1 Wednesday, 25 January 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.02 a.m.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good morning to everybody in the courtroom. If
6 there is nothing to discuss at the moment, the witness should be brought
7 in, please.
8 [The witness takes the stand]
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Good morning, Mr. Kralj. Welcome back to the
10 courtroom. I have to remind you that the affirmation to tell the truth
11 you made at the beginning of your testimony still applies today.
12 Mr. Tolimir is continuing his examination-in-chief.
13 WITNESS: SLAVKO KRALJ [Resumed]
14 [Witness answered through interpreter]
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You have the floor, Mr. Tolimir.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. God's
17 peace unto this house, and may this day in Court and the final judgement
18 reflect God's will and not mine. And in the manner that will be most
19 beneficial to the souls of all of us.
20 Examination by Mr. Tolimir: [Continued]
21 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Kralj, good morning. I wish you a pleasant
22 stay among us. We broke off while we were dealing with document D303
23 yesterday. I would like that document to be displayed again. We have it
24 on our screens. We read three paragraphs yesterday.
25 You know that this is a document of the Main Staff of the VRS,
1 dated 31 August 1994, it was sent to all commands, and the subject line
2 reads: "Order Regarding Movement of Humanitarian Aid Across Lines of
3 Separation." It was signed by General Milovanovic. We saw the signature
4 yesterday. And he said:
5 "You know that the GS of the VRS no longer has any jurisdiction
6 or responsibility concerning approval of entry and movement of teams and
7 convoys of organisations through the territory of Republika Srpska."
8 In the second paragraph, it says:
9 "This approval is now issued --"
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I have to interrupt you. Please slow down while
11 reading. The interpreters have a problem.
12 Please continue.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
14 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
15 Q. In paragraph two, General Milovanovic says. I quote:
16 "These approvals are now issued by the co-ordinating body for
17 humanitarian aid and the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Social Welfare.
18 "The Army of Republika Srpska has the obligation to check teams
19 and convoys of humanitarian organisations passing through the territory
20 of Republika Srpska and crossing lines of separation into territory
21 controlled by Muslim and Croatian forces."
22 Fourth paragraph:
23 "The reports that we send to you contain all the information in
24 our possession that we obtain from approvals issued by the
25 afore-mentioned institutions."
1 Mr. Kralj, this document is dated 31 August 1994. Were you
2 familiar with it? Thank you.
3 A. Yes, I was familiar with the document.
4 Q. Thank you. What I have just read out to you, was it really
5 implemented in practice the way it's written here, the way it's stated
6 here? Thank you.
7 A. It was implemented the way it is stated here.
8 Q. Thank you. Since you were a member of the organ directly in
9 charge of humanitarian convoys moving in the territory of
10 Republika Srpska, can you explain to the Trial Chamber the difference
11 between UNPROFOR convoys and UNHCR convoy?
12 A. UNPROFOR convoys were armed convoys. They travelled from their
13 bases to the enclaves and sometimes from a base in Croatia through
14 RS territory to their bases in Sarajevo. They carried personnel and
15 equipment that they needed to carry out their mission. They only
16 supplied UNPROFOR units.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 A. And to the other question, my answer is that humanitarian convoys
19 carried supplies for the civilian population. That population could be
20 either in RS territory or in the territory controlled by the Muslim Croat
22 Q. Thank you.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, you should recall that this question
24 was put to the witness already yesterday and answered by the witness.
25 You should try to avoid repetitions.
1 Please carry on.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I will
3 establish a link now.
4 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Mr. Kralj, tell us if UNPROFOR directly contacted the Main Staff
6 when they wanted to enter VRS controlled territory, or did they contact
7 anybody else? Thank you.
8 A. UNPROFOR directly contacted the Main Staff of the VRS through
9 their Pale office, which was in accordance with the agreed procedures.
10 These procedures were agreed by the central joint commission.
11 Q. Thank you. These other organisations, UNHCR,
12 International Committee of the Red Cross, Doctors Without Frontiers, how
13 did they announce their arrival in RS territory? Please explain, thank
15 A. Humanitarian organisations, once the co-ordination body of the
16 government was set up, were obliged to submit their requests to that
17 co-ordination body, which was -- which had the exclusive authority for
18 issuing approvals for the movement of humanitarian aid convoys.
19 Q. Thank you. Do you know if that co-ordinating body decided how
20 much food could be carried for the enclaves or was somebody else who took
21 such decisions, such as the donors themselves or? Thank you.
22 A. As for food, the government co-ordination body often held
23 meetings with representatives of those organisations. It was the donors
24 who decided on the total quantities of food, so it was up to them to
25 decide how much food they would transport to or through the RS, and the
1 co-ordinating body only decided how much could pass in a given period.
2 Q. Thank you. What was the role of the VRS, then, with regard to
3 those UNHCR convoys and other humanitarian aid convoys? What were the
4 duties of the VRS in that respect? Thank you.
5 A. The duty of the VRS was to inspect the convoys upon their entry
6 in or exit from VRS controlled territory. They had to guarantee their
7 free passage along the approved routes. They also had to keep a
9 Q. Thank you.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please see document D307
11 now. Thank you.
12 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
13 Q. We see here a document of the Main Staff of the VRS, dated
14 16 January 1994. The subject line reads: "Implementation of the Orders
15 by the RS President, Communication." The reference is also to a document
16 in the line below, and it says:
17 "Pursuant to the order of the president of the RS,
18 Dr. Radovan Karadzic, item 3 of order," so-and-so, that's an order of
19 15 January 1994, "is hereby amended and shall read:
20 "Any dispute issues with representatives of UNPROFOR and military
21 observers shall be resolved exclusively through the corps commands and
22 the Main Staff of the VRS and with international humanitarian
23 organisations through the government co-ordination body for humanitarian
25 "Commander Lieutenant-Colonel Ratko Mladic."
1 Now my question is this: Can you give us some examples of these
2 disputed issues because of which this order was drafted? What kind of
3 issues were those? What happened when convoys passed through and there
4 was a need for communication with them? Thank you.
5 A. Some UNPROFOR military observers at individual check-points,
6 especially around Sarajevo, were prone not to respect the time and the
7 place of passage. Some vehicles would be announced at one time and would
8 arrive a day earlier.
9 As for humanitarian organisations, some were not aware of the
10 rules, such as Karitas in the Banja Luka region or Merhamet. They tried
11 hard to get approval from the corps to enter RS territory or territory
12 controlled by Muslim Croat forces. In order to alleviate the pressure
13 that arose due to many such issues, this solution was --
14 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please repeat. The
15 interpreter didn't understand.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Could you please repeat the last sentence. The
17 interpreters didn't catch it.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This solution, namely giving
19 authority to the corps command to deal with some minor issues concerning
20 UNPROFOR, reduced the pressure on the VRS Main Staff to deal with petty
21 issues that can successfully be dealt with by corps commands. It was in
22 their mutual interest, especially in the interest of UNPROFOR, because
23 they constantly demanded to be allowed more contacts with lower-ranking
25 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Thank you. Could you please tell us whether the obligation to
2 report or to announce the convoys a day before was a protocol matter or
3 were there other reasons why there was a request to announce the convoy's
4 movement 24 hours in advance? Thank you.
5 A. The duty to announce the convoys 24 hours in advance -- actually,
6 this referred to military observers, for the convoys the period was
7 48 hours in advance, so in view of the situation in the field it was war,
8 it was a combat zone, and the corps command had to create conditions
9 secure enough for the said convoy to pass safely to its destination at
10 the announced time.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now look at P68 in e-court.
13 Actually, P689.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: While this is coming up, I would like to ask you
15 about the document D307 we have just had on the screen. That was
16 previously in August 2011 MFI'd pending translation. As we could see,
17 the translation is available. Are you tendering it now in full?
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. The
19 Defence would like to tender it in its entirety. Thank you.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes. It will be received as D307.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can we look at page 2
22 in the Serbian, please. Thank you.
23 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Well, let's look at article 6. This is a decision on the
25 appointment of a committee for co-operation with the UN and the
1 international humanitarian organisations. It's dated the
2 14th of March, 1995. Thank you, Aleksandar. I would kindly ask you to
3 look at article 6, please, which states the following:
4 "Permits for the movement of convoys and employees of the UN and
5 humanitarian organisations on the territory of Republika Srpska shall be
6 issued by the co-ordinating body for humanitarian operations, pursuant to
7 committee decisions."
8 Can we now look at article 7, which states:
9 "The committee shall adopt special rules of procedure for issuing
10 permits for the movement of convoys and employees of the UN and
11 humanitarian organisations on the territory of Republika Srpska," end of
12 quote from article 7.
13 My question is: The Main Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska,
14 could it change this decision by the committee permitting the movement of
15 convoys in the territory of Republika Srpska? Thank you.
16 A. General, sir, this is a document that can only be amended by the
17 body that issued it. The Main Staff did not have the authority to alter
18 government documents.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now look at the decision on
21 the appointment of a president, vice-president, and members of the state
22 committee for co-operation with the United Nations and international
23 humanitarian organisations. Thank you. We can see that now on our
25 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
1 Q. We're looking at article 1 and 2 which comprise the document.
2 In -- article 2 has nine items. Let's read item 1:
3 "Head of the co-ordinating -- Professor Nikola Koljevic, deputy
4 president of Republika Srpska, is hereby appointed president of the state
5 committee for co-operation with the UN and international humanitarian
6 organisations. Maxim Stanisic is hereby appointed deputy president of
7 the state committee for co-operation with the UN and international
8 humanitarian organisations."
9 In article 2 that follows, under item 7, it states:
10 The members are listed here.
11 And then in item 7 it states:
12 "Let Colonel Milos Djurdjic -- co-ordinator for the committee's
13 relations with the Ministry of Defence and the Main Staff of the
14 Army of Republika Srpska."
15 So do you know, perhaps, what was the role of this co-ordinator
16 of the committee of the Main Staff of the ministry and the Ministry of
18 A. As we can see in article 2, item 7, this references to
19 Colonel Milos Djurdjic. His role in line with the responsibilities of
20 the Main Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska and the corps whose --
21 through whose territory these convoys would pass was -- first of all,
22 before the passage of the passage of the convoys [Realtime transcript
23 read in error "advise"] was approved, he was to see if the convoy -- if
24 the situation was safe enough for the convoys to pass. And then after
25 that, when the convoy passage was approved by the co-ordination body, it
1 was his job to see that this was safely implemented. They were to
2 inspect the convoys and to keep a record of the goods that were in the
3 convoy that was passing through.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now look at D79 in e-court,
6 please, which is marked for identification.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: While this comes up, one correction for the
8 record, page 9, line 21. The word "advise" should read "convoys." Thank
10 Mr. Tolimir.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. We're
12 now looking at Exhibit D79. This is an order from the president of
13 Republika Srpska which states -- actually, the date is the
14 13th of June, 1995. We're interested in article 2, page 2, point 7.
15 Actually, it's page 2, item 7. And we can see item 7 now which states:
16 "To allow ICRC convoy Zenica-Sarajevo with medical supplies that
17 will be distributed to the Serb and Muslim side along the route that the
18 Supreme HQ of the Army of Republika Srpska assesses as safe. To avoid
19 the route via Ilijas."
20 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
21 Q. My question is this: What was the role of the Main Staff in
22 relation to this ICRC convoy? Thank you. What was the role of the
23 Main Staff?
24 A. The role of the Main Staff was to assess whether the route was
25 safe for passage of said convoy, and it states here "to avoid the route
1 via Ilijas" because that route was not safe. The president already knew
2 that this route was not safe.
3 Q. Thank you. Are you able to explain to the Trial Chamber why it
4 wasn't safe, if you know? Thank you.
5 A. Well, I don't have precise information, but I know that there was
6 some actions underway.
7 Q. Thank you. In this case who was in charge of the convoy's
8 safety, the convoy that was announced by the president of
9 Republika Srpska announcing its passage through the territory of
10 Republika Srpska? Thank you.
11 A. The Army of Republika Srpska was in charge of the passage of the
12 convoy or, rather, the Main Staff was through the corps. They were to
13 deal with all matters relating to the safe passage of the convoy through
14 the territory, especially because it was carrying medical supplies that
15 were in short supply everywhere.
16 Q. Thank you. Are you able to tell us if a convoy announced in this
17 way was subject to checks and who carried out these checks at the
18 check-points? Thank you.
19 A. This convoy was subject to the usual control, which implied
20 inspecting the personnel and the equipment that was being carried. They
21 were also obliged to have a list with them of the equipment that they
22 were carrying or which equipment or medicines were approved by the
23 co-ordination body.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
1 document now, please.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It was already tendered through Witness Nicolai,
3 but only marked for identification because the Witness Nicolai couldn't
4 provide us with any information about this document. Now it will be
5 received as D79.
6 Please continue, Mr. Tolimir.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I would
8 like to look at document 1D935 in e-court, please. Thank you. Thank
9 you, Aleksandar.
10 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Kralj, are you able to tell us what kind of document this is?
12 Can you tell what it refers to, who is sending it to whom? Thank you.
13 A. This is a document of the co-ordinating board for humanitarian
14 aid, dated the 17th of May, 1995. It's signed by Dragan Kekic. The
15 document refers to the UNHCR humanitarian organisation, its Belgrade
16 office, that was supposed to do the following by the 25th of May pursuant
17 to the central plan for equipment supplies. By that date, it was
18 supposed to transport a satellite telex, satellite equipment, computers,
19 adapters. You cannot really see it that well here.
20 Anyway, it was supposed to transport this equipment for the needs
21 of the UNHCR office.
22 Q. Thank you. Could you please read out the first line.
23 A. "Permission is given for request JUG/PAL/HCR/0241."
24 Q. Thank you. I was thinking of the note in the text, just below
25 the paragraph.
1 A. Could you please zoom in? It's too small.
2 "A weekly plan is hereby approved with the exception of note 3 on
3 page 3."
4 Q. Thank you. Did the co-ordination body presided over by
5 Dragan Kekic forward notes such as this that had to be abided by both
6 those on the convoy and those inspecting it; otherwise, they wouldn't
7 know his notes and remarks were about? In other words, did he forward
8 such documents to both parties involved?
9 A. Copies of the same document were sent to both the UNHCR and the
10 Main Staff of the VRS.
11 Q. [Microphone not activated]
12 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
13 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Thank you. Further down the page, just under the
15 26th of May, 1995, it reads:
16 "In addition to the permission, a copy of the approved request
17 and a copy of the bill of lading must be presented. A copy of the bill
18 of lading must be sent to the co-ordinating body through the commission
19 inspector or the border police at the border crossing."
20 Tell us, please, what this instruction was intended for or for
22 A. This was an instruction aimed at the UNHCR, stating that they
23 have to be in possession of valid documents. The border people knew of
24 this requirement as well, since the convoy was supposed to go via
25 Karakaj. There was no combat activity there; thus, the civilian police
1 also played an important role at the border crossing there.
2 Q. Thank you. Why was it necessary that was person forwarding this
3 document forwarded this to the Main Staff of the VRS as well, by the same
5 A. The Main Staff of the VRS was in charge of control along the
6 demarcation lines facing the enemy. This was for the purposes of
7 control, escort, and an ability to inspect the cargo.
8 Q. Thank you. Who was authorised to notify the check-point in
9 question about the contents of this document? When someone was to cross
10 the border, who was supposed to notify the border crossing staff?
11 A. The Main Staff of the VRS was authorised to inform the border
12 crossing staff of the crossing of a convoy along its lines of command.
13 Q. If the co-ordinating body rejected an UNHCR request or a request
14 by some other humanitarian organisations, was the Main Staff informed of
16 A. The Main Staff was informed regularly about any changes and
17 failure to grant the passage of a convoy.
18 Q. Was this another control measure so as to prevent someone who had
19 originally been rejected to try to cross anyway?
20 A. Of course. If there was an omission or a situation in which
21 someone possessed documents which were not confirmed and accepted, they
22 would still be unable to cross over without the consent of the
23 Main Staff.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we have this admitted,
25 please? Thank you, Aleksandar.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter document 1D935 shall be
3 assigned Exhibit D338. Thank you.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we next have 1D01044.
5 We can see that this is a document of the Main Staff of the
6 Army of Republika Srpska, dated the 22nd July, 1994. It was sent to the
7 Drina and Sarajevo-Romanija Corps. It was signed by General Milovanovic
8 as we will see on page 2.
9 Could we have that page, please. Thank you. Let us now go back
10 to page 1. Thank you.
11 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Let us look at the first sentence by General Milovanovic:
13 "We are hereby inform you that the co-ordination body of the RS
14 government for humanitarian operations approved the movement," but it
15 seems to be illegible, "of the teams and convoys of humanitarian
17 And then we have a specification of individual teams and convoys.
18 Towards the bottom of the page it says:
19 "Carry out a check ..."
20 It is the second paragraph from the bottom.
21 "Carry out a check and ensure unhindered movement on the roads
23 My question is this: Did General Milovanovic appropriately use
24 the authority invested in the Main Staff of the VRS when it comes to
25 convoys and humanitarian assistance?
1 A. General, sir, I'd like you -- to remind you of the formulation
2 which says:
3 "We are hereby inform you that the co-ordination body
4 approved ..."
5 In other words, the units in question are reminded of the fact
6 that the co-ordinating body is the body which approved the delivery of
7 humanitarian assistance as specified, a followup of which is an
8 instruction to carry out a check and ensure movement on the roads
9 approved. It indicates that the co-ordinating body is the body which
10 made the decision on the convoy to pass through. It was the obligation
11 of the army, or, rather, of the personnel at the check-point to carry out
12 the check and ensure movement on the roads approved. This is different
13 compared to the previous period when the Main Staff was issuing
15 Q. Was this the period prior to 1994?
16 A. Yes, prior to 1994.
17 Q. Have a look at the last paragraph on this page. It reads:
18 "The Drina Corps command must urgently gather, arrange, and
19 submit the overview of humanitarian aid delivered to Srebrenica, Zepa,
20 and Gorazde for the month of July this year. The types and quantities of
21 the following goods must be listed in the overview:"
22 Now we can go to the next page. We have a number of items
23 listed. The document goes on to say the following:
24 "As of 22 July 1994 note all the types and quantities of goods
25 during the checks."
1 In the corps commands which had bodies tasks with the functioning
2 of check-points within the area of responsibility in question, were there
3 registers and log-books kept of the amounts and types of goods that went
4 through the territory of the RS for the needs of the enclaves Srebrenica,
5 Gorazde, and Zepa as mentioned in this document? Thank you.
6 A. The commands had designated personnel who were in charge of
7 keeping lists and records of goods. As of the 22nd of July, 1994, a
8 particular emphasis was placed on that aspect as a result of this order.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I seek to tender the document on
10 the screen, which is 1D01044 so that we can move on to the next document.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document shall be assigned
13 Exhibit D339. Thank you.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Thank
15 you, Mr. Registrar.
16 Could we next have D209. Thank you. Thank you.
17 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
18 Q. On the screen is a document of the Drina Corps command of the
19 3rd of May, 1995. It is a breakdown of humanitarian aid to the Muslim
20 enclaves for March and April 1995. There are items from number 1 through
21 to 26, and there is a breakdown for March and April, and as well as per
23 My question is this: Did you at the Main Staff have access to
24 these records kept by the units in the field within whose areas of
25 responsibility the enclaves were, and did you make use of it? Was it of
1 assistance to you to have such breakdowns and produce summaries?
2 A. The Drina Corps pursuant to our request - that is the request
3 made by Colonel Djurdjic - submitted summary breakdowns of what had been
4 transported to enclaves during a given period. Those summaries were like
5 this one on the screen.
6 Q. Thank you. Could your organ always give the commander of the
7 Main Staff information about the quantities of food and other items
8 delivered to enclaves for any given month? Thank you.
9 A. Our organ was able to provide information at short notice to the
10 commander of the Main Staff, pursuant to his request. That information
11 would be about total quantities of individual kinds of goods during a
12 given month or by convoy.
13 Q. Thank you. Did Colonel Djurdjic, who worked with you and who was
14 chief of the civilian affairs sector, have accurate information about the
15 quantity of articles that arrived in the previous months and was he aware
16 of the needs of the soldiers and civilian population as concerns
17 individual food stuffs? Thank you.
18 A. Colonel Djurdjic had the necessary information about the
19 population and the enclave and UNPROFOR presence. He also had
20 information about the quantities of goods delivered to the individual
21 enclaves during any given period. The information was accurate or,
22 rather, accurately collected, especially after that order that we saw, I
23 think it was dated 22 July 1994.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Judge Nyambe has a question.
25 JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you.
1 I just need to take you back to -- I am addressing this question
2 to the witness. I want to take you back to page 17 of today's
3 transcript, starting with line 18. I am referring specifically to the
4 question by General Tolimir where he said:
5 "Did you at the Main Staff [Realtime transcript read in error
6 "ministry"] have access to these records kept by the units in the field
7 within whose areas of responsibility the enclaves were, and did you make
8 use of it?"
9 I don't think in your answer you answered those questions. Do
10 you think you can answer those questions for me, please? Thank you.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand this part about
12 the "ministry" because I was at the Main Staff of the VRS.
13 JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you. Then the followup question was:
14 "Was it of assistance to you to have such breakdowns ...?"
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was of great assistance to have
16 such breakdowns. It enabled us to inform the commander how much was
17 delivered to the individual enclaves when he demanded such information.
18 JUDGE NYAMBE: Thank you.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I put a followup question to you. Perhaps
20 you misunderstood or it was a translation issue, the question of
21 Mr. Tolimir repeated by my colleague Judge Nyambe. There was no
22 reference to a ministry. The question was:
23 "Did you at the Main Staff have access to these records kept by
24 the units in the field?"
25 There was only a reference to the Main Staff. Could you now
1 answer the question, please?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Pursuant to requests by
3 Colonel Djurdjic, the units regularly submitted such reports. Usually
4 that would be a summary monthly report.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you for your answer.
6 Mr. Tolimir, please carry on.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
8 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Mr. Kralj, did Colonel Djurdjic take care that everything was
10 done in accordance with the relevant standards and did he inform the
11 Chief of Staff of anything being or not being in accordance with the
12 standards? Thank you.
13 A. Colonel Djurdjic had access to the applicable standards, and if
14 he noticed that something deviated from the standards he would point that
15 out to the commander or whoever had the duty to take the relevant
16 decision. He would inform that person that a quantity was either normal
17 or otherwise and thus usable for other purposes.
18 Q. Thank you. Did the Main Staff in case of abnormal or great
19 quantities able to conclude that what was actually being done was the
20 setting up of war reserves by either UNPROFOR or humanitarian
21 organisations? Was the Main Staffs able to draw such a conclusion based
22 on the breakdowns we mentioned?
23 A. It was possible to conclude that reserves were being formed based
24 on monitoring the quantities of goods entering the enclaves. Those goods
25 could either be -- could either have been transported there by UNPROFOR
1 or by other organisations.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we now please see
4 65 ter 1787. Thank you. Thank you. Please enlarge because the witness
5 has repeatedly requested the enlargement of the document because the
6 letters are small.
7 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
8 Q. This is a document of the Main Staff dated 7 March, 1995. It
9 says, I quote:
10 "We would like to inform you that we approve the authorisation
11 kot number 361," and there is a number of abbreviations and so on.
12 Do you know what these abbreviations stand for and what is this
13 all about?
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Kralj, can you read that or should it be
15 zoomed in?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I just read about half, a little
17 more. It would be good if it could be enlarged, though.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think it is difficult to enlarge it. Yes,
19 exactly. That --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it's better legible now.
21 The first thing I notice is that this is an open text that was
22 sent to the command of military post number 7111 and military post
23 number 7598. These are the civilian designations of military post
24 numbers that were used for the delivery of mail; that is, the
25 communication channel was not a protected military channel. And then it
2 "We would like to inform you that we approve the authorisation
3 kot for hp ..."
4 This is the co-ordinating body for humanitarian aid of the
5 Republika Srpska. And then a reference is made to document 361-MKCK
6 which stands for International Committee of the Red Cross which was filed
7 at Pale under number 95/265/n. It refers to the delivery of medical
8 material from Pale to Zepa. Departure on 8 March and return on the same
9 day along the route Pale-Podromanija-Rogatica-Zepa and back along the
10 same route. The team consists of the persons mentioned here:
11 Miljana Jelic, ID 2328 - ID standing for identity document - she had that
12 document as a member of that humanitarian aid organisation. The second
13 person mentioned is Danijela Krneta, whose ID number is 2322. And then
14 there are the vehicles yg 019 Geneva. The vehicle number is 5244. The
15 second vehicle is yg 140 Geneva 5294. These are the license plate
16 numbers on the vehicles of the ICRC. Content: ICRC mail such as letters
17 and whatever. Then personnel belongings and medical material, as listed
18 in the document carried by the team leader.
19 I would like to say that the International Committee of the
20 Red Cross is one of the international organisations -- can you hear me?
21 One of the organisations which was impartial in this process and never
22 created problems when it comes to following procedures. On this
23 occasion, they were given approval to carry a list showing the quantity
24 of goods they were carrying. And based on that list, an inspection was
25 made and report was drafted. It also goes on to say:
1 "Check and enable free passage on the approved routes."
2 Can we scroll down?
3 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
4 Q. This will do for the moment. Let's keep it this way because I
5 want to ask you about the first line of this cable. Thank you.
6 The first sentence of this cable reads:
7 "We would like to inform you that we" --
8 THE INTERPRETER: "Approve of the authorisation," it should be.
9 Interpreter's remark.
10 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Why this language, "inform you that we approve of"? For whom is
12 this meant?
13 A. This word, "approve," well it wasn't really necessary. It would
14 have been enough to say, We inform you that the co-ordination body
15 approved this or that. But the operatives added this word because they
16 were wont to use such phrases, but this document could have -- could have
17 been drafted without this word, too.
18 Q. And this, "We would like to inform you that we approve ...," does
19 that refer to -- actually, who does that refer to? Thank you. To whom
20 is this sent?
21 A. This is sent to the check-point, to the military post.
22 Q. Thank you. According to what you know, did the Main Staff review
23 at any point whether it should give its approval or not to the decision
24 of the co-ordinating board?
25 A. The Main Staff did take part in the process before the
1 co-ordinating body reached its decision. If it received the body's
2 decision, then it was supposed to implement it, not to give its approval
3 if the decision had already been made.
4 Q. Thank you. Are you able to tell us how the Main Staff knew what
5 some humanitarian organisation was requesting and how did it know that?
6 A. The Main Staff would receive information or the request from the
7 co-ordinating body.
8 Q. Thank you. And the co-ordinator of the co-ordinating body of the
9 Main Staff, did they have any influence or effect on that decision?
10 Thank you.
11 A. The co-ordinator had any influence only in the area of control
12 and to indicate whether certain routes were safe for passage.
13 Q. Thank you. When you're talking about security, your department
14 for civilian affairs, did it have information as to how and in what way
15 the inhabitants acted towards the convoys that were passing through the
16 territory of Republika Srpska or the territory which was controlled by
17 the enemy? Thank you.
18 A. There were revolts by the inhabitants in some areas opposing the
19 passage of the humanitarian aid convoys through the territory under the
20 control of the Muslim Croat forces or to the territory under the control
21 of the Muslim Croat forces, especially in the direction of Tesanj towards
22 Travnik and also in the direction of Zepa and Srebrenica.
23 Q. Are you able to tell us why the inhabitants demonstrated this
24 kind of attitude towards the convoys that were supplying the Muslim Croat
25 federation territory through the territory of Republika Srpska? Thank
2 A. The combat actions with soldiers who were from the families at
3 the line of separation were killed, wounded, from certain places in the
4 territory of the Army of Republika Srpska. There were incursions by
5 groups or small groups that were carrying out different massacres. This
6 is the first thing.
7 The second thing is during a certain period there was no aid from
8 those organisations distributed to the population of Republika Srpska.
9 So they were dissatisfied.
10 Q. Thank you. Are you talking about the period when there were
11 sanctions imposed by the United Nations and by humanitarian organisations
12 imposed by countries that were opposed, and they were imposed on
13 Republika Srpska?
14 A. Yes, this does refer to that period. I stress that Serbia also
15 had imposed sanctions, whereby the humanitarian situation in
16 Republika Srpska was even more difficult.
17 Q. Thank you. Are you able to tell the Trial Chamber how the
18 Main Staff dealt with this resistance by the inhabitants since they were
19 those that they were not in friendly relations with but they were
20 receiving humanitarian assistance? Thank you.
21 A. The Main Staff took all measures, including escorts of the
22 convoys, up to the line of confrontation, and then in some cases also the
23 civilian police participated where this was deemed necessary, such as was
24 the case in the 1st Krajina Corps where the convoys moved along a longer
25 route from Gradiska through Banja Luka, Jajce and towards Travnik.
1 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Tolimir, I think we must have our first break
2 now and we will resume at 11.00.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I would just like to
4 give you an explanation. I am obliged to tell Mr. Vanderpuye that today
5 he will be able to begin his cross-examination of this witness. This is
6 something that I promised yesterday. We are going to finish in the next
7 session. Thank you.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much for this information. It is
9 appreciated. We adjourn.
10 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
11 [The witness stands down]
12 [The witness takes the stand]
13 --- On resuming at 11.02 a.m.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Before we continue with the examination of the
15 witness, I would just shortly raise one matter. The parties will be
16 aware of the fact that the Defence in the Perisic case urgently
17 requested, yesterday afternoon, access to confidential material in our
19 We all realise that in their case it is a very urgent matter.
20 Therefore, I would kindly ask the parties if they are in a position to
21 respond to that orally tomorrow morning and to give us their position on
22 this requested so that we can address that, we, as a Chamber, address
23 this matter by filing as soon as possible.
24 Would that be possible for both parties to give oral submissions
25 tomorrow morning at the outset of the hearing tomorrow morning?
1 Mr. Vanderpuye.
2 MR. VANDERPUYE: Yes, Mr. President. Of course, we'll be
3 prepared to address the Trial Chamber.
4 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
5 And the Defence?
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. The
7 Defence is also prepared. We can even say now that we are in agreement
8 that everything that was requested can be disclosed, so you can consider
9 that we have stated our opinion now instead of tomorrow.
10 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much for that.
11 In this case, I would ask the Prosecution if they are in a
12 position to ...
13 [Prosecution Counsel Confer]
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: First I want to continue my sentence. I just
15 gave you the opportunity to consult. I wanted to ask if you are in a
16 position to make an oral submission already today, either now or at the
17 end of today's hearing?
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: We may be able to do it at the end of the
19 hearing, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much. That is very helpful.
21 So if we have resolved this problem, then we should continue the
22 examination of the witness.
23 Mr. Tolimir, you have the floor again.
24 Just a moment, Judge Mindua has a question.
25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Witness, I would like to go back
1 to something that was said just before the break, page 23, line 23 of
2 today's transcript.
3 We can see and read in English the following sentence that:
4 "... the co-ordinator of the co-ordinating body of the
5 Main Staff ..."
6 That's what you said. So I just wanted to get a clarification.
7 Are you saying that within the co-ordination commission, which belonged
8 to the government, there was a representative of the Main Staff and that
9 person also had the title of a co-ordinator? Is that what you wanted to
10 say or is there a mistake in the transcript?
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Kralj, you can see that -- the relevant part
12 on the screen now, page 23, line 23. Perhaps the Court Usher can assist
13 the witness.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He was a co-ordinator representing
15 the Main Staff for co-operation with the co-ordinating body.
16 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well. So what you are
17 telling us is that this is not a VRS co-ordination commission, but it's
18 rather the co-ordinator who is the representative of the Main Staff
19 within the co-ordination commission; is that it?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that is correct.
21 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Kralj, I have another question I would like
23 to put to you. Just before the break, and this is on page 24, lines 19
24 and 20, you said the following, and it will appear to the screen in a
25 moment. You said, and I quote:
1 "There were incursions by groups or small groups that were
2 carrying out different massacres."
3 Could you give us some more details about what you were saying?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This was in the territory of
5 Srebrenica going towards or directed at Kravica with Muslim groups making
6 incursions into the territory, although the territory was already under
7 the control of UNPROFOR.
8 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And what do you mean by "different massacres"?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Individual killings, either of
10 civilians or members of the army.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: To understand your statement in full, is it
12 correct that you are saying Muslim groups encircled Serb groups and
13 comitted massacres? Is that what you are saying?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that is it. There were sudden
15 attacks of small groups which could attack and pull-out unhindered.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: In which time-period did that happen?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In the course of 1994.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
19 Mr. Tolimir, thank you for your patience. Please carry on.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
21 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
22 Q. During the last session we discussed the issue of humanitarian
23 organisations and problems which arose when they crossed RS territory to
24 reach federation territory which was under Muslim BH Army control, and
25 they provided supplies to them. Can you tell us something more about the
1 problems you have just discussed with us, which occurred between May and
2 late June 1995? Thank you.
3 A. There were continued attacks on the units and civilians which
4 came from the territory of Srebrenica. Srebrenica at the time was under
5 UNPROFOR control. There were several such instances, including groups,
6 individuals, reconnaissance activities, and killings of both civilians
7 and soldiers.
8 Q. Thank you. Kindly tell us whether this situation in which the
9 groups attacked civilians and soldiers in RS territory and in the
10 protected areas had an impact on the overall situation with the convoys
11 which supplied them and UNPROFOR which protected them before they
12 returned to the territory which was controlled by their forces?
13 A. It was the basic reason why the population in those areas
14 objected to both UNPROFOR and the convoys.
15 Q. Thank you. While we are on this topic, tell us if you know
16 whether there were such attacks on the Main Staff, on the roads, and
17 villages? Were any villages torched by the sabotage groups which came
18 from the territory of the Muslim Croat federation or from Srebrenica and
20 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could the accused be asked
21 to turn the microphone towards him, not away from him? We have trouble
22 hearing him.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Kralj, did you hear the interpreter's note?
24 Please turn the microphone -- turn the microphones toward your head so
25 that the interpreter's can hear you better.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The accused, please. Not
2 the witness.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I made a mistake. I thought it was an address to
4 Mr. Kralj. It was an address to you, Mr. Tolimir. Yes, thank you.
5 Mr. Kralj, now your answer, please.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There were attacks on the
7 Main Staff of the VRS which were repelled successfully. There were
8 attacks on the village as well. The attack on the Main Staff of the VRS
9 came from the direction of Zepa.
10 MR. TOLIMIR: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Kralj. Tell us, please, whether there were
12 problems with convoy movements across RS territory during the bombing
13 campaign in May 1995 and later? And I have in mind the bombing campaign
14 against the RS.
15 A. General, sir, there were no problems. During the bombing,
16 everyone stopped moving about, whether such movements had been announced,
17 planned or not.
18 Q. Thank you. Can you tell the Chamber who was it that halted all
19 convoy movement in May 1995?
20 A. It was halted by those who sent the convoys. It was not the
21 co-ordinating body but the UNHCR and other organisations. They simply
22 did not see their plans through; although, they did not even notify us
23 that they would give up on their plans in the first place.
24 Q. Thank you. Between May and July 1995 when the attack on
25 Srebrenica occurred, was it a frequent occurrence or was it only specific
1 to May 1995?
2 A. It was a common occurrence and it did not only take place in May.
3 Q. Thank you. Did it also take place during the bombing of the RS
4 by NATO, when different facilities were bombed in RS territory in August
5 and September 1995?
6 A. There were no convoys arriving during August and September. And
7 especially so when there were immediate air-strikes.
8 Q. Thank you. Did you have problems communicating because the relay
9 stations and other facilities were destroyed by bombing, and how did you
10 co-ordinate your work with the co-ordinating body and UNPROFOR in terms
11 of being able to relay messages?
12 A. Due to bombardment and the fact that the relay stations were
13 destroyed, there were no telephone lines. There were no other electronic
14 means to communicate, so we established courier connections. In other
15 words, we sent a vehicle with a courier to transport mail on a daily
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Kralj, for your answers. Can you tell us whether
18 your department for co-operation and civilian affairs, irrespective of
19 the bombing and other problems, always treated UNPROFOR and the
20 humanitarian organisations in the same way?
21 A. We were professional. It was our task to communicate with them,
22 irrespective of what was going on. Nothing changed in our relationship
23 towards them, in particular.
24 Q. Thank you. Could you feel any change the way these international
25 bodies and organisations saw the VRS and RS population in terms of how
1 they continued providing humanitarian assistance?
2 A. One could clearly see that they were afraid. Later on, when
3 things got back to normal, that co-operation improved again.
4 Q. Can you tell us what period exactly it is? What month and year?
5 A. Following August and September 1995.
6 Q. Thank you. Mr. Kralj, in the introductory part yesterday you
7 said that you attended some talks in Vienna, and during your testimony
8 you mentioned Vienna, Tolimir, and Talic. Let us try and clear it up.
9 Can you tell us what the talks in Vienna were about, the ones you and
10 Tolimir participated in and what were the activities of General Talic in
11 Vienna before he was arrested?
12 A. Your Honour, I was a member of a negotiating team alongside
13 General Tolimir when the implementation of Annex 1D of the Dayton Accords
14 was concerned, in particular Articles II and IV. Article II had to do
15 with confidence building measures between the VRS and BH Army and the
16 Federation and the RS. It also had to do with the quantities and types
17 of weapons and control, mutual control, of those assets that the two
18 armed forces were entitled to under the article. Article IV included
19 some other participants in the talks so as to include Croatia and the
20 then-FRY. The talks took place under OSCE auspices. That's the first
22 The second part regarding General Talic. Together with him, I
23 took part in a number of working meetings at a higher level, including
24 army commanders in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as ministers of defence.
25 We visited Brussels, London, and the last stop was Vienna when we talked
1 to the OSCE again. I wasn't present then, as that was the occasion when
2 General Talic was arrested.
3 Q. Thank you, Mr. Kralj. Can you tell the Chamber the month and
4 year of the Vienna talks that you participated in with General Tolimir?
5 A. I think it was in late 1995.
6 Q. Thank you. Was an agreement signed as a result of those talks
7 between the warring parties in Bosnia-Herzegovina and a number of
8 different former Yugoslav republics?
9 A. All those meetings resulted in the signing of an agreement, which
10 was finalised by an agreement on the reduction of weapons assets in --
11 which in its final stage include Croatia and the FRY as well.
12 Q. Did you take part in the implementation of the signed agreements,
13 and can you tell us when the implementation activities pertaining to the
14 agreements were undertaken?
15 A. The first agreement we signed was the one under Article II. Once
16 it was signed, it began being implemented right away. Once the
17 Article IV agreement was signed and once the arms verification centre was
18 established, I acted as the leader of escort team on the RS side. We
19 received Federation inspections as well as inspections from Croatia,
20 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Under
21 certain procedure which was arranged with the OSCE and the parties in
22 Vienna, our inspections, in turn, were received by the armed forces of
23 Croatia, the FRY, Bosnia and Herzegovina, although it did not have its
24 single armed force but they, too, wanted to be a side to the agreement.
25 In Vienna all information was exchanged about the weapons of each
1 of the sides in keeping with the agreement. I was often present at such
2 occasions with General Tolimir.
3 Q. Thank you. Tell us, now, did the activities to implement the
4 disarmament agreement and arms control continue throughout 1996 in
5 Bosnia-Herzegovina and in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia? Thank you.
6 A. 1996 was a year of -- marked by activities under these
7 agreements, especially activities aimed at the reduction of the quantity
8 of weapons. There were more weapons than envisaged by the agreement. In
9 the agreement there were specific limits with regard to calibre, the
10 number of pieces, and so on, that each party was entitled to have.
11 Q. Thank you. Did you and I, as RS negotiators, report regularly on
12 everything that we comitted to on behalf of the RS with regard to the
13 reduction of the quantity of weapons? Did we report on that regularly to
14 both military and civilian authorities? Thank you.
15 A. That was a very topical matter during that period. After any
16 action taken by the commission in Vienna, a report was drafted that was
17 sent to both the Main Staff and the civilian authorities of the RS.
18 Q. Thank you. How much of your time did that take? I mean the
19 preparations for the implementation of the agreement within the RS?
20 Thank you.
21 A. It took a lot of our time. There was a need to establish a
22 separate group within the department to deal with these matters, such as
23 the preparation of information, the forwarding of information about
24 weapons, the collecting, and later a separate body had to be established
25 for these inspections and for receiving inspectors.
1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Kralj, for coming to this Tribunal to testify
2 about past events. Thank you for replies you gave. The Defence has no
3 more questions for you.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to thank you,
5 Mr. President. We can now give the Prosecution the opportunity to
6 examine the witness.
7 I would just kindly ask for an opportunity to see the witness
8 after this examination later on in the Detention Unit, because the
9 witness has expressed such a wish. Thank you.
10 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you, Mr. Tolimir. There are two matters:
12 One is that there is still one document on the screen. This is
13 65 ter 1787. Are you tendering it?
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you for reminding us,
15 Mr. President.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It will be received.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document shall be assigned
18 Exhibit D340. Thank you.
19 JUDGE FLUEGGE: And the other matter, you asked for the
20 opportunity to meet Witness Kralj. This will be decided at a later
21 stage, and we will come back to that.
22 Now it's the turn for the Prosecution for their
24 Mr. Vanderpuye, you have the floor.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning to you,
1 Your Honours. Good morning everyone.
2 Cross-examination by Mr. Vanderpuye:
3 Q. And good morning to you, Mr. Kralj. My name is Kweku Vanderpuye.
4 On behalf of the Prosecution I am going to put some questions to you in
5 respect of your direct examination which has just been completed by
6 General Tolimir. If I ask you anything that's unclear, let me know, and
7 I will try to rephrase it or state it in a way that we can better
8 understand one another. And if there is anything you would like me to
9 repeat, also let me know, and I will do the same.
10 Let me just start by asking you a couple of questions.
11 General Tolimir just mentioned that you had expressed a desire to see him
12 following your testimony here today. That's correct, isn't it?
13 A. I expressed the desire to visit him at the Detention Unit, and I
14 submitted the documents required for that. I did that on Monday.
15 Q. When was the last time you saw General Tolimir before you had
16 been testifying here?
17 A. Some 15 years ago.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic.
19 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, just so there is no
20 misunderstanding, as far as I know both Mr. Tolimir and Mr. Kralj
21 submitted the required documents for a visit tomorrow rather than today.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] After the end of the trial.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think this is only to be considered for a time
24 after your testimony.
25 Mr. Vanderpuye, please carry on.
1 MR. VANDERPUYE:
2 Q. You said that the last time you saw General Tolimir was some
3 15 years ago. Have you been in contact with members of his Defence
4 before testifying here?
5 A. My first contact with Aleksandar was a telephone conversation in
6 which he asked me if I would be willing to testify in this trial. That
7 was some 20 days ago.
8 Q. All right. Now you've indicated your first contact. How many
9 contacts did you have with, when you say Aleksandar, I assume you mean
10 Mr. Gajic, before testifying in these proceedings?
11 A. When I heard that it would be about a subject matter with which I
12 am familiar, I agreed. Upon arriving to The Hague on the 21st, I had
13 consultations with him. That was on a Saturday and Sunday.
14 Q. When you say you had consultations with him, what do you mean by
16 A. The gentleman acquainted me with the procedures applied by this
17 Tribunal and with the parts of the indictment - he didn't go into
18 details, however - and he said what the hearing would be about. I
19 replied that I had previously testified in General Miletic's trial. I
20 understood that the subject matter to be dealt with was the work of the
21 civilian affairs department and that the most important point would be
22 the prevention of the passage of humanitarian aid convoys.
23 Q. All right. So you discussed the basic subject matter of your
24 testimony with Mr. Gajic; is that fair to say?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. And you also informed Mr. Gajic that you had testified in the
2 case in the Defence of General Miletic back in 2008 December; right?
3 A. Yes. I told him that I had testified, but I didn't go into the
5 Q. Did you have an opportunity to review your testimony in that
6 case, that is the case of Prosecutor versus Popovic et al., your
7 testimony from 3 through 5 December 2008 in the Defence of Radivoje
8 Miletic, one of the accused in that case?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Have you reviewed that testimony since you testified in 2008?
11 A. No, I haven't.
12 Q. Can you confirm to this Trial Chamber that that testimony that
13 you gave was as truthful and accurate as it could have been in the
14 circumstances at the time?
15 A. The testimony was truthful, given the circumstances at the time.
16 I believe I would give the same testimony even today.
17 Q. That's helpful to know. General Tolimir asked you a lot of
18 questions about the facts and circumstances surrounding the events in
19 1995 and, indeed, periods beyond and preceding that, and you seem to have
20 a pretty good recollection of some of that material. Let me ask you,
21 Mr. Kralj, can you tell the Trial Chamber when it was that you first
22 heard that thousands of Muslim men from Srebrenica had been murdered in
23 July 1995 by Serb forces?
24 A. Your Honours, it was published in the media, the BH Federation
25 media. I saw it on television. And I saw it only a few days after the
1 alleged events.
2 Q. When would that be? The end of July? Beginning of August? Can
3 you give us some indication.
4 A. In late July.
5 Q. All right. Let me ask you a couple of questions about your
6 background. Now, you were assigned to the VRS Main Staff I think you
7 indicated on the 3rd of November, 1994; is that correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You came there from the 1st Krajina Corps?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. While you were in the Krajina Corps, you performed the functions
12 of a liaison officer with international organisations and UNPROFOR and
13 the like; right?
14 A. I was a member of the civilian affairs sector of the corps and
15 that was their duty. That is correct.
16 Q. When you went to the Main Staff, you worked there as an officer
17 in the sector for civilian affairs; is that correct?
18 A. I was an officer and an interpreter. Actually, that was my main
19 duty, to interpret into and from English. And I was assigned to the
20 civilian affairs sector, headed by Colonel Djurdjic, to work there.
21 Q. Colonel Djurdjic headed up the civilian affairs sector. You were
22 one of the members of that sector. Did you work with Colonel Pandzic as
24 A. I also collaborated with Colonel Pandzic.
25 Q. Besides the three of you, who else worked in that sector?
1 A. Let me just clarify. Colonel Pandzic did not belong to that
2 sector. He was a chief of aviation. We only collaborated with him
3 concerning UNPROFOR helicopter sorties toward protected zones, so he did
4 not belong to that sector. He was chief of aviation.
5 Q. Thank you for clarifying that. Who else worked in the sector?
6 A. When I came there, there were just Colonel Djurdjic and me.
7 Q. Was that the case throughout your tenure in that sector, or did
8 that change?
9 A. The sector was later reinforced with personnel in the framework
10 of the implementation of Articles 4 and 2 of the agreement that we spoke
12 Q. In 1996?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. So you collaborated with Colonel Pandzic who was a member of the
15 airforce. Who else did you collaborate with?
16 A. I personally was at the disposal of all those who submitted a
17 request to Colonel Djurdjic for an interpreter at meetings. However, the
18 priorities were clearly defined. The commander had the highest priority
19 and then it went further down along the chain of command. That applied
20 in the case of simultaneous meetings.
21 Q. Your sector liaised with international organisations; correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. UNPROFOR?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. UNHCR?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And other international organisations and NGOs; right?
3 A. Correct.
4 Q. You also had substantive responsibilities beyond being an
5 interpreter; right?
6 A. In that sector to which I was assigned to work, my duty was to
7 get acquainted with all documents and work procedures to be able to do
8 administrative work during the absence of Colonel Djurdjic,
9 administrative work that had to do with the functioning of the sector.
10 Q. All right. Well, that administrative work had to do with, for
11 example, inspecting check-points - right? - in relation to the movement
12 of convoy material?
13 A. Yes, in a way.
14 Q. "Yes, in a way." What do you mean by that?
15 A. We followed the problems that occurred at the check-points and
16 issued relevant guidelines or instructions in order to improve things.
17 Q. You said yesterday that your role was to inspect the check-point,
18 draw up a short report as to whether the instructions were abided by,
19 that you were authorised to instruct personnel on how to communicate with
20 convoy members in an appropriate way. You remember saying that?
21 A. I remember. That was my role in the 1st Krajina Corps where I
22 was liaison officer, and I was present both in the control of
23 check-points and I was involved in escorting convoys through RS territory
24 but that was there. That was not the case when I was with the
25 Main Staff.
1 Q. I see. So when you were with the Main Staff, you didn't engage
2 whatsoever in the administration of check-points throughout, let's say,
4 A. No.
5 Q. So you had no idea how those convoys were actually being
6 administered; is that right? At the check-points, I should add.
7 A. I did have an idea how they were supposed to do it and I had an
8 idea of how they did it, but that was not my duty.
9 Q. Did you train members of the convoys of -- of check-points?
10 A. Could you please specify as to when and where?
11 Q. During the period of time that you were in the Main Staff, did
12 you participate in training members of these convoy inspection units?
13 A. No.
14 Q. You only did that in the Krajina Corps; is that right?
15 A. Yes. I did that initially during the time when a particular
16 check-point was being set up.
17 Q. And when you were in the Krajina Corps, you also made sure the
18 check-points were regularly reporting to the disposition of convoys -
19 right? - up the chain of command?
20 A. That was the duty of the unit manning the check-point. They had
21 means of communication, and in their combat report there was an item
22 about the situation in the territory which included the passage of
23 convoys, be it humanitarian or UNPROFOR convoys.
24 Q. I understand whose duty it was. My question is: Did you make
25 sure that that duty was carried out?
1 A. This was part of my job. I was maintaining records of all the
2 reports that would reach the command. The command was some 50 kilometres
3 away from the check-point, so I wasn't at the check-point all the time.
4 The reports would come to the command, to the sector for civilian
5 affairs, to Colonel Vujnovic and then he would issue assignments. And
6 then other than this job, I also had the job of an interpreter which was
7 quite intensive work.
8 Q. While you were at the Main Staff, who undertook those
9 responsibilities with respect to the personnel in the administration of
10 check-points regarding convoys from -- either from UNPROFOR or
11 humanitarian aid sources?
12 A. This was Colonel Djurdjic's main work and his main task.
13 Q. And the reports that were generated in respect of the movement of
14 these convoys at the various check-points, those reports were sent up to
15 the Main Staff, weren't they?
16 A. That is correct.
17 Q. And those reports, when they were sent to the Main Staff, were
18 reviewed by officers of the Main Staff; correct?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Did anybody review these reports that came from the check-points
21 to the Main Staff, either directly or indirectly?
22 A. All the reports -- actually, I would like to ask you to clarify a
23 little bit. I said that the report on the work and the passage at the
24 check-point from the unit where the check-point was, was part of the
25 combat report, it was a paragraph in it, and it would arrive to the duty
1 officer. Those combat reports were sent to the commander for his review.
2 Colonel Djurdjic would read what was necessary from those reports, and if
3 there was something of interest for him, good or bad, he would note that
5 Q. All right. So Colonel Djurdjic would review these reports, yes?
6 A. The duty officer would review them and the duty operations
8 Q. Djurdjic would read what was necessary from those reports; right?
9 A. That is correct.
10 Q. The reports were addressed to the commander - right? - as part of
11 a combat report?
12 A. That is correct.
13 Q. They would be reviewed by the commander, or at least they were
14 intended to be reviewed by the commander; right?
15 A. The commander would usually review all the reports, all the
16 combat reports.
17 Q. What about the deputy commander, General Milovanovic?
18 A. General Milovanovic also reviewed the reports. However, in
19 practice it turned out that they were at the command post very rarely at
20 the same time.
21 Q. What about the assistant commanders?
22 A. The assistant commanders dealt with issues from their line of
23 work from the reports.
24 Q. What about General Tolimir?
25 A. General Tolimir was assistant commander for intelligence and
1 security affairs. So he was dealing with issues that he was responsible
3 Q. He was a member of the joint commission that you testified about,
4 wasn't he?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. You identified his initials and signature on documents relating
7 to the disposition of convoys; isn't that true?
8 A. Correct.
9 Q. He submitted proposals to the commander as to what to do with
10 these convoy requests from UNPROFOR in the documents you've identified;
12 A. He submitted proposals. He would give proposals, if that was
13 what was asked of him, but he wasn't obliged to have an overview of all
14 the convoys. Milos also could have submitted that to the commander.
15 Q. Well, Milos did, didn't he?
16 A. If there were any disputed issues, if he noticed any, before
17 giving it to the commander, he could consult with General Tolimir. These
18 could be matters from the domain of the joint military commission, and
19 this is what he did regularly whenever he had the opportunity.
20 Q. What I want to know from you, Mr. Kralj, is whether or not
21 General Tolimir in his capacity or in his -- given his involvement in
22 convoy issues reviewed reports containing the disposition of those
23 convoys that were sent to the Main Staff? And I don't want you to guess.
24 If you know.
25 A. I do know. I am not guessing.
1 Q. What's your answer, then?
2 A. Djurdjic would review the report. If he thought that something
3 was not clear which had to be submitted for the commander's signature or
4 placed in his documentation, if he had the opportunity he could consult
5 General Tolimir, but he was not obliged nor was the procedure such that
6 he had to take a document first for General Tolimir's review and then to
7 the commander.
8 Q. Mr. Kralj, my question is pretty straight forward. You said that
9 there were documents concerning the convoys and the disposition of the
10 convoys that were sent to the Main Staff and they were contained in a
11 combat report. These were reviewed by the commander or deputy commander;
13 A. These were reports where the activities of the check-point were
14 noted and they were part of the combat report.
15 Q. That's right. What I want to know is if General Tolimir reviewed
16 those reports concerning those activities.
17 A. He didn't have to do it, but he did it if he felt it was
19 Q. He, General Milovanovic, and General Mladic needed to know what
20 the disposition of those convoys were in order to frame how to address
21 requests and other issues concerning future convoys; right?
22 A. All three of them, as part of their duties, did deal with
23 convoys. General Mladic reviewed each item in detail and would ask for
24 Colonel Djurdjic's suggestions on numerous issues in order to be able to
25 make a proper decision. If General Mladic was not there, the same thing
1 could be done by General Milovanovic.
2 Q. And if General Milovanovic wasn't there, the same thing could be
3 done by General Tolimir; right, Mr. Kralj?
4 A. Well, he couldn't unless the commander authorised him to do that.
5 Q. All right. So if he were authorised, he could do it?
6 A. He could in terms of issuing instructions to Djurdjic. Miletic
7 substituted for General Milovanovic along the chain of command, so he was
8 the one who could pass the document on down to the units. I don't
9 remember General Tolimir signing any kind of decision unless it was
10 something at the request of the commander or Colonel Djurdjic.
11 Q. When you say "signing a decision," what do you mean by that?
12 Because you probably will recall that you identified a document where a
13 request was cut in half by 50 per cent and that was signed by
14 General Mladic and the suggestion came from - I believe it was -
15 Colonel Djurdjic. And then there was another document you identified
16 where General Tolimir contradicted General Mladic's "no" with a "yes" and
17 indicated that the request was in conformity with a prior understanding.
18 Do you remember that, Mr. Kralj?
19 A. I recall it very well with the following observation: The "no"
20 in the upper right-hand corner was not written by Tolimir but it was
21 written by Mladic, and then when he consulted with Tolimir then he
22 approved it. I didn't see General Tolimir's initials next to that "no"
23 in the -- that corner. Tolimir even said that these were quantities that
24 were agreed per week and that this fitted in with that, and then in the
25 light of that General Mladic changed his opinion, allowed the convoy to
1 pass, and crossed out that "no."
2 Q. That might have been a translation issue, but that's exactly what
3 I was referring to. And in that particular document, there is no
4 indication whatsoever that General Tolimir consulted with General Mladic;
5 right? That's an inference that you drew.
6 A. At the top General Mladic was not mentioned but the document
7 went -- actually, General Tolimir was not referred to. The document was
8 sent directly to General Mladic for his approval, but when the
9 clarification was made that these were weekly agreed quantities, this
10 could have been done only by telephone or -- because General Tolimir took
11 part in these commissions, so General Tolimir exerted his influence on
12 General Mladic to change his opinion about that convoy so that convoy or
13 those convoys did proceed.
14 Q. Well, let me just get right to the --
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Vanderpuye, I see Mr. Gajic on his feet.
16 Mr. Gajic.
17 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I think that it would
18 be good in situations like this to show the witness the document, or at
19 least to refer to the exhibit number so -- the exhibit number because
20 then later it will be very difficult for us to follow the transcript.
21 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think we all remember this document we have
22 seen yesterday on the screen, and it's up to the Prosecutor to decide if
23 he wants to show the document at this stage or perhaps later.
24 Mr. Vanderpuye, please carry on.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President. I may do that.
1 Q. But let me just ask this question first, Mr. Kralj: You were
2 examined in the Popovic case, as you recall, on December 4th, 2008. You
3 were asked a question concerning an exhibit which related to an UNPROFOR
4 document, and you were asked this question and you gave the following
5 answer. This is at page 29280 of the transcript. And it begins at
6 line 23 on that page. And I'll read through the next page through
7 line 6. It says:
8 "And General Nicolai apparently sent a request to
9 General Tolimir, and it's seen between brackets that there is
10 General Mladic mentioned between brackets. Did General Tolimir, about
11 these humanitarian issues and the UNPROFOR convoys, did he replace
12 General Mladic for these purposes?"
13 You gave this answer:
14 "General Tolimir was involved in the procedure to approve convoys
15 and to meet with UNPROFOR on the issue of convoys, and he would be
16 replaced by General Milovanovic. In the absence of General Milovanovic,
17 General Tolimir could also issue approvals."
18 My question to you was, if I can find it on the screen, whether
19 General Tolimir could issue approvals? You gave me a pretty long answer.
20 Is the answer to that question "yes "as you testified to a couple of
21 years ago?
22 A. What just needed to be added is in the form of a proposal because
23 since he was a member of the joint central commission, which we haven't
24 mentioned here, he was the best versed person in the procedures that
25 should have been implemented by the Main Staff.
1 Q. All right. I think I have my answer.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Vanderpuye, for the sake of the record, you
3 were referring to the testimony of Mr. Kralj in the Popovic case?
4 MR. VANDERPUYE: Yes, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I see this document on your list of --
6 MR. VANDERPUYE: It is --
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: -- probably-to-be-used documents in this case.
8 MR. VANDERPUYE: It is on the list of exhibits.
9 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You should put the number on the record so that
10 that can be clearer reference to it.
11 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I will do
12 that. It is 65 ter 7583. I would have to add it to the list of exhibits
13 because it wasn't on the original 65 ter list.
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: If you intend to use it further --
15 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE FLUEGGE: -- as a document.
17 Please carry on.
18 MR. VANDERPUYE:
19 Q. You said General Tolimir was the best versed person in respect of
20 the procedures to be implemented by the Main Staff; right?
21 A. Yes, in relation or compared to other generals.
22 Q. Okay. He was informed about what was going on in terms of convoy
23 requests and the movement of convoys both humanitarian and military in
24 the form of UNPROFOR; right?
25 A. He was informed more about the things that related to work of the
1 joint commission.
2 Q. Okay. You testified a little bit earlier that the Main Staff
3 issued certain orders regarding the manner and intensity of convoy
4 checks. You remember that?
5 A. Meaning the manner and intensity of the passage of convoys?
6 Q. Well, I suppose how they would be checked, yes.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. They did that during the period of time that you were in the
9 sector for civilian affairs?
10 A. The convoys were passing much earlier. Before I came, the
11 procedure for that was already established.
12 Q. Yes. My question is: Was that occurring during the period of
13 time that you were in the Main Staff?
14 A. For UNPROFOR convoys, yes.
15 Q. What about for humanitarian convoys? Did the Main Staff not
16 issue orders with respect to how to manage those convoys?
17 A. At the time I was in the 1st Krajina Corps, I would implement
18 those orders or part of the orders.
19 Q. As far as you're aware during the period of time that you were a
20 member of the Main Staff in the sector for civilian affairs, did the
21 Main Staff issue orders in relation to the manner and intensity of
22 checking convoys both UNPROFOR and humanitarian aid convoys?
23 A. No.
24 Q. All right. So you never saw an order issued by the Main Staff in
25 relation to checking convoys or how to check them concerning either one
1 of those types of convoys or one or the other?
2 A. I had access to the documentation maintained by Djurdjic, and, as
3 needed, I could look at everything that was in the archive that was of
4 interest for my specific work. I already said that I also did
5 interpreting work, and, if needed, I would be also jumping in to stand in
6 for Djurdjic.
7 Q. Is that a "yes," Mr. Kralj?
8 A. Well, we could say yes. I could find in the documentation the
9 things that I was interested in.
10 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, I see it's time for the break,
11 and I think now is as good as time as any.
12 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Indeed. We must have our second break now, and
13 we will resume at 1.00.
14 --- Recess taken at 12.31 p.m.
15 [The witness stands down]
16 [The witness takes the stand]
17 --- On resuming at 1.01 p.m.
18 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Vanderpuye, one personal observation. The
19 witness is here to testify and to give as much information as he can. I
20 observed that you -- some of your questions were put to him in a quite
21 aggressive tone. I think there is, at the moment, no need for that. You
22 should be -- you should consider that. Please carry on.
23 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you very much, Mr. President.
24 Q. Good afternoon to you, Mr. Kralj.
25 A. Good afternoon.
1 Q. You received certain intelligence concerning what was going on
2 with the convoys on the ground and that would have been in 1995; is that
4 A. Can you specify what intelligence?
5 Q. Information about the quantities or the quality of the cargo that
6 was being transported, for example.
7 A. Do you have in mind permissible or impermissible cargo? Any kind
8 of regular reporting? Could you please clarify.
9 Q. Did you receive intelligence information about impermissible
11 A. In the department we had some intelligence about how the
12 humanitarian aid transported by UNPROFOR convoys or UNHCR convoys was
13 being distributed in the enclave. Is this the intelligence you had in
15 Q. It is. I just wanted to know what intelligence you had regarding
16 the convoy, so this is part of it. Did you have other intelligence as
18 A. We were not acquainted with other intelligence, save for pieces
19 of information pertaining directly to the convoys so that such activities
20 would be monitored and prevented.
21 Q. Okay. And you got this information, that is the intelligence
22 concerning these convoys, the improper use of convoys, as it were, from
23 Colonel Djurdjic within your unit; right?
24 A. He would always briefly tell me what was going on.
25 Q. And Colonel Djurdjic received this intelligence information from
1 the intelligence service; is that right?
2 A. Colonel Djurdjic occasionally acted as the duty team leader, and
3 as such was privy to everything that was going on when he was on duty.
4 He received certain reports from units concerning intelligence work, and
5 it was part of regular combat reporting.
6 Q. And these units that provided information as a result of regular
7 combat reporting, were they part of the intelligence service of the VRS?
8 A. The intelligence service has an organisational structure of its
9 own. I'm not familiar with it save for the intelligence that pertained
10 directly to the convoys which found its way into combat reports.
11 Q. Let me ask it this way, maybe. At transcript page 18293 of these
12 proceedings, lines 9 through 18, you were asked this question and you
13 gave this answer. And this is by General Tolimir:
14 "Thank you. Were you aware of information about abuses of
15 humanitarian aid convoys in the Srebrenica, Zepa, and Gorazde enclaves?
16 Did your office have this information?"
17 And your answer was:
18 "Our office received relevant information to the effect that
19 certain quantities of assistance were being delivered to the army of the
20 Muslims in Srebrenica. They didn't specify concrete quantities. And
21 Colonel Djurdjic, since I was busy with other tasks, always used the
22 opportunity to inform me about these cases. I didn't receive information
23 as such. I received information from Colonel Djurdjic, and he, in turn,
24 received the appropriate information from the intelligence service."
25 What I'd like to know is when you made the reference in this
1 answer to the intelligence service, what you mean?
2 A. I had in mind such information as was contained in the combat
3 reports; that is to say, information from the field that was included in
4 the combat reports. Colonel Djurdjic could have been informed orally at
5 the meetings he attended by security organs. It doesn't have to mean
6 that he received separate written reports about the goings on with
7 convoys. He didn't receive such written reports. He received comments
8 or suggestions about the convoys and the humanitarian aid destined to go
9 to the enclaves. We do not have a paper trail of any reports. It's not
10 that the intelligence service was duty-bound to submit any reports to our
12 Q. Okay. The security organs that you mentioned - and I hope it's
13 translated correctly - but you did mention security organs in your
14 answer; is that correct?
15 A. Security organs deal with the activities of the enemy in our
16 territory. Intelligence organs deal with the activities of the enemy on
17 the other side, on their territory. Information concerning activities in
18 our territory and the incursions of such forces into our territory could
19 be dealt with or clarified by them for the sake of Colonel Djurdjic, and
20 he also saw such information in combat reports regularly. I earlier
21 mentioned and -- that one of the items in the combat reports was also
22 entitled: "Situation in the Territory."
23 Q. Just so that I am clear, and maybe it's just me, are you saying
24 that the information or some of the information that Colonel Djurdjic
25 received came from the security or intelligence organs?
1 A. Part of the information from the field was part of the combat
2 reports. And it was done by the people in the fields, not by any
3 particular organ or department of the Main Staff.
4 Q. All right. Now I am thoroughly confused. When you said in the
5 answer that I read back to you in your earlier testimony that
6 Colonel Djurdjic, in turn, received appropriate information from the
7 intelligence service, you're telling me that that has nothing to do with
8 intelligence or security organs of the VRS? Do I have that right?
9 A. It has nothing to do with any organs of the Main Staff. In any
10 combat report, one received summary information sent from the unit which
11 has its own security and intelligence organs. It was a regular way of
12 reporting by subordinate commands to the Main Staff of the VRS. Combat
13 reports were daily documents sent from each and every subordinate unit.
14 Q. Is there any particular reason why in response the
15 General Tolimir's question you said that Colonel Djurdjic received
16 information from intelligence -- from the intelligence service as opposed
17 to read it in a combat report or gained it from some other unknown
18 source? Is there any particular reason why you chose the term
19 "intelligence service"?
20 A. When it was necessary to provide clarifications based on the
21 information contained in a combat report, Colonel Djurdjic could turn to
22 the service to ask for additional information, and if the service deemed
23 it necessary, could provide it to him. That is what I meant. In combat
24 reports everything is put in summarised form as to the events which took
25 place, and if Colonel Djurdjic wanted to undertake specific measures, he
1 probably needed additional information.
2 Q. All right. Now, in this answer you've referred to "the service,"
3 what service are you referring to?
4 A. I've already said that the security service deals with internal
5 enemy in our territory, and the intelligence service conducts
6 intelligence work in enemy territory. If there was an event in
7 Srebrenica, for example, and such information was included in a combat
8 report and if colonel was unclear and needed additional information, he
9 could turn to the intelligence service and its head to see if he could
10 get additional information than the information contained in the report.
11 And it was up to them to decide whether to give it to him or not. They
12 are a closed-type organisation, and they only provide information on the
13 need-to-know basis and within a limit scope.
14 Q. All right. Thank you. I think I am clear on that now.
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Gajic.
16 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I did not wish to
17 intervene before the witness concluded. On page 57, the witness used the
18 term "intelligence service" once or twice, and I believe that there was a
19 confusion in the way it was recorded or interpreted.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: I think it's on the record, but you should be
21 more specific if you find a relevant sentence which was not properly
22 recorded. You may check that.
23 Mr. Gajic.
24 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. For example,
25 page 57, line 8, in the transcript, instead of "service" only there
1 should be "intelligence service."
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Are you referring to line 8?
3 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, of course, Mr. President. At
4 least in my LiveNote.
5 JUDGE FLUEGGE: It says there:
6 "... and if the service deemed it necessary, could provide it to
8 Are you referring to this sentence?
9 MR. GAJIC: [Interpretation] It's gone from my scene now, sorry.
10 I had in mind page 57, line 7:
11 [In English] "Colonel Djurdjic could turn to the...,"
12 [Interpretation] and then we should have "intelligence service," [In
13 English] "... to ask for additional information."
14 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you. I reads, I quote:
15 "Colonel Djurdjic could turn to the service to ask for additional
16 information, and if the service deemed it necessary, could provide it to
18 Mr. Kralj, could you -- you will recall what you have said in
19 this answer. Did you just refer to a service or a specific service by
20 providing this answer?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It should read "intelligence
22 service," although the mistake may be entirely my own.
23 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
24 Mr. Vanderpuye.
25 MR. VANDERPUYE: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Q. All right. I think I have my answer and I understand what you
2 said, Mr. Kralj. Let me take you to 1995, particularly in respect of the
3 processing of convoy requests. You distinguished for us the processing
4 of UNPROFOR convoy requests and humanitarian aid convoy requests
5 following the establishment of the co-ordinating -- the state or
6 government co-ordinating body for humanitarian aid. And there is a
7 difference, correct?
8 A. There is.
9 Q. Up until 14 March, 1995, UNPROFOR requests were dealt with by the
10 Main Staff of the VRS; correct?
11 A. Not only until the 14th of March, but later on as well.
12 Q. And they were dealt with in the process that you describe which
13 involved evaluating the nature and the content of the -- of the proposed
14 convoy materials; right?
15 A. Right.
16 Q. And I think we agree that that involved your unit as well as
17 other members of the Main Staff, including General Tolimir,
18 General Milovanovic, General Mladic, and General Miletic?
19 A. Not all of them took part in the decision-making process. Some
20 of them were included in the process from time to time, the overall
21 process, be it by providing proposals or by signing a document which had
22 already been decided on, or in the drafting of documents. It wasn't
23 necessary for the whole team to meet and decide on a particular document
24 or convoy.
25 Q. Okay. Colonel Djurdjic, your boss, also participated in this
1 process; right?
2 A. The colonel was the most competent person in the chain. Not the
3 chain, really, but he had the best expert knowledge of all in the
4 Main Staff when it came to humanitarian aid and UNPROFOR convoys. He
5 also held the greatest responsibility.
6 Q. You participated in this process, too. More than just shuffling
7 papers, you actually made suggestions on how to deal with particular
8 convoys, didn't you?
9 A. Only if I was involved in preparing a document when
10 Colonel Djurdjic was not present. In such cases, I followed the
11 procedure he otherwise would have.
12 Q. Okay. So on occasion you did make suggestions to the commander
13 or whoever was around to approve convoys in the absence of
14 Colonel Djurdjic?
15 A. I would put the documents in the pipeline. It wasn't necessary
16 to make suggestions if everything was clear. If there was no problem
17 with a particular document, and if there was enough time, I would include
18 it in the commander's mail. He would read it and return the document
19 with his own suggestions, approvals, or requests for additional
21 Q. Colonel Djurdjic could, and in fact did, make suggestions to the
22 commander on how to deal with specific convoy requests. That's right,
23 isn't it?
24 A. Colonel Djurdjic had an accurate register and was in a position
25 to give specific information to the commander or obtain such information
1 in the form of a proposal requested from him. Djurdjic didn't decide
2 what would pass and what wouldn't. He only provided information,
3 information requested by the commander, be it on previously transported
4 quantities or something else. The most common problem encountered was
5 the purpose of the equipment listed, so he had look for or ask for
6 additional information from the one who has submitted the request.
7 Mostly, it would be the UNPROFOR command. And they were known to
8 transport quite a quantity of goods they didn't need themselves.
9 MR. VANDERPUYE: If I could have 65 ter 5106, please, in e-court.
10 Q. Mr. Kralj, you can see here that this is a document from the
11 Main Staff dated 25 February 1995, and it concerns the disposition of a
12 convoy request. Do you see that there, sir?
13 A. I do.
14 Q. What I'd like to do is to take you to page 12 in the B/C/S and --
15 just a moment. I'll see if I can find it in the English. I understand
16 it's page 17 in the English.
17 Can you tell us what's written there in the handwriting?
18 MR. VANDERPUYE: If we could just blow up that portion.
19 Q. Can you read that out, Mr. Kralj?
20 A. It says:
21 "Kralj, why not?"
22 MR. VANDERPUYE: And if we could just zoom out in the B/C/S for a
24 Q. And we can see here the word "ne" in a circle with a question
25 mark and then crossed out. And I am sure you don't have a specific
1 recollection of this document because it's been a while, but next to the
2 circle with a crossed out "ne" appears to be "da" written in Cyrillic; is
3 that right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And who would have written that, if you can recall?
6 A. I cannot recall because there are no initials here, neither next
7 to the "yes" nor next to the "no," whoever wrote these words.
8 Q. Why would it have been addressed to you in this particular way as
9 concerns that element of the convoy request?
10 A. Because probably this document was submitted earlier since
11 somebody wrote "no," but there was no problem. And then there was a
12 question to me, "why not?" What's the problem? The document came back
13 by mail to clarify that issue, and maybe you have a -- the related
14 document which will show what happened because these were military
15 observers who took regular shifts. There was no problem, no reason not
16 to approve that. And when the commander reviewed it, he placed these
17 checkmarks. But then the question is if he really did review it, because
18 he would have initialed it.
19 This is an unusual situation. The date is 24 February. The
20 document was obviously returned, and the question was put to me, "Why
21 not?" Why not let this convoy go? I don't remember it. This was long
22 ago. I believe that this rotation was -- that this notation took place,
23 because, you know, the military observers come and stay for a time and
24 then are replaced by others.
25 Q. All right. I just want to know why this would be directed to
1 you. Would you have been the person who wrote "no"? Is that why it
2 would have been directed to you?
3 A. No. The reason was my presence in the office so I could check
4 why not, so I could see what the problem was, but the document is all
5 right. There is no reason not to let them rotate.
6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Kralj.
7 JUDGE FLUEGGE: May I ask the witness: Have you any idea who
8 wrote these words "Kralj, why not?" Whose handwriting is this?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's very difficult for me to
10 decipher because I had only just arrived and I was not yet familiar with
11 the structures or people's handwriting. Maybe somebody authorised by
12 General Mladic to sign a document, if necessary.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: You just said, "I had only just arrived," but
14 this is now 16 years ago. And after that point in time you gained some
15 experience. You don't recognise this handwriting?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At this moment, not really.
17 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you.
18 Mr. Vanderpuye.
19 MR. VANDERPUYE: If we could show the next page, please.
20 JUDGE FLUEGGE: One moment, please.
21 Mr. Tolimir.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Microphone not activated]
23 THE INTERPRETER: We cannot hear the accused.
24 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Please move the microphone towards yourself.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Microphone not activated]
1 THE INTERPRETER: It is no better.
2 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Something is wrong with your microphone. The
3 interpreters can't hear you at the moment. Perhaps you can use the other
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] [Microphone not activated] Thank
6 you, Mr. President.
7 The witness asked to see the first page containing a list of all
8 documents in this batch to check whether this document was dispatched or
9 not, so I kindly ask that it be shown to him so although it may turn out
10 that this discussion is actually pointless.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Vanderpuye may take that into consideration.
12 Please carry on.
13 MR. VANDERPUYE: What I would like to do is show the witness the
14 next page in this document. I understand it's 19 in the English.
15 Q. And ask the witness, Mr. Kralj, do you recognise the signature or
16 initials following the word "da" that's in the circle in the middle of
17 this page?
18 A. This is General Mladic.
19 MR. VANDERPUYE: What I'd like to do is show the witness the page
20 preceding the one I showed him a moment ago with the handwriting on it.
21 It would be ERN ending 7782. Page 16 in the English. And if we could
22 zoom in, again, on the initials following the word "da" in this document.
23 Q. Can you tell us whose initials those are, Mr. Kralj?
24 A. This is Mladic.
25 Q. Does that help you in respect of the handwritten note mentioning
1 your name on the page in between these two pages?
2 MR. VANDERPUYE: That is, ERN page ending 7783.
3 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Can we see that again, please?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand what exactly you
6 MR. VANDERPUYE:
7 Q. Well, that's all right. If you don't recognise the handwriting
8 we'll leave it there.
9 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, I think it's time for the break
10 in any event.
11 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Indeed, you are right.
12 MR. VANDERPUYE: We do have one matter to discuss.
13 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes.
14 MR. VANDERPUYE: I'm sorry, I --
15 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Yes. First I would like to thank Mr. Kralj that
16 he provided us with his knowledge today. We have to continue tomorrow
17 with the cross-examination by the Prosecutor.
18 The witness may leave the courtroom.
19 Thank you very much, and tomorrow morning in this courtroom we
20 will continue.
21 [The witness stands down]
22 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Mr. Vanderpuye.
23 MR. VANDERPUYE: Mr. President, you had addressed a matter
24 concerning access to certain materials that was filed by the Defence in
25 the Perisic case. I've discussed that with Mr. McCloskey. We have no
1 problem or objection to the -- for access to be granted provided that the
2 normal protections and considerations are kept in place.
3 The exhibit in question, I think, is P2808, and I understand that
4 access to parts of the transcript was also requested, and so we accede to
5 that as well.
6 JUDGE FLUEGGE: Thank you very much for that. And the Chamber
7 will file a decision in due course, as soon as possible. We are at the
8 end of today's hearing. We resume tomorrow morning at 9.00 in this
9 courtroom. We adjourn.
10 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.,
11 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 26th day
12 of January, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.