1 Thursday, 16 January 2003
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Case number IT-98-29-T, the Prosecutor versus
7 Stanislav Galic.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
9 The Chamber owes a decision to the Prosecution. The Prosecution
10 has requested to reconsider the time available for the Prosecution for
11 cross-examination of Witness DP35. The Chamber will grant to a very
12 limited extent the request. That means that the Prosecutor -- the
13 Prosecution has another 20 minutes net time for cross-examination. "Net
14 time" means that interruptions, whatever, will not be part of those 20
15 minutes. So 20 minutes effective time for further cross-examination.
16 Among others, the Chamber has taken into consideration the
17 efficiency of the time -- the efficiency with which the time available was
18 used. The Chamber has in mind, for example, that coming to the rhythm of
19 firing of a 40-millimetre weapon, it might have not taken half an hour to
20 get there through 20, 30, and then finally 40-millimetre.
21 The Chamber also has taken into consideration that the
22 presentation of the Prosecutor's case primarily should take place during
23 the first part of the trial. And of course, the Prosecution is entitled,
24 just as the Defence was, to take advantage of Rule 90(H) in order to
25 present relevant parts of its own case if one can expect that a witness
1 has knowledge of it, but that would not justify a firm expectation of what
2 can be expected from the other party in respect of calling witnesses. If
3 they are called, Rule 90(H) applies. If they're finally not called, the
4 Prosecution will have to rely on time available for the case presentation
5 at the beginning of the trial.
6 The Chamber has granted extra time in respect of Witness DP35
7 already because the Chamber sees that this witness is not without
8 importance for the Prosecution. It grants another 20 minutes, and then
9 we'll move on.
10 Mr. Usher, could you please escort Witness DP35 into the
12 [The witness entered court]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. DP35.
14 THE WITNESS: Good morning.
15 JUDGE ORIE: May I remind you that you're still bound by the
16 solemn declaration you've given at the beginning of your testimony.
17 THE WITNESS: [No audible response]
18 JUDGE ORIE: The cross-examination by counsel will now continue.
19 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
20 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 WITNESS: WITNESS DP35 [Resumed]
22 [Witness answered through interpreter]
23 Cross-examined by Mr. Ierace: [Continued]
24 Q. Sir, you have told us that vehicles in military and vehicles for
25 which you had reason to believe they were carrying weapons or explosives
1 were legitimate targets. Were there any other types of vehicles that were
2 legitimate targets? And I'm talking about cars.
3 A. I stressed that these vehicles were field vehicles or lorries.
4 This was not about larger-type vehicles, at least in the area that I was
5 able to follow it in in those directions. There were no light vehicles.
6 There were no passenger cars, passenger vehicles.
7 Q. You've told us that you were responsible for the anti-aircraft
8 weaponry and training of the crews of those weapons. What would be your
9 attitude towards those crews targeting any car in the city on the other
10 side of the confrontation lines? Do you think that appropriate or
12 A. I would think it inappropriate, and I have already stressed that
13 they were not in a possibility to fire on the town in the urban, in the
14 densely populated part of town.
15 Q. Yesterday you told us in some detail about the types of rounds
16 that could be fired by anti-aircraft weaponry and in particular how 90 per
17 cent of those rounds were of the explosive type, so that once fired they
18 would inevitably explode. Do you agree that if such fire was directed
19 indiscriminately into the city, it would terrorise the civilian
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I have to object. I have to
24 object in the way that the question was phrased. It seems to confirm that
25 the troops would have been firing at the town in an indiscriminate
1 fashion. And the position of this witness was completely the opposite.
2 So it's in the contradiction to the previous testimony of the witness.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
4 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I invite you to read the question, and
5 especially the use of the word "if." To me it quite clearly contemplates
6 a hypothetical situation.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The -- in cross-examination it is permissible
8 to raise a situation, even if this does not reflect entirely the testimony
9 of the witness until that moment.
10 Please proceed.
11 So would you please answer that question that if such rounds that
12 would necessarily explode before -- if that would be fired to the city,
13 that this would terrorise the civilian population.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can. I have stressed that we
15 did not fire from three barrels but from two. We didn't use long bursts
16 of fire but short bursts of fire or single-mode fire. So the priority
17 when opening fire was efficiency, effectiveness, and saving of ammunition.
18 So it would be completely pointless for me to allow units or sections to
19 open fire in an indiscriminate fashion, unselectively. So I am answering
20 your question that I did not allow it and I was not in a position to
21 open -- or to follow such inselective fire.
22 MR. IERACE:
23 Q. You misunderstand my question. If there had been indiscriminate
24 use of those weapons, if they had been fired across the city
25 indiscriminately, do you accept that in that circumstance inevitably such
1 firing would terrorise the civilian population of Sarajevo; yes or no?
2 A. That would have caused the terrorising of the population, but we
3 did not do this.
4 Q. All right. Now, you told us earlier in your evidence that you
5 received protests passed on through the liaison officer of the SRK. Was
6 that Major Indjic?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Did those protests relate to civilians being targeted?
9 A. I stressed those cases for which I knew and described in my
10 statements, and in any case there were also cases where there was the
11 allegation that civilians were targeted. But these cases were not within
12 the -- my authority in the work of the command, so I could have been
13 informed about this but I did not discuss them.
14 Q. If you are able to answer my questions with a simple yes or no,
15 then please do so. We don't have a lot of time.
16 Did Major Indjic attend the meetings you have described at the
17 operations centre on a daily basis that you attended with General Galic
18 and other senior subordinates; yes or no?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You told us about a particular protest which involved a UN
21 officer, and I think you said his name was Kolp; is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. You said that Kolp expressed gratitude for the investigation
24 carried out by the SRK in relation to that particular incident. Was that
25 relationship with Kolp typical of the relationship that the SRK enjoyed
1 with UNPROFOR in relation to protests?
2 A. This is one case. I believe that there were more than one, but I
3 cannot guarantee if I wasn't present whether there was satisfaction
4 expressed or gratitude by the UNPROFOR members.
5 Q. But you attended these daily senior meetings which reviewed
6 operations. As far as you're aware, was there a good relationship between
7 UNPROFOR and the SRK command in relation to protests or not?
8 A. I think that there was good cooperation and a good relationship.
9 Q. Now, you were asked by Mr. Piletta-Zanin whether protests included
10 such precise information as the exact locations of alleged victims, and
11 you said that the protests did not. Did that cause any difficulty for the
12 SRK in carrying out its investigations; yes or no?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Why, then, in view of the good relationship did the relevant SRK
15 personnel simply not ask UNPROFOR for the relevant further information?
16 A. Further information was requested, but in most of the cases it had
17 to -- things had to happen very quickly to reach a conclusion very quickly
18 about what had really happened, and that's why there were problems. If
19 there was a very wide area that was given, it was very difficult to decide
20 on a precise location and about what victims, exactly where, and as to
21 what was said to the representative of the defence.
22 Q. All right. Now, who was it in the SRK who primarily dealt with
23 UNPROFOR in relation to protests? Was it Indjic?
24 A. Yes. Yes, with his associates.
25 Q. Are you aware of any reason as to why he and his associates could
1 have not requested that further information when first informed of the
3 A. There was no reason not to request further information.
4 Q. All right. Now, did General Galic ever in the relevant period
5 tell you that he had personally received a protest involving civilian
6 victims from UNPROFOR?
7 A. I wouldn't say that he had directly received it, but again,
8 protests went through the office of the liaison officer, and they were
9 forwarded to General Galic, that is, to the operation centre.
10 Q. Please listen to the question. I'm not asking you what typically
11 happened. I'm asking you whether General Galic ever told you in the
12 relevant period that he had personally received a protest involving
13 civilian victims from UNPROFOR. Yes or no?
14 A. No. No.
15 Q. Now, you told us that reports were generated as a result of these
16 investigations. You said the reports were forwarded to the main staff of
17 the VRS. Is that correct?
18 A. Those reports -- yes. Yes, they were. They were forwarded, yes.
19 Q. Would you expect those reports to be with the archive of the SRK?
20 A. Parts of the reports that were to be found in daily combat
21 reports -- so these were summaries of parts of reports that were done by
22 the liaison officer -- were in any case in daily combat reports, as this
23 was the case yesterday, the one where we discussed item number 8.
24 Q. Do you mean by that that there were not separate reports in
25 relation to these investigations but, rather, references to them in the
1 combat reports? Is that what you mean?
2 A. No. A separate report went along the route through the liaison
3 officer with UNPROFOR, and this is the line that the detailed report
4 followed. But a summarised, shortened version of a report was put as an
5 item within the daily combat report entitled "Relationship with UNPROFOR."
6 Q. All right. So you do mean that there were not separate reports
7 that went to the main staff but, rather, references to the reports
8 incorporated in the daily combat report. Is that correct? Yes or no?
9 A. No. What I wanted to say is what I said, that following the line
10 of the office of the liaison officer, those reports went to the main staff
11 because it was in the main staff that the liaison officer was. And along
12 that line he was superior to Indjic. Indjic did that report for that
13 officer in the main staff and also --
14 Q. -- Do you know where those reports are today; yes or no?
15 A. No.
16 Q. You tell us that reports went to UNPROFOR. Were they written
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. I suggest to you that is incorrect, that written reports in
20 relation to such protests were not given to UNPROFOR. What do you say to
22 A. I am convinced that they did go. You probably have different
24 Q. Now, are you aware of anyone, anyone at all being charged as a
25 result of an investigation carried out within the SRK in the relevant
1 period for unlawful behaviour resulting in the injury or death of
2 civilians on the other side of the confrontation line; yes or no?
3 A. No.
4 Q. I want to know whether any of these protests that were received
5 alleged anti-aircraft fire into the city. And I appreciate you have
6 already told us that your weapons could not reach the city on the other
7 side. Nevertheless, were there such protests?
8 A. No.
9 Q. I suggest to you that there were.
10 A. Give me an example, please. Explain.
11 Q. I suggest to you that throughout the relevant period protests were
12 made by UNPROFOR which involved the use of anti-aircraft fire into the
13 city. Do you agree or disagree?
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the witness has
15 already answered the question very clearly, asking the Prosecution to give
16 an example.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's exactly that answer that permits the
18 Prosecution to ask it again.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. IERACE:
21 Q. Do you agree or disagree?
22 A. No.
23 Q. I suggest to you that the state hospital was a regular recipient
24 of anti-aircraft fire from the area of Vrace in the relevant period.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, here -- no, no
2 the chronology -- I withdraw.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
4 MR. IERACE:
5 Q. Do you agree or disagree?
6 A. I don't agree. This is the first time I hear that the state
7 hospital was targeted from Vrace. Yes, it was within the range, but we
8 never even saw the hospital, if, that is, you're talking about Kosevo
9 hospital, we never even saw the Kosevo hospital from Vrace.
10 Q. Your positions on the map, I suggest to you, from the
11 anti-aircraft --
12 JUDGE ORIE: May I just interrupt you, Mr. Ierace.
13 MR. IERACE: I understand, Mr. President, yes, Kosevo.
14 JUDGE ORIE: There seems to be a confusion as to what hospital.
15 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.
16 Q. My question is directed to the state hospital, not the Kosevo
17 hospital. Are you aware of the existence in the relevant period of the
18 state hospital? Previously known as the military hospital, sometimes
19 known as the French hospital.
20 A. Now I understand. Yes, it is the military hospital. The military
21 hospital could be within the range, but it could not be seen from any
22 Vrace position or any other position on this side, as I showed you on the
24 Q. I suggest to you that that answer and indeed the positions you
25 marked on the map are the anti-aircraft units mean little in view of the
1 inherent mobility of those units. In other words, they could be very
2 easily moved around. What do you say to that?
3 A. Yes. They could move about, but they were obstacles which
4 prevented it from firing at -- rather, hitting the state hospital.
5 Q. I see. Now, on Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve 1992, where were
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we need
8 chronological precision. We need this to be stated more precisely
9 chronologically. Shall I repeat that?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand. But Christmas Eve 1992, I
11 take it that's the 24th or 25th at night. Is that what you --
12 Oh, yes, yes. I do understand. I apologise. Christmas is not a
13 unambiguous expression in this respect, Mr. Ierace.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
15 MR. IERACE:
16 Q. In relation to Serbian Orthodox New Year's Eve 1992, where were
18 A. In Mostar.
19 Q. In relation to the 24th of December, 1992, where were you?
20 A. 1992? On Trebevic.
21 Q. On Christmas Eve, according to the Serbian Orthodox calendar in
22 1992, where were you?
23 A. 1992? I told you. I was in Mostar. And for Christmas, the
24 Catholic Christmas, on the 24th of December, I was in Trebevic.
25 Q. I suggest to you that on Christmas Eve, 24th of December, on the
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 stroke of midnight there was a barrage lasting some 20 minutes of
2 artillery, mortar, tank, and machine-gun fire into the city, including the
3 firing of a 40-millimetre Bofor anti-aircraft gun. What do you say to
5 A. I cannot answer that because I did not discuss this case, whether
6 a 40-millimetre fired. Then it was done beyond my control without my
8 Q. -- From Trebevic, you would have heard it, wouldn't you?
9 A. Yes, that is right.
10 Q. And in your absence at Mostar, on the other two evenings, I
11 suggest to you exactly the same behaviour occurred and it could not have
12 occurred without you knowing about it. Do you agree?
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I think there is some
15 confusion. I believe there is some confusion again. If we're talking
16 about 1992 January and the witness's stay in Mostar.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Let's perhaps put it in a different way to the
19 Mr. DP35, are you aware of an event approximately 20 minutes of
20 artillery, mortar, tank, and machine-gun fire on either Orthodox or
21 Catholic Christmas or New Year's Eve --
22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, including anti-aircraft fire.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Including anti-aircraft fire. So does such a
24 barrage - I'm asking for 20 minutes at one of these days - ring a bell to
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It can ring a bell, but now I cannot
2 associate that event with any special importance. I do not see why it was
3 so important. I was on Trebevic at the time under the regiment command
4 post, and I was given no warning that there was any fire opened or that
5 the firing was done by a unit under my command.
6 JUDGE ORIE: We're talking about -- we are talking about a barrage
7 that lasted some 20 minutes and a large number of weaponry firing
8 approximately at the same time for 20 minutes. Do you have any
9 recollection that such a thing happened? Whether it was important in your
10 view or not is a different matter, but did such a thing happen?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I do not recall.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] We have two small objections.
16 We have -- we are keeping our eye on the clock, and it is now already more
17 than --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I said net time.
19 Please proceed.
20 Yes. The second issue you wanted --
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, that is it. I think that
22 the time has expired.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, please proceed.
24 MR. IERACE:
25 Q. Sir, I suggest to you that throughout the relevant period
1 anti-aircraft fire deliberately or recklessly fired at civilians in
2 Sarajevo on the other side of the confrontation line. What do you say
3 about that?
4 A. I do not agree.
5 Q. You've told us that you moved around the area as well as spending
6 time in the operations centre. Did you not see erected throughout the
7 city barricades at intersections consisting of containers, blankets,
8 sheets and the like?
9 A. No.
10 Q. You never saw that?
11 A. On the opposite side, no. I saw them on our side.
12 Q. Were you aware of the existence of such barricades at any stage
13 through the relevant period?
14 A. I knew about their existence, but I could not see them on the
15 Muslim side. On our side they existed, yes.
16 Q. Are you telling us that you knew about their existence on the
17 other side of the confrontation line during that time?
18 A. Well, one could see them only along the Miljacka, that is, right
19 next to the confrontation line.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, could I ask you to conclude in one or two
22 MR. IERACE: That will cover it, Mr. President. Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any need for the Defence to re-examine the
24 witness? Please proceed.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you,
1 Mr. President.
2 Re-examined by Mr. Piletta-Zanin:
3 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, good morning. I'd like to go back to
4 what you just said.
5 THE INTERPRETER: And will the counsel please speak into the
7 Q. There was a lot of talk about protests which were made, and there
8 were such questions yesterday. And today I'd like to suggest to you the
9 following -- we shall have read out names which are presumably all
10 civilian, and then my question will be: Have you ever seen these names in
11 any protest whatever? I will now read them now, and if any of those names
12 rings a bell, you will please tell us so.
13 [redacted], Anisa Pita --
14 MR. IERACE: Mr. President.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
16 MR. IERACE: If those names relate to the indictment, I'd ask my
17 learned colleague to be sure that he doesn't offend any protective orders
18 in relation to the names.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But before continuing, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
20 Mr. DP35, have you any knowledge or is -- do you have any
21 recollection in respect of names of civilian victims or --
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the Muslim side, you mean? No.
23 JUDGE ORIE: You have -- no.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, that answer all the questions.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
2 Q. When you spoke about protests, witness, the question that we'll
3 ask in this relation - I never said it precisely - whether those were
4 general protests concerning alleged illegitimate shelling or quite the
5 contrary, if these protests were general or specific concerning sniping,
6 the protests that -- the rare protests which are mentioned in your answer,
7 did they concern the protests concerning shelling or something else?
8 A. Can I? I've already mentioned the specific case of the fire
9 opened at the tower. There it was precisely said what had been hit. And
10 it was also pointed out, and I said, that it was the rocket launcher. And
11 on my position there were no rocket launcher, so I said that that was not
12 the case.
13 I also mentioned the shelling of Dobrinja. The checking was done,
14 and it was completed as I have pointed out.
15 There was general reference to Markale, but there was no specific
16 location. The number of casualties ranged between a few to several
17 dozens. I know. I remember that.
18 Through the liaison officer, cooperation was offered with the
19 opposite side to investigate the case, but in that case we did not receive
20 an answer in the affirmative, and personally I was not concerned with this
21 because my men could not participate in this, that is, my men and the
22 subordinate units, but those associates of mine who were to take part in
23 this and who stood ready to do that did not because their cooperation was
24 not accepted in order to establish the facts. I presume somebody didn't
25 really want to have the truth properly established.
1 Q. Thank you, witness. I'd like us now to try to synthesise,
2 therefore, the examples you gave us, and possibly since I said that you
3 are a witness concerned mostly shellings. Is that how I should understand
4 your testimony? They mostly had to do with shellings?
5 A. Yes. Yes. By and large those were shellings, or perhaps the use
6 of rocket launchers.
7 Q. Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Witness, when
8 investigations were conducted, you told us that they had to be conducted
9 under wartime conditions. Could you give us some details concerning the
10 manner in which those investigations were conducted. How did this happen?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.
12 MR. IERACE: That does not arise out of cross-examination. I
13 didn't get to that topic.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] This does arise from
15 cross-examination because the witness said that when -- that it was very
16 difficult to do this because the time was limited. It was a wartime
17 situation, that one needed to try to establish the facts straight away.
18 So it does arise from the cross-examination.
19 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, no question was asked of this witness
20 in cross-examination about the modus of the investigations.
21 JUDGE ORIE: No. But a question was asked whether the lack of
22 data was any --
23 MR. IERACE: Impediment.
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- Impediment to the investigation. To that extent
25 the Defence is allowed to ask to a limited extent questions on this issue.
1 MR. IERACE: As you please, Mr. President.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
3 Q. Witness, could you give us some details. How did you go about
4 this? Was it always possible to do it? And so on and so forth, if you
5 know it.
6 A. I said in case of the Butmir sports air field, it was not in
7 dispute, because there were those positions from which it could be fired
8 at from our side, so that UNPROFOR officers and senior officers could go
9 there safely in our presence, in my presence, and escorted by the unit
10 that was there. It was more difficult to go to the opposite side. I
11 mean, for our representatives, even with guarantees, because UNPROFOR was
12 unable to ensure the safe conduct for our representatives to that side in
13 order to check particular sites. And I suppose that was why our men were
14 not incorporated in the investigation either in Dobrinja or in Markale.
15 Q. Witness, in this particular last case, was it very difficult to
16 investigate the latest element, that is, the fact that it was impossible
17 to go check the site? Did it make it very difficult to establish facts?
18 A. That was one of the reasons why things remained salient.
19 Although, there are certain things which confirm what I said earlier;
20 namely, that the accusations were false.
21 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, now I'd like us to focus on another
22 matter and that is a document which we looked at yesterday, the order
23 which came from General Galic and whose item 3 was general instruction to
24 observe to comply with the Geneva Conventions. Do you remember this
25 document? It was 1491 -- no, excuse me, 1492. And this is a document
1 which you had the opportunity to read yesterday. Do you recall that
2 document, and could that document be given you once again. 1492.
3 THE REGISTRAR: This document is now under seal.
4 JUDGE ORIE: The document should not be put on -- placed on the
5 ELMO, yes.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Well, but we can -- we can
7 indeed -- we can deal with it without putting it on the ELMO because I
8 think we all recall this document. I need the witness to have it before
9 his eyes. It does not have to be put on the ELMO.
10 Q. Just to ascertain that we're talking about the same document,
11 witness, I'm referring to item 3. However, before that, before that I'd
12 like you to read aloud the items 1 and 2. Can you do that, please.
13 A. Item 1: "Enable unfettered passage and protection of parcels,
14 equipment, and personnel, extending help to the civilian population of the
15 opposite side."
16 2: "Prohibit the misuse for military purposes of foodstuffs,
17 crop, water mains, and reserve drinking water, and dams in hydro
19 Item 3 --
20 Q. Thank you. And now will you please be so kind as to read the
22 A. "The order for an unfettered passage of humanitarian relief to all
23 units of SRK on the basis of the directive, doesn't really matter, 1993,
24 order of the main staff of the Army of Republika Srpska under the
25 indicated number in order to maintain to support the signed cease-fire
1 from our side and consistent implementation of the directive as --" and
2 then follows the text that I have just read.
3 Q. Thank you, witness. Yesterday you said in relation to item 3 that
4 you'd rather not comment on this item. Can you tell us why did you give
5 that answer.
6 MR. IERACE: I object, Mr. President. In fact, the witness said
7 that during examination-in-chief. And in essence, my friend has just
8 re-asked the question that I asked the witness yesterday. So this is not
9 a proper question for re-examination.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, with your
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The Prosecutor has, following
15 the answers of the witness, asked a number of questions of the witness in
16 order to find out whether the witness knew or did not know what was in
17 these documents and to show that this witness, like the other officers who
18 were under him, were aware of this, and that is why we believe the Defence
19 has the right to ask these questions of the witness and that is why we ask
20 him to read them. And what I am reading was the work which was done by
21 the Prosecution during the cross-examination, and I'm asking the witness
22 because he declined to give the answer to that, and therefore, I'm trying
23 to clarify it.
24 MR. IERACE: Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. IERACE: If I could. My friend, with respect, misses the
2 point. It was during his questioning of this witness that the witness
3 said he could not comment on point 3. If my friend wanted to find out why
4 he could not comment, he could have done that in chief. The question he
5 has just asked the witness is one that I asked in cross-examination. It
6 is inappropriate in re-examination, secondly, to simply re-ask the same
7 questions asked in cross-examination.
8 JUDGE ORIE: One of my problems is - and that might be the problem
9 for the parties as well - that we have not in this courtroom the
10 transcript available of what happened yesterday. So if one of the parties
11 could provide me with the relevant -- it has been loaded this morning. So
12 I am, as always, behind.
13 It was asked to the witness in chief yesterday, Mr. -- The day
14 before yesterday.
15 MR. IERACE: The day before yesterday. And I have copy of that.
16 JUDGE ORIE: If you could please provide that -- the relevant
18 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
19 JUDGE ORIE: I'm informed that we have the day before yesterday as
20 well. I should first open that.
21 Could you please point at the -- at the page number, Mr. Ierace.
22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, as I printed it off yesterday, it was
23 page 59 of the draft LiveNote. This is for the 14th of January. The time
24 was approximately 11.59.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'll do a search in the transcript.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 MR. IERACE: Perhaps the word "comment."
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's what I had in mind.
3 The witness responded to a question of you, Mr. Piletta-Zanin,
4 that he could not comment on it. So the reasons why he could not comment
5 on it could have been asked by you at that very moment. The witness gave
6 extensive information on the circumstances of the documents, so the issue
7 on whether or not the witness could comment on it and the further
8 elaboration of that do not arise from cross-examination but from the
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Gladly, Mr. President. Very
13 Q. Witness, after you said that you would rather not comment, the
14 Prosecution asked you some questions concerning this item 3. And I am
15 referring now to the question asked by the Prosecution which had to do
16 with this item 3. You stated in response to these questions that in your
17 opinion, you would have judged it useless to redact, to redraft this item
18 3. Is that what you said?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Thank you. Would you please explain to the Chamber why did you
21 say that.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.
23 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I don't have an electronic copy of
24 the -- or any copy of the transcript from yesterday because of the change
25 of courtroom.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I'll search for the -- they have been loaded this
3 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. I simply don't recollect
4 any comment by the witness that he thought it pointless to redraft the
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's not my recollection either. I think the
7 word -- there might have been things useless but not redrafting. At least
8 that's not my recollection. But if you could indicate where to find that,
9 Mr. -- I think the witness testified yesterday that he would have drafted
10 the order in a different way.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm asking the
12 witness, and the witness said yes. I've just asked the question, and the
13 witness has said yes. So I think that his best place to --
14 JUDGE ORIE: I think it's a matter of -- the objection of
15 Mr. Ierace was that you misrepresented the evidence, and the usual way of
16 solving such a problem is to look at the transcript. And if you think
17 that the transcript is not correct in this respect - and I was just trying
18 to search for it - then of course we always called --
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, may I ask the
22 Prosecution according to the usual rule to quote the passage where the
23 witness did not say this, since --
24 JUDGE ORIE: You can't quote a passage if someone does not say it.
25 If there's an objection, you should refer to the place where --
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I agree with you,
2 Mr. President. This is rather hard. What I wanted to ask him is to quote
3 the passage, but I will do it differently. Thank you.
4 Q. Witness, what did you say, please, yesterday in relation to the
5 need or lack of need to do in relation to item 3? Can you remind us of
7 A. I said that I would not have put in, written, item 3 because the
8 subordinate units, that is, the commanders from the subordinate units, do
9 not have time to study in detail -- to remind themselves of the decisions
10 or certain parts of the Geneva Conventions, particularly if this is in
11 relation to implementing the task or carrying out the tasks which are
12 completely clear, both in item 1 and item 2, that are unambiguous. So
13 what I said is that there was no possibility for us not even to carry the
14 most basic rules in documents let alone any expanded rules. So I'd like
15 to add to my answer in the following way, because I've thought about it,
16 and I know what I said: That on several occasions when there was time,
17 there were certain parts that were forwarded that are important, relate to
18 war conflicts, important for the subordinate units, and I know this did
19 figure. So what I am saying: Regardless of how much I knew things by
20 heart - and of course, you cannot know things by heart without having
21 these documents, Geneva Conventions in your hands, or even certain
22 parts - what I'm saying is that the introductory part from the order which
23 refers to the Presidency and the main staff, that was enough for me, that
24 this was written by a certain category of people who are literate and they
25 know what they're referring to. They're referring to the Geneva
1 Conventions. Therefore -- that's what I said. It's for subordinate
2 units. What would have been enough were items 1 and 2, not that item 3
3 was completely superfluous. Items 1 and 2 are sufficient. Item 3 is not
4 completely superfluous. But what I said is not that we didn't understand
5 it. What I'm saying is that it wasn't necessary to study it as such, to
6 go into details.
7 Q. Thank you, witness. Now, what have you to say about the knowledge
8 that the other officers had or did not have in relation to the conventions
9 mentioned in item 3 -- and that in the course of cross-examination. Now,
10 in relation to that, the question is the followings -- I'm not talking
11 about the details, about the word-for-word recollection of the convention.
12 But the essence, the essence of the convention that was mentioned in item
13 3, is it known to you? Are you familiar with it? And did other officers
14 in the corps know about this? Did they know it?
15 A. Generally it was known.
16 Q. What do you mean by "generally"?
17 A. What I mean by "generally" is what is known that was implemented.
18 That is, that it is important to prevent civilian casualties, civilian
19 victims, that it is prohibited to prevent humanitarian aid from passing
20 through, no matter which side it comes. Then what is important to save
21 the wounded, whether they were regardless or whether they were civilians
22 or military. So that's what I'm saying generally speaking, globally
23 speaking, how to behave with prisoners, and so on.
24 Q. Thank you. And the answer that you are giving, since we asked you
25 about the corps and other officers, in your opinion what about other
1 officers? Did they know it?
2 A. Generally, yes.
3 Q. Thank you, witness. Now I'd like us to -- no, there is one more
4 question in relation to this, in relation to the knowledge. Do you know
5 if the documents, specific documents in relation to Geneva Conventions,
6 were given by the military hierarchy to the officers in question precisely
7 on the level of the brigade? And if so, which ones? That is, technical
8 documents and so on.
9 A. In the brigades in operation centre, in their operation centres,
10 there were short excerpts from there, or that is, instructions, which were
11 in relation to the humanitarian side of things, in relation to the Geneva
12 Conventions. So the main duties of certain levels of command, and those
13 who were involved in combat operations, what the positions were. That was
14 specifically for prisoners and for wounded soldiers of the other side.
15 Q. Witness, can you simply tell us -- I have seen you handle a piece
16 of paper on your desk. Can you tell us, how was this summary technically
17 made? I'm talking about the situation and the troops. Was there
18 something that was very voluminous or was it something that was easy to
19 handle and take around with you, in terms of the volume of the material of
20 the documents?
21 A. The excerpt that could be -- that could fit onto one or two pages
22 and give the most important instances, situations in relation to the
23 conventions - now I cannot recall which exact items these were because I
24 don't have the conventions before me or this kind of summary, this kind of
25 memo - this is what it was: It was a kind of things to remember.
1 Q. Thank you, witness. Now we can go on to another subject, and this
2 is the subject that I'm interested in in relation to the crossing of the
3 airport. The first question, generally put, may seem strange to you, but
4 did it snow in Sarajevo; yes or no? In general. Generally speaking. And
5 of course in wintertime.
6 A. During the first two winters that we spoke of, the first winter
7 there was a lot of --
8 Q. No, no. I'm going to stop you. No. Just very simply. Does it
9 snow in Sarajevo as a general rule; yes or no?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, is it correct to say that if we
12 have an environment which is covered in snow, particularly at night, the
13 visibility is better if the snow reflects the light surrounding it?
14 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I object to leading.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'll withdraw the question. I
17 will rephrase it.
18 MR. IERACE: So there's no misunderstanding, I object to all
19 leading from the Defence.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I take note of that.
23 Q. You were asked the following question yesterday, and I'm going to
24 quote it as I can see it in my notes in English, therefore: [In English]
25 "What did you expect your troops to do? What did you expect your troops
1 to do if they were fired upon at night by one or more individuals from a
2 group that may include civilians [Interpretation] or several individuals?"
3 Just a minute. Just a minute. That was the question that you
4 were asked yesterday by the Prosecution. First question: If at night
5 fire is opened in wartime situation - so we are -- this is a hypothetical
6 question we're talking about - and the soldier on whom the fire is opened,
7 what can he think or what should he think about the type of the people who
8 opened fire on him? Were they civilians or were they military? That is
9 the first question. Did you understand the question?
10 A. Yes. Yes. He can only think that he's being attacked; and
11 therefore, he has to -- his duty to is defend himself.
12 Q. Thank you very much. So if he's defending himself in this
13 situation with firing in response, whether discriminately or
14 indiscriminately, at this level there is no importance at night.
15 A. Yes.
16 MR. IERACE: Mr. President.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Thank you very much.
19 MR. IERACE: I object to leading. My learned colleague has
20 just -- my learned colleague has just put a specific proposition to the
21 witness. That's --
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'll rephrase it.
23 MR. IERACE: -- Re-examination.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, putting a leading question to a
25 witness and upon any objection to say "I'll put it in a different way"
1 then the harm has been done. Would you please move to your next subject.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you very
4 Q. I'll go back to the question of orders that were transmitted.
5 When an officer receives an order, what is he to do? This is a basic
6 question, but I'd still like an answer.
7 A. He has to read it, study it, to understand it. If there are
8 certain things that are not clear, he has to address the superior command
9 for clarifications, either general or specific, relating to specific
10 parts. After that he has to compile an order for his own level, to whom
11 he then addresses instructions, either orally or in written form,
12 depending on the time. And in that order it is -- from that order of the
13 superior command, he has to put in his order the elements of the order
14 that are specifically relating to his unit, and he has to relate those
15 contents that are directly connected to the conditions of -- conditions of
16 the unit that is subordinate to him that will be used in combat
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm going to go
20 on to another subject which is not in relation to opening of fire but
21 which is chronologically in relation to something that -- with the
22 witness's testimony. I don't know whether I am allowed to do it, but I am
23 going to do this.
24 Q. Witness, you said yesterday in answering a question of the
25 Prosecution that when people were crossing the runway, they were possibly
1 bringing in ammunition. Do you remember that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Thank you. Can you tell us, what type of ammunition was that?
4 A. I presume this was a different type of ammunition. Primarily
5 ammunition for firing -- infantry ammunition that was possible to cross.
6 I think it was in March 1993 that a vehicle was hit that was crossing the
7 runway at night and that this vehicle exploded and the detonation lasted
8 for some time, which meant that the airport runway, under the direct
9 control of UNPROFOR representatives, explosive materials were carried. I
10 think it was in Sarajevo or around Sarajevo. In Kotorac I believe this
11 was, because -- from Donji Kotorac towards the sports airport that this
12 ammunition was carried and that the explosive was needed to more speedily
13 fortify this line. So there was ammunition that was carried and vehicles
14 were used, then also explosive materials.
15 Q. Thank you. This vehicle that exploded and that you say this
16 vehicle probably carried explosive material, can you tell us what type of
17 vehicle this was. Was this a civilian or a military vehicle? This is not
18 a leading question, I believe.
19 A. You can see it in the morning only. It was a lorry. But we could
20 only see it when it was already burnt out, so you couldn't see what colour
21 it had been, whether it had been a camouflage colour or whether it had
22 been white, blue, or red. It could not be seen because the vehicle was
23 destroyed because of the explosive materials that it was carrying. It was
24 a military vehicle in any case because it was either mobilised or it had
25 belonged to the military.
1 Q. Therefore, if you were not able to at the time of the incident
2 determine clearly to what category this vehicle belonged, were there any
3 other factual circumstances that allowed you to come to the conclusion,
4 the conclusion of your troops? And if so, which ones?
5 MR. IERACE: I object, Mr. President. This does not arise out of
6 cross-examination. The cross-examination on the topic of vehicles was
7 confined to cars and how the troops of the SRK according to the
8 understanding of the witness would determine on appearance or other
9 information the purpose of the vehicle, that is, military of civilian.
10 This goes beyond that.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, the questions of --
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, may I be heard,
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. I'm
16 going to come back to the questions asked by the Prosecution in relation
17 to private vehicles. But for the moment this witness gave quite a clear
18 precise detailed answer from which we concluded that the incident had
19 happened at night. And I believe that in relation to the question as to
20 whether it was indiscriminate or discriminate fire, we have now new
21 information, so it is now to find out how was it possible to assume or not
22 assume in relation to the implementation of the conventions, and this is
23 why this question is important to be asked of the witness.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
25 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I assume from those comments by my
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 learned colleague that he's focussing on this incident of the vehicle that
2 exploded on the runway. If that's --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's how I understood.
4 MR. IERACE: If that's the case, this goes well beyond
5 cross-examination. Cross-examination did not touch upon this particular
6 incident. The witness has already said that effectively he's relying on
7 hearsay, that as he understands it there is no indication as to the
8 appearance of the vehicle before it was fired on, in any event, it was
9 fired upon at night, and so on.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- But the vehicles in a more general way that were
12 the subject of cross-examination. Would you please keep this in mind when
13 you proceed.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. Very
15 well. Thank you.
16 Q. Witness, generally speaking, you were asked questions about
17 vehicles that seemed to be civilian vehicles. And before I ask you the
18 question that I was going to ask you, first I'll ask you another question:
19 Do you know how was fuel controlled in the period of war in the part of
20 the city of Sarajevo under the control of the BH army?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, I'm going to ask you a hypothetical
23 question: Do you know -- I won't ask any questions.
24 MR. IERACE: I think we know what the hypothetical question is
25 going to be. And it is inappropriate to be asked in re-examination of
1 this witness. Again, the issue was --
2 JUDGE ORIE: But Mr. Ierace, I do not know what the hypothetical
3 question is going to be.
4 But keep in mind, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, that if you ask a question
5 which is inappropriate, then I might ask you to move to your next subject.
6 Of course, it all depends on the question you're going to put to the
7 witness. But please keep this in mind.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. Although, I am rather
9 surprised by the apparent ability for the Prosecution to predict my
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- No need to comment on that. I think I clearly
12 expressed the Chamber waits for your question but at the same time it
13 should be clear that the question should be appropriate.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Witness, in relation to the questions of vehicles, you said, I
16 believe, that the other side had small lorries. I think you spoke of
17 2-tonne lorries, and pick-up trucks, and that they were used as weapons
18 with mortars, so used them as mobile weapons. Do you remember that?
19 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, again, I don't recall that. I could
20 be mistaken.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please indication where you find
22 this. And I will certainly assist you. I have got the computer version
23 of the transcript.
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'll go on to another subject,
25 Mr. President.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed then.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Witness, I asked you a question in relation to the archive which
4 had been housed in barracks. We spoke about it yesterday. Do you
5 remember those questions?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you. The question that I'm asking you now in relation to
8 the answer that you gave is the following: Apart from the Defence team,
9 was there a person, no matter who it was, that you would have asked at any
10 time in the 18 months that we're talking about any information and more
11 specifically to find out if the documents belonging to the SRK were
12 located in the Sokolac barracks; yes or no?
13 A. I can add something in relation to what I said yesterday. The
14 archive, as far as I know, was not in the Sokolac barracks. I know that
15 it had been prepared for Lukavica. I already said that, and I had taken
16 part in some of the preparations.
17 Q. No, witness. Please focus on the question. My question is the
18 following: Apart from the Defence team, was there anyone else, anyone
19 whosoever, who had asked you at any time if the SRK documents were located
20 in the Sokolac barracks; yes or no? As far as you recall.
21 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, that is a leading question. Again,
22 I'm not assisted by the transcript from yesterday, but I recollect that I
23 asked very broad questions of the witness to give him every opportunity to
24 indicate any contact. And in my respectful submission, there is nothing
25 arising out of that cross-examination that requires clarification of this
1 type in re-examination.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President. Mr. President,
3 it seems there is an interpretation problem, I am told. In the content of
4 the question, perhaps this is not how it came to the witness in Serbian,
5 so I'd like to stress that we are only asking two things: If there was
6 anyone else who had asked a question and if there is someone else, not
7 counting the Defence team.
8 Now, in relation to what Mr. Ierace said, I have to say that the
9 questions that were asked by Mr. Ierace were in relation to some persons
10 who were very well determined and whose name is in the transcript.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- Directly arises from cross-examination. The
13 Chamber would like to hear the answer to the question.
14 Could you please answer the question, Mr. DP35, whether anyone
15 else, during this period mentioned before, 18 months, ever asked you about
16 the archives. So apart from members of the Defence team.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand.
18 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Organs of my command with the --
20 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness slow down, please.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please slow down a bit, because the
22 interpreters have difficulties in translating what you say. Please
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, yes. So in this period,
25 just like in the previous period, the organs of the command -- certain
1 questions that were contentions, they could be linked to wartime. They
2 addressed to me, because I was practically the only one who had been left
3 of the officer cadre in the command of the current 5th Corps, and I was
4 asked if I knew anything about the archive. Yesterday I answered that I
5 had received the question by the representative of the Prosecution. I had
6 received this question, but this was a general question, and I think that
7 Milenko Radovic had been mentioned. I don't remember that man. Perhaps
8 he had been together with the commander Andric. Somebody else -- a
9 person, whether in civilian clothes or in uniform, who had been the
10 representative of our military prosecutor's office, not from the Defence
11 team, because the Defence team members did not enter the command because
12 we met outside our command, and that they may have asked the question,
13 these -- not the Defence. They didn't know anything about the archive.
14 And my answer was that I knew what had happened until the moment when it
15 was packed in Lukavica, because we had to move it.
16 After the corps has been disbanded, I don't know any more.
17 Perhaps parts of the archive had come to Sokolac or to Pale or to Trebinje
18 or to Bijeljina. There was a unit in the war in Sokolac in the old part
19 where we had temporary accommodation because there was a warehouse.
20 Perhaps you should look there, whether it was archived there. I don't
21 know what they did with it afterwards. Perhaps that representative of the
22 military prosecutor's office may have found these document, because it
23 seems to me that the document that was before me yesterday, this was the
24 copy of the original document of the corps command, because there is a
25 seal on it and there is a seal with the code of the station. So that's an
1 original document. Whether this has been taken out of the packed -- of
2 the pack of combat reports or whether it was just taken out or whether the
3 whole parcel had come to this Tribunal, I don't know, because I was not
4 there. That is the reason why my answer yesterday -- perhaps my answer
5 wasn't very specific, but Radovic's surname is familiar with me. But to
6 link up the first name and the last name as it was mentioned by the
7 representative of the Prosecution, I don't know, because I don't know that
8 man. I guarantee you, and people who know me, they know that I have a
9 good memory and that from 1992 I can list you out of 200 names at least
10 100 names who were members of my unit. So I cannot state something which
11 is not in my mind, and Radovic is not, so it is possible that some of the
12 documents from the archive may have gotten to Sokolac and that's where
13 they were found. I don't know whether it was the Defence team or the
14 public prosecutor's office, whether they were involved in
15 looking -- searching for those documents.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I
17 have --
18 JUDGE ORIE: I have one additional question. If you said "they
19 waited outside," where exactly was that? You said, "We met, and they
20 waited outside. They did not enter." Where exactly was that?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm talking about Sokolac. I'm
22 talking specifically about the representative of the Defence, Pilipovic,
23 when they came to Sokolac they told me -- she was there. She waited for
24 me at the visitor's room. So if she had some notes, either to take or to
25 ask me about them. That's what he said. So in any case she never came to
1 me office. So she's here. So this can be confirmed or added to. But
2 specifically, no interview with me was ever conducted in my office. That
3 is, in the -- on the premises of the command.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you for this moment. When you met with
5 members of the Defence team who waited outside in Sokolac, did you then
6 enter that building?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I entered there after I finished
8 talking with her.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What did you do in that building?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, I held the same duty during
11 the war. I was the chief of AAD in the command of this corps. So I was
12 chief of AAD in the command of the 5th Corps until the 5th of September,
14 JUDGE ORIE: What was the reason -- Sokolac was your office at
15 that time?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sokolac, the command of the 5th
18 JUDGE ORIE: Which was -- your office was in the building and the
19 members of the Defence team waited in the visitor's room; is that correct?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, some 50 metres, more or less.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Across the yard.
23 JUDGE ORIE: What was exactly the aim of that visit?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The aim of their visit was to
25 tell -- to meet me, to ask me a certain number of questions which I could
1 answer for the Defence team, or rather, before the Chamber in this case,
2 because they knew that I was one of the officers who had stayed there and
3 who was directly in the command and whose immediate superior was
4 General Galic. So I did not call them. They learned it out of nowhere
5 about me and they tried to establish contact with me, and I told them that
6 I was at their disposal.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Was the search for documents one of the specific
8 issues discussed at that occasion?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. And even the search for
10 documents was hardly mentioned. I was only asked whether I had any
11 documents and which ones I did, and I said I did not know. Perhaps I
12 still had a piece of paper. Because I simply had no conditions to keep
13 any of these documents -- I mean, documents that I personally dealt with,
14 that I simply did not have those documents. Subsequently I found the
15 sketch, and you could see that it was only an annex, the sketch of the
16 shelters at Mojmilo for actions against Lukavica. And I showed them. I
17 believe it was in December, and I showed it to them and said, "Perhaps you
18 can use this.." And here you have it, and I can explain that, because
19 that was the diagram that existed.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Did you give any other documents that you -- or have
21 you given any access to any other documents you retrieved later on at that
22 same time to the Defence team, apart from the sketch you just mentioned on
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no. I didn't have any other
25 documents. I saw documents, the map that you had at your disposal. But
1 it came through other channels, not mine. But I know that I had
2 used -- that I used it personally at the time, and I saw this map. I'm
3 familiar with it and it has my handwriting on it in part, even though we
4 took shifts with this. But I was not the one who gave it to the Defence
5 and I did not have it at my disposal. It must have been taken from the
6 archives somewhere.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, how much time would you
8 still need to --
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] If there are no objections, I
10 think not more than 15 minutes, if the witness gives us short answers. I
11 have certain subjects to cover which I think can be done quite quickly.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.
13 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, if you're contemplating the break.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. IERACE: There are two issues I'd like to raise relating in
16 each case to queries I made of the Defence in court the other day.
17 There's certain information which we're still waiting on from the Defence
18 as to evidence --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I expected a list.
20 MR. IERACE: That and a query in --
21 JUDGE ORIE: It was a matter of hours rather than a matter of day,
22 as far as I remember.
23 Ms. Pilipovic.
24 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we discussed it
25 yesterday in view of working hours that we finished last night and started
1 this morning, I had no time to give it to my colleagues and I will do it
2 today. Yesterday I was simply physically unable to write it down and send
3 it. So I'll do it today after we finish our work. It will be around
4 15.00. I will send it to my colleagues.
5 JUDGE ORIE: -- Tomorrow.
6 MR. IERACE: The other issue involves --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. IERACE: -- The accused, Mr. President. If you recollect.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do recollect that, and I take it it's not an
10 issue to be dealt with at this moment. But I then take it that the
11 Defence will have made up its mind.
12 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. We bear in mind this issue,
13 and I think we shall also answer this question shortly.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Shortly -- by today or ...?
15 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do not think we
16 shall be able to do it today in view of the pace of work here. I think
17 that we shall discuss it not in the Tribunal but when we go to visit
18 General Galic, and I presume it will be on Friday.
19 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
20 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Tomorrow afternoon.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And there would be an opportunity to -- if
22 there's any need, to discuss or comment on the position the Defence takes
23 by next Monday. Would that be -- I do understand -- I do appreciate that
24 we can't expect the Defence to give the information requested unless there
25 has been a proper occasion to discuss the matter with the accused.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 MR. IERACE: I understand, Mr. President.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. IERACE: And perhaps if a deadline could be set of Monday
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I expect that if the discussions have
6 taken place on Friday in the afternoon, that the decision could be reached
7 during the weekend so that the Prosecution is informed by next Monday
8 morning. We are sitting in the afternoon next week.
9 Yes. Then we'll adjourn until ten minutes past 11.00.
10 --- Recess taken at 10.39 a.m.
11 --- On resuming at 11.10 a.m.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, you're on your feet.
13 MR. IERACE: Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Over the break I've
14 looked at the transcript from yesterday --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. IERACE: -- In relation to the topic of archival material and
17 contact with the Defence. I seek leave to ask further questions following
18 the conclusion of re-examination on that topic. The basis for the
19 application is that the witness has said that since he gave his evidence
20 yesterday, he now recalls further matters. And on the face of it, there
21 appear to be some contradictions between his evidence given today on that
22 topic and his evidence given yesterday. I seek to explore those
23 differences and this further information that he's provided.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber understands your application to refer to
1 the matters you tried to explore more deeply in cross-examination, not new
2 areas to be explored, unless it directly results from answers given to
3 where you got no answers yesterday. To that extent, the Chamber will
4 grant the application.
5 Mr. Usher, could you please escort the witness into the courtroom.
6 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. As you
8 examined this witness in great detail on this point, we'd really like not
9 to waste too much time with this, apart from the matter of principle.
10 Q. Witness, I'd like us to go back to what you said regarding the AAD
11 weapons, arising from questions asked of you by the Prosecution. And on
12 the basis of a proposal of the Prosecution, you were asked to put on the
13 map numbers for some positions and then the command post and forward
14 command post, and it turned out that you could not mark everything on this
15 map for technical reasons, I believe. Now, will you please tell us, what
16 are these reasons in a nutshell?
17 A. Yes. The forward command post at Nisici there is no -- the upper
18 part of the map, so I put an arrow there, and it was at a distance of some
19 20 to 25 kilometres north-north-west of Vogosca. Cemerska forward command
20 post, once again outside the map, below Lukavica -- Rakovica, it's on the
21 road towards Kjevoto [phoen] -- Trnovo, and that is some 15 to 20
22 kilometres south of the end of the map, and that is why I couldn't draw
23 that. And the same applies to firing positions of AAD brigades in the
24 area of Ilijas and part of the Igman brigade, that is, Blazuj, Rakovica.
25 On Rakovica I did mark a certain position. So these are minor
1 imprecisions which I could not draw on the map because they are outside
2 the map, but I think that provided you with other information concerning
3 the weaponry.
4 Q. Thank you, witness. Concerning the number of pieces - and by this
5 I mean the information at the corps level - what can you tell us about two
6 things, that is: First, the deployment of these pieces, not immediately
7 in the vicinity of Sarajevo but on the front? And I'm referring to the
8 SRK. And on the other hand, did you know how long was the front line in
9 kilometres that would concern the SRK?
10 A. First, the length of the front line on this -- I will start from
11 here. The length of the front line, as far as I can remember - but I
12 don't think I will go off the mark too much - was about 50 kilometres, and
13 it had two lines, the front one and the rear one.
14 Q. I have to stop you.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, it is very
16 important to rectify, because I think that the figure -- the figure that
17 was mentioned in the English transcript is not what I heard. I think we
18 are talking about a bigger -- about a longer front line.
19 Q. Will you slowly repeat how long was the front.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, if you --
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said --
22 JUDGE ORIE: If you think there might be some misunderstanding,
23 you should not explain that it was longer but just ask the witness again
24 in order to avoid whatever confusion to repeat his answer. Please
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I should be happy to do
3 Q. Witness, will you please tell us once again how long was the
4 front. But be -- speak slowly so -- because -- so that everybody can hear
5 what you are saying.
6 A. It was over 250 kilometres.
7 Q. Yes. Thank you very much. And now you can resume your
9 A. The front line -- there were two types of front line, one -- we
10 call them rings. There was an inner ring, and that was the front line
11 facing Sarajevo. And there was also an outer ring, which was behind our
12 backs, as we said it. It was towards Gorazde, towards other parts of the
13 front, towards Cemerska Mount and so on. So we had two front lines.
14 Within the area of responsibility, we had AAD units. And basically they
15 were to be between a kilometre or perhaps more, depending on the
16 deployment of defence troops in the depth of the front. But it so
17 happened that some of our positions had to remain on the first front line,
18 as, for instance, in the sports air field, and they were -- they had been
19 positions before the start of combat operations and their intention was to
20 defend the Butmir air field. However, this air field was not in our area
21 of responsibility, and we kept those positions and performed other combat
22 tasks from there.
23 Secondly, the positions of the units. I had a lot of difficulty
24 in establishing the conventional positions for the AAD because during
25 those three years that we're talking about, there were practically no
1 actions from the air, so that the positions were frequently fragmented.
2 And what I drew on the map was our basic firing positions. That is, I
3 could not draw the position of a piece which according to -- under the
4 technical principles was outside the area where we kept the firing
5 position. In those parts of the map where I drew their positions do not
6 show the full deployment of the Ilijas -- of AAD pieces in the
7 Ilijas Brigade, and they had a circular deployment towards Visoko, towards
8 Cemerska Mount, et cetera.
9 On the map shown by the Defence from Nisici, which shows also part
10 of the Nisici plateau, shows the deployment with marked positions or
11 pieces which were groups. On the Nisici plateau, there wasn't a special
12 AAD unit. But from the corps and brigade AAD units, one or two pieces
13 were taken from them to set up the AAD on the Nisici plateau and the same
14 held true on the Trnovo axis, and that is not marked on the map.
15 I believe I've given you enough information about the method of
16 deployment and possibilities.
17 Q. Thank you. I'd like you to be so kind as to answer the following
18 question: The number of weapons that you indicated yesterday - I will not
19 repeat it - but you told us we had so many such weapons and so on. So my
20 question is: Does it also hold true of other positions, other than the
21 positions which could be marked on the map that you used? In other words,
22 were there also weapons outside this limited area shown on the map?
23 A. I spoke about the number of pieces in the whole area, which means
24 that I also included those parts which I could not show on the map, and
25 this is the Nisici plateau, the Ilijas Brigade, and the Trnovo area. I
1 gave the number of pieces as per calibre. I was not asked about weapons
2 of the 40-millimetre calibre and, one, the so-called Bofors, and there
3 were 42 of them in the area.
4 Q. Very well. Thank you. Witness, I'm changing the subject, and it
5 will be my last subject. We spoke about missions of sending the
6 ammunition into the city. And so my question is: How would you qualify
7 these missions of delivery of ammunition into the part of the city which
8 remained under the control of the BH forces, in terms of degree? Were
9 there major deliveries for the adversary, or how would you describe them?
10 A. Well, my assessment - and it's not only mine, it is something that
11 we arrived at at discussions and analysis on the basis of information that
12 we had - is that those were important quantities of equipment, especially
13 in the period of interest to us. Later on it must have changed because...
14 Q. Yes, please do go on.
15 A. Yes. Sorry. I thought you were interrupting me. Later on - I
16 don't know when exactly - so-called rapid intervention forces were set up,
17 and they helped significantly the adversary forces. So through the tunnel
18 across the airport runway and using some other corridors we could also see
19 that some of it went through the area at Ilidza. A vehicle was stopped
20 with a double bottom, and at the bottom there were some explosive devices
21 and combat devices, so that it was even delivered through our area.
22 Q. Thank you very much. My question is as follows: Speaking from
23 the strategic point of view, were these deliveries important, these
24 missions? Were they important or not? Strategically speaking. I'm
25 speaking from the point of view of logistics and strategy.
1 A. Logistically speaking, yes, of course. They were important. Now
2 strategically, it is more difficult to say. But strategically speaking,
3 inevitably, yes, and from this operational point of view.
4 Q. Thank you. And now I will ask you something -- a theoretical
5 question: If soldiers had to carry out important logistic missions, and
6 if they are on the point of being discovered, for instance, when crossing
7 the runway, say, under the cover of darkness, what would have been their
8 military reaction if they had been discovered there?
9 A. You mean the soldiers of the opposite side, of the adversary?
10 Q. Yes, yes, yes. Of course.
11 MR. IERACE: I object. Mr. President. This didn't arise out of
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Perfectly, it does arise
14 directly, because the question was as follows: Mr. Ierace was asking
15 whether this was happening under cover of darkness. Don't you think that
16 the last thing they would do would be to open the fire, because that would
17 then reveal their positions? Now my question is to know -- I believe this
18 was quite vital with regard to this particular itinerary, to this
19 particular route.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ORIE: The subject is permissible, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
22 Nevertheless, would you please rephrase your question, because there are
23 some elements in it which are really difficult to understand from a
24 practical point of view. I am especially pointing at the part "at the
25 point of being." How would you translate that in rather factual terms?
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well.
2 Q. Witness, now, I'd like to turn now to the adversary troops when
3 they were transporting weapon, that is, ammunition, across the runway, and
4 under cover of the night. If these soldiers - this is a hypothetical
5 question - if these soldiers know that they are on the point of being seen
6 possibly, that is, discovered, and that perhaps they were able to see for
7 themselves some worrying movements, what would have been their response
8 strictly militarily speaking? What do you think about this?
9 A. In any case, they were carrying out a combat task. I rule
10 out -- and I believe that you need not ask whether among them there were
11 also civilians. I've already said, they were carrying out a combat, a
12 military task, in any case. Whether fire was open or not - and this is
13 primarily about opening -- whether our fire was open in response to their
14 opening of fire - it did happen. It did occur that fire was opened in
15 order to turn the attention away from one point on the runway, in order to
16 make the other part of the runway safer. So this was manoeuvring fire.
17 In order to divert attention of our forces that were able to fire, in
18 order to open fire on one part and not on the other.
19 Another detail: We are convinced that crossing the runway was
20 done under the umbrella of the UN forces. This even happened during
21 daytime. And that's why we -- in those situations we protested.
22 Q. Witness, the very last question: You said something in your
23 answer regarding manoeuvring fire. Can you tell us, do you know what is
24 diversionary fire? This is diversionary fire.
25 A. I said there is a manoeuvre to be done by movement and fire.
1 Manoeuvring by fire, so it's either to divert attention or to prevent an
2 attack. There is a manoeuvre tactical act, action. In order to conduct
3 movement in one part, in order to draw out the forces of the opponent,
4 while the actual main attack would happen in a different direction. So
5 this is how this type of fire works, on a different type of runway.
6 Q. Now, my question: What can you tell us about the frequency of
7 such diversionary fire on the runway?
8 A. That's very hard to say. Sometimes it would happen in two or
9 three days twice or sometimes in -- within ten days it would happen twice,
10 or perhaps it happened twice during one single day.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm just going
12 to check the transcript.
13 I believe we have no further questions. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, you asked permission to put some
15 additional questions to the witness.
16 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: You are allowed to do so now.
18 Further cross-examination by Mr. Ierace:
19 Q. Sir, earlier this morning you were asked some questions about who,
20 if anyone, you had spoken to on the topic of access to archival material,
21 and you said, "I can add something in relation to what I said yesterday."
22 Did you recollect further material overnight on this topic?
23 A. No. No, I wasn't able to, apart that I had said that I had given
24 a sketch from Mojmilo as additional, because I found it coincidentally
25 during the time I was waiting to come and testify.
1 Q. You said this morning that you met at Sokolac with some people,
2 including a representative of your military prosecutor's office. When did
3 that meeting take place?
4 A. Well, perhaps a year ago. I was called -- I was summoned to see
5 General Andric, and he asked me whether I knew something, and there was a
6 civilian present there and some of our other senior officers. He asked me
7 if I knew anything. And while I was thinking about it, I gave some
8 additional information because my answer was that I did not know of the
9 location where the archive may have been put and that it was possible that
10 one part of it was in Sokolac. So that was my explanation in relation to
11 what I had said yesterday.
12 Q. Now, let me be clear on, firstly, those details. You were at
13 Sokolac barracks at that stage when you received the call from the
14 military prosecutor; is that correct?
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, that is not the
16 testimony of the witness.
17 MR. IERACE: I'll rephrase that.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] May I just --
19 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
20 MR. IERACE:
21 Q. All right. You said you were called -- you were summoned to see
22 General Andric, and he asked whether you knew something. Where were you
23 when you were summoned? Where were you exactly?
24 A. I was in my office on the same floor in the corps command where
25 General Andric was.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. All right. So you walked up the corridor to his office; is that
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And when you entered his office, how many other people were there
5 with him?
6 A. I think there were two of his assistants, his close associates,
7 and one civilian. He was not introduced to me. Maybe he was and I've
8 forgotten it, but I heard from the others or I may have understood from
9 the others that the others told me that this other person was somebody
10 from the military prosecutor's office. That's why I don't remember the
11 name. Because I don't know many people from those structures, from those
13 Q. Now, you say that he asked -- well, do you say that the general
14 asked you if you knew where the archive was?
15 A. Yes.
16 MR. IERACE: Excuse me, Mr. President.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, with all due
18 respect, I have to object to the way that the questions are phrased.
19 Asking a question of a witness -- asking if he was -- he had used a
20 corridor, a specific corridor. Can we just focus this type of
21 questioning. Thank you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I think you opposed against the
23 way Mr. Ierace presented the earlier testimony, and I think Mr. Ierace
24 tried to avoid whatever misunderstanding in this respect. Let's try to be
25 as efficient as possible.
1 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
2 MR. IERACE:
3 Q. And you told him that you did not know the location but you
4 suggested that it may be -- or part of it may be in Sokolac; is that
6 A. That I presumed that it may be there. It may have happened to go
7 there together with the files of the logistics base.
8 Q. Now, you were in Sokolac when you had that conversation, weren't
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And when you told him that it may be in Sokolac, did you mean in
12 the same complex where you and he were talking?
13 A. No, others.
14 Q. How far from where you were?
15 A. 150 metres.
16 Q. In a different building?
17 A. In a different building.
18 Q. All right. And did you take him to that building?
19 A. No. I said already. No.
20 Q. All right. Did you tell him where in that building he should
22 A. No.
23 Q. Did you tell him the building?
24 A. I said in the building where the units of the logistics department
25 were during the war, and that they may have put the documents there.
1 During the move a part of the archive may have gotten there, but I did not
2 enter the premises. And in that old building where these units may have
3 filed their archive.
4 Q. All right. Now, was there anything else discussed apart from that
6 A. No.
7 Q. Did you then leave his office?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Now, you mentioned a representative of the Defence, Pilipovic, did
10 you mean Madam Pilipovic who is seated to your left at the moment?
11 A. Yes, Pilipovic.
12 Q. All right. And you mentioned that she waited for you at the
13 visitor's room. Was that the same day that you were having the
14 conversation with the general, General Andric?
15 A. No, no.
16 Q. All right. Was that before or after the conversation with
17 General Andric?
18 A. I think that I met Ms. Pilipovic before this conversation took
20 Q. All right. Why were you referring to a particular occasion where
21 Madam Pilipovic was waiting for you in the visitor's room? What was the
22 significance of that?
23 A. Which occasion?
24 Q. Well, you said this morning -- you were asked by Mr. President,
25 "If you said 'they waited outside' where exactly was that?" You said "we
1 met and they waited outside. They did not enter." "Where exactly was
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And you said, "I'm talking about Sokolac. I'm talking
5 specifically about the representative of the Defence, Pilipovic. When
6 they came to Sokolac, she was there. She waited for me at the visitor's
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. What's the significance of that meeting in relation to this topic
10 of the archival material? Why did you mention it?
11 A. I didn't mention the link between the archive and Ms. Pilipovic.
12 I mentioned the discussions, because you had asked me whether there were
13 conversations regarding the archive. So I had separated the conversation
14 took place at General Andric's in relation to the archive and the
15 discussions which were in relation to my participation in this process, in
16 the Defence case, which was separate. It was mostly without any documents
17 that I spoke to them, mostly, without any documents at my disposal.
18 That's how I talked to Ms. Pilipovic, not the documents, not with the
19 documents that I had in front of me. I'd already stressed this in my
20 previous answers.
21 Q. Well, to be clear on this, did Madam Pilipovic or anyone else from
22 the Defence ask you any questions at all about where any of the archival
23 material for the SRK could be located?
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It will be good to specify the
2 time, because earlier we had asked some questions. It will be good to
3 specify the time.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I to understand this question to be about this
5 meeting or in general, Mr. --
6 MR. IERACE: In general.
7 JUDGE ORIE: In general.
8 Did the members of the Defence, including Madam Pilipovic, have
9 ever asked you any question about where any of the archival material for
10 the SRK could be located?
11 A. I don't remember whether they asked such questions. Why do I say
12 this? I'm saying this because I had said that I did not have at my
13 disposal some documents that would have made it easier, that would have
14 made it easier for me to participate in the defence.
15 Q. You tell us that you don't remember whether they asked such
16 questions. Is it your evidence that whether they asked such questions or
17 not, you did not take them to any archival material, apart from the sketch
18 that you've told us about? And that was in your possession, in any event.
19 Is that correct?
20 A. Yes, it was. I found it later by chance among other documents.
21 Q. -- From. Now, you said this morning that you had taken some part
22 in some of the preparations. And I take that to be reference to the
23 preparations of the archival material. Is that correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. You said, "I know that it had been prepared for Lukavica." What
1 do you mean by saying --
2 A. At Lukavica.
3 Q. At Lukavica. When did you take part in some of those preparations
4 of the archival material?
5 A. The material for the archive was prepared in the course of 1995
6 for all the previous years, and I took part in this as a member of the
7 team in compiling them, putting them together, preparing them for being
9 Following the signing of the Dayton Agreement and the decision
10 that we should move out together with the command, I knew where the
11 materials were, and those members of the team that had worked with me on
12 this previously, they had a key at their disposal and this material was to
13 be packed, transported, and put away. Whether it was taken to Pale or to
14 some other location, I do not know. I mentioned yesterday or the day
15 before yesterday my answer, because at that time I was in the field. I
16 was involved in the movement of weapons and equipment of the AAD together
17 with the --
18 Q. Please stop. Who were the members of the team that worked with
19 you on the packing of the archival material? You mentioned they had a key
20 at their disposal. Who were they?
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] This no longer stems from the
24 cross-examination or from the re-examination.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE ORIE: We'll allow the witness to answer this question and
2 then --
3 Could you tell us who were the members of the team with whom you
4 did the packing of the --
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The members of the team were from
6 the temporary composition. I wouldn't -- I would rather not name them.
7 These were two civilians, members of our unit, a civilian, and a typist
8 who was making a list and notes. They were just able to move -- transport
9 the documents to some location because very soon afterwards there was the
10 disbanding of the corps.
11 Now, what happened to the materials following the disbanding of
12 the corps, I don't know, because I remained in the vicinity of Sokolac
13 together with all the technical equipment and materiel under a tent and I
14 was not able to keep with me any part of the documents.
15 JUDGE ORIE: You --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know that what remained --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. DP35, the question was the names of those that
18 were in the team. You said you would rather not mention their names.
19 We'll now turn into private session so that you can give us those
20 names without the outside of the world to hear the answers you are giving.
21 One moment, please.
22 Could we turn into private session.
23 [Private session]
12 Pages 17703 – redacted – private session
20 [Open session]
21 JUDGE ORIE: We are. Please proceed.
22 MR. IERACE:
23 Q. Sir, yesterday I asked you this question: "Following Dayton, did
24 you have anything at all directly or indirectly to do with moving any of
25 the archival material of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps at any stage after
1 December 1995?" And you replied, in part -- this is the commencement of
2 your answer: "After December 1995, I know that the archival material was
3 moved to Pale," and you went on to say that you were at Sokolac and --
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. -- After that.
6 A few minutes ago you said, "Whether it was taken to Pale or some
7 other location, I don't know."
8 A. That's what I said yesterday.
9 Q. No. Yesterday you said, "After December 1995, I know that the
10 archival material was moved to Pale." And today you say you don't know if
11 it went to Pale.
12 A. I disagree with yesterday's phrasing. I don't know -- yesterday I
13 do --
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- Yesterday, according to the transcript, you said,
15 "After December 1995, I know that the archival material was moved to
16 Pale. But at the time I was withdrawing anti-aircraft equipment from the
17 Sarajevo Romanija Corps area and the Sokolac region, and I no longer had
18 access to that archival material and I can't tell you what happened to it
19 later on." That's your words as they were written down yesterday.
20 Mr. Ierace, you asked --
21 And Mr. Ierace now asked you why you said yesterday that the
22 archives were transported to Pale, whereas you say today that you didn't
23 know whether they went to Pale or to -- you mentioned a few other places.
24 Could you please answer the question.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. The word "I know," I cannot
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 confirm that I'd said it yesterday, and I'm linking yesterday's answer and
2 today's answer, which has the same meaning, but there is this word "know"
3 or "not know" which makes it be the complete opposite of each other. If I
4 had said that I was in Sokolac for taking out the material, then this word
5 of mine, "I know" transcribed yesterday it could be rather hasty, because
6 I could not have followed the archives to Pale for me to say "I know." I
7 could have said "I know that it was supposed to go to Pale," if you'll
8 allow me to add this to my answer -- I know that this was supposed to go
9 to Pale, and that would have been identical with the meaning of what was
10 said today. I do not wish in any way to prevent you from finding out
11 anything, but I don't want to say or be seen to be saying something
12 yesterday and something else today. I could not have followed its
13 movement to Pale if I was in Sokolac.
14 JUDGE ORIE: You've answered the question.
15 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I apologise, but I believe
17 that if we undertake a complete reading of what the witness said
18 yesterday, I think a little bit of the situation could be clarified. This
19 is what I'm allowing myself to do. Specifically --
20 JUDGE ORIE: If you could please draw the attention to those
21 keywords so that we can read them on our computers.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, of course.
23 JUDGE ORIE: In such a way it does not give a clue to the witness.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. The keyword is, if I can
1 find it, [In English] "Access" by example or --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It is lines 2 and 3.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I'll repeat it. I stopped halfway the answer.
5 You also said, "And I no longer had access to that archival
6 material, and I can't tell you what happened to it later on." Does that
7 make you feel that you should add something to your answer or ...?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Only to confirm that I know it went
9 to Pale. It should be added "I know", that it should have gone to Pale,
10 that it was supposed to go to Pale.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 Mr. Ierace.
13 MR. IERACE:
14 Q. This morning you said, "After the corps has been disbanded, I
15 don't know any more." When exactly was the 4th Corps -- the Sarajevo
16 Romanija Corps, I should say, disbanded?
17 A. February -- February 1996.
18 Q. When was it that you say it was moved, whether to Pale or
19 somewhere else from Lukavica?
20 A. December 1995/January 1996.
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, this question
22 was already asked and already answered, and the witness said "after
23 December 1995." There are some questions which are being asked again
24 which have been already clearly answered.
25 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
1 MR. IERACE: One more question, Mr. President.
2 Q. When you say the others had a key to the archive, was it a key to
3 a locked truck, a key to a trunk, a key to what?
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the witness has
5 already answered, because he spoke about the key to the building.
6 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] At least, what I believe I
8 heard in his language.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The key to the office, practically.
10 And I even think that it wasn't in the hands of the members of the team
11 but that it was Colonel Zarkovic who had it, who remained in that building
12 with some men who were to organise the move. And we went after our own
14 MR. IERACE: In view of that answer, Mr. President, one further
16 Q. Your reference to Colonel Zarkovic, is that Colonel Zarkovic who
17 was a senior officer of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps?
18 A. That's right, yes.
19 MR. IERACE: That's all.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In the English transcript, the key is not
21 related to a building, Mr. Piletta-Zanin. But if there's any need to
22 check that in the original tape, the Chamber will assist you.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. DP35, the Judges have several questions for you
25 as well. The first questions will be put to you by Judge Nieto-Navia.
1 Questioned by the Court:
2 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Could the map be shown to the witness. I
3 would like to see the airport area, please.
4 JUDGE ORIE: The map should be moved a bit downwards. Yes.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Here it is.
6 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Thank you.
7 I think that you said that the positions X1 and X5, as far as I
8 can see, were not able to --
9 A. 4 and 5. It is 4 and 5.
10 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Okay. I'm sorry, I cannot see that very
11 well -- 4 and 5 were not able to fire towards the runway of the airport.
12 Was that your testimony yesterday?
13 A. Yes, it is.
14 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: You said that there were other units which
15 could do so.
16 A. That's right.
17 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Could you point to the -- those units, to the
18 place where those units were.
19 A. Yes. Infantry units, Dobrinja I; infantry units, Novakovici
20 houses, part of Donji Kotorac.
21 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Were those units under your command?
22 A. No.
23 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Do you know whether those units ever opened
24 fire towards the runway of the airport?
25 A. I cannot give you an exact answer, but they did open it. That was
1 not under any jurisdiction and under my immediate control.
2 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: But how do you know that they did that?
3 A. In the -- the command post is in the immediate vicinity. You can
4 see it to the right. And in the building, in the command building in
5 Lukavica - and it says "KM" - I was frequently at positions X4, 5, and 6.
6 And from the position X6, one could follow exactly where the circle is
7 placed next to "X6." In this circle is an elevation from which one
8 couldn't open fire but one could not -- but one could observe. And that
9 is why I related the observation post to this order to open or not open
10 fire in the direction of the runway.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 MR. IERACE: I apologise, Your Honour. I noticed that the witness
13 was pointing to the screen. I wonder if he could be directed to point at
14 the map on the ELMO so that we can follow those positions.
15 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Yes. But he mentioned X6, yes, the command
17 A. I was pointing at X6. No, the command -- I mentioned the command
18 in Lukavica and the observation post was at X6, and I'm pointing at it
20 KM, which is the command post Lukavica, then positions in
21 Dobrinja, Donji Kotorac, and the observation post at X6, that is what I
23 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Did you ever personally observe those units
24 when they were opening fire towards the runway?
25 A. I cannot say I saw it with my own eyes, because from the position
1 of contact at Dobrinja I and Dobrinja IV, towards Dobrinja II and III, one
2 could hear fire from there all the time, and it was the immediate
3 interface, because there wasn't a street separating the forces, and it
4 would be frequently only walls in one building. One could hear fire
5 frequently from there, and it was very difficult to say whether fire was
6 being opened in the direction of the runway or whether fighting was going
7 on in some part of Dobrinja.
8 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: So your testimony is that you personally
9 didn't see those units firing towards the runway. That's your testimony.
10 A. Yes.
11 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: But you know -- you know that those units
12 opened fire sometime, because you heard that.
13 A. Yes. And after all, it was their job to follow, to keep under eye
14 this part of the runway because that was within their lines, within their
15 combat assignment lines.
16 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Do you know which part of the runway was used,
17 if it was used, for crossing of the BiH units?
18 A. Well, I can't really say exactly, but I don't think it was the
19 first third or perhaps first quarter of it. But, rather, the part which
20 was further away, towards this area where Muslim forces were deployed. So
21 from here it is only -- only this part was in our area of responsibility,
22 this area which I am pointing at now. So down -- I would say it was
23 rather down the runway in this direction.
24 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Do you mean to the west-north-western part of
25 the airport?
1 A. Yes, the north-western part. That is, in the direction of Ilidza.
2 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Now I will move to another topic. Were you
3 trained by the JNA?
4 A. Yes.
5 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Was part of your training some information on
6 the Geneva Conventions?
7 A. Yes, in part.
8 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: What do you mean by "in part"?
9 A. Well, I graduated from the academy in 1972, so in part. The
10 decisions of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the definitions in the
11 additional protocols and those which had to do with the United Nations and
12 all the rest. That is why I say yes, but insofar as we could at that
13 time, between 1968 and 1972, yes, from what we could learn and remember.
14 And we remembered what one does not need to learn, something that one
15 remembers by simply knowing what international relations are in other
16 aspects, from conversations, from the media, and the rest.
17 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Do you know whether after 1962 up until 1992
18 the soldiers were trained or received lessons on the Geneva Conventions?
19 I don't mean the officers but the soldiers.
20 A. There were individual questions, just as there were through the
21 civil defence the population was given booklets with instructions how
22 to -- what kind of conduct they should apply in their own defence in case
23 of the extension of first aid, in case of capture, and so forth. So they
24 were excerpts of general nature that were distributed among the population
25 and among the soldiers as well, elementary matters.
1 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: I have another question: Is the fire, the
2 anti-aircraft fire, a direct or indirect fire?
3 A. Direct only.
4 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: No further questions.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Judge El Mahdi also has one or more questions to you.
6 JUDGE EL MAHDI: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 [Interpretation] Witness, I'd like to ask you if you can tell me
8 what was roughly the percentage of former JNA members amongst your troops,
10 A. All unit members had served their military service with the JNA
11 before the war. But in the units of the permanent JNA forces until
12 January 1992, those men who were in my unit, in my regiment, the regiment
13 I commanded from July 1992, in my unit there were four
14 officers - active-duty, I mean. I was the fifth such officer, and I also
15 had - but I may go wrong - 15 soldiers under contract, and I also had two
16 civilians, that is, people who were in the former unit in the JNA. That's
18 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Perhaps you should make my
19 question clearer. If I understand you well, you testified that during the
20 military service, one learnt the ABC's of humanitarian law, that is, the
21 Geneva Conventions. So my question has to do with those people who were
22 trained, that is, those who did their military service with the JNA and
23 who then are supposed to have received some elementary instruction in
24 humanitarian law. So my question was about the number -- about the
25 percentage, the share of such men amongst your troops. If I understand
1 you well, you tell us that everybody did his military service, so in other
2 words you could say that all the men under your command and in the corps,
3 too, had done their military service and, therefore, were also aware more
4 or less with the general principles of the Geneva Conventions. Is that
5 what you are telling us?
6 A. Yes, that is what I said. Some elementary, that is, the minimum
7 knowledge. Yes, they had that.
8 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Right. Then I'm going to broach
9 another subject, if I may. If I understand you well, the positions exist
10 in order to pursue a particular military objective. Can you briefly
11 explain to us the military reason behind the choice of how your troops
12 would be deployed around the city of Sarajevo. What was the
13 objective -- the military objective you pursued? Because you said that
14 the other party did not have any air force. And therefore, what was it
15 that you pursued and the decision to -- your decision or the decision of a
16 corps to deploy the troops at the positions that you chose was part of
17 which plan, whether such decisions were taken by you or at the corps
19 A. In my earlier explanations of the positions, I already said that
20 when I arrived there in July 1992, that at that time, that July, had
21 already those covered assignments. I'm talking about regiment units. And
22 that this combat assignment was not significantly changed during the
23 period of time we are talking about here. So my predecessors whom I did
24 not find there when I got to the regiment, because they had left for
25 various reasons, by that time, before the conflict broke out, that is,
1 before April, they had already defined those firing positions, because
2 whenever there was a certain tension in a country or around it, then the
3 anti-aircraft defence units are the first ones to reach their combat
4 positions. And even in peacetime, whilst they were still a part of the
5 JNA, they already had certain firing positions which they took in order to
6 defend certain facilities or certain directions. My units from the
7 beginning, that is, from 1992 -- that is, in 1992 they took those
8 positions in order to enable the mobilisation and further activities
9 arising from the combat assignments of the corps.
10 The sports air field was taken in March, as far as I learnt from
11 those men whom I found there. And as such, in the Yugoslav People's Army,
12 it was -- served as a training ground and also for -- and it was used as a
13 facility, as a tactical, as an immobile object for training.
14 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, perhaps I did not
15 phrase my question precisely. And I would also like to seek a
16 clarification. You said that you inherited those positions, that is, that
17 the positions had already been taken and defined before you came there.
18 A. That is correct.
19 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Therefore, you were aware -- you
20 were familiar with a military plan, that is, these positions were taken
21 based on a particular military objective that was pursued on the basis of
22 a plan. So my question is: Can you briefly explain to us the why. Why
23 did the military choose those positions? Secondly, did the objective
24 pursuit remain the same for the duration of the conflict? And that is my
25 question. Or did it change? And will you please try to be as precise as
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 possible and not -- and in just so many words.
2 A. Well, in a nutshell, the plan of deployment of the units in my
3 regiment, which existed during the JNA time, did not exist any longer and
4 was not of use to us because it had lost the importance. It applied to
5 some completely different tasks because the territory which the regiment
6 could use and move about had changed completely. The JNA troops prior to
7 the war had a completely different area than the Sarajevo Corps, so the
8 peacetime plan could not be used in wartime. The units happened to be on
9 the positions that they were at and from those positions -- at those
10 positions they carried out preparations for air combat, which started only
11 three years later. And from those positions, with of course the necessary
12 shifts, they also provided support to units at this or some other parts of
13 the front in Sarajevo.
14 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Right. So you shifted some
15 positions, didn't you, depending on the military needs within the
16 framework of a plan? Now, the purpose, the objective, the orders that
17 were given you, the objective that you pursued, was what, briefly
18 speaking? You were responsible for what, to do what?
19 A. Why, I was responsible for the preparation of the orders and
20 preparation of a proposal to say whether one could extend support and
21 provide anti-aircraft defence from the existing positions or whether a
22 certain shift, a certain move was needed, whether the positions ought to
23 have been changed. And the pieces can be moved within a particular
24 existing position. They can be put closer together or perhaps a platoon
25 of the battery -- a battery has two platoons. So the platoon can be moved
1 or the whole battery can be moved.
2 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you. I shall move to
3 another subject. That will be the last one. You said with regard to the
4 fire which would last -- fire from different weapons, which would last for
5 a few moments - and I quote you in English - [In English] "But now I
6 cannot associate that event with any special importance." [Interpretation]
7 So my question is -- I'd like to understand exactly what you said, so I'm
8 asking you to clarify. What did you mean by the phrase "it can ring a
10 A. Well, could you just remind me what is it that we were talking
12 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] It was a Prosecutor's question,
13 and the Prosecutor asked you about a shot sometime towards the end of the
14 year, around Christmas 1992, and it happened -- that is, there were
15 several shots fired during 20 minutes or so. 20 minutes came up. But
16 during a period of time. And to this question your answer was, and I
17 quote, [In English] "But now I cannot associate that event with any
18 special importance." [Interpretation] Do you remember it now?
19 A. Yes, I do. I do.
20 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] And do you remember the question
21 too, witness?
22 A. Yes, yes, I do. I understand now. There was some slight
23 confusion about the term and the dates. We were talking about Christmas,
24 and then we talked whether it was the Orthodox Christmas or the Catholic
25 Christmas, was I in Mostar, or in Sarajevo, and I said that I was in
1 Trebevic. The Prosecution said that the fire lasted 20 minutes? I do not
2 recall that. That is what I'm saying. But perhaps my memory would have
3 been jogged if I knew specifically. And then a member of the Prosecutor's
4 team --
5 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] No, no, no. It does not matter
6 whether it was 20 minutes or 15 or 25 minutes.
7 A. But you said that there was also 40-millimetre fire. And I tried
8 to answer, because if I put together those event, nobody -- because I was
9 interrupted then. So I must say that this battery with -- that is, this
10 platoon with 40-millimetre pieces was nearest to me. But nobody lodged a
11 protest with me. Nobody protested against this fire being open from
12 40-millimetre pieces which were part of the regiment artillery, and there
13 were such Bofors, that is, 40-millimetre. There were also in other places
14 in -- they were with the brigade units which were not under my
15 jurisdiction directly, which were part of brigades, and they could have
16 opened fire. This does not mean that I am trying to shift the
17 responsibility, that it is something that escaped my control, that
18 fire -- that 40-millimetre fire had been -- was opened without my
19 authorisation. But I also said when we were talking about the military
20 hospital that 40-millimetre fire, if it was a Christmas fire, that it
21 could only mean random wanton fire, but it could not produce any
22 effect -- that it could not affect or hit the military hospital from the
23 position at Vrace.
24 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Could you please
25 repeat for the interpreters because they did not hear your answer.
1 Witness, the end of your answer, please.
2 A. The end of the answer or the whole answer?
3 JUDGE EL MAHDI: No, no, no. Just the last sentence, because the
4 interpreter lost it.
5 A. My last sentence. I see. If fire was opened from the Vrace
6 positions towards the military hospital - and this has already been
7 mentioned - and I said that if fire was opened without my authorisation
8 but then it must have been just wanton arbitrary fire which would produce
9 no effect on the military hospital or any other target. It means that it
10 could not destroy troops. If it hit the wall of any building which was in
11 its way, then it could have. But I wasn't asked that and I didn't explain
12 it. Then it will be damage of the wall of about this size and depth of
13 about 2 or 3 fingers, that is, not even -- so that bullet would not have
14 even damaged the brick.
15 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] And tell us, why hit the wall
16 without hitting the troops, without producing casualties? Can you please
17 explain it to me in two words.
18 A. Well, if it was just arbitrary fire, somebody was firing random
19 shots to mark a particular holiday, such as Easter or Christmas or the new
20 year, just fires like that. Another objective would be a support to show
21 that there were units there.
22 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Well, this is what I do not
23 understand, because I'm not getting the interpretation. There seems to be
24 a problem.
25 JUDGE ORIE: [Microphone not activated] -- Is -- I'll try to speak
1 some English words and see --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Mr. President, please.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Now I'm creating the problem. Is the French
4 translation functioning now? Yes. Then please proceed.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I gave the explanation. Do I have
6 to repeat it now because of the interpretation problems?
7 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes. Because I didn't follow
9 A. Yes. You asked what was the objective of opening fire. If, as I
10 said, if the fire was opened without an order, without the authorisation
11 to do so, without any report -- as commander of the regiment, that means
12 that the fire was opened as wanton and arbitrary firing. And this is a
13 Balkan habit, a custom. I don't know what it's like in other countries.
14 But that means that for New Year, for Christmas, fire is opened. That
15 happens in peacetime too. That's what it was. However, this fire may
16 have only occurred for a very short time because they received ammunition
17 which was in the central warehouse. And I headed the disposal of my unit
18 in coffee spoons, so to speak, so they had to report what they were using
19 it for and we had to report what they were using it for. But if there was
20 some action that was planned, some operation that was planned, as it was
21 alleged that it lasted for 20 minutes, then I would have had to know about
22 this order and I never knew about this kind of order because there would
23 be no purpose in firing this at night. For 20 minutes in order to waste
25 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Thank you, sir.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I would have some questions for you as well, but
2 since that will take certainly more than two or three minutes, we'll first
3 have a break and we'll adjourn until five minutes to 1.00.
4 --- Recess taken at 12.34 p.m.
5 --- On resuming at 12.56 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be escorted into the courtroom.
7 Mr. DP35, I've got a few questions for you as well. You told us
8 that from your Vrace positions the state hospital could not be targeted.
9 What -- how many storeys does the main building of the state hospital
10 have, approximately?
11 A. Seven or eight, something like that.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is it a high-rise building?
13 A. Yes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 A. Yes, it's a high-rise building.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Could it be seen from Vrace, the upper part of the
18 A. Perhaps the roof part of the upper-most storey.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes --
20 A. Because I never -- I did come to that position, but it was never
21 from that position that we were looking at what was in front of us and
22 what was the top floor of the hospital. We never discussed about the
23 position of the military hospital. I know that we had the data that there
24 were in some other parts that there were weapons or some ammunition, that
25 in some parts where this was -- some targets where this was done, but we
1 couldn't reach them. So we would take weapons and ammunition to other
2 positions so that they could target those other targets from other
3 positions, but we never -- it was never within our range to target those
4 other parts.
5 JUDGE ORIE: And -- but the higher parts were in the range that
6 you could target or not? It's not entirely clear to me what you tell us
7 about -- if you tell me -- let me put the question a different way to you.
8 If you tell me that you might have been able to see the upper part of the
9 building, why could you not have targeted that part of the building?
10 A. I said -- I can't be sure whether the top part could be seen, the
11 top part of the hospital. I also said that the hospital -- it was not in
12 our interest for our units to target it. It wasn't a target we would
14 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not asking whether you did it but whether you
15 could have done it, technically.
16 A. Technically, what I said in the first part of my answer, it is
17 probable that the top parts could have been targeted.
18 JUDGE ORIE: My next question is that you said this morning that
19 you ruled out that among those crossing the runway, there were civilians.
20 Did I understand you correctly?
21 A. Yes, yes, you understood me correctly. I ruled it out because I
22 was not in a position to see whether these civilians were parts of these
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So you say, "I didn't know. It was not
1 A. It's not impossible.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. My next question is -- I tried to get a better
3 understanding of your testimony in respect of what I will call Christmas
4 fire. That means firing of weaponry at an occasion such as Christmas, and
5 I'd like to concentrate on the 24th of December, when you said you were at
6 Trebevic. You testified that no warning was given to you and that the
7 firing was not upon your orders. This suggests that you knew about such
8 an event but that you had received no previous warning and that you did
9 not order to participate in such fire. Is that a correct understanding?
10 A. No. I'd like to clarify the first part. I didn't know, but I
11 found out when we were speaking about Christmas from the Prosecution -- I
12 found out that this was opening of fire on Christmas. But this was the
13 Catholic Christmas. If you're speaking about the 25th of December, I did
14 not know about it. I did not know about the opening of fire. Now, if I'm
15 saying if there was an opening of fire, I did not have an order for some
16 members of my unit to take -- some parts of my unit to take part in that.
17 I can just add something else: If it's Christmas, then it's a
18 Catholic Christmas, and no unit of mine had any purpose of
19 opening -- firing wantonly or opening fire, because in the parts of
20 Sarajevo towards Vrace, there were no Croats, and there would be -- and
21 there was no HVO units in that part of Sarajevo that was turned towards
22 us. So if there was any opening of fire, that was without my authority,
23 outside of my control. But I did not receive any protest, any criticism,
24 any remark in relation to this opening of fire.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand you. You did not receive any
1 protest. We heard evidence that intensive random fire was -- took place
2 on the 24th of December, when you said you were in Trebevic. On the one
3 hand side, your testimony does not exclude for the possibility that
4 intensive random fire -- I'm not talking about hitting objects, but fire
5 as you described it yourself, random shots, took place -- you do not
6 exclude for that and you told us that on the 24th of December, you were in
7 Trebevic. Could you -- if you do not exclude for it, would you agree with
8 me that if such an event would have happened, that you would have heard
9 it, being on Trebevic?
10 A. That could have happened. I would have been able to hear that,
11 but the question is whether I can't remember. But I really -- it doesn't
12 stand out in my mind that there was such opening of fire on such a date.
13 That is not in my recollection. I really don't know whether on the
14 occasion of any holiday I said that wanton opening of fire was possible
15 but whether on any such holiday, Catholic or Orthodox or Muslim holiday,
16 whether we were prevented from opening fire. I know that for New Year, my
17 task was to inspect the units and to make sure that and to warn the units
18 not to open fire, precisely not to provoke and to cause disorder because
19 somebody was marking such a day.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You have no recollection, you say. Do I have
21 to understand this that you do not exclude it but you don't remember?
22 A. Yes, that's right.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. My next question is about complaints.
24 You were asked how General Galic would deal with complaints about
25 shelling. The question was whether he dealt with it in a professional
1 way, and you answered that he would not just have a glance at such
2 protests but would deal with it seriously. That's how I understood your
3 answer. Is that correct?
4 A. Yes, that's right.
5 JUDGE ORIE: The questions were about complaints about shelling.
6 Would -- did General Galic, if there were any complaints about sniping,
7 deal with it similarly seriously as the way you told us he dealt with
8 complaints about shelling?
10 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence must
11 object to this in the current --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, if there's any problem of translation,
13 whatever, but if the other party puts a question to -- if it's a technical
14 matter, fine. If it goes to the content of the question, I would first
15 ask the witness to answer the question unless --
16 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] The content of the question, yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me first consult my colleagues.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps we first -- could I ask the usher to escort
20 the witness out of the courtroom for one second.
21 [The witness stands down]
22 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, as a general rule, the parties are
23 supposed not to intervene apart from matters like there's no translation
24 or something like that on questions from the Bench. Nevertheless, since
25 the Chamber is aware that this is a sensitive issue, that we'll give you
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 an opportunity to express yourself, but that's an exception to the rule.
2 Please proceed.
3 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. My
4 objection is in that I carefully followed in the last two days the
5 testimony of Witness DP35, and in his answers he never said that he
6 received protests in relation to sniper incidents. Perhaps --
7 JUDGE ORIE: That's the reason why I asked -- why we would deal
8 with it in a similar way if there had been any. So it was not included in
9 the question that there were. So if that would be your objection, then...
10 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, he said that he never
11 received protests, never.
12 JUDGE ORIE: The witness did not receive any protests, yes. But I
13 was not asking about protests addressed to the witness. I was asking
14 about the way the accused was dealing with protests, whether the witness
15 knew anything about that.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is -- the Chamber has decided that the
18 objection is denied.
19 Mr. Usher, could you please escort the witness into the courtroom.
20 [The witness entered court]
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. DP35, I asked you a question. Do you still
22 remember my question? The question was about the way the -- General Galic
23 would deal with any protests about sniping if there were any. Could you
24 please answer the question, whether it was in a similar way or different.
25 Please proceed with your answer.
1 A. My assessment is, although I couldn't attend the way or couldn't
2 be present directly how the general dealt with that, but I believe that
3 the approach to any protest was the same, was equitable, and I believe
4 that this is how it was done. But as far as the sniping itself, I know
5 very little, and I couldn't really comment further on that.
6 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not asking about your personal knowledge of the
7 sniping but whether you were ever -- whether you ever heard how General
8 Galic would deal with complaints about sniping.
9 A. Well, I said in the beginning that my assessment was that it was
10 the same approach to those protests and for other protests. So for those
11 protests and the protests which were -- had different content.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. On what is your assessment based?
13 A. I said -- I said I couldn't be directly present there when a
14 protest was discussed, because I couldn't be present. If a protest was
15 discussed at a meeting where other members of the command staff attended,
16 then I could have followed that. But if a protest was discussed outside
17 this meeting, then General Galic must have discussed this through his
18 liaison officer through whom the protests went and with possibly some
19 people whose task was to study this and assess it. So that's why my
20 assessment is that the approach of General Galic was the same for all
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do I understand you correctly if you say that
23 protests about sniping were not the subject of even mentioning during the
24 meetings you attended? Were they mentioned? Were they discussed? Were
25 they not mentioned? Were they ...?
1 A. They were mentioned, as well as other protests, if they occurred
2 prior to the meeting. If these protests occurred after the meeting and
3 then they were resolved in the period of one day, say, of one working day,
4 or in the course of the daytime, then it must have been discussed with
5 other people outside the meeting.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And at those occasions where these protests about
7 sniping were mentioned during the meeting, what would be said about it?
8 What would be the procedure to deal with it?
9 A. There was a warning that was given to the relevant persons who
10 would forward that warning and check it in the units whether fire was
11 opened, for instance. Or there was a warning -- that was the task given
12 to the liaison officer with UNPROFOR to check whether the protest was
13 based on facts, on something that had really happened. And we always
14 stressed that there were many protests that occurred which were not based
15 factually and that practically people were just involved in studying this,
16 discussing it, and then the opposite thing was true. And there were
17 other -- firing was also discussed in relation to the weapons which need
18 not have had optical sights.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Was there ever given an instruction to
20 investigate at your side - that means the Bosnian Serb forces - to
21 investigate the complaint as to the facts underlying the complaint?
22 A. Commissions were set up, teams, to check the information. But now
23 I cannot really tell you how many of them, where, and in relation to what
24 protests, whether it was artillery weapons or other, whether small arms
25 fire, how many protests. But we've already discussed the reaction, the
1 response, and the work of teams on the mission in the case that involved
2 me. But it was not a protest dealing with fire from small arms, from
3 in-country weapons.
4 JUDGE ORIE: But were such teams also formed if the complaints
5 were about small arms fire, more specifically what is called sniping,
6 apart from whether this was done with a weapon with an optical sight or
8 A. I cannot say whether a team was formed on every occasion because
9 it was mostly combat operations. But I know that a team would be formed
10 if a protest had been lodged in case of a cease-fire, so-called truce,
11 when also we lodged the largest number of protests to the opposite side.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. My next question would be: You told us about
13 meetings that took place where General Mladic was present, and I'm just
14 seeking to clarify your testimony. You said that you had a clear
15 recollection of one of these meetings, in September 1992 at Jahorina, and
16 you also told us that the majority of such meetings were held in Lukavica.
17 Could you tell us approximately how many Lukavica meetings where
18 General Mladic was present have taken place in your presence.
19 Approximately. I'm not asking whether it was -- if it was an exact
20 number, but approximately, since you said the majority.
21 A. I do not remember meetings when General Mladic was present when I
22 was there, and that is why I said I was quite sure about that meeting in
23 September 1992 on Jahorina, and I'd really not be able to speak about my
24 presence at meetings where General Mladic was, when we were in Lukavica.
25 JUDGE ORIE: -- That the majority took place in Lukavica.
1 A. Yes, correct. I did. But I did not say that General Mladic was
2 present. I pointed out that as a rule some representatives of the main
3 staff were present, and I remember that General Mladic attended one of
4 those meetings on Jahorina. I'm not aware of his presence at Lukavica,
5 but I do know that other representatives were there.
6 JUDGE ORIE: May I just read your answers to the questions in that
7 respect. You said, "At those meetings of ours which took place on a daily
8 basis, no, General Mladic did not appear. But I did see General Mladic at
9 meetings when there were reports from all commanders of the brigades and
10 regiments. General Mladic would come to some of those meetings or some of
11 the officers from the main staff."
12 The next question was: "Where were those meetings held in the
13 relevant period, Pale, Lukavica, at different places, where?"
14 You said, "In Lukavica, one was held. In Jahorina, at that time
15 we didn't have such meetings in Pale. Mainly in Lukavica. The majority
16 of meetings took place in Lukavica."
17 So you're using the plural several times also in respect of
18 meetings where General Mladic was present. Could you -- do you say your
19 answer was not correct, or could you otherwise give me an approximate
20 number of meetings held in Lukavica where General Mladic was present?
21 You said General Mladic would come to some of these meetings.
22 That's a plural.
23 A. Yes. You defined it correctly. But I was not wrong either. I
24 said that I was present at a meeting, at a briefing on Jahorina, that
25 meetings were held in Lukavica, and perhaps as you said, in plural,
1 General Mladic was present. I was not present at those meetings because
2 our commander's position was to attend to other business whilst those
3 meetings were held, so I was not physically present there because it was
4 more interesting and more necessary for one of the assistants to be
5 present. And I, when I was not on the ground, I was in the operations
6 centre, because I told you that I spent most of my time there. So --
7 JUDGE ORIE: If I may stop you. You said, "But I did see General
8 Mladic at meetings," also in the plural. So your testimony, as I read it
9 from the transcript, was not that you heard about his presence but that
10 you did see him.
11 A. Yes. I saw -- I did not have to be present at a meeting because
12 the hole in our command was next to the operation centre. It was
13 interesting for me to see who was coming. So I could see General Mladic
14 at the meeting but I was not at the meeting. Or sometimes during the
15 meetings if I was on duty or if it was an urgent message, then it was my
16 duty to enter the room with a meeting and to inform the corps command
17 about a certain message that had arrived and which needed to be acted upon
18 immediately. So I did have the opportunity to see General Mladic.
19 JUDGE ORIE: So I do understand that at several occasions you saw
20 General Mladic attending a meeting or about to attend a meeting in
21 Lukavica; is that correct? Meetings with General Galic.
22 A. Yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you. Then you briefly referred to the
24 fact that although from your side it was offered to participate in the
25 incident on the Markale market, that you were refused to participate in
1 such a joint investigation, and you also briefly referred to your
2 investigations. What was investigated precisely within the organisation
3 you worked in on the Markale market incident?
4 A. I had nothing to do with the market investigation. I said that I
5 was involved in investigation of the tower, of the control tower at the
6 airport, but it had nothing to do with Markale.
7 JUDGE ORIE: You didn't say that you participated in this
8 investigation but referred to the refusal to allow your people to
9 participate in a joint investigation and you briefly referred to what you
10 called "our investigation," not saying that you participated in it. What
11 do you know about your -- not you personally but the investigation on your
12 side on the Markale market incident?
13 A. I know about it because as our contribution to cooperation on the
14 ground and our relations with UNPROFOR, that day I wrote the combat report
15 for the main staff and one item in that report contained the explanation
16 which I had received from the liaison officer, and that report in that
17 part -- that part of the report said that we had offered to assign a
18 certain number of our men to the joint team of the -- the foreign
19 investigation team, that the other side refused that, and I sent this
20 report --
21 JUDGE ORIE: I referred to that, that the other side refused your
22 contribution to such an investigation. You said you did write the combat
23 report of that day.
24 A. [No audible response]
25 JUDGE ORIE: And you explained. What did you actually explain in
1 that report?
2 A. Just as I have told you: That following the protest lodged
3 regarding the action of our forces against Markale, or rather, this
4 destruction that was thrashed a lot by the media, that then the chief of
5 staff set up a commission and through the liaison officer suggested that
6 the joint commission be set up under the UNPROFOR leadership. However,
7 the other side did not accept our proposal and that was the end of it.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand, but --
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I do not want
10 to interrupt you, but just to say that the witness said -- spoke a
11 condition regarding the Markale incident, and this does not appear in the
12 English transcript, and I simply wanted to make that clear.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you. Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
14 I do understand that a commission was formed and that it was
15 offered that this commission would take part in the investigation, a joint
16 investigation, and it was refused. Was there any investigation either by
17 this committee or by any other committee or any other persons
18 investigating the alleged facts underlying the events as they were told to
19 you? I mean, what did your part investigate -- were not allowed to
20 participate in a joint investigation. What did your part investigate
21 itself? Who did it and how was it done? If you have any knowledge of
23 A. Well, I cannot say I do. All I can say is that it was discussed
24 whether it was possible that a piece of weapon, one shell caused injuries
25 to so many people and that, therefore, that was impossible. Now, whether
1 a commission was formed and at which level it was discussed, I did not
2 take part in such discussions and I, therefore, cannot speak about
3 details. All I can say is that in general on the basis of knowledge which
4 official -- and there was some -- official information, that it was
5 impossible that such a thing could have happened on the basis of action of
6 any of our pieces.
7 JUDGE ORIE: You said, "All I can say, that it was discussed
8 whether it was possible that a piece of weapon, one shell caused injuries
9 to so many people." Discussed by whom?
10 A. Discussed by the whole command and all the commands.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand that you were present during these
13 A. There were discussions day in, day out. Besides, the media
14 flooded us from all sides with the footage which we simply did not
15 believe. We simply did not believe they were authentic. We simply did
16 not think that they were true. That is what this is about.
17 JUDGE ORIE: You just told us that the conclusions drawn was that
18 such a piece of weapon -- that one shell could not have caused so many
19 injuries and casualties as you were told there had been. Were there any
20 other conclusions from that -- from these discussions?
21 A. There were other conclusions; namely, that it could have only been
22 the result of purposeful activity of the other side orchestrated, set up,
23 because we saw such footage. I believe this Tribunal also has some of
24 this footage. And it is impossible not to see that along a stall three or
25 four people are lying in pools of blood and that the stall and what is on
1 it, the goods, the stuff that is being sold, that it is absolutely intact,
2 that not a single scratch is there. So it's obvious that it is a set-up.
3 These are some of the conclusions which we drew from it, and I believe
4 such conclusions are still drawn from that because there is some such
5 footage. I did see some of it on television.
6 JUDGE ORIE: What were the other sources on which you based your
7 conclusions during these discussions? Because you told us that from the
8 footage, you saw pictures that, as you were told, were taken from the
9 Markale market. Were there any other sources that would support the
10 conclusions you'd drawn at that time?
11 A. Well, the first conclusion has to do with the action of the
12 weapon, or rather, the shell because technically it is impossible for one
13 shell to produce so many casualties. Had it been a bomb, I mean, dropped
14 from the air, it could -- yes, it could cause so many casualties, because
15 I saw such a shell, 120-millimetre shell fall next to me, and I and all
16 the men who were working with me got off without a single scratch, whereas
17 it fell right next to me on the asphalt and I got away completely
18 unscathed and the men next to me, and it was only 6 metres from me. And
19 the crater of the shell was like this, as a plate in the asphalt. And
20 that a shell could get through all those stalls and kill so many people,
21 it is impossible. Even a Kacusak [phoen] couldn't have done that.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Do you have any other considerations that
23 were -- that you used when reaching such a conclusion in your discussions
24 that it -- these were false allegations?
25 A. Well, as you have just said, these are false accusations, and as I
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 have said, a set-up, and I'd rather not discuss it any further, because I
2 really do not know. What else could I say?
3 JUDGE ORIE: I'm just repeating your words that these are false
4 allegations. I'm refraining from whether they are false or true. That's
5 finally one of the tasks this Chamber still has to achieve. But I do
6 understand that you cannot give me other reasons you've taken into
7 consideration when reaching such conclusions.
8 A. That's right.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for your answers. I have no further
11 Are there any additional questions to put to the witness?
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The Defence does have a
13 certain number of questions, yes. We'd like to finish, but we're afraid
14 that this witness might be called tomorrow. But we shall try to be as
15 brief as possible so as not to have to do it. Can I start?
16 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
18 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I will take up the questions
20 in a certain order and I will be precise.
21 Could the witness be shown the map which he marked following
22 questions by Judge Nieto-Navia, and I would like to concentrate on the
23 airport, the area of the airport.
24 Further examination by Mr. Piletta-Zanin:
25 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, you were asked by Judge Nieto-Navia
1 about the positions which was at the far east end of the airport which
2 couldn't or could open fire in the direction of the airport. Do you
3 remember that?
4 A. I do.
5 Q. Thank you. Witness, could you tell us, what were the positions
6 facing those Serb positions that you mentioned? What were the enemy
7 positions at the far east end of the airport?
8 A. Their positions were along this line of separation, as I said,
9 between Dobrinja I and IV on our side, Dobrinja II and III from the Muslim
10 side, and further into depth --
11 Q. I will interrupt you here. I will interrupt you now, witness.
12 The witness is adding his gesture to his words and is pointing towards
13 Dobrinja -- or rather, the whole route which covers the complex of the
14 airport to the north of it and, therefore, south of the Dobrinja locality.
15 Please proceed.
16 A. Secondly, the enemy positions were in the area of Donji Kotorac,
17 from the sports air field where we see this first structure - I am
18 pointing at it here - through the locality of Donji Kotorac and then on
19 towards the end of the runway. So these were the Muslim positions.
20 Q. Thank you very much.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please wait for the witness to
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you're requested to make a break
24 between answer and the next question.
25 And since this courtroom has to be used this afternoon, could you
1 please find a moment to finish in one or two minutes.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I can't do it, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Conclude not your examination but for this very
4 moment. I'm not limiting at this moment your time to ask questions to the
5 witness but we have to continue tomorrow so --
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. Yes, of course.
7 Of course. Yes, thank you. Thank you. I shall be happy to do that.
8 So I will repeat what I said for the transcript, and that was the
9 witness mentioned different localities, but apart from that he extends he
10 has gesture in the direction to the west and south of the airport.
11 Q. Witness, you told us what were the positions of the two sides. Do
12 you know if there were exchanges of fire or cross-fire between these
13 positions? And if so, often did that happen?
14 A. Yes. There were exchanges of fire --
15 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, this -- this question and indeed the
16 previous questions do not arise out of questions asked by you,
17 Mr. President, and Your Honours. In any event, there has been a
18 considerable volume of evidence to the same effect by other witnesses. So
19 I object to this question and to the line of questioning, in terms of
20 it -- whether it should be permitted.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, if you would give it some
22 thought, what arises from questions from the Judges and what not. The
23 mere fact that something is mentioned does not automatically mean that
24 it's an issue that came up. But we have to adjourn anyhow, so plenty of
25 time to consider it and then we'll hear your next questions tomorrow
2 Unfortunately we could not finish with your testimony today,
3 Mr. DP35. But certainly we'll finish tomorrow. So I have to ask you to
4 come back now in this same courtroom tomorrow morning at 9.00.
5 We'll adjourn until tomorrow morning.
6 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
7 at 1.47 p.m., to be reconvened on Friday,
8 the 17th day of January, 2003, at 9.00 a.m.