Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 23561

 1                           Wednesday, 20 July 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning,

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.  This is case number IT-08-91-T,

 7     the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.  Good morning to

 9     everyone.

10             May we have the appearances, please.

11             MR. HANNIS:  Good morning, everyone.  For the Prosecution,

12     Tom Hannis and Crispian Smith.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Slobodan Zecevic,

14     Slobodan Cvijetic, Eugene O'Sullivan, and Ms. Tatjana Savic appearing for

15     Stanisic Defence this morning.

16             MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour,

17     Aleksandar Aleksic for the Defence of Mr. Zupljanin.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Would the usher please escort the witness to the

19     stand.  There was something you had, Mr. Hannis?

20             MR. HANNIS:  Yeah, I had two brief matters.  I can do them at the

21     end of the day or I can do them now, whatever is your pleasure.

22             JUDGE HALL:  Because we expect this to be a relatively short

23     sitting, perhaps the end of the day would be -- that's more efficient.

24             MR. HANNIS:  That's fine, Your Honour.  And for the record I note

25     we are sitting without Judge Harhoff.

Page 23562

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, thank you.

 2                           [The witness takes the stand]

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Macar, good morning to you.  Before Mr. Zecevic

 4     wraps up his re-examination, I give you a final reminder as to your

 5     solemn declaration.

 6             Yes, Mr. Zecevic.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 8                           WITNESS:  GORAN MACAR [Resumed]

 9                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

10                           Re-examination by Mr. Zecevic: [Continued]

11        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Macar.

12        A.   Good morning to everybody.

13        Q.   Yesterday we discussed P199, which is tab 115.

14             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we have on our screens P199,

15     please.

16        Q.   These are the minutes and tape-recording of the National Assembly

17     of Republika Srpska held between the 24th and 26th July 1992.  At this

18     Assembly Mr. Karadzic gave a speech, gave a presentation, and Mr. Hannis

19     asked you about the order of the Presidency based on which the order of

20     the minister of the interior was adopted to disband all special units in

21     July of 1992.

22             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please turn to page 13.

23     In your version it's page 14 of the Serbian text and page 16 of the

24     English text.  Thank you.

25        Q.   The last paragraph starting with the words:  "One of the

Page 23563

 1     essential problems ..."  It's also the last paragraph in the English

 2     text.  And Mr. Karadzic says there:

 3             "One of the essential problems we are facing is the poor

 4     functioning of central authorities.  The responsibility lays partly or

 5     mostly on us, primarily because we have not yet fully defined the status

 6     of SAO autonomous regions, or their organs in relation to the central

 7     authorities."

 8             Further on at the very end Mr. Karadzic says:

 9             "We will know immediately that this is about the congenital Serb

10     tendency towards autonomy, tendency of creating small princedoms and

11     small princes behind whom one can always find private interest and not

12     the interest of the nation."

13             Mr. Macar, in your view, is Mr. Karadzic in these words

14     accurately portraying the situation as it existed in 1992?

15        A.   Yes, fully.

16             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please turn to the next

17     page now, which is page 15 in the English -- no, I apologise, 15 in the

18     Serbian text in e-court and page 17 in the English text.

19        Q.   In the second paragraph, somewhere in the middle of the English

20     text, he says, third sentence:

21             "There are only individual needs for power among local

22     power-mongers for power and financial benefit and financial power, which

23     can only temporarily wear the disguise identifying with the motherland,

24     identifying with a smaller entity.  I think that history could not deny

25     us any minor identification right now.  All Serbs at this point need to

Page 23564

 1     identify themselves with the Serbdom in its entirety."

 2             On the following page, which is page 16 of the Serbian text and

 3     page 18 of the English text, in the middle of the page.  Somewhere

 4     towards the end of the English text it begins with the words:  "However,

 5     in the domestic political sense ..." which is somewhere in the middle of

 6     the Serbian text.  Mr. Karadzic says:

 7             "However, in the internal domestic political sense, we have

 8     enormous problems, which this Assembly will have to define, that is to

 9     say, to give carte blanche to the Presidency and the government to

10     implement decisively the necessary measures in every stage.  At this

11     stage the priority is to put into order the state mechanisms of power,

12     that is to say, state organs; to reorient the police for peace time; to

13     place the remaining police force within the JNA; and to place all special

14     police forces which are being misused by some people under the single

15     command of the Republic MUP, and under no circumstances should they be

16     put under the command of some local princes."

17             Tell me, please, Mr. Macar, are you familiar with the fact that

18     this was the position of the president of the Presidency of

19     Republika Srpska?

20        A.   Yes, and his position was partly formulated based on the

21     information delivered by the ministry, sent by the ministry to the

22     government and to the Presidency.

23        Q.   Just one more quotation from the speech.  It begins on this page,

24     the last sentence, and then it continues on to the next page which is

25     page 17 of the Serbian text and page 19 of the English text.  Somewhere

Page 23565

 1     in the middle of the English text it says:

 2             "Everything that is being adopted by various Crisis Staffs and

 3     various War Presidencies, all of those are measures that are adopted in

 4     the state of war and they are not legitimate when adopted by the legal

 5     organs of power.  This is why I recommend that the Assembly confirm what

 6     the Presidency acting as the Assembly has decided, namely, to establish

 7     elected and legitimate organs of civilian power everywhere, throughout

 8     the territory, and these authorities should not function as rivals of the

 9     military power.  Rather, they should complement each other."

10             Then he goes on to say:

11             "What is important is that we have to decisively eliminate

12     para-state as well as paramilitary formations.  The para-state ones are

13     perhaps even more dangerous right now because they can make catastrophic

14     decisions that in peace time nobody would recognise or confirm, and in

15     the meantime they're causing us great damage."

16             Do you agree with these words of Mr. Karadzic?  Do you agree that

17     this reflects the situation as it existed in 1992?

18        A.   Yes, fully.

19        Q.   Following Mr. Karadzic, Branko Djeric, prime minister, also gave

20     a speech.  It's your page 17 and page 18 in e-court, whereas page 20 in

21     the English text, 20 and 21.  These are the words of Branko Djeric, the

22     prime minister.  And then on the following page, page 19 in e-court and

23     page 21 of the English text, Mr. Djeric gives a comment at the bottom.

24     It begins with the words "certainly" or "naturally."  It is also in the

25     middle in the English text "the geographical seat of the government ..."

Page 23566

 1             Mr. Djeric says:

 2             "Certainly their contribution but a negative contribution came as

 3     a result of the geographical seat of the government.  Namely, due to the

 4     conflict and other factors, the government was for a longer period of

 5     time completely isolated, had no contacts and no co-operation with the

 6     municipalities.  SAO Krajina and SAO Herzegovina were for a while

 7     completely cut off from the government and had no contact with the

 8     government."

 9             Sir, these are the words of the prime minister.  What was the

10     experience of the minister of the interior, was it similar to what he's

11     saying?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And at the end of his presentation, Mr. Djeric, as

14     prime minister, on your page 23, gives proposals for measures that the

15     government wants the Assembly to adopt.

16             In e-court in the Serbian version it's page 24 and page 26 in

17     English, which is item 2 of his proposals.  I apologise, 25 in English.

18     And then it continues on to 26, but it begins on page 25.

19             Item 2 reads:

20             "While the war conflict is on and while the fight for freedom is

21     on, ensure strengthening of central authorities to the necessary level.

22     It is necessary to adopt a decision today to bring about constitutional

23     amendments to proclaim, among other things, the title of the

24     Serb Republic and the Republic's political and territorial organisation."

25             And then on the following page, page 25 of the Serbian version,

Page 23567

 1     he says:

 2             "In doing so, the current administrations of SAO would become the

 3     administrations of regions."

 4             Mr. Macar, Mr. Djeric here proposes constitutional amendments.

 5     Do you know whether these amendments were eventually adopted and what

 6     were they about?

 7        A.   Yes.  Autonomous regions were abolished -- rather, their

 8     responsibilities and their jurisdiction were abolished.

 9        Q.   On the same page, item 4, another proposal to the Assembly was to

10     issue or implementation of the order of the Presidency on the ground and

11     the order on withdrawing paramilitary formations and placing all

12     formations and reserve police under single military command.

13             Are you familiar with this instruction, with this proposal,

14     rather, of the government given to the Assembly?

15        A.   Yes, I know about this.  And earlier on when I said that

16     Mr. Djeric was not all that familiar with state administration, I should

17     have given an explanation, or rather, an explanation is needed here, that

18     if there are any extra military -- rather, if there are any extra police

19     reserve forces, they should be put under the military command.  That was

20     the gist.

21        Q.   The last proposal under item 7:

22             "The government seeks support for placing," or rather, "for

23     vacating immediately all regulations and all enactments adopted at all

24     municipal levels or adopted by certain state organs which are contrary to

25     the constitution, laws, and other regulations of the Serb Republic of

Page 23568

 1     Bosnia and Herzegovina or else they need to be put into compliance."

 2             Sir, can you tell me which regulations does the government have

 3     in mind here when making this proposal?

 4        A.   They primarily refer to regulations which deal with the work of

 5     the state administration, so as not to enumerate starting from the

 6     constitution, the Law on State Administration and Local Administration.

 7     And they mean that there needs to be a harmonisation between the local

 8     regulations and constitution as well as the legislation passed at the

 9     level of the Serbian republic.

10        Q.   Thank you.

11             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] So as not to lose any more time,

12     I'll just give reference to the Trial Chamber.  P2308, tab -- 2038, tab

13     116 has the conclusions and the decisions of the Assembly which pertain

14     to these proposals advanced by the president of the Presidency and prime

15     minister.  This is under items 3, 5, 6, and 8.

16        Q.   Sir, we have no more than two or three questions left.

17     Page 23413 of the LiveNote, Mr. Hannis showed you P2016 which can be

18     found at OTP tab 95.  You don't have that in front of you, sir, but it

19     will come up on your screen.  This was about the appointment of

20     Vojin Popovic as chief of the Gacko public security station.  You

21     remember commenting on that when prompted by Mr. Hannis?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   1D323 is our next document, please, tab 120 in your own binder,

24     sir.  This is a letter from the CSB dated the 28th of July, 1992, signed

25     by Mr. Krsto Savic, CSB chief, sent to the MUP of the Serbian Republic of

Page 23569

 1     BH, specifically to the minister.  There's a reference there to a

 2     document dated the 26th of July.  It reads:

 3             "With regard to the letter you sent to the Gacko SJB authorising

 4     senior police inspector Vojin Vukovic to set up a police station attached

 5     to the Gacko SJB, we hereby inform you of the following ..."

 6             Sir, what about this person, Vojin Vukovic, do you know this

 7     person?

 8        A.   Yes, he was a police administration inspector.

 9        Q.   I know he wasn't from your own administration, but do you know

10     that in the month of July he was off to Gacko to establish a police

11     station there?

12        A.   If memory serves, I think he did.  I think there was even an

13     incident that occurred or something like that, but I do remember him

14     leaving.

15        Q.   All right.  We best just read the document in its entirety to jog

16     your memory.  Mr. Savic goes on to say:

17             "If there have been any mistakes or irregularities have been

18     directly committed by members of the MUP at the Gacko police station, the

19     Trebinje CSB must be informed so that together we can assess them and

20     take adequate measures.

21             "We have been told that the inspector who was given authorisation

22     to set up the Gacko police station does not have the necessary respect

23     and trust of the inhabitants of Gacko to carry out the given task.

24             "In order to clarify the situation, we suggest that you send us

25     detailed information of the reasons for 'setting up a police station' in

Page 23570

 1     Gacko and, if necessary, we can together deal with the situation and find

 2     a solution for it."

 3             Does this jog your memory in relation to what exactly occurred at

 4     Gacko?

 5        A.   Yes, that is exactly what I was saying.  I remember some sort of

 6     an incident occurring there.  Mr. Vukovic originally hails from

 7     Herzegovina.  Why the animosity towards him in Gacko?  I can't remember

 8     any details of the situation, but I know that some problems occurred.

 9        Q.   And do you perhaps know why Mr. Vukovic was dispatched to Gacko

10     by the Ministry of the Interior, specifically the police administration?

11        A.   As far as I remember, another team had previously been dispatched

12     to Gacko.  They drew up a report based on which the police administration

13     ordered certain measures to be taken.  I'm not sure if that was done

14     following consultations with the head of the public security sector or

15     not, but that would have been the procedure.

16        Q.   Do you know if the previous team that travelled to Gacko had come

17     up with anything?  Your answer is not sufficiently clear the way it was

18     recorded, and please try to speak slowly so the interpreters can

19     understand what you're saying.

20        A.   The team of inspectors from the police administration visited the

21     Gacko public security station.  They ascertained that there were certain

22     problems, which they presented in their report to the police

23     administration leaders.

24        Q.   Is that report in any way related to the fact that

25     Inspector Vojin Vukovic was dispatched there to set up a police station

Page 23571

 1     in Gacko?

 2        A.   The police administration would have produced an assessment based

 3     on a report, following which they would dispatch an authorised inspector

 4     to help organise the situation and allow for a normal functioning of the

 5     public security station there.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Just a couple of questions left.

 7             During his cross-examination, Mr. Hannis showed you P614.

 8             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we have that up, please.

 9        Q.   This is a dispatch by the Presidency that you commented on when

10     prompted by Mr. Hannis.  You do remember that, sir, don't you?

11        A.   Yes, I do.

12        Q.   Again, we have a case of war crimes against Serbs.

13             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please zoom in on the very

14     end of this document in the Serbian, the last paragraph.  If we could

15     please have the same in English.  It's on the next page of the English.

16        Q.   As you see, sir, the Presidency is here adamant that information

17     should be forwarded to the commission that we talked about, and then the

18     reasons for that are stated.  It reads:

19             "This is very urgent because the enemy has established special

20     offices or services to pass our victims off as their own.  They then

21     proceed to forward this information to all international organisations

22     and embassies."

23             Sir, did you know anything to indicate that this was really the

24     case back in 1992?

25        A.   [No interpretation]

Page 23572

 1             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter did not hear the answer.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:

 3        Q.   [Microphone not activated]

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone for Mr. Zecevic, please.

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.

 7        Q.   [Interpretation] The next document you commented on with

 8     Mr. Hannis was P187, OTP tab 82.

 9             MR. ZECEVIC: [Interpretation] Could we have that on our screens,

10     please.  Thank you.

11        Q.   Sir, do you remember being shown this decision on the strategic

12     objectives of the Serbian people of Bosnia and Herzegovina by Mr. Hannis?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   You answered about the extent of your knowledge and awareness of

15     these strategic objectives.  Nevertheless, sir, look at these

16     six strategic objectives and tell us whether in your opinion - we're just

17     waiting for the English to come up - in your opinion, is there a single

18     strategic objective here that relates to the Ministry of the Interior and

19     its members?

20        A.   No, none.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Sir, the next document was P684, tab 115, OTP

22     tab 115.  This is a report on the work of the Prijedor SJB dated the

23     29th of September, 1992.  You remember commenting on this document, sir,

24     don't you?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 23573

 1        Q.   Sir, who would have been responsible for forwarding a report on

 2     the work of a certain SJB in a certain period of time?

 3        A.   Each of the CSBs in relation to their own areas.

 4        Q.   For the centres to draw up a report like that covering a certain

 5     time-period which is then to be forwarded to the Ministry of the

 6     Interior, would they not be required to gather all of the local reports

 7     from all of the public security stations throughout their area and then

 8     use those to draw up their own summary report, as it were?  Is that not

 9     how it worked?

10        A.   Yes, that's precisely how it worked.

11        Q.   Are individual reports by each of the public security stations

12     also individually forwarded to the ministry?

13        A.   No.  The only report that is ever forwarded to the ministry is

14     the CSB report.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Two days ago, Mr. Hannis was showing you some

16     military documents, specifically P591, tab 96, OTP tab 96; and P746,

17     OTP tab 97.  The former is a military security report and the latter is

18     Colonel Sipcic's report, who at the time was a general, as the document

19     tells us.  You do remember being shown these two documents by Mr. Hannis,

20     don't you?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Sir, what about the Ministry of the Interior or your

23     administration or indeed anyone else, did any of these ever receive any

24     of the documents produced by the military back in 1992?

25        A.   No, none.

Page 23574

 1        Q.   What about similar documents?

 2        A.   In 1992 I don't remember receiving any documents from the

 3     military.

 4        Q.   Thank you very much, Mr. Macar.

 5             Mr. Macar, this concludes my re-examination.  I would like to

 6     emphatically thank you for the time you have given us and for your effort

 7     in giving evidence here, particularly in view of your complex personal

 8     circumstances.  We really appreciate your effort in coming here to help

 9     us establish facts.  Thank you very much.

10        A.   I would like to apologise for my breakneck pace at times and any

11     omissions I may have made, but it was very difficult for me to control my

12     speech at particular points in time and there was some misunderstanding

13     due to that.

14                           Questioned by the Court:

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Macar, I would like to go back to the

16     Koricanske Stijene incident at the very end of August 1992.  Charges were

17     filed against unidentified persons.  We've seen that, we've seen the

18     document about that.  You remember that?

19        A.   Yes.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Were there ever charges filed against identified

21     perpetrators?  Against policemen?  Reserve policemen?

22        A.   The information that I received back in 1993 suggested that we

23     had been successful in identifying a number of persons, two, three, or

24     more, I can't be sure.  My information also suggested that these persons

25     left and crossed to one of the VRS units.  Some steps were taken and

Page 23575

 1     contacts established with some military security men in a bid to track

 2     these men down.  Up until the end of 1995 no criminal reports had been

 3     filed against unknown [as interpreted] perpetrators, but one was still

 4     making an effort to both identify them and to physically track them down.

 5     That was the information that I had and that I had received from the

 6     centres.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  I'm sorry, Your Honours, I note that the witness

 8     said, line 21 and 22, that no criminal reports had been filed against

 9     known perpetrators until 1995.

10             MR. HANNIS:  But, Your Honour, that's confusing because the rest

11     of the answer goes on and says:  "... but one was still making an effort

12     to both identify them and track them down."  So if there were known

13     perpetrators, you don't need to identify them.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Can you clarify that, Mr. Macar?  You did say

15     "known perpetrators," right?

16        A.   The procedure says that first there would be criminal report

17     against unknown perpetrators until the perpetrators are identified.

18     Evidence is gathered to show that a certain person committed a certain

19     criminal offence, and then one files a criminal report against a

20     known perpetrator, which is then based on such material as has been

21     forwarded to the prosecutor.  At stage one we're talking about unknown

22     perpetrators.

23             What I stated is that up until the end of 1995, no criminal

24     reports had been filed against known perpetrators because persons were

25     not available who were suspected of committing a crime or there was

Page 23576

 1     circumstantial evidence to suggest that these persons committed a crime.

 2     I then went on to explain that the information that I had -- that I had

 3     received from the Banja Luka CSB - and I won't speculate whether we're

 4     talking about two or more persons - information was gathered about the

 5     possibility of their involvement in the commission of a crime, but they

 6     escaped to one of the VRS units.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And those possible perpetrators that were

 8     identified, were there -- were they policemen from Prijedor?

 9        A.   We suspected some persons from Prijedor based on information

10     received by the service.  They were alleged to have been wearing what

11     looked like police uniforms.  Those too sported different colours

12     sometimes, but our information suggested they were wearing uniforms and I

13     can't speculate whether we're talking about two or more persons who were

14     unavailable because they had escaped to some military units.  Another

15     thing that I do know is the services established contacts with the

16     appropriate military authorities in a bid to locate those individuals, so

17     that together with the military authorities we might bring these persons

18     in for further procedure.  That was the information that we had at the

19     time.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  But even if the persons identified are at large

21     but the investigators have information that they wear police uniforms, it

22     must have been very easy to verify whether they were part of the police

23     force, police officers or reserve police officers.  Wouldn't that be

24     an -- an easy, simple, and straightforward thing to establish?

25        A.   I don't think it was simple because in all stations, public

Page 23577

 1     security stations, they did not have orderly lists of reserve police

 2     force members.  If you remember, when the Prosecutor put to me minutes of

 3     a collegium meeting from the end of 1993, the ministry was not properly

 4     equipped until quite late into the day when it comes to information,

 5     orderly information, for each member.  This started in late 1993 and

 6     continued into 1994.  It wasn't until then that they created the

 7     centralised database for all CSBs, SJBs, with the names of all members of

 8     active and reserve police force in order to establish the actual state of

 9     affairs and to eliminate consequences dating back or stemming from 1992,

10     when the ministry was not able to establish exactly who the members were

11     of active or reserve police force in a particular SJB.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So although there was information that they were

13     wearing police uniforms, what you're saying is it wasn't really helpful

14     to check whether they were on the list, on a personnel list, of Prijedor

15     police station or not?

16        A.   The information that I received early on in March when I attended

17     the first meeting, I remember that I heard that there were two persons

18     concerning whom there was some indicia.  But the information did not

19     point to them being members of either active or reserve police force.

20     They continued on gathering information, and from the information coming

21     from the site they were able to conclusively identify them.  But I know

22     that it wasn't until 1995 that they identified the entire group who had

23     committed that terrible crime.  Those initial two that were brought into

24     custody, for them it was never with certainty established to which unit

25     they belonged.  And I think that it was only in late 1995 or 1996 that it

Page 23578

 1     was established that one of those suspected persons was killed in

 2     war operations.  It was either in late 1995 or early 1996.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  It was established, wasn't it, that the incident

 4     happened with people, Muslim -- Muslims, on a convoy to Travnik; isn't

 5     that right?  That was established quite early in September, wasn't it?

 6        A.   As I have stated earlier, I heard about the event for the first

 7     time in September, and it wasn't until March 1993 when the first meeting

 8     was held in the Banja Luka CSB in the crime police department that I was

 9     told - and I'm paraphrasing now based on what I can recollect - they told

10     me that they were taking operative steps to try to identify the

11     perpetrators.  So it was only in March when I was briefed by the head of

12     the crime police, I was inquiring about the state of affairs, and this is

13     the information that I was given in March of 1993.  Based on what he told

14     me, I was sure, I was convinced that they were taking measures, adequate

15     measures, and that this is how far they got.

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  The investigations started immediately after the

17     incident.  Were they ever concluded properly, do you know?

18        A.   What I heard in March was that military representatives and

19     representatives of judicial and civilian organs went to the site and that

20     the civilian investigative judge from the court in Banja Luka continued

21     acting on the case and that part of that team also comprised members of

22     the Banja Luka CSB.  The investigative judge from Banja Luka whose name I

23     do not remember was in charge of that effort.  After the consultations

24     and after the first information became available, the investigative judge

25     from Banja Luka whose name I cannot remember took over the case.

Page 23579

 1     According to the law, the investigative judge is the person in charge of

 2     the investigation and on-site investigation.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  You didn't hear, you don't have any information

 4     about this investigation being interrupted, being stopped, being ordered

 5     to be stopped?

 6        A.   I do not have information indicating that anybody had issued an

 7     order to terminate the investigation.  The investigation is headed by the

 8     investigative judge, and I have no information indicating that anybody

 9     told them to terminate the investigation.  I never heard of that either

10     in 1993 or subsequently.

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Could the military authorities have ordered such

12     a thing at that time?

13        A.   Military authorities do not have jurisdiction over a civilian

14     investigative judge, and I couldn't really speculate whether this judge

15     acted in accordance with the law or not, whether he did what he was

16     duty-bound to do under the law or not.  Nobody could have ordered the

17     judge to terminate the investigation or conduct any investigative

18     measures without the consent of the judge.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Do you know whether Stojan Zupljanin ever visited

20     the crime site?

21        A.   I can't remember that particular piece of information, whether it

22     was Mr. Zupljanin or somebody else representing the police who went to

23     the site.  I know that the event itself and the information about the

24     event caused quite a big stir at the ministry.  Everybody was upset.  I

25     know that I commented on this with my colleagues.  Now, who came on

Page 23580

 1     behalf of the centre, whether it was Mr. Zupljanin or somebody else, I

 2     don't know.  It is the investigative judge who sets up the investigative

 3     team and somebody from the centre is normally part of the team.  Now,

 4     whether that person was Mr. Zupljanin or not, I can't tell you either

 5     way.  I don't know.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  At that time did you have within the MUP, central

 7     MUP, a forensic department?

 8        A.   In 1992 -- and by your leave I can explain.  The forensic centre

 9     did not exist in Banja Luka in 1992.  They started setting it up in 1993.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  You're saying the forensic department in

11     Banja Luka.  I was asking about forensic department -- central forensic

12     department within the service you were heading.  Are we talking about the

13     same thing?

14        A.   We are discussing the same issue.  In 1992 there was no forensic

15     centre at the level of the Ministry of the Interior.  It did not exist as

16     part of the crime police administration.

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

18             JUDGE HALL:  If I may refine the last question that Judge Delvoie

19     put to you.  Although this did not exist until 1993, was there an

20     equivalent in 1992; and if not, who did the work which in 1993 came to be

21     done by this central unit?

22        A.   In 1992 in the CSB there was a forensic unit within the

23     crime police sector.  Head of that unit was Brane Buhovac, who later on

24     was assigned to the position of the head of the forensic centre

25     established by the headquarters of the Ministry of the Interior in

Page 23581

 1     Banja Luka.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, sir.

 3             Mr. Hannis, anything arising out of the Judges' questions?

 4             MR. HANNIS:  Actually, Judge, there are a couple of questions I

 5     would like to ask with your permission.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  [Microphone not activated]

 7             MR. HANNIS:  That would be fine.  Thank you.

 8                           [The witness stands down]

 9                           --- Recess taken at 10.10 a.m.

10                           --- On resuming at 10.32 a.m.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Hannis, while the witness is on his way in, in

12     addition to the question arising out of those put by the Bench yesterday

13     you had indicated that you may have sought leave to re-open your

14     cross-examination in terms of one point that Mr. Zecevic had opened on

15     which you took objection.  I assume that that matter has been resolved

16     and you don't need to go down that road?

17             MR. HANNIS:  That's correct, Your Honour.  That had to do with

18     something about a meeting that this witness had with Mr. Delimustafic.

19     Based on his answer, I see no need to request re-examination on that.

20             JUDGE HALL:  I thought not.  Thank you.

21             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

22                           [The witness takes the stand]

23             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Hannis.

24             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

25                           Further Cross-examination by Mr. Hannis:

Page 23582


 2        Q.   Mr. Macar, are you not aware that in -- as early as September and

 3     in October 1992, the Prijedor SJB by Mr. Drljaca had provided information

 4     to CSB Banja Luka Stojan Zupljanin about the policemen from Prijedor who

 5     had escorted the convoy from which these men were taken and murdered?

 6     You never knew about that?

 7        A.   If I were to see it, perhaps, but I don't know about these

 8     things.  I didn't look at them and I don't remember learning about that

 9     back then.  As part of the operative measures, they probably did seek

10     information, which is only understandable.

11        Q.   Well, this is in response to the question that Judge Delvoie

12     asked you about:  Wouldn't it be a simple and straightforward matter to

13     find out who was in the police and who the police were that escorted that

14     convoy?

15             MR. HANNIS:  And, Your Honours, I want to show two exhibits which

16     were not on my list to use with this witness because I didn't anticipate

17     this coming up, but they are in evidence and I would like to show the

18     witness because they pertain.  The first one is P682.

19        Q.   I don't have a copy, Mr. Macar, so you'll have to look on the

20     screen.  It's dated the 24th -- or the 14th of September, from

21     Mr. Drljaca to the chief of the CSB Banja Luka, responding to a dispatch

22     that had been received from Banja Luka.  And you will see it says:

23             "In reference to your dispatch of the above number and date,

24     we ... inform you we are unable to investigate the alleged killing on the

25     21st of August because all the policemen who escorted the convoy to

Page 23583

 1     Travnik have been in the battle-field in Han Pijesak since

 2     9 September 1992."

 3             Do you see that?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   And you're telling me this is the first time -- this is the first

 6     time you were aware that this information had been provided to

 7     Mr. Zupljanin in the CSB Banja Luka in September 1992?

 8        A.   Your Honours, I believe I was clear in my earlier evidence too.

 9     I learned of the event at Koricanske Stijene in September of 1992, as we

10     were conducting preparations to move the headquarters of the ministry to

11     Bijeljina.

12             The first occasion to be briefed by the crime department of the

13     CSB was in March.  This is when the head of the crime department told me

14     about what they had done.  So that was in March, and as far as I can

15     remember, they said that two or more suspects were in the VRS.  It is

16     possible that this is the same piece of information as mentioned in this

17     letter.  However, I never had occasion to see this letter before.

18        Q.   But it's clear that the information about the names of the

19     policemen involved in the escort were known back in September.  Are you

20     saying it was not possible to find two named known persons in the VRS?

21     It wasn't like they had gone off and joined the French Foreign Legion.

22        A.   This is a hypothetical question.  In any unit, from Trebinje to

23     Krupa, if a person --

24        Q.   No, no --

25        A.   You're putting a hypothetical question to me.  What I know is

Page 23584

 1     that despite the co-operation with the military organs, they were unable

 2     to establish where these two or three or more persons were, in which

 3     unit.

 4        Q.   What information do you have that the names of these individuals

 5     were ever conveyed to the military by the police?  Do you have any

 6     documents showing that was ever done?

 7        A.   To tell you the truth, I had [as interpreted] occasion to go to

 8     the archives of the ministry looking for some documents that I was

 9     interested in.  In that meeting, as part of that meeting, I also inquired

10     about Koricanske Stijene and I was told that they had established contact

11     with the relevant military police persons and that they were working on

12     trying to identify them.  I can't now give you the number of the persons

13     involved, whether it was two or more.  They were trying to establish in

14     which unit these people were in order to bring them in and to continue

15     taking the necessary action in order to try to prove whether these

16     persons had committed this crime.

17             MR. HANNIS:  I see Mr. Zecevic on his feet.

18             MR. ZECEVIC:  I believe 23, 20, I believe the witness said in the

19     negative, that he didn't have the opportunity to go to the archives of

20     the ministry for the documentation that he was interested in.  He

21     mentioned the document from 2005 again.  So maybe you can clarify that.

22             MR. HANNIS:  Well, it doesn't matter for the question I was

23     asking.

24        Q.   The fact is, named perpetrators were known to the MUP, to

25     Mr. Drljaca and Mr. Zupljanin, in September of 1992, but that information

Page 23585

 1     was not conveyed to any investigative judge or a prosecutor so that they

 2     could take the steps that they're entitled to do and able to do under the

 3     Law on Criminal Procedure.  Right?  They need that information before

 4     they can start initiating steps, and that information, although it was

 5     known by the police, was not conveyed to the prosecutor or a judge in

 6     1992, was it?

 7        A.   Based on this letter, as far as I can understand, it says, all

 8     policemen who escorted the convoy to Travnik are on the battle-field in

 9     Han Pijesak.  Now, whether all of them were perpetrators, whether all of

10     them were suspected of perpetrating the crime, I don't know.  I can't

11     speculate on that.  Perhaps some of them were suspected of having

12     committed the crime.  I don't even know how many policemen escorted the

13     convoy and whether all of them were suspected of being involved in the

14     crime.

15        Q.   And those individuals' names were on payroll lists in the

16     Prijedor SJB that were available to you or anyone else who wanted to look

17     at them in 1992; right?

18        A.   Whether all of them were on payroll lists, I don't know that.

19     And I don't know how many policemen and who escorted the convoy.  I

20     didn't go into these details, either the payroll or anything else.  I

21     received information about what the CSB had done and what they were in

22     the process of doing.  Now, whether all of the escorts were suspected of

23     having committed that crime or two or three or five of them were, I can't

24     remember that.  It somewhere stayed in my memory that two or more persons

25     were suspected, but I don't know which persons.  I was informed that they

Page 23586

 1     were trying to locate them via military police.

 2             MR. HANNIS:  No further questions from me, Your Honour.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Zecevic.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC:  Just two, Your Honours, to clarify some issues

 5     concerning the question Mr. Hannis posed.

 6                           Further Re-examination by Mr. Zecevic:

 7        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Macar, just a couple of questions.  Who has

 8     jurisdiction over a crime which takes place in the territory of any CSB?

 9     Is it the centre that has jurisdiction over it or is it in the

10     jurisdiction of the crime police administration in the headquarters?

11        A.   The administration in the headquarters does not deal directly

12     with investigative measures.  It is the jurisdiction of the centre and

13     SJB to investigate actual crimes.  In this particular case, it fell under

14     the jurisdiction of the Banja Luka CSB in co-operation with the relevant

15     public security stations.

16        Q.   Sir, the administration HQ did not have its own forensic team

17     units or equipment.  Even if the administration HQ had wanted to conduct

18     an investigation, would they have had the means available to them to

19     investigate serious crimes like these?

20        A.   The HQ-based crime administration did not have the organisational

21     units that could have been used to shed light on complex crimes such as

22     these.  They didn't have a forensic centre, we didn't have a properly

23     established and equipped organisational units to take special measures

24     and document crimes, you probably know what that means, secret

25     surveillance, tapping phone lines, conducting searches.  And there is one

Page 23587

 1     thing that I would like to mention.  In the Ministry of the Interior, not

 2     in 1992 and not during the war, we didn't have in -- the internal control

 3     service which now exists in all of the security bodies.

 4        Q.   Mr. Macar, I beg you to focus on the question.  We have half a

 5     page of your answer being recorded here, and I would like to again remind

 6     you of my question.  Even if the administration, the HQ-based

 7     administration, had wanted to conduct an investigation, would you have

 8     had the means available to you or the services available to you to

 9     investigate serious crimes like these?

10        A.   No, we didn't.  We didn't have the personnel, we didn't have the

11     equipment.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Just another thing.  When in March 1993 you were

13     informed at the Banja Luka meeting about the then-status of the

14     Koricanske Stijene case, were you briefed, were you presented a report,

15     or did you inspect the files of the crime police of the Banja Luka CSB?

16        A.   No, I did not inspect the files.  I was briefed by the relevant

17     officer of the crime service there.

18        Q.   Was that the established procedure in cases like these during --

19     during inspection rounds like these?

20        A.   First of all, this was no inspection round or any inspection at

21     all being carried out.  This was our first meeting where we met the men

22     in the leading positions of the crime service, the way the crime service

23     was organised, the human resources situation, the equipment there; and we

24     discussed the subjects of safety and crime.

25        Q.   I apologise for saying "inspection."  It was my mistake, but

Page 23588

 1     please answer my question.  Was that the established procedure during

 2     such visits for you to be briefed without you needing to go back and

 3     consult the files?  Was that the established practice or did it just

 4     apply to this one situation?

 5        A.   That was the established practice.

 6        Q.   Thank you very much.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Aleksic, I apologise, I should have asked you

 8     before I came to Mr. Zecevic as to whether you had any questions arising

 9     out of the Judges' questions, but I now ask you.

10             MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Indeed, Your Honours, by the

11     Chamber's leave I would like to ask a couple of questions in relation to

12     Mr. Hannis' re-examination.  I would also like to show the witness two

13     additional documents if I may.

14                           Further Cross-examination by Mr. Aleksic:

15        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning to you, Mr. Macar.

16        A.   Good morning.

17        Q.   In relation to the document we have on our screens, the one you

18     have been looking at --

19             MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Could we please have P1380.

20        Q.   It says reference your dispatch such and such, the 9th -- the

21     11th of September.  Do you see that, sir?

22        A.   Yes, I see that.

23             MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Can we zoom in on the Serbian,

24     please.

25        Q.   You see, Mr. Macar, this is the dispatch that we mentioned that

Page 23589

 1     Mr. Drljaca refers to in his reply.  Likewise, Mr. Zupljanin is

 2     forwarding Mr. Stanisic's order here.  If you look at the part just under

 3     Mico Stanisic's name, Mr. Zupljanin says:

 4             "In relation to this order, it is necessary to immediately take

 5     written statements about the events at Skender Vakuf, Knezevo, from the

 6     policemen that escorted the convoy from Prijedor to the border with

 7     Travnik on the 21st of August, 1992."

 8             And then it goes on:

 9             "You are to personally deliver the written statements with the

10     biographical data on these policemen by the 15th of September at the

11     latest.

12             "You must also supply us with a list of all the citizens from

13     your area who travelled on those convoys along the above-mentioned route

14     at that time."

15             You remember that previous document by Mr. Drljaca.  The previous

16     document does not, in fact, show that he acted upon this dispatch by

17     Mr. Zupljanin and that he indeed forwarded all of the information

18     required.  Do you agree, sir?

19        A.   Yes, I do.

20        Q.   Thank you.

21             MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Can the witness please be shown

22     P617.  Another dispatch by Mr. Zupljanin.  Please zoom in on the Serbian.

23     Thank you.

24        Q.   Mr. Macar, again a dispatch by Mr. Zupljanin.  Right at the

25     outset he refers to two of his own previous dispatches.  You remember the

Page 23590

 1     one dated the 11th of September and then the one by Mr. Simo Drljaca.

 2     Again, he demands, on the 7th of October, 1992, that Mr. Drljaca submit

 3     to him a detailed report to answer the following questions, and then

 4     there's a list of specific questions.

 5                           [Defence counsel confer]

 6             MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   And it reads:

 8             "Inform me:

 9             "Which policemen escorted the convoy (personal details) ...

10     (photocopy) ... and submit all of the -- and attach patrol orders, list

11     all the policemen active and reserve who escorted the convoy."

12             And then item 2:

13             "Was anyone else, apart from the policemen, part of the convoy

14     security and escort; and if so, who (personal details, what formation

15     they belonged to and so on)?"

16             Number 3:

17             "What did the police officers write in their reports (patrol

18     orders) when they returned from that mission (photocopy and attach

19     reports from the service)?"

20             Number 4:

21             "The report on what was done during the on-site

22     investigation ..."

23             And at the very end, Mr. Zupljanin says:

24             "I hereby again demand that you act upon and respond to our

25     dispatch number ..." such and such, dated the 11th of September, 1992,

Page 23591

 1     the one that we looked at a minute ago.

 2             Mr. Macar, based on what I've just read back to you, based on

 3     what you've just seen, did Mr. Zupljanin not act perfectly in accordance

 4     with the law seeking to obtain all of the relevant information relating

 5     to the event from Mr. Simo Drljaca?

 6        A.   Yes, fully in keeping with the law.

 7        Q.   The correction for the transcript, 30, 15, my question was:  Did

 8     Mr. Zupljanin not act in accordance with the law in attempting to seek

 9     all the information relating to -- all the relevant information relating

10     to the event from Mr. Simo Drljaca.  My question was:  Did Mr. Zupljanin

11     act in accordance with the law in attempting to seek all the information

12     relating to the event from Mr. Simo Drljaca.

13             Thank you very much, Witness.  I have no more questions for you.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I'm sorry, Mr. Aleksic, I was about to ask you

15     whether you intended to show the witness Mr. Drljaca's report, the answer

16     to this.  No?

17             MR. ALEKSIC: [Microphone not activated]

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Macar, do you know whether Mr. Drljaca ever

19     responded to this dispatch?  Did he write this report?

20             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honour, there is a document in evidence which I

21     believe is that response, if you want to look; it's P618.

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  No --

23             MR. HANNIS:  I'm sorry.

24                           Further Questioned by the Court:

25             JUDGE DELVOIE: [Microphone not activated]

Page 23592

 1             Mr. Macar, do you know whether Mr. Drljaca responded to this

 2     or -- except for what Mr. Hannis told you just right now?

 3        A.   No, I don't know whether he responded and whether he included any

 4     of the requested details.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Can we have on the screen P618, please.

 6        A.   I'm not familiar with this document.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  But you have read it just now, didn't you?

 8        A.   Yes.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Is this a proper response to Mr. Zupljanin's

10     questions and his dispatch we just saw?

11        A.   I don't think it contains everything that Mr. Zupljanin had

12     requested.

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  With regard to the information Mr. Zupljanin was

14     looking at, was trying to get from Mr. Drljaca, would this have satisfied

15     Mr. Zupljanin, do you think, or would you expect a further insistence

16     from Mr. Zupljanin to get the information he wanted?

17        A.   I don't know what happened later on during this exchange and as

18     he was looking into the matter.  I suppose he required further

19     explanations because this document does not deliver what was previously

20     requested.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And now that we know from Mr. Zupljanin's

22     dispatches, the two of them, that the focus is on the policemen securing

23     the convoy in something that even in those times must have been

24     considered as a major incident and a terrible stain on the corps if ever

25     they would have been involved.

Page 23593

 1             Would you expect this could end like this with two dispatches

 2     answered in a very evasive way and that would be it?

 3        A.   It is still my conviction that it didn't end like this, it

 4     couldn't have ended like this.  But I don't think these two dispatches

 5     were all that it was about.  It didn't end there.  Now, what happened

 6     later, I can't say.  I didn't have a chance to look at the actual

 7     exchange of letters or indeed to know about any operative steps that were

 8     taken.  On the other hand, I can hardly speculate.  I suppose there were

 9     further activities, and I believe that if you go to the archive of the

10     CSB you should be able to find the relevant information there.  I assume

11     that this was not the end of it.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

13             JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated]

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone for the President, please.

15             JUDGE HALL:  Sorry.

16             Mr. Macar, we thank you for coming to give evidence before the

17     Tribunal, especially having regard to your particular circumstances.  We

18     know it's been a long period that you've been with us, and you are now

19     released.  And we wish you a safe journey back to your country and we

20     also hope that your health issues are soon resolved.  The -- I would

21     remind Mr. Zecevic in your presence or remind you that Mr. Zecevic still

22     has to provide for the benefit of the Tribunal, for the sake of

23     completion, the necessary documentation in terms of the reason for why

24     you would have been absent -- why we were unable to begin your testimony

25     when we should have.

Page 23594

 1             So the usher would now escort you from the courtroom.  Thank you

 2     again, sir.

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, too, Your Honours, for

 4     your attentiveness to my condition during the evidence.  I would like to

 5     thank the Prosecutor as well and apologise to the Defence for my speedy

 6     evidence which may have left Mr. Zecevic at something of a disadvantage

 7     at times.  Thank you.

 8                           [The witness withdrew]

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Before I come to Mr. Hannis, who indicated he had

10     two matters, there is -- well, one matter in two parts that the Chamber

11     wishes to raise, part (b) of which should probably be in closed session.

12     So we would do that now, we could move into closed session.

13                           [Private session]

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 23595

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6                           [Open session]

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  You had foreshadowed, Mr. Zecevic, that the -- there

 9     will be a bar table motion filed on behalf of the accused Stanisic.

10     Today is Wednesday and I am -- we are certain that you have this very

11     much in hand, so could we expect this by Friday?

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, Your Honours.  We will file it by Friday, the

13     bar table motion, yes.

14             JUDGE HALL:  And you may -- the -- you may include -- the Chamber

15     would also grant leave to include in that the matter which was dealt with

16     in the brief private session.

17             MR. ZECEVIC:  I understand, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, thank you.

19             So do you now formally close, subject to that filing,

20     Mr. Zecevic?

21             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, Your Honours.  There is just one -- one

22     additional matter.  Your Honours' ruling -- the oral decision of

23     15th of July, 2011, in respect to one document which is 897D1, we intend

24     to file a motion for reconsideration of the Trial Chamber on that

25     particular -- on that particular document.

Page 23596

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.  So --

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  And the -- and the -- oh, I'm sorry.  I'm sorry,

 3     Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  No, I was finished.  I just said so noted.

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.  Therefore, we would at this point close

 6     our case subject to our motion for reconsideration concerning the 897D1

 7     and the bar table motion as we -- as we -- as we promised to be filed on

 8     Friday with -- with the addition of the matter which we discussed in

 9     the -- in the private session.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

11                           [Trial Chamber confers]

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, if I may just use the opportunity.

13     We would like to express our gratitude to Ms. Veretelnikova and the

14     Registry for their assistance and help.  We would like to thank the VWS

15     for their impeccable performance.  We would like to thank the CLSS for

16     the extra effort on translating some of the documents.  And especially we

17     are very grateful to the interpreters, which had a very hard time, I

18     know, with some of our witnesses, for their exceptional and excellent

19     job.  Thank you very much.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.

21             Yes, Mr. Hannis.

22             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honour.  Just, I guess, three brief

23     matters.  One is regarding Exhibit P2355, which is an organisational

24     chart for the CSB Sarajevo.  It was shown to the witness MS-003 and he

25     made some changes and the Prosecution has now updated that chart with the

Page 23597

 1     changes, and that document is 65 ter 20217, reflecting the changes by

 2     MS-003.  If there's no objection from the Defence and with the agreement

 3     of Your Honours, we would like to replace the old Exhibit P2355 with this

 4     new 65 ter 20217.  I don't know if the Registry wants to give it the same

 5     number or -- okay.  I see a nod of the head "yes" and that would be our

 6     request.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Basically the last thing you raised was what I was

 8     just about to ask of the Court Officer, whether it should be given a new

 9     number or whether we just substitute.

10                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

11             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, the -- according to the Court Officer, it's

12     better to keep the old number.  So the -- so -- so you may so substitute

13     it.

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  No objection.

15             JUDGE HALL:  I've -- I'm sorry, I anticipated you, Mr. Zecevic.

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

17             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

18             The second matter is just a matter in the transcript for 11 July,

19     at page 23132, line 10, I am recorded as asking if we could show the

20     witness Exhibit P991, which was tab 77 of our binder, a document dated

21     6th of March, and it -- the Exhibit is actually number P911, not P991.

22     So perhaps I misspoke, but I wanted to correct that on the transcript.

23             The last matter is that now the -- that we will be moving to the

24     Zupljanin Defence case, we would request pursuant to Rule 67 that if --

25     that if the Zupljanin Defence have any statements of any of the witnesses

Page 23598

 1     that they intend to call, that those be provided to us in advance of the

 2     witnesses coming to testify sufficiently for us to prepare our

 3     cross-examination.  Thank you.

 4             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Aleksic, I'm sure that you're alive to that

 5     requirement.

 6             MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Absolutely, Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Hannis, about the Cutileiro map, you remember

 8     yesterday or the day before.

 9             MR. HANNIS:  Yes.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Is there any agreement between parties about that

11     one?

12             MR. HANNIS:  I didn't speak to them.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, we haven't spoken, Mr. Hannis and I,

14     but we -- we found out what apparently appears to be the case.  In the --

15     in the annex report of our expert, Mr. Bajagic, in annex number 10 there

16     was a map of Bosnia and Herzegovina, but it is my understanding that the

17     map of Bosnia and Herzegovina has been -- which is -- which is provided

18     in that annex and is not part of the exhibit because we didn't offer the

19     annex 10 is -- is quite different from the one that is -- well, quite

20     different because it is different in -- in respect to -- to the

21     municipalities and the -- a lot of information which was added by the

22     Office of the Prosecutor.  In any case, Your Honours, this -- this is --

23     both of these maps are basically the ethnic maps.  They showed the ethnic

24     majority of the certain population in the certain areas of Bosnia and

25     Herzegovina.  Therefore, it does not depict the -- the actual -- the

Page 23599

 1     actual Cutileiro Plan division on the -- on the -- on the -- on

 2     Bosnia-Herzegovina -- on the entities.  And therefore, I don't know if

 3     that -- if that would be of much assistance to the Trial Chamber.

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So basically there is no agreement and let's

 5     forget about it.

 6             MR. HANNIS:  Sorry, Your Honour, with regard to the Rule 67

 7     matter, the Rule provides that the Trial Chamber should set a dead-line

 8     for that disclosure to be made, and I don't think one's been given to the

 9     Defence.  We would like you to set a date so that there's no

10     misunderstanding about when that material should be provided.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Since you're on your feet, Mr. Hannis, could you

12     assist by indicating when that dead-line should be in accordance with

13     practice in the Rules?

14             MR. HANNIS:  Well, Your Honour, I think in a previous case I had

15     it was -- it was 30 days before the witness was going to testify.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Aleksic, do you have a problem with 30 days?

17             MR. ALEKSIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would need to

18     confer with my colleague, Mr. Krgovic.  As far as I know, as far as I

19     have learned over the last year, we did not take a single statement

20     during all of our proofing sessions with our witnesses.  I do have to

21     check that with Mr. Krgovic and I shall certainly comply with any ruling

22     by the Trial Chamber.

23             MR. HANNIS:  In that case, 30 days doesn't seem like too much.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Well, the -- rather than counsel from both sides and

25     the Bench all being engaged in a guessing game at this point, this is

Page 23600

 1     certainly over the practice of the Tribunal and in accordance with the

 2     Rules such a well-trod path, that I'm sure that with very little

 3     research, counsel would know what they ought to do.  So the Chamber would

 4     rule that counsel give the required notice in accordance with established

 5     practice, and that should cover it.

 6             And with that, we take the adjournment in this case to the

 7     5th of September.  I am sure that counsel on all sides would be

 8     diligently engaged in preparing for the next phase of this, but

 9     notwithstanding that work, that in such gap as there is and such breaks

10     and you're able to take over the summer, I trust that everyone has a -- a

11     safe time and come back refreshed and reinvigorated for the work ahead.

12     Thank you.

13                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 11.20 a.m.,

14                           to be reconvened on Monday, the 5th day of

15                           September, 2011