Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 5857

1 Wednesday, 22 May 2002

2 [Open session]

3 [The witness entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

5 [The accused entered court]

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Registrar. Can we have the case called,

7 please.

8 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. This is the case number,

9 IT-99-36-T, the Prosecutor versus Radoslav Brdjanin and Momir Talic.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, Mr. Brdjanin. Can you hear me in a

11 language that you can understand?

12 THE ACCUSED BRDJANIN: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour.

13 I can hear you and I understand you.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. You may sit down.

15 General Talic, good morning to you. Can you hear me in a language

16 that you can understand?

17 THE ACCUSED TALIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour. I

18 can hear you in a language that I understand.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you.

20 I notice, General Talic, that again we are back to square one. We

21 don't have either Maitre Pitron or Maitre de Roux. Are you still happy

22 with the situation?

23 THE ACCUSED TALIC: [Interpretation] Yes. For this week, that's

24 what we have agreed on.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.

Page 5858

1 Appearances for Prosecution.

2 MS. KORNER: The usual, Joanna Korner, assisted by Susan Grogan.

3 Good morning Your Honours.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning to you.

5 Appearances for Radoslav Brdjanin.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: Good morning, Your [Realtime transcript read in

7 error "Honour"] Honours. I'm John Ackerman, I'm with Tanja Radosavljevic

8 and Milan Trbojevic.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning to you.

10 Appearance for General Talic.

11 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Natasha Ivanovic-Fauveau,

12 assisted by Fabien Masson. I represent General Talic.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Madam . And good morning to you.

14 So -- yes, Mr. Ackerman.

15 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, a slight correction in the

16 transcript. When I said good morning. I said good morning Your Honours.

17 Meaning I said good morning to all three of you. And the transcript only

18 says I said good morning to you, Your Honour. And I wouldn't want to

19 leave the other two judges out. Good morning, Your Honours.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Ackerman.

21 Yes, could one help Madam Fauveau, please. Usher.

22 Yes, Judge. Now, good morning to you. Could I ask you to repeat

23 the solemn declaration once more before you start giving evidence today,

24 please.

25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour.

Page 5859

1 I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth,

2 and nothing but the truth.


4 [Witness answered through interpreter]

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. You may sit down.

6 So what's going to happen, Judge, today is Madam Fauveau will

7 conclude presumably her cross-examination, and then Mr. Ackerman will

8 commence his.

9 Mr. Ackerman, as I told you before, is counsel for -- lead counsel

10 for Radoslav Brdjanin.

11 Yes, Madam Fauveau. You may proceed. Thank you.

12 Cross-examined by Ms. Fauveau-Ivanovic: [Continued]

13 Q. [Interpretation] On the 26th of April, you spoke about

14 General Talic's visit to the Manjaca camp. On page 5084 of the French

15 transcript. Why didn't you mention General Talic's visit to the Manjaca

16 camp in any of your written statements?

17 A. I don't know why I didn't.

18 Q. You said that it seems to you that you saw General Talic at the

19 observation post. What was the distance between you and this observation

20 post?

21 A. About 50 metres to 80 metres perhaps.

22 Q. Would you allow for the possibility that you were mistaken and

23 that you didn't see General Talic but someone else?

24 A. I do allow for that possibility.

25 Q. You said -- and it's still on the 26th of April, 2002, page

Page 5860

1 5087 -- when counting all the persons who died in Manjaca and those who

2 died in the transport, there were between 60 and 80 persons who died.

3 Could you say how many people died in the Manjaca camp itself?

4 A. Well, as for what I saw with my very own eyes, I saw eight people

5 being killed in front of the entrance; that is to say, by the gate.

6 That's when the transport arrived from Prijedor in the morning, when

7 people were being taken off the buses. I saw these eight people being

8 killed. In the camp, as far as I know, four persons were killed and then

9 one died as a consequence of the beatings, so that's five. I think that

10 one or two died -- I don't know -- from an illness or the consequences of

11 hunger. I know that one man from the village of Crljeni from the

12 municipality of Kljuc died two days before a transport was supposed to go

13 to England transporting the ill. That's about it.

14 Q. You spoke about the death of Omer Filipovic. Did you see his

15 body?

16 A. Yes, I did.

17 Q. Where did you see this body?

18 A. I saw it as they were carrying him out of the horse stables in the

19 morning, when there was some military commission that was carrying out an

20 investigation and when the body was held there.

21 Q. You also spoke about an incident in which about 20 people died.

22 They suffocated in transport on the way to Manjaca. Did you personally

23 see their bodies?

24 A. I did not see their bodies myself, but I spoke about that. I said

25 how I found out about this event that night and also the next days, the

Page 5861

1 following days we talked about this at the camp and we knew what had

2 happened.

3 Q. Could you confirm that the representative of the Red Cross went to

4 the camp?

5 A. Are you referring to the International Red Cross?

6 Q. Yes the International Red Cross.

7 A. I can confirm that.

8 Q. Did you personally speak to the representative of the

9 International Red Cross?

10 A. Yes, I did, several times at that.

11 Q. Did you have the opportunity of speaking to the representative of

12 the International Red Cross without the guards being present?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. At the hearing of the 13th of May -- it's page 12 of the

15 LiveNote -- you said that there was only one exchange of prisoners. Could

16 you be more precise and say which exchange you are referring to.

17 A. As for what I know, this was an exchange that took place on the

18 14th of November, 1992 at Vlasic. Once this exchange didn't go through,

19 but the next time it succeeded. This was an exchange of civilians from

20 the camp for combatants, as far as I managed to find out -- Serb

21 combatants.

22 Q. Do you know whether an exchange took place on the 25th of June?

23 A. I don't know about that.

24 Q. Do you know about an exchange that took place on the 17th of

25 July?

Page 5862

1 A. Perhaps it was organised, but I don't know whether it was carried

2 out actually.

3 Q. Do you know about another exchange on the 28th of July?

4 A. I don't know.

5 Q. Do you know about an exchange that took place on the 31st of

6 July?

7 A. I don't know.

8 Q. On the 23rd of August?

9 A. What kind of exchange was this and where? I don't know. It's not

10 that people went from Manjaca, no.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, are you aware of a particular date when an

12 exchange as the one that is being suggested to you took place? At least

13 the month.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I mentioned the 14th of November.

15 That's when there was an exchange and when it actually went through.

16 Several times there were attempts to have an exchange, but people were

17 returned to the camp. I don't know. Possibly there was one more exchange

18 at Jajce, but I really don't know about that. Perhaps this took place

19 before I was released from solitary confinement.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: And you are not aware of any other exchanges that

21 may have taken place.

22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: So please, next question, because we can't go on

24 from one week -- or from one month to the other, when you could ask a

25 simple, direct question. Madam Fauveau, please.

Page 5863

1 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

2 Q. Do you allow for the possibility that there were regular exchanges

3 of which you were not aware?

4 A. During my stay at the camp, I could notice if somebody went to be

5 exchanged. In July, August, September, October. Perhaps there were some

6 individual cases. People went perhaps on an individual basis for money.

7 I know of some individual cases of this kind.

8 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, I think that may be a good

9 point -- is it suggested that these were large-scale exchanges? In other

10 words, more than a few individuals.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Fauveau.

12 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] No. The suggestion is --

13 the suggestion is that there were regular exchanges but not on a large

14 scale.

15 Q. You also spoke about people who had been released from Manjaca.

16 Could you confirm that the persons who were elderly and underage people

17 were released from Manjaca?

18 A. I remember that elderly people from the municipality of Sanski

19 Most were released. That happened once.

20 Q. Could you confirm that through the intermediary of the

21 International Red Cross, a group of persons was sent to England from

22 Manjaca?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Could you confirm that a certain number of clerics were also

25 released from Manjaca?

Page 5864

1 A. I remember about a particular number. But they were released

2 quite late. They spent a long time in Manjaca, in the camp of Manjaca.

3 Q. Could you confirm that the Merhamet representatives visited

4 Manjaca?

5 JUDGE AGIUS: When you say, Madam Fauveau, a representative in the

6 singular or the plural? Because here the translation -- the

7 interpretation says "Merhamet representative," just one.

8 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I said "the

9 representatives," in the plural?

10 A. And I have confirmed that.

11 Q. Sir, I'm going to read to you a report from an international

12 organisation. And for the record, it's document 763, which was

13 communicated in accordance with Rule 70.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. 763?

15 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: 763, yes.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: I have it here.

17 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Korner.

19 MS. KORNER: Yes.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Am I right --

21 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, Madam Fauveau spoke to me about this,

22 and I said there was no objection by --

23 JUDGE AGIUS: This is a confidential document, as you know.

24 MS. KORNER: It was dealt with, yes.


Page 5865

1 MS. KORNER: But I -- Your Honour, I have no objection to it

2 being -- part of it being put.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Please proceed, Madam Fauveau.

4 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

5 Q. It's the first paragraph on page 3, the second sentence. I'm

6 going to read this part of the report which dates from the 23rd of June,

7 1992. And I'm going to ask you whether you agree with this analysis of

8 the Manjaca camp. [In English] "The delegation from Merhamet visited a

9 prisoner camp at Manjaca mountain where 1.200 persons are held by the

10 army. Material conditions were poor, especially concerning hygiene. But

11 there were no signs of maltreatment or execution of prisoners, they

12 reported."

13 A. Could I please see this document.

14 Q. [Interpretation] I'm sorry. I can't show it to you.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. You can be shown the paragraph in question,

16 just the paragraph. It's on page 3, at the top of the page --

17 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I --

18 JUDGE AGIUS: You object?

19 MS. KORNER: I do. I'm sorry. This -- all that the witness is

20 being asked to do -- and I appreciate he wants to see the document -- is

21 does he agree that's an accurate description of the camp.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: I will read it out to you, Judge. The Prosecution

23 has every right to object to this, because this is a confidential document

24 released to the Prosecution under a special -- I'm going to read out to

25 you very clearly the paragraph in question, which is -- forms part of a

Page 5866

1 report which is dated 23rd of June, 1992 and covers the period 16 to 20th

2 of June, 1992 and updated on the 22nd -- being an update on the situation

3 as it was obtaining previously on the 22nd of May, 1992 till 16th of June,

4 1992. So basically we have an update of the situation relating to the

5 dates 16th to 20th June, 1992, even though the report is dated 23rd of

6 June.

7 The paragraph in question reads as follows: "Arbitrary detention

8 of persons allegedly participating or planning hostile actions against

9 Serbian authorities." These last words are in quotes. "A delegation from

10 Merhamet visited a prisoner camp at Manjaca mountain where 1.200 persons

11 are held by the army. Material conditions were poor, especially

12 concerning hygiene, but there were no signs of maltreatment or execution

13 of prisoners, they reported." And then there is another part of the

14 paragraph which does not concern us. So this is the report. And this is

15 supposedly a report by an independent observer.

16 MS. KORNER: Well --

17 JUDGE AGIUS: I need to -- I need to make it clear that it's

18 someone reporting what supposedly Merhamet --

19 MS. KORNER: Reported to them.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Reported to them, yes.

21 MS. KORNER: So it's not an independent observer of what happened.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: No. What -- who is reporting this is an independent

23 observer.

24 MS. KORNER: Yes.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: But he's reporting or she's reporting not just --

Page 5867

1 not to give an indication -- what supposedly Merhamet representatives who

2 had visited Manjaca camp had reported to them.

3 MS. KORNER: Yes. Your Honour, I think the simple question that

4 Madam Fauveau asked was: Does he agree that that's accurate.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, exactly.

6 Do you agree that as on 16th to 20th of June, 1992, the

7 description of the conditions in Manjaca, as I read out to you, is

8 correct?

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't agree with that. That has

10 no foundation whatsoever. Merhamet was under the control of the Serbian

11 authorities. And those people who wrote that, they should be ashamed of

12 that. At the time it was terrible in the camp. There was beating,

13 maltreatment, and other things, killing. I've already spoken about

14 this -- returning people who had disappeared in the transport --

15 JUDGE AGIUS: You don't agree.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. That's shameful.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Next question, Madam Fauveau.

18 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. You said that there were 5.434 prisoners. How did you get this

20 figure? 5.434 prisoners.

21 A. I did not say 7.000. I said 5.434. That's the number of people

22 who went through the camp.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. According to the interpretation that I am

24 receiving, at least, I don't think you said 7.000, did you? Here I have

25 5.434. And Madam Fauveau wants to know how you came up to that figure.

Page 5868

1 What's the basis of your information, in other words.

2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This information is reliable. I

3 obtained this information, this accurate information, on the basis of the

4 statement of a camp inmate, Ibrahim Begovic is his name, and he kept

5 records. He was at the other camp. He is perfectly aware of that

6 figure. I agree with that figure, because my estimation was about

7 6.000 -- my estimate was about 6.000, so I know exactly how many people

8 were in one camp and how many people were in the other camp. So at the

9 time when the inmates from Omarska, Sanski Most, and other places arrived,

10 there were about 4.500. So one camp, about 2.000, 2.250, and about that

11 many in the other one. These are approximately accurate figures. And as

12 for that particular figure, I got it from the statement of an inmate who

13 kept records. So the figure is 5.434. That is from the 1st of June until

14 the 18th of December, 1992. That's how many people went through the

15 camp. That's how many people were deprived of all conceivable rights, all

16 human rights.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Fauveau.

18 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. Would you allow for the possibility that this figure is not exact

20 and that the total number of detainees in Manjaca was 4.400, more or

21 less?

22 A. The figure ranging between 4.400 to 4.500 refer to the summer

23 period; that is to say, when people arrived from Sanski Most and Prijedor,

24 when they were transported. I know that for sure because I was cutting

25 bread, and I know how many slices of bread I had to cut. And also, I took

Page 5869

1 cards -- International Red Cross cards when I was cutting bread, so I knew

2 exactly how many people there were there.

3 Q. I would like you to have a look at an extract from a videotape.

4 It's a videotape that the Prosecutor has already shown you. I'm not going

5 to show the entire tape but just the part where Paddy Ashdown made a

6 comment on leaving the camp. And I'm going to ask you to read the

7 subtitles, since there are Serbo-Croat subtitles. I'd like you to read

8 what Paddy Ashdown said as he was leaving the camp. It's Prosecutor's

9 document 468 -- P468.

10 Sir, can you read the subtitles in Serbo-Croat.

11 [Videotape played]

12 A. I can.

13 Q. Could you read it.

14 A. There's no need for that.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: No. Judge, please let me decide. Please read it.

16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Very well, Your Honour.

17 "When leaving, he stated that no matter how dismal things

18 looked --"

19 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Next sequence.

20 A. "It seems that this camp was run properly."

21 Q. This cassette dates back to August 1992. Do you agree with this

22 statement?

23 A. This is a person's very own opinion based on one particular thing

24 that was seen. I do not agree with this assessment.

25 Q. You spoke about an exhumation which took place in the year 2000

Page 5870

1 and at which you found the body of your colleague Nedzad Muhic. Do you

2 remember this?

3 A. Yes. I mentioned that. I mentioned they saw the body.

4 Q. Could you say where the location was of this mass grave, the mass

5 grave in which Nedzad Muhic was found?

6 A. In Krkojevac.

7 Q. Was this mass grave in the vicinity of a bank -- of a river bank?

8 A. Yes.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: That's different, between a bank and a river bank.

10 Yes, okay. But for a moment I thought what does a bank have -- what does

11 it have to do with it -- with the mass grave. It's a river bank we are

12 talking about, not a bank, because the translation here said a bank, you

13 know.

14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. There are no buildings there.

15 This is the canyon of the Sana River.

16 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

17 Q. And Nedzad Muhic was allegedly killed in 1992; is that correct?

18 A. That's correct.

19 Q. Could you say how you recognised Nedzad Muhic's body in the year

20 2000.

21 A. On the basis of the clothes he was wearing, because we were in

22 prison together. We were together in prison at the public security

23 station, and I know what he was wearing.

24 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar show

25 the witness document P778. It's in fact the map that is over there.

Page 5871

1 JUDGE AGIUS: That's the map that we had yesterday, which I see in

2 the back there. It's still there.

3 Judge, if you need to stand up at any time, please feel free to do

4 so.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: It's okay, usher. Usher, it's okay.

7 Yes. It's -- wait for the question first.

8 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

9 Q. Sir, you said that you found this map in 1995 in the house of the

10 Nezirevic family in Sanski Most; is that correct? Did you yourself find

11 this map?

12 A. That's what I said, and I'm the one who found this map. I'm the

13 one who took it from this house.

14 Q. When did you find this map?

15 A. Well, I found this map in the second half of October 1995.

16 Q. Did you find this map accidentally, or were you aware of the fact

17 that there were military documents in that house?

18 A. This is my street where my burnt house was, in Mahala. And this

19 house is about 150 to 200 metres away. That's where the primary school in

20 Mahala is. The command of the brigade was in this primary school during

21 that period; that is to say, that the military command was there and the

22 military police of the 6th Krajina Brigade. And I toured these

23 buildings. This house was also burnt down, and I knew that it was

24 repaired during the war and that meetings were held there. It's like a

25 villa by the river. That's where there were some documents, and I took

Page 5872

1 them over, maps for the most part, including this one. This was in the

2 basement of that house.

3 Q. So before going to that house, you found -- where you found that

4 map, you knew or you assumed that you would be able to find military

5 documents there. Have I understood you correctly?

6 A. That's right.

7 Q. Was anyone able to enter that house before you arrived and before

8 the Serbs left Sanski Most, and would such a person have been in a

9 position to place that map there?

10 A. I don't know why anybody would do that. When I came, there were

11 some military people there in Sanski Most -- or rather, operations were

12 still taking place towards Banja Luka and Prijedor.

13 Q. Is it true that this map is titled, "The war route of the 6th

14 Brigade"?

15 A. Yes. It says, "The war journey of the 6th Krajina Brigade." It

16 means the same thing, what you said.

17 Q. Do you agree that this term, "the war route, war journey," and

18 answer the question only if you know the answer -- is it true that this

19 term is only used when a state of war has been declared?

20 A. I do not agree with what you stated.

21 Q. Isn't it the term that a military person would have used for the

22 situation which existed in the Republika Srpska in 1992 and 1993?

23 Wouldn't such a person have used the term "the combat route," rather than

24 "the war route"?

25 A. I disagree with your statement, because I found other documents

Page 5873

1 too, such as, for example, the manuscript of the commander of the 6th

2 Krajina Brigade, Colonel Branko Basara. And he is describing their war

3 route, their war journey in this report. And this was submitted to the

4 Prosecution, the original.

5 Q. As far as these manuscripts are concerned belonging to Colonel

6 Basara, how do you know that they belonged to Colonel Basara?

7 A. How do I know? This is a leading question, but I shall respond

8 nevertheless. His signature is there.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, Judge, Judge. I don't know what the system

10 is in your country, but over here on cross-examination you can be asked

11 direct questions, leading questions. So please -- and I frankly don't see

12 the objection.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's not an objection, Your Honour.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. But it's a simple question. You're making an

15 allegation, a statement, that these documents belonged to Colonel Basara

16 or -- you're being asked to explain how you know that or how you came to

17 that conclusion. So what's wrong with that question? It's a perfectly

18 legitimate one.

19 Go ahead.

20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the basis of his signature,

21 handwriting, and the facts presented in that report, and the place where

22 the document was found, actually.

23 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

24 Q. How can you affirm that this document was really written by

25 Basara?

Page 5874

1 A. How can I affirm that? I said it on the basis of his handwriting,

2 his signature, and the place where the document was found, and the facts

3 that are mentioned. This document was not something that was observed

4 here in this case.

5 Q. Do you know that Basara left Sanski Most in December 1992?

6 A. I can't remember exactly when he left. On the basis of the

7 documents and analyses that I had. But I know that he did leave Sanski

8 Most and that another commander was appointed. I think it was

9 Mr. Kajtez.

10 Q. I'll return to the map. Could you have a look at what is written

11 next to "Bosanski Brod."

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, if you need to leave your place to have a

13 closer look, please do. But then when you speak, do speak -- do go back

14 to your place and speak into the microphone. Thank you.

15 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

16 Q. Is it true that it says "Bosanski Brod," and that there is a date

17 next to that?

18 A. Yes, that's correct. It says "Bosanski Brod," and there is an

19 arrow towards Bosanski Brod and also there is a date, the 18th of

20 September, 1992.

21 Q. Do you agree that this town, Bosanski Brod, was called Srpski Brod

22 in Republika Srpska?

23 A. I think that's right.

24 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry. Could we know from when it is said that

25 Bosanski Brod was called Srpski Brod.

Page 5875

1 JUDGE AGIUS: I think some other witness did mention that. I

2 can't remember exactly who. But he did give that explanation.

3 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's right.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't recall the date, obviously.

5 MS. KORNER: No. I'm asking Madam Fauveau if she'd be kind enough

6 to suggest from what date.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Madam Fauveau, please. I think that's

8 important.

9 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] According to what I know,

10 immediately after the Serbian army arrived in Bosanski Brod, this town was

11 renamed Srpski Brod; that is to say, in October 1992.

12 Q. This map dates back to May 1993 at the earliest, because the last

13 mark on this map is May 1993. Why would the Serbs have used the name of

14 Bosanski Brod for a town which they themselves had renamed Srpski Brod?

15 A. I don't know about that.

16 Q. Do you agree that a war route or a combat route should show the

17 exact movements of the brigade?

18 A. Yes, I confirm that. That is precisely what I think.

19 Q. According to this map, the 6th Brigade went to Srebrenica and

20 Bratunac and it went through -- it passed through Travnik. Could you

21 explain how a Serbian brigade could have passed through Travnik.

22 A. I think this shows the municipalities, the territories or the

23 municipalities. That's where the arrow is pointing. It's not pointing

24 towards the town itself, because the 6th Krajina Brigade was at Vlasic,

25 the territory of Travnik, that is. And it took part in operations.

Page 5876

1 Q. If you have a look at the war route of the 6th Brigade in the

2 direction of Bratunac, the 6th Brigade would have had to pass through

3 territory under the control of Muslims. How could it have done such a

4 thing?

5 A. I don't agree with you, because this brigade had corridors -- or

6 rather, up to Bratunac, the territory was linked up.

7 Q. But I agree with you on that point, sir. But the arrow on the map

8 passes through Muslim territory.

9 A. The arrow does not necessarily depict the direction of movement.

10 It just shows the territory of the municipalities where the brigade

11 operated. This is a map. And the arrows do show the municipalities where

12 the brigade was and where it operated.

13 Q. But five minutes ago or even less you said that a war route should

14 show the exact movements of a brigade. So if this map is authentic, it

15 would have shown the real route that the brigade took to reach Bratunac;

16 isn't that right?

17 A. I don't think that's right. Military experts know where they went

18 through.

19 Q. Is it a military map or not?

20 A. Yes, this is a military map.

21 Q. Why would members of the military have made a map that didn't

22 correspond to the military route?

23 A. I'm not an expert for maps or a military expert, so I can't really

24 answer these questions.

25 Q. Would you allow for the possibility that this map was made by

Page 5877

1 anyone but a member of the military?

2 A. Why would anybody else chart a map except for the military, except

3 for the 6th Krajina Brigade?

4 Q. The 6th Krajina Brigade in May 1993 allegedly used the name

5 Bosanski Brod for a town called Srpski Brod and allegedly showed a route

6 which wasn't the real route. Can one call that the war route?

7 A. These are official names of municipalities of Bosnia-Herzegovina;

8 therefore, I believe that this is an official map, a military map, of the

9 6th Krajina Brigade where they show the territories where they were at the

10 front line. There are also other documents and reports. Believe me. In

11 Sanski Most, we found this military documentation. It says exactly when

12 people left, on which buses, and how many people, and the exact names and

13 surnames of the people involved. So there are other documents too that

14 show this. This is not the only document. General Talic will agree with

15 me, won't he?

16 Q. He has said that these names -- the official names of

17 municipalities in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Since when has the army of

18 Republika Srpska respected the laws of Bosnia-Herzegovina rather than the

19 laws of Republika Srpska?

20 A. I don't know about that. I have no answer to that question of

21 yours. I don't know how to answer it.

22 Q. I'll ask you the question once more, and then I will move on to

23 another subject. Would you allow for the possibility that this map was

24 not made by members of the 6th Brigade?

25 A. I do not allow for that possibility. This map was made by the

Page 5878

1 members of the 6th Krajina Brigade. And it's in colour too, the original,

2 that is.

3 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar show

4 the witness document P667.

5 Q. Is this a list of persons who were arrested between the 18th of

6 May and the 6th of June, 1992 in Sanski Most?

7 A. This is a list of civilians collected from the houses of Sanski

8 Most. They are Bosniaks and Croats. They're no prisoners of war.

9 Q. Do you know who found this document?

10 A. I think that this document came from me.

11 Q. Where did you find this document?

12 A. At the public security station in Sanski Most.

13 Q. Does this document bear a signature?

14 A. No, it doesn't. There's no signature.

15 Q. Is there a stamp on the document?

16 A. There's no stamp.

17 Q. Is there a date on the document?

18 A. There is a date. It says "List from the 18th of May until the

19 16th of June. Persons handed over to the military investigation

20 authorities of the 5th Corps for further investigation procedure." And

21 this is from a file of documents.

22 Q. The dates that you have just mentioned, it's in fact the period

23 during which these persons were arrested. That's correct, isn't it? It's

24 not the date of the document.

25 A. This document was compiled in that period. That is my assertion.

Page 5879

1 My name is in this document too, under number 85. And from the public

2 security station -- from the prison, my name was called out and I was

3 taken out and transported by a truck on the 17th of June. I know all

4 these persons.

5 Q. So the dates that you have read, the 18th of May and the 6th of

6 June, they refer to the period during which these people were arrested;

7 isn't that right?

8 A. I said that these persons were not taken prisoner. They were

9 arrested or called in for an interview, an interrogation, and then they

10 were kept in prison. But they were not taken prisoner.

11 Q. I don't know what interpretation you received in Serbo-Croat, what

12 the translation was in Serbo-Croat, but the verb "arreter" in French means

13 arrest. So could you answer my question. Were these people arrested

14 during the period 18th of May, 6th of June, 1992?

15 A. That's right.

16 Q. But this document doesn't have a date. The document itself hasn't

17 been dated. We don't know when this document was written.

18 A. There is no date on it.

19 Q. Do you agree that this document could have been written on the 6th

20 of June at the earliest?

21 A. I can't say, because the inspectors of the crime investigation

22 service in Sanski Most, when they actually processed this document and

23 when they brought this to Manjaca, I really don't know, because there

24 should be a document of this kind in Manjaca when they came up there.

25 Q. Since the people mentioned in this document were arrested between

Page 5880

1 the 18th of May and the 6th of June, do you agree that this document could

2 not have been written before the 6th of June?

3 A. The arrest started on the 25th of May, and I don't know when this

4 document was made but I know when these people were arrested, in that

5 period.

6 Q. Yesterday I showed you a document which didn't have a signature

7 and didn't have a stamp. You said that it wasn't an official document.

8 In that case, why -- why is this document without a signature, without a

9 stamp, without a date? Why would this document be an official document?

10 A. Well, this document -- well, you can take it as an unofficial

11 document too, but it does show something. Facts are contained in it,

12 facts, and a list of persons who were arrested and handed over to the 5th

13 Corps of the Yugoslav army for further investigation procedure. And thank

14 God most of these people are still alive. They will say when they were

15 arrested and when they were detained and when they were at Manjaca and

16 when they were released and what they lived through.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated]

18 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

19 Q. You allow for the possibility that it's not an official document.

20 A. This is an official document; that is to say, from the

21 documentation of the public security station in Sanski Most, from the

22 official file of investigators. And it is the way -- it was taken over

23 from the public security station. It's in the same file, the same

24 binder. This is the original, and that's the way it's been since then,

25 and I still stand by that.

Page 5881

1 Q. Do you know that on the 6th of June, 1992 the 5th Corps no longer

2 existed?

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Did you say the 6th or the 5th?


5 JUDGE AGIUS: Because again we've got the 6th Corps. Now, it's

6 the 5th Corps, Judge, not the 6th. I don't know what interpretation you

7 got.

8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This shows that the document was

9 made earlier -- that is to say, during the arrest of people and while they

10 were being investigated, interrogated. I know that the 5th Corps was

11 transformed.

12 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

13 Q. Just a moment. You said that the first arrest took place on the

14 25th of May. Do you stand by this statement?

15 A. I do stand by that.

16 Q. Do you know that on the 25th of May, the 5th Corps no longer

17 existed?

18 A. I don't remember the date exactly when the 5th Corps of the JNA

19 was transformed into the 1st Krajina Corps of the Serb army. I can't

20 remember the exact date. But it's not important what it says up here. I

21 know who did this. I know who arrested us. I know who escorted us,

22 who -- I know where we were, and I know who was responsible for us.

23 Q. Yes. But that's another problem. What I'm interested in at the

24 moment is the authenticity of this document. And I can understand very

25 well that you don't know when the 5th Corps withdrew from Bosnia. But it

Page 5882

1 seems to me nevertheless that an officer from the Sanski Most police

2 station would have known that the 5th Corps was no longer in existence.

3 MS. KORNER: [Previous translation continues] ... but not to give

4 her own interpretation of what a police officer knew in Sanski Most.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: She's right, Madam Fauveau. Ms. Korner is right.

6 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I'll reformulate that

7 question.

8 Q. Do you know -- and if you don't, just say that you don't know the

9 answer -- do you know why a person who was allegedly an official of the

10 Serbian state -- why would such a person who said that these people were

11 forwarded to the 5th Corps -- were handed over to the 5th Corps since this

12 corps was no longer in existence?

13 A. First of all, what kind of a Serb state? What kind of a Serb

14 state are you talking about? This is nonsense.

15 Q. Do you mean to say that the Serbian state was not in existence,

16 that the Republika Srpska did not exist?

17 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter is not sure what the answer

18 was. Could the witness please repeat it.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, could you repeat your answer, because the

20 interpreters did not quite get it.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said, what kind of a Serb state?

22 JUDGE AGIUS: No. But the question was: "Do you mean to say that

23 the Serbian state was not in existence, that Republika Srpska did not

24 exist?" This was the question. And you answered something which the

25 interpreters did not hear well. Could you repeat your answer.

Page 5883

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said what she says is nonsense.

2 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] If I could translate that

3 for you. The witness said that what I am saying is rubbish.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Go ahead, Madam Fauveau, please.

5 And Judge, as a Judge I think don't put me in a position where I

6 have to explain to you that you have no right to attribute the kind of

7 statements to Defence counsel, who are only doing their duty here. I'm

8 sure that if you were in my position, you'd be doing exactly the same.

9 Madam Fauveau, please.

10 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. Could you tell me how an official of the Serbian state or of

12 Republika Srpska, if you prefer, was unaware of the fact that the Serbian

13 army had been formed and that this zone was covered by the 1st Corps?

14 JUDGE AGIUS: That's -- Madam Fauveau, you should rephrase it,

15 because you are assuming that he -- this official, whoever the official

16 would be, was unaware. I mean, I -- it takes me at least two to three

17 weeks at the beginning of each year to get used to the idea of writing

18 down the new year, and I keep writing the previous year. So I am

19 perfectly aware that we would have started a new year, but it just happens

20 that I keep writing down "2001" even though we are in 2002. It doesn't

21 mean that I'm not aware. It means that -- it's just a habit.

22 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, I don't want to interrupt. And I

23 take the point that Ms. Fauveau is making about this document but in fact

24 it seems to me that it ought to also be pointed out that they went on

25 using the stamp of the 5th Corps after the transformation as well, which

Page 5884

1 is clear from the document. So how good a point this is, I don't know.

2 And we have spent a lot of time on it.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: And I don't understand why the witness is being

4 so -- when he could answer it in just two words or three words.

5 Do you assume responsibility for what others write, Judge?

6 Because I don't.

7 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

8 Could the registrar show the witness P740.1 and P740.2 -- 780.

9 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter corrects himself. 780.

10 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

11 Q. First of all, could you have a look at document P782, which is a

12 decision of the judge from the municipal court in Sanski Most.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Did you say 78 --


15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Because the interpretation says 782. And

16 that's not correct.

17 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

18 Q. Do you agree that this is a decision from a judge of the municipal

19 court in Sanski Most?

20 A. [No audible response]

21 Q. Could you have a look at the Serbo-Croat version.

22 A. That is the case. That is the case. This is a document of the

23 municipal court of Sanski Most, number 714/97, dated the 20th of October,

24 1997.

25 Q. If you look at the Serbo-Croat version. It's on the first page,

Page 5885

1 the second paragraph -- the last paragraph. And it's the second page in

2 the English version. It's the only paragraph on that page.

3 The judge of Sanski Most established that: [In English] "The son

4 of the applicant was indeed killed on 25 June 1992 by Serb-Chetnik

5 military units near the hospital in Kotor Varos." [Interpretation] Is

6 that correct?

7 A. That's what it says here.

8 Q. This terminology, "the Serbian Chetniks," is this a terminology --

9 are these terms that were currently used in Sanski Most?

10 A. I don't think so.

11 Q. Is it true that this is a derogative term for the Serbian army?

12 A. No, it is not a derogatory term. It is one of pride for the Serb

13 army.

14 Q. I assume that the "Ustasha" is also a term which is honourable for

15 the Croatian army.

16 A. I don't know about that.

17 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm going to

18 move on to another subject. I need another 15 minutes. Would it be

19 better to have a break now?

20 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll have the break now. We'll resume in 30

21 minutes' time. So it's -- at five to 11.00. Thank you.

22 --- Recess taken at 10.24 a.m.

23 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Fauveau.

25 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

Page 5886

1 Q. At the hearing of the 13th of May -- page 48 of the LiveNote, it

2 was from that point -- you stated what the procedure was in order to

3 declare that a person who disappeared was dead. Do you remember speaking

4 about that?

5 A. Yes, I remember that.

6 Q. And you said that a birth certificate had to be attached to the

7 request; is that correct?

8 A. That's right.

9 Q. Do you agree that normally -- in normal situations the

10 municipality in which the person was born issues the birth certificate?

11 A. That's right.

12 Q. Do you have in front of you document 780.1? It's a birth

13 certificate. Do you have this document?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. It's the birth certificate of a person who was born in Kotor

16 Varos; is that correct?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And this birth certificate was issued by the Sanski Most

19 municipality.

20 A. That is not correct. This certificate was issued by an authority

21 of the administration that was set up in the federation for citizens,

22 refugees from the municipality of Kotor Varos; that is to say, their

23 office, which had the authority to issue such documents.

24 Q. Very well. You are right. And this organ, this office, did it

25 have the archives of the Municipality of Kotor Varos?

Page 5887

1 A. Well, I think so, because these offices for citizens who were

2 refugees in the Federation had their own records, their books of

3 registration, ledgers that they obtained from the authorities involved.

4 But they did have these records of citizens. So they were established in

5 the Federation for all municipalities, for all refugees in the Federation.

6 For example, in Sanski Most, there were a few such offices: For the

7 Municipality of Prijedor, for the Municipality of Banja Luka, for the

8 Municipality of Kotor Varos, I think, then Bosanska Dubica, and other

9 municipalities. I can't remember all these offices right now, but

10 citizens who were staying as refugees in Sanski Most could address this

11 office for the issuance of this kind of a document. So this is a legal

12 document.

13 Q. Is it true that the archives of Kotor Varos municipality remained

14 in Kotor Varos?

15 A. I think so. So the Municipality of Kotor Varos has its organs in

16 Kotor Varos, and that is where the archives are.

17 Q. Did this office in Sanski Most have access to the archives in

18 Kotor Varos?

19 A. I don't know about that, but I said that these offices had

20 communications, some communications with these official institutions in

21 Sarajevo, in the Federation, and they obtained these lists, these excerpts

22 from the birth registers, because without this kind of an excerpt from the

23 records of births, death, et cetera, they couldn't have issued documents.

24 Q. You spoke about an identification number that every citizen in ex-Yugoslavia had.

25 Do you remember speaking about this?

Page 5888

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. So you could confirm that all the citizens of ex-Yugoslavia had an

3 identification number.

4 A. I can't confirm that fully, because a citizen would have to go to

5 the authority in charge -- and that is public security station, or the

6 MUP -- and then his personal identification number would have to be

7 established. I don't know if all citizens had their personal

8 identification numbers established. I assume they did. Not only the

9 former Yugoslavia, but also in Bosnia-Herzegovina now, because a person

10 who is of age, if he or she seeks to get an ID or a passport, has to have

11 this personal identification number, just like children who are

12 registered -- who are registered in these books of records.

13 Q. Do you agree that the personal identification number consists of

14 13 figures?

15 A. I think that the personal identification number consists of 13

16 figures.

17 Q. Do you agree that the first seven figures in the personal

18 identification number refer to the date of birth?

19 A. That's right.

20 Q. Could you explain why the birth certificate, which is P780.1,

21 contains a personal identification number which is not complete and which

22 only contains the numbers which refer to the date of birth? And I would

23 like to draw the Trial Chamber's attention to the fact that there is a

24 translation error in the numbers in the English translation, in the

25 English version?

Page 5889

1 JUDGE AGIUS: You are right. There is an extra number, "9," which

2 shouldn't be there. In fact, just for the record, the Trial Chamber is

3 indicating that on the -- what appears to be the original, the identity

4 number -- personal identity number is shown as 1505960, while in the

5 translation -- translated version in English, the personal identity number

6 is shown as 15095960, which does not correspond to the number shown on the

7 original document.

8 Yes. Thank you, Madam Fauveau. I had already noticed it, but I

9 was going to -- to bring it up myself later. Thank you.

10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, the -- can I just say that the only

11 thing that I'm slightly concerned about is I understood -- and Your Honour

12 will recall when I was going through the evidence of declarations of death

13 and exhumations -- I understood there was no challenge to this evidence.

14 And indeed both Defence counsel agreed. But we now seem to be going

15 into -- we've already done it with part of the exhumations, how part of a

16 body was identified and now with this particular birth certificate. If

17 there is some kind of challenge, then obviously I'm going to have to

18 devote more time to going through the documentation.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know whether there is a challenge or not, to

20 tell you the truth, because I don't --

21 MS. KORNER: Well, that's what I'm just asking.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't quite see where Madam Fauveau is heading.

23 It may well be something much simpler, which I very much suspect, in fact.

24 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] All right. Well, Your

25 Honour, I'm just making that point so it's clear.

Page 5890

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Korner.

2 Madam Fauveau, you may proceed for the time being as if this

3 exchange of debate did not take place. Don't worry about it. Go ahead.

4 If it's the case of drawing your attention to something, I will.

5 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Could you explain why this personal identification number is not

7 complete?

8 A. I can say that often records had shortcomings, in terms of

9 personal identification numbers, because in the former Yugoslavia these

10 records anyway were not complete, as far as personal identification

11 numbers were concerned. I remember during the elections as well there

12 were considerable difficulties concerning personal identification numbers.

13 It is possible that this citizen did not have his personal identification

14 number established. I don't know why it's missing. So it's this part,

15 this date of birth. And the rest -- the rest can be established.

16 Q. On the basis of which facts was a birth certificate issued in this

17 Sanski Most office for the persons who were not born in Sanski Most?

18 A. I can't answer that question now because I didn't go into records

19 of these offices. But I would go and pay a visit to some of these

20 offices, and I saw that they did have some records. You see what I'm

21 saying? I really do not know on the basis of what this authority issued

22 this certificate. I imagine that they had some records, some lists that

23 they obtained from the central records of the MUP in Sarajevo or in some

24 other way. But for me, this is a legal document concerning a person who

25 was born in Kotor Varos with all the personal data contained here. This

Page 5891

1 was confirmed by the person who actually initiated these proceedings

2 before the court of law; that is to say, that these data are correct.

3 Q. Is it possible that this birth certificate was issued at the

4 request of the family and that the facts weren't at all verified?

5 A. This certificate was issued upon the request of the family of the

6 person concerned. As for the facts, I can't say anything about that.

7 This was issued according to the procedure that was made possible for

8 these authorities during the transition period after the war, because the

9 citizens could not immediately address the authorities in Republika Srpska

10 for the issuance of such documents. There were considerable difficulties.

11 That is why these authorities, these offices, had been established as

12 interim authorities. I think they've been abolished by now and that on

13 the basis of federal regulation, such offices no longer exist.

14 Q. At the hearing of the 14th of May, you spoke about people in

15 Vrhpolje who decided to not surrender their arms, their weapons, and to

16 defend themselves. Do you remember speaking about this?

17 A. Yes. I remember.

18 Q. You said -- and it's on page 17 of the LiveNote of the 14th of

19 May -- that all these people were killed. Is that correct?

20 A. That's not what I said.

21 Q. I'm going to read what you stated. [In English] "They withdrew to

22 a position above the village in order to defend their village, to defend

23 their houses. They didn't want to surrender. They had infantry weapons

24 on them. I think that all those people died. They were all killed."

25 A. Apart from those who were involved in the exchange, I did mention

Page 5892

1 that these persons had captured a group of officers and soldiers of the

2 6th Krajina Brigade and that they asked for an exchange and that this was

3 made possible for them, that is, to take buses to a locality in Bihac.

4 That's what I said. And there were about 180 such persons, perhaps a bit

5 less. And the rest who stayed in the forest were captured and killed.

6 Some were captured and interrogated at the public security station in

7 Sanski Most, and there is a trace of that. There are statements, but all

8 these persons were liquidated at an unknown locality. That's what I

9 said.

10 Q. So you do agree that not all of them were killed.

11 A. No. They all were not killed; that is to say, those who went to

12 Bihac were not killed, those who were exchanged. And this was made

13 possible for them. And I imagine that Mr. Talic knows this, that this

14 group went to Bihac and that these 46 Serb officers and soldiers were

15 released.

16 Q. You said that there were 300 prisoners in Vrhpolje. Do you know

17 how many of them were exchanged?

18 A. The figure I gave was approximate, was less, I think. I said that

19 this was the maximum that could have been there. According to what I

20 know, 158 persons went to Bihac -- no, 183. 183. I received this

21 information -- I received this information from persons who went to Bihac,

22 and I saw them after the war.

23 Q. And these resistance in Vrhpolje, these Muslims, were they armed?

24 A. I don't know the extent to which they were armed, but I think that

25 some of them - probably a large number - had small arms, light weapons. I

Page 5893

1 mean automatic rifles, and some ammunition as well.

2 Q. And these people in Vrhpolje, these Muslim members of the

3 resistance, were they wearing uniforms?

4 A. Well, I'm not sure that they wore uniforms. Possibly some of them

5 could have had uniforms, but I don't know. I do not preclude that

6 possibility, that somebody did have a uniform. But most of them had no

7 uniforms. Most of them were in civilian clothing.

8 Q. So they were wearing civilian clothing and they had weapons.

9 That's how it was, isn't it?

10 A. I'm not sure. I'm not sure about that, so I really can't say. I

11 know that there was one person who was a former JNA officer. He was with

12 them and he was their commander and he was involved in negotiations with

13 the command of the 6th Krajina Brigade concerning negotiations --

14 concerning an exchange. And he led these men.

15 Q. But you would allow for the possibility that some of these 300

16 Muslims in Vrhpolje, of these 300 resistance, were wearing civilian

17 clothes.

18 A. I do allow for that possibility.

19 Q. At the hearing of the 15th of May, you spoke about mass graves in

20 Vrhpolje, and you said that they weren't marked. Is that correct?

21 A. That is correct.

22 Q. These mass graves were located in the vicinity of the bridge of

23 Vrhpolje; is that correct?

24 A. Some mass graves were right by the bridge and underneath the

25 bridge at Vrhpolje.

Page 5894

1 Q. And the bridge in Vrhpolje was destroyed in 1995; is that correct?

2 A. That is correct.

3 Q. So these mass graves which were near or under the bridge in

4 Vrhpolje were in a combat zone; is that correct?

5 A. Which combat? Tell me, which combat? Conflicts took place in

6 1995. Are you referring to 1992?

7 Q. 1995.

8 A. All right.

9 Q. So it is possible that the markings at these mass graves were

10 destroyed in the fighting.

11 A. That's not possible, because the ground where I was searching for

12 the graves, it was levelled and there was grass there. There weren't any

13 visible markings, because had there been any, people would have known that

14 a grave was there and they would have marked that place.

15 Q. When were these exhumations carried out, these exhumations in the

16 vicinity of the Vrhpolje bridge?

17 A. There were several exhumations, because in that area several mass

18 graves were found at several localities too. But over there by the

19 bridge, the first exhumations were carried out, and there is a report in

20 writing about that. I don't want to engage in guesswork concerning the

21 date, et cetera, so I think it's there in the report. I can just say that

22 I was informed by SFOR that they found this on the left-hand side while

23 they were clearing the remnants of the bridge, that they found some

24 skeletons deep down, and that they stopped further work on clearing the

25 rubble, because they were supposed to build a bridge. That's when I

Page 5895

1 established that particular locality. So it was SFOR that was the first

2 to find this grave.

3 Q. Could you tell us the year.

4 A. I think it was the beginning of 1996.

5 Q. And this mass grave was beneath the debris of the bridge that had

6 been destroyed; is that correct?

7 A. That's right.

8 Q. So how can you say that among the debris from the bridge, there

9 was no debris from markings of the mass grave?

10 A. I can assert that because people were there in September 1995,

11 members of the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. No one told me that there was

12 such a locality there. Furthermore, the grave was found deep down when

13 they were digging there, because a new bridge was supposed to be built

14 there. So it was not on the surface; it was deep down. This grave was

15 concealed underneath the left side of the bridge by the river bank, by the

16 bank of the River Sana.

17 Q. Could we agree that at the place where the mass grave was found,

18 the terrain, the ground, had been covered by debris from the bridge?

19 A. Yes. In 1996. Or rather, from October -- September 1995 until

20 the bodies were found.

21 Q. I have just one more question for you. Before you came to give

22 testimony here, did you have the opportunity of reading the indictment

23 against General Talic?

24 A. No, I did not.

25 Q. Thank you.

Page 5896

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Madam Fauveau.

2 Judge, you're now going to be cross-examined by Mr. Ackerman.

3 Mr. Ackerman, do you prefer to take Madam Fauveau's place, or are

4 you going to remain where -- okay.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner.

6 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, just before Mr. Ackerman begins --

7 because effectively, Manjaca is more evidence-related to General Talic

8 directly than Mr. Brdjanin. If I understand the cross-examination, part

9 of a report has been read that said that conditions seemed to be all right

10 and Mr. Ashdown's comments afterwards. There's been no specific challenge

11 to any of the events and incidents that the judge described.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, that in itself is a challenge, I think. No?

13 It's -- in other words, I mean, his words are being put in question, in

14 doubt.

15 MS. KORNER: Right.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: -- By two affirmations coming from other sources.

17 One was which supposedly Mr. Ashdown said.

18 MS. KORNER: Yes.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: And the other one Merhamet told the other gentleman.

20 MS. KORNER: Yes well, that's --

21 JUDGE AGIUS: I think I'm satisfied --

22 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, the reason I'm raising it at this

23 stage so to make it very clear. Virtually every witness we're calling is

24 going to be dealing with events in Manjaca. I'm anxious to reduce, if

25 possible, the amount of time I have to spend with each witness dealing

Page 5897

1 with the conditions in Manjaca. Obviously there will be two or three

2 more -- if as I understand it, therefore, the challenge is limited to

3 well, there are reports that say this was all right but that there's

4 no -- because there is no -- Madam Fauveau has no specific instructions

5 and cannot have specific instructions to challenge the detail, then I will

6 take it that the general's defence on this is simply that he doesn't know

7 one way or the other. It seems to me the proper way to draw it. Because

8 otherwise, if there's more information specific to the detailed account of

9 the camp that's been given by this witness --

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's put it like this. Ms. Korner -- and then I'll

11 call upon you, Madam Fauveau, to make your remarks.

12 The report that Madam Fauveau read from is very specific in that

13 it relates to a period of four days --

14 MS. KORNER: Absolutely.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Those four days, however, supposedly representing an

16 update of --

17 MS. KORNER: Yes. But not an update on the report on the camp.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Exactly. Between the 16th and the 20th of

19 June.

20 MS. KORNER: Yes.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: So basically whatever that report states can only be

22 referred to those particular four days.

23 MS. KORNER: Yes.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ashdown's alleged comments -- because these

25 are -- if I read well or I heard well, someone saying Mr. Ashdown said --

Page 5898

1 MS. KORNER: Well, one actually hears him saying it in English at

2 a later stage.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't remember the exact date of Mr. Ashdown's

4 visit.

5 MS. KORNER: It was the 10th of August.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: So basically we're talking of the 10th of August and

7 what he saw, what he was allowed to see, whatever. That's about it.

8 Having said that, I now call upon you, Madam Fauveau, to remark or

9 to comment on Ms. Korner's submission. In other words, what are you

10 contesting?

11 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I gave to

12 the witness evidence that I had at the moment. In fact, what we are

13 contesting is the image of this camp, and I didn't have any other evidence

14 to show him other than the evidence that I presented him with. As far as

15 the personal acquaintance with General Talic is concerned, Ms. Korner is

16 quite right because General Talic never went to that camp, so it could

17 only be based on the reports that he received.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that's -- that -- it's clear enough.

19 MS. KORNER: Yes. That is clear.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I think so.

21 MS. KORNER: Thank you. I'm sorry. Your Honour, that is clear.

22 Thank you.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: So Mr. Ackerman, if you're ready, we can start.

24 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you, Your Honours. I am ready.

25 Cross-examined by Mr. Ackerman:

Page 5899

1 Q. Mr. Draganovic, I have a lot of questions to ask you. I have 41

2 pages of notes of questions I want to ask you. And the Judge has told you

3 that you can get yourself out of here quicker if you'll listen carefully

4 to the question and just answer the question that I'm asking you and not

5 follow that with some speech. Do you think you can do that?

6 A. I hope so.

7 Q. So do we all.

8 You became a judge in Sanski Most, didn't you, in 1987?

9 A. I think that it says in my statement exactly when I became a

10 judge. It gives the exact date. It should be contained in my statement,

11 yes.

12 Q. So you don't know when you became a judge.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: He didn't say that, Mr. Ackerman. He told you

14 basically -- you already have the answer in my statement.


16 Q. Do you know when you became a judge?

17 A. I said that in my statement, it gives the date. And it was in

18 1997 -- no, not in 1997 -- in 1987 in Sanski Most. That's when I came

19 from Bosanska Dubica, where I was also a judge.

20 Q. Now, we started this process with me suggesting to you that if

21 you could just listen and answer my questions, we'd be a lot quicker. And

22 the simple question I asked you is: You became a judge in Sanski Most in

23 1997? It would be so easy to say yes, rather than all this business about

24 your statement, wouldn't it?

25 A. Please. Don't try to suggest to me how I should answer.

Page 5900

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, you should know that if you are on a

2 collision course -- and I am not going to help you. You are very much

3 alone there. I have been a witness myself in my career. And as a judge,

4 you are alone. As a witness, you are alone as well. And I can sense that

5 if you are not careful, you are on a collision course. You could have

6 answered the question in the simplest of ways, yes or no, and you didn't.

7 Mr. Ackerman.


9 Q. The second thing you need to know, Mr. Draganovic, is your

10 statements are not evidence in this case. The evidence in this case is

11 the testimony you give from this witness stand and the exhibits that are

12 admitted. So it is not sufficient to make evidence in this case that you

13 said something in your statement. Do you understand that?

14 A. Yes, I do.

15 Q. Now, you were not from Sanski Most. You were not born and raised,

16 you didn't grow up in Sanski Most, did you?

17 A. I grew up in Sanski Most, and I've lived in Sanski Most since when

18 I was a child, but I was born in the Kljuc municipality.

19 Q. What I want to know is how is it that after only one year of going

20 to the judiciary in Sanski Most, you were made the court president. How

21 did that happen?

22 A. It was part of regular procedure. That's how it happened. Since

23 my term of -- the term of office of the former president had expired --

24 she was Snezana Tesanovic, I was proposed as the president of the court

25 and I was elected.

Page 5901

1 Q. And elected by whom?

2 A. I think it was by the parliament. I was elected by the

3 parliament -- or the Assembly of Sanski Most municipality. I can't

4 remember now exactly.

5 Q. Were there other judges in Sanski Most that had been there longer

6 than you in the lower court?

7 A. At that time I don't think there were any other judges who had

8 been there longer than myself. Perhaps one of the judges had been there

9 for longer than I had, but she was on sick leave -- on maternity leave for

10 three years.

11 Q. And when you became president, you'd been there about a year.

12 A. More or less.

13 Q. And how is it you don't know who elected you judge? How could

14 that be?

15 A. At the time, the laws had been changed. I know that the municipal

16 courts were under the competence of the municipalities and that at

17 sometime during that period, they fell under the Republic of

18 Bosnia-Herzegovina. I can't remember exactly.

19 Q. So you -- as you sit here today, you just don't know who elected

20 you president of that court.

21 A. Perhaps the Municipal Assembly of Sanski Most or the parliament of

22 Bosnia and Herzegovina.

23 Q. But the answer is you don't know.

24 A. I think it was the Municipal Assembly of Sanski Most.

25 Q. All right. You told us in your testimony the other day that 48

Page 5902

1 members of your family had been killed during the war. Understand that

2 I'm not asking you this question. I just am asking you: If I were to ask

3 you to name each of these people and tell us how they died, would you be

4 able to do that?

5 A. I -- first of all, I didn't say 48. But I think that I could

6 describe -- give the names of all my relatives who were killed.

7 Q. You told the Chamber a few moments ago -- well, let me ask you a

8 question before I ask that one. The organisation Merhamet -- the

9 organisation Merhamet is a Muslim charity organisation, isn't it?

10 A. A Bosniak humanitarian organisation. Yes, you could say that.

11 But not just for Muslims; for everyone who needs help.

12 Q. And you know that in 1992, it had offices in Banja Luka, don't

13 you?

14 A. Yes, I do.

15 Q. And you know that Bosniaks worked in those offices and did the

16 work of Merhamet during that year, 1992?

17 A. Yes. I found out that they worked there. That's correct.

18 Q. You know Adil Medic, don't you?

19 A. I know Mr. Medic.

20 Q. And do you want to stand by your statement that Mr. Medic was

21 under the control of Serbian authorities?

22 A. I stand by my statement that Merhamet in Banja Luka was under the

23 control of the Serbian authorities but not Adil Medic.

24 Q. You know that Adil Medic, on behalf of Merhamet, was visiting

25 Manjaca, don't you?

Page 5903

1 A. That's right.

2 Q. On the first day of your testimony here, Mr. Draganovic, you told

3 us -- I'm going to read you the exact question and answer. It's page

4 4846, lines 3 through 5.

5 MS. KORNER: Date, please.


7 MS. KORNER: The date.

8 MR. ACKERMAN: 23 April.

9 Q. Question: And you -- "And have you worked in liaison with the

10 office of AID both in Sanski Most and in Sarajevo?"

11 Answer: "Yes. I cooperated with the AID."

12 Is that true?

13 A. That's not what I said.

14 Q. Sir, I'm reading from the transcript.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. But he said much more than that,

16 Mr. Ackerman.

17 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I've read the entire answer.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: We could actually stay here and read the entire

19 deposition as far as it relates to the questions that he was asked about

20 his cooperation with AID, but I do remember that he said much more than

21 that.

22 MR. ACKERMAN: Maybe during the cross-examination of Madam Fauveau

23 he talked about that.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: No. No. It was not during the cross-examination

25 only. Also on -- upon the cross-examination, but not only on

Page 5904

1 cross-examination. Also on examination-in-chief.

2 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, Your Honour, if you want to look at page

3 4846, there is one question about AID and one answer about AID and that's

4 it. There is nothing more than that.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. Well, that may be on that particular date.

6 But on other days he did amplify on the alleged cooperation with AID. So

7 go straight to the question that you need to ask him, because it's not

8 fair to refer the witness to one statement only if you know that he has

9 made further statements on his cooperation with AID, be it on that same

10 occasion or on other occasions.

11 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I don't know why you are saying his

12 alleged cooperation with AID. It sounds like you have made a conclusion

13 that he did not cooperate with AID --

14 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no.

15 MR. ACKERMAN: And in the transcript he says he did --

16 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm saying "alleged" because it was put to him

17 whether he cooperated or not, and it was put to him one way by one counsel

18 and put to him in another way by another counsel. So when I say "alleged

19 cooperation," because he's already qualified what kind of cooperation he

20 had with the AID.

21 MR. ACKERMAN: It was put to him by the Prosecutor, "You worked

22 in liaison with the office of AID both in Sanski Most and in Sarajevo,"

23 and his answer was yes --

24 JUDGE AGIUS: And then later he explained that he worked as a

25 judge in cooperation with AID and he also worked not as a judge with AID.

Page 5905

1 So this is why I am asking you go straight to the question that you want

2 to ask him. Because he did explain in detail to --

3 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, I object to your characterising it, Your

4 Honour, as "alleged cooperation." That sounds like a finding being made

5 by the Court that he did not.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman, I can assure you that it is no finding

7 at all, especially knowing that you are going to ask questions to the

8 witness on his cooperation with AID. He has already stated that he

9 cooperated, but it's not the cooperation that was put to him at one point

10 in time. He qualified his cooperation by explaining what kind of

11 cooperation it was.


13 Q. Sir, did you prior to coming here to testify in the period of time

14 between the time you knew you would be a witness in this case and the time

15 you came here to testify, did you speak with anyone from AID about the

16 testimony you would give here?

17 A. Please. Could you repeat that question again. I'm sorry.

18 Q. During that period of time between the time you became aware that

19 you would be a witness in this case and when you actually came here to The

20 Hague, did you speak with anyone from AID about your testimony, about the

21 testimony you would give here?

22 A. No, I didn't.

23 Q. During that period of time that you returned home while we had a

24 break in the trial, did you speak with anyone there, AID or otherwise,

25 about your testimony here?

Page 5906

1 A. No, not at all. I didn't.

2 Q. In Sanski Most during the investigations you conducted in 1995 and

3 later, you knew a person by the name of Zijad Ibric, didn't you?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And he worked for AID, didn't he?

6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, do I have to answer

7 this question?

8 JUDGE AGIUS: If you know the answer, yes.

9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you please repeat the

10 question.


12 Q. Zijad Ibric worked for AID, didn't he?

13 A. Zijad Ibric does work for the AID. He's an official in AID, the

14 Agency for Investigation and Documentation.

15 Q. Did anybody from AID give you a ride to the airport in your trips

16 here?

17 A. Never. Never. I don't drive around with those people.

18 Q. You think that would be improper, don't you?

19 A. I don't think anything. I know who -- who brought me there.

20 Q. You and Mr. Zijad Ibric interviewed some witnesses together,

21 didn't you, in connection with those investigations?

22 A. That's possible.

23 Q. And as an example, sir, I'd like you to look at three exhibits,

24 DB73.1, DB74.1, and DB76.1. I'd ask you be shown those, please.

25 Now, sir, my question is really very simple, and I think it would

Page 5907

1 be very easy for you to answer it. All I want to do is direct you to the

2 last page of each of those statements and ask you if it's not the case

3 that these documents show that you and Zijad Ibric took statements from

4 the person whose name also appears -- and signature also appears on those

5 documents. And I'm only showing you it for that purpose. Is that the

6 case?

7 A. Yes. This is a statement that I took as an investigating judge --

8 Q. Referring to 73.1? Just look at all of them and then confirm for

9 me that they're all statements that you took as investigating judge, along

10 with Zijad Ibric.

11 A. I took this statement as an investigating judge, and Mr. Zijad

12 Ibric typed this statement out on a computer.

13 Q. And you're referring to 73. what? Look at the front. It says

14 73. something on it.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. 73.1? Now, look at 73.2. The same thing? It should say DB73.1,

17 DB73.2 -- no, 74.1 and DB76.1.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And the last one.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Mr. Ackerman. Take the first one of

21 these documents, DB73.1, please, Judge. Starting from the title [B/C/S

22 spoken], and skip the first paragraph, consisting of one line, the second

23 paragraph, consisting of eight lines. The third paragraph, starting with

24 [B/C/S spoken]. Can you read out that paragraph so that I have it

25 translated, please.

Page 5908

1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "This statement is being taken and

2 recorded by the investigating judge of this court, Adil Draganovic, with

3 the assistance of an official from the AID, Zijad Ibric."

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.

5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These two copies are identical.


7 Q. Give me the numbers of the identical ones.

8 A. It's this one. Down here there is a Prosecution number, 00431945,

9 and number 00431945. They are identical.

10 Q. You're correct. I think two of them are identical.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. In the first of these documents, you have a

12 reference number which is redacted, while in the second you don't.

13 MR. ACKERMAN: I believe they're identical, Your Honour. They

14 were --

15 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know. If it's not important for you,

16 Mr. Ackerman --

17 MR. ACKERMAN: Okay. It's not.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: -- You may go ahead.


20 Q. My only purpose, sir, in showing you these was to show that you

21 and Mr. Ibric worked together in taking these statements. And you signed

22 them yourself, didn't you?

23 A. That's right. That's how this statement was taken.

24 Q. How about a man named Husein Ganic? Did you know him?

25 A. I can't remember now.

Page 5909

1 Q. Do you recall if you and Mr. Ibric took a statement from a

2 gentleman named Husein Ganic? Does that ring any bells with you?

3 A. I really can't remember.

4 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honours, I want to bring to your attention and

5 move the admission of defendant Brdjanin Exhibit number 77. I will tell

6 you that it is a -- an extract from the transcript in the Kvocka case,

7 pages 11018 through 11060. It contains --

8 JUDGE AGIUS: 11018. Yes.

9 MR. ACKERMAN: Through 11060. Those are the page numbers of

10 transcript. It contains the full testimony--

11 MS. KORNER: Your Honour. I object to this completely. I object

12 to a description of this document. I object to the admission of testimony

13 from another case which the Defence, if they wish to put it in and it has

14 some relevance -- I was unaware till this morning. Indeed a pile of

15 documents was placed on the -- in front of me this morning, which I

16 haven't had an opportunity to go through, and I object to this in its

17 entirety. And if this is going to happen --

18 JUDGE AGIUS: That is something which I had hoped we agreed upon

19 in the very beginning of this trial. And this is somewhere where

20 cooperation has been shortcoming, because it's not fair that even the

21 Chamber itself comes to today's sitting only knowing what documents are --

22 you're going to make use of at the beginning of the sitting, at 9.00, and

23 then having the documents available during the first -- first break and

24 not having had an opportunity to go through them.

25 MS. KORNER: That's right, Your Honour.

Page 5910

1 JUDGE AGIUS: That's not what we had agreed upon in the very

2 beginning of this trial, Mr. Ackerman.

3 MS. KORNER: And Your Honour, Mr. Ackerman should --

4 JUDGE AGIUS: The same applies to Madam Fauveau.

5 And sometimes the same applies to you, because you do exactly the

6 same thing.

7 MS. KORNER: [Previous translation continues] ...

8 JUDGE AGIUS: And my complaint is quite a clear one. You should

9 not -- I do acknowledge that everyone is busy here, but I do acknowledge

10 also that we have an agreement that you should make available the

11 documentation or at least indicate what documents you are going to make

12 use of in good time. I don't expect to know weeks and months before, but

13 at least we should be in a position to know a day before what documents

14 you are going to make use of.

15 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's not in fact correct. Unless Your

16 Honour points to a specific incident in each case. Because otherwise

17 there's complaints from the Defence. We say the documents we're going to

18 use --

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, Ms. Korner, there have been days when I came

20 here having a List of Documents which I had asked my staff to have

21 prepared for me and I have gone through only to find out that in the space

22 of 12 hours, that list has changed, it has increased in number. That

23 happened yesterday. For example, Madam Fauveau started with a list of

24 about six or seven documents. All of a sudden yesterday I found out

25 that -- or the day before yesterday that it had increased in number,

Page 5911

1 multiplied by about three or four. And as regards your list, we only had

2 it this morning, Mr. Ackerman.

3 MS. KORNER: Can we return -- I'm sorry if Your Honour feels that

4 we're deficient in providing lists. As I've said, in fact, we're not

5 going provide lists in future because it's too complicated. We're going

6 to hand out the documents was we come to them.

7 But Your Honour, at this moment; we've drifted slightly off the

8 point, which is I was unaware that an attempt was going to be made to put

9 in part of a transcript, and I certainly want to read it and in principle

10 I object to method -- this method of attempting to adduce evidence into a

11 trial.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: I haven't read it either, Ms. Korner. The only

13 thing I can suggest at this point in time -- banking on the cooperation

14 of -- from Mr. Ackerman -- is if he could postpone this -- putting this

15 question with regard to that -- to later until we at least go through the

16 script -- the transcript and see what it is -- what it is about.

17 MR. ACKERMAN: I'd be happy to do that, Your Honour. Of course.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. And then we will decide on your objection

19 later on, because I -- don't expect me to rule on the admissibility of

20 this document and on the -- the legitimacy of the question that

21 Mr. Ackerman has put and will be putting on this document, not having read

22 it.

23 MR. ACKERMAN: Let me just say that it represents prior recorded

24 testimony that the Prosecutor had --

25 MS. KORNER: No. I object to this, Your Honour.

Page 5912

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Don't -- don't say it in front of the witness.

2 MS. KORNER: I object --

3 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm not going to talk about the content at all.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: So what you are talking about.


6 MS. KORNER: And what's the prior recorded testimony got to do

7 with anything.

8 MR. ACKERMAN: It's admissible.

9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour I object to this. I don't want any of

10 the content of this document -- until I have had a chance to look at it.

11 And Your Honour, I would in future ask that if this type of document is --

12 there's going to be attempt to put it in, we must be notified in advance

13 so we don't have this unseemly discussion in front of a witness.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's leave it at that for the time being. We

15 are going to take time to read this document. And there is Mr. Ackerman's

16 understanding on this. He will put the question if it's admitted -- and

17 the document-- on the document if it's admitted later on. Is that okay

18 with you, Mr. Ackerman?


20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.


22 Q. Sir, do you know a person by the name of Jasminka Putica?

23 A. I don't remember.

24 Q. Would it -- let me see if I can refresh your memory a bit. She is

25 a judge in Sarajevo. Do you know her?

Page 5913

1 A. That's not the name.

2 Q. Have I got the name wrong?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Could you tell us what the name is.

5 A. If you're asking about a judge, I know that there is a judge by

6 the name of Jasminka Putica at the Supreme Court of the Federation of

7 Bosnia-Herzegovina.

8 Q. That's what I thought I said. Obviously I was misunderstood.

9 And do you know what her ethnicity is?

10 A. I don't know.

11 Q. Do you know a gentleman by the name of Bakir Alispahic?

12 A. I don't know.

13 Q. Have you ever heard of Bakir Alispahic?

14 A. I've heard of him.

15 Q. Have you heard of him in connection with any function that he had

16 with AID?

17 A. I've heard about that.

18 Q. Do you know that he used to be the chief of AID?

19 A. I read about that in the newspapers.

20 Q. Do you know where he is now?

21 A. I don't know.

22 Q. Didn't you read in the newspapers that he's in jail?

23 A. I didn't.

24 Q. Do you know Enver Mujezinovic?

25 A. I don't know him.

Page 5914

1 Q. Do you know of him?

2 A. I haven't heard of him.

3 Q. How about Irfan Ljevakovic?

4 A. Could you please put a question to me.

5 Q. Do you know Irfan Ljevakovic?

6 A. I don't.

7 Q. Do you know Edhem Veladzic?

8 A. If you're referring to Edhem Veladzic, I do know that person.

9 Q. Do you know him -- he was the ex-chief of police security centre

10 in Bihac. Is that where you knew him?

11 A. I know him as former minister of the police of the canton of

12 Bihac.

13 Q. Do you know where he is now?

14 A. I don't.

15 Q. Didn't you read that he was in jail?

16 A. I didn't read about it, because I've been in The Hague for a long

17 while now.

18 Q. You told us that you had read something in the newspaper about

19 Mr. Alispahic that had to do with some of his recent problems, did it

20 not?

21 A. I don't know what you're driving at, but -- I really don't know

22 what you're asking me.


24 Q. How about -- do you know --

25 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry. Your Honour, I'm going to ask what the

Page 5915

1 relevance of this is. What this witness may or may not have read about

2 people in the papers.

3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I'd be happy to tell you out of the

4 presence of the witness. I'd be eager to tell you out of the presence of

5 this witness.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated].

7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm sorry about the microphone.

9 Usher, could you escort the witness out for a while, and then

10 we'll continue.

11 Judge, we need to discuss something in your absence, which I am

12 sure you understand.

13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.

14 [The witness stands down]

15 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] He doesn't need to be

16 taken far, because I suppose this is only going to last a couple of

17 minutes.

18 Yes, Mr. Ackerman.

19 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I can tell you only my current

20 understanding, and I can also tell you this matter is -- continues to be

21 under investigation. But it is clear that five individuals have been

22 arrested and are sitting in jail in Sarajevo, having been detained on the

23 orders of this judge Jasminka Putica. They are described as five former

24 officials of AID and their associates, including the former head of AID,

25 Mr. Alispahic. They are charged by the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina

Page 5916

1 with engaging in terrorist activities, with manufacturing documents. And

2 it's a very, very serious matter. There is an article about it in

3 Oslobodenje. And I have an investigation going on trying to find out

4 more about it. They apparently also were engaged in some kind of a plot

5 to assassinate Fikret Abdic.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Who is Fikret Abdic?

7 MR. ACKERMAN: Fikret Abdic was the person who got the most votes

8 in the election for president of BiH but was not seated. Mr. Izetbegovic

9 was seated instead. So Abdic went off to the Bihac area and formed his

10 own organisation and actually wound up fighting against the

11 Bosnia-Herzegovina forces, the Bosnian army. He's a controversial

12 figure. He was recently tried, as I understand it, in Croatia. And as I

13 understand it -- and please understand my information right now is pretty

14 sparse -- the purpose of this plot to kill him was that he was seen by

15 these people at AID as a traitor to their cause, which is -- well, I'm not

16 going to describe what it is because I want to investigate a little

17 further. But I think it's a serious matter. I only wanted to ask this

18 witness --

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly. I mean --

20 MR. ACKERMAN: -- If these were people he had worked with. And

21 apparently they are not. So that will end my questions to him.

22 This matter will come to your attention I think in much greater

23 detail at some point regarding all the documents we have here from AID.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: No. At this point I think the questions that he's

25 been putting up, perfectly legitimate, providing he ends the question

Page 5917

1 there, depending on what kind of answer he gets.

2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm going to ask again. How is it

3 relevant that certain people that this witness may or may not know have

4 been arrested and charged?

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. But again, these are allegations, like -- like

6 I said. It -- I am taking them on the face value for the time being. I

7 take Mr. Ackerman's word that the facts are as he states, as he stated --

8 in other words, that proceedings have been instituted against these four

9 or five persons. Obviously -- I mean, he's got an interest to establish

10 whether the witness ever cooperated or worked with these four or five

11 persons in particular if amongst the charges that they are facing is the

12 fabrication of false -- forged documents, as he has suggested.

13 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm sorry. At the moment, Mr. Ackerman

14 may be right, he may be wrong. I haven't the faintest idea even if Your

15 Honour hasn't --

16 JUDGE AGIUS: But we are not judging --

17 MS. KORNER: Can I finish, Your Honour?


19 MS. KORNER: I am simply asking what is the relevance unless it is

20 suggested that a particular document that we have produced -- and I've

21 been through this before. We've had these wild allegations being made.

22 If it is suggested that these particular documents, any one of them that

23 we have got, are forged, are not authentic, then that -- and that this

24 witness knows something about it, then it can be put. But this sort of

25 general do you know these people and then Your Honour to be informed that

Page 5918

1 these people have been arrested and have been charged and the charges

2 involved -- Your Honour, again, I say what is the relevance?

3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I must respond, if you'll allow me.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: I think I'm going to exempt you from having to

5 respond, Mr. Ackerman, because the position is as follows: The Chamber

6 has admitted on a prima facie basis all the documents -- practically all

7 the documents that you brought forward, knowing all the time that there is

8 a ongoing objection on the part of both Mr. Ackerman and Madam Fauveau

9 with regard to if not all, the majority of documents originating from

10 Bihac and in the case of Madam Fauveau in particular, documents

11 originating from Sarajevo. We've had statements in this Chamber that

12 these documents are not trusted. Now, obviously the question is still

13 there at the end of the day. That's going to be one of our major tasks.

14 We will have to distinguish between one document and another and come to a

15 conclusion. At this point in time, if there is this allegation

16 throughout -- permeating all the proceedings in this case that some

17 documents which are unsigned or unstamped or both and some documents

18 originating from Sarajevo and some documents originating from AID and --

19 and/or Bihac, these are being contested -- although for the time being, no

20 specific details are forthcoming with regard to any one of these

21 particular documents. If there is an allegation now or if there is a

22 statement by Mr. Ackerman that there are persons from AID that are being

23 charged with -- amongst inter alia fabrication of documents, I'm going to

24 allow to question, to see whether the judge -- whether the witness has

25 ever been associated with these five persons, because that may have a

Page 5919

1 relevance. If he has been associated with these five persons, that may --

2 it may not have a relevance even if he has been associated, because

3 everything stands to be proved. But if he has not been associated in any

4 way with these five persons, obviously that is going to be given its due

5 weight. If he has been associated with these five persons, that will also

6 be given its due weight. This is why I'm definitely going to allow the

7 question to go ahead.

8 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] Your Honour, I'm not going

9 to pursue this -- I'm not going to pursue except to point out to Your

10 Honour that the fact that these people may have been arrested, may have

11 been charged, proves precisely nothing.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Of course it doesn't.

13 MS. KORNER: If the allegation is -- and I repeat this again and

14 then I'm going to sit down, Your Honour -- that a particular document or

15 all the documents in this case that come from -- through the auspices of

16 AID are forged, fine, then let that be put and we'll deal with that.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: That stands to be seen and to be decided.

18 MS. KORNER: I know. Your Honour. But that's why I need to deal

19 with that. Obviously, if that's the allegation that's been made and it's

20 going to be put in terms that any documents handed in through this witness

21 who allege -- who says, I'm sorry, not alleges -- who says he found these

22 documents in the CSB that these documents were not found there, or that

23 they've been forged by him in conjunction with other members of the AID,

24 then that is an allegation that must been put.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait one moment.

Page 5920

1 Ms. Korner, the motion is very simple in any mind, at least. It's

2 true that what Mr. Ackerman has stated as being reported -- and I don't

3 know which newspaper -- is something that is -- seems to be in the air,

4 that one day or another maybe will be decided but that at the present

5 moment there is no decision on those facts. But do you expect the Trial

6 Chamber to ignore as if it is not happening the fact that there are four

7 or five persons from AID that are being charged -- I'm not saying that

8 they are guilty -- but that are being charged with, amongst other things,

9 fabrication of documents, when this Trial Chamber has in front of it an

10 allegation from the Defence, again which will need to be decided upon

11 later on, that there are amongst the documents originating from Sarajevo

12 or -- and AID documents that are forged or are not being accepted? How

13 can I ignore that?

14 MS. KORNER: I don't think I'll answer Your Honour's question.

15 Thank you. I've made my objection.

16 [Trial Chamber confers]

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman, if there's anything that you would

18 like to say, please go ahead. If not, we'll get the witness back, and I

19 would like you to put the question before the break.

20 MR. ACKERMAN: All right. I'm not sure I have a question left to

21 put. I think I went through every individual. Let me just make sure. I

22 think I -- the last person I asked him about was Mr. Alispahic and he said

23 he didn't know him. And that was the end of the names. And I don't think

24 there's another question to put to him because he doesn't know them and he

25 clearly doesn't work with them. And that would end it.

Page 5921

1 But let me say this: Ms. Korner is trying to shift a burden to us

2 that we cannot have.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: It's not going to be shifted to you, Mr. Ackerman.

4 MR. ACKERMAN: And what she's saying is we must show they're

5 forgeries. She must show they're authentic. And by Your Honour's ruling

6 at the beginning of this trial if we raise any indication whatsoever that

7 these documents do not come from an official source and are not

8 trustworthy, then it's up to the Prosecutor to prove their authenticity.

9 That's her job, not ours. It's not our job to prove they are forgeries.

10 So she has her burdens wrong. She has what she has to do wrong.

11 Secondly, I have newspaper articles that say more about this, but

12 they say things that I think might be reckless. For instance, they

13 connect these people with Al Qaeda and the activities of Al Qaeda in the

14 U.S. And I don't think -- that may not be responsible. The one newspaper

15 that --

16 JUDGE AGIUS: We have enough on our shoulders already.

17 MR. ACKERMAN: The responsible newspaper of Oslobodenje. It's not

18 a Serbian newspaper. It's an independent newspaper. And the charges are

19 made by the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina, not Serbian court. And so

20 that's all I have to say about it. And so say that this is wild

21 allegations, I think is -- is an outrageous thing for her to say. If the

22 Prosecutor knew about this --

23 JUDGE AGIUS: They could be the wildest of allegations. I don't

24 care at this point in time, Mr. Ackerman.

25 MR. ACKERMAN: If the Prosecutor knew --

Page 5922

1 JUDGE AGIUS: If there is a hint that there may be -- there could

2 have been cooperation between any witness -- not just this one -- and AID

3 members or officials who are being charged -- presently charged with

4 fabrication of documents, that is of course of interest to this Trial

5 Chamber.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, what I want to say is if the Prosecutor knew

7 about it, I think it was her obligation to bring it to your attention.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: The Prosecutor didn't know about it. I mean, don't

9 bring it -- as if the Prosecutor knew about this and is trying to hide

10 something from us. I mean, I don't take it like that.

11 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I know nothing whatsoever about this. I

12 will clearly be making inquiries as a result of now finally being told.

13 Had we been asked about this, we could have probably made inquiries

14 ourselves. But the point is still -- the one I made is in our submission

15 a valid one. Of course the burden is upon us to show that these documents

16 are authentic. Not for one moment do I suggest that the Defence has any

17 burden upon it to show they're not authentic. But if the suggestion is

18 going to be made that all the documents that we have produced, that come

19 through the auspices of AID are in some way suspect or forged, then of

20 course we will discharge our burden by calling as much evidence as we can

21 to show that those documents are in fact authentic. But until such time

22 as we have an inkling -- because this is the first time it's been

23 suggested -- or at the beginning of this trial that these documents are

24 forgeries -- we can't discharge our burden unless we know about it. So

25 that's all that I'm saying about it.

Page 5923

1 JUDGE AGIUS: No. Perfectly --

2 MS. KORNER: The second thing is, Your Honour, as I say again in

3 respect of this witness, if the suggestion is to be made because he has

4 cooperated with AID officials, he in some way is responsible for the

5 creation or has lied about documents, then that must be put to him.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, you are right there as well.

7 I think we can leave it at that for the time being. We'll have a

8 break.

9 Madam Registrar, please, the witness will be taken to his room.

10 And until he continues with his evidence in 30 minutes' time, he must

11 remain incommunicado. That includes members of his family.

12 --- Recess taken at 12.32 p.m.

13 --- On resuming at 1.04 p.m.

14 [The witness entered court]

15 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, just before Mr. Ackerman --

16 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait. We don't have the accused present as yet.

17 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, just before Mr. Ackerman continues, it

18 may be as well if we were to leave ten minutes at the end of the session

19 to deal with the document which I've now read.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, you have read it already.

21 MS. KORNER: I read it on the break. I know what this is about.


23 MS. KORNER: I don't think it will take longer. And also there's

24 a couple of administrative matters I want to deal with.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Okay. So we'll agree, Mr. Ackerman -- I would

Page 5924

1 say we stop at least ten minutes before quarter to 2.00 so that we thrash

2 this -- the submission on this document and whatever is left to be

3 discussed.

4 Yes, Mr. Ackerman, you may proceed.

5 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, the first thing is what I'm told was a

6 mistranslation. That document 73.1, Your Honour, that you asked the

7 witness to read, the third paragraph of --

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Yes.

9 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm told by my associates that that was not

10 properly translated, and I'm wondering how you would like to try to solve

11 that problem.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: I think I can solve that problem by kindly asking

13 you to turn to your co-counsel who knows the language, and if she agrees

14 to read that third paragraph, if I remember well. Then we -- I'm not

15 going to ask the witness again to read it.

16 MS. RADOSAVLJEVIC: [Interpretation] The statement was taken --

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Slowly. Slowly. Yes.

18 MS. RADOSAVLJEVIC: [Interpretation] "The statement was taken and

19 recorded by the investigating judge of this court, Adil Draganovic with

20 the cooperation of Ibric Zijad a professional associate of the AID -- a

21 professional official from the AID." [In English] Thank you.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Are you happy now with the interpretation?

23 MR. ACKERMAN: [Microphone not activated] I suppose I am. Your

24 Honour. I was just told that the original one was not absolutely

25 correct.

Page 5925

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So you may proceed with your questions.

2 MR. ACKERMAN: [Microphone not activated] I'd like the witness to

3 be given DB78, please.

4 And Your Honour -- oh, Your Honour, I mentioned to Ms. Korner that

5 there actually was one lingering question from what we were doing right

6 before the break, and that's what I'm going to do now. It will be quite

7 brief.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I would suppose it's expected from you.


10 Q. Sir, you told us that you did recognise the name Edhem Veladzic as

11 being someone who had served as a minister in Bihac. And I've now given

12 you two -- one document, which actually contains two documents, DB78 B.

13 And you'll notice two signatures, a signature on each of those documents,

14 purporting to be from a person Edhem Veladzic. Is that the person that

15 you were talking about that you knew?

16 A. Yes, it is.

17 Q. And is this a person that you ever worked closely with in

18 connection with your work with AID?

19 A. No. This person has nothing to do with my work.

20 Q. All right. Thank you. Now, I know you have told us this, and I'm

21 asking you again simply because I don't recall. What -- when was it --

22 the date that you returned to Sanski Most in 1995?

23 A. The 15th of October, 1995.

24 Q. And I think you told us that that was about five days after the

25 army had captured Sanski Most, the BiH army.

Page 5926

1 A. That's right.

2 Q. What was Sanski Most like five days after the BiH army retook it?

3 What did you see when you returned to Sanski Most?

4 A. I arrived there in the afternoon with my wife. I first went to

5 see my house which had been destroyed. I went there. It was a sunny

6 afternoon.

7 Q. Were there a lot of military vehicles in the streets?

8 A. I don't think there were many of them.

9 Q. How about flags and symbols of Bosnia-Herzegovina or Croatia?

10 A. Why of Croatia?

11 Q. I'm just wondering. I'm just asking the question.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Just answer the question. I mean, it's -- why do

13 you want to argue the point? He might as well ask you why there were

14 other flags. But what's the point?

15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think there were flags in front of

16 the municipality building. I don't know whether there were any others. I

17 saw some flags, but only the flags of Bosnia-Herzegovina.


19 Q. And did you immediately upon your return -- I mean, within a day

20 or two, resume your post as president of the court?

21 A. In the first few days, I had conversations in the municipality

22 building, and I then went to the court building and prepared to resume

23 my work in those days.

24 Q. Did some authority ask you to resume your post as president of the

25 court, or did you just do that on your own authority?

Page 5927

1 A. When I arrived there, I first heard that another colleague of mine

2 who was a lawyer had been appointed as the president of the court in

3 Sanski Most. Knowing full well that he couldn't have that post and that

4 the organs in Sanski Most could not do that, I went and told them that I

5 had come there to carry on with my work, and that was accepted.

6 Q. And the colleague who had been appointed president I take it was

7 someone who had been appointed by the Republika Srpska?

8 A. No.

9 Q. Who had appointed this person?

10 A. The presidency of the municipality had appointed him before I

11 arrived there from Germany.

12 Q. And what was his name?

13 A. His name was Ismet Sarcevic.

14 Q. And how was it you took over his position?

15 A. I went to the president of the presidency, who was then Mr. Mirzet

16 Karabeg, and to Alagic Mehmed, who was a member of that presidency. And I

17 spoke to them. I explained that I had come to stay and to start with my

18 work and that I was a legal -- president of the court in Sanski Most and

19 the judge and that no one else could be appointed to this position without

20 following the procedure, and they agreed with me on that point. I then

21 went to the building of the municipal court, where I met Mr. Sarcevic,

22 and he really showed me the decision of the presidency according to which

23 they were appointing him as president of the court. I explained to the

24 gentleman that that could not stand, that there was a legal procedure that

25 had to be followed, and that my term of office had not yet expired, and I

Page 5928

1 asked him to leave the building immediately. He handed over the keys to

2 me without objecting, and he left the building, and he no longer attempted

3 to get involved in my work. And on my own initiative, I started working

4 at that point, because according to the law of Bosnia and Herzegovina, my

5 term of office had not yet expired.

6 Q. How long was your term of office?

7 A. I think my term of office was four years as president of the

8 court. But as a judge, the term of office was for an eight-year period.

9 But given the wartime situation, an amendment had been made to the law,

10 and these terms of office had been extended until further notice and they

11 were valid for six months after the end of the war. Or that is to say,

12 after the signing of the Dayton Agreement.

13 Q. So did Ismet Sarcevic remain as a judge of the lower court even

14 though he was not the president?

15 A. No. As I said, he left the building, and he stopped doing this

16 work. He didn't do anything else. He was a deputy of the head of the

17 Municipality of Sanski Most.

18 Q. Would it be fair to assume that he was not happy with what you

19 did?

20 A. He didn't show this.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: But he didn't send you a bouquet of flowers either,

22 did he?

23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, he didn't.


25 Q. Did other judges who had left in 1991/1992 return and resume their

Page 5929

1 positions in Sanski Most?

2 A. No, they didn't.

3 Q. You were the only one that came back and resumed your position?

4 A. At that time, yes.

5 Q. I assume there came a time when you started living in your house

6 in Mahala again. Is that true?

7 A. Three years later, when I had managed to repair it to a certain

8 extent and ensure that there were living conditions there.

9 Q. And one of the repairs you made was to replace the roof, wasn't

10 it?

11 A. Yes. The roof was replaced too.

12 Q. And how did you do that? Where did you get the materials to

13 replace the roof?

14 A. With a labourer who had built a roof for me before, I agreed that

15 he should repair the roof.

16 Q. But my question was: Where did the materials come from? Where

17 did the actual roof come from that was put on your house?

18 A. This labourer obtained the material -- or rather, he and his

19 relatives obtained the material.

20 Q. Do you know from where?

21 A. Maybe I do.

22 Q. And what would the answer be?

23 A. I don't have to answer that question.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, please don't take my place. I'm the Judge

25 here. You are the witness. For the time being, you have to answer that

Page 5930

1 question, until I am not of the opinion that it is an irrelevant question

2 that is being asked, you are required to answer it.

3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour --

4 JUDGE AGIUS: You don't need to explain for the time being,

5 Mr. Ackerman. Put the question again, and the witness will answer it.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I do have a suggestion.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.

8 MR. ACKERMAN: If what I thought to be the case is actually the

9 case, it may be that -- the reason I'm hesitating is I'm hesitating as to

10 whether I want to say this to you in the presence of the witness or not.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: If you don't, we'll send the witness out again.

12 MR. ACKERMAN: I think it's better we do that.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Usher --

14 MS. KORNER: Looking at the time, is there much -- I wonder if

15 Mr. Ackerman perhaps could move to another topic and then he could deal

16 with that when we're going to deal with the other matters.


18 JUDGE AGIUS: I wouldn't, if I were you. I would -- I would

19 rather the witness leaves the courtroom for a while.

20 Is it going to take you long to put this to us?

21 MR. ACKERMAN: It will be extremely brief. Probably less than one

22 minute.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So the witness is better out rather than in,

24 if this is going to be discussed. Also because he's being reticent, he

25 doesn't want to answer the question. So that makes me suspicious in any

Page 5931

1 case.

2 MS. KORNER: Well, my point is it's going to leave ten minutes --

3 by the time he goes out --

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Korner, I want this to be done and concluded

5 before the witness goes back the his hotel. I have my own reasons.

6 Please.

7 [The witness stands down]

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.

9 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, the information I have -- which is not

10 completely verified. I understand there is even a videotape -- is that

11 the roof that is on his house was stolen from a home of a Serb resident

12 who had left the area because the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina had taken it

13 over, that he and his workers went there and stole the roof off that house

14 and took it over and put it on his. The reason I hesitated to have him

15 answer the question when he said what he said was it became clear to me

16 that that may be the case. And in that case, it may be that you should

17 advise him that -- of his rights regarding self-incrimination, because it

18 may be a crime what he did, if that's what he did. And that's why I

19 wanted to do it out of his presence.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. The witness can -- the usher is with him.

21 No? Okay. You can bring the witness in again, please.

22 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

23 [The witness entered court]

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, I am -- I am authorising Mr. Ackerman to put

25 the question to you again. In other words, as to whether you knew where

Page 5932

1 the material for the construction of the roof or reconstruction of the

2 roof came from. If in answering that question you think that you may be

3 throwing some -- you would be giving some information which could be

4 either incriminating or that you have a good reason not to answer, then

5 you can ask for the permission of the Trial Chamber not to answer the

6 question. But you have to furnish an explanation first.

7 Mr. Ackerman, you may proceed with the question, and then we'll

8 deal with it as -- with the problem as we go along.

9 It's not being hinted that you have anything that is

10 incriminating. But it's not being excluded either. In other words, I

11 will have to answer -- ask -- wait for the question and for your answer,

12 and we'll move from there.


14 Q. The question, sir, is: Where did the materials come from that you

15 used to replace your roof?

16 A. I had an arrangement, an agreement with the labourer with regard

17 to obtaining the materials for the roof, with the labourer who worked on

18 the roof.

19 Q. And you told us that you knew where the labourer got those

20 materials. The question is: Where did the materials come from?

21 A. The labourer said that this was second-hand material that he had

22 collected.

23 Q. Why were you hesitant to answer that question when I first asked

24 you? Why did you feel you should not answer it?

25 A. I just think that this is not important.

Page 5933

1 Q. Isn't it the case, sir, that you know that that material came from

2 the roof of the home of a Serb resident who had left Sanski Most when the

3 BiH army came there? It was stolen from that residence and put on your

4 house; isn't that the case?

5 A. I didn't know about that.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: Do you want to break now, Your Honour, or do you

7 want me to go forward?

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, if you have no further questions that you can

9 bring to an end in five minutes, we can --

10 MR. ACKERMAN: I do. I can do five more minutes, if you like.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Would ten minutes be sufficient for what you have to

12 exchange?

13 MS. KORNER: No idea, Your Honour. I wouldn't have thought it

14 should take longer than that.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So we'll go on for the next five minutes,

16 Mr. Ackerman.


18 Q. How long after your return to Sanski Most did you begin conducting

19 investigations?

20 A. Well, I already said that in my statement, that I started

21 collecting documents straight away.

22 Q. Were you doing those -- this document collection that you were

23 doing, were you doing that as a judge of the lower court of Sanski Most,

24 or was that something you were doing as a private individual?

25 A. I didn't do anything as a private individual, only as a judge.

Page 5934

1 Q. And this gathering of documents, then, I take it was in connection

2 with some case that was being put together in your court to charge someone

3 with a criminal offence?

4 A. I was assigned to duty by the presidency of the municipality to

5 collect documents and evidence concerning war crimes in the territory of

6 the Municipality of Sanski Most.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: I think he has -- he has already explained this,

8 Mr. Ackerman, with reference to the document itself or two documents,

9 actually.

10 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes, Your Honour.

11 Q. How is it that the presidency of the municipality was in a

12 position to control the court and to tell the president of the court what

13 to do? How is that? I thought you were independent.

14 A. Yes. I was independent.

15 Q. All right.

16 A. But since there were quite a few documents and at that time it was

17 necessary to tour various institutions and have a look at these documents.

18 This was suggested to me, and I accepted that.

19 Q. So you characterise it as a suggestion that you accept it rather

20 than any order from the president of the municipality; is that a fair

21 statement?

22 A. Yes, that's right. It was not an instruction.

23 Q. Did anyone else direct your investigations and tell you what to

24 investigate or suggest to you what to investigate, or did you do most of

25 this on your own?

Page 5935

1 A. This was not a classical investigation. This was collection of

2 evidence, facts, documents. And they were submitted to prosecution

3 authorities. At that time, as a professional man and in cooperation with

4 the cantonal prosecutor's office in Bihac, I did that.

5 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I think we need to stop there.


7 MR. ACKERMAN: And if the witness has more answer to my question,

8 I guess he can give it in the morning.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you. The witness can be escorted out.

10 Thank you, Judge. We'll continue tomorrow.

11 Do you think you will finish your cross-examination tomorrow,

12 Mr. Ackerman?

13 MR. ACKERMAN: I will try very hard, Your Honour. I'm on page 8

14 of a 41-page set of notes. But --

15 JUDGE AGIUS: I think the witness is being pretty short in his --

16 MR. ACKERMAN: I think we're going to get there, yes.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: -- Reply. So if I can ask you to make an effort.

18 MR. ACKERMAN: I'll certainly make an effort.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Judge, you may withdraw. Thank you. And

20 we'll continue tomorrow morning at 9.00.

21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you too.

22 [The witness stands down]

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner.

24 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, this refers back -- Your Honour, this

25 refers back --

Page 5936


2 MS. KORNER: Yes. DB77. But it refers back to what Madam Fauveau

3 was attempting to do in her cross-examination relating to the Kvocka

4 trial, to which I object. Your Honour, there are really two objections,

5 but I don't have to go further than relevance. It's the transcript of a

6 graphologist who gave evidence on behalf of the Defence in respect of a

7 statement taken by AID from a witness who in fact was granted protective

8 measures. So I'm not going to refer to his name -- suggesting that the

9 signature on the statement taken by AID was in fact not the signature of

10 the man who purported to sign it.

11 Your Honour, this was not a witness that we're calling. This is

12 not a statement referred to which there is any suggestion that this

13 witness had anything to do with it. The fact that it was alleged by the

14 Defence and it got no further than an allegation that Mr. Ibric in some

15 way forged that signature. It was never ruled upon because in the event

16 it didn't need to is neither here nor there as far as this trial is

17 concerned nor as far as this witness is concerned. In any event, this is

18 not the way to attempt to get in evidence that relates to a person who is

19 not a witness to the case. Your Honour, that's very simply my objection.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman, before you reply to this, given what

21 the witness has already testified on, his connections or absence of them

22 with the four -- five persons that you mentioned and also as to the

23 names -- other names that you mentioned, I would like you to address also

24 the relevance of this document when you are replying, because that's

25 important. I mean, I haven't read it. I don't know whose signature was

Page 5937

1 in question in this other case.

2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, you don't need to read it in detail. It

3 was -- it was a witness in the other case who's not a witness in this

4 case, who gave evidence, actually. And it was suggested apparently on

5 behalf of the Defence that Mr. Ibric from AID in the statement he had

6 taken from this witness -- the only relevance of which can have been

7 contradictory -- can I just finish, Your Honour.


9 MS. KORNER: Had forged the witness's signature.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: I see.

11 MS. KORNER: That was it.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: And I remember when Madam Fauveau had raised the

13 matter, the -- her intention was to ask the witness whether he knew --

14 MS. KORNER: About this.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: -- About this incident.

16 MS. KORNER: Yes. And again I say it's irrelevant whether he knew

17 or didn't know.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I see you standing, Madam Fauveau.

19 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. You

20 are -- you interpreted my question quite correctly. And in fact, I didn't

21 continue to pursue this line of questioning because the witness replied

22 no. I don't really see how Ms. Korner can say that it is a question which

23 is not relevant since if the witness knew anything about this incident, he

24 could have told us what the working methods of the AID were. And as

25 Ms. Korner says, there are many documents which come from the AID which we

Page 5938

1 contest.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: Given the situation or the picture as it emerges,

3 Mr. Ackerman, what's your position? Are you going to proceed with

4 questioning the witness on this document, or are you going to limit it to

5 the -- to some other simple question without the need of having to refer

6 or -- to this document or bring it -- or seek to bring it in evidence --

7 tender it in evidence?

8 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, what I want to do at this stage --

9 JUDGE AGIUS: I'll explain to you why. Because if you see that

10 you are not going to get anything from the witness on this document, we

11 will visit the problem when it comes to the evidence that will be tendered

12 by the -- by the Defence.

13 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I'm not finished with Mr. Zijad Ibric,

14 so any judgement made about whether this is relevant or not, based on the

15 proposition that I am finished with Zijad Ibric would be incorrect.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know whether you are or not.

17 MR. ACKERMAN: What I suggest to you is that we defer whether or

18 not this document is admissible until I've finished my cross-examination

19 and then perhaps you'll see that it is.

20 The question, of course, has to do with this witness's association

21 with and working with Zijad Ibric who this piece of transcript shows may

22 very well have forged the signature of a witness to a statement.

23 Ms. Korner tells you that witness was protected. But you will see if you

24 look at the statement that his name is openly mentioned throughout the

25 testimony. So if he was protected, at least his name was not protected.

Page 5939

1 And Ms. Korner says you don't have to read it. And of course you

2 do. I mean, if you're going to determine its admissibility, you do have

3 to read it.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: I will read it for sure. You can rest assured.

5 MR. ACKERMAN: And I think the best thing is to wait until I have

6 finished all the questions I'm going to ask him about Ibric and all the

7 things I'm going to do about Ibric before I then submit it --

8 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I better make this absolutely clear.

9 Your Honour said, "Are you going to ask the witness about it?" I object

10 to the witness being asked about testimony in other cases.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: No. No. What I suggested was asking the witness

12 questions that may actually originate from here but without making it

13 explicit that he's being asked or without reading out to him or without

14 having in evidence the transcript of proceedings in another case. I

15 mean, he could -- for example, what Madam Fauveau was seeking was to ask

16 the witness whether he knew a certain person, first; and secondly, whether

17 he knew that the signature of that certain person had been forged or

18 something like that.

19 MS. KORNER: No, that's not what she asked.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: No. What she --

21 MS. KORNER: She asked --

22 JUDGE AGIUS: She didn't ask the question. She was seeking to

23 ask --

24 MS. KORNER: She was seeking to ask, Your Honour - I know

25 she'll correct me if I'm wrong - not whether the witness whose signature

Page 5940

1 was forged knew about it. She was seeking to ask whether --

2 JUDGE AGIUS: The witness knew.

3 MS. KORNER: -- the witness knew that there had been an allegation

4 made in the Kvoca case that he, Mr. Ibric, had forged somebody's

5 signature. That's what she asked.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: No. You are right.

7 MS. KORNER: It's objectionable on any grounds, because it's

8 irrelevant. If the question had been phrased "At the time when you were

9 collecting evidence together with Mr. Ibric or taking statements, were you

10 aware -- did you know that he was in the habit of forging signatures,"

11 fine. Although, there's no evidence of that. But nonetheless, the way it

12 was phrased was objectionable.

13 And I see both counsel on their feet. They'll have a chance when

14 I'm finished.

15 What I'm saying is this is not a proper way of getting this sort

16 of evidence in. And certainly the admission of a transcript of an

17 examination and cross-examination of a graphologist relating to a

18 statement not before this Court -- to a witness not before this Court is

19 irrelevant and objectionable.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Ackerman first -- or rather, I would give

21 the floor to Madam Fauveau, because obviously her remark would be shorter

22 and related only to --

23 Yes, Madam Fauveau.

24 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I still

25 don't understand the objection raised by Mrs. Korner. My question was

Page 5941

1 exactly what you said and what Mrs. Korner said. It's not a witness who

2 has no relation to this Tribunal. It's a witness who has been cooperating

3 with this Tribunal for years. And it concerns a trial which has a direct

4 connection with the investigations carried out by this witness in Bosnia

5 and also a connection with the trial that is being conducted here. And I

6 can't ask this witness whether the signature of the person in question is

7 false or not because I have no evidence with regard to this. The only

8 thing that I can ask is what I did ask, whether -- when in his contact

9 with the Prosecutor or with others, was he -- did he hear that there was

10 an allegation about a signature on a document from AID, an allegation that

11 this was a false signature. And I don't see why this should be

12 inappropriate in this hearing.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: There is a very simple approach to it. You asked

14 the witness with regard to the documents that he has been shown where

15 there are three signatures -- his own, the AID man - I forgot his name -

16 and the person making the statement -- whether that person put his

17 signature in his presence. And that would bring everything to an end.

18 Mr. Ackerman, with regard to those three documents -- or two

19 documents.

20 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, one of the names that I asked this

21 witness today if he recalled was the name of the witness whose name --

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I know. I remember that.

23 MR. ACKERMAN: -- you see in here.


25 MR. ACKERMAN: And I have information that he was involved in the

Page 5942

1 taking of that statement and that his signature appears on it.

2 The problem is this: The report of the expert and the forged

3 document are missing from the records of this court. We tried to get

4 them. We were told that they're gone. Now, if I were a particularly

5 paranoid --

6 JUDGE AGIUS: You were told by this Chamber that they were gone?

7 MR. ACKERMAN: We were told by the Registry that they were gone.

8 Now, if I were a particularly suspicious and paranoid individual,

9 I would wonder if that didn't happen to protect AID and Mr. Ibric. But I

10 don't --

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you mean to state that this document was ever

12 in -- amongst the documents that you tendered?

13 MR. ACKERMAN: No. No. They were exhibits in this case.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: In the Kvocka case?

15 MR. ACKERMAN: In the Kvocka case.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: What do we have to do with that? I mean -- I mean,

17 I thought you had asked Madam Registrar to give you this document --

18 MR. ACKERMAN:. No, no, no. I'm not suggesting you had anything

19 to do with it. We were trying to confirm what we heard about this

20 witness's signature also appearing on the document, and we wanted to look

21 at the actual report of the witness so we could be a little bit more

22 precise about what we're doing here. And we're told those documents are

23 all missing. And that's the word I think that was used, isn't it, that

24 they were missing? It's missing.

25 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. I could even add that

Page 5943

1 the document in question is D28/4 and D29/4 in the Kvocka case.

2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we've run over time, in any event.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, we have.

4 MS. KORNER: So we'll have to -- I've made my objection. And

5 Mr. Ackerman says he wants to deal with it at the end of his

6 cross-examination, so let's leave it at that.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I think that --

8 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, may I just very quickly just ask --

9 we're just finishing off the protective measures motion for the rest of

10 the witnesses. It will run over. The page limit is ten pages for a

11 motion. Can we -- it's so obvious. Your Honours asked us to do it. Can

12 we have leave --

13 JUDGE AGIUS: It's necessary. If it's necessary, you have our

14 consent -- our authorisation straight away.

15 MS. KORNER: All right. And Your Honour while I'm here -- and

16 finally very quickly, in relation to Rule 92 for Sanski Most, the two

17 witnesses who Your Honour ruled that --


19 MS. KORNER: -- need to be brought for cross-examination, no

20 protective measures - that's Mr. Kurbegovic and Mr. Seferovic - we're not

21 going to extend the life of the Sanski Most thing by calling them, so

22 we're not going to call them.


24 MS. KORNER: And that's -- in respect of Mr. Mayhew, we're

25 going to see what the cross-examination in respect of Mr. MacLeod is like

Page 5944

1 before we decide.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you. My apologies --

3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I wonder if you've ordered that they

4 be brought here by cross-examination, is it up to the Prosecutor whether

5 to comply with that order or not?

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Pardon?

7 MR. ACKERMAN: If you've ordered that these witnesses be brought

8 here for cross-examination, is it the Prosecutor's decision as to whether

9 or not to comply with your order?

10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour -- we're going to get slaughtered by the

11 Samac case, but Your Honour, in fact we asked -- we said we want to put

12 the evidence in under Rule 92 and we didn't want to call them. Your

13 Honours said no, if we want to put them in under Rule 92, we have to have

14 them here for cross-examination. We're saying --

15 JUDGE AGIUS: No. I don't think you need to explain.

16 MS. KORNER: Right.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Because it's -- to me, it's very clear. That's why

18 I asked Mr. Ackerman to repeat the question.

19 MR. ACKERMAN: It's too late in the day. I'm sorry. I shouldn't

20 have even raised it.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.

22 So my apologies again to the technical staff and to the

23 interpreters. You've been most kind. I thank you.

24 Tomorrow morning at 9.00.

25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned

Page 5945

1 at 1.51 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday,

2 the 23rd day of May, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.