1 Friday, 9 September 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.
7 This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and
8 Stojan Zupljanin.
9 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 May we have the appearances, please.
11 MS. KORNER: Good morning, Your Honours. Joanna Korner and
12 Crispian Smith for the Prosecution.
13 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
14 Slobodan Cvijetic, and Ms. Deirdre Montgomery appearing for
15 Stanisic Defence this morning. Thank you.
16 MR. KRGOVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Dragan Krgovic,
17 Aleksandar Aleksic, and Miroslav Cuskic appearing for Zupljanin Defence.
18 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
19 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, before the witness comes in, may I
20 just return to something that happened yesterday which I suddenly
21 appreciated when I re-read yesterday's transcript. Judge Delvoie stopped
22 me about the document that -- with the timings that was made at the
23 Registry. And I'm afraid it was a complete misunderstanding by me. And
24 can I just say that I wasn't attempting to go behind the question of
25 whether it was a privileged document or not. I was trying to get at
1 accurate times and dates, and I really wanted him to use it as a
2 memory-refreshing document and I should have made that absolutely clear.
3 But I can see now, on re-reading the transcript, why Judge Delvoie
4 stopped me.
5 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you, Ms. Korner.
6 JUDGE HALL: So would the usher please escort the witness back to
7 the stand.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, while the -- with your leave, while
9 the usher is bringing the witness in, there is a matter I would like to
10 raise with the Trial Chamber, but I propose, because it has to be in the
11 private session, that it be done at the end of the day. I need three
12 minutes for that.
13 JUDGE HALL: Three minutes?
14 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, five. It's a short submission. Information,
16 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
18 [The witness takes the stand]
19 MS. KORNER: I don't know whether Your Honour wants to deal with
20 this or whether you'd like me to ask the questions.
21 JUDGE HALL: No. It's -- you're cross-examining. I would give
22 the witness --
23 Good morning, General. I give you the usual reminder of your
24 solemn declaration, and I return the floor to Ms. Korner.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
1 WITNESS: VIDOSAV KOVACEVIC [Resumed]
2 [Witness answered through interpreter]
3 Cross-examination by Ms. Korner: [Continued]
4 Q. General, yesterday, as you know, you were asked by the Court,
5 after the Court adjourned to go through your report and to see if you
6 could identify the parts where you got assistance from Mr. Krgovic in
7 your -- in resolving your dilemmas.
8 Were you able to do that?
9 A. Ms. Korner, I read my report, and I recalled topics and details
10 which were the subject of my conversations with Mr. Krgovic.
11 Q. Perhaps you'd be kind enough, then, to -- by identifying the
12 relevant paragraphs in your report, to let us know which they are.
13 A. Ms. Korner, I told you yesterday that I had some dilemmas. For
14 example, I asked Mr. Krgovic to what extent, within the topic given, I
15 should expound on the Law on Military Courts and Military Prosecutors.
16 He replied that this is a topic to be discussed by the lawyers
17 representing the Defence and that I should limit my activity on the
18 military topics, or, more precisely, the use of police units in combat
19 activities, within armed forces.
20 Other issues that we discussed were more of technical nature: How
21 this trial is supposed look like; whether I can have at hand textbooks
22 and rule-books during the trial; how many days I'm supposed to spend
23 here; and other similar issues that were not related to the report itself
24 or a specific paragraph of the report.
25 Q. Yesterday after court, did you speak to Mr. Krgovic over the
2 A. No, Ms. Korner.
3 Q. Are you sure?
4 A. I'm sure.
5 Q. So you just recall, did you, yesterday, when you went through
6 your report that it was only on the military courts and military
7 prosecutors that you raised with Mr. Krgovic, and his only input was that
8 this was a topic to be discussed by the lawyers.
9 That's it, is it?
10 A. Exactly, Ms. Korner. Maybe I omitted one more thing.
11 It was I who helped Mr. Krgovic by explaining some military
12 phrases to him; for example, the difference between attaching and
13 resubordinating. And many other military terms. It was I who helped
14 Mr. Krgovic, and not the other way around.
15 Q. Right. What you said yesterday was this, and this is at
16 page 23836 of the transcript.
17 No, it's not in your report, General. I'm reading to the Court
18 what you said yesterday, and I'll read how this all happened.
19 "Did you speak" - this is at line 9 - "to Mr. Krgovic or any
20 member of the Defence team before you delivered your final version about
21 the contents of your report?
22 "I spoke to Mr. Krgovic on a number of occasions while I was
23 working on the report.
24 "Q. Did you tell him what you were going to put into the report?
25 "A. Yes.
1 "Did you make any changes to what you were going to put into the
2 report, as a result of your conversation with Mr. Krgovic?
3 "A. It was more of a consultation.
4 "Q. What do you mean by 'a consultation'?"
5 You said:
6 "I wouldn't bring him a document so that he could put in some
8 "No. But I want to know what you mean by 'consultations.'
9 "Sometimes I had a dilemma. Then I would ask him, he would give
10 me a reply. I would memorize it. I will go home. I would sit behind my
11 computer, and I would put it into the report that I was currently working
13 "Give us an example of a dilemma in which Mr. Krgovic gave you
14 the answer.
15 "I can't remember with any precision right now. I'm merely
16 answering your questions."
17 And then I will skip the next two question -- answer, because it
18 was about the duties of an expert.
19 "... I emphasise once again: That I drafted the report on my
21 "But, General, I understand that you did the physical drafting
22 of ... your own. But from what you just told us, it contained input from
23 Mr. Krgovic who solved your dilemma.
24 "A. More often, or to be more precise, it was really a
25 suggestion. Or I shouldn't say really [sic] 'suggestion.' In those
1 cases when I had small problems in interpretation of certain laws and
3 "Q. Do you mean he gave you the interpretation, General?
4 "He helped me. He helped me to resolve a dilemma. Legal
6 And then we went back to ask you - I'll skip the next question
7 and answer - about what your report might suggest to the reader.
8 "Q. And, in actual fact, the reality is ... isn't it? It
9 contains parts that you got from Mr. Krgovic who solved your dilemmas.
10 Is that right?
11 "Q. [Sic] There is no such thing in this report. The dilemmas
12 were only inside my head.
13 "Well, firstly let's go back to these dilemmas. How many times,
14 if you can recall, did you consult Mr. Krgovic about a dilemma that was
15 in your head?
16 "For instance, three or four times."
17 Now, what you've said this morning is effectively there was just
18 once, and he didn't resolve a dilemma he just told you not to put -- I'll
19 just the exact words:
20 "I asked Mr. Krgovic to what extent, within the topic given, I
21 should expound on the Law on Military Courts and Military Prosecutors.
22 He replied that this is a topic to be discussed by the lawyers
23 representing the Defence and that I should limit my activity on the
24 military topics, or, more precisely, the use of police units in combat
25 activities, within armed forces.
1 "Other issues that we discussed were more of technical nature:
2 How this trial is supposed look like ... textbooks ..."
3 Now, what would make you go back to your -- memorize what he
4 said, go back to your computer, on at least three or four occasions, on
5 what you've just told us this morning?
6 A. Ms. Korner, I met with Mr. Krgovic three to four times, and I
7 told you what we discussed. It was more me talking to him than him
8 talking to me. Also, Mr. Krgovic had a need of his own to meet up with
10 As for dilemmas, as we are -- if you are now going to launch into
11 a discussion of what dilemma is, you have to understand that for me a
12 dilemma was how to address the Judges and other personnel here at the
13 Tribunal. But, of course, this is not a dilemma that found its way into
14 my report.
15 Q. What was it you had to memorize, go back to your computer, and
16 type out?
17 A. I memorized the fact that I should not delve in to the military
18 courts and military laws, and that's why I did not write anything about
19 that in the report.
20 You asked me how it went, and I told you. I would go there, I
21 would arrive, I would get something, or I would not bring anything. You
22 insisted on some notes. I told you that I had no notes.
23 Q. I'm sorry. What you're now saying is it's a negative. In other
24 words, having spoken to Mr. Krgovic about military courts for one thing,
25 you didn't put it into your report. But what you told us yesterday was a
1 positive, that something he said on at least three or four occasions was
2 memorized by you and put into the report.
3 Now, do you see the difference between what you said yesterday
4 and what you're saying this morning?
5 MR. KRGOVIC: I object to that because it's not correct
6 interpretation what the witness said.
7 MS. KORNER: I think he speaks English, so it doesn't make any
9 [Defence counsel confer]
10 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] The only thing that I want to say
11 here is that Ms. Korner sub-lined two answers of this witness; one
12 pertained to the method used, and the second was about how many times we
13 met. This was not the answer to one question. It was the compilation of
14 two answers to two different questions which had been linked in a wrong
15 way and quite purposefully.
16 One question related to how many times we met, and another
17 question was about what -- what it looked like, our encounters.
18 JUDGE HALL: I confess, Mr. Krgovic, that I too had difficulty
19 with Ms. Korner's question but not for the reason that you've stated. I
20 myself now appreciate the conflation of the two issues. But to the
21 extent that I may have had difficulty with the question and you may have
22 had difficulty, the witness may also have had. So I would invite her to
23 rephrase the question.
24 MS. KORNER: Does Your Honour mean the last question I asked him?
25 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] About negative -- yes.
1 MS. KORNER: I see. Your Honour found that difficult to follow.
2 Very well.
3 If there's -- I read out -- I should add, before I rephrase the
4 question, that I read out accurately and completely the General's
5 questions and answers yesterday.
6 Q. Right, General. I will repeat the question I asked you.
7 Yesterday you told the Court that you had dilemmas, and, again, I
8 will make sure that I get this accurately.
9 Again, going bake to page 23836?
10 "Ms. Korner, I wouldn't bring him a document so that he could put
11 in some corrections.
12 "... what you mean by 'consultations.'
13 "... I had a dilemma." Sometimes. "Then I would ask him, he
14 would give me a reply. I would memorize it. I would [sic] go home. I
15 would sit behind my computer, and I would put it" - in other words, what
16 had you memorized from your conversation with Mr. Krgovic - "into the
17 report that I was currently working on."
18 That's what you said yesterday. And that's what I mean by a
19 positive; something was added to the report.
20 This morning, what you told us is that as a result of your
21 conversations with Mr. Krgovic you didn't put something into your report
22 about military courts or military law because he told you not to bother,
23 and that is a paraphrase. Which, in other words, is a negative action.
24 You're not doing something.
25 Now do you see the difference?
1 I hope that's clearer to you.
2 A. I told you about the dilemmas that I had. But those dilemmas
3 were resolved during the conversation. And it is true that this dilemma
4 I did not include into my report. I was speaking in principle. You
5 asked me about the methodology of drafting the report. You asked me what
6 did I do, bearing in mind that I didn't have any written notes. And I
7 simply wanted to describe vividly the process of making it. I really
8 don't see what the problem is and why you're asking me all this and
9 whether it has anything to do with the contents of my report.
10 I would like, here, to expound on the contents of my report, if
11 you would permit me.
12 Q. What were -- what were the dilemmas which were resolved which did
13 go into your report?
14 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, there -- there's something I'm not --
15 and it may be only me, but it's something that I would certainly have to
16 clear up with the witness, and certainly mean no criticism of the
17 interpreters when I pose this question. The word dilemma in English
18 carries certain connotations. And I'm wondering whether those
19 connotations are what the witness intended to convey.
20 So my question to the witness is that: When you say what we --
21 the word that has continuously come up is "dilemmas," what do you mean?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I gave an example.
23 Maybe it would be more precise to say that I didn't know some things. I
24 didn't know, for instance, how to address people here at the Tribunal,
25 and I consider that a dilemma. That's why I asked Mr. Krgovic to tell me
1 how to address the president of the Chamber, how to address another
2 Judge, how to address another lawyer, how to address Madam Prosecutor.
3 These were the unknowns for me.
4 I didn't know whether I was allowed to take out my textbook out
5 of my brief case and use it during the work here. That's what I asked.
6 And other similar questions. And, of course, all this did not find its
7 way into my report.
8 And since Ms. Korner is insisting, I gave one concrete example.
9 There was the question of whether I should use the Law on Military Courts
10 and Military Prosecutors and to what extent. And I told you the reply
11 that I received from Mr. Krgovic. So that's how call it Serbian,
12 dilemmas, unknowns. That's what I met.
13 JUDGE HALL: Thank you very much, sir.
14 Yes, Ms. Korner.
15 MS. KORNER:
16 Q. How to address me or the Judges or anything like that is not
17 something that you would memorize and put into your report by typing it,
18 is it?
19 A. That's right.
20 Q. And --
21 A. But, still, I have to remember it, memorize it. It has to be
22 inside my head so that I would know how to behave here.
23 Q. Yes. But, again, I return to what you told us yesterday.
24 Something that you memorized - more than one thing, apparently - you went
25 back, sat down, and typed into the report that you were writing. What
1 was it?
2 A. Ms. Korner, I was speaking to you in general terms about how I
3 worked, because I didn't make any notes. And I did not include any of
4 these dilemmas in my report.
5 I may have been less than precise yesterday when I finished my
6 sentence. I allow for that possibility.
7 Q. I'm going to ask you -- well, can I explain why we're
8 concentrating on this aspect, General. Because yesterday I asked you
9 about what you understood to be the duties of an expert and then put to
10 you various things. Were you aware that the opinions the expert
11 expresses should be the expert's own, formed independently, and not the
12 views of either the client or any other person?
13 A. I'm aware of that, Ms. Korner.
14 Q. Are you sure that you didn't have a conversation with anybody
15 from the Defence team last night when it was explained to you that if you
16 couldn't identify the parts of the report for which you received
17 assistance from Mr. Krgovic your report might be disallowed?
18 A. Ms. Korner, I didn't consult anybody from yesterday's session
19 till today.
20 MR. KRGOVIC: [Previous translation continued] ... I didn't object
21 to that. But basically Ms. Korner used our private conversation between
22 parties about the topics for cross-examination. I mean, it's not proper.
23 Because we discussed about this topic what was the dilemma, and I told
24 Ms. Korner privately what was my conversation between expert on that
1 JUDGE HARHOFF: When you say "we," Mr. Krgovic, you are referring
2 to yourself and Ms. Korner?
3 MR. KRGOVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... me and Ms. Korner.
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
5 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I very carefully didn't do that because
6 I didn't want to put Mr. Krgovic in even more an embarrassing position.
7 But it is -- it is certainly the reason why I'm asking these questions.
8 In any event, I don't believe that I can take this topic any
9 further with the witness. Your Honours have heard the answers.
10 MR. KRGOVIC: I'll just say, I'm not in an embarrassed position
11 at all.
12 JUDGE HALL: So we move on.
13 MS. KORNER:
14 Q. I'm afraid, General, you're going to have to answer more
15 questions about who you spoke to in respect of the evidence that you're
16 giving and your report.
17 You told us yesterday that you spoke to a number of generals
18 after you had submitted your report for filing to Mr. Krgovic. Can you
19 give us, please, first of all, the names of the generals to whom you
21 A. I do not know whether the people want me to mention their names
22 in public. I have no problem with that, but I don't know what their
23 reactions might be.
24 MR. KRGOVIC: [Previous translation continued] ...
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, inasmuch as this was after his report
2 was submitted, we have a difficulty seeing the relevance of this
4 MS. KORNER: But he's given evidence, Your Honour, a great deal
5 of evidence, which was not contained in his report. And I'm going to the
6 same issue. Is this his own knowledge or somebody else's. He's obliged
7 to identify this.
8 JUDGE HALL: I think I follow you.
9 Mr. -- I'm wondering whether the General's reservation, which may
10 be unfounded, would be resolved by moving into private session to deal
11 with the names of the persons.
12 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I can see absolutely no reason at all
13 why the names of generals he spoke to should not be said in public.
14 JUDGE HALL: I probably agree with you. It's just that the
15 witness has expressed reservations.
16 MS. KORNER: Well, if he explains why he has reservations and why
17 he doesn't want to mention them, that's another matter.
18 JUDGE HALL: Do you understand our concern, General? The -- as
19 to why -- could you explain why it is that you are reluctant to mention
20 the names of these persons with whom you spoke after your report had been
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe that I
23 stated clearly that I have no problem with saying those names, but I
24 don't know if the people in question want me to mention their names in
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE HALL: Yes, Mr. Zecevic --
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I may have to request a break and
4 make some phone calls, but then I'm surely not allowed to do that. I'll
5 repeat that I have no problem, because these are facts. I'm talking
6 about two generals and a colonel, but I think I should ask them first. I
7 don't know if you understand.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: May I, Your Honours?
9 JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] Yes.
10 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, it seems to me that what the
11 witness is expressing, he's expressing the concern because he doesn't
12 know whether -- whether the people that he talked to might have some
13 consequences out of that fact. Therefore, for whatever reasons he might
14 have these reservations.
15 And I honestly don't see the problem that we go in a private
16 session, he tells the names so Ms. Korner has that, we have the
17 information, it's just not public, and the people are not having any
18 consequences out of that. That is precisely why the private sessions
19 exist in this Tribunal, among other things.
20 Thank you.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, if, for your own purposes, you would
23 wish the witness to name these generals with whom he spoke, we would move
24 into private session only to receive the names. And depending on how
25 things develop, the status of that may be removed at some point. But at
1 this point, if you -- if you are pursuing that question, we would move
2 into private session.
3 MS. KORNER: Yes, I am pursuing that question.
4 JUDGE HALL: So we go into private session.
5 [Private session]
11 Pages 23867-23868 redacted. Private session.
25 [Open session]
1 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
2 MS. KORNER:
3 Q. I'll repeat the question that I asked.
4 Were you consulting the persons you have named because you
5 personally knew nothing about the events between 1992 and 1995, as they
6 affected the VRS?
7 A. Ms. Korner, I must repeat that I have never said that I didn't
8 know anything about the events in the VRS from 1992 through 1995.
9 Q. Okay. All right. Well, I may come back to that when we deal
10 with your -- your history.
11 Now, can we move, please, to further matters to do with your
12 report and your discussions with counsel.
13 You originally said that the problems you had were to do with
14 legal matters. Do I understand, then, that you yourself have no
15 expertise in the interpretation of laws?
16 A. I have never said that I had serious legal problems. I did say
17 to you yesterday that within my responsibility I was often duty-bound to
18 interpret some new rules or regulations to other members or units once
19 these were published.
20 Q. I will quote what you said yesterday when you were dealing with
21 Mr. Krgovic's interventions. This is at page 23837:
22 "Most often, or to be more precise, it was really a suggestion.
23 Or I shouldn't really say 'suggestion.' In those cases when I had small
24 problems in interpretation of certain laws and regulations."
25 Now, that's right, isn't it: You are not an expert in the
1 interpretation of laws and regulations?
2 A. To my mind, Ms. Korner, we should draw a line between strictly
3 legal regulations, on the one hand, and military regulations, on the
5 The rules of service that I mention in my report and the Law on
6 the Armed Forces, for example - I also mention that in my report - are
7 military regulations. And I'm trained and competent to interpret them.
8 Q. All right. Had you, before you came here to The Hague, met
9 Mr. Cvijetic?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And how often did you -- well, sorry. First question: When was
12 the first time that you met Mr. Cvijetic?
13 A. The first time in Belgrade, just before I left, in Mr. Krgovic's
15 Q. Yes. When you say just before you left, do you mean last week?
16 A. No, I think it was the week before.
17 Q. All right. And for how long did you meet Mr. Cvijetic in
18 Mr. Krgovic's office?
19 A. Perhaps two hours.
20 Q. Did you see him again when you came to The Hague?
21 A. Yes. Yes, we met here, together with Mr. Krgovic.
22 Q. And for how long did you see Mr. Cvijetic here in The Hague?
23 A. It was a whole morning that Mr. Cvijetic spent with us.
24 Q. And the purpose of Mr. Cvijetic's meeting you back in Belgrade
25 and here for the whole morning was to take you through each and every one
1 of the documents he proposed to show you; is that right?
2 A. Mr. Cvijetic showed me some documents, but it was more me
3 explaining to Mr. Cvijetic some military terms and resolving some of his
4 dilemmas, because I understood that I am part of the team of the lawyers
5 of the Defence and that I'm supposed to help them with the things
6 pertaining to the military topics.
7 Q. Right. Your understanding of your role in this case is that you
8 are part of the team for the lawyers to help them with the things
9 pertaining to military topics. That's your understanding, is it?
10 A. Ms. Korner, I am the expert for the Defence. I think that's my
11 official title.
12 Q. Yes. Well, you see -- well, all right. Let's be quite honest
13 and straightforward about this, shall we, General? You see your role as
14 helping the Defence to win the case, don't you?
15 A. Well, it's a little bit strange for me to say "to win the case."
16 It reminds me of military terminology which is improper for the setting
17 of a courtroom.
18 Q. Well, all right. To help -- I'll rephrase that. It is, you see
19 it, your role as to assist the Defence in its role of obtaining an
20 acquittal for their client, Stojan Zupljanin. Is that a better way of
21 putting it?
22 A. Yes, that's correct.
23 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honours, I see the time. I know it's a
24 bit early, but I wonder if perhaps the -- there's a matter I want to
25 address Your Honours on, but it may be that -- I mean, certainly the
1 General ought to leave court. And perhaps we could take, as far as he is
2 concerned, the adjournment earlier?
3 JUDGE HALL: You mean the adjournment for this session, I take
5 MS. KORNER: Oh, for the session, yes, yes. I don't mean for the
6 whole day.
7 JUDGE HALL: General, there is a procedural matter which counsel
8 wish to address. So, like yesterday, we would ask the usher to please
9 escort you from the courtroom while we deal with that matter.
10 [The witness stands down]
11 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, before you begin, if I may, there are
12 two matters which, because I don't trust my own memory, I might forget by
13 the end of today, which I am to remind -- one that I'm to remind counsel
14 about; the second is an invitation. The first one is to reminder to
15 Mr. Krgovic about his revised batting order. The second matter is that
16 counsel would recall that on, I think it was Tuesday, there were two
17 documents that were referred to which, to the surprise of counsel,
18 were -- had been filed confidentially and it has been brought to our
19 attention that there are a fairly large number of documents which have
20 been entered confidentially which probably don't need to be
21 so-classified. So we would invite counsel to go through the list of
22 these documents and agree which documents can have that confidential
23 classification removed. And we would -- this isn't an urgent matter, but
24 lest it slips from counsels' own recollection, we would invite you to do
25 this by the time we resume after the November -- you know, with the
1 sharing-time with the other trial, whatever the date is in November when
2 we come back with this trial.
3 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, yes. I think one of the problems is
4 that a lot of the documents which, on the face of themselves, don't
5 identify who produced them but have come in through a witness who
6 testified in closed session. As I understand the problem, which is why
7 they are confidential, if anybody wants to see how they are produced, it
8 raises the problem of closed session testimony or private session
9 testimony. And I think that's the problem. But we can certainly have
10 a -- another look at -- I think most of the documents to which this
11 applies are the documents produced -- well, actually, no, they're also
12 Defence documents that were put to certain witnesses. So -- but we'll
13 certainly -- I hope Your Honours don't require an urgent response to
15 JUDGE HALL: Yes, I said November.
16 MS. KORNER: Well, yes. All right.
17 JUDGE HALL: Thanks.
18 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I'm afraid we're back to the same
19 topic I was raising yesterday. And it's this: It is absolutely now
20 plain as a pikestaff, and I commend the General for his honesty on this,
21 that this is not an independent expert. Leaving aside the contradictory
22 answers that he's given about the input from Mr. Krgovic; in effect, now,
23 he's saying, I do see my role as assisting the Defence to obtain an
24 acquittal for Mr. Zupljanin.
25 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, the -- the opening paragraph of the
1 report is: "I have been engaged by the Zupljanin Defence team,"
2 et cetera. And isn't this the -- isn't this the inherent nature of
3 experts who are not called by the Court? I recall, and I appreciate that
4 the thinking in the system with which you and I would be more familiar
5 may have developed, but I remember as long as 25 years ago there was an
6 article in the New Law Journal dealing with experts as hired guns, and
7 that's a problem that -- that persists in adversarial proceedings, isn't
8 it? And to the extent that these -- the proceedings before these
9 Tribunals have that character, the -- it is - I'm trying not use the word
10 "inevitable" - but it is not surprising that the expert called by one
11 side, as opposed to an expert, as I said, who the Court itself calls,
12 would -- that his -- his testimony would be -- would reflect the side
13 that calls him. So, as a Tribunal, the -- the witness's answer to your
14 last question, I don't find surprising.
15 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour -- [microphone not activated] --
16 suggests surprising. Well, I mean, surprising, I suppose, in its
17 honesty. That may be what lies behind a lot of experts' opinions, as we
18 all know from experience, but, Your Honour, there is a clear, clear duty
19 on an expert which is certainly developed in, as Your Honours puts it, in
20 the jurisdiction from which we practice, which is, there has to be at
21 least, I suppose if nothing else, an appearances of objectivity and
22 impartiality for the evidence to have any credibility at all.
23 Now, Your Honours, this is not an unknown situation in this
24 Tribunal. It's largely arisen, it's fair to say, and I think this is the
25 first time it's arisen with a Defence expert witness, with the expert
1 witnesses that the Prosecution have called, because they worked, some of
2 them, they worked for the Office of the Prosecutor, therefore their
3 evidence should be excluded. And short of any evidence that there was
4 real involvement in the development of the Prosecution case, by and large
5 it's been left as a matter of weight. But as Mr. Zecevic is familiar
6 with it, because he was in the case, in the Milutinovic case - and,
7 Your Honours, I can produce copies -- I'd have to go and get them, but I
8 can produce copies of these cases - the Trial Chamber there disallowed
9 the evidence of one of the Office of the Prosecution's witnesses with
10 anything other than factual information. No opinion evidence was to be
11 given - I'm summarizing, and, as I say, I can produce it - on the basis
12 that he was far too closely connected with the investigation and all the
13 other matters in that case.
14 And, Your Honours, I raise this now so that we
15 can [indiscernible] the last time I raise it. But it is my submission
16 that given what's happened, given what we now know has happened with the
17 General and how he came to write the report and his own views of what his
18 role is, that this evidence really should be excluded under the term
19 provisions of Rule 95.
20 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in reply, I can say
21 the following --
22 JUDGE HALL: Sorry, was Ms. Korner finished?
23 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, that's my -- it's my, if you like,
24 preliminary submission. If Your Honours wish to hear more, then I can
25 get the authorities that --
1 JUDGE HALL: No, I only thought you were still on your feet.
2 Thank you.
3 MS. KORNER: No. I'm -- I'm -- that's my submission.
4 JUDGE HALL: Yes, thank you.
5 Yes, Mr. Krgovic.
6 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I think that the jurisprudence
7 quoted by Ms. Korner is improper. The witness Coo in the Kosovo case was
8 excluded because he interviewed both witnesses and the accused during the
9 investigation phase. That was the reason that he was excluded as an
11 The jurisdiction mentioned by Ms. Korner, the Prosecution staff
12 are normally not called as experts. However, the jurisprudence of this
13 Tribunal allows each of the sides to call their own experts. And now
14 Ms. Korner was putting things in the mouth of the witness in explaining
15 his role. The Defence called him to help shed light on certain facts.
16 He said that the fact that he was called by one of the sides has nothing
17 to do with what he stated at the beginning of the trial. He said that he
18 thinks that he's speaking the truth in order to help the Tribunal and the
19 parties to the proceedings. That's what he emphasised.
20 In any case, I already stated yesterday that our practice was
21 that only after the cross-examination and re-direct examination are
22 finished we should discuss these issues.
23 I think that that was the practice in this case and in other
24 cases before the Tribunal.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: [Previous translation continued] ... Your Honours,
1 just very briefly: I'm actually very grateful to Ms. Korner that she
2 brought up the -- this issue because that is precisely -- that was the
3 basis of -- of our submission concerning the expert witnesses which were
4 employees or former employees of the -- of the Office of the Prosecutor
5 and testified in this case, and we cited that particular jurisprudence
6 from -- from Milutinovic case.
7 Now, Your Honours, I don't really see that we need to go at
8 length into this matter. It -- it is obviously a misinterpretation. You
9 have to -- we always have to keep in mind that there -- that the witness
10 is hearing in his earphones what is the interpretation of the question.
11 It goes without saying that the witness is the expert for the Defence.
12 Of course it goes without saying that the interests of the Defence of
13 Mr. Zupljanin is to acquit Mr. Zupljanin. So if I call an expert, of
14 course he assists me. And if you ask me what -- how am I assisted by --
15 by the expert, I'm assisted by expert so I can acquit my client. Because
16 that's my ultimate goal.
17 Therefore -- I mean, I don't really -- I don't really find what
18 Mr. -- Ms. Korner, I'm sorry, what Ms. Korner found in his answer. I
19 think it is just the matter of misinterpretation. And we are using, for
20 the third time, like, 45 minutes on the matter, which I don't think
21 deserve that kind of attention.
22 Thank you very much.
23 MS. KORNER: Your Honour --
24 JUDGE HALL: Anything in response?
25 MS. KORNER: Yes, Your Honours. There's a fundamental
1 misunderstanding with respect by the Defence of the duties of an expert.
2 And as I say, I do not blame for the General for anything that's
4 The duty of an expert is to render an impartial, objective
5 opinion. It does not matter whether he works for the -- whether he's
6 employed by the Defence or employed by the Prosecutor, provided the Court
7 is satisfied, and they have to be satisfied of this before they can admit
8 the evidence, that this is an independent report and evidence; the
9 witness's own expertise, and not that of others; that he is qualified to
10 give that evidence; and he is not there simply to express the views of
11 his "client." And in each and every case when the objection has been
12 made in respect of witnesses from the OTP, the Chamber has been satisfied
13 before it admitted the evidence that the reports were done by the
14 experts. If assistance was offered, that was explained. That was the
15 independent opinion of the expert, whoever they worked for, and that they
16 had followed all the rules that pertain to experts. In this particular
17 case, obviously, particularly Mr. Brown and Dr. Nielsen.
18 Your Honour, it is quite apparent that that's not what has
19 happened here. And had all of this been made clear in the accompanying
20 submission of the expert general report, then the objection would have
21 been made before he gave evidence. But we didn't know any of that. The
22 Defence knew exactly about the expert witnesses we've called, from
23 Dr. Donia through to Mr. Brown, knew everything about them; we didn't
24 know anything.
25 So that's why this objection is being made now. And I do not
1 think it is a waste of the Court's time, because this is a -- clearly an
2 important matter.
3 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE HALL: So we would take the break and return at the usual
7 --- Recess taken at 10.22 a.m.
8 --- On resuming at 10.59 a.m.
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I appreciate you're going to rule, but
10 can I just, effectively to deal with what Judge Hall put to me, actually
11 read what your own decision was on the 29th of December -- September,
12 2010, on the decision allowing us to call Ms. Hanson as a witness. In
13 paragraph 10, you -- I'm sorry, Your Honour. Yes. Sorry, having said I
14 was going to read it to you ...
15 Sorry, Your Honours. In any event, Your Honours do deal with -
16 can I look at it? - the question of a potential bias of an expert -- no,
17 I'm sorry, Your Honours, I did have it a moment ago. Oh, yes. Here we
19 Your Honours quoted Nahimina. I've got the wrong decision;
20 that's why I'm ... it's paragraph 9:
21 "An expert is expected to make statements and draw conclusions
22 independently and impartially. The fact that the witness has been
23 involved in the investigations and preparation of the Prosecution or
24 Defence case or is employed or paid by one party does not disqualify him
25 as an expert witness or make the expert statement or report unreliable:
1 In the Nahimina case, the Appeals Chamber said:
2 "An expert is required to testify with the utmost neutrality and
3 with scientific objectivity."
4 Your Honours, I appreciate that it's -- it's -- you're going
5 rule, but I just thought I'd remind you of that. And that -- it was the
6 5th of November, 2009, your decision.
7 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Ms. Korner.
8 In terms of the application that is, at present, before us, we
9 are not persuaded that we should, at this point, disqualify the witness
10 as an expert or his report. And, therefore, we invite the counsel for
11 the Prosecution to continue her cross-examination of the witness.
12 [The witness takes the stand]
13 MS. KORNER:
14 Q. Now, General, shortly before you explained what you perceived
15 your role to be as an expert witness for the Defence, I was asking you
16 about your conversations with Mr. Cvijetic. And at page 21, line 14:
17 "Mr. Cvijetic showed me --" you told us:
18 "Mr. Cvijetic showed me some documents, but it was more me
19 explaining to Mr. Cvijetic some military terms and resolving some of his
21 Now, did Mr. Cvijetic, during this -- the first meeting and the
22 half-day meeting you had just before you testified, take you through all
23 the documents that he was going to ask you about?
24 A. I do not remember exactly. You're saying all the documents. I
25 don't think we really went through all the documents.
1 Q. All right. Did he tell you exactly what questions he was going
2 to ask you and ask you about your answers?
3 A. We spoke more about the topics that would be discussed.
4 Q. Yeah. You see, the reason I ask you that is that between
5 pages 23775 and -776, because that really dealt with your report, he took
6 you through -- 23776 and 23778, he put a whole series of propositions to
7 you based on laws and regulations. For example, at line 7 of page 23777:
8 "I'll list some of the [sic] laws and regulations, such as: The
9 Law on All People's Defence; the strategy of All People's Defence and
10 social self-protection; and Yugoslavia, as a Federation, was also
11 signatory to all international conventions, governing, among other,
12 international humanitarian law; is that correct?
13 "I agree with you.
14 "Q. The federal units, republics, had the right to further
15 elaborate the system of All People's Defence and social self-protection
16 and take it to even lower levels. That is, municipalities, enterprises,
17 and so on. And to achieve that, they had the right to adopt republican
18 legislation ...?
19 "That's how it was regulated."
20 And so on and so forth.
21 And most of the times you just said "that's correct."
22 But did you actually know any of that, or did he tell you that
23 when you met him?
24 A. Ms. Korner, I was familiar with the subject matter. I used some
25 of those documents and laws when I worked on my report.
1 Q. All right. Well, let's return to some of the matters I was
2 asking you.
3 When you were asked to do a report, you say you met Mr. Krgovic.
4 Did you ask for him to put down, in writing, exactly what he wanted the
5 report to be about?
6 A. No, I did not.
7 Q. But as a military officer, weren't you concerned to make sure
8 that you perfectly understood what your instructions were?
9 A. I knew perfectly well what the topic of my work was, and that was
10 the use of police units in combat.
11 Q. That's all you were told, was it, that you were asked to deal
12 with, the use of police units in combat?
13 A. You asked me whether I understood what I was supposed to do. And
14 I replied that I knew that perfectly well --
15 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... yes.
16 A. -- and that I didn't -- didn't ask for written notes.
17 Q. Yes, but, I'm sorry, so it was a simple instruction, you write a
18 report about the use of police units in combat? I imagine he added
20 A. The topics I have also spoken about were also mentioned in
21 passing as the expected integral parts of my report; such as, command in
22 the army, the organisations of one and the other army. And I said that I
23 was clear about that.
24 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... you have covered quite a lot
25 of topics in your report completely outside the topic of the use of
1 police units in combat, haven't you?
2 A. That is correct. I had to deal with some other topics too --
3 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... so did you --
4 A. -- to clarify.
5 Q. Sorry. "To clarify." So did he ask you to do that, or did you
6 volunteer to do that?
7 A. It was my choice, my approach.
8 Q. So is the answer to my question: You said -- you volunteered to
9 write reports on other topics?
10 A. Ms. Korner, these are not other topics.
11 Let me explain what the main theme is. Or, rather, if you want
12 to elucidate the main theme, you have to study many documents and explain
13 many concepts. Who commands whom, why, how that is regulated, what kind
14 of relationships are in place. And that is why I also introduced other
16 Q. All right. So was it your idea to introduce the chapter on the
17 defence of towns or cities, or Mr. Krgovic's?
18 A. I don't quite remember whose idea it was. I think it was mine.
19 Because I knew, based on the insight I had acquired, that such commands
20 were in existence during the war.
21 Q. Well, I mean, Mr. Krgovic explained to you, didn't he, very
22 clearly, or had you been following the trial in any event, what the
23 various issues were that had arisen in this case, as they affected the
25 A. That is correct.
1 Q. All right. Now, finally, because we've got really sidetracked
2 from it, can you tell Court, please, now, without referring to any
3 documents, how long you spent writing this report between the
4 1st of March and when you delivered it to Mr. Krgovic sometime before the
6 A. Little short of a month, Ms. Korner. I worked for up to ten
7 hours a day.
8 Q. So are you saying that you worked - let's call it 27 days,
9 because it's filed on the 28th - you worked something like 270 hours?
10 A. That is correct.
11 Q. All right. Did you feel that was sufficient time for you to
12 produce a report for this case?
13 A. Before answering this question, I believe that in my reply to
14 your previous question I said that sometimes I worked for up to ten
16 Q. Are you reading the transcript in English?
17 A. No. My English is not good at all.
18 Q. All right. But, I'm sorry, but I'm asking you whether you felt
19 that the time that you were given was sufficient for you to produce a
20 proper report.
21 A. Ms. Korner, I accepted that duty, and I knew that since I'm
22 retired and have no other activities, I have good work conditions and I
23 have access to all books and literature. I accepted to write this report
24 in such a short time, but, of course, that is relative.
25 Q. All right. You said, and we'll come on to it in a moment, on
1 your notes on methodology, you've listed the documents that you had
2 looked at and you said: "All the documents" -- I'm sorry. You generally
3 talked about the documents you'd looked at. And you said: "All the
4 documents are listed in the bibliography."
5 That's right, is it, the documents you looked at are listed in
6 the bibliography to the report?
7 A. That is correct.
8 Q. So can I ask: Who -- who provided you with the -- the -- the
9 documents that you looked at? Did -- did Mr. Krgovic provide you with
10 any documents, or Mr. Cvijetic -- well, no, because you didn't see him
12 Did Mr. Krgovic or anybody else provide you with documents to
13 look at?
14 A. I had my own copies of the military rules and regulations, but I
15 also used the library of the Military Academy. I did receive some
16 documents from Mr. Krgovic.
17 Q. So can you roughly tell us how many documents you got from
18 Mr. Krgovic? I mean, we'll look at the list of documents in your
19 bibliography in a moment, but can you roughly remember?
20 I see you're looking at your bibliography, General. I just --
21 we'll come on to that in a moment. Did you get any documents from
22 Mr. Krgovic outside of those which are listed in your bibliography?
23 A. No, Ms. Korner.
24 Q. Did you yourself, as a result of your researches, ask for any
25 documents to be given to you by Mr. Krgovic or anybody else?
1 A. I think that I asked for a transcript.
2 Q. Was that the transcript of the evidence of General Milovanovic in
4 A. I think so.
5 Q. Because you quote that.
6 Were there any documents or quotes from books that you decided
7 not to include?
8 A. Not as far as I remember.
9 Q. Well, let's have a look, please, at your bibliography.
10 MS. KORNER: If we could have up on the screen. The report is
11 00031D2, and it's the last -- well, it's the -- it's - one, two - three
12 pages before the end.
13 Q. All right. Now, there's your bibliography. Items 1 through
14 to 13 are books, are they not, written by other people about the strategy
15 and events? So when I say "strategy," military strategy and/or the
16 events of the conflict. Do you agree with that?
17 A. I do.
18 Q. Through -- 14 through to 27 are effectively -- well, they're
19 slightly mixed. But, again, they're textbooks or laws relating to the
21 A. That is correct.
22 Q. 28 to 30, do those represent original documents that you looked
24 A. They were copies of these documents.
25 Q. Yes, I'm sorry, obviously they were copies. What I mean is,
1 though, the actual decision of the Presidency itself, as opposed to a
2 reference in a book.
3 A. It was the actual decision of the Presidency.
4 Q. Right. So, as I say, 28, 29, and 30, you're talking about the
5 actual document. And, in fact, 31, I suppose. Is that right?
6 A. That's right.
7 Q. Then, the next is the Book of Rules, which is going back to a JNA
8 manual, as it were. The -- which is 32. 33, instructions; that's a
9 document that we've seen in this court.
10 Then we go back between 34 and 41, do we not, to regulations
11 dating back to the JNA; is that right?
12 A. That's right.
13 Q. 42 and 43 are actually VRS orders, is that right, that you looked
14 at, copies thereof?
15 A. That's right.
16 Q. 45 to -- sorry, 44 to 46 are three documents relating -- issued
17 by the MUP side of -- of -- of these events; is that right?
18 A. That's right. 44, 45, and 46.
19 MS. KORNER: And then if we go to the next page, please.
20 Q. 47. 47 to 55 are actual documents emanating from the VRS during
21 the period; is that right?
22 A. That's right.
23 Q. And then we get 56 and 57, expert report - and I'll come back to
24 that in a minute - of Mr. Butler. And, finally, the transcript you asked
25 for of General Milovanovic.
1 So if we analyse that, 14 of the documents you looked at are
2 academic books, if you like; 18 are, sort of, JNA doctrinal manuals;
3 9 are RS laws or decrees; and for this report, you looked at precisely
4 11 contemporaneous documents issued by the VRS; and three relating to the
6 Do you think that 11 contemporaneous documents from the VRS and
7 three from the MUP was sufficient for you to give an overview of what
8 happened in 1992 -- was sufficient to give you an overview what happened
9 in 1992 between the VRS and the MUP?
10 MS. KORNER: And I see Mr. Krgovic wishes to object.
11 MR. KRGOVIC: To be honest with the witness, Ms. Korner forgot to
12 quote two expert reports.
13 MS. KORNER: No, I didn't. I'm coming back to them [Overlapping
14 speakers] ...
15 MR. KRGOVIC: -- relating to V--
16 MS. KORNER: [Overlapping speakers] ... I'm coming back to the
17 expert reports --
18 MR. KRGOVIC: Relating to VRS.
19 MS. KORNER: I am coming back to Mr. Butler's report.
20 Q. And my questions remains: Do you think that 11 contemporaneous,
21 actual VRS documents and three MUP documents is sufficient for you to
22 write a proper report?
23 A. I believe that the Chamber is going to judge the validity of my
24 report. I found it sufficient to write about the topic given to me by
25 the Defence lawyers.
1 Q. Because a lot of the documents you looked at in the course of
2 your evidence adduced by Mr. Krgovic, and later by Mr. Cvijetic, were
3 documents you had only seen, were they not, after you'd done your report?
4 MR. KRGOVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours, but there is one part of
5 his previous answer missing in transcript.
6 The witness said which -- or ask him to repeat last sentence,
7 because you start asking him and the last part of his answer is not ...
8 MS. KORNER: All right.
9 Q. General, the answer you gave to my question, when repeated,
10 whether those documents were sufficient, as recorded, is:
11 "I believe that the Chamber is going to judge the validity of my
12 report. I found it sufficient to write about the topic given to me by
13 the Defence lawyers?"
14 And I gather you said something else. Can you repeat that?
15 A. I said for the needs of the Defence lawyers and for the needs of
16 this Tribunal, this Honourable Tribunal.
17 Q. Right. You see, as you said in your introduction, you were
18 engaged to write an expert report on the topic of command in the armed
19 forces of the Republika Srpska, including resubordination and
20 co-ordinated action of police units of the RS minister -- Ministry of the
22 Now, are you seriously saying that from -- that -- that the
23 14 documents in total, leaving aside Mr. Butler's report - and I'll come
24 back to Mr. Butler's report - that's enough for you to give an accurate
25 depiction and come to a conclusion?
1 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honour, I object to this line of question
2 because it's really misleading the witness, because witness never said
3 it's on -- his report based on related VRS based on only of this
4 document. That's what Ms. Korner trying to establish. But he never said
5 that his expert report was based on this -- only these documents.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 MS. KORNER: Well, all right. I -- I'll deal with that.
8 Q. Is your expert report, please, then based on Mr. Butler's report
9 for the Popovic case, largely?
10 A. Ms. Korner, I read a great deal more of material, books. I have
11 my own experiences. I lectured. I wrote the expert report in the
12 Popovic case. So I assert that this report is based on the laws and
13 regulations, that it has a sound scientific basis, that it is truthful.
14 And I repeat: That it is up to the Trial Chamber to make their own
16 Q. Yes. But in order to make an informed decision, General, I would
17 suggest that they need to consider not only what's in your report but how
18 you came to write it. And, so, I -- I go a back to where I started.
19 Before you wrote this report, the only original - and by
20 "original," I mean the actual documents that you had looked at that
21 related to the VRS and the MUP, about whom you were -- you are saying you
22 are talking - are those 14 documents. That's right, isn't it?
23 A. I also spoke about my personal information, about the situation
24 and relationship within VRS.
25 Q. [Previous translation continued] ...
1 A. I often went to Prnjavor. I have relatives there. My seven
2 brothers served in the VRS. Three of them were killed; one was seriously
3 wounded. The command post of the Krajina Corps was in the immediate
4 vicinity of my place. This means that I had information, I had contacts,
5 and I claim that I was able to write about this topic and draft this
7 Q. Yes, I appreciate that you -- you claim that.
8 Now, Mr. Butler's report was dealing with issues of command and
9 control in the VRS in relation to the events at Srebrenica; is that
11 A. I think so.
12 Q. Well, did you re-read it before you wrote the report? Before you
13 wrote your report, this report.
14 A. I read it.
15 Q. All right. And it had absolutely nothing to do with the
16 relationship between the police and the army during 1992, did it?
17 A. I don't remember the details.
18 Q. Well, we can let you have another copy of Mr. Butler's report and
19 you can refresh your memory from that, if you didn't bring it.
20 But more to the point, General, is: Did you know that there had
21 been an expert report dealing with the very issues that you were asked to
22 write a report about, namely, the VRS in 1992, specifically in the
23 Autonomous Region of Krajina area, specifically about General Talic,
24 which dealt with those issues?
25 Were you told that by Mr. Krgovic?
1 A. I do not remember this detail.
2 Q. Well, having worked with Mr. Krgovic before, and when he
3 instructed you for the Popovic case, although, as it turned out, you
4 didn't give evidence, and he told you about Mr. Butler's report, are you
5 telling us he didn't tell you that there was an expert called Mr. Brown
6 who had produced a report on these very issues?
7 A. I remember the document by Mr. Brown.
8 Q. Well, are you telling us you did know that he had delivered a
9 report and given evidence and you were given a copy of that report? Is
10 that what you're saying now?
11 A. If I quoted it in my bibliography, then I was certainly given the
12 report. I believe it can be found in the bibliography.
13 Q. Well, it isn't in the bibliography, General. So please tell
14 us -- and we'll give you a copy now and you can have a look at it.
15 MS. KORNER: To the usher, just show it to Defence counsel,
17 Q. Were you given a copy of that report by Mr. Krgovic?
18 A. No, I haven't seen this document.
19 Q. Well, then, how do you know about Mr. Brown?
20 A. I remembered the man from the media. Sometimes I followed some
21 of the trials in Serbia, so that's why I thought that perhaps I used some
22 of that material. But I would have to take a closer look at my
23 bibliography. I claim that everything that I perused and everything that
24 was at my disposal can be now found in the bibliography.
25 Q. Right. Mr. Brown's report does not appear in your bibliography.
1 And you've just told us you don't recognise the report. So does that
2 mean you were not given a copy?
3 A. Of course I wasn't, if I didn't put it in my bibliography.
4 Q. Well, if you had known that there had been an expert testifying
5 about those events, is -- would you have asked to see that report before
6 you wrote your own report? In the same way that you saw Mr. Butler's
7 before you wrote your report for the Popovic case.
8 A. What if. I was not aware of this report, but I'm sure that I
9 probably would have used it in my work.
10 Q. Do you -- well, first of all, would you like to read through
11 Mr. Butler -- Mr. Brown's report?
12 A. I would be glad to read it, if permitted to do so by the
13 Trial Chamber. Maybe I can take it with me over the weekend.
14 Q. That's exactly I was going to suggest, General, that this can be
15 your light reading for the weekend, if Their Honours are happy with that
16 and the Defence don't object.
17 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have no idea how
18 this can be relevant for this testimony, for this expert testimony. But
19 I do not object. I'm simply not quite sure whether it's relevant for
20 this witness, whether he read the report by an analyst of the
22 JUDGE HALL: You're looking expectantly towards the Chamber --
23 MS. KORNER: [Overlapping speakers] ... no, no, Your Honours. The
24 General said he would like to have a look at it, so if that's -- if
25 Your Honours don't think there's anything wrong with that, that's what
1 I'm going to invite him to do, to take it with him over the weekend.
2 Q. Did you know, were you ever told, that a further expert had
3 testified for the Prosecution about the role of the MUP in 1992?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Would you have liked to know that as well?
6 A. I personally like to read a lot. So, yes, I would like to read
8 Q. No? I'm not, at the moment -- although you can have that as
9 well, if you like.
10 I want to know: You, as an expert instructed by the Defence,
11 knowing that, on the last occasion, there had been an expert for the
12 Prosecution, whether you would have liked to have been told that an
13 expert on police matters had already testified.
14 A. But I told you that I didn't know that.
15 Q. I appreciate you weren't told that. I'm asking you, as an
16 expert, whether you would have expected or liked to have been informed by
17 Mr. Krgovic that your evidence would be weighed up against two other
18 experts who had testified for the Prosecution.
19 A. Even if I had read it, I have to say, once again, that this
20 report would have looked exactly the same that it looks now.
21 Q. Sorry, does that mean that whatever you had seen in those reports
22 could never have affected your opinion that you were going to deliver?
23 A. Well, Ms. Korner, I cannot figure out from your question which of
24 my opinions expounded in my report are incorrect and why I should correct
25 them. We still haven't really touched upon any of the opinions and views
1 in my report.
2 Q. Don't, worry, General, we are going to come to those opinions and
3 matters which I'm going to suggest to you you are in error on simply
4 because you don't know, and you don't know because you haven't looked at
5 the relevant documents.
6 But for the moment I'm just concerned as to the whole methodology
7 by which you approached your task; because, you'll have to accept it from
8 me, that's important. Are you saying that regardless of what you saw or
9 read in those reports, with the various documents footnoted, you would
10 not have changed anything in your report?
11 A. In order to answer you, Ms. Korner, I would really have to read
12 both reports. Only then would I be able to answer your question. And
13 specifically related to my report, and parts of it, if any, which would
14 be in contradiction to the reports by the two Prosecution witnesses.
15 So if I compare my report to the reports drafted by the
16 Prosecution experts, I would have to see those details specifically.
17 Q. Yes. I was actually trying to get at your whole method of work,
18 but that's not the point.
19 And, finally -- and you can have -- we'll give you Dr. Nielsen's
20 report as well so -- as you say, you enjoy reading.
21 Finally, on this topic, you heard Mr. Krgovic's objection. When
22 you were writing your report, either for the Popovic case or for this
23 case, did you rely on Mr. Butler's report? Did you use Mr. Butler's
24 report as the basis for anything that you've said?
25 A. Mr. Butler's report is contained in the bibliography of my
1 report, which means that I used it in drafting the report.
2 Q. Yes, but what -- what parts of the report are based on
3 Mr. Butler's? You don't indicate -- you don't footnote Mr. Butler's
4 report anywhere.
5 So which parts of your report are based on Mr. Butler's?
6 MR. KRGOVIC: I object. The witness didn't say that he used the
7 Butler report as a base on his own report. He just said that he wrote --
8 read this.
9 MS. KORNER: No, he said: "I used it in drafting this report."
10 Really, Mr. Krgovic must not interrupt to help the witness out
11 like this.
12 Q. Now, which part of your report is based in any way on
13 Mr. Butler's report?
14 A. If I didn't quote Mr. Butler and no footnotes can be found, it
15 means that I did not use any quotes from his report. But I read the
16 document. I can't tell you off the top of my head which parts I used. I
17 read it, and I probably derived some conclusions that I included in my
18 work. But right now, it would be necessary to compare my report with
19 that report in order to ascertain that precisely, to see whether I used
20 anything, and I emphasise "in case I used anything." But I did read it,
21 since it can be found in the bibliography.
22 Q. All right. That's as far as I can take this.
23 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I'm going to start on the topic of --
24 of his actual military career, so perhaps this would be an appropriate
25 moment. I know it's five minutes early. I can certainly start the
1 topic -- but ...
2 JUDGE HALL: It's actually ten minutes early.
3 MS. KORNER: Oh, is it? All right.
4 Q. Right. Let's turn, shall we, to your military history, please.
5 Can we have up your CV on the screen.
6 MS. KORNER: Sorry, the CV is 00030D2.
7 Q. I'm concerned -- General, I want to ask you about your actual
8 military career, as opposed to the schooling which we see, the education
9 and advanced training.
10 MS. KORNER: So can we look at page 2 in English.
11 Q. You were promoted to major on the 29th of July, 1991, and became
12 a lieutenant-colonel in July of 1995. So for the majority of the period
13 of the conflict, you were a major; is that right?
14 A. That's correct. It's a high rank in the military.
15 Q. And if we look at the various posts that you had, would this be a
16 fair summary - and correct me if I'm wrong - that the majority of your
17 work, until such time as you went to the Military Academy, was as a
18 morale officer. And that's -- I know it's a general term, and I'll come
19 on to the specifics of what's meant in a minute.
20 But would that be fair?
21 A. Yes. But I should add that while I was performing those duties,
22 you can see that I went through all the levels of command in existence in
23 the military. I am one of the few officers whose career moved all the
24 way from company, as the lowest level; through battalion; regiment, which
25 is equivalent to a brigade; three corps; air force, as a strategy
1 groupation [as interpreted]; air force command; and ending in the
2 General Staff, which is the highest level of command. After that, I was
3 also in the Military Academy, part of the educational sector under the
4 Ministry of Defence, which means that I had a chance to acquaint myself
5 with the politics going on within the Ministry of Defence.
6 Q. Yes. And the majority of your military experience, is this
7 right, was in the air force, rather than the army itself, if we look at
8 it? And, again, correct me if I'm wrong.
9 A. That is correct. Air force units usually shares their garrisons
10 with the army. And one of my duties was -- or consisted in the
11 co-operation between army units or navy units and air force units in
12 which I served.
13 Q. All right. Now, can I just outline to you the responsibilities
14 of an officer for moral guidance, religious, and legal affairs. Was it
15 moral guidance, tradition and cultural activities, information,
16 co-operation with state authorities and other social entities, religious
17 affairs, legal affairs?
18 A. That's right.
19 Q. Is it also correct that the -- the organ or the sector for moral
20 guidance, et cetera, did not engage directly in matters of conducting
21 combat operations and did not have an influence on the use of units?
22 A. That is not correct.
23 Q. Really? Because I'm quoting to you what you wrote in your report
24 for the -- for General Gvero in the Popovic case, and General Gvero, as I
25 understand it, was the morale officer. At page 29.
1 MS. KORNER: Perhaps we could have up the Popovic report.
2 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honours, the witness -- this part of the
3 report must shown -- must be shown to the witness.
4 MS. KORNER: I'm going to.
5 MR. KRGOVIC: Not to put out of the context.
6 MS. KORNER: I'm going to, Your Honour. That's just what I've
8 The report is 20232, 65 ter. 24 in B/C/S. 24 in B/C/S; 29 in
10 Perhaps we better go back, I suppose, to page 27 in English,
11 first of all, and 23 in B/C/S.
12 JUDGE HALL: Ms. Korner, with this -- would this be a convenient
13 point to take the break? You're about to start this document.
14 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, I'd rather deal with this, if I
16 JUDGE HALL: Very well. Very well.
17 MS. KORNER: If I may. I'm sorry. Now that I've started.
18 That's why I said, you know ...
19 JUDGE HALL: I thought you were having some difficulty, that's
20 why I suggested --
21 MS. KORNER: No, no. No. I've found it. Thank you,
22 Your Honour.
23 Q. That's the paragraph -- well, certainly in B/C/S.
24 MS. KORNER: But in English it's -- we need to go on to 27,
25 please. Oh, I see, well, can we pull it up? Is that the bottom of the
1 page? Yes, but it should say moral guidance. All right. I seem to have
2 a different version somehow. Could we go, in English, on to page --
3 could we go on to page 28, please, in English. Yes.
4 Q. Responsibilities. That's what I just read to you and which you
5 agreed. Do you accept that that's from your report?
6 A. That's correct.
7 Q. Now let's find the bit I've just further read to you.
8 MS. KORNER: At page 29 in English, and I think it's 24 in B/C/S.
9 Yep. Should be the line 42 in B/C/S, and the English part is the last
10 paragraph. Can we highlight that.
11 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Could Ms. Korner please ask a
12 specific question to the witness. The duty of the morale -- the
13 assistant for morale in the Main Staff, rather than the duties of an
14 officer for moral guidance, et cetera, in general.
15 The paragraph was not correctly cited, because this speaks about
16 the responsibility of the assistant commander for moral guidance,
17 et cetera, as opposed to the general duties and responsibilities of an
18 officer in charge of moral guidance.
19 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, the -- according to the CV of the
20 General, he was the assistant commander for moral guidance, 1989 to 1991.
21 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] But not with the Main Staff of the
23 You are confusing the witness, because you are taking excerpts
24 from a quotation that was about a specific person at a specific place and
25 at a specific time. This is about a totally different level of command.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, maybe I can assist.
2 MS. KORNER:
3 Q. Certainly, but --
4 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, I appreciate it's time for the break.
5 Q. Just, General, if you want to tell us, fine, you explain what
6 you'd like to explain.
7 A. I wanted to ask you to repeat your previous question.
8 Q. All right. I think that will probably have to wait until after
9 the break.
10 JUDGE HALL: So we return in 20 minutes.
11 [The witness stands down]
12 --- Recess taken at 12.07 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 12.43 p.m.
14 JUDGE HALL: We appreciate that we had an extended break at this
15 point, but, Ms. Korner, I'm reminded about Mr. Zecevic's request for five
16 minutes, and the Chamber needs five minutes. So, if you could keep an
17 eye on the clock end wind up with, say, 1.35.
18 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, yes. Mr. Zecevic informed me -- I also
19 recall that he'd asked for time. I think he wants a little longer than
20 the ten minutes that he -- so if we say half past 1.00?
21 JUDGE HALL: Very well.
22 [The witness takes the stand]
23 MS. KORNER:
24 Q. Now, General, my original question, before I pulled up your
25 report, was that I read to you what you'd written there and asked you if
1 that was correct. And you said: "Not exactly."
2 So in what way is it not correct?
3 A. Ms. Korner, I wanted you to ask me the question about, if I
4 remember correctly, whether it was correct that the organ for morale does
5 not participate in the preparation for military operations. And I said
6 that it wasn't -- that it wasn't correct. Or I think you phrased it:
7 participate in the preparation of operations. And that's why I answered
8 in the negative, because all organs participate in the preparation.
9 However, here, you showed me a context where it reads: The
10 execution of combat activities. Which is something else altogether.
11 Once the execution of combat activities begins, it is clear that only the
12 commander decides and is responsible for that.
13 So I repeat: I understood your question to refer to preparation,
14 which is one thing, something different from the execution. And that is
15 why I replied as I did, because that's how I understood your question.
16 Q. All right. I actually read to you word for word what had you
17 written in the report in English, or the translation, but I will accept
18 there may have been a translation error there.
19 The -- but you agree that you -- the -- the combat morale officer
20 did not, as you put it, take part, engage directly, in matters of the
21 execution of a combat operation, and the second part, did not have an
22 influence on the use of units?
23 MR. KRGOVIC: Again, I object. Because it is not said
24 that officer for morale. It was said the specific person in charge,
25 meaning General Gvero. Not officer for morale in general terms.
1 MS. KORNER: Do you know, this is really getting a bit much. I
2 am reading to the General from his own report in respect of a morale --
3 the duties of an assistant commander for morale, in this case,
4 General Gvero, who was in the corps.
5 Q. General, are you saying that there is a difference between the
6 duties of an assistant commander for morale in a corps or in a -- in a
7 lower unit, a brigade, say? Are there difference [sic] in his duties?
8 Responsibilities, I should probably say, not duties. Responsibilities.
9 A. Certainly there are differences between the levels of command.
10 The lower the level of command, the -- the less is included in these
11 responsibilities; and the higher the level, logically, the zone of
12 responsibility and the territory are greater, and that is why they have
13 more things to take care of.
14 Q. Yes, the greater -- I accept that entirely. And just to confirm
15 this, can we have a look, please, at the document you refer to quite
16 often in your report, which is the Defence document at tab 23, and which
17 I -- 47D2, Article 21.
18 MS. KORNER: Which is, in English, at page 13; and, in B/C/S, at
19 page ... no idea. I mean, it's page 22 -- sorry, it's page 13 in English
20 and it's page 22 of the document -- page 19. Thank you. 19 in B/C/S.
21 Q. Assistant command of political and legal affairs -- oh, sorry,
22 this is the -- I should say that this is the book of rules on the
23 responsibility of the ground forces corps command in peacetime. And that
24 sets out, do you agree, the -- the responsibilities of the assistant
25 commander for political and legal affairs?
1 A. I agree.
2 Q. All right. Thank you. And so can I go back to my original
3 question before I was interrupted.
4 Is it right, as you put in your report on behalf of
5 General Gvero, that an assistant commander for moral, political, legal,
6 religious affairs did not have -- at whatever level - brigade, corps -
7 did not have an influence on the use of units?
8 A. Ms. Korner, what are you talking about is something that I used
9 as a witness statement and included it in my report. That witness was
10 a -- was an immediate participant, and he stated about a specific person,
11 namely, General Gvero, that he had no influence on combat activities.
12 It's a well-known fact that morale organs were not popular during
13 the war because they were considered commie officers. And this was
14 written in that context, if I remember the transcript of that officer's
15 statement correctly.
16 Q. Yes. I'm sorry, but, first of all, I accept entirely you -- you
17 wrote this when you were assisting the Defence of General Gvero. But you
18 don't just say General Gvero. You say it has a general statement, based
19 on what this witness, Mr. -- who you put -- no, Mr. Trkulja said, and
20 from that you interpolate, you as the expert in this case, a general
21 principle. Do you agree that's what you've done in that sentence in that
23 I suppose you better go back to the report again.
24 MS. KORNER: What's the number?
25 20232. No. This is the Defence ... no, this is the Gvero --
1 sorry. The Gvero report. 20232, please.
2 Can we go back, please, to page 29 in English and to page 23, I
3 think it was, in B/C/S.
4 No, next page in B/C/S, so 24. Thank you.
5 Q. At the bottom, you wrote:
6 "The sector for MVP [sic] did not engage directly in matters of
7 conducting combat operations and did not have an influence on the use of
9 So you weren't just saying that about General Gvero. You were
10 actually saying that in general.
11 A. Ms. Korner, this is a quotation from a transcript, if I can see
12 it well enough. It is the testimony of Nedeljko Trkulja, who
13 specifically said about that case.
14 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... well, but I take it,
15 General, that you wouldn't have quoted it and put it into your report if
16 you didn't agree with it as an experienced morale officer.
17 A. Ms. Korner, as far as I remember, the focus of that report was
18 command responsibility. And there, I wrote that the assistant commander
19 assists his commander before a decision is taken. Once it is taken, and
20 combat activities begin, then there's only one officer who decides, and
21 that's the commander of the unit.
22 This is the context in which this was written.
23 Q. Yes. The idea was to help the Defence secure the acquittal of
24 General Gvero from the events in Srebrenica by putting in to your report
25 that he had absolutely no command or control responsibilities of the
1 troops; that's right, isn't it?
2 Is that right?
3 A. You're right. But not when you say that only helped
4 General Gvero. I wanted to explain that this is a principle present in
5 the army, and I wanted to assist the Trial Chamber, first and foremost.
6 Q. Right. Now, I -- that's -- that was the general. I want to come
7 back to the specifics of your career.
8 Can we have, please, back up again your CV.
9 MS. KORNER: 30D2. And can we go, please, to page 3.
10 Q. The first time, is this right -- I'm sorry, page -- I beg your
11 pardon. Page 2. Under Posts, at number 8, administrative officer in the
12 moral guidance, religious, and legal affairs organ in the air force
13 anti-defence command of the VRS from 1995 to 1996.
14 And as I think you told us, that was after the Dayton Agreement;
15 is that right?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. And, as you also told us, you left Bosnia, Bihac, on
18 May the 10th, 1992, and became, I take it, a member of the VJ.
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. So you have no personal experience of being in the VRS until the
21 conflict was over.
22 A. I had a tremendous war experience that I acquired in Slovenia and
23 Croatia. And also there were skirmishes in Bosnia already when I was
25 Q. I'm sorry, Mr. -- I'm going come on to your actual combat
1 experience in a moment, but I'm now talking about your experience of the
2 VRS as an army.
3 You personally have no experience of the VRS as an army, the
4 Republika Srpska army, until after the conflict was concluded, because
5 you left before it had been established?
6 A. I was not a participant in those events in that period.
7 Q. Please, answer the actual question. You have no experience of
8 the VRS as an army until after the conflict was concluded?
9 A. Madam, experience is a wide term. While I was in VJ, I was
10 following the events in the VRS, both because of my family and as an
11 officer. But, as I stated, I did not participate personally in those
12 event, just as you said.
13 Q. Did you ever, during the period, see the orders issued by
14 General Mladic, General Talic, or any of the other commanders during the
15 period 1992?
16 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm sorry, Your Honours, we have -- we're
17 experiencing some problems with the transcript. It's not going.
19 MS. KORNER: Oh, so it has.
20 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
21 JUDGE HALL: We're advised that it's a LiveNote problem, not a
22 transcript problem. So we can continue.
23 MS. KORNER: We can?
24 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
25 MS. KORNER: Thank you.
1 Q. Right. General, please, my question, and I'll repeat it: Did
2 you ever, during 1992, see the orders issued by any of the commanding
3 officers at whatever level?
4 A. I don't remember. But I believe that as part of my education at
5 the Military Academy -- as part of the education at the Military Academy
6 you can see that it was approximately at that time that I graduated from
7 the Command Staff Academy of Land Forces. We analysed the experiences
8 from that war, and it is possible that there were some documents there.
9 Q. Well, anything's possible. Did you see the orders issued by
10 General Mladic during 1992 itself?
11 A. Not in that period.
12 Q. Did you have any meetings during the period 1992 with any of the
13 generals in charge of executing the Supreme Command's desires? I'm going
14 to put it that way. Probably not the right word. Plans.
15 A. I told you that the command post of the Krajina Corps in, I
16 think, 1993 or 1994 - I'm not sure - was situated close to my birth
18 Q. Yes. For the moment, please, just concentrate on 1992.
19 During 1992, with the beginnings of the conflict, did you have
20 any meetings with General Talic or any of the Command Staff of the
21 1st Krajina Corps?
22 A. I spent almost half a year at the Bihac airport in 1992.
23 Q. After --
24 A. And during that period, it is possible that I encountered those
25 officers. But not after that.
1 Q. All right. Did you ever see any of the combat reports in 1992
2 that were sent by the 1st Krajina Corps to the Main Staff?
3 A. Not in that period.
4 Q. You personally, General, what combat experience do you actually
6 And can I say, it's not a criticism at all, this, but I would
7 like you -- to know what combat experience you've had.
8 A. Combat experience is a wide term. I can tell you some of my
9 activities which I have undertaken by helping the blockaded units, in
10 helping those units to extricate themselves from Slovenia, and to
11 transfer themselves to Croatia, Serbia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.
12 Likewise, later on, in the Republic of Croatia, I spent more than
13 two months as a commander of a defence sector. I was personally in the
14 trench with my soldiers and officers.
15 Q. Have you ever come under attack? Have you ever been attacked by
16 an opposing force?
17 A. I was under the attack of enemy forces at the time when I was the
18 commander of the defence of a sector at the Plejso airport. In the
19 course of the aforementioned combat activities, the order arrived to
20 cease the combat activities. I transmitted the order to all my fighters.
21 Later on, one of my fighters requested me the permission to
22 destroy a house. He had observed an enemy soldier firing from that house
23 before. I did not permit this. I had some problems because of that when
24 we returned to the command. The story got out that the captain would not
25 allow a soldier to destroy a Ustasha house. I defended my right and,
1 subsequently, always behaved in the same manner. That is why I am one of
2 the few officers from the war who remained in active service after
3 democratic changes in Serbia, and I was even promoted.
4 Q. Right. In fact, you must have been a major at the time. But
5 never mind that.
6 All I'm asking: Is that the summit of your combat experience,
7 that whilst you were at the airport -- do you mean you -- actually the
8 trenches were coming under attack by infantry troops, or that there was
9 bombing? What do you mean?
10 A. There were infantry forces.
11 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... were you actually attacked
12 by those infantry forces? That's what I'm asking you.
13 A. That's correct. By the then-paramilitary formations of the
14 Republic of Croatia. Because the Republic of Croatia was, at the time,
15 part of the federal state.
16 Q. Yes, all right. Leave aside that part of it. It's your combat
17 experience I'm interested in.
18 Is that the one and only time that you were engaged in combat?
19 A. All the time during the NATO aggression on the Federal Republic
20 of Yugoslavia, I was at combat posts. This entails air force units and
21 the land forces units throughout the territory. You know very well that
22 we endured constant bombing from air, that huge quantities of materiel
23 and personnel had to be moved on a daily basis, and that very important
24 issues had to be resolved.
25 Q. Yes. During what you call, and did call in your report, the
1 NATO aggression, you were actually the chief of psychological and
2 propaganda activities, weren't you, in the air force?
3 A. That was my functional title. Every officer is assigned a
4 functional duty once he is accorded a post.
5 However, during the war, one has to do everything that his or her
6 commander orders that is not contrary to the law.
7 Q. During this incident at the Plejso airport, were you in command
8 of the -- the troops of the JNA?
9 A. Specifically I was the commander in charge of this particular
10 sector of the Plejso airport. There was a number of similar sectors.
11 Q. And, finally on this, then, apart from this incident at Plejso
12 airport, is there any other time in your career when you were faced by
13 infantry troops firing at you? Just to make very clear what I mean.
14 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Just one more thing. Could
15 Ms. Korner specify the meaning of the "incident"? I think that she's
16 misinterpreting the testimony. Because according to the witness's
17 testimony, this wasn't an incident.
18 I would like her to be more precise in her quotation of the
19 previous testimony.
20 MS. KORNER: I'm calling it an incident because that's what the
21 General described and how he stopped somebody burning down an Ustasha
23 Q. But, General, let's be absolutely precise: The -- the time that
24 you have described, where you say you were attacked -- your trenches were
25 attacked by infantry paramilitary groups from Croatia, how long did that
2 A. It lasted from the 15th of September, 1992, until the end of
3 November of the same year.
4 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... yes, but I think you mean
5 1991; is that right? Not 1992.
6 A. That's correct. Thank you.
7 Q. And are you saying that for a period of two months you were under
8 continuous attack from infantry -- I say "infantry," but infantry
9 paramilitary troops from Croatia. Is that what you're saying? Day after
10 day after day?
11 A. No, that's not how it was. During the time when I was not in the
12 trench, I used to go to the units. On the way there, I would be
13 intercepted by paramilitary formations in the attempt to stop or arrest
14 me and my men. As you can see, they did not accomplish this.
15 Q. Yes. All right. And what are we talking about? A dozen men,
16 six men, hundreds?
17 A. The groups varied. The groups at check-points.
18 Q. Yes. Are you telling --
19 A. Ten to 20 men. When they see a military vehicle, they would
20 normally run out in front of you, armed, and normally right behind them
21 there would be large groups of civilians. That was their way of
22 protecting themselves, because we were not allowed to shoot at civilians.
23 Q. Right. So this is not exactly combat, is it, in the sense of one
24 group firing or attacking another?
25 A. That was the true combat. There was a case --
1 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... no --
2 A. -- of a major who was killed in precisely this manner. He was on
3 his way from Zagreb towards Sisak --
4 Q. [Previous translation continued] ... yes, all right --
5 A. -- with a water cistern.
6 Q. Yeah, I'm sorry, because we're short of time and I want to ask
7 you about one more thing before we adjourn. I'm sure that people did get
8 killed at these check-points, but it's not the point I'm trying to deal
10 I want you to look, finally, please, because of your experience
11 with the air force, at a video-clip, please, and with the army.
12 MS. KORNER: And it's P2014, and it's at tab 94A of our
14 Q. And I want you to tell us, please -- what you're about to see is
15 news reel footage of what happened beginning of July in Kotor Varos.
16 [Video-clip played]
17 MS. KORNER: Can we pause, please.
18 Q. Can you tell us, sir, with your military experience, is that a --
19 well, first of all, obviously, is that a tank?
20 MS. KORNER: Well, perhaps we ought to reverse it slightly. Oh,
21 okay. There may be a better one coming up.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe so.
23 MS. KORNER:
24 Q. Right. Now, tell us, please, what kind of tank is that?
25 A. It seems to me to be a T55, the old tank.
1 Q. When you say "the old tank." From the JNA; is that what you
3 A. From the JNA, yes.
4 Q. All right.
5 MS. KORNER: Let's just continue on.
6 [Video-clip played]
7 MS. KORNER: Don't worry about the interviews. Let's go to the
8 last part of the ...
9 [Video-clip played]
10 MS. KORNER: Can we pause just before we see --
11 Q. Are you able to identify that aircraft for us?
12 A. I think this is the Eagle aircraft. "Orao."
13 Q. Which the JNA had; is that right?
14 A. It's a well-known fact that a number of these airplanes remained
15 in the Republika Srpska air force.
16 Q. All right. They were handed over by the withdrawing JNA to the
17 Republika Srpska air force; is that right?
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. Well, let's just finish this clip, shall we?
20 [Video-clip played]
21 MS. KORNER: Stop there, please. Thank you.
22 Q. Exactly what sort of weaponry is being fired there, General, at
23 this village or area?
24 A. Rockets.
25 [Video-clip played]
1 Q. Capable of causing massive destruction, would you say?
2 A. It depends on the pilots' precision and training.
3 [Video-clip played]
4 Q. Have you ever seen that footage before?
5 A. No. This is the first time.
6 Q. Would you say that was a proper use of force?
7 JUDGE HALL: Is that a fair question, Ms. Korner? There's no
8 context with --
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, bombing a village? Or firing rockets
10 at village?
11 MR. KRGOVIC: I mean, what's the point? Where is the village on
12 this place, on these videos?
13 MS. KORNER: Well, if Your Honours think it's an improper
14 question, then I'll withdraw it.
15 JUDGE HALL: I didn't say whether it was improper -- I asked
16 whether it was because on the face of it there was no context, as I said,
17 to the way the question was put.
18 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, we can roll the video back and you
19 will see where the rockets are being fired.
20 JUDGE HALL: Well, it's obvious that rockets are being fired,
21 Ms. -- anyway, let's not have an argument.
22 It's time to deal with those administrative matters with which we
23 have to.
24 MS. KORNER: Yes. And one last thing before the General leaves:
25 We've got a copy of Mr. Butler's report for the General to add to his
1 reading over the weekend, if he wants to, because I'd like him to confirm
2 on Monday that it has absolutely nothing to do with anything other than
3 command and control during 1995 and contains no reference to the police.
4 JUDGE HALL: General Kovacevic, as we have indicated, as you may
5 have heard, there are a number of procedural matters again with which we
6 have to deal before we take the break for the weekend, so we would again
7 ask the usher to escort you out a little ahead of us. And this being a
8 weekend break that we're coming upon, I would remind you of my caution on
9 Monday that you cannot discuss your testimony with counsel from either
10 side. And, furthermore, in such communications as you have with anybody
11 else, you can't discuss the -- sorry, you can't have any contact with
12 counsel from either side. And such communications as you have with
13 anybody else, you can't discuss your testimony.
14 So we would continue with your cross-examination on Monday. You
15 are excused.
16 Yes, please go ahead.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I gladly accepted
18 these documents, which are rather comprehensive, because I appreciate the
19 work and the effort these people made, and I would like to get acquainted
20 with what they did. But to what extent should I familiarize myself with
21 it, and will I be questioned about the contents of these documents
22 subsequently? I mean, I hope I have the right to ask this question.
23 JUDGE HALL: Well, the -- counsel, as I understand it, for the
24 Prosecution, has invited you to look at them, and I suppose she would --
25 MS. KORNER: No, Your Honours. I asked him whether he'd like to
1 see them, and he said he would. Which is why we got copies. The only
2 question that I -- well I say and I may ask him some other questions if
3 he reads them, but it's entirely a matter for him, save for the Butler
4 report which he's already read and references in his own report. I do --
5 I will be asking him to confirm that that report is concerned with
6 command and control issues during 1995 and does not deal with any
7 relationship between the military and the police.
8 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Ms. Korner.
9 So, General, I trust that that answers your question.
10 [The witness stands down]
11 JUDGE HALL: So before we go into private session to deal with
12 Mr. Zecevic's matter, the -- I would return to the -- to two of the
13 matters that I raised earlier. And in terms of Mr. Krgovic's batting
14 order, could we have that by today week. It will be Friday,
15 the 16th of September.
16 And in respect of these confidential exhibits which we have
17 invited counsel to look at and consider how we would deal with them, the
18 suggested date is the 7th of November. But if counsel think that that is
19 insufficient time, we could make it later, sometime in December. But
20 we're open to what your inclination is in that regard.
21 And the other matter which the Chamber wishes to raise is that,
22 in terms of -- well, there's an ancillary matter. The --
23 Mr. Krgovic, there is an e-mail that we have seen in terms of --
24 of next week's witnesses, and we -- do we correctly infer that there's a
25 typographical error in that and that in fact you would not be in a
1 position to begin 003 next week?
2 In any event, while you ponder that, Mr. Zecevic, the -- we would
3 need your estimate for your expected cross-examination of this witness.
4 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'll check, but I
5 don't think that I changed the batting order. There must be a mistake,
6 perhaps due to miscommunication. But I haven't changed my batting order.
7 At any rate, I will provide feedback should there be any changes.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: Mr. Zecevic, is it -- sorry, sorry. Mr. Krgovic.
11 Sorry, Mr. Zecevic.
12 Mr. Krgovic, in your mail for on Friday, 16, it is said SZ-103,
13 is that --
14 MR. KRGOVIC: [Microphone not activated]
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for counsel, please.
16 MR. KRGOVIC: [Microphone not activated] ... probably a typo.
17 JUDGE DELVOIE: A typo. It's 003?
18 MR. KRGOVIC: [Microphone not activated] ... yes.
19 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
20 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
21 JUDGE HALL: So -- so, Mr. Krgovic, the batting order would be,
22 bearing in mind the fact that some of the witnesses in the old batting
23 order has been removed and the --
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE HALL: And others were added.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 MR. KRGOVIC: Your Honour --
3 JUDGE HALL: The 92 bis additions. Thanks.
4 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours. I'm working on
5 the organisation, to see why -- to try to accommodate the witnesses. If
6 there is time, depending on the total amount of time used by these
7 witnesses, I may call a witness between two others to give short
8 evidence, and I may combine them with some of the viva voce witnesses.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 JUDGE DELVOIE: Is it likely that we complete Mr. Kovacevic's
11 evidence or testimony on -- on Tuesday?
12 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated]
13 JUDGE DELVOIE: No.
14 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] That was the plan before Ms. Korner
15 spoke at [sic]. But I understand the Prosecutor wants to examine
16 Mr. Kovacevic on Wednesday, too.
17 I may need about an hour for re-direct examination, probably even
18 more, so that we can start with the following witness on Thursday or
20 JUDGE DELVOIE: So we have --
21 MS. KORNER: [Overlapping speakers] ... but it seems to me -- I'm
22 sorry, Your Honour was still speaking.
23 JUDGE DELVOIE: No, go ahead, Ms. Korner.
24 MS. KORNER: But it seems to me that with what's been happening
25 that it's -- I've got a lot, factually, to cover with him. I'm surprised
1 that Mr. Krgovic is able to estimate his re-examination without hearing
2 any other evidence. But I think it's (redacted)
3 won't start until Thursday.
4 JUDGE DELVOIE: So, Mr. Krgovic, to make this completely clear,
5 there are two issues: First one is the -- the -- the witnesses ordered
6 for next week, so now we here that ST-003 [sic] would come on Thursday.
7 But the other matter is the batting order for future. And so
8 we're expecting a new batting order in which all the changes are
9 incorporated by the end of next week at the latest, please. Thank you.
10 MS. KORNER: And, Your Honours, we would be grateful - because
11 obviously we're working [indiscernible] - if there are witnesses
12 presently on his list who are definitely not coming, we could be told
14 MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] I understand, Your Honours.
15 However, at this moment I cannot reply to Ms. Korner's last
16 remark because some witnesses still have medical problems. And I have no
17 feedback about that. But you will certainly be informed in due course.
18 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: May I --
20 JUDGE HALL: Yes. So we no go into private session.
21 MR. ZECEVIC: Not, Your Honour. Before I --
22 JUDGE HALL: Sorry.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: I was requested by the Trial Chamber to -- to give
24 the -- to give our estimation on -- on cross-examination of the next
25 witness and in respect to confidential exhibits, and I think I can do
1 that in the open session. If it pleases the Court at this point.
2 JUDGE HALL: Very well. But I -- I expected it by e-mail.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ...
4 JUDGE HALL: But if you're in a position to -- [Overlapping
5 speakers] ...
6 MR. ZECEVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, I am. I am in a
7 position --
8 JUDGE HALL: Yes, please go ahead.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, in respect to these
10 confidential exhibits, we believe that 7th of November is okay, as far as
11 Stanisic Defence is concerned, and we will -- we will meet the deadline
12 as set -- as -- in accordance with your -- with the Trial Chamber's
13 ruling, yes.
14 JUDGE HALL: You would recall that it's a joint report that we
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes --
17 JUDGE HALL: I appreciate that you're in a position to --
18 [Overlapping speakers] ...
19 MR. ZECEVIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, but that is exactly
20 why I said in respect of -- "as far as Stanisic Defence is concerned."
21 However, Ms. Korner has a significantly bigger number of these documents
22 than us, so ...
23 And I'm informed by Mr. Cvijetic that our cross-examination
24 expected for the Witness 003 will be one session, one and a half hours.
25 And now we can move to private session, Your Honours.
1 JUDGE HALL: Yes.
2 MS. KORNER: As I explained to Mr. Krgovic, we can't give an
3 estimate because we don't have the benefit, as does Mr. Cvijetic and
4 Mr. Krgovic, of knowing what the witness is going to say. So at the
5 moment, at a rough and ready guess, we're doubling the six hours that
6 Mr. Krgovic has asked for.
7 [Private session]
11 Page 23924 redacted. Private session.
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE HALL: Yes, so we rise, to resume on Monday. If memory
24 serves, we are bouncing around both in terms of time and courtrooms next
25 week, so we'll be someplace on Monday morning.
1 I trust everybody has a safe weekend.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m.,
3 to be reconvened on Monday, the 12th day of
4 September, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.