1 Monday, 11 October 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The Accused Zupljanin not present]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.11 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning,
6 everybody in and around the courtroom.
7 This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and
8 Stojan Zupljanin.
9 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
10 Good morning to everyone.
11 May we have the appearances today, please.
12 MR. OLMSTED: Good morning, Your Honours. Matthew Olmsted,
13 Joanna Korner, and Crispian Smith for the Prosecution.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
15 Slobodan Cvijetic, and Eugene O'Sullivan appearing for Stanisic Defence
16 this morning. Thank you.
17 MR. KRGOVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Dragan Krgovic,
18 Igor Pantelic, and Aleksandar Aleksic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.
19 Our client is not present. He will come after the first session.
20 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
21 Yes, Ms. Korner.
22 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, we do have a matter to raise before
23 the first witness today is called.
24 Although Mr. Olmsted is -- is going to be calling the witness,
25 Your Honours, it really raises a matter of principle, which is why I'm
1 here dealing with.
2 Your Honours will have seen that the next witness was in the
3 motion called to deal with some two adjudicated facts that were denied
4 or -- or in some way altered. I hope Your Honours had a chance to look
5 at the proofing note that was sent round last week, because Your Honours
6 will see that it is proposed that he give evidence on, in fact, a total
7 of seven adjudicated facts.
8 Your Honours, the fact is that's the evidence he can give. And
9 it's our submission that although originally we put him down only for the
10 three, he should be allowed to give evidence about all of them, for this
11 reason: Your Honours, effectively, if we call witnesses who can speak to
12 other adjudicated facts which were the subject of, as I say, either
13 rejection or alteration by the Trial Chamber, then they should be allowed
14 to do so.
15 Clearly it's in Your Honours' interest to have the best evidence
16 available when you come to render your decision in this case. And, of
17 course, the adjudicated facts which come from the trial or appeal
18 judgements are a distillation, quite often, of large numbers of witnesses
19 having given that evidence and/or documents.
20 In addition, Your Honour, the adjudicated facts, until a slight
21 change in the Defence position, which has been coming about very
22 recently, have not been agreed. In other words, they're the subject of
23 either putting the Prosecution to strict proof or direct challenge that
24 the events contained in the adjudicated facts ever happened. And so,
25 therefore, it's important that the Prosecution is able to prove those
1 matters to the best of its ability.
2 Your Honour, we submit the only, as it were, flaw would be the
3 question of notice, and we say it's not a flaw because we have given
4 65 ter summaries for each of these witnesses which show the matters that
5 they can speak about. And, in addition, they'll be shown in the proofing
6 note, which in this case I believe was delivered Thursday -- yes,
7 Thursday of last week.
8 So, Your Honours, in all the circumstances, we say that the
9 witness, particularly this witness -- because some of the adjudicated
10 facts relate to the context of how he comes to deal with the actual facts
11 for which he was originally notified, and Your Honours have said we can
12 lead evidence as to context.
13 So in all circumstances, Your Honour, we say, and we're raising
14 it now because it's going to happen with some other witnesses as well, so
15 that we can have a ruling from Your Honours whether we may be allowed to
16 do this.
17 So, Your Honour, that's the submission we make.
18 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Zecevic.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, we do object to this, and I will give
20 our reasons right now.
21 The 16th of June motion -- the Prosecutor's motion says,
22 paragraph 4:
23 "The denied adjudicated fact in essence provides the summaries of
24 the facts on which the proposed witness will provide evidence."
25 So if that is a position -- that was the position of the
1 Office of the Prosecutor, at that point they should have stated all the
2 adjudicated facts that they intend to prove through that witness.
3 So if they failed to do that, there is really nothing we can do
4 about it. They are supposed to know their case, and they are supposed to
5 know what their witnesses are going to testify -- or are able to give
6 evidence about.
7 The Trial Chamber decision of 14th July says, paragraph 20:
8 "The Trial Chamber reiterates that the testimony of each selected
9 proposed witness will be admissible solely for the limited purpose of
10 seeking to establish the substance of the specified denied adjudicated
12 Your Honours, if what Ms. Korner just said, it's important that
13 the Prosecution is able to prove those matters to the best of its
14 ability - it's page 2; 24, 25, lines. Now, as I said, if this is
15 important for the Office of the Prosecutor, they should have, at the
16 point on the 16th of June, they should have proposed all these witnesses
17 and specified the exact adjudicated facts that they -- these witnesses
18 are going to give the evidence about.
19 In this -- doing it at this point is highly prejudicial for the
20 Defence, and the Defence had no notice about it, whether the -- if
21 the Office of the Prosecutor is going to raise additional adjudicated
22 facts with -- with these witnesses. This creates a problem for us, you
23 see, Your Honours, because some of the witnesses which came earlier we
24 could have challenged the adjudicated facts, have we been on notice that
25 the -- that the -- that the Office of the Prosecutor is willing to bring
1 the -- the evidence to that effect.
2 Therefore -- therefore, we take the -- the objection very
3 seriously, and we -- and we very serious object to this line of -- of
4 conducting the case by the Office of the Prosecutor.
5 Thank you very much.
6 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.
7 Yes, Mr. Pantelic.
8 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, if I may, very shortly, adopting the position
9 of Stanisic Defence, I would like to outline the practice imposed by the
10 OTP in this case with amendments of 65 ter list, amendments of the -- in
11 terms of evidence, in terms of documents, in terms of witnesses, and now
12 we have another attempt to sort of say on the backdoor introduce certain
13 elements of the theory of their case.
14 Obviously so big confusion in presenting of OTP case is actually
15 on place, and the mere fact that they filed more than 50 motions in terms
16 of the amendment of the initial 65 ter list practical every -- every
17 week, the average is number -- every week, one motion, plus this approach
18 with adjudicated facts issue which is absolutely in contravention of the
19 rulings and the orders of this Trial Chamber.
20 Shortly, if this kind of request will be granted, that would be a
21 serious violation of the -- of the principles of the fairness of the
22 trial and the interests of the accused. That's the point. We have to --
23 to know, and we're asking -- kindly ask from this Trial Chamber to -- to
24 tell the OTP to stop. We have to know where is the line, where is the
25 moment to stop in this kind of practice.
1 Thank you.
2 [Defence counsel confer]
3 MR. PANTELIC: And, for the record, this witness was called only
4 for -- for a -- one adjudicated fact, which is 470. And I don't see
5 really to -- the reason for expansion in terms of the -- the issue of --
6 of judicial economy, in terms of issue of the trial expedition in terms
7 of costs, in terms of the issue of repetitiveness, because we -- we see
8 that many of these witnesses will -- will tell the same story, so I think
9 all these facts should be -- should be -- have in mind before reaching
10 the decision.
11 Thank you so much for your attention, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: Ms. Korner.
13 MS. KORNER: Yes.
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: Could you indicate the seven new facts that you
15 are raising.
16 MS. KORNER: Your Honours haven't got the proofing not with you?
17 Your Honour, the facts that this witness will be called for are 263, 470,
18 471, 860, 861, 875, 1082.
19 As I say, part of it is the -- is the actual context as well of
20 how this witness -- would Your Honours give me a moment.
21 [Prosecution counsel confer]
22 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, this -- this witness is going to deal
23 with the killings outside of Manjaca, but he comes from Omarska. And
24 these -- some of these adjudicated facts deal with Omarska.
25 Now, Your Honours, can I just answer two matters raised by
1 Mr. Zecevic, which is this: First of all, notice. As I say, we argue
2 there is notice, originally in the 65 ter but in the proofing note which
3 was handed out on Thursday. And, Your Honour, these are
4 crime-based witnesses, all of them, and we would submit that that's --
5 you know, 48 -- sorry, 48 -- 72 hours' worth is sufficient notice.
6 Second matter, I don't quite understand what Mr. Zecevic means by
7 "some of the witnesses which came earlier we could have challenged the
8 adjudicated facts, have we been on notice that the Office of the
9 Prosecutor is willing to bring evidence" about them. Well, Your Honours
10 they have -- those adjudicated facts that they have taken issue with,
11 they have been challenging. And we've always made it clear that where an
12 adjudicated fact was challenged we would be calling the evidence which
13 related to that adjudicated fact. So I don't quite follow what
14 Mr. Zecevic means by that.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Would you like me to explain, Your Honours?
16 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, the Office of the Prosecutor
18 proposed some adjudicated facts. The Trial Chamber decided on the
19 adjudicated facts. After the decision on adjudicated facts, the
20 witness -- the Office of the Prosecutor asked by their motion to add
21 additional witnesses to deal with some of the adjudicated facts that have
22 been -- that have not been accepted by the Trial Chamber or accepted in
24 Now, out of, let's say, hundred of the adjudicated facts which
25 originally were proposed, the Office of the Prosecutor calls witnesses
1 for 20 or 50 adjudicated facts. So other 50, they're not calling any
2 evidence. Therefore, why should we challenge these facts if they are not
3 going to be part of the evidence.
4 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, I think there's a slight misunderstanding
5 there, Your Honours.
6 These are all -- these are not adjudicated facts which have been
7 accepted, these adjudicated facts are ones which have been, as I say,
8 either denied or in some way tinkered with.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: But that is precisely the point which I'm trying to
10 explain to Your Honours.
11 Had we been on notice that the Prosecutor is willing to bring
12 evidence about these adjudicated facts, then we would have raised that
13 with some of the witnesses which passed in the meantime between the
14 16th of June and today [Overlapping speakers] ...
15 MS. KORNER: Yes, Your Honours, there's still a - sorry - there's
16 still misunderstanding. All of these facts are in our annex but covered
17 by other witnesses. Sorry, they're not adjudicated facts; they're all
18 ones from the annex.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE HALL: We thank counsel for their submissions. It seems to
21 us that there is eminent logic in the application that is made by the
22 Office of the Prosecution; and had the application, as articulated today,
23 been the subject of the earlier motion dealing with these witnesses, that
24 it would have been difficult to not accede to that application. However,
25 the Chamber, having ruled on how the witnesses who are being called in
1 respect of the denied adjudicated facts, how their evidence should be
2 limited and circumscribed, we find ourselves in total agreement with the
3 first part of Mr. Zecevic's reply. And, therefore, our Ruling is that,
4 to confirm our earlier decision, that the witnesses who are being called
5 in respect of the adjudicated facts, that the evidence would be limited
6 to the specified adjudicated facts and so much of the context as is
7 necessary to make sense of it. And the -- that allowance of context is
8 not an invitation to lead the witness far afield beyond the limitations
9 of the specified adjudicated facts.
10 Thank you.
11 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, one other matter.
12 I'm reminded that the next witness, we filed a motion to dealing
13 with the protective measures of all the new witnesses some time ago,
14 ST-017 has protective measures, which were granted in two earlier cases,
15 and I'm assuming that Your Honours will therefore be carrying on the
16 protective measures for him, which are pseudonym and closed session.
17 JUDGE HALL: Yes. That -- that motion is in the process of being
18 refined, but the principle, of course, is that such protective measures
19 as have been afford previously would continue to apply.
20 MS. KORNER: Yes. And, Your Honour, while we're on the subject
21 of still outstanding motions, Your Honour, we still haven't had rulings
22 on a number of - I think it's about three - witnesses that we've applied
23 to call to deal with matters. And, obviously, we are actually getting
24 near the end of the case, and I don't know the order of priority in
25 Your Honours dealing with motions, but obviously the application to call
1 witnesses are clearly quite important.
2 JUDGE HALL: Yes. We thank you for the reminder, Ms. Korner.
3 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, with your permission, while we are
4 waiting for the witness to be escorted to the court, I kindly ask our
5 friends, I think it's in the interest of both sides also and
6 Trial Chamber, that before the examination of particular witness just for
7 the record we have a reference of which fact, adjudicated fact, we are
8 having this particular witness. If it's not a big problem, I mean. And
9 then we could easily follow, at a later stage, what is relevant, what --
10 if -- if it's not big complication. Thank you.
11 JUDGE HALL: I thought we had that, but ...
12 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, I mean before -- after the solemn
13 declaration then, I mean -- [Overlapping speakers] ...
14 JUDGE HALL: [Overlapping speakers] ... I -- I now -- yes, I now
15 see what you're saying.
16 MR. PANTELIC: -- and then we could later on follow the issues.
17 Thank you.
18 JUDGE HALL: That would be convenient. I now follow.
19 [The witness entered court]
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE HALL: The -- to add to what I would have said before,
22 the -- if the Prosecution is minded to adopt such a procedure - and I
23 don't know that we would require them to do so - of course, it would have
24 to occur before the witness is escorted to the stand, for obvious
1 Yes, please have the witness make the solemn declaration.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
3 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
4 WITNESS: MUHAREM MURSELOVIC
5 [Witness answered through interpreter]
6 JUDGE HALL: Good morning to you, sir. I trust that can you hear
7 me in a language that you understand.
8 The solemn declaration that you have just made imposes upon you
9 an obligation to give truthful testimony to this Tribunal. And should
10 you fail to do so, the Tribunal is empowered to impose penalties for
11 perjury under the statutes which created the Tribunal.
12 Would you begin by telling us your name, sir.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] My name is Muharem Murselovic. I
14 live in Prijedor where I was born.
15 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. And what is your date of birth and what
16 is your ethnicity, please.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was born on the
18 24th of November, 1947, in Prijedor. I'm a Bosniak by ethnicity.
19 JUDGE HALL: And what is your profession?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm an economist in the catering
21 business. That's my profession. And that's what I did until the war.
22 After the war, I was in politics. I held an office in local politics,
23 and for the past -- for the last three years I've --
24 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: For the last three
25 years I have been an MP in the Assembly of Republika Srpska.
1 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. Have you testified previously before
2 this Tribunal or before any of the courts in the countries that comprise
3 the former Yugoslavia?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I testified before this Tribunal in
5 the Stakic case and in the Brdjanin case.
6 JUDGE HALL: Thank you. In which case I need only remind you of
7 our procedure and that is that the side calling begins by questioning and
8 then the side opposite has the right to cross-examine. And the side
9 calling you then has a right to ask questions in re-direct. And the
10 Chamber may, at any point, intervene to ask questions by way of
12 I'm sorry, could counsel for each of the accused indicate what
13 their estimate of the time is that they would need with this witness? We
14 don't have it before us. Thanks.
15 [Defence counsel confer]
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, most probably, the
17 Stanisic Defence will not have any questions for this witness unless
18 there should be an issue in his statement. In that case, we will require
19 perhaps up to half an hour.
20 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Krgovic.
21 Sorry. Mr. Pantelic.
22 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, I will cross-examine this witness
23 Your Honour.
24 To be on the safe side, maximum 40, 45 minutes for this witness.
25 Even less if this issue of context will be narrow. But context, with our
1 friends from the OTP is very relative issue. So if we shall speak
2 about --
3 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Pantelic.
4 MR. PANTELIC: -- 470, that's okay. But if something will arise,
5 then I reserve my application for more time.
6 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, just very quickly, that is a matter,
7 actually, that I had intended to raise. We've actually not been given
8 any cross-examination estimates, and we need -- our planning is dependant
9 on what cross-examination is going to be. I wonder if Your Honours would
10 care to order that we now get cross-examination estimates.
11 JUDGE HALL: That is an issue you may recall, Ms. Korner, that we
12 have been considering and turning over in our minds for some time. And I
13 confess it has been put somewhat on the back burner because we have
14 discovered that it is not a -- it is not as easily done as first appears.
15 But it's something that we haven't forgotten.
16 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] Thank you, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Olmsted, how long -- we do have some estimates
18 before us, but we take it that was in anticipation of the success of the
19 motion which had been earlier made.
20 What is your revised estimate of time that you would spend
22 MR. OLMSTED: Thank you, Your Honour. Considerably less. I
23 think we'll probably be going around an hour, maybe a little bit more,
24 depending on how much this witness -- how long his answers are.
25 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
1 Sorry, Mr. Witness, I had interrupted the preliminary questions
2 that the Bench puts to you to get an estimate of the time that it
3 would -- is expected your testimony would take. And you would have heard
4 what has passed between the Bench and counsel and therefore I needn't
5 repeat it.
6 The only thing that I would add is that the sitting times of the
7 Court are from when we have a morning session we rise for the day at 1.45
8 but the -- each session is of no more than 90 minutes because the tapes
9 have to be changed in order to -- for the record-keeping of the Tribunal.
10 And the advantage of such breaks is that allows for the convenience of
11 the Bench, counsel, witnesses, and everyone else. But notwithstanding
12 those fixed periods when we would break in which the day's sitting is
13 divided, if for any time you feel discomfort and need to take a break,
14 you alert us and we will, of course, accommodate you.
15 And, Mr. Olmsted, you may begin your examination-in-chief.
16 MR. OLMSTED: Thank you, Your Honour.
17 Examination by Mr. Olmsted:
18 Q. Good morning, Mr. Murselovic.
19 A. Good morning.
20 Q. Let me first start by apologising for holding you here over the
21 weekend. We know that you have a number of important matters to attend
22 to back at home, so we're going to try to get you on a plane as soon as
24 Can you tell us, where did you reside before the conflict in
1 A. Until the war, I lived in Prijedor. I lived in the town. And
2 the last address where I resided at was the main street of Prijedor,
3 before it was called Marshal Tito Street, number 43, after the war. And
4 when I came back in 1998, the name of the street is the King Peter I -
5 the liberator - Street, number 43.
6 Q. Prior to the conflict, did you own any businesses in Prijedor?
7 A. Yes. Until 1992. Actually, to be more precise, from 1978 until
8 1992 I was in private business. I had a restaurant which was called
9 Mursel. I also had a snack bar. And in those conditions, it was quite a
10 good business because this was still in time of socialism. One of the
11 restaurants was in my name, the other one was in my wife's name. Later I
12 formed a company, and this company employed up to 15 employees.
13 I was fairly successful in this kind of work, if I may say so.
14 Q. You mentioned a little bit while ago that you are currently
15 involved in politics. Were you also involved in politics prior to the
17 A. At first multi-party elections in 1990, I was elected to the
18 local parliament. I was elected a deputy, representing a party, which we
19 called the Party of Private Initiative, which gathered private business
20 owners, businessmen, and then as -- from 1990 to 1992, until the
21 beginning of the conflict, I was a representative in the municipal body.
22 Let me just mention, this is from the multi-party elections in
23 1990. Before 1990, I was never involved in politics. I was not a member
24 of the League of Communists. So only after 1990 did I actively start
25 taking part in politics.
1 Q. And just to clarify a couple of matters, you mentioned you were a
2 representative in the municipality body. Would that be the
3 Prijedor Municipal Assembly?
4 A. Yes, yes. Prijedor Municipal Assembly, the local body of the
5 municipality of Prijedor, yes.
6 Q. And could tell us what ethnicities were represented by the party
7 you belonged to, this Party of Private Initiative?
8 A. All the businessmen were there in our party more or less. There
9 were people of different ethnic groups in the party. I was a Muslim. Of
10 course, there were other ethnic groups as members. The president of the
11 party -- I don't really remember exactly who it was, but I think it was a
12 man from Doboj. He was a Croat.
13 It was a small party which brought together private artisans,
14 businessmen, tradesmen, and it was of multi-ethnic composition.
15 Q. Were you arrested on 30 May 1992?
16 A. I was arrested on the 23rd of May for the first time. The
17 23rd of May, 1992. I spent the night in prison, in the
18 Prijedor Police Station, actually. There were six or seven other people
19 there with me. I was arrested a week later for the second time. This
20 was on the 30th of May, after which I was taken to the Omarska camp.
21 Q. And who arrested you on the 30th of May?
22 A. I was arrested on the 30th of May around maybe 1.00, something
23 like that. A neighbour knocked. His name was Ranko Vujasinovic. He was
24 a young man of maybe 25 at the time. I don't think he was 30 years old
25 yet. I knew his parents because his grandfather had the same name
1 Rajko [as interpreted] Vujasinovic. I know that well. He knocked on the
2 door, on the ground floor door. He asked me to come outside. I came
3 out. I was alone in the apartment, in the house. And he asked me to
4 bring weapons with me if I had any. I had a legal revolver with a
5 licence. I handed that to him, and then he asked me -- it was actually
6 quite insolent and arrogant. He was taking all the neighbours from the
7 neighbouring houses to a hotel across the street. It was called Hotel
8 Balkan. There were about 2- or 300 people there, men, women, children.
9 All of these people were there, and we spent two or three hours in that
10 hotel that afternoon. This is right across the street from my house on
11 the square in Prijedor, in the very centre of town. It's an old hotel, a
12 relatively old hotel, called Hotel Balkan. It was opened in 1961.
13 Q. You mentioned Ranko Vujasinovic. Do you know what organ he
14 worked for?
15 A. He was a reserve police officer, and he was wearing a police
16 uniform, as a reserve policeman. He wasn't an active policeman; I knew
17 that. His house is some 100 to 120 metres away from mine. So he was a
18 reserve policeman; I know that for sure. There was another reserve
19 police officer there, but I remember this one because he was my
21 Q. Now, you mentioned that you were taken to Omarska camp that day.
22 Can you tell us who actually transported you to Omarska? Who was in
23 charge of that transportation?
24 A. I must say that we were in quite an uncomfortable position in
25 this hotel. We didn't know where we were there, what we were doing
1 there, what reason. There were elderly women there, children also. At
2 one point, the policemen checked our IDs, but we all knew each other more
3 or less. But they said that Muslims should be separated and go to one
4 side, and the Croats and the Serbs should go to the other side. Of
5 course, I went and stood on the side where the Muslims were standing, and
6 the Croats. And then from our group, they separated people who looked
7 older. They were perhaps in their 70s or something like that. They told
8 us that we should go outside.
9 We went out in front of the hotel. There were buses there. I
10 could see three or four buses. We boarded the buses. The bus that I
11 boarded, there were quite a few people that I knew there. There was an
12 Asif Kapetanovic there, Sefik Terzic; these were all people from the
13 town, my neighbours practically. At the front entrance, there was a
14 policeman who was standing there. He was already retired. I didn't know
15 at the time whether he was retired already or not. He is a year or so
16 younger than me, or perhaps the same age as me. I know that his name is
17 Grahovac. I knew it then. Stevo Grahovac; I think that was his name.
18 He was standing at the front door. He had a machine-gun, a weapon, in
19 his hands.
20 We entered the bus -- I entered the buses. And then three or
21 four buses were filled, and then we set off from in front of the
22 Hotel Balkan, and we went to the right, along the Mose Pijade Street.
23 That's what it was called at the time. Now the name is
24 Akademika Raskovica, Academician Raskovic Street. We went -- we passed
25 the court-house, and then we stopped in front of the police station. The
1 bus stopped in front of the police station. This was our Prijedor police
2 station. It also stopped in front of the municipal building. We waited
3 for a bit there. And an unpleasant incident, as far as I was concerned,
4 occurred there.
5 I asked this policeman, I asked him, Where are we being taken?
6 Where are we going? Why are we being taken away? It was not clear to
7 us, first of all, why we were taken from our homes; and then, secondly
8 where they were being taken in these buses. I could see the people were
9 surprised, they were upset. This Grahovac just was shrugging his
10 shoulders as if he didn't know where we were going. Like that.
11 Q. Let me ask you some questions with regard to this so we can get
12 through this a little quicker.
13 I just want to go back. You said that you were at the hotel and
14 they separated people into two groups. And I want to clarify, for the
15 record, was one group to consist of the Muslims and Croats, while the
16 other group consisted of Serbs; is that correct?
17 A. Yes. Yes, correct.
18 Q. And after -- you mentioned that you asked the police where they
19 were taking you. Did the police ever tell you where they were taking you
20 that day?
21 A. No. They were just shrugging their shoulders. They said they
22 didn't know where they were taking us. They were very insolent. This
23 Vujasinovic was quite insolent, and he said something that was not nice
24 to one of the neighbours and I think he kicked him. The situation was
25 quite unpleasant. I mean, this person could have been his grandfather,
1 not even his father.
2 Q. And, eventually, these buses that were on, they arrived at
3 Omarska camp; is that correct?
4 A. Correct.
5 Q. And how long were you detained --
6 A. Excuse me. We didn't know where we were going. I had never been
7 to this Omarska camp before. We were not even taking the
8 Banja Luka-Prijedor road where you would usually go. We went by a
9 different route through some neighbourhood. At one point while we were
10 passing through town we were lying on the floor. We saw a few houses
11 that were set on fire. But, basically, we got to this camp. We didn't
12 know it was a camp. We came to this mine. There were some business or
13 administration buildings around, some work-shops. We didn't know where
14 we were, why we were there. But, in any case, this is where we arrived.
15 Later we found out that this was Omarska, the Omarska mine. I didn't
16 have the opportunity to see it before.
17 Q. And can you tell us how long you were at Omarska camp?
18 A. I was in the Omarska camp until August 6th, when we were -- our
19 names were called out again. There was a check. And then on the
20 6th of August, again we boarded some buses, and now we were in a more
21 difficult situation because we all had dysentery. We were all in a
22 terrible, exhausted state. We had all lost at least 25 to 30 kilos. And
23 then on the 6th of August - I think that was one of the most difficult
24 days of my life - we didn't know we were going. We were boarded on the
25 buses at 10.00 in the morning, and we were travelling by placing our head
1 forward. We were lying on the floor. And it was unbearably hot and the
2 heat was turned on.
3 Q. Sorry for interrupting you. We are going to get to that incident
4 in a little bit. I just want to lay a little more context so we
5 understand that event clearly.
6 During your time at Omarska, were you able to determine who was
7 the commander at the camp?
8 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, point number one: We have this
9 adjudicated facts related to this question. I -- it slipped to my -- but
10 it's not in dispute. We have it. You already ruled that it's
11 adjudicated facts.
12 Point number 2: If my learned friend Mr. Olmsted will go with
13 these kinds of questioning relating to context, he will cover practically
14 all facts which was previously denied and limited not to do that.
15 What we have here, we have Mr. Murselovic, he was a victim, he
16 suffered a lot, he has his story to tell, but specifically related to the
17 incident out - I will not mention the name, the place - out of
18 Omarska camp.
19 So I think -- I didn't react before, but all these questions and
20 answers are really -- are going nowhere in terms of the judicial economy
21 and the efficiency of the trial. Thank you.
22 MR. OLMSTED: Your Honours, I'm trying to lay some foundation.
23 Obviously the incident which occurred on the 6th of August, 1992, the
24 6th and 7th of August, 1992, we have to lay the foundation that he knew
25 who were -- was involved in it, who was there that morning, who from the
1 leadership at the camp was there. So I'm just laying foundation as to
2 whether he knows who was at the camp, who was in charge, and what was
3 happening that morning. And, of course, his time, for over two and a
4 half months, would give him some insight as to who these particular
5 individuals are. I'm not trying to expand into other adjudicated facts;
6 I'm really just laying the context so we can understand his evidence with
7 regard to the particular incident.
8 JUDGE HALL: Mr. Olmsted, we trust that we aren't going to have
9 to laboriously go through this each time one of the witnesses to testify
10 to adjudicated facts is called. To repeat what we have said on more
11 occasions than I would try to count, obviously some context is necessary
12 to make sense of the -- of what the witness is about to say. But only to
13 make sense of what the witness is about to say. And here the identified
14 adjudicated fact is one where the line of questions, we agree,
15 Mr. Pantelic, is totally unnecessary.
16 MR. OLMSTED: Very well.
17 Q. I want to turn to events on the 6th of August, 1992.
18 Do you recall where you were being detained at Omarska on the
19 6th of August, 1992?
20 A. Well, I was detained at different places. For a while I was in
21 the so-called Mujo's Room, that was a room behind the cafeteria. And
22 then for five or six days I was in garage which was next to that room.
23 And on 6 August -- well, actually, I believe the previous night I
24 slept -- or, rather, I didn't really sleep because in that garage the
25 width was about 22, 23, square metres large and there were about 150 and
1 170 of us, so we were all standing like sardines. Then there was a
2 roll-call. We were among the first, and we boarded the first two or
3 three buses, and we didn't know where we were going.
4 Q. You mentioned there was a roll-call. Who gave the roll-call?
5 A. The police officers who were taking us away. I'm not sure if it
6 was Meakic or one of the guards. There was one who we called Brki. They
7 made roll-calls the previous days. And on that morning, they called the
8 first group. That's what they called us. I don't know "the first
9 group." The first group of what? And then we boarded the first buses
10 that were lined up in the camp.
11 Q. When they were doing this roll-call, did they have lists with
13 A. Yes, they did. They couldn't have called us without them. So
14 they had lists, and they told us that we were the first group. Again, I
15 don't know on which criteria they decided that they were the first group.
16 And there were rumours that we would be exchanged, and all sorts of
17 rumours. But it was clear that we would be taken somewhere but we had no
18 idea where.
19 So we were called as the first group, we boarded the buses. And
20 as far as I could tell, there was a number of buses, ten or 15. The
21 first three or four, maybe five, buses carried the first group. But
22 nobody had told us where we were going nor why. Actually, we were only
23 too glad and could hardly wait to leave that hell.
24 Q. I want to talk a little bit more about these lists.
25 Were you aware that the police at Omarska were placing people
1 into -- or detainees into categories?
2 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Olmsted, are we still in the context of
3 Manjaca camp?
4 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honour, I'm sorry, I really do object to
5 this -- that.
6 MR. OLMSTED: We are on the day that they're being taken to
7 Manjaca camp. And the witness has talked about there was a roll-call and
8 there were some lists, and I'm trying to clarify what information those
9 lists contained.
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: No, Mr. Olmsted. You're trying to determine
11 circumstances in Omarska.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, first of all, the witness said,
13 himself, he doesn't know about the lists at all. He said I assume they
14 had a list because they wouldn't know on -- by their memory of our names;
15 so therefore I don't see the basis for even asking this question, let
16 alone that it doesn't concern anything about the adjudicated fact this
17 witness is -- has come to give evidence about.
18 Thank you.
19 MR. PANTELIC: I do apologise. I really think it's time for all
20 of us to travel to Manjaca. I mean, let's go to that -- let's go to this
21 particular event. Otherwise, we shall object on numerous bases here
22 because this particular fact you're not allowed. It's 861. And then
23 you're, through the backdoor, trying to get these answers. It's not
25 MR. OLMSTED: Well, I'm moving on, Your Honours, any way. But,
1 again, I think it's important to know who was there on the morning of the
2 6th August, 1992, and what was going on before they entered onto the
3 buses to go to Manjaca. And that's what I -- all I'm trying to do at
4 this stage. But I'll move on to another issue.
5 Q. You mentioned that you were -- you boarded buses. Were you
6 ordered to board those buses, and, if so, by whom?
7 A. Certainly. It was the guards who called us, who ordered us to do
8 so. And there were several guards and police officers.
9 Q. These guards that ordered you to enter the bus, what uniforms
10 were they wearing?
11 A. Police uniforms.
12 Q. Now, you mentioned that there were, I believe -- well, I'll ask
13 you again because I don't see it right here in front of me.
14 How many buses were at Omarska camp that morning?
15 A. My estimate would be about 15. Or more, maybe. 15-ish. Or,
16 rather, let me say, 15 at least. From 15 to 20. I didn't count them at
17 the time.
18 Q. And how many detainees do you estimate were on these
19 approximately 15 buses?
20 A. When we came to Manjaca, we learned that there were
21 1300 detainees. That was a known fact, that there were about 1300 of us
22 who were taken to Manjaca.
23 Q. Now, either that morning or afterwards, did the police guards
24 from the camp tell you where you were going that day?
25 A. No.
1 Q. And can you tell us how many detainees were on your particular
2 bus that morning?
3 A. Well, on that bus where I was, there were at least 80 or 90 of
4 us. That was a public transportation bus. It wasn't a long-distance bus
5 but one of those commuting buses. And we didn't sit there or stand. We
6 lay on the floor. One on the other, and that is on -- in two layers, as
7 it were.
8 Q. And why were you laying on the floor?
9 A. We were ordered to. They ordered us to lie down on the floor,
10 one over the others, as -- because we were supposed to pass through the
11 city of Banja Luka, and they wanted the bus to appear empty. We -- we
12 knew the route from Prijedor, and we concluded that we were moving toward
13 Banja Luka. And to anybody who would look -- who would see the buses,
14 the buses would seem empty.
15 Before that, we had all eaten something rotten. It may have been
16 beans or something. So but -- everybody had dysentery and we all stank
17 like animals. And the ones were lying on the others and the police
18 officers would step on our backs to go from -- from the front to the
19 rear, and commenting, Now these Balja guys really stink like hell. And
20 it was very hot. And our filth was usually running down our legs.
21 Q. You mentioned police officers on the buses. Can you tell us how
22 many police officers were on each bus or if -- to the extent you know, on
23 your bus?
24 A. On our bus, I think there was only one who was sitting in front.
25 So he was some two metres away from us, and we were all crammed in the
1 rear. And it really stank very badly. I suppose they may not have
2 smelled it. But we were able to make out that there was some sort of
3 escort, but we couldn't see much. Occasionally when one would raise his
4 head to cast a glance outside, then we would see something, but we
5 couldn't determine where we were going. And there was some escort. We
6 saw police vehicles, blue vehicles with police or milicija on them. They
7 seemed like armoured vehicles. But there were also regular cars that
8 escorted us. And it was a rather long drive.
9 Q. Other than the police escorts that escorted these 15 buses that
10 day, did you see any other organs escorting the buses that day?
11 A. No, I didn't see any other escort. I told you that there was a
12 police escort. It seemed like a police armoured vehicle. We saw it when
13 we arrived at Manjaca.
14 There was also some sort of escort, but we couldn't see much of
15 it. There was some regular passenger cars. But I told you, we lay on
16 the floors, underneath the seats, so we were not allowed to raise our
17 heads, and so we didn't really do that. And we were lying on the floor,
18 the ones on the others, like sardines.
19 Q. You mentioned it was hot inside the bus. Can you explain why it
20 was hot inside the bus?
21 A. Well, first of all, 6 August 1992 was a very hot day. And,
22 secondly, all the windows were closed. They didn't allow us to open them
23 even a little. And the heating was also turned on. So there must have
24 been at least 50 degrees inside. It was an inferno. We were all melting
25 away in that heat and in that stench.
1 Q. Sir, do you personally have any medical conditions that made it
2 particularly bad for you, this bus ride?
3 A. Yes. Even then, just like today, I'm a diabetic. They didn't
4 give us any water, and I got very thirsty. So it was very hard on me.
5 There wasn't any water. It was unbearably hot. My only desire was to
6 approach the window-panes and lick them because there was condensed water
7 on the window-panes. There was -- the steam condensed upon the
8 window-panes, and it was my wish to get to the window and lick it because
9 there was this small quantity of water there, and that may actually have
10 saved me. Although, then, my sugar level probably dropped considerably,
11 I had lost 30 kilograms, I was starved, and that also may have saved me.
12 And I licked that glass pane on which there was some condensed water, and
13 that's how I was able to ingest some fluid.
14 Q. Where did the buses end up that day?
15 A. During the ride, the buses stopped several times, but we didn't
16 go out. We were lying on the floor. They would open the doors, and they
17 stopped at roadside inns that we noticed as much. We didn't get up. But
18 the locals threw stones at us through the open doors and cursed us. And
19 around 8.00 or 9.00 in the evening it had already -- it was already dark.
20 We arrived at place, we didn't know where we were, but that was in front
21 of the Manjaca camp. And the buses parked there. The drivers had gotten
22 out. And the escort that was on the buses also went out. They again
23 checked whether everything was well closed and the heating was left on,
24 and that's how they left us on those buses.
25 Q. I don't think I see this question initially as to when the buses
1 took off, but can you -- from Omarska camp, but perhaps you could tell
2 us, how long did the trip take from Omarska until your arrival at
3 Manjaca? If could you give us an estimate.
4 A. The trip started at 10.00 a.m. until 8.00 or 9.00 p.m., so it was
5 about 11 hours. We didn't know what time it was though. We didn't know
6 where we were. We were only in that unbearable inferno on those buses.
7 This -- there was immense heat.
8 Q. And you mentioned that they left you on the buses that -- which
9 were sealed and had the heat on. And how long were you made to stay on
10 the buses that night?
11 A. All night. We stayed there all night, until about 6.00 a.m.,
12 when it started dawning. Then they opened the doors and ordered us to
13 get out. It was a rather cold at that hour. And from that terrible
14 heat, we suddenly were thrown into this cold morning air.
15 Q. I want to talk about events during that night of
16 6 August to 7 August 1992.
17 During that night, what were the police escorts doing?
18 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm really sorry. I have to object.
19 The witness just testified that the drivers of the buses -- the
20 drivers of the buses and the escorts left. I don't -- I don't see where
21 does Mr. Olmsted founds the foundation for posing this question. Not to
22 mention that everything we heard so far has nothing do with the
23 adjudicated facts which are about to hear, I guess.
24 MR. OLMSTED: This is exactly to deal with the denied adjudicated
25 facts. I'll clarify that matter. I appreciate the intervention from my
1 learned friend.
2 Q. Can you clarify for us. You mentioned that the police escorts
3 and drivers left, exited the buses that night. Did they leave the
4 vicinity or did they stay around the buses?
5 A. They stayed near the buses. We could hear voices, we could hear
6 sounds. Although the engines were running and we were sealed inside
7 those buses, but we could tell that there were others present outside the
8 buses. We didn't know where they were exactly, but we heard that they
9 were around. And they started calling the names of some people on my
10 bus. They started looking for people.
11 Q. And when you say "they were calling people from your bus," do you
12 know, were those the escorts, or were they someone else?
13 A. Yes, those were the people who escorted us. From my bus, they
14 took out an elderly man. He was called Dedo Crnalic. And they said,
15 Dedo Crnalic, come out. We heard them opening the door and calling Dedo
16 Crnalic. And they said, We'll make "cevapcici" of him.
17 At that moment he even grabbed my jacket because when we were
18 going to the guards, we were want to put our jackets on because it's less
19 painful when they beat you if you wear a jacket. And then they started
20 beating him immediately. We could hear him groan. And he groaned and
21 whined. And then the sounds died down. And then they threw him back in
22 the bus, and they asked two others to come out. And Dedo Crnalic died
23 there, lying with us in that bus. But we didn't know that until the
24 following morning.
25 Q. When he came back into the bus or he was brought back into the
1 bus, did you have a chance to observe what kind of condition he was in?
2 A. He was -- well, I saw him lying there in the front part of the
3 bus, but I didn't approach him. But I heard him making some sounds, so
4 he must still have been alive. But he -- I didn't pay much attention to
5 him anymore. I was licking the window-panes to -- and I was focussed on
6 my own survival. But he was lying in the front part of the bus. But
7 nobody could leave their place, you know. No one could go to him to see
8 whether he was all right.
9 In the morning, I told some younger guys, Take Dedo out. And
10 they replied, He's dead; he isn't showing any signs of life. And
11 eventually he was taken out, and we saw some other dead bodies lying
13 MR. OLMSTED: Your Honours, I'm going to move on to other victim
14 of this incident, so perhaps this is a good time for us to break.
15 JUDGE HALL: Yes. We return in 20 minutes.
16 [The witness stands down]
17 --- Recess taken at 10.25 a.m.
18 --- On resuming at 10.50 a.m.
19 [The witness takes the stand]
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 MR. OLMSTED:
22 Q. Mr. Murselovic, do you recall any other detainees who were taken
23 off of the bus that night?
24 A. Yes, there were many of us, and all of these were people that
25 were familiar. I can't say -- I don't quite understand your question.
1 There were many of us. There were 1.300 detainees there.
2 Q. Yes, let me rephrase my question.
3 You already told us about what happened to Mr. Crnalic. And my
4 question to you is: Are you aware of any other detainees who were on the
5 bus that night, the night of 6 August 1992, who were taken off by police
7 A. The following morning, we saw some dead bodies, and we got
8 information that Nezir Krak, whom I also knew, and then a neighbour of
9 mine, Sead Babic, called Djuzin, and some other people from other bus
10 were killed. From my bus, Dedo Crnalic was the only one who was killed.
11 But we could see them taking out these other dead bodies from the buses.
12 Q. You mentioned Nezir Krak. During the night, did you hear him
13 being taken out of the buses?
14 A. Yes, he was taken out, and then we could see dead bodies there.
15 He never entered Manjaca with us, and we found out that he had been
16 killed. We saw the dead bodies. I didn't get close but there were some
17 seven or eight bodies that were lying there next to the buses, and it was
18 known. We heard when the commander of the camp said, I don't want the
19 dead; I am accepting only the live ones. Because the guards wanted to
20 leave the dead bodies there, and this man Bozidar Popovic said, We are
21 not interested in that. I'm not interested in the dead people; I'm only
22 admitting those who are alive.
23 And so we saw those seven or eight dead bodies. I didn't know
24 all of them. I knew some of them. I knew Nezir Krak well. He was a car
25 mechanic by profession. I would see him often. I would say hello, greet
1 him. We were not friends particularly, but we were not on bad terms
2 either. And I heard and I saw him as being among the dead there.
3 Q. Yes, and let me rephrase my question one more time, as I'm trying
4 to get to a particular issue. While you were on the buses on the night
5 of 6/7 August 1992, did you hear the police guards calling out Mr. Krak
6 to come off the bus?
7 A. We were not able to hear much because the buses were well-closed.
8 They took Dedo Crnalic off our bus. And I must say, truthfully, I didn't
9 hear. I mean, there was some people being called out, some people were
10 looking for some people. We heard that. But it's been 15 years or more
11 since then, so I really cannot say. They were calling out some people.
12 We heard scuffling and sound of voices. But we couldn't hear anything
14 But it's a fact that they were taking some people off the buses,
15 looking for some people. The buses were well-closed and we were lying on
16 the floor, so we really couldn't know who was actually being called out.
17 But we heard and then saw the next day some seven or eight dead bodies,
18 and we were told Nezir is there and this Sead Babic and some others that
19 I cannot recall right now were among them.
20 But many of them, seven or eight, were taken off the buses that
21 night and killed, just like Dedo Crnalic.
22 Q. You mentioned that saw the bodies, the corpses, when you got off
23 the bus. Who put the corpses -- who had taken the corpses off the buses?
24 A. The prisoners, the young men among us. They took the dead bodies
25 from the buses.
1 Q. Do you know, were they ordered to do that; and if so, by whom?
2 A. Yes. The guards, the policeman, ordered that they be taken out.
3 And that is why Bozidar Popovic reacted, the one who was admitting us to
4 the camp. I said, I don't need dead ones, take that away.
5 Q. That morning, the morning of the 7th of August, when you exited
6 the bus, did you recognise any of the police guards or escorts from the
7 day before?
8 A. I recognised some policemen. I noticed Bosko Grabez. He was an
9 older reserve policeman, retired. I knew a few others. One of them even
10 spoke to me and he asked me, Mursel is that you? I said, yes, it is, and
11 so on. And then I left quickly.
12 So I don't know if this was wise or not. I didn't really look at
13 the policemen that much. I knew they were policemen. Some of them
14 I [Realtime transcript read in error "you"] knew, some of them I didn't
15 know. The best thing was not to look at them, cross your -- meet their
16 gaze. The biggest problem was that I knew quite a few of those people.
17 Q. You mentioned, I believe, someone by the name of Sead --
18 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry. Just for the accuracy of the
19 transcript, 33:6, I believe the witness said I -- I -- people knew me
20 much -- much more people knew me than I knew them. So ...
21 If can you clarify that with the witness.
22 MR. OLMSTED: Well, that's a fairly minor point.
23 Q. But can you confirm that's what you told us just a moment ago?
24 A. Yes. I said that these were people, policemen, in police
25 uniforms. I knew some of them. I didn't know all of them. Some were
1 from the surrounding villages. They were not from town itself. Prijedor
2 is a big town, a big municipality, that had 112.407 citizens before the
3 war, so it's logical I didn't know all of them, I didn't all of the
4 policemen. But I knew many of them, and many of them knew me.
5 I was a deputy, I was born in town, I was a well-known caterer,
6 and before that I worked in the school as a teacher, professor. So I
7 assume that many more people knew me. There was some of the pupils there
8 as well. So many more people knew me than I knew them. Some of them you
9 lose sight of. I knew some policemen. I knew that some of them were
10 policemen. I didn't know the names of some of those policemen, but did I
11 know that they were policemen.
12 Q. You mentioned a police officer by the name Bosko Grabez,
13 G-r-a-b-e-z. Can you tell us, what did you see him doing that morning of
14 the 7th of August?
15 A. I noticed about him -- I saw him. I did see him. I knew him
16 well. I knew where he lived. I knew -- he was a policeman, a traffic
17 policeman, even, when he was working as an active policeman. He was
18 older. When I say older, I mean that he was at least ten years older
19 than me. And allegedly he -- this Sead Babic got off the bus, called
20 Djuzin - that was his nickname - with whom this Grabez alledgedly --
21 well, this Sead would often make jokes at the expense of Bosko. And then
22 that morning there was this incident when this Grabez told some younger
23 policemen, indicating Sead Babic, he pointed him out to these younger
24 policemen, and they took him somewhere, and they killed him.
25 Q. Did you see Grabez interacting with these two police officers and
1 gesturing towards Mr. Babic?
2 A. Yes, I saw him talking and indicating that they should separate
3 him. There were many of us there. You know, it was difficult to follow.
4 But I noticed that he pointed with his finger at Babic and he asked this
5 younger policeman to take him a little bit further away. And he never
6 entered -- I didn't see Babic dead, even though he was my very close
7 neighbour, close to my house. But he never entered the Manjaca camp with
8 us. He wasn't in the Manjaca camp, which means that he didn't leave this
9 place alive. They took him away.
10 And then there was talk amongst us that Bosko paid him back for
11 some kind of earlier incident, because he would make fun of him. He
12 would joke at his expense when he retired. So this is how this other guy
13 paid him back for that.
14 Q. Did you -- you mentioned that you saw approximately eight corpses
15 near the buses that morning. Can you tell us, did you learn what
16 happened to those corpses?
17 A. Approximately -- well, the same thing happened to them as with
18 Dedo Crnalic.
19 Q. Were those corpses taken away that day?
20 A. [Microphone not activated] ... Bozidar Popovic, the camp
21 commander at Manjaca, to accept the dead bodies. The corpses were later
22 put back on the buses, and according to my information, these bodies were
23 exhumed in 1998, 1999, 2000. And specifically this Dedo Crnalic, whom I
24 knew well, he was an elderly gentleman. Those corpses were not accepted
25 at the Manjaca camp. They were taken back to the buses. This is a fact.
1 And we exhumed Dedo's body in Srbac, which is below Banja Luka. It's
2 about -- it's below Banja Luka, because these bodies were thrown into the
3 Vrbas River. As they were returning from Manjaca, they threw the corpses
4 into the river, and then down river they were buried somewhere, and then
5 we exhumed them. And then after 2000, the family asked for the bodies,
6 and he was exhumed, identified, and buried at the request of the family.
7 I attended the funeral.
8 Q. How long did you remain at Manjaca camp?
9 A. I was in Manjaca until the 14th or the 15th of November. From
10 the 6th of August, we entered on the 7th, in the morning, and I left
11 Manjaca - I was the oldest in my group, the first group that left - on
12 the 14th. The night between the 14th and the 15th of November.
13 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter did not catch the year.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] So we had spent some 100 days
15 there, until the 15th of November, when, through the mediation of the
16 Red Cross, we were transferred to Karlovac.
17 MR. OLMSTED:
18 Q. And just to clarify, that was the 14th or 15th of November, 1992?
19 A. Yes, yes, correct.
20 Q. Now during your time at the Manjaca camp, did any police
21 officers, civilian police officers, interview you about what had happened
22 to the detainees on the night of the 6th and 7th of August, 1992?
23 A. I didn't have the opportunity to speak about that. But there was
24 some policemen there, reserve policemen, who were from Sanski Most. I'm
25 not from Sanski Most, but I was with friends from Sanski Most, so one of
1 these policemen that they knew from Sana, we were sitting there in the
2 kitchen talking and he said that those dead bodies were returned also and
3 thrown into the Vrbas River. But I didn't have too many contacts nor did
4 I speak too much about these reserve policemen who were guarding us.
5 Because they were mines around, even one man lost a leg. So it was a
6 problem to stay in one place for too long or to move around, even though
7 I must say that the situation in Manjaca was much better than the
8 situation in Omarska, because the Red Cross came, they gave us blankets,
9 food, and so on.
10 Q. You mentioned these police officers from Sanski Most. Do you
11 know, while they were at the camp, were they investigating this
12 particular incident, this crime committed against Mr. Crnalic and the
13 other detainees who were killed outside of Manjaca camp, to your
15 MR. PANTELIC: Objection, Your Honour. It's beyond the issue of
16 the adjudicated facts.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Nobody ever took anyone. Oh,
18 sorry, nobody ever investigated the matter, not why we were there, why
19 people were killed, or anything like that.
20 MR. OLMSTED: No further questions, Your Honours.
21 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Pantelic:
23 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Murselovic. In view of all the
24 things that you have experienced and all the things that you have gone
25 through, I would like to express Mr. Zupljanin's sympathy. And now I
1 will have to ask you about some details about what you are testifying
3 A. Very well.
4 Q. Just one question: You are still performing a duty in the
5 Prijedor municipality, I assume?
6 A. No. In this mandate which is running out, I was a deputy in the
7 People's Assembly of Republika Srpska.
8 Q. There were recent elections. Were you re-elected?
9 A. No, I did not run for that level. I was running for the post of
10 president or, rather, vice-president, of the Republika Srpska, and the
11 results have not been published yet.
12 Q. Well, we hope that you will be successful.
13 Mr. Murselovic, when you left Manjaca, you went to Croatia; is
14 that correct?
15 A. We were transferred to Karlovac; that's right.
16 Q. It's enough you can just say yes or no.
17 A. Yes, yes.
18 Q. At a later period, you came to Sanski Most; is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Which year was that in?
21 A. This was in 1995.
22 Q. You returned to Prijedor after the Dayton Agreement was signed;
23 is that right?
24 A. I came back to Prijedor after the first multi-party elections in
25 1997. The elections were held in November 1997, and already in October,
1 November, December I had come back to Prijedor in order to set up this
2 new multi-party authority.
3 Q. In 1997, you provided a statement to the OTP; is that correct?
4 A. Most probably, yes.
5 Q. After that, you testified in two cases here, as you said earlier.
6 If you can just say yes or no for the transcript.
7 A. Yes, yes. In the Stakic and Brdjanin cases.
8 Q. And in the period from this incident at Manjaca until 1997, did
9 you give a statement to authorised investigative organs of the
10 Federation, or some foreign services, relating to the incidents that you
11 witnessed in Manjaca; did you provide any such statements?
12 A. Yes, yes. Immediately when we were brought to Karlovac, all of
13 us inmates passed through an interview. We called it an interview.
14 During the first seven or eight days, we had to provide blood and urine
15 samples, go through an examination, and then representatives of
16 international organisations interviewed us. I don't know who those
17 people were, but all of us had to go through this process. And we spoke
18 about all the things that we had experienced. This was in Karlovac, in a
19 barracks somewhere in town. I don't remember exactly where it was. It
20 was somewhere in the centre of town.
21 Q. And did you sign the statement that provided at the time?
22 A. I don't remember in 1992 whether I signed it or not. They wanted
23 to have some facts from us, where we were, where did we go, what we
24 experienced, and so on and so forth. All of us who came from the Manjaca
25 camp had to give these statements. Well, we thought this was kind of
1 strange, funny. We were all traumatised, frustrated, so we did give a
2 statement, all of us. This was when we were released. This was sometime
3 in November or December 1992, and it took place in Karlovac. We probably
4 did sign something, but I really cannot remember that now.
5 Q. I know that it's been quite some time ago. At the time, did you
6 refer to the Manjaca incident when you gave this statement, if you
8 A. Most probably, yes. I probably did. Because all the things that
9 were important I did mention them. I mean, this interview took a whole
10 day. They asked everybody something.
11 Q. Upon your arrival to Sanski Most in 1995, did you give a
12 statement to the police, the investigators, to the AID, or anybody else
13 about your experience at Manjaca?
14 A. No. Nobody asked me about that.
15 Q. When you took over your new office in 1995, I think you were also
16 the -- a deputy in the Assembly of RS?
17 A. I was president of the municipality of Prijedor, or -- and
18 vice-president too. And then I also -- later on I also became a member
19 of parliament, and I was elected three times to the Assembly of the RS.
20 Q. I suppose that as a deputy, as a politician, to this day you
21 haven't officially initiated proceedings or taken part in proceedings
22 against the Serb perpetrators who, according to your knowledge, have
23 committed crimes. You haven't filed criminal complaints or contacted any
24 authority; right?
25 A. I didn't for the simple reason that I had actually faired well as
1 I have survived. So I didn't give it much thought. I thought that --
2 or, rather, I felt that my -- the mere fact that I was alive was a
4 Q. Mr. Murselovic, you certainly don't know, considering what you
5 went through, whether or not the police of the RS initiated criminal
6 proceedings regarding the incidents the Manjaca. You don't know, do you?
7 A. Not as far as I know. But let me tell you, two or three years
8 ago, I was summoned by the Banja Luka Public Prosecutor's Office to give
9 a statement in my capacity as a member of parliament due to the fact that
10 I was a participant of some events that happened at Manjaca. The
11 prosecutor, whose name I forget, examined me, and I related to him my
12 experiences regarding Dedo Crnalic and some others. So I did make a
13 statement, and I was examined fairly. So whatever I said here today, I
14 also said to that prosecutor. And that may have been two or three years
15 ago, roughly.
16 Q. You and I and everybody from the region know where Banja Luka is,
17 but let's state it for the record any way. You gave a statement to the
18 prosecutor of the RS whose seat is in Banja Luka; correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Let us return to some details, Mr. Murselovic.
21 These details are not essential for the Defence of our client
22 because there is no direct relation between him and those individuals
23 down there. But since the Prosecutor asked you, let me ask you the
24 following: You left Banja Luka in that convoy to Manjaca on
25 6 August 1992, and you testified here today that you stopped several
1 times on the -- on the way there and that you witnessed some hatred and
2 intolerance on the part of some Serb families who had thrown stones at
3 you; right?
4 A. They stopped mostly by roadside inns, I suppose, yes, on our way
5 to Manjaca, and that's why.
6 Q. But the point is it was war, 1992. The front line is all around.
7 Everybody is dying, Serbs, Croats, Muslims; and there is tension among
8 the Serbs and an unfavorable attitude toward other ethnicities; correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And there were provocations such as stones being thrown at the
11 convoy by the Serb population; correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Do you allow for the logical possibility that the organiser of
14 the convoy and those who provided security to it in order to reduce the
15 risk and possibly avoid provocations ordered you to lie down so that your
16 heads may not be seen. Do you allow for that possibility for -- as being
17 the reason for your position during the transportation?
18 A. No.
19 Q. During the trip to Manjaca, you said it was stuffy and that
20 everything was closed and that the heating was on and that it was warm
21 outside; right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And certainly the driver who was a Serb and the police officers
24 who provided security to you had to bear the same condition as you;
1 A. Probably, yes. But the driver could open the window which was
2 next to him, and we were in no position to do so.
3 Q. Well, my -- I'm asking you logically whether those escorting you
4 would want to make life difficult for themselves by making it unbearable
5 for you. Isn't that illogical? You may have exaggerated some things?
6 A. No, I most certainly haven't. That was the most difficult day of
7 my life, this trip.
8 Q. Let us return to that convoy.
9 Did they demand any money or some valuables? I mean those who
10 escorted you in -- in that convoy.
11 A. No, not in the convoy. Because we had been robbed earlier in
12 Omarska, so there was no need to do so because we were left with nothing.
13 But upon arriving at Manjaca we got searched once more. And if anybody
14 had his personal ID on him or anything of the kind, they would take it
15 away at Manjaca, if it was left on somebody at Omarska. Because at
16 Omarska people came in at different hours and under different conditions.
17 But at Manjaca, we were once again searched. They took away all our
18 personal IDs, and that's how it was. And during the ride, there was no
19 need to demand money or valuables from us because at Omarska they had
20 stripped us of everything.
21 At the time, the Seiko 5 watch was very much in vogue, and I
22 found it funny that we were constantly asking whether anybody had a
23 Seiko 5 watch. Obviously to the guards this was something very valuable.
24 Q. Based on your experience as an eye-witness, you will agree with
25 me when I say that the basic motive of this blackmailing or the extortion
1 of prosperous citizens was robbery, to get something out of the people;
3 A. Right. But that possibility was provided them. Nobody prevented
4 them from doing so.
5 Q. When you came to Manjaca, you knew some people from your escort,
6 and there's evidence that -- showing that they were also -- they also
7 knew who they wanted from those buses; correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. So at that moment you were unaware of the motivation of the
10 perpetrator, why they wanted a certain individual from the bus; correct?
11 A. That is correct.
12 Q. You spoke about an episode, but you allow for the possibility
13 that there were some earlier incidents that may have resulted in acts of
14 revenge, as inappropriate as that revenge may be?
15 A. Well, yes. It's possible.
16 Q. At Manjaca, it was a POW camp commanded by the army; correct?
17 A. Yes. Because that man Bozidar Popovic was a lieutenant-colonel.
18 Q. You were at Manjaca earlier, taking part in military exercises;
20 A. Yes. But not at the camp itself. It was a cattle farm. But I
21 was very near that place at Manjaca, as a reserve soldier.
22 Q. On the right of that compound, there's a road and then there's a
23 ditch and so on. But what -- and where were the buses located with
24 regard to the compound?
25 A. Now, there are these barns on the right side, and the buses were
1 parked on the right.
2 Q. Was there a -- a large, free space?
3 A. Well, yes, probably. Because there were many buses. But I was
4 so exhausted, and everybody else was, that we didn't have the nerve to
5 look around a lot. And we were eager to get away from those fellow
6 Prijedor people, to call them that, and even if it meant going to
8 Q. It was night, and visibility was poor; correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And the windows were misted up; right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. So it was difficult to see, in such conditions, who did what
13 outside the buses, what kind of incidents went on; do you agree with me?
14 A. I do.
15 Q. So you can assume some details and possibly later under more
16 favourable conditions you may have learned more details. You didn't
17 eye-witness everything; right?
18 A. Yes. I said as much. But I saw the event with Dedo. I saw him
19 being taken away, and I saw him beaten up when he was brought back, and I
20 saw him dead.
21 Q. But you cannot be sure about the others; right?
22 A. Yes. But I did see dead bodies in the morning.
23 Q. And the late Mr. Crnalic died on the bus; correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. In your subsequent humanitarian work and social activities or,
1 rather, socio-political activities, at Sanski Most, on several occasions
2 you approached the court, the municipal court at Sanski Most, to make
3 statements about some persons having died, to enable their families to
4 exercise their rights; correct?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And it's logical that if you make a statement five years after
7 the incident, that is, in 1997, that such a statement is much more
8 reliable than any statement that you are making now; correct?
9 A. Yes, probably.
10 Q. Mr. Murselovic, I'm not trying to vivisect you, certainly; I'm
11 merely saying that logically at that time your memory must have been
12 better and that your answers were more detailed. So I'm not trying to
13 trap you in any way, God forbid.
14 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] Could we please see document
15 2D03-1259, please. Uh-huh.
16 Q. Although the letters are very small, I'll take you through some
17 of the details mentioned here.
18 This is a court ruling dated 7 February 1997. We're talking
19 about the Sanski Most Municipal Court.
20 Can you see it?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And it's a ruling to declare Dedo Crnalic dead. You can see
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And in paragraph 3 of the ruling --
1 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] Could we ask the Registrar to zoom
2 in on paragraph 3.
3 Q. Can you see it better?
4 A. I can see it.
5 Q. We can see that the proceedings were presided by
6 Judge Edina Ridjesic; correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And in that paragraph, two witnesses are mentioned; you are one
9 of them. And you say that in front of Manjaca camp, Serb soldiers took
10 out the late Crnalic out of the bus and shot him before the eyes of the
11 other inmates.
12 A. That's what it says, but it didn't happen that way. They
13 probably knew that he was killed and identified, possibly exhumed
14 already; I'm not sure. But that he was shot before the eyes of the other
15 inmates, that's not true. It says here: With other -- with him and
16 other inmates from the Omarska camp to the Manjaca camp, and so on, but
17 Dedo and seven other inmates were taken off the bus and shot in plain
18 view of the other inmates, and so ...
19 I'm reading it.
20 Q. No, no. Please don't read it because we don't want it all on the
21 record. I'll help you.
22 A. [No interpretation]
23 Q. So before the court at Sanski Most as a witness under oath you
24 gave this statement; correct?
25 A. Well --
1 Q. And in this statement, 1997, five years after the incident, you
2 said that Serb soldiers had taken seven persons off the bus and shot this
3 man Dedo Crnalic. This is what it says.
4 A. Yes, that's what it says.
5 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation] I see my learned friend on his
7 MR. OLMSTED: Yes, Your Honours, I'm a bit confused as to the
8 purpose of this line of questioning. I assumed from Mr. Pantelic's
9 questions, foundational questions, that he is trying to refresh this
10 witness's memory as to what happened on the 6th and 7th of August, 1992.
11 So it's unclear; is Mr. Pantelic claiming that the detainees who were
12 killed on that date were shot? Is that what he's claiming? Otherwise, I
13 don't see the purpose of this line of questioning.
14 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated]
15 MR. PANTELIC: Just be patient and we shall cover that issue.
16 JUDGE HARHOFF: But, Mr. Pantelic, I was looking for the
17 reference that you had made to the fact that it was soldiers who took out
18 the prisoners from the bus and shot them.
19 Where do you find this reference?
20 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, this is -- the paragraph stated --
21 it's in their statements, both proposed witnesses specified the date and
22 the time, et cetera, et cetera.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: If I may be of -- of assistance, Your Honours.
24 The Serbian text says the Serbian soldiers took out of the bus
25 and -- and shot, and the English translation omits the Serbian soldiers.
1 MR. PANTELIC: So, for the record, Your Honour, I think the best
2 solution is that witness just read out this particular portion, that we
3 have a clear record.
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes, obviously, because the English translation
5 does not reflect the information that this was done by soldiers.
6 MR. PANTELIC: And then later on we could ask, from translation
7 unit, to -- to rectify this particular part.
8 MR. OLMSTED: Your Honours, before we proceed, again, I mean,
9 this is not this witness's statement. This is a ruling by a municipal
10 court in 1997 on evidence we don't what the basis of it is. We just have
11 some kind of interpretation of events.
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Olmsted, we are fully aware of what this is.
13 My question was only triggered by Mr. Pantelic's reference to the fact
14 that this had been done by soldiers. The matter is now clarified. We
15 can ask the witness to read it out, and let's move on.
16 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. I kindly ask you, Mr. Murselovic, to read the paragraph slowly
18 which begins with the words: "Both ..."
19 A. It says in the paragraph:
20 "In their statements, both proposed witnesses specified in detail
21 the time and place of death of Dedo Crnalic. Witness Muharem Murselovic
22 said that Dedo Crnalic was taken on the bus together with him and the
23 other inmates and was taken by bus to the Omarska camp. Arriving at the
24 Manjaca camp, Dedo and seven other inmates were taken off the bus by
25 Serbian soldiers and shot in place view of the other inmates. In his
1 statement, witness Atif," something, maybe Draganovic, "said that he was
2 at the Manjaca camp when the buses with the inmates from the Omarska camp
3 arrived, and he watched with other inmates as eight inmates from the
4 Omarska camp were taken off the bus and shot in front of the bus and
5 their bodies were thrown on a heap. Among the killed, the witness
6 recognised Dedo Crnalic whom he knew from before the war from sports
8 Q. Thank you. That is it.
9 And now, the point is this: In view of the circumstances that
10 you confirmed earlier here, in terms of the time and the physical
11 elements, and in view of these two pieces of information that you have,
12 you allow that there were Serb soldiers who took part in this, on the
13 basis of this statement; is that correct?
14 A. No. The fact that -- where it says that they were shot in plain
15 view, this did not happen. I never stated that. They declared them dead
16 probably on the basis of information that they were killed. In order to
17 declare someone dead, you need certain information. So I did that so
18 that they would be able to do it. I said that I had seen him dead. All
19 the things that I told you about, that he was taken off the bus, that the
20 guards took him off the bus and killed him, all of that stands, because
21 here, in this statement of reasons, it says that both witnesses said this
22 and that. I was with him. Our goal at the time was to declare him dead.
23 As for this, that he was shot, no. He was killed while wearing
24 my jacket. We had checked jackets, both, and he took mine by mistake
25 when we were going out, and I know this very well. I probably said, when
1 providing the statement: I saw him dead, he was killed in Manjaca, he
2 was killed while wearing my jacket, I saw him dead, I saw him when he was
3 being taken out; and this is sufficient. I don't know, though, how this
4 court put all of those facts together. I don't know that.
5 Since we're talking about certificates of death that were issued
6 en masse --
7 Q. I understand you completely. You're a witness before the court.
8 You stated this for the transcript. But the point was this: You allow
9 for the possibility that in that group there were different members,
10 guards, armed persons. What I'm saying is that there were all three
11 types of people. Do you agree with that option?
12 A. I agree that we were brought by reserve or active policemen.
13 They were policemen. They handed us over to Omarska, which was a
14 military camp. But all these guards in the camp as well, there were
15 plenty of policemen who came. But in structure, Manjaca was a military
16 camp. And we had a much better time in Omarska because there was more
17 order there. In Manjaca where all the supervision was done by the police
18 was much worse.
19 So I'm just stating that on the basis of all of the things that I
20 said, the paraphrasing in this statement of reasons or in there ruling
21 might have been slightly different. It might have been slightly
22 differently put together.
23 MR. OLMSTED: I'm not sure if this is an interpretation error or
24 perhaps the witness is a little bit confused. It seems like there's --
25 he's switching Omarska with Manjaca camp. They were taken to Manjaca
1 camp where they were handed over to the military commanders of that camp,
2 and the conditions were worse at Omarska than Manjaca.
3 But I'm not sure we have to go over all that. His evidence on
4 direct examination is clear on that.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Murselovic, I think what the issue is really
6 about here is if can you testify to who exactly killed those seven or
7 eight detainees who were taken out of the buses that night on the
8 6th of August. So far, you have testified that, in your view, as far as
9 you recall, they were killed by the guards, that is to say, the
10 policemen, who escorted you.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Policemen.
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: [Previous translation continues] ... yes. But now
13 Mr. Pantelic is suggesting to you that in fact they -- they could have
14 been killed by soldiers from Manjaca.
15 And so could you be more specific about your testimony, whether
16 it was one or the other group who --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can, I can.
18 JUDGE HARHOFF: [Previous translation continues] ...
19 perpetrated --
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those people were killed by the
21 escort, the police that were escorting us and that brought us in front of
22 the Manjaca camp. This is beyond any doubt.
23 The statement of the camp warden saying that he didn't want to
24 receive dead bodies meant that he was wanting to have nothing to do with
25 the killings. And the guards who guarded us that night who held us in
1 the buses that night, they took out those seven or eight people and
2 killed them. That is a fact. I know specifically about Dedo Crnalic,
3 when he was taken off from my bus, beaten, massacred, and that he was
4 carried in through the front door, and that he died in this bus where I
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: And were you able to see this happening outside
7 the bus? Could you peak out through the window?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I couldn't see or peak through the
9 window. But as soon as he came out, they started beating Mr. Crnalic.
10 And he was saying, Children, please don't beat me. And they were saying,
11 We're going to make kebabs, we're going to make minced meat out of you;
12 that they would massacre him. And he said, Please, young ones, don't
13 kill me, don't beat me. And then you could hear moaning and shouting.
14 This took maybe some 20 minutes, half an hour or so, I don't
15 know. And then after 40 minutes or so, he was carried back inside
16 through the front door. They asked two people from the bus to carry him
17 inside the bus. It was dark, the lights were off, it was hot, we were
18 lying on the floor, but I was able to hear that. That's what I was able
19 to hear.
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you very much.
21 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Witness, can you tell us who called him out
22 and who asked other detainees on the bus to take him back in after the
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Those who brought us, the guards
25 who were escorting the convoy, they did it. The policemen who were in
1 our escort. They took him out. They called him out. They opened the
2 front doors and said can someone come out so that they can carry Dedo
3 back inside.
4 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... for MFI,
5 pending the translation, this particular part which is missing, if there
6 is no objection.
7 MR. OLMSTED: We object. I mean, what's the purpose? This
8 document has been read to the witness, the witness read it out loud.
9 It -- clearly he disagrees with what it states. It's not even a
10 judgement; it's a ruling on a certificate of death. So its evidence is
11 minimal with any value [sic].
12 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, we have -- this witness was also
13 witness, and he was a part of these proceedings before the court in
14 Sanski Most. He -- he confirmed that. So I don't see any particular --
15 particular reason not to have this document for the future moment where
16 we shall go to the interpretation and, you know, explanation of each
17 position. OTP will have possibility to give their position; and we,
19 MR. OLMSTED: Really, this creates this troubling, vicious circle
20 that we've encountered before. They're putting forth a ruling, signed by
21 someone who is not a witness here. Without calling the person who signed
22 this document, we have no idea where, really, this information came from.
23 We've heard from the witness that he denies this information as accurate.
24 So really it's opening the door to a whole bunch of evidence on a
25 document that really is of minimal value.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm really --
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm really sorry, but I would like the Office of
4 the Prosecution to clarify their position. If this document, which is a
5 certificate of death of one of the victims which are in our indictment,
6 is of minimal value, I don't know what is of greater value in this case.
7 MR. OLMSTED: It's not in dispute that this person was killed.
8 That is clear. The question is: What value does it have beyond that
9 particular fact?
10 MR. ZECEVIC: It is in dispute, Your Honours.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE HALL: Whereas an argument could be made along the lines
13 that Mr. Olmsted is formulating it, the relevance of this document is
14 patent. And it's now as good a time as any to admit it.
15 So --
16 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I'm sorry. With respect, we're back
17 to -- and I'm sorry. I'm taking over from Mr. Olmsted at this stage.
18 This document which the witness says is wrong is being put in to
19 prove, the Defence say, that he is unreliable and not credible when he
20 says this man was suffocated. It's being put in to prove the truth of
21 what is contained in that document.
22 Your Honours, that is not a proper proceeding.
23 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, the -- there is a clearly a
24 contradiction, and it is obvious the purpose for which the Defence would
25 wish to rely on this document. At this point, they have clearly set out
1 what -- where they hope to be. I was saying -- I go back a few minutes
2 in the document. We -- our ruling is this document should be marked for
3 identification at this point.
4 But the -- it is inherent, in the process in which we are
5 engaged, that contradictions such as this would occur. And the -- it is
6 a resolution which, if the Chamber finds that the truth of the contents
7 of this document, as distinct from the document merely being a piece of
8 paper is something it should consider, is something that the Tribunal
9 would have to waive. That's the nature of evidence.
10 But what we have is what purports to be a ruling from a -- a - is
11 it a court? - from a -- from an official organ of state which, on the
12 face of it, contradicts the witness's evidence, so it's ...
13 MS. KORNER: But, Your Honour, that's -- that's the -- that's the
14 whole point. Whether Your Honours -- I'm perfectly happy, but we haven't
15 had this situation. If you say that official documents we don't have to
16 prove that they're the -- the truth or otherwise, then they're simply
17 going in provided they're relevant. But that is not what Your Honours
18 have not been ruling up so far. So far. We have had endless arguments
19 and discussion about this. And this particular document is being put in
20 not because it's an official organ but because it is suggested that
21 because this is contained in this document without hearing any witness as
22 to what happened Your Honours should accept that this witness is wrong.
23 Now, Your Honours --
24 JUDGE HALL: Don't -- that's the argument that we will be invited
25 to find at the end of the ... but for the moment, the -- the document is
1 clearly not irrelevant. And the use of the double negative by me is
3 MS. KORNER: Very well, Your Honours.
4 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
5 JUDGE HALL: So it's marked for identification pending the
6 receipt of the certified translation.
7 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit 2D113, marked for identification,
8 Your Honours.
9 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Mr. Murselovic, and can you please tell me, during your stay in
11 Manjaca, did you speak to the camp commander and say that it was
12 necessary to investigate this incident that you witnessed, you and your
13 colleagues? Did anyone ever approach the camp commander and ask him that
14 an investigation be conducted into this matter?
15 A. No. But I need to clarify something, please, about this document
16 and --
17 Q. No, no. No. Mr. Murselovic, you need to perhaps explain that to
18 the Prosecutor. There are different rules in force here now.
19 I asked you --
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. -- whether you spoke to the security, military security organs,
22 in the Manjaca camp, to an investigator, or the camp commander to
23 initiate proceedings against the perpetrators of this crime. Yes or no?
24 A. No.
25 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honours. I don't have further
1 questions for this witness. Thank you.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE HALL: The -- before -- sorry.
4 Mr. Pantelic, your cross-examination is concluded?
5 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, I don't have --
6 JUDGE HALL: Yes. Before I invite counsel for Stanisic -- for
7 Mr. Stanisic to cross-examine, the witness wanted to -- whereas we're
8 reluctant for witnesses to volunteer testimony, there was some
9 clarification the witness wanted to make, and it appears to be pertinent.
10 So could you go ahead with the intervention that you wanted to
11 make, Mr. Murselovic.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I must first say that I was called
13 as a witness upon the request of the wife of Dedo Crnalic to confirm
14 whether or not he was killed at Omarska and whether I had seen him dead,
15 and I confirmed I did. I said I saw when he was called and I saw him
16 dead. And that's the first thing that I did.
17 I didn't read the minutes or sign it. I did that for her to take
18 care of some private business, supposedly, so I only stated that I saw
19 that he was killed.
20 That was number one.
21 And the second thing I want to say is the following: Do you
22 think that we were supposed to raise issues with the military commander
23 of Manjaca such as why these people were killed rather than some others?
24 Do you think that we were at liberty to address the camp commander with
25 such issues, why some people were killed? I mean, that's ridiculous.
1 That wasn't a debate circle.
2 JUDGE HALL: [Previous translation continues] ... thank -- thank
3 you, sir.
4 Yes, Mr. Cvijetic.
5 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, just this last
6 matter has arisen. I wasn't going to ask any questions otherwise.
7 Could I have the same document back on the screens, please,
9 Cross-examination by Mr. Cvijetic:
10 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Murselovic.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. This is the final ruling about the request to declare a person
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. The judge ruled to that effect, having heard the witnesses who
16 spoke about the circumstances of the death; is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Before the judge made that ruling, you made an oral statement in
19 her presence; correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. She had minutes taken of that statement, written minutes;
23 A. I just know that I made a statement to the effect that the man
24 was dead. Because the purpose of the request was to declare him dead, to
25 exercise some rights.
1 Q. Just tell me whether the official court reporter made a record of
2 your statement. Was it dictated to her?
3 A. I don't know. I didn't pay attention. The purpose was only to
4 have the man declared dead. The purpose was simply to prove that
5 so-and-so was dead.
6 Q. Did the judge warn you of the importance to make a truthful
7 statement, just like here before this Tribunal?
8 A. I can't see my signature anywhere here. I made an oral
9 statement, and there were many such cases, but I didn't make many
10 statements, just two or three, about people whom I really had seen dead,
11 whether it was at Omarska or anywhere. And I don't quite remember. But
12 I certainly did not say that they were shot. That is out of the
13 question. I know the circumstances of his killing, and this ruling was
14 not read out to me.
15 [Defence counsel confer]
16 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Let me ask you once more. Did the judge who ruled this have a
18 reason to interpret your statement differently than you gave it?
19 JUDGE HALL: [Previous translation continues] ... I --
20 MR. CVIJETIC: [Interpretation] I withdraw my question,
21 Your Honours. I have no more questions for the witness.
22 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Olmsted. [Microphone not activated] Yes,
23 Mr. Olmsted.
24 MR. OLMSTED: Thank you, Your Honour.
25 Re-examination by Mr. Olmsted:
1 Q. Not long ago Mr. Pantelic suggested to you that the police guards
2 who were escorting you from Omarska to Manjaca camp on the
3 6th of August were there to protect you and other detainees.
4 Can you tell us, you've testified that you were lying down in the
5 buses. What were the guards doing while you were lying down on the
6 bus -- in the buses?
7 A. Several times they would walk through the bus from the rear door
8 to the front door or the other way around. And they were walking on us
9 probably to humiliate us because we were lying on our bellies. And then
10 walking on us, they would say, Oh, these Baljas do stink. And we were
11 lying prostrate on the floor, the ones over the others.
12 Q. Did they make you sing any songs during the trip?
13 JUDGE HALL: You needn't articulate your objection, Mr. Zecevic.
14 Yes, Mr. Olmsted, please go on. Please confine yourself to what
15 has come out of cross-examination.
16 MR. OLMSTED: Well, Your Honours, it does. Your Honours, let me
17 explain why. Mr. Pantelic is suggesting that the police were doing --
18 were escorting these detainees for their protection, making them lie on
19 the floor, protecting them from the outside world. And I want to ask
20 whether they were made to sing any songs and that would establish, help
21 establish, that this was not the case. Because the songs themselves
22 indicate that they weren't there to protect them but to make matters
23 worse for them.
24 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, this is really not fair from the --
25 from my learned friend Mr. Olmsted. In the examination-in-chief, this
1 witness said that at certain stopovers there was, you know, dangers
2 against the prisoners from the Serbian population. I follow that issue,
3 suggested to -- to this witness that that could be the case because of
4 the tensions, ethnic tensions, there. And now my learned friend is
5 fabricating a story that my suggestion was that Serbian police protected
6 them from the outside world.
7 I mean, where we are going, for Christ's sake? It's not fair.
8 JUDGE HALL: Well -- [Overlapping speakers] ...
9 MR. PANTELIC: You have chief, you have cross. So confine
10 yourself to re-direct and the issues.
11 JUDGE HALL: Mr. -- it seems to me that their initial question
12 about protection was a fair question. But this question about singing
13 songs is clearly beyond the pale. Drop it and move on.
14 MR. OLMSTED:
15 Q. Mr. Pantelic also asked whether the guards robbed you while on
16 the bus that day, and you mentioned that you were robbed at Omarska camp.
17 Can you tell us who robbed you at Omarska camp?
18 A. Well, I was robbed by reserve policemen. They took my wallet and
19 all the money I had. I know that I had 500 Swiss francs on me and one
20 police officer took them from me. I don't know his name. And there was
21 some 2- or 300 marks. But I do remember specifically that 500 francs
22 note. We were all robbed to the bone.
23 At that time, at Omarska, there was no chance that anybody would
24 have any money on them or any valuables, and it was the police officers
25 who were robbing us.
1 MR. OLMSTED: I have three more questions, Your Honour, but we're
2 at the break. Do we want to a break now, just in case we go a little bit
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE HALL: We'll take the break now and come back in
6 20 minutes.
7 --- Recess taken at 12.05 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 12.45 p.m.
9 JUDGE HALL: I believe the parties were alerted that we would
10 have been delayed taking the bench. We had certain administrative
11 matters that we were trying to iron out in anticipation of the witness to
14 MR. OLMSTED: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Q. Mr. Murselovic, just a few more questions for you.
16 I just want to return one more time to these incidents when you
17 stopped along the way to Manjaca camp, the convoy stopped along the way
18 to Manjaca camp and people from outside were throwing stones at you and
19 other detainees.
20 Can you tell us, how did the police guards who were escorting you
21 that day react to this, to the stone throwing?
22 A. I must say that they didn't prevent that at all. On the
23 contrary. They, in a way, were inciting it.
24 Q. I think we missed the last bit of what you said. You said that
25 they weren't preventing it, in a way, they were doing something. What
1 were they doing?
2 A. Well, they would open the door a little - the bus had three
3 doors - and throw -- stones were being thrown at us. They would -- they
4 would say that they were extremists, there is Green Berets or something
5 and such. So that's how they incited people to throw stones at us.
6 Q. I want to turn, lastly, to the killing of Dedo Crnalic.
7 On the night of August 6th and 7th, 1992, when the guards called
8 out Mr. Crnalic, did they appear to have known him personally?
9 A. I don't know whether they knew him personally. I didn't know
10 that. But they knew his first and last name, and they said, Dedo
11 Crnalic, come out to -- and we'll make -- we'll turn you into kebab; to
12 repeat that once more. And that's they took him out.
13 Q. Did -- the guards that called him out that night, did they know
14 which particular bus he was on, or were they searching every bus for him?
15 A. I don't know. They probably knew which bus he was on because
16 when they opened the door and said, Dedo Crnalic, come out; so they must
17 have assumed that he was on our bus.
18 Q. Can you tell us where Mr. Crnalic was from originally?
19 A. Mr. Dedo Crnalic hailed from a neighbourhood in Prijedor that was
20 called Skela or Raskovac. That is a part of town predominantly settled
21 or populated by Bosniaks. There were others too. But he lived in that
22 neighbourhood that we called Skela, and Dedo Crnalic was a well-known
23 sports activist. He was on very good terms with the sports officials of
24 former Yugoslavia. He coached a club, and then he was also director of a
25 club. By trade, he was a tailor. But he liked sports very much, and he
1 engaged in sports a lot, although he was very active in his local
2 commune. He took care of issues such as water supply, heating, and so
3 on, so people knew him and liked him for that.
4 MR. OLMSTED: No further questions, Your Honours.
5 Questioned by the Court:
6 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Murselovic, you told us that the buses
7 stopped at several occasions during your ride to Manjaca camp. And if
8 I'm not wrong, you said they stopped at local inns; right?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is right.
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: What were the -- what was the reason of these
11 stops; do you know? Why did they stop?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Probably to have a drink or refresh
13 themselves, having a beer or something. That must have been one of the
14 reasons. But they didn't take us off the buses, nor did they let us
15 leave the buses.
16 JUDGE DELVOIE: At any of these stops, you -- in other words,
17 there were -- on the way, there were no sanitary stops for you, for the
18 detainees; and when arriving at Manjaca, no sanitary stop either? You
19 stayed in the bus all the time?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We were on the buses all the time.
21 And there was no need for us to go to toilets because we were in such a
22 state that we had nothing left to do there. We were all wallowing in our
23 own filth and urine. All night we -- they didn't let us go out. Only in
24 the morning around 6.00 when we were let off the buses, then they would
25 allow us to go and relieve ourselves.
1 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
2 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Murselovic. We are especially
3 appreciative of your having to relive these horrible events in assisting
4 the Tribunal. Your testimony is at an end. Are you released as a
5 witness, and we wish you a safe journey back to your home.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
7 [The witness withdrew]
8 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, before Mr. Demirdjian deals with the
9 next witness, can I raise one matter. And I'm sorry to have to raise it.
10 Your Honour, it relate to the appropriateness of language used in
11 court by counsel. Your Honour, at page 60, line 19, I -- I would
12 respectively suggest, and I may say I was expecting Your Honours to take
13 action on this, that the language that was used by Mr. Pantelic is not
14 appropriate in an international forum in open court. It may cause
15 offence to a very large section of the population. And I raise it now
16 because it's not the first time that that expression has been used.
17 JUDGE HALL: Thank you for bringing it to our attention,
18 Ms. Korner. It's something -- I would review the transcript, and if we
19 consider that it is necessary and advisable to formally speak to it, we
20 certainly would. Thank you.
21 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, I do apologise, but I just checked
22 this particular portion of the transcript, and could we have more details
23 from Ms. Korner where and what was said.
24 JUDGE HALL: Well, she's given the reference.
25 MS. KORNER: I'm not going to --
1 MR. PANTELIC: I checked, Your Honour. I don't see any
2 particular problem with wording or. ...
3 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm not going to repeat the expression
4 because it's what I -- it's the nature of the expression that I'm
5 objecting to.
6 JUDGE HALL: I have seen the highlighted portion, and I remember
7 at the time that I heard it. But still I would prefer to, rather than
8 speaking to it now, to give the matter some reflective thought.
9 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] ... the only reason I'm
10 raising it, it's not the first time that matters have been expressed in
11 that way. If Your Honour looks at 3rd of March of this year, again, page
12 7.193. I let it go the first time. But I -- I -- as I say, I think it's
13 is objectionable.
14 JUDGE HALL: Others may too agree, Ms. Korner. But one of the
15 problems is going to be the - how should I put it? - overlay of
16 contemporary popular culture over other considerations. So that's why I
17 said it's something that we would need -- on which we would need to
19 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I understand. All I'm saying is that
20 what may be said in the course of private conversation is one thing; what
21 is said in a court of law in an international forum is another.
22 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, I do apologise. Mr. O'Sullivan was
23 very kind to give me certain language details obviously.
24 Well, I -- I deeply understand that word that I used -- I didn't
25 know that there is difference between, in English, between "God's sake"
1 and "Christ's sake." So now he clarified. If that's a problem, I really
2 would like to -- to say that my -- absolutely I didn't have any intention
3 to offend anyone. So I don't know how -- how it was translated in B/C/S,
4 but, obviously, that's the intention.
5 Thank you.
6 JUDGE HALL: Thank you for your explanation, Mr. Pantelic.
7 Yes, Mr. -- is the information that we have before us correct,
8 that your next intended witness is 017?
9 MR. OLMSTED: Yes, Your Honour, that's correct. And as
10 Mr. Demirdjian would like to occupy my seat, if I may be excused at this
12 JUDGE HALL: Yes, you may withdraw. And while you're doing that,
13 there's a brief oral ruling that the chamber has to deliver.
14 The Trial Chamber is seized of the Prosecution's motion seeking
15 to amend its Rule 65 ter list of witnesses in response to its challenges
16 to adjudicated facts filed confidentially on the 8th of July, 2010.
17 The -- on the 22nd of July, 2010, the Defence for Mr. Zupljanin
18 filed a response objecting to the motion.
19 The Defence for Mr. Stanisic did not respond.
20 On the 27th of July, 2010, the Prosecution sought leave to file a
22 This is an oral ruling affecting ST-017 who is to be heard now.
23 On the 21st of July, 2010, acting pursuant to the Trial Chamber's
24 first -- 14th of July, 2010, decision granting, in part, the
25 Prosecution's motion to amend its Rule 65 ter witness list as a result of
1 the Trial Chamber's 1st of April, 2010, decision concerning judicial
2 notice of adjudicated facts, the Prosecution filed a noticed adding
3 ST-017, inter alia, to the 65 ter list.
4 Accordingly, the Trial Chamber interprets the portion of the
5 motion pertaining to ST-017 as a request to expand his testimony to
6 address the adjudicated facts purportedly challenged by the Defence; that
7 is, to address the testimony of ST-054 concerning the Adjudicated Facts
8 558, 559, 561, 562, and 563.
9 For the reasons set forth in a written decision to be rendered
10 shortly, the Trial Chamber considers that there is a prima facie,
11 reliable, and credible challenge to these adjudicated facts.
12 Furthermore, the Trial Chamber considers that the proposed
13 expansion of ST-017's testimony, a personal account to these events, is
14 relevant to the adjudicated facts and has probative value. The
15 Trial Chamber does not consider that expanding the scope of his testimony
16 will unduly prejudice the Defence, as they have been on sufficient notice
17 of this testimony.
18 Therefore, the Trial Chamber is satisfied that it is in the
19 interests of justice to allow ST-017 to testify on Adjudicated Facts 558,
20 559, 560, 561, 562, and 563.
21 [Prosecution counsel confer]
22 JUDGE HALL: Having regard to the extant order regarding this
23 witness's status, we would immediately move into closed session.
24 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, Your Honours, this rule -- extemporary
25 ruling has taken us all by surprise. We're not sure that we're talking
1 about the same witness. So you're going have to give us time for a
3 [Prosecution counsel confer]
4 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
5 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Your Honours, there seems to be a bit of a
6 confusion as to whether the -- what the decision is in relation to,
7 because ST-017 is the very next witness.
8 Would it be possible to adjourn for five to ten minutes just so
9 we can find that motion and deal with this? Because at the moment we're
10 not able to find that motion and figure out exactly what was requested in
12 JUDGE HALL: Very well.
13 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Thank you, Your Honours.
14 --- Break taken at 1.06 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 1.21 p.m.
16 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Yes, Your Honours, I --
17 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Demirdjian.
18 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Yes, I apologise for that, but we are ready to
19 proceed now.
20 JUDGE HALL: So we go into closed session.
21 MR. DEMIRDJIAN: Yes.
22 [Closed session]
11 Pages 15767-15776 redacted. Closed session.
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: And we are back in open session, Your Honours.
8 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
9 We have been alerted to a motion that is about to be filed by the
10 OTP in respect of the next witness on the list, and the - in terms of
11 protective measures - and when that comes in, we would -- once it's
12 formally filed, we would be requesting of the Defence an expedited
14 So we take the adjournment to 9.00 tomorrow morning in this
15 courtroom. Thank you.
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m.,
17 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 12th day
18 of October, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.