krstic trial, and I believe, in the Popovic trial.
24 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. If a military ID card was found on the
25 person which is listed here as third in this table and it was found on
1 the person under number 142, can you tell us then whether this person was
2 searched before the killing, if these documents, the military orders, had
3 not been taken away from him? Thank you.
4 A. Just to indicate, on the document that I'm looking at Cerska 142
5 is not number three. But I can't say that they were searched and that
6 document was missed. In my experience of seeing several thousand bodies,
7 the majority had something in their pockets. The majority -- the vast
8 majority did not have bags or suitcases or back-packs, but almost all of
9 them had some items in their pockets, cigarette lighters, fire-starters,
10 keys, photographs, and often more than one wallet in their pocket. I
11 believe that they would collect the identifications from deceased persons
12 and carry them. But I can't say whether they were searched. I wasn't
14 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. We don't have much time, so can we have
15 in e-court P1776, page 97 in English, and 104 in Serbian. That's
16 Mr. Brunborg's report dated 2009?
17 I want to take a look at only one table, a table showing the
18 discrepancy between the date of death or missing, between the lists of
19 the Prosecution and the BiH Army. The table also contains information on
20 the mass grave where the remains were found.
21 So this is the table that we are interested in. Now can you take
22 a look at the first three columns. That's the name, and then we have
23 date of birth, date of death, and then date of death corrected, which
24 means that somebody must have corrected it. And also you can see the
25 place of death, corrected as well.
1 Now when you have considered this table, you will see that some
2 dates denote 1992. The last numbers will you see 92, 92 and but then
3 there is 94, 94, 93, and so on and so forth. There are many, many
4 numbers 92, 93, 93, 94, 95, 95, 94, 94, 92, 94, 94, 94, 95.
5 So there are many victims here who were killed before the events
6 in Srebrenica and as you can see some of those dates were corrected later
7 on. So my question is: Can you please analyse this table a little bit
8 further, if this is necessary and then tell me is it true that the data
9 here show that some of the cases that the OTP is trying to link only with
10 Srebrenica are also the cases which were actually killed before 1995,
11 because they were buried before 1995.
12 Could we maybe zoom in on the English table for the witness so
13 that the witness could have a good insight.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: Your Honour, I just -- I wonder if this is the
16 witness that should be testifying about this without further foundation
17 that he knows what these documents are or anything about it. I know we
18 have heard lots of evidence on this. But without a foundation -- further
19 foundation what is the purpose of this witness's analysing documents in
20 this manner, I don't see how it ties in to any of the topics that we're
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Indeed, we have heard Dr. Brunborg explaining
23 this table. But perhaps the witness knows something about it.
24 Please try to answer the question, Mr. Manning.
25 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, if I can say, I don't believe there's
1 any instances where the bodies in the mass graves that I've spoken about
2 pre- date July of 1995. There is no evidence whatsoever that any of
3 those bodies that I've seen, pre-date 1995.
4 As to this table, I've seen Mr. Brunborg's work. It is
5 extraordinarily detailed. I cannot really comment on why that figure,
6 those dates are there, or who supplied those dates. This work was done
7 by Mr. Brunborg. I do note that it says this is a table of inconsistent
8 results and identified the fact that those details must be wrong in some
9 respect. And, indeed, some of them have been corrected to July of 1995.
10 So I can't really assist in this particular table and the underlying
12 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. I didn't want you to comment on this. I
14 merely asked you if you connect all those victims to the events in
15 Srebrenica, wouldn't you agree that this data here shows that some
16 victims perished in events which are unrelated to July 1995?
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, the witness provided you with his
18 knowledge about this table. He just gave the answer. There's no need
19 for repeating the question.
20 Please go ahead.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's correct. Thank you,
22 Your Honour. We are going to go on.
23 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Witness, certain reports have been tendered into evidence through
25 you. Can we have 65 ter 533.
1 This is a document titled: Witness statement, Antonio Brown
2 investigator. Could you please tell us whether this is --
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: [Previous translation continues] ... may I
4 interrupt you. We would like to have the clear -- a clear record, the
5 Registrar please.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, 65 ter document 00533 is an exhibit,
7 P1821. Thank you, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. That helps.
9 Now your question, please.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you,
12 So can we have this on the screen. Okay. Now we can see it.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
14 Q. This is statement of witness. Since it says here: Statement of
15 witness, is it a witness statement or is it an expert report?
16 A. It's both. Mr. Brown completed a report in a manner that was
17 appropriate to his legal system. Professor Wright produced a completely
18 different report. Mr. Baraybar, again, different, which, if I can
19 comment, is one reason why I summarized the reports, because they were
20 all in different formats, but without looking at the rest of the document
21 this is a -- is a statement by an expert witness, Mr. -- sorry,
22 Professor Anthony Brown.
23 Q. Can you give us any expert information on the methods used by
24 palynologist during compiling of his report?
25 A. Your Honours, I can as a layman. I assisted Mr. Brown. I
1 collected samples with him. I went through his reports and his
2 statements. Extraordinary interesting process. But I'm a layman. He
3 explained the process to me, soil in a certain area is a product of the
4 geography of that area. If it's in a river-bed, clearly, it will have
5 large boulders and sand, et cetera. If it is at the top of a mountain,
6 it will have a different geography and a different soil. Mr. Brown also
7 relied on pollen. If an area has a number of willow trees, then willow
8 pollen would be in the soil. If there's a horn beam, that would be in
9 the soil. He also relied on micro-fossils within the soil, which, in
10 total, indicated to him that the soil in that particular area was a
11 product of the immediate geography. So he could say that the soil from
12 Glogova had a certain characteristic. If you travelled 30 kilometres
13 away the characteristics were different. He as an expert compared those
14 differences and he would say that the soil in the secondary grave was the
15 same indistinguishable from the soil in the primary grave, and that that
16 soil did not belong in the area of the secondary grave. But, again,
17 that's a layman's summary of Mr. Brown's expert reports.
18 Q. Thank you for this, for this layman's explanation of Mr. Brown's
19 report. And now we can go to another topic that relates to the method of
20 interviewing witnesses, more specifically, those interviews in which you
21 took part.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now have P147. This is the
23 interview performed by Mr. Manning. The witness was
24 Mr. Milorad Bircakovic. So can we have 1D147, page 19.
25 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, just for the record, this is not in
1 your list of documents to be used with this witness.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. Does that
3 mean that we may or may not use it.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You may use it. I just want to establish good
5 working conditions for both parties. You may use it. Go ahead, please.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Just to clarify for the record, this is exhibit
8 D147. Thank you.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Your microphone --
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we only take a look at the
11 table because it contains both Serbian and English. My legal assistant
12 just told me that we can use this copy because it contains both Serbian
13 and English.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
15 Q. I'm interested in the seventh row from the top. Can you take a
16 look at the seventh row. It's page 19. Page 19, seventh row, please.
17 Thank you.
18 I'm going to read now from what I see in front of myself. You
19 say: "We have aerial images of the executions taking [realtime
20 transcript read in error "takes"] place."
21 And then you say: "We have seized records from the Zvornik and
22 the Bratunac Brigade."
23 And then you say: "And we have many people from those brigades
24 in the Drina Corps interviewed."
25 And then you say: "We also have your documents, your documents
1 from the military police, and your daily schedule."
2 And then say: "What I want you to understand is that it's very
3 important for you to tell the truth."
4 And then you say: "If you try to hide what happened, or hide
5 your part in what happened, your knowledge of what happened, I can prove
6 that you lie, and I want you to understand that this is your chance to
7 tell the truth, here and now," et cetera.
8 Now, bearing in mind what you told the witness before you
9 interviewed him, and later on you questioned him about other subjects -
10 we can read about it later on in the text - and you told the witness that
11 you exhumed bodies of thousands of men and boys before this interview
12 with the witness. My question is as follows: Who was the team leader
13 during the exhumation of mass graves of Branjevo and Orahovac, was it
15 A. At Branjevo Military Farm, it wasn't me; I wasn't at the
17 In Orahovac, there was an exhumation that was conducted before I
18 was there and I was present for the exhumation of Orahovac 2, an area
19 that had been unexhumed. And I was present at not only the -- the
20 location and the opening of Orahovac 1, but for most of the exhumation
22 Q. Thank you. Can you take a look at the 12th row from the top in
23 this table. This is where you say: "I have personally exhumed bodies of
24 thousands of men and boys."
25 Does that pertain to the mass graves about which you questioned
1 Witness Bircakovic? Thank you.
2 A. Yes, it does. I had been involved at that stage in the
3 exhumation of a number of mass graves which contained thousands of
4 bodies. And not only that, I dealt with the artefacts and the bodies
5 from the previous exhumations for when I wasn't present. I'd returned
6 hundreds of bodies to the Bosnian Commission for Missing Persons, and I
7 believe that I have the right to say that I was personally involved in
8 the exhumation of thousands of men and boys.
9 Q. Thank you. You may have right to say anything, but would you
10 please answer this question: This way of questioning a witness that we
11 can see here, is it actually an extortion of statement, the statement in
12 line with what you know to be true, or were you exactly supposed to ask
13 him about his own knowledge and to obtain and -- those answers from him
14 that he wanted to give you? Thank you.
15 A. Your Honours, from memory, the suspect was a relatively junior
16 member of the corps. I recall that I cautioned him, that I gave him his
17 rights, that I offered him a lawyer, that I offered him the opportunity
18 to seek legal advice, and part of my duties as interviewing a suspect is
19 to clearly tell them what I intend to question them about. I intend to
20 question you about the Srebrenica executions; I intend to question you
21 about your role in those executions. If I can then let that witness
22 know, a relatively junior member of the corps, that we have a great deal
23 of information, a great deal of evidence that showed what happened, I
24 would hope that he would see that and understand that it would be in his
25 interests to tell the truth, but, also, that I was seeking the truth. I
1 did tell him that we had that information. I did tell him that we would
2 be able to tell if he was lying, as many of the other suspects had done,
3 and I wanted to make it very clear to him, in fairness to him, that we
4 knew many of the circumstances of the offence, and if he lied to us, then
5 it would not be providing the truth and it would not assist him, but I
6 gave him his rights as a respect. I didn't, in any way, brow-beat him.
7 If you listen to the tape on no occasion did I raise my voice. I simply
8 stated factually what we knew, and that we had a significant amount of
9 information and evidence.
10 Q. Thank you. So if you gave some facts to him and then later on
11 questioned him on those very same facts, isn't there a danger that he
12 could be led astray by those facts, instead of telling you his own
13 answers? And now he is telling you something about the things that you
14 actually found out through other people and other methods. Thank you.
15 A. I think that is something you would have to ask the witness. But
16 if you look at this interview, I am assuming that it went on for several
17 hours, and when I finished talking to the witness, to the suspect, I
18 asked him if he could tell me his story, his version of the events. And
19 he told me his version of the events, and I questioned him on every
20 aspect of that version of the events. And I believe, without checking,
21 that I showed him maps or documents or photographs to assist in that
22 process. But I gave him the opportunity to answer my questions the way
23 he wished to do. And if there was any discrepancy that I could see, I
24 would ask him questions, Can you please explain to me your answer?
25 Et cetera. I gave him the opportunity to tell me his story.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. Judge Nyambe has a question for the
3 JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you.
4 In line -- on page 48, line 7, General Tolimir, quoting from the
5 document on the screen, has you as saying: "We have aerial images of the
6 executions takes place," meaning, I suppose, "taking place."
7 Do you have actually have images of executions taking place?
8 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, one thing I would like to do is check
9 the tape to see exactly what I said, but I do accept that I said, We have
10 a aerial image or images of the execution taking place. I believe,
11 without reading the entire document, I'm referring to the Branjevo
12 Military Farm photographs, in which Mr. Erdemovic had described the
13 bodies lying on the grounds and you see, in those images, bodies lying on
14 the ground.
15 I also believe I'm able to say that in we have photographs of
16 mass graves being created at the time that people are killed, that people
17 are executed. Now, I don't say that we have a photograph of a man
18 standing with a gun and shooting someone, but we have photographs showing
19 the execution of men and boys next to mass graves. We have mass graves
20 created where we know people were executed.
21 But in specific answer to your question, I believe I was
22 referring to that image from Branjevo Military Farm. I would -- I would
23 have to check when we received the video of the Kravica warehouse which
24 shows bodies outside the warehouse and sound of gun-fire. I would have
25 to check when we received that, because I might also have been referring
1 to that, although it's not an aerial image. There is an aerial image of
2 that bus that's photographed in that image.
3 But, specifically, I believe I was referring to the Branjevo
4 Military Farm image.
5 JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you.
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, please carry on.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
8 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. The Trial Chamber, in these proceedings,
10 had the chance to see the statements of many Prosecution witnesses, and
11 they could see that before giving the statement, the representatives of
12 the OTP would give them the status of a suspect, both before the
13 interviews and before their testimonies here in the courtroom.
14 My question is: What are the specific conditions for somebody to
15 be considered a suspect and then accorded the rights of the suspect?
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
17 MR. McCLOSKEY: And, Your Honour, I'm sure what General Tolimir
18 is referring to is the caution that we normally give. But I don't think
19 the term, as you remember, is suspect in that. So I just -- so the
20 witness is clear, I'm not sure you've ever referred to anyone as suspect.
21 But I think what the General is saying just the caution, just so that is
22 clear, so the question is clear to the witness.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, gives this remark of Mr. McCloskey
24 reason for rephrasing your question?
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
1 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
2 Q. In the course of my examination of Prosecution witnesses in this
3 case, I would oftentimes ask them if they knew what was the basis for
4 their suspect status. Even this witness was cautioned that he may be
5 considered a suspect, which will depend on the answer he gives, and this
6 also has to do with Witness Bircakovic?
7 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter isn't sure about the name.
8 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation] And so my question for Mr. Manning
10 Q. What were the conditions that needed to be in place in order for
11 an individual to be considered a suspect, and in order for him to be
12 cautioned accordingly. Thank you.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
14 MR. McCLOSKEY: There's just a slight misunderstanding. I have
15 no problem with the General's questions about suspects prior to
16 interviews; that's absolutely correct. What he -- he suggested that the
17 Court has referred to people as suspects, and that's just not correct.
18 But there's something -- there's the caution that we know about which
19 sounds much like that and I think that's what he is referring to. I just
20 wanted to clarify that. Because it would not be correct to say that the
21 Court has referred to people as suspects.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, I didn't understand Mr. Tolimir in
23 that way, that he was -- I think it was clear from the record and from
24 this document that he was referring to such an interview of a witness by
25 Mr. Manning.
1 MR. McCLOSKEY: That -- I absolutely agree. But then he went on
2 and said in Court they do the same, they do the same thing and that is
3 what I understood him to say. And I think he meant the caution but, you
4 know, I could be wrong. We can go back. He said it happens in the
5 investigation and it happened in court. And that -- that's my only
6 clarification. What happens in court is a caution, not a suspect.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think we can resolve the problem by asking the
8 witness, what were the conditions that needed to be in place in order for
9 a person to be considered a suspect or in order for him to be cautioned
11 That was the question.
12 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, in each case, it would be different.
13 Without reading the interview and my recollection of the circumstances,
14 the suspect would have been identified as a suspect because of a
15 suspicion that he was involved in the offence. Perhaps when the
16 individuals were in the Zvornik Brigade engineering logs. Perhaps he --
17 we could identify that he was in a particular area. I can't tell you the
18 specifics, but a suspect is someone who, for some reason, we suspect of
19 having involvement in the offence. Major Jokic, for instance, who was
20 tried previously, was identified from a duty log as being present in a
21 certain place at a certain time, which would have led me to believe he
22 was a suspect. In this case, something led us to believe he was a
23 suspect, his involvement. I, therefore, cautioned him and gave him
24 certain rights. If he was a member of the Serbia -- the Bosnian Serb
25 Army, and I had no suspicion that he was a suspect, I would have
1 interviewed him as a witness.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey.
3 MR. McCLOSKEY: And, Mr. President, just so you're absolutely
4 clear, page 52, line 23, the question is about suspects and then he goes
5 and says: "Both before the interview and before their testimonies here
6 in the courtroom ..."
7 And it was the "before their testimonies here in the courtroom",
8 that -- I think he is just referring to the caution, which is very
9 similar to the suspect interview, and that was my point. For the
10 investigator, there is quite a big difference is why I wanted to get that
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you for that clarification. I think we
13 have overcome this problem.
14 Mr. Tolimir, please carry on.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
16 The caution normally given in the courtroom is understood to be
17 the same given by the Prosecution normally during interviews. At least
18 that's how I see it.
19 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Who was the member on your team who decided if a person was to be
21 accorded the status of a suspect? Thank you.
22 A. To my recollection, we needed to summons these individuals. We
23 would send an official summons to the Republika Srpska to request these
24 suspects attend. So, we, as a team, would have made the decision that
25 they were a suspect. Perhaps, I said this man was present on this day;
1 therefore, he is a suspect. Do you agree? Yes. Let's summons him as a
2 suspect. Someone else may have said, Here is a document that shows that
3 this man was there; therefore, he is a suspect.
4 But the request to have that person attend for interview was a
5 formal request made by the Tribunal to the Republika Srpska. So it would
6 vary as to who would indicate that the person was a suspect.
7 Q. Can you please tell me who was from among the team of
8 investigators, the one authorised to make such an assessment and give the
9 caution? Thank you. Or better said, who was it within the team who had
10 the right to give the status of suspect to an individual.
11 A. Well, effectively, if it was a planned mission in advance, we
12 would submit the documentation and ask for those individuals to attend.
13 But if I spoke to a witness, perhaps I spoke to a witness in Tuzla, and
14 that witness said to me, I killed someone, I would make the decision,
15 based on what they said, that they are a suspect, stop the witness
16 interview and start a suspect interview. I could make that decision as a
17 police officer, as an investigator. But in the more structured process,
18 we would discuss which individuals should be interviewed. We would
19 discuss their status. We would have them come as a witness. You are a
20 witness, sir, we would like to ask you questions, and take a witness
21 statement. Or we would establish that for some reason they're a suspect,
22 and we would conduct a suspect interview. And it could be, in that
23 process that, at the end of it, I could say, well, that person is no
24 longer a suspect or is less of a suspect or prove to me that they were
25 not there.
1 But I could make that assessment.
2 Q. Thank you. That's precisely what I wanted to hear, whether it
3 was you, members of the team, who made that decision, or whether it was
4 up to the OTP, as such, to grant a status of the sort before an
5 interview -- an interview is conducted.
6 A. It was both, Your Honours, depending on the circumstances.
7 Q. Thank you. When an interview is summons and you -- when an
8 individual is summonsed and the summons indicates that the individual is
9 a suspect, do you have the obligation to tell the individual, before you
10 commence questioning him, what the basis for the suspicion against him
11 is? Thank you.
12 A. I don't recall the wording of the summons. It may have indicated
13 that. It may have indicated generally, that, as a member of a certain
14 corps, they were considered a suspect. I don't recall. But as soon as I
15 commenced the interview, I would tell them why they were a suspect.
16 Q. Thank you. A moment ago, we saw Witness Bircakovic's statement.
17 Did you caution him about the fact that he was considered a suspect, and
18 did you tell him why this was so? Thank you.
19 A. I believe I did. I'd have to check. But if he was a suspect, I
20 would have cautioned him, given him his rights and then said, I wish to
21 speak to you in relation to your involvement in the Srebrenica massacre,
22 or in your involvement in relation to Branjevo Military Farm, or whatever
23 specific topic I was going to discuss with him. But I would caution him
24 and then I would tell him, generally, the allegation against him.
25 Q. Does this mean that the OTP would previously have specific
1 information as to why a certain individual is considered a suspect? And
2 was it then necessary for the individual to be given that specific
3 information underlying suspicion, together with the rights that were read
4 to the person?
5 A. As I say, I don't recall what the summons said, but when the
6 person is interviewed, I would tell them, as is fair, what they were
7 suspected of. That might be in general terms. For instance, I
8 interviewed the commander of the artillery unit which shelled the town of
9 Srebrenica. I had records which showed that he had shelled a
10 significant -- fired a significant number of shells into Srebrenica. He
11 was, therefore, a suspect, and I said to him, words to the effect of, I
12 want to talk to you about the shelling of Srebrenica, your role in that.
13 And, as it progressed, I would produce to him documents, showing how many
14 shells were fired into Srebrenica, how many shells he had fired the
15 previous day, asking him why he did that, what was the purpose of that.
16 So as the interview progressed, you would become more and more specific
17 and would you show the suspect what documents or photographs or witness
18 accounts you had which indicated why they were suspects. It was a
19 lengthy interview process.
20 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. Tell us, was it your practice to allow
21 any of these individuals to retain a legal representative or a lawyer and
22 would they have one present while you were interviewing them? Thank you.
23 A. If they were a suspect, they would be offered the opportunity of
24 seeking legal advice, of getting a lawyer. And in many instances, a
25 lawyer was present. If they initially refused and said, I don't need a
1 lawyer, at any stage during the interview if they said, I think I need a
2 lawyer, I would have stopped the interview and allowed them to get a
3 lawyer. Some had sought previous legal advice; some had lawyers present;
4 and I believe this individual, from memory, did not have a lawyer
5 present. But he was given that opportunity.
6 Q. Thank you. Was there a single case where an individual who was
7 told that he was a suspect ultimately became a suspect, or,
8 alternatively, was charged with certain allegations but were then -- but
9 then these charges were subsequently dropped in exchange for a statement?
10 Thank you.
11 A. I can't recall. The charges wouldn't necessarily have been
12 dropped if -- perhaps Mr. Erdemovic is a good example. He gave evidence
13 after he was charged. I'm not quite sure if I have your question
14 correct. But there were instances where people were interviewed as
15 suspects, and then, later on, we believed they were not suspects. There
16 were cases where people were interviewed as suspects and were later
17 charged before this Tribunal or by the Bosnian Court. And there is a
18 process where an individual can provide evidence to the Court after
19 they've been dealt with.
20 Q. Thank you. You mentioned Erdemovic. After -- was he interviewed
21 after the indictment was issued or did he ask for such a status after the
23 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Was he interviewed
24 before the indictment was issued or was such a status accorded after the
1 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I have met Mr. Erdemovic once. I
2 wasn't involved in that process. I understood that he was brought to the
3 Tribunal, was interviewed and was charged. I don't know that process,
4 I'm sorry.
5 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Thank you for your answer. I was about to ask you in those
7 instances where you were present and where a suspect would ultimately
8 become an indictee, if you have any such experience in the cases you were
9 involved in.
10 A. I interviewed General Krstic. I was part of the interview, but
11 that was after he was indicted. I don't recall interviewing the suspects
12 who were ultimately charged before this Tribunal. I don't believe that
13 someone I interviewed as a suspect became an indictee.
14 Q. Thank you. According the -- or, rather, in the procedure prior
15 to the point where an individual would be -- or could be given the status
16 of a suspect, in that previous procedure, is any sort of pressure or
17 influence exerted on the individual? Thank you.
18 A. No. I don't really understand your question. Prior --
19 Q. Since we were just now discussing cases of the procedure prior to
20 the indictment being issued, that's to say, the procedure where you
21 gathered information, would you tell individuals that they were suspects
22 at that stage only in order to get information or answers that the
23 Prosecution wanted to get? Thank you.
24 A. No. If a person was a suspect, there was a valid reason that
25 they were a suspect. It was complicated to conduct a taped interview.
1 It was difficult to transcribe them. If I had an individual who was a
2 witness, I would prefer that, because it was better for me to sit down
3 with a witness and say, Tell me what happened, tell me the story. A
4 suspect interview is more difficult to conduct, takes longer, and is by
5 the nature of it, somewhat adversarial. If a witness was available, I
6 would interview them as a witness, whether they be a Serb -- Bosnian Serb
7 officer, or a civilian, or a Muslim, or a Croat.
8 Q. Thank you. Are you familiar with any case where members of your
9 team of investigators would be called to account for certain omissions on
10 their part, for instance, for not investigating certain matters that were
11 relevant or important? Thank you.
12 A. No, I don't believe so. You'd have to be more specific.
13 Q. Thank you. Did you order that a team be set up from among
14 members of the Bosnian government who would be charged with further
15 exhumations? Was it you who did that? Thank you.
16 A. No, it was not me. The exhumations and the recovery of bodies by
17 the Bosnians had been occurring for some years before we handed over
18 responsibility, and that was a government body, established by that
20 Q. Thank you. A moment ago you said that you set up a team from the
21 Bosnian government which conducted further exhumations of mass graves,
22 and you oversaw that work. So it wasn't the Bosnian government that that
23 team up.
24 So my question is: Could the Serbian government set up a team
25 that would investigate crimes at Srebrenica? Thank you?
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, I don't think that you are correct
2 in this statement. I recall that the witness said the Bosnian government
3 set up this commission which was monitored and supervised by the OTP
4 investigators. This is my recollection of what he said, but perhaps you
5 can explain it further, sir.
6 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, that's correct. The
7 Bosnian commission was already in place. Following the 2001 hand-over,
8 we created a team of ICTY staff members who monitored the
9 Bosnian commission. They -- they went to the sites with them, they did
10 the work together, and that was the OTP staff who monitored the work of
11 the commission.
12 But in answer to the question about a Serbian investigation, I
13 believe that was the case. The Republika Srpska conducted an inquiry in
14 relation to Srebrenica and produced a report, as did the Dutch
15 government, as did, I think, the Americans, as did, clearly, the OTP.
16 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Thank you. I'm not asking you about parliamentary reports or
18 political reports. Yesterday, you said that Madam Del Ponte,
19 Madam Prosecutor, decided that exhumations should be handed over to the
20 Bosnian government. So was it an initiative that came from the Bosnian
21 government or were they actually handed over the entire exercise?
22 A. I think I said yesterday I don't recall the specifics. But we
23 handed over responsibility to the relevant government in that country,
24 the Bosnian authorities, and we monitored those exhumations, and then,
25 after that, they were monitored by the ICMP.
1 Q. Thank you. Please tell us, does the OTP of this Tribunal have
2 the right to entrust exhumations to a government that was a party to the
3 conflict and to a non-governmental organisation dealing with missing
4 persons? Thank you.
5 A. Yes, I believe it did, and it does. And, indeed, the Tribunal
6 has handed over prosecution matters to the Serbian government, to the
7 governments of Montenegro, Croatia, and Bosnia. I believe that we had
8 the right to do so and that it was approved by the Tribunal.
9 Q. Mr. Manning, you know full well what my question is: Did you
10 hand over to the Serbian government investigations concerning grave-sites
11 found in and around Srebrenica.
12 A. Sir, I'm trying to answer the question as best I could. I've
13 said that we handed over to the Bosnian government. We did not hand over
14 to the Serbian government those details. I know that we handed over to
15 the Serbian state details of investigations and prosecutions and that
16 that state has successfully prosecuted people for the Srebrenica
17 offences. But we handed over to the Bosnian government, the Bosnian
18 state government, the Bosnian Commission for Missing Persons.
19 Q. I do understand you as a police officer. But, tell me, did you
20 hand over investigations to the Bosnian commission or was it handed over
21 to any and all who could do anything about it, the exhumations,
22 grave-sites, so any Bosnian entities that could have anything to do with
23 the grave-sites you located? Thank you.
24 A. It was handed over to the Bosnian Commission for Missing Persons
25 who conducted exhumations, monitored by, initially, the ICTY, and then by
1 ICMP. And also probably by PHR and perhaps other government --
2 non-government organisations. But we handed it over to the
3 Bosnian Commission for Missing Persons.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: [Previous translation continues] ... we must have
6 the second break now.
7 Have you any idea how much time your cross-examination will take?
8 Is it possible to finish today or will you need more time tomorrow? It's
9 just a question.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We will finish today, soon after
11 the break, in fact. I have several questions left for the witness.
12 Thank you.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
14 We adjourn and resume at 1.00.
15 --- Recess taken at 12.30 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 1.02 p.m.
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes, Mr. Tolimir, please continue.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
19 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
20 Q. In order to be precise about what we were saying, both you and
21 me, please tell me, was it the Federal Commission for Missing Persons
22 that was the only one authorised to exhume mass graves around Srebrenica?
23 Thank you.
24 A. Following our hand-over of responsibility for those graves, my
25 answer would be yes. But once we had handed them over, then that would
1 have been in the hands of the Bosnian commission. But, as I understand
2 it, the Bosnian commission have been exhuming the bodies with the
3 assistance of ICMP.
4 Q. Thank you. Did the federal commission have exclusive authority
5 and monopoly over the mass graves, the bodies, and the artefacts? Thank
7 A. I would say yes. If someone attempted to exhume the graves who
8 was not the Bosnian government, I would assume the Bosnian government
9 would have attempted to stop that. We would certainly have attempted to
10 intervene if someone not authorised attempted to disturb the sites.
11 Q. Thank you. Since we saw that it was the only one that was
12 authorised after responsibility was transferred to it, tell me, was the
13 commission also authorised to transfer its authorisations to others, in
14 relation to the exhumation of mass graves? Thank you.
15 A. I simply don't know.
16 Q. Thank you. How can you then check and verify the accuracy of the
17 work of the Commission for Missing Persons, and does it submit any
18 reports to you? Does it report to you on whom they employed, what they
19 were doing, et cetera? Thank you.
20 A. No, it did not. Initially we monitored the exhumations and then
21 it was conducted by the Bosnian state commission and ICMP. They provided
22 us data and information, as in that material that I produced in my
23 report. But they did not report to us.
24 Q. Thank you. Does that mean that all the information, the
25 evidence, et cetera, was verified exclusively by the Bosnian Commission
1 for Missing Persons and the ICMP? And does this mean that neither the
2 OTP nor other organs of the court have any jurisdiction over them? Thank
4 A. The Bosnian commission and ICMP are primarily interested in
5 recovering the bodies, and not recovering the evidence. If evidence was
6 recovered, when we monitored, we would seize that evidence or have it
7 provided to us. If evidence was found during exhumations and was
8 provided to us by ICMP, we would use that information. But the
9 Bosnian commission is recovering bodies, not recovering evidence. And
10 the ICMP are monitoring that process and identifying those bodies.
11 Q. Thank you. Does the Bosnian commission answer to this Court and
12 to the OTP in any way whatsoever? Is it responsible to this Court in any
13 way whatsoever? Thank you.
14 A. I don't believe so. Apart from the Court's powers to subpoena
15 witnesses or seek documents, I don't believe so.
16 Q. Thank you. The authorisation of the Court or the OTP? Did the
17 Court authorise the Bosnian commission or was it the OTP that authorised
19 A. No, it wasn't the Court. It was the OTP and the ICTY that
20 released responsibility for those mass graves to the Bosnian commission.
21 Q. Thank you. Could then any information and any data entered by
22 the Bosnian commission based on exhumation be considered impartial if you
23 entrusted all of this to just one state or to just one party to the
24 conflict, in relation to Srebrenica? Thank you.
25 A. I have examined the work the Bosnian commission but, more
1 particularly, the ICMP, and I believe the ICMP is an international body
2 which is unconnected to the war and the conflict. I saw no evidence that
3 there was any wrong-doing from the Bosnian commission in the recovery of
4 the bodies, in the identification of the bodies, and in my review of ICMP
5 procedures, or the Podrinje Identification Project procedures, I saw
6 fairness, I saw checks and balances and review and a process which was
7 predominantly geared to identifying the human remains and returning them
8 to the families. They were very precise in their work. And, as I've
9 indicated, I believe that they also recover bodies from the other
10 entities, not just the Bosnian Muslim victims.
11 Q. Thank you. What is the working language of the commission? If
12 it's the Bosnian state commission, what is its working language?
13 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter didn't understand the very end
14 of the question.
15 THE WITNESS: To answer the question, as I understood it, the
16 working language of the commission would be B/C/S,
17 Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian. And the main language utilized by ICMP was
18 English. But they were multi-nationals, so I'm sure they used other
19 languages. Documentation that I reviewed was either in B/C/S or was in
21 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Thank you. We would like to know how the OTP monitors the work
23 of the Bosnian commission, if all its documents are in the Serbian
24 language, or the Bosnian language, as they call it. How can they monitor
25 it then? Thank you.
1 A. You'll have to ask the OTP if they continue to monitor the work
2 of ICMP. I can simply state that if documents are received in a foreign
3 language, they can be translated into English. Much of the reporting
4 that I saw from ICMP was in English, and, indeed, many of the people
5 employed there were former ICTY archaeologists or anthropologists or
6 international anthropologists, archaeologists who produced documents in
8 Q. Thank you. I was asking you about the Bosnian commission, and
9 then we'll get to the international commission. Thank you.
10 A. Your Honours, the Bosnian commission and ICMP work together, so
11 when they go to a site, they're together. They're in the same vehicles.
12 They dig the same hole. They remove the same bodies. They work
13 together. So, therefore, they, on occasion, produce documents in
15 Q. Thank you. Does the International Commission for Missing Persons
16 have any responsibility to this Tribunal and to this Court? Thank you.
17 A. I don't know. I'm not sure of their mandate. They're an
18 internationally recognised organisation. They may be signatory to some
19 agreements. I don't know.
20 Q. Thank you. Please tell us whether you saw a document today which
21 had 220 names on it as victims of Srebrenica, and who were, in fact,
22 killed before or after the events in Srebrenica? Thank you.
23 A. I believe you're referring to the part of Mr. Helge Brunborg's
24 report, in which there was -- stated 220 names, some of whom had been
25 corrected, and some who had different dates. As I said, I'm not familiar
1 with that document or the sources of that document.
2 Q. Thank you. And is anyone going to answer for the fact that
3 they're trying to delude the Court by false entries and by entering
4 people on these lists who were not killed in Srebrenica but after the
5 events, in fact? At events later and at events that pre-date 1994?
6 Thank you.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, could you explain that? I'm --
8 I'm -- I don't understand your question. The fact that they are trying
9 to delude the Court by false entries and by entering people on these
10 lists who were not killed in Srebrenica but after the events.
11 I'm surprised about this statement. You should clarify that.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Mr. Manning, let me rephrase my question. After the Brunborg
15 report on irregularities in relation to a certain number of people, and
16 based on their own findings, where the OTP found that false information
17 was entered, does the OTP plan to start any proceedings against anyone in
18 the Bosnian commission or in the ICMP? Thank you.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, you know this witness is no longer
20 part of the OTP or engaged with the -- or employed by the OTP. I think
21 he can't answer the question about plans of the OTP.
22 Mr. McCloskey.
23 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes, I don't have any problem with the General
24 putting his case as he is, that there has been false and there has been
25 deluding and that kind of thing. But it needs to be done, of course,
1 with something that serious to the -- to the person that he is suggesting
2 that is doing it. And I'm not sure who he's suggesting, if it is
3 Brunborg or someone else.
4 But, yeah, no problem with his allegations which he has some
5 sport for, which I don't think he does. But it should be done to the
6 person or entity that he is accusing of such outrageous conduct.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: This is the reason why I asked Mr. Tolimir to
8 substantiate, clarify this allegation, how we should understand it. But
9 it's in your hands to do that. Otherwise, please continue your
10 cross-examination, if you have further questions.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Thank
12 you, Mr. McCloskey.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
14 Q. My question to you, Mr. Manning, is this: Since you transferred
15 authorities to the Bosnian government and to a non-governmental
16 commission whereby they can decide what is a fair standard, did you
17 maintain the right, as the OTP to hold anyone, either of them responsible
18 for entering false information? Thank you.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: The witness could answer the question for the
20 time-period when he was employed by the OTP.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
22 I don't believe there was specific content in the hand-over
23 document that prescribed what they would do in that instance. It was
24 outlined what we would ask them to do, as in provide us access to the
25 sites, provide us information when necessary. I don't recall anything
1 about sanctions if they provided false information. I would have to
2 check the particular document.
3 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Manning. During today's cross-examination, when I
5 asked why you handed things over to Amor Masovic. He said it wasn't
6 handed over to Mr. Amor Masovic but to Mr. Murat Hurtic. However, we
7 have a document that we received by the OTP on the 7th of February, 2001,
8 and I would like to have it shown to you a document in closed session so
9 you could have a look at it and so that could you see that this document
10 was sent to Amor Masovic with persons who signed their names on it, and I
11 don't want to say these names until we're in closed session. Thank you.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before we go into closed session, I would just
13 ask you -- I recall the witness having said that this responsibility was
14 handed over to the Bosnian government, not to a single person. I think
15 we should be clear with that.
16 And now we turn into private session.
17 [Private session]
11 Pages 10312-10318 redacted. Private session.
12 [Open session]
13 THE REGISTRAR: We're back in open session, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. McCloskey, your re-examination.
15 MR. McCLOSKEY: Yes --
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before we give you the floor, Judge Nyambe has a
18 JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you. Just a clarification at page 78 of
19 today's transcript, lines 2 to 6, you have -- you are recorded as having
20 said the following: "To my recollection all the mass graves were located
21 in the area of responsibility of the Drina Corps within the Drina valley
22 in the area of Srebrenica, Bratunac, and Zvornik, stretching from Pilica
23 and the Branjevo Farm in the north, to Zeleni Jadar, secondary graves in
24 the south.
25 Is this -- are these places you are mentioning in
1 Republika Srpska or in the Federation.
2 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry if I confused you, Your Honour. They are
3 in, as I understood, the area of the Republika Srpska.
4 JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Sorry for interrupting you, Mr. McCloskey.
6 You have the floor.
7 MR. McCLOSKEY: Mr. President, I don't anticipate having a lot of
8 redirect, but certainly more than about three minutes. If I can have
9 some time to gather my thoughts, and there are some issues I want to
10 discuss with Mr. Gajic which may make things go quicker.
11 I have a question or two on this document so we can get that out
12 of the way.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You may do that. Otherwise it is better to
14 commence the re-examination tomorrow. Because this courtroom is occupied
15 this afternoon, and two of the three Judges present are sitting this
16 afternoon in other trials.
17 MR. McCLOSKEY: Absolutely. It would be good to stop.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much.
19 Sir, have you to come back tomorrow; I apologise for that. We --
20 I have to remind you not to contact the parties during the break.
21 We adjourn now and resume tomorrow in the afternoon in this
22 courtroom, 2.15. We adjourn.
23 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.43 p.m.,
24 to be reconvened on Thursday, 24th of February,
25 2011, at 2.15 p.m.