1 Monday, 10 March 2003
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.10 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around the courtroom.
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Case number
9 IT-98-29-T, the Prosecutor versus Stanislav Galic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 Is the Defence ready to continue the cross-examination of the
12 expert witness?
13 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
15 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 WITNESS: RADOVAN RADINOVIC [Resumed]
17 [Witness answered through interpreter]
18 Examined by Ms. Pilipovic: [Continued]
19 Q. [Interpretation] General, good morning.
20 A. Good morning.
21 Q. On Friday we stopped discussing documents 203, 1863, 1864, and
22 1865. These are the documents I showed you when we were speaking -- when
23 we spoke about the truce and the measures that General Galic took.
24 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Could these four documents please
25 be shown: 203, 1863, 1864, and 1865.
1 Q. General, I think that on Friday you spoke about document 203, 22
2 November 1992, and you explained what General Galic did, what measures he
3 took when he was appointed as corps commander.
4 A. Yes. I mentioned an entire series of measures taken by
5 General Galic in order to support the truce. In front of me I have
6 document 203 from the command of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps. The date is
7 the 22nd of November, 1992. It's a protest to UNPROFOR. General
8 Galic - at the time he was a colonel in the Sarajevo Romanija Corps - he
9 requested that the truce be supported and that UNPROFOR take action with
10 regard to the units of the 1st Corps of the BH army and he requested that
11 this truce be maintained, because he said if the action wasn't
12 interrupted, halted, the corps forces would be forced to take measures to
13 respond to the situation, and "that would bring into question all the
14 efforts to find a peaceful solution to the problems in Sarajevo and
16 JUDGE ORIE: Could the document the witness is talking about be
17 put on the ELMO because the Bench has some problems in identifying the
18 right -- and could the ELMO be zoomed in also on the upper part.
19 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. General, did you read from item 1: "if those actions don't stop,
21 the corps will be forced to respond adequately to the situation. It would
22 put in question all the efforts for a peaceful solution to the problem in
23 Sarajevo and beyond, and this is something that UNPROFOR is supporting
25 A. Yes, I read that out. I wanted to emphasise the fact that you can
1 see how at the beginning of his mandate General Galic insisted on
2 maintaining the truce because that was an opportunity for peace.
3 Otherwise, if it was necessary to respond to the provocations, the opening
4 of fire on the part of the other side, violence would escalate, peace
5 would be threatened, and then the chances of having a peaceful solution to
6 the situation in Sarajevo would be reduced. So I concluded that he was in
7 favour of a peaceful solution.
8 Q. General, document 1863, 15 February 1993; 1865, 19th of June,
9 1993; and the document dated the 15th of February, do they also indicate
10 the measures taken by General Stanislav Galic in order to cooperate with
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... With the
15 unnumbered -- at least partly unnumbered series. Could whatever document
16 is dealt with be put on the ELMO so that we can identify it.
17 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it was -- the
18 Defence's intention, but since you had the documents, or rather, the
19 registry, we were not in a position to make corrections, but corrections
20 have been made in the registry.
21 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not blaming you for anything, but we have one
22 well-numbered set by now, which is in the hands of the registry. So if
23 they are put on the ELMO, we can follow what the testimony is. Please
25 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. General, is this document 1863 a document that is from the
2 Sarajevo Romanija Corps about determining the coordinates for UNPROFOR?
3 A. Yes. The corps commander tells his subordinates, orders his
4 subordinates to introduce the UNPROFOR coordinates in their working
5 booklets so that they could be protected from possible action from the
6 Sarajevo Romanija Corps, taken by the units of the 1st Corps.
7 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Please, could we have the document
9 Q. That's a document dated the 15th of February, 1993.
10 A. Yes, the date is the 15th of February, 1993. It's an order in
11 which General Galic ordered his subordinates to introduce the coordinates
12 of observation points in the territory under the control of the BH army
13 1st Corps, and he forbids that within a radius of under 1.000 metres they
14 should not take action in that area, and in this way he wanted to avoid
15 any possible hit that might occur when the artillery is used.
16 Q. And we have document 1865 too.
17 A. That's also an order in which General Galic ordered his
18 subordinates to cease hostilities.
19 Q. Thank you.
20 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, given the time that
21 we have, that the Defence has now left, my colleague will continue with
22 the examination.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
24 Examined by Mr. Piletta-Zanin:
25 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, General.
1 A. Good day.
2 Q. We'll start by showing you some documents. But to the extent that
3 this is possible, could you please answer my questions by saying yes or
4 no. This would be much appreciated because of our time restrictions.
5 General, first of all, a document that we're going to show you,
6 the number of the document is 278, 278. And at the same time, we are
7 going to show you a map, with the assistance of the usher, and we will
8 place it on the ELMO, as well as document number 278, please.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'd appreciate it if we could
10 show this to the general, document 278, in order not to waste too much
12 Mr. President, these documents have been numbered. If we are
13 going to lose some time, I'd appreciate it if this could be taken into
14 account, if this could be added to the time that we have.
15 Q. General, you spoke about elevations around Sarajevo. Do you
16 remember speaking about that or not?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you. General, I don't think I heard you say anything about
19 the Grdonj elevation. What was this elevation called? Do you remember?
20 A. The Grdonj elevation? Well, I don't remember what the altitude
21 was exactly, but I know where it is. I think it is about 805 metres. I
22 think that that was the altitude.
23 Q. Thank you. What can you tell us, since we're talking about this
24 now, what was the position, General -- I apologise, what was the army that
25 held the positions on Grdonj; in other words, elevation 906?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. The units of the 1st Corps of the BH army held this position,
2 elevation 906, and the positions that were just below, a little further to
3 the east or to the south-east, that was in Sedrenik and the Sarajevo
4 Romanija Corps held this.
5 Q. General, very well. But on the elevation Grdonj itself, which
6 army held the positions in the southern part of Grdonj?
7 A. That was the unit of the 1st Corps of the BH army.
8 Q. Thank you. How do you know and who did you speak to about this in
9 order to obtain this knowledge?
10 A. I was partially able to see that from the maps that I had, from
11 documents to an extent, and I was provided with the direct information
12 from the command of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps, the 1st unit,
13 General Lizdek.
14 Q. Thank you. General, I would now like to examine document 278.
15 You have it in front of you. It also has an ERN number 025 -- I
16 apologise, 02056268. General, do you recognise this document?
17 A. Yes. It's a document that I had in front of me when I was writing
18 my report.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could it please be put on the ELMO.
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: So we can recognise it.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
23 Q. It's a document that consists of a number of pages. Could you
24 please give another document to the general so that he can go through it.
25 Must I repeat that? Should I repeat that?
1 JUDGE ORIE: You asked that another document -- another document.
2 Which document did you have in mind?
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I asked for a second document
4 to be shown to the witness so that he could be able to go through it,
5 thank you in advance.
6 Q. General, having solved this problem, do you recognise this
7 document? You said yes. What can you tell us about this document,
9 A. I recognised the document. It's an order from the commander of
10 the 102nd Motorised Brigade from the 1st Corps of the BH army, and it's
11 dated the 1st of February, 1994. In this document, he orders what the
12 disposition of his subordinate units should be, battalions, divisions,
13 companies, command posts, logistics, et cetera. And on the basis of that
14 document, I drew a map. This order was represented with map symbols on
15 the map, and you can see the positions in that part of Sarajevo.
16 Q. Thank you. General, I also asked for the map to be placed on the
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could you place this map,
19 please, on the ELMO.
20 Q. My question is as follows - and I'd like to say that the following
21 number will be D235 - General, to the right of you, you have the map.
22 A. Are we speaking about this map?
23 Q. Yes. General, with regard to a second map that we are going to
24 show you in a minute, for this area, the area to the north-west of
25 Nedzarici, did you have a lot of information, more than the information
1 you had for other companies or brigades? What can you tell us about the
2 information you had, please?
3 A. In these areas, that is to say, positions in the town, from when
4 the SRK was formed, the 3rd Motorised Brigade was based here, and then in
5 the middle of 1993 it was renamed the 102nd Motorised Brigade. For this
6 area of Sarajevo, I had the greatest amount of information, which is why I
7 decided to represent the combat positions of those brigades in that part
8 of the Sarajevo theatre of war.
9 Q. Thank you. General, we're going to have to carry out an exercise
10 very rapidly. And could you please answer these questions: There are
11 some symbols on this map. Are these classical symbols that are usually
12 used in the army?
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] And could the technical booth
14 please zoom in so that we could have a clear view of this map.
15 Q. Have you understood the question, General?
16 A. Yes, I have.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Please, could you zoom in.
18 A. I drew this map on the basis of instructions for working maps,
19 which were in force in the JNA, and which both sides in the conflict
20 adopted. So according to those rules, how certain elements of the combat
21 disposition and how certain elements of the unit should be represented,
22 this is decided on. And in operative communications, one is very clear
23 about what one can find there and what this means.
24 Q. Very well. General, so that we can understand this matter, we'll
25 start with the simplest things. Could you tell us what a triangle means
1 with a flag. I can see a triangle and a flag attached to it with the
2 number "2." What does it mean, General?
3 A. The triangle above which there is a flag with a "2", a number 2 in
4 it, this is the map symbol for the command post of that battalion, that
5 is, the 2nd Motorised Battalion.
6 Q. Thank you. General, we also see other symbols such as a
7 horizontal line, a half circle full, and two or three curves coming out of
8 this circle, sort of.
9 A. Do you mean this symbol?
10 Q. No. I don't want to guide you, but there is a full half circle
11 under letters "BVG 2."
12 A. I see. You mean this. This is a map symbol for firing positions
13 of the battalion firing group, and inside of this ellipse is a symbol for
14 mortar, which means that this is the firing group of the 1st Battalion.
15 Q. I see. General, under the word "Borbeni," please, to the far
16 right, near the word -- under the "R" in the word "Borbeni," there is a
17 sign depicting -- please look at the map. Under the letter "R" in the
18 word "Borbeni" --
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could the AV booth zoom in on
20 this so we can see clearly. That is, zoom in -- zoom out a little. Yes.
21 Zoom out a little, please. That's it. Just a little further so that we
22 can see the word "Borbeni," just a little more, some more, so that we see
23 all of it. A little further out. Right. Please stop here.
24 Q. General, under the word "Borbeni," under the letter "R," here is
25 what I'm interested in. On the right side, to the right - the witness is
1 pointing - this sign, these three lines, two of them shorter, the central
2 one being longer, what does this depict? Yes, this sign.
3 A. This is a map symbol for firing positions of the brigade firing
4 group, and these three circles depict, or rather, mean that this brigade
5 firing group has three batteries. So these circles are map symbols for
6 batteries, Howitzers, and mortars. So this firing group has two Howitzer
7 batteries and one mortar -- or rather, two mortar batteries and one
9 Q. My next question is as follows: All the signs that we see on this
10 map, with the exception of the flags, do all these signs depict positions
11 where specific weaponry is located, or do they mean something else? I'm
12 talking about the symbols on this map.
13 A. All these symbols depicted on the map represent locations where
14 armed men are located, even what you called triangles with little flags,
15 those are command posts and command posts are protected, secured, by armed
16 men, such as police units of the command posts.
17 Q. We'll pass to document 235.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] So as not to waste time, could
19 it be put in front of the witness.
20 Q. Witness, do you recognise this document?
21 A. Yes, I recognise the document. It is an order of the commander of
22 the 1st Corps of the BH army for defence, dated 25th October 1993.
23 Q. Would you please give me your comments, if any, on this document.
24 A. Yes, I do. I would like us to look at this document where the
25 commander of the 1st Corps sets out the areas of responsibility of his
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 subordinate brigades, and he orders that in these zones they organise
2 combat positions. He explicitly sets out which unit or which brigade is
3 in which area.
4 On the second page of the document, under item 5, 5.1, that is,
5 the commander orders to the commander of the 1st Motorised Brigade where
6 and in which zone he should organise defence, in other words, where he
7 should deploy his forces. He determines the positions and the command
8 post for this brigade. This is a part of the town - and I'm sorry we
9 don't have this central map with us to see which area this is - this is
10 the north-west part of the town from Ugorsko to Visk [phoen].
11 Q. We're going to do the following: The map will be distributed with
12 one copy put on the ELMO. I don't know if the usher can hear me. Thank
14 One of these maps can be put on the ELMO?
15 A. If you allow me to finish my answer.
16 Q. General, right now -- yes, please continue.
17 A. So according to the same model of organisation of defence for the
18 102nd Brigade, which we saw on the ELMO with a lot of detail, the
19 commander of the corps orders the 2nd, the 1st, the 5th, the 101st Brigade
20 of the HVO, 15th, 105th, 4th, and all units of firing support and
21 logistics to take up positions in the urban part of Sarajevo, with the
22 exception of the 4th Brigade, which was occupying positions outside
23 Hrasnica, that is, in the strict urban area.
24 If you now imagine this city of Sarajevo, this strictly urban
25 part, it was occupied by military forces in the identical manner as we saw
1 on the map dealing with the 102nd Brigade.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I would like to suggest with
3 the Court's leave that our assistant, with the help of the usher, puts
4 this open map behind you so that we can all see it. If not, it will have
5 to be folded and put on the ELMO.
6 Of course, if we have the Court's leave. Maybe the lady will be
7 able to handle it on her own. Thank you very much.
8 Q. General, we are now going to do this in this way so that we can
9 see better. You see the map here?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Did you make this map?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. General, do you have this pointer that you were using yesterday?
14 Yes. Thank you. We see in the eastern part of this map a zone which is
15 very representative, indicative, of military presence. Does it have
16 anything in common with the little map that we saw a moment ago?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Very near that but further to the west we see another zone with
19 military installations, that is, a zone right next to it, to the west,
20 west to the zone, that is, between the two zones you indicated -- yes,
21 this is it. And then to the north, there is a zone which apparently is
22 devoid of military installations. Could you give us your comments: Why
23 does it seem that in this zone there are less military targets or
24 installations, and what can you tell us in general about this map?
25 A. I am showing where one battalion of the Ilidza Brigade of the SRK
1 was, and I didn't represent this as military targets because I was
2 depicting military targets of the 1st Corps of the BH army in Sarajevo.
3 In these areas I did not depict any targets because my idea was to show
4 how they are positioned, how they are laid out in the urban part of the
5 city, because my entire report focussed on the urban part of Sarajevo.
6 But generally speaking, for the so-called peripheral non-urban areas,
7 there is a separate document -- I don't know the exact number, but it
8 passed through my hands. It was done in the Sarajevo Romanija Corps, and
9 it identified about 370 targets. There is also a map of these targets
10 where they are clearly depicted, and we can see that even this part is
11 full of military resources of the 1st BH army Corps. However, I didn't
12 represent them here. I was interested, rather, in the urban part.
13 Here, in this urban part of Sarajevo not so many targets are
14 depicted for the precise reason that in the documents that were available
15 to me, I did not have as much information as for the areas where these
16 targets are represented. In this part of Dobrinja, there was the 5th
17 Brigade, the 101st Brigade. In this area there was the 6th Brigade. But
18 for them I had less information, so I couldn't identify targets as I was
19 able to in the localities where there are more of them.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Mundis.
23 MR. MUNDIS: For the record, perhaps, the areas that the witness
24 has just pointed to should be indicated for the purposes of the
1 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please do so, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yes, gladly. But
3 I have to say that he mentioned Dobrinja, whereas the witness clearly
4 indicated clearly in the area of Dobrinja, that we know well. He said the
5 5th and the 105th. We have to see in the transcript. And he also
6 mentioned the zone of Mojmilo, which --
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was the 101st.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, the 101st Motorised, I
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 6th, the 10th at
11 Colina Kapa-Jewish cemetery, Kladovo and Cuprija the 1st, then
12 Kozja Cuprija-Hladivode, Hladivode-Grdonj is the 3rd, the 7th was from
13 Grdonj to Kobilja Glava, and thereon we enter the area of the 1st Brigade,
14 which went up to Zabrdje, from then on there was the 2nd and the 102nd. I
15 didn't depict the targets for these because this goes outside the urban
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation].
18 Q. How many brigades are on this map?
19 A. We don't see any brigades on this map. They were on the map of
20 mutual deployment where we see 13 brigades but some of them are not
21 visible because they did not have areas of responsibility. There were
22 three forces for alternative assignments, such as the 1st Vikic Brigade,
23 the special MUP Brigade, such as the Reconnaissance and Sabotage Brigade,
24 such as the Independent Manoeuvring Battalion, that is, a number of
25 battalions that did not have specified areas of responsibility in
2 Q. Two questions about this map, and we'll come back to it later:
3 You mentioned a moment ago there was a brigade at Grdonj. Will you please
4 check on this map. Where did you draw the line in Grdonj? And then with
5 respect to elevation 906, do you assess this map is accurate in view of
6 the information we obtained, oral and documentary?
7 MR. MUNDIS: Objection.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. MUNDIS: It's a leading question.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour, may I respond?
12 We have the map in front of our eyes, all of us. We see that the northern
13 border, near Grdonj, passes through a certain area. What I want to ask
14 the witness is that he gives us his comment which concerns a line. It is
15 not too much to ask in view of the time spent by the Prosecution.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mundis.
17 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, in order to save time and not ask the
18 witness to leave the courtroom, let me quickly state an objection on the
19 grounds that the witness has testified that he created the map. It would,
20 therefore, follow that he would think it was accurate.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, we heard a lot of evidence,
22 especially on the situation of confrontation lines in the area you were
23 just referring to by those who were present at that time. So therefore,
24 this expert witness is not primarily a witness of fact, I would say. But
25 if you think that he knows facts from his own observation, then this is
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 merely a matter of fact, it's not a matter of expertise where a line is.
2 That's a fact. Could you please lay the basis for his knowledge. And if
3 not, if there's no personal knowledge, then the Chamber will be able to
4 compare this map with the evidence we've heard. Please proceed.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Gladly.
6 Q. Witness, you took part in the peace negotiations in Geneva between
7 the two parties in the capacity of expert. That's what you told us last
8 time. At that time did you have in your possession military maps,
9 detailed ones, that depicted the situation on the ground; yes or no?
10 A. We did have maps. I don't know whether they were detailed -- in
11 fact, they were detailed, but I don't know if they were precise. I was
12 just a participant in negotiations.
13 Q. Thank you. But at that time did you know whether the Serb
14 party - reply with yes or no - did you know whether this area of Grdonj
15 was under Muslim control?
16 MR. MUNDIS: Objection. It's a leading question. And in light of
17 the answers previously -- the witness's previous answer, there's a lack of
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You're now asking whether a certain area was
20 under the control of one party. Do I have to understand you that the
21 expert witness should answer this question on the basis of the maps he
22 just referred to, or is there any personal knowledge? It should be clear
23 what the basis is for the facts on which this expert relies.
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] About these two things,
25 possibly the maps and possibly -- this is the purpose of my question. I'm
1 asking him whether the representatives of the Serb side, in fact, the Serb
2 side, indicated at these peace negotiations whether certain elevations
3 were under Muslim control. And if yes, whether Grdonj was among them. I
4 want to hear what he personally knows about it as a participant in the
6 Q. If you don't know, you just don't know.
7 A. No, I don't know.
8 Q. General, thank you. I would like us to go back to this map now.
9 I would like us to see what was the maximum number of military
10 installations, military targets, that we could find in Sarajevo or in
11 theory if there were more of them than depicted, what could be the number
12 from statistical information?
13 MR. MUNDIS: Objection, Mr. President. It's a leading question.
14 It calls for speculation, and it lacks probative value.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, gladly, Your Honour. I
17 don't think it is a leading question. I was asking the witness whether he
18 depicted everything he could. There are quasi-scientific ways of
19 representing something without actually seeing. For instance, I can see a
20 truck full of wheat and I don't necessarily have to wait. If I know the
21 capacity and I can calculate and arithmetically determine how many tonnes
22 of wheat there are in it. That's why I'm asking the witness by analogy.
23 And I don't think it is speculation. We can calculate things in one or
24 another way, for this clarification.
25 JUDGE ORIE: So if I do understand you well, you are asking the
1 witness what, according to his experience, he would expect to be the
2 number of and then I think you're asking about military installations,
3 military targets.
4 Your question is twofold. The first one is: What is the maximum
5 number of military installations, military targets that we could find in
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Precisely.
8 Q. For instance -- first of all, if the total number is
9 represented - yes or no; and second, if not, what can be said about it?
10 A. Shall I answer now?
11 JUDGE ORIE: First let's try to get the question clear,
12 Mr. Piletta-Zanin. Do you know the total number of military installations
13 that, as far as I understand, could be military targets in Sarajevo? Yes.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In this urban part of Sarajevo,
15 every day, according to my reckoning, there was over 1500 military
16 installations that can be considered as --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you. You said according to your
18 reckoning. The first question is: Do you know it? And my second
19 question -- my second question would be: Whether you could, on the basis
20 of your experience, give a calculated guess as to the number? First, do
21 you know it?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do know.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please give us the answer. We don't have to
24 guess then.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Every day in the urban part of
1 Sarajevo there was over 1500 targets. This can be calculated in a
2 relatively reliable manner based on the structure of units and their
3 deployment, which is depicted on the map of mutual deployment.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I understand your answer to be that you have an
5 opinion about it on the basis of your experience. Because if you
6 calculate it, it's not that you know one, two, three, four, five. But if
7 you say you have five units of such character, they would have -- they
8 would need so and so much command posts or whatever. But -- so we do
9 understand your answer to be a calculation on the basis of your
10 experience. Please, then, explain to us how you calculate this.
11 Or if you want to proceed --
12 I do understand that the outcome of your calculation was that
13 there were over 1500.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] In the interval, perhaps we
15 can put this map down. We don't want to spare -- to squander the manpower
16 we have in this courtroom.
17 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, while that's -- while that's being
18 done, could I get the exhibit number for that map, please. It's not
19 marked on my copy of the map.
20 JUDGE ORIE: On my copy, it's 1913 on the left top corner.
21 Now -- yes, that's the -- this one is perfectly numbered, as far as my
22 copy is concerned.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
25 Q. General, could you please give us your answer about this
1 calculation. Very briefly, please.
2 A. Your Honour, under military doctrine, an average battery target,
3 the target of a battery or a mortar company is deployed section in
4 defence. It is very easy to calculate how many sections the 1st Corps had
5 in the urban part of Sarajevo if you follow the areas of deployment of its
6 brigades, by brigades and by battalions and companies, as I have shown on
7 this other A4 map. If you do that, you know exactly the composition of
8 company firing groups, battalion firing groups, brigade firing groups,
9 company observation points, battalion command posts, the command posts of
10 brigades, the logistics, including bases, quartermaster stations,
11 technical stations, communication centres, radio devices, workshops,
12 depots. And when you take all that into account and add it up, I
13 calculated that there was 1.530 targets in Sarajevo every day. This is
14 nothing too complicated. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to
15 calculate this. You only need to know the structure of the troops.
16 Q. If I understood you well, General, you are telling us that
17 preceding from the hierarchy starting from brigade down, you know also
18 that so much weaponry is needed for one brigade and so much manpower, and
19 that's how you arrived at the figure of 1530. Is this your reasoning?
20 A. Those are the military resources that are determined by one
21 battery target, by the target that a battery fires at. A battery can
22 consist of four to six artillery pieces, mortars, cannons, or Howitzers.
23 That's the target in question.
24 Q. General, another question about these targets: Let's take the
25 number 1.500. Out of these 1.500 -- about these 1.500 targets, what can
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 you tell us about the mobile nature of these targets? For example, were
2 these targets embedded? Were they fixed, or the -- on the contrary, were
3 they very mobile targets? Could you comment on this, please?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mundis.
5 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, the witness just gave a list of 10 or
6 12 different types of targets. The question is not specific.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from that, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I do understand
8 that the --
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Will you hear what I have to
10 say, Mr. President?
11 JUDGE ORIE: I just wanted to add one other element so that you
12 could respond. I'm drawing your attention to the fact that the witness
13 said that his number was based upon a calculation of certain types of
14 targets, and I would like to ask you what your question was specifically
15 about when you -- about types of targets or about specific factual
16 targets. Because your question asked whether the targets were mobile
17 and -- yes, please respond, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, my question was
19 vague, so that I should not be criticised for being leading. I'd
20 appreciate it if this witness could tell us whether certain targets were
21 mobile or fixed, and I did not want to be specific and say targets such as
22 a machine-gun carried by a man, was this mobile or not? My question was
23 vague, and I wanted the witness to answer on the basis of his experience
24 and on the basis of his knowledge, on the basis of what he was able to see
25 in the documents that he examined when compiling his report.
1 Has the objection been rejected, Mr. President?
2 JUDGE ORIE: No. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you may ask a question about
3 this, but please make clear whether you are asking about --
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Well, I'll move on to another
5 subject, Mr. President, because I see that it is not possible to question
6 the witness about this.
7 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... I will ask a
9 Could you tell us whether by nature of the targets you just
10 mentioned, whether you could tell us whether they are by nature of a
11 mobile character or of a fixed character.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The targets that I had
13 mentioned -- among the targets that I had mentioned, there were some that
14 were relatively fixed and there were others that were mobile, that could
15 be moved. The structure of the army was such that --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Are you now referring to targets of which you know
17 the existence specifically, or are you talking about the targets by their
18 very nature being mobile -- more or less mobile?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All these targets are mobile. But
20 I'm talking about what I know about Sarajevo. You can see from the
21 documents this is frequently the case, in relation to UNPROFOR observers
22 and international military observers. Information was cited according to
23 which officials from the 1st Corps of the BH army held their mortars and
24 moved them from one place to another very easily, and this was very
25 difficult for the Sarajevo Romanija Corps to neutralise, to deal with. So
1 this part of the combat disposition was very mobile. They would fire a
2 few mortars -- mortar shells from a certain position and then they would
3 move, and this is how they'd provoke a response from the Army of Republika
4 Srpska, or rather, from the units of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand that you specifically are pointing to
6 the mobility of mortars?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That of mortars and of the
8 manoeuvring forces that provided the support force. In the 1st Brigade
9 and in the 3rd Brigade these were the armoured battalions, the mixed
10 artillery battalions and the self-propelled Howitzers which were in the
11 Hum area and in the Velesic area.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
14 Q. General, you have spoken about these weapons. With regard to the
15 issue of mobility, what can you tell us about PAMs and similar weapons,
16 PAMs, anti-aircraft machine-guns?
17 A. You can move these weapons at any point in time. They are very
18 mobile weapons in the battlefield.
19 Q. What was the case in Sarajevo, according to the documents that you
20 were able to examine; yes or no?
21 A. Yes, of course.
22 Q. The same question for PATs, anti-aircraft cannons?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Your answer?
25 A. Yes. Yes.
1 Q. General, as a result, given that the number of tactical
2 targets - the number of weapons was 1.500 according to your
3 calculations - and the number of places where these targets were, could
4 the number of positions be far greater given their mobile nature?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Thank you. General, I'll move on to a methodological question.
7 The map that you had in front of you a minute ago was elaborated, and I
8 think that you identified over 220 features. You marked over 220
9 features. Can you tell us how you proceeded, what methodology did you use
10 to determine what these objectives were. And secondly, to locate them on
11 the map. Which documents allow us to understand how your map functions in
12 methodological terms?
13 A. I studied the documents of the sides involved in the conflict, and
14 I singled out the documents which contained information on military
15 targets, and on that basis I compiled a list of 24 documents which made
16 reference to those targets. The list of documents is numbered from 1 to
17 25, and 24 documents because in the first list I made a mistake. One
18 document was mentioned twice, so one list mentioned 24 documents, the
19 other 25. Out of those 24 documents, in fact, 16 documents from the
20 archives of the 1st Corps, they were provided to the Defence by the
21 Prosecution and the Defence provided me with these documents, and those
22 documents come from the archives of the SRK. On the basis of those
23 25 -- or rather, 24 documents, I compiled a list of military targets in
24 Sarajevo according to the groups, as they were mentioned on the map, as
25 they were indicated on the map. And furthermore, I marked the positions
1 of those targets on the map, the ones that I managed to identify, since I
2 have personal knowledge of Sarajevo, and this was also with the help of
3 people who knew Sarajevo better than I did. So these documents consist of
4 three parts: There's a list of documents, a list of targets, and then we
5 have the targets marked on the map. So it's easy to check what sort of
6 targets are in question if you take into consideration all these three
7 groups of documents. That was the methodology I followed.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. With the
9 assistance of the usher, I would like to hand out - but I think that these
10 documents have already been provided to the registrar - the list of
11 documents numbered D1915. I think I have a sufficient number of copies.
12 If someone would like to take this document.
13 Yes. That's the one, but we've already numbered it here.
14 Q. General, could you confirm that this is the document you were
15 referring to?
16 A. Yes. I was talking about this document. If you have a look at
17 the number of the document, it's 15 and then 17. So the 16th one is one I
18 repeated, so I removed it then, but so as not to disturb the series I am
19 still left with the number 25, but in fact there are 24 documents.
20 Q. Very well. General, with regard to this document, there was a
21 number of a document that was provided to you. Can you confirm this
22 document that was shown to you?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. This is the list that was already prepared. Madam Registrar, you
25 marked it to the right of this list, but it must have been provided to you
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 as one bundle. I don't know if you have it. If you don't have it, could
2 you place it there, please.
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I don't want to
4 waste too much time, but these documents were handed out. I know that
5 we're working -- that we're going very fast. Can we show them to
6 General Galic -- I apologise, to General Radinovic.
7 That's it.
8 Q. General, could you have a quick look at the document.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mundis.
10 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, I'm not quite sure which bundle of
11 documents the Defence is referring to.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I think the Defence is referring to a bundle of
13 documents which was presented to us in a greyish -- yes. I think that's
14 the --
15 MR. MUNDIS: This has now been marked as Defence 1915, this entire
16 bundle; is that correct?
17 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know. Because the list of documents is not
18 numbered. All the documents listed seem to be -- to have been numbered.
19 And they -- I find them next to the list itself.
20 Does the list play any role, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, then it should be
21 numbered as well, or would you like to whole bundle to be --
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, because
23 I'd like to witness to have a quick look at it and just say yes, that's
24 it, so that I won't have any problems with regard to identification and so
25 that I'm not told you've invented targets in Sarajevo.
1 Q. Now, Witness, have a look at the document. If you recognise it,
2 you could say yes, that's the document I've seen and then we could move on
3 to another subject. It's just a question of procedure.
4 A. Yes, I recognise these documents, and I can confirm that this is
5 the list, the one I've been provided.
6 Q. Very well. So that's the one that you used when writing your
7 report and creating the map.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] With the assistance of the
9 usher and Madam Registrar, could we have document 243, and we'll examine
10 pages 0204 -- 02057541, page 4 --
11 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel please repeat the numbers.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Do you have this text in Serbian, General?
14 A. On which page? 131 --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, the booth asked --
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The second page --
17 JUDGE ORIE: The numbers that you mentioned.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. I apologise. Document
19 243, D243. We'll have a look at the second page. The ERN number finished
20 with numbers 541. The line starts with P/4.
21 Q. And general, after having had a glance at this document, could you
22 tell us -- do you have the same page?
23 A. Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: May it be put on the ELMO so that we have -- at least
25 we know what the front page looks like.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could we have the second page
2 on the screen, the one that finishes with the numbers 541.
3 Q. And could you read the sentence that is underlined, that is to
4 say, the one that starts at item 4.
5 A. It's part of the document where the commander informs of his
6 decision. "He decided that by relying on certain ground points, he should
7 destroy the enemy."
8 JUDGE ORIE: We have difficulties in finding 243,
9 Mr. Piletta-Zanin. Could perhaps the first --
10 Mr. Mundis.
11 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, I rise to object on the grounds that
12 this is cumulative. Document 243 was a document Ms. Pilipovic showed this
13 witness either late Thursday or early Friday and had the witness read out
14 a portion of the same exact paragraph that Mr. Piletta-Zanin has now taken
15 the witness to. You'll find it was about the, maybe, twelfth document
16 that was shown to the witness. We've already -- we've already been over
17 this area, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Ms. Pilipovic, could you confirm that you dealt
19 with the same document, or is it something different?
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It's quite probable. It's
23 quite probable. But my question was first of all: As we have seen many
24 documents, I wanted to refresh the memory so that he could see what was at
25 stake because he has seen hundreds of documents. If I can't do this, very
1 well, I'll try to achieve the same effect by asking a lot of questions.
2 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... Objection to
3 say if I can't do that, if I can't question this. Would you please. You
4 can do it. There's an objection. We are trying to find document 243 out
5 of the big bundle. It would have certainly helped if you would have said
6 this is a document Ms. Pilipovic went through already last Thursday, last
7 Friday, so that in the heap of documents you have provided, part of them
8 unnumbered, that we can find our way. You can do -- you are just
9 responding to a -- to an objection. I have not given a decision, so
10 there's no need whatsoever to complain about what you can do and what you
11 cannot do. But we have to be in a position to follow the exercise.
12 Otherwise, it will be useless -- the testimony will be useless if we are
13 not in a position to follow closely what the expert witness tells us.
14 Please proceed and refrain from similar comment.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. I'll have another
16 comment at the end of the hearing. I'll need 30 seconds to expose
17 something very clearly. And if possible, I will make the comment in open
19 Q. Witness, document 243. My question is as follows -- and I would
20 appreciate it if you could read this document out, if you could read the
21 sentence that I mentioned to you out aloud.
22 A. "By relying on appropriate ground features, destroy the enemy at
23 the forward end and spread panic among the Chetniks and civilians, then
24 launch an attack," and then he mentions the direction Stupsko Brdo, the
25 Nedzarici barracks, the theological faculty, Vojnicko Polje, Dobrinja V,
1 Aleksa Santic primary school, the airport settlement, and he mentioned
2 artillery preparation and the necessity of imposing great losses on the
3 Chetniks, losses are to be imposed on the manpower and materiel.
4 Q. General, with regard to what General Galic did, with regard to
5 civilians, my question is as follows: Did you find any documents
6 containing orders from General Galic which dealt with the issue of
7 civilians? Did you come across any such documents?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Thank you. General, did you find only one document, or did you
10 find several documents?
11 A. Several.
12 Q. Thank you. General, what you were able to see -- according to
13 what you were able to see yourself, what was the spirit and what were the
14 contents of the orders issued by General Galic in these documents?
15 A. General Galic issued orders that stated that civilians should not
16 be deployed, or rather, that they should be positioned 5 kilometres behind
17 the front in order to protect them.
18 Q. I'll stop you there in order to save time. With regard to the
19 treatment of civilians, and in particular Muslim civilians, did
20 General Galic issue any specific instructions; yes or no? What was the
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. What sort of instructions, General?
24 A. I came across orders in which General Galic ordered his
25 subordinates to behave in accordance with the Geneva Conventions in
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 relation to the civilian population who were in the territory under the
2 control of the Serbian forces.
3 Q. General, the orders provided by General Galic that stated that the
4 Geneva Conventions should be respected, were they repeated to the troops
5 and what can you tell us with regard to the issue of trenches and combat?
6 A. As far as orders are concerned, General Galic requested in his
7 documents that his officers and his men should respect the Geneva
8 Conventions. There is almost -- there is not a single document -- there
9 is barely a single document in which this isn't mentioned. So I didn't
10 come across a document which would show that they did not respect these
12 Q. Very well. General, I would now like to move on to other
13 subjects, and perhaps we will return to this map if we have the time. But
14 we're going to move on to more general issues.
15 First of all, General, you were asked to dictate your observations
16 for practical reasons. There were three or four observations. Did you
17 have the time to do this? Because we haven't seen anything. If you have
18 had the time to do so, perhaps during the break you could provide us with
19 these documents so that we can familiarise ourselves with this and so that
20 we can continue with your examination.
21 And secondly, General, in your report you often use the term
22 "civil war." I'd appreciate it if you could tell us why you use this
23 term and what the practical distinctions are. What is the difference
24 between a civil war and an ordinary war in reality on the ground?
25 A. I use the term "civil war" for the war in Sarajevo and in
1 Bosnia-Herzegovina because it really had all the characteristics of a
2 classical civil war. Why did I insist on using that term? Because the
3 perception of military elements, the behaviour of the sides, the overview
4 of the dynamics, the relation between the warring factions, the relation
5 between the civilians and the soldiers, all these factors are quite
6 different with regard to ordinary wars in which it's easy to distinguish
7 the fronts. You know where the fronts are. You know who the warring
8 factions are. The warring factions can be distinguished on the basis of
9 the symbols that they bear. All the relations between civilians and
10 soldiers are determined. It's easy to distinguish military and civilian
11 objects. There is no confusion in this regard, and it's easy to assess
12 whether principles of doctrine are being enforced in accordance with the
13 rules of war or not. And in civil wars, this is not very reliable. It's
14 very difficult. It's almost impossible.
15 Q. General, could you briefly comment, if possible, on soldiers, on
16 troops. I'm referring to infantry men involved in the reality of the
17 conflict in an urban environment, someone who receives certain
18 instructions but who also has to defend and defend himself. What is the
19 influence of such a situation, of such a civil war on the specific -- on
20 the particular attitude of a soldier in such an environment? Have you
21 understood my question?
22 A. Yes. In such a conflict, the one that we are talking about, in
23 militia military organisations where subordination is not very well
24 defined and where the principle of participating on a voluntary basis in
25 an army, where there is no war situation -- for example, where there are
1 no clear symbol, where you can't distinguish uniforms and where people
2 don't reside only in military buildings but also in civilian buildings.
3 These are all elements which make it impossible for the
4 organisation -- for the military organisation to be organised in a
5 professional way, in a way that a well-organised army would do this. And
6 the system of command suffers from -- fails more than in classical wars.
7 Q. Witness, for technical reasons, I don't think we'll have the time
8 to go into your observations, during the break to familiarise ourselves
9 with your observations. This is why I'm asking you about it now. You
10 wanted to comment on your text. It wasn't a purely technical comment. It
11 didn't concern errors, but it had to do with the substance. And I think
12 that I know that it has to do with the matter of distinctions, with making
13 distinctions. What can you tell us about this in relation to your report?
14 What can you tell us about this distinction?
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mundis.
16 MR. MUNDIS: Objection, Mr. President. The question is not clear.
17 If Mr. Piletta-Zanin is referring to distinction as a legal term, that's
18 not a proper question.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'm in a stalemate situation
22 because we don't have the amendments that you wanted to have written. I
23 don't think we'll have them when we carry on with this testimony. I think
24 that I know what the witness would like to say. If you would allow me to
25 be leading here, I'll be very clear. But otherwise, for technical
1 reasons, I'll not be able to put this question.
2 JUDGE ORIE: We'll consider to -- whether we'd allow you to do
3 this during the break.
4 Could you give us a brief indication on to what subject you'd like
5 to add something. Just mention the subject, not your changes you'd like
6 to make. But on what subject would you like to change your report or
7 adapt your report or ...?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That has to do with distinguishing
9 civilians from soldiers.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. After the break you can put some questions.
11 And it's -- the witness now identified himself what was the area on which
12 he would like to make any changes to his report.
13 Madam Usher, could you please escort the witness out of the
14 courtroom so that Mr. Piletta-Zanin has the 30 seconds he asked for to
15 give a -- to submit something. You said you would like to do that in open
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, at the end of the hearing,
18 Mr. President.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any specific reason why -- well, this is the
20 end of the first part. But is there any reason why not to do it at this
21 very moment, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, it will be at the end of
23 the hearing or not. If it's not possible, it doesn't matter.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I'll allow you to do that. But the only thing I'm
25 adding to it is that if you wait until then, of course it can have
1 no -- we cannot draw any consequences of what you tell us during the
2 examination of this witness.
3 Yes, Mr. Mundis.
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, thank you.
5 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, if we could get an indication of
6 approximately how much time remains for direct examination, that would be
7 very helpful.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I asked the new -- I'll give you an indication
9 after the break.
10 We'll adjourn until 11.00.
11 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.
12 --- On resuming at 11.04 a.m.
13 JUDGE ORIE: The time spent until now on examination-in-chief is
14 approximately four hours, a little bit over four hours. The Chamber has
15 indicated before that it would certainly -- if extra time would be
16 granted, it would not be more than one hour, up to five hours. Therefore,
17 the examination-in-chief should end by approximately 12.00. That would
18 bring you to five hours. And then the Prosecution would have five hours
19 as well.
20 You may proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Q. Witness, you were about to indicate, with respect to the
23 modifications to your report, something about what you wrote. In your
24 report, as we can read it in English, we see that at a certain point you
25 practically established the principle of identity of fighters and of
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 civilians in Sarajevo. Could you please clarify your position and state
2 exactly what you understand by this.
3 A. In this part of my report, I was talking about the identity of
4 civilians and soldiers respectively. I thought that it was a military
5 matter, a military problem, and it is simply understood that this category
6 of identities of civilians and soldiers refers exclusively to the identity
7 of males, able-bodied men. We must certainly rule out children, the
8 elderly, and the greatest part of women because we know from documents
9 that there were also women in the BH army. But certainly the greatest
10 percentage of women is excluded from this category. I simply overlooked
11 this. I didn't even think it is an error because we know from the context
12 that it is able-bodied men who are meant by this.
13 Q. Precisely. With respect to able-bodied men, are there in the
14 history of the Sarajevo war certain periods of time in which it was more
15 difficult for factual reasons, for reasons related to the situation, and
16 other periods where this distinction was more difficult to make? I'm
17 talking about able-bodied men of military age. What can you tell us about
19 A. Throughout the war, it was very difficult to distinguish between
20 civilians and soldiers. But in the dynamics of war, there were periods
21 when this was easier and periods when it was more difficult. It was the
22 most difficult at the beginning of the war until mid-1993, and from then
23 on it was a little easier but it was never easy to make a clear
24 distinction, to be absolutely certain in the difference between civilians
25 and soldiers. But in this period when it was the most difficult, this has
1 to do with notorious facts that are characteristic for this war, which
2 means that the armies on both sides, and especially the BH army, did not
3 have uniforms, so as far as clothing is concerned, there was absolutely no
4 distinction. General Siber, who was deputy general of the BH
5 army -- deputy commander of the BH army, wrote in his book that they
6 received their first uniforms only in the end of November, but even when
7 they got them one could expect - and we could see that also on video
8 footage, on the tapes that I have seen - that both soldiers and civilians
9 wore parts of uniform, plus soldiers wore some civilian clothes as well.
10 You could also see from my own contributions and from documents which I've
11 come across that in the command system of the BH army, the commanders did
12 not refrain at all from using civilian facilities for placing military
13 equipment. In the BH army but also in the Sarajevo Romanija Corps and in
14 the VRS it was the case that the army lived and operated in precisely the
15 same environment as the civilians. When they were not waging war, they
16 rested in both military and civilian facilities. So the military
17 structure was not clearly separated from civilian facilities, and it was
18 simply impossible to make the distinction.
19 Q. Thank you. I would like us to place ourselves in the shoes of a
20 soldier on either side who is defending his territory. In your personal
21 experience of a high-ranking military man, what could be the position of
22 such a soldier when he sees at a small distance from him somebody he
23 cannot immediately identify but who appears to be of male sex in what we
24 call the combat zone, meaning his immediate zone of responsibility or
25 close to him?
1 A. If I understood your question correctly, it is simply expected
2 that all the troops located in the so-called tactical depth - and that
3 means an area where the battalions of the 1st front line are deployed,
4 that is, their combat disposition - it is simply expected that this area
5 is free of civilians. This is a doctrinary principle. In the city it is
6 simply impossible. And I have heard the testimony of some military
7 leaders of the 1st Corps. I think it was the commander of the Dobrinja
8 Brigade who said that they could not separate civilians from soldiers. I
9 know it was difficult, but that makes the risk so much higher. So the
10 commander does not expect to find civilians within the tactical depth. It
11 is a doctrinary obligation and everyone who fails to observe that take
12 upon themselves the risk for possible civilian losses.
13 Q. We are talking about the commander of the Dobrinja Brigade. Do
14 you remember his name?
15 A. I think it was Ismet Hadzic.
16 Q. Did you talk to him personally?
17 A. No. That's the commander of the 5th Dobrinja Brigade of the 1st
18 BH army Corps. I would have liked to talk to him, but I'm afraid that at
19 the time when I was making my report and when I was in Sarajevo, I don't
20 think he would be happy to talk to me.
21 Q. Did you have the impression that this commander of the 5th
22 Brigade, was it a question of principle or was it something that he lived
23 himself, this difficulty of distinguishing who is who?
24 A. I'm afraid I didn't understand your question, or maybe it was a
25 question of translation.
1 Q. I'm asking: This answer provided by this military man, did it
2 regard a military principle or was it something that he had to live
3 through, his personal experience?
4 A. I didn't say that he replied to me. He replied to a question
5 asked him in the courtroom, why he didn't distinguish soldiers from
6 civilians. I think he was sincere in saying that. In that type of war it
7 was absolutely impossible to make the distinction between soldiers and
8 civilians. But I think that the commanders were not responsible enough.
9 They could have done more for the protection of civilians, evacuating
10 them, at least temporarily from the area of combat activities. But I
11 admit it was impossible to carry out to the full.
12 Q. Just one more question to finish with this topic: Until which
13 distance -- up to which distance the human eye can identify details of a
14 human silhouette?
15 MR. MUNDIS: Objection.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Mundis.
17 MR. MUNDIS: Objection, beyond the scope of this witness's
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Let us check, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
22 Q. General, in the military technique, are there scientific data that
23 are taught to officers, particularly regarding what a human eye can
24 distinguish, depending on distance?
25 A. Well, a certain part of training is called the training of
1 observers. Observers on the front line using not only instruments but
2 also the naked eye collect data.
3 Q. You personally, do you have any knowledge of this scientific data
4 as to what the naked eye can see and cannot see at a certain distance?
5 A. No, I really don't know that.
6 Q. Thank you. I would like to pass to another question. You said in
7 your -- one of your answers on Friday that General Galic had to observe
8 his military hierarchy and specifically his general staff concerning
9 specifically a protest by the other party, by the other side, or the
10 UNPROFOR. I would now like to ask you to specify what you meant by that.
11 Did this pose difficulties? What did you mean?
12 A. I'm afraid I didn't understand you quite well.
13 Q. I'll rephrase. Yesterday you told us from what you saw that the
14 general conveyed protests when they were made to the general staff. Do
15 you remember that?
16 A. Yes. Yes. Now I understand.
17 Q. Well, this factor, the existence of this hierarchical scheme, what
18 did it represent to General Galic? Was it an obstacle or what? That's my
20 A. In Sarajevo, General Galic was between several fires, if we can
21 put it that way metaphorically. Above him he had the general staff of the
22 VRS as his superior command. He had his subordinates in the chain of
23 command, to whom he had to convey certain orders. But he also had above
24 him the civilian part of the superior command, as a parallel command of
25 sorts. At the same time, there was this whole conglomerate of
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 international organisations, including the UNPROFOR, who imposed demands
2 on him. That's the civilian part of the high command, the military part
3 of the high command, and the UNPROFOR. So he was receiving a lot of
4 requests, and the relationship with the UNPROFOR was regulated by the
5 general staff. Therefore, Galic had obligations without having the right
6 to make decisions. That's why he was between two fires and he was always
7 exposed to reproaches and had the obligation to comply with demands.
8 As far as the UNPROFOR is concerned, he responded to every
9 reproach made to him, either by initiating an investigation with regard to
10 the facts, or by demanding certain action from his subordinates. But most
11 of his responses were directed at the superior command that was above him
12 and which restricted his communication with the UNPROFOR.
13 Q. Very briefly, in two words: This confusion and this multitude of
14 components, the civil part of the command, the military part of the
15 command, and the international organisations, did it render
16 General Galic's task even more difficult? What was the general conclusion
17 you made?
18 A. Yes. This was certainly one of the major impeding factors in
19 Galic's command system.
20 Q. Thank you. General, now, could you please answer the following
21 question: How many documents did you have to examine in order to write
22 your report over these two years? I don't want you to be very precise.
23 Just give me an order of value. More than 200? More than 500? More than
24 1.000, or just in the hundreds?
25 A. Of course I didn't count them, but if I remember the volume of
1 binders that I had to deal with, I think it was over 5.000.
2 Q. General, in all these documents that you have seen - and I'm not
3 talking obviously about the indictment - did you see a single document
4 dated in the period from September 1992 to August 1994 addressed to
5 General Galic that had to do with terrorist acts or something similar to
7 A. No.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, if you look at the transcript, I
9 see -- I see that what I understood to be "actes de terreur," has been
10 translated by "terrorist acts". But I think you said "acts of terror"; is
11 that correct?
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. It is
13 difficult for me to follow everything and to read. We are talking indeed
14 about acts of terror. I'll rephrase the question because the English
15 transcript is not quite what I would like it to be.
16 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... The question
17 put to you, General, was that -- did you understand that to be asked about
18 whether there was any mentioning of acts of terror or acts of terrorists?
19 How did you understand the question that you just answered?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understood the question to deal
21 with acts of terror, not terrorist acts, indeed.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
24 Q. Another question, a major question of principle, General: In the
25 documents that you were able to study, were you able to determine at which
1 level in the BH army were the mortars, small and large calibres, deployed;
2 brigade, corps, or other level?
3 MR. MUNDIS: Objection, relevance, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this was intended
6 to solicit a response from the witness, especially in view of certain
7 techniques related to the use of these weapons. I think we have already
8 heard about it. It is doubtlessly important.
9 JUDGE ORIE: The witness may answer the question.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 A. All the units had the ammunition that had this sort of weapon.
12 Companies had 60-millimetre mortars; battalion firing groups had ammo for
13 82-millimetre mortars, and brigades had ammo for 120-millimetre mortars.
14 Q. My question had to do with the BH army, that is, the Army of the
15 Presidency, as we term it here. I don't know if you understood.
16 A. I understood. That is the principle that applied to both armies.
17 Q. Very well. My question didn't have to do with who had the
18 ammunition but who literally -- for the B/C/S booth, not the ammunition
19 but the weapons. Who had the power to order fire from these mortars? Who
20 commanded the use of mortars? Was it at the level of battalion, the
21 corps, or what level?
22 A. Weapons are within the organisational military establishment of
23 units. Every commander has the right to order activity from his unit
24 unless forbidden by his superior. I didn't see in any documents that the
25 BH army prohibited the use of their weapons.
1 Q. Thank you, General. We are now going to pass to questions of
2 principles. On page 9 of your report, in the English version -- sorry,
3 page 49 of your report in the English version, you mentioned a certain
4 number of strategic and military objectives.
5 A. Do you think I will need the report in front of me?
6 Q. If you have it, yes, please, take it.
7 JUDGE ORIE: If the Court copy could be at the disposal of the
8 expert witness.
9 Do we have the report, Madam Registrar? Otherwise, the --
10 Then if you put it on the ELMO and put it in front of you so we
11 can see whether we have the same page.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
13 Q. We are talking about item 102. And I can gladly provide my own
14 copy with things underlined in it. But I can provide it, if necessary.
15 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... You have no
16 copy, General? You have no copy?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's in my bag. I don't want to
18 take it without your approval.
19 JUDGE ORIE: But I think it's -- if -- it would be preferred if
20 there would be a not underlined copy available.
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
22 Q. General, we are referring to item 102.
23 A. I underlined certain things.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Everyone has underlined some parts. If you put your
25 copy, page 49 of the English version, on the -- on the ELMO so that we
1 can --
2 I take it, General Radinovic, that the underlinings are yours?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In my copy, yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Witness, could you please point to item 102. That's 112. There
7 we are. Thank you.
8 Here you mentioned six strategic and military objectives. And my
9 question is as follows: According to your experience as a general,
10 according to the knowledge that you have of the events, are these
11 legitimate objectives?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you. I would now like to turn to the issue of what is
14 sometimes called blockade, but I would like to ask you a question about
15 the blockade imposed on the troops, the fact that an attempt was made to
16 block troops in the city, this procedure, according to military strategy
17 and doctrine, is it a legitimate procedure; yes or no?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Thank you. Witness, let's turn to this issue of strategy, since
20 we have objectives listed in six items here. Did you ever find a single
21 document which mentioned a seventh item, the existence of a corps plan,
22 perhaps, that would have referred to the destruction of Sarajevo and/or
23 the elimination of the Muslim population of Sarajevo? And of course I am
24 talking about a Serbian plan.
25 A. No.
1 Q. Thank you. Witness, I would like you to specify for which
2 reasons - because that's the sense of your report - why do you assess that
3 the city itself, not as a source of soldiers but as a place of residence
4 for civilians, why was this city not a city under siege, according to your
5 experience, on the basis of your experience and your report?
6 A. For several reasons. There are several reasons for this claim.
7 The first - and I think this is the main reason - is that about 2 and a
8 half kilometres, in that area, around Sarajevo was totally free, so the
9 entire area of the Sarajevo airport was free. It was an open area.
10 Throughout the wartime period, the Sarajevo airport was open, it
11 functioned for humanitarian deliveries, for international meetings. The
12 humanitarian convoys were able to come through, convoys belonging to the
13 humanitarian agencies, the so-called blue routes were also open, and
14 throughout the wartime period a large number of international
15 organisations and international representations were present in Sarajevo:
16 The UNPROFOR command, the international organisation committee. So in
17 brief it was possible to enter and leave Sarajevo; naturally, under
18 supervision. But the UNPROFOR commander from January 1994 to January 1995
19 was General Michael Rose and in his book he was quite explicit. He said
20 that Sarajevo was not encircled and it wasn't under siege, and there was
21 no reason not to believe the commander of the forces who had the situation
22 in Sarajevo under their control, and this is an elite officer of the
23 British army who was certainly familiar with the situation in Sarajevo.
24 Q. General, when you say that Sarajevo was not under siege, which
25 Sarajevo are you referring to? Because I think there is a distinction to
1 be made there.
2 A. When I say Sarajevo, I'm referring to the entire city of Sarajevo.
3 I'm not referring to part of Sarajevo. I'm referring to the entire city.
4 Part of Sarajevo in the strict urban sense includes Grbavica, Nedzarici,
5 Ilidza, Rajlovac, Vogosca. These were also parts of Sarajevo, so --
6 Q. I'll stop you there. With regard to these areas that you have
7 mentioned, were you able to observe anything with regard to the
8 difficulties of the civilian population in these areas, Nedzarici, Ilidza,
9 et cetera, in comparison to the difficulties that the population on the
10 other side of the line had? Were you able to compare this?
11 A. I wasn't there, so I was not able to experience this directly, but
12 when I saw the state the buildings were in and having spoken to the people
13 who lived in these buildings, I think that the difficulties and the fear
14 of war, I think that those in Grbavica and Nedzarici were equally exposed
15 to it as those who were in Velesici or in Alipasino Polje or in Dolac
16 Malta, or Otok, et cetera.
17 Q. And would you include the possibility of physical circulation?
18 A. Well, as far as the possibility of circulating is concerned, the
19 people in Grbavica, they were connected to the part under the control of
20 Sarajevo and it was easy for them to move. The people from Nedzarici, it
21 wasn't easier for them to move than for civilians from Sarajevo. So these
22 are parts that were under the control of sides in the conflict. Sarajevo
23 was a divided city. It wasn't a city that had been blockaded, that was
24 under siege. Each side had a certain part -- had its own part under its
1 Q. Thank you. General, I would now like to move on to a delicate
2 issue, that of casualties, the loss of life. Are you aware of a text that
3 is called "The Tabeau report"; yes or no?
4 A. Yes, I'm not a demographer, so I'm not familiar with the fact that
5 is a demographer would be familiar with, but yes, I have examined it.
6 Q. Rest assured, General, we aren't either. But were you able to
7 come across figures regarding the losses suffered on the other side of the
8 line? That's my first question. Yes or no?
9 A. Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mundis.
11 MR. MUNDIS: Objection. The witness has indicated he's not a
12 demographer, and the next witness to be called by the Defence is, in fact,
13 an expert in this subject.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand that the question was about
15 figures, so rather about facts than to the expertise. And if a -- even if
16 an expert would have by any chance any knowledge of certain facts, he can
17 be asked about it.
18 Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 Q. General, if you came across these figures, what can you tell us
21 about the number of losses, the magnitude of the losses, during the period
22 we are interested in on the Serbian side?
23 A. Well, I noticed that on the Serbian side there are about 2.300
24 dead and there were about 3.300 dead on the other side. I'm not sure that
25 these figures have been correctly interpreted, that I have interpreted
1 them correctly, but this shows that there are no huge differences in the
2 number of dead on both sides. So both sides suffered the terrors of war.
3 Q. Where did these figures that you obtained come from, General, the
4 figures that you are talking about now?
5 A. Well, I found them in the report made by Ewa Tabeau.
6 Q. I'm talking about the other side.
7 A. Well, this is from the Dayton documents that I had from the SRK,
8 the Sarajevo Romanija Corps.
9 Q. Thank you very much. So you yourself found these figures in the
10 course of your work.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you. General, could you now tell us briefly something about
13 what the Defence calls "total war." You told us yesterday and today that
14 there was a desire for peace expressed by General Galic himself but also
15 by the Serbian side to get out of the impasse. What can you tell us on
16 the basis of your experience, your report, about the attitude of the enemy
17 side with regard to peace or continuing with the war?
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Mundis.
19 MR. MUNDIS: The Prosecution objects on the grounds of relevance,
20 lack of foundation.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. Mr. President, this
23 witness examined about 5.000 documents. Some of them have to do with
24 peace agreements and others, as we have seen, concern spreading panic
25 among the civilians on the Serbian side and they have to do with
1 persecuting Chetniks. We saw this document a minute ago. We think that
2 this witness may have seen other documents --
3 JUDGE ORIE: The objection is denied. Please proceed.
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Witness, could you please answer this question.
6 A. When I examined the basic documents that have to do with the
7 behaviour of the sides - and I'm talking about their original documents
8 but also secondary documents, studies carried out by people who were
9 involved in that conflict that we call the war in Bosnia and
10 Herzegovina - when I examined these documents, I found out that from the
11 very beginning it suited the Serbian side to negotiate peace as soon as
12 possible, and it is my personal belief, since I was familiar with the
13 political events, I knew that the Serbian side didn't want a conflict, but
14 since there was a conflict, the Serbian side wanted the war to come to an
15 end as soon as possible. But on the basis of the documents and the
16 behaviour I observed and the sources, I gained the impression that the
17 presidency side did not want the war to come to an end until they managed
18 to attain their strategic objectives, and their strategic objective was
19 defined in their documents, in their programmes, as being a single Bosnia.
20 It wasn't to be divided. It was to be a unitarian Bosnia, and the rights
21 of the peoples were to be respected.
22 Q. General, a purely technical question: Sometimes we have the
23 impression when we examine the documents that we call SITREPs, UN reports,
24 reports made by UN observers, we sometimes gain the impression that there
25 is an apparent disproportion between some of the outgoing shells, some of
1 the shells fired from Sarajevo, and others coming into Sarajevo, the part
2 of Sarajevo under the control of the Muslim forces. My question is as
3 follows. And the first part of my question is: How many shells have to
4 be fired in order to attempt to eliminate an object, neutralise an object,
5 in general? And then, the second part of my question is: What can you
6 tell us about the observation conditions in the field for the UN
7 observers? Thank you.
8 A. As far as the criteria for neutralising certain targets is
9 concerned, according to the military rules in force for certain weapons,
10 there are norms, there are rules which specify the number of projectiles
11 that have to be fired at a certain target in order to neutralise it, in
12 order to attain a certain degree of neutralisation.
13 Q. A specific example, please. If, for example, I am to destroy a
14 battery that is opening fire at me, how many projectiles would I have to
16 A. If the target is in the open, it's not sheltered, from a
17 120-millimetre mortar, it's necessary to fire 26 shells at each target in
18 order to have -- in order to neutralise it to a 25-per cent degree. So to
19 be -- so to have the certainty of 25 per cent of neutralising the target.
20 Q. And to attain 100 per cent, do I have to multiply it by 4?
21 A. Well, we don't know how many shells should be fired to attain 100
22 per cent degree of certainty. But for 50 per cent of certainty, 96 shells
23 have to be fired at one target if it is sheltered.
24 Q. General, and if the object is protected?
25 A. Then even more. If it's protected, then it's not possible to
1 destroy it. It's only possible to control it by opening fire.
2 Q. General, what are the sources? You say you need a certain number
3 of shells. Could you give us a reference, a technical reference.
4 A. Yes. You have instructions for artillery. These are instructions
5 for 82-millimetre mortars and you have instructions for 120-millimetre
6 mortars, and the instructions there are the criteria and the rules for the
7 number of shell that is have to be fired to neutralise a certain target.
8 Q. And who wrote these instructions, who published these
9 instructions? Is there an institution?
10 A. Well, these are the official rules which are in use in the
11 JNA -- which were in use in the JNA and are still in use in the Army of
12 Yugoslavia today.
13 Q. And as an expert, you can confirm this information; yes or no?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Thank you. General, what is the legal responsibility of a
16 commander against whom fire might be opened? That is to say, if fire is
17 opened against his men, if he does not -- I'm talking about a commander
18 who does not respond to fire.
19 A. He has the professional obligation of opening -- of responding to
20 fire and disabling the enemy, preventing the enemy from inflicting losses.
21 So it is his duty in the system of command to take such action. But what
22 his legal responsibility is, I don't know. I'm not a lawyer, but I assume
23 that he has to return -- he has to be held responsible. If he has to be
24 held responsible professionally, he has to be held responsible legally
1 Q. General, I'm going to turn to the second part of my question
2 again, that you haven't dealt with, and it is as follows: What are the
3 difficulties for an observer, whoever that observer may be, in a city such
4 as Sarajevo, in order to hear the fires -- the shots being fired from the
5 city, if these are small mortar shells, 120-millimetre shells?
6 A. Well, if on the Papa side in Sarajevo, the BH army side, you
7 consider that there were between five and seven observation posts - and I
8 personally came to the conclusion that there were very few observation
9 posts for such a large area - if one wanted to be certain of identifying
10 all the shots, that was one of the problems. But the second problem was
11 that when you have a densely inhabited city, it is very difficult
12 especially if shots are being fired from behind buildings, it's very
13 difficult to hear every shot. And this is not the case with the
14 explosions, when the shot is already fired, you hear the explosion better
15 than the shot being fired itself. There's a difference in the data in the
16 observer's reports with regard to the outgoing and incoming fire.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, perhaps this is not necessary, but
18 I remind you that there are ten minutes left. Please proceed.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. I think we'll
21 Q. General, my question is: You were able to examine some documents
22 about the media when writing your report; yes or no?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Thank you. What can you tell us, very briefly, about the
25 conclusions you were able to reach in relation to the issue of the way the
1 media treated information in the course of this war? And I'm referring in
2 particular to the alleged random shelling, indiscriminate shelling. Thank
4 A. Well, it was my belief that the media was used as a means of war
5 in Sarajevo, not only because they didn't understand the situation but
6 also because they were frequently manipulated. I'll provide you with some
7 of the most striking examples that one can show that manipulation was at
8 stake. On the map I showed you that the claim -- that the Sarajevo
9 Romanija Corps had all the elevated positions in -- around Sarajevo, I
10 said that this was not true. In the media and TV reports and in the
11 papers, and unfortunately in the official reports of UNMO teams, it says
12 that members of the SRK surrounded Sarajevo, they held elevations around
13 Sarajevo, and they shelled Sarajevo. This is quite simply false.
14 And furthermore, in the UNMO reports and also in the media, they
15 constantly mentioned the fact that it was impossible to accept the action
16 of SRK artillery behind the front lines, and if anyone -- if you know
17 anything about the army, you will know that the artillery is not used at
18 the front line because in such a case you would inflict losses on your own
19 forces. It's used in the depth, in order to attack the reserves, the
20 firing positions of the artillery, manoeuvring forces, the movement of
21 forces, et cetera. But it's not for forces at the front line.
22 Q. General, I'll stop you there. I have four more questions, and I
23 would like to address them all. My first question is: You established
24 that the tanks -- or almost all the tanks of the SRK were buried around
25 Sarajevo. Does that show that there was the desire -- they were
1 entrenched around Sarajevo. Does that show that they wanted to carry out
2 an aggression?
3 A. No. That's the least favourable way of using armoured forces.
4 The tank has force because it unites fire, movement, and strikes, and the
5 SRK used tanks in a way that took advantage only of its firing power, so
6 the tank was entrenched, or rather, it was a fixed firing position, so it
7 wasn't as effective as any cannon.
8 Q. Thank you. General, the depth of the front -- I'm not talking
9 about the zone of responsibility. I'm talking about the area which
10 adjoining the front and where you have the various echelons of function:
11 The line itself, then while logistics and reserve, right down to the
12 command of the front. What is the depth of this zone in military terms,
13 in terms of metres? How many hundreds of metres were they?
14 A. For a battalion, it's between 3 and 5 kilometres. For a brigade,
15 it's 15 to 20 kilometres. For a corps, it's 50 kilometres. But in an
16 urban area, these dimensions reduced. So for a battalion, it would be 1
17 and a half to 3 kilometres. For a brigade, about 5 kilometres.
18 Q. Very well. Thank you. General, when one uses a shell, do you
19 know whether there is a margin of error, a technical margin of error which
20 is related to the weapon that is used?
21 A. Yes. There is a so-called deviation of the shot, when the shots
22 don't hit the target, they disperse.
23 Q. What is the possible margin of error?
24 A. Well, up to 300, 500 metres. It depends on the charge. I don't
25 really know exactly.
1 Q. Thank you. Could you tell us - because I have another two
2 questions to put to you - could you briefly tell us why this
3 disproportion -- you spoke about snipers in your report. Why was there
4 this difference between the Muslim position with regard to professional
5 snipers and the Serbian position? So why was there this lack of balance?
6 A. Well, first of all, the 1st Corps had far more men in Sarajevo
7 than the SRK. And since the formations were similar, one to two snipers
8 in a detachment, well, by definition the 1st Corps had more snipers and
9 the 1st Corps had sniper weapons that were better than those of the SRK.
10 They had 12.7-millimetre snipers. The 1st Corps had these weapons and the
11 SRK didn't. And the Zrak factory was under the control of the 1st Corps,
12 and throughout the wartime period they produced equipment for the needs of
13 the 1st Corps.
14 Q. Witness, could you tell us very briefly - and this is something
15 that appears in your report - could you tell us why the forces in Sarajevo
16 refused, according to your report, the possibility of demilitarising
17 Sarajevo itself? I'm not talking about the removal of weapons. I'm
18 talking about demilitarisation.
19 A. Well, demilitarisation was the only real method that could be used
20 to avoid the catastrophes of war in Sarajevo. It wasn't accepted
21 unfortunately, and I personally think that the Muslim side needed Sarajevo
22 as a victim of Serbian aggression in order to attain its radical
23 objectives, and that was to control the entire area of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
24 It was not able to achieve this goal by using strategic means. So they
25 were trying to cause NATO to intervene, and General Rose talks about this.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. Mr. President, I
2 think that my colleague would like us to provide a certain number of
3 documents to the witness. These are the documents that the
4 registrar -- Madam Registrar should already have. And the numbers, I can
5 tell you what they are, 227, 205, 261, 263, 262, 206, 1866, 1867, 260,
6 254, 255, and 248. We would simply like the witness to have a look at
7 these documents. I think that they were bundles that were already
8 provided in order to facilitate the registrar's work.
9 Q. And could the witness just tell us whether he has seen these
10 documents by saying yes or no. Could he just tell us whether he
11 recognises them. And we will then have other documents that we will
12 provide directly. I think that there is -- that we have them here. I
13 believe, yes, that we have an agreement about this.
14 General, do you recognise these documents?
15 A. Yes. I have seen all of them. I studied all of them, and I think
16 I quoted most of them in my report. The documents relate to the conduct
17 of the SRK towards the UNPROFOR.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my very last
20 question, because I'm going to stop here, has to do with the alterations
21 that the witness wanted to make in his reports.
22 Q. Tell me, did these alterations have to do with the essence or were
23 they simply for clarification, like the one you just mentioned, or did you
24 want to correct misprints, typos, et cetera?
25 A. I wanted to correct things that could cause translation errors.
1 Q. Just one question about this --
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there is one
3 interpretation problem that I was able to identify, if I can correct it by
4 asking the witness. And it's a formal question.
5 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... We'll see
6 whether we allow the witness to answer that question.
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 Q. General, don't answer immediately. Is it true that I told you
9 when we were working together on this file that there is a spot in the
10 English version dealing with the destruction of a neighbourhood close to
11 what is called Ciglane and that you told me, "I didn't use the term
12 'destruction' in Serbian but a term that corresponds, rather, to
13 'damage'"? Don't answer immediately.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you may answer the question.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I answer? Yes.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. We'll
17 deal with the other documents according to the accepted formula.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I tried to check the documents just shown to the
19 witness, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, because we still have to deal with the
20 unnumbered version. Could perhaps ...
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Do you want me to quote again
22 the numbers of these documents, Your Honour?
23 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... On my screen,
24 but I would like to have on the ELMO the document 1866 so that we can
25 compare whether this is -- I think the matter -- this one has been
1 clarified. That's the document that was the 7th of May, 1994. When
2 I -- 227, could that please be put on the ELMO. Yes. Thank you. And
3 205, please. Yes. Thank you very much.
4 Is the Prosecution ready to start the cross-examination of the
5 expert witness?
6 MR. MUNDIS: Yes, Mr. President. But first just two matters for
7 the record.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You wanted to --
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I wanted, in order to
11 facilitate the Prosecution's work, I don't know if you want us to
12 communicate now the documents that I referred to at the end of my
13 questioning or during the break. It's just a question of courtesy, Your
15 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, presumably my learned colleague is
16 referring to documents that they're intending on tendering from the bar
17 table. The Prosecution would be pleased at the break to receive an
18 indication as to which documents that might be, but we have made our
19 position clear that with respect to those SRK documents for which we have
20 questions regarding authenticity, that we will not accept those documents
21 being tendered from the bar table.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is it tendering from the bar table that you
23 intend, or were you referring to the last documents, 227, 205 --
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, no, Your Honour. I was
25 referring to the last topic of my intervention, namely tendering from the
1 bar table. And I think there is one document we could submit immediately.
2 Not the numbers that I just listed.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I take it that the numbers will be given
4 to the Prosecution so that they can find their position.
5 Before giving you an opportunity to start with the
6 cross-examination, Mr. Mundis, I would have one question to you: This map
7 you made with all the positions on it, you remember the map that's D1913,
8 when did you prepare that map?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I brought it with me, when I came
10 here. When I came to The Hague, I brought it with me. That means I made
11 it perhaps 15, 20 days ago, maybe a month ago, but I studied the documents
12 much earlier.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Was the map made on request of the Defence or did
14 you ...?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. That was at my own initiative.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you very much.
17 Please proceed, Mr. Mundis.
18 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, last week you also loaned the witness
19 a dictaphone recording machine, and we have yet to receive any changes
20 that the witness may have made.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could -- perhaps -- I gave you my dictaphone.
22 Are you -- have you finished whatever you'd like to do with it, or -- and
23 what is the result of your work?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. I have completed
25 all the work I wanted to using your dictaphone. I recorded what I had
1 written, and I also have it on paper. I can provide the paper if
2 required. So there are three things that I think should be borne in mind
3 when using my report. And when you gave me this dictaphone, you said
4 please return it. I didn't respond immediately because I thought you were
5 joking and I still think you were, because since this is on the
6 transcript, please tell me why did you warn me to return it?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Because it's the -- it's the Dictaphone I use
8 personally, so I'd rather continue using it in the future. That's the
9 reason why I asked you to return it.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You didn't really think that I
11 wouldn't have returned it without that warning. It goes without saying,
12 doesn't it?
13 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... Of course it
14 goes without saying. I -- but the only reason is that usually if any
15 piece of -- whether it's a Dictaphone or a computer, it's always very
16 precisely registered. That's the bureaucracy in the United Nations. And
17 I just gave it to you and I said I expected that you return it. There was
18 no -- not one second thought involved in it.
19 Yes. Mr. Mundis --
20 Perhaps you could, whatever you have in writing or on tape, you
21 could please give it to Madam Usher. She'll then give it to the registry
22 so that it will be made available for the parties.
23 Madam Usher, could you please.
24 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness just
1 said there were three matters that need to be borne in mind. I don't
2 know. Do you think it's good for him to enumerate them so that we have
3 them on record?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I thought he said he also had it on paper.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. But I would
6 prefer it to be on record, on the transcript.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you tell us what three matters should be
8 borne in mind, just briefly.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, the first has to do with a
10 possible wrong understanding of my position regarding the identities of
11 soldiers and positions, paragraph 220. I said there is full identity of
12 civilians and soldiers. It has to be borne in mind that I meant
13 able-bodied men of military age, that is, from 18 to 60. Not all
14 civilians, therefore, but only the male population in the military
15 age -- of military age.
16 The second thing has to do with paragraph 273 of my report, where
17 I used the Serbian word that means "the neighbourhood of Ciglane
18 suffered." It was translated, I was told, as "destroyed." The meaning,
19 however, is different from the translation. What was meant was that
20 consequences were suffered by this neighbourhood, not that it was
21 completely destroyed.
22 And the last correction would be to the chapter "Conclusions,"
23 conclusion number 33. I wrote that General Galic was accused of holding
24 Sarajevo under siege. I used the wrong term because I was carried away by
25 the allegations made in the accompanying documents, which said that
1 General Galic was accused of terrorising civilians by shelling and sniping
2 during siege. So I made this slight of hand, and I'm sorry I wrote this.
3 I would kindly ask you to bear in mind that I meant the allegation
4 regarding the terrorising of the population by shelling and sniping from
5 the position of siege.
6 And the last remark: I'm not sure that there are no misprints,
7 changing the number of an item or the date which would reflect on the
8 document they used for this particular claim. But if there are such
9 mistakes, I will find them and correct them.
10 JUDGE ORIE: That is clear, General Radinovic.
11 Mr. Mundis, then please proceed.
12 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
13 Cross-examined by Mr. Mundis:
14 Q. Sir, your Ph.D. is in political science. Can you tell us what the
15 title of your dissertation was.
16 A. My dissertation was not in the area of political sciences. It is
17 titled "The method of military science." So it's a question of
18 methodology of research in military science.
19 Q. You've testified here at the Tribunal in two previous cases, the
20 Foca and Krstic cases; is that correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And in those trials, just as in the present case, you prepared a
23 report and testified under oath; is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Page 202 of your report in the English version there's a list of
1 books that you referred to. Can you please give us the titles and authors
2 of any other books that you may have consulted in preparing your report..
3 A. I didn't understand the question.
4 Q. Other than the books listed --
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour, objection. I
6 don't have page 202 in my copy of the report. Maybe I'm more modest than
7 others, but I have a copy that ends with 195. Maybe we're talking about a
8 different report.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mundis.
10 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, on the version of the report filed
11 with the registry, in the lower right-hand corner, immediately prior to
12 the witness's CV is the number "202". At the top of that page, it says
13 "Studies and books."
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Microphone not activated]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
16 So the question was whether you did consult any other books than
17 those mentioned.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really don't understand the
19 question. I've been reading all my life. And of course I absorbed all
20 sorts of information from all sorts of sources, and it is certain that I
21 have used my general knowledge from various books in various areas. But
22 if you ask me about a specific book, whether I used it or not, I would be
23 able to answer. It is difficult to enumerate all the books that I have
24 used for making this report. I only quoted those which I quoted.
25 MR. MUNDIS:
1 Q. The next -- one of the next categories of sources that you used,
2 as listed in paragraph 11 of your report, were transcripts of statements
3 of witnesses.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You listed six individuals from the VRS whose witness statement
6 transcripts you read. Do you remember that?
7 A. I can look up my own introduction. That's where I wrote it. I
8 don't remember all the names, but yes. Lizdek, Sladoje, Lugonja,
9 Sinkovic. I don't know the others, are there as well. Of course I quoted
10 them. I've read them. And there's no reason for me to hide it.
11 Q. And witness, these transcripts that you read were from interviews
12 that the Prosecution conducted with these individuals; is that right?
13 A. I don't know. I received these copies from the Defence team. I
14 don't know which form these interviews took. It was not my duty to deal
15 with this.
16 Q. I think in response to your last answer, you've answered this
17 question, but were there -- from the transcripts that you were provided,
18 did the Defence legal team indicate to you that you should read all of
19 those transcripts?
20 A. No. It was something that I asked for myself because I wanted to
21 see what those people who were familiar with the situation said about the
22 relevant period, because that is one of the criteria according to which I
23 collected my information when preparing to draw up my report and come here
24 to testify. I simply thought that this type of information should not be
25 ignored because it is precious. And it would be with great satisfaction
1 that I would read and use transcripts of testimonies of witnesses who are
2 former BH army members, if only I had the opportunity.
3 Q. Witness, when you read these transcripts, do you recall seeing at
4 the beginning of each of the transcripts questions where the person
5 conducting the interview identified himself as an investigator with the
6 Office of the Prosecutor?
7 A. To be frank, I didn't pay attention to this particular line. I
8 was more interested in the essence of the text. If I had paid attention,
9 I would be able to give you a more certain answer.
10 Q. You indicated -- you named the following individuals: Milanovic,
11 Zarkovic, Indic, Lizdek, Sladoje, and Lugonja.
12 A. No, not Milanovic, Milovanovic.
13 Q. Milovanovic. Are those the six individuals whose statement
14 transcripts you recall reading?
15 A. I think so, yes.
16 Q. Did you rely on information contained in those transcripts in
17 producing your report?
18 A. Not much. I rather used them as a secondary source than a primary
20 Q. You also indicated that you relied on witness statement
21 transcripts or witness statements from certain United Nations military
22 observers or UNPROFOR personnel; is that right?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And again, you listed six or seven names and then specified
25 others. Do you recall other than the names listed in paragraph 11 of your
1 report which statements of which military observers or UNPROFOR personnel
2 you read?
3 A. No, I really couldn't. If you could refresh my memory and remind
4 me of a specific name, maybe I could say yes or no.
5 Q. Did you read a witness statement of Viktor Bezrouchenko?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Witness, the documents that you've reviewed, you told us there's
8 been at least 5.000 of them, and I think you also told us Thursday or
9 Friday that it was tens of thousands of pages of documents. I'd like to
10 focus your attention on the SRK documents that you reviewed. Where did
11 you get those documents from?
12 A. I received SRK documents from the Defence.
13 Q. Other than documents -- SRK documents received from the Defence,
14 did you take any steps or efforts to obtain SRK documents from any other
16 A. No.
17 Q. The next source that you inform us you relied upon were the notes
18 that you took of direct interviews - and I'm quoting your report - "with a
19 series of outstanding superior officers of the SRK and direct participants
20 in the war." You then indicated the functional titles of these
21 individuals; is that right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Did you rely on the information that you derived from these
24 interviews in reaching the conclusions set forth in your report?
25 A. No, except for certain locations and certain details that were not
1 sufficiently clear to me from the documents. When I was reading the
2 documents and studying the situation, some things seemed insufficiently
3 clear and I wanted to clarify them, talking to the participants and
4 looking at documentation of the 1st BH army Corps. So in order to find
5 out more about this, to hear about these things from the participants, to
6 get a more certain position, this information was important to me because
7 it was firsthand information from people who directly participated in the
8 war, although I didn't rely strictly upon it.
9 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, I note the time. Perhaps this would
10 be an appropriate time for a break.
11 JUDGE ORIE: We'll adjourn until ten minutes to 1.00.
12 --- Recess taken at 12.30 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 12.55 p.m.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, you're on your feet.
15 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President. In relation to the videotape
16 excerpt relevant to the evidence of Richard Gray, there was some homework
17 to be done on the weekend by the Defence in relation to that.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. IERACE: Would you wish to deal with that, Mr. President, at
20 the end of today's testimony perhaps?
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps -- how much time would it take?
22 Because there's another issue which takes perhaps one or a couple of
23 minutes. I'd rather do it at the end so that we can then --
24 MR. IERACE: Yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: -- Excuse the witness for that moment.
1 Mr. Mundis, would you please proceed.
2 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
3 Q. Witness, in your statement, you also indicated that you listened
4 to audiotapes of the in-court testimony of certain witnesses that you
5 considered relevant. You indicated UNMOs, UNPROFOR personnel, and three
6 witnesses that you listed by name, Karavelic, Hadzic, and Zecevic. Did
7 you listen to the audiotapes of the testimony of any other witnesses?
8 A. Well, I don't understand. I mentioned those three --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I think there
11 is a name, concerning the names. Could the Prosecution tell us where they
12 found this claim, where this claim comes from.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mundis.
14 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, all of this information is contained
15 in paragraph 11 of the report, in the English version pages 5 and 6. On
16 page 6, you'll see about one-fourth of the way down "Audiotapes," and at
17 the very end of the sentence -- or the paragraph with the word
18 "audiotapes" underlined, you'll see those three names that I just
20 JUDGE ORIE: It says "et cetera."
21 MR. MUNDIS: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: So it's not -- Mr. Piletta-Zanin, what is the
24 Yes, Ms. Pilipovic.
25 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] To the extent that I followed the
1 general's answer, Zecevic was not mentioned. That's why I asked my
2 colleague to react. I think only Karavelic and Hadzic were mentioned,
3 although the name is mentioned in the report.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the name is mentioned in the report. So that is
5 a mistake then? You did not listen to the audio recording of the
6 testimony of Mr. Zecevic, or did you?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I watched the testimony of
8 Mr. Zecevic when it was directly relayed on Belgrade television. It was
9 broadcast live from the Tribunal.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's clear.
11 Please proceed.
12 MR. MUNDIS:
13 Q. Witness, after the name Zecevic, it says "et cetera." Can you
14 tell us the names of any other witnesses who testified in this courtroom
15 whose audiotape testimony you listened to in preparing your report?
16 A. Well, for example, I listened to Buha [as interpreted], Indic, and
17 there were other witnesses too, but right now I can't remember the names.
18 "Et cetera" means that the list is not complete. It means that I
19 listened to other witnesses too.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you: Did you record somewhere what
21 testimonies you have listened to? I mean, you say I don't remember, but
22 is there some list where you did write down exactly what you heard?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I didn't write the names down.
24 I listened to the tapes, I made a note of the facts that were important
25 for me. These were working papers, the kind that anyone -- the kind of
1 notes that anyone makes when working.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Mundis.
3 MR. MUNDIS:
4 Q. Witness, the English transcript says that you listened to "Buha".
5 Would that be Bukva?
6 A. Bukva, yes.
7 Q. Do you recall the names of any of the other members of the SRK
8 whose testimony you listened to, besides Bukva and Indic?
9 A. No, not the names, but I do remember facts. I remember
10 testimonies. For example, I watched the testimony which was broadcast
11 live by a company commander from the Nedzarici Battalion, and then I also
12 watched the live broadcast of the testimony of a witness from Grbavica,
13 from the Jewish cemetery, and so on.
14 Q. With respect to the testimony that you either watched the live
15 broadcasts of or listened to the audiotapes of, can you please point us to
16 any page or footnote in your report that refers to that testimony or that
17 cites to that testimony for anything that you've written in your report.
18 A. No, I can't remember. I don't think that I cited this, because in
19 my report such testimonies aren't of such importance for me to refer to
20 unless it had to do with some specific position. But at the moment, right
21 now I could not refer to anything -- specify anything in the report.
22 Q. You told us, witness, or you wrote in paragraph 11, subparagraph 3
23 on page 6 that you made three study tours, each lasting four days to
24 Sarajevo and its environs. You told us that a cameraman and a guide
25 accompanied you on occasion. You were also joined by one of the chiefs of
1 staff of one of the SRK brigades on one of those trips. Did anyone from
2 the Defence legal team accompany you during any of these study trips?
3 A. Mrs. Pilipovic was present, lead counsel.
4 Q. Was that on one of the study trips or all three of them?
5 A. I didn't go on a single visit without being accompanied by
6 Mrs. Pilipovic, lead counsel.
7 Q. Who was the SRK guide that accompanied you, and did that person
8 accompany you on all the trips or simply one or two of them?
9 A. Mr. President, could I avoid mentioning names in open session, if
10 possible. If I have to mention names, I should appreciate it if we could
11 go into private session. I simply wouldn't want to refer to names in any
12 context whatsoever because I haven't obtained their consent to do so, if
13 this is important.
14 MR. MUNDIS: There's no objection.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Since the Prosecution has no objection, we'll turn
16 into private session.
17 [Private session]
25 [Open session]
1 MR. MUNDIS:
2 Q. Did you take -- witness, did you take any notes of what this guide
3 or guide --
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I think that what preceded,
7 that is to say, the difficulties the Defence had to carry out its
8 interviews in a sort of fabricated anonymous way, I think that this should
9 be incognito -- I don't think this should be in open session.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me first -- Mr. Piletta-Zanin, the witness
11 was responding to something not asked to him in this respect. He was
12 asked about other things. On the other hand, I have no problem in -- you
13 did not ask the witness about it during the examination-in-chief, but I
14 have no problem in stating in open court that the witness, although that
15 was not the subject of the questions said, that they used when visiting
16 Sarajevo a relatively neutral car in order to prevent any -- any problems.
17 And he said something about an electro company and that the cameraman had
18 faced problems before.
19 Please proceed, Mr. Mundis.
20 MR. MUNDIS:
21 Q. Witness, did you take any notes of what these guides told you
22 during any of these trips?
23 A. I didn't use the guides. I didn't treat them as people with whom
24 I would hold conversations. They escorted me. I asked them to take me to
25 the locations that I had previously selected, and I believe that it wasn't
1 important --
2 Q. Excuse me. The question is: Did you take any notes from what
3 these people told you when you were in Sarajevo?
6 spoke to him and I provided the notes I made about that conversation. I
7 provided them to the Trial Chamber.
8 Q. While you were making your direct observation study trips, did you
9 take any notes about what you saw during the time you were in Sarajevo
10 making direct observations?
11 A. Of course, I did. And you have my notes on the video cassettes.
12 I filmed the Sarajevo theatre, a panorama of Sarajevo from the viewpoint
13 of the facilities used for the disposition of the units, to see what the
14 disposition of both sides was, the deployment of both sides was, and this
15 helped me to make the map.
16 JUDGE ORIE: May I just say: You repeated the name you didn't
17 want to pronounce in open session, so a redaction will be made in that
18 respect. Yes? General Radinovic, you asked for closed session, and then
19 in open session you repeated it.
20 So could -- Madam Registrar, could perhaps the --
21 Yes. Please proceed.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't have that kind of caution,
23 but I spoke to that person and I provided a note --
24 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not blaming you. But if you ask for private
25 session, then please try to concentrate not to mention those information
1 later on that you gave in private session.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. MUNDIS:
4 Q. Witness, in response to the question, you said you have my notes
5 on the video cassettes. Did you make any handwritten notes on paper or in
6 a notebook or any other type of written notes while you were making your
7 study trips to Sarajevo, notes of what you saw, what you could see from
8 various locations, et cetera?
9 A. No, I didn't write anything down.
10 Q. Witness, in addition to the videotape, did you take any still
11 photographs at any time during your study trips to Sarajevo?
12 A. I didn't.
13 Q. Did anyone who was accompanying you take still photographs and did
14 you rely on those still photographs in producing your report?
15 A. No one took any photographs in my team and in my presence, and I
16 did not rely on photographs.
17 Q. In writing your report, did you rely on or did you review the
18 videotape that you had made?
19 A. The video recordings that I shot? Is that what you're talking
21 Q. The videotapes that were shot during your study visits, whether
22 you took the video or someone else took the video, did you look at those
23 videotapes when you were producing your report?
24 A. Of course. Several times.
25 Q. Did you -- during the war, did you visit the Sarajevo theatre
1 personally at any time during the war?
2 A. Yes, I did.
3 Q. Do you recall in what capacity you visited the war -- or you
4 visited Sarajevo during the war?
5 A. Yes, I do.
6 Q. Can you please tell us what that capacity was.
7 A. As I said in the course of the examination-in-chief, in response
8 to lead counsel, Mrs. Pilipovic, I said that in 1992 and 1993 I was the
9 assistant to the Federal Ministry of Defence for strategy and for defence
10 politics. At the same time, I was a military expert in our state
11 delegation for the Geneva negotiations. And on each trip made by the
12 prime minister of the government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, I
13 was a member of the delegation as a military expert. My trip to
14 Sarajevo - I think it was at the end of July or the beginning of August, I
15 can't remember exactly - it was with the delegation led by Milan Panic,
16 the Yugoslav prime minister at the time. That was the first visit to
17 Sarajevo. After the beginning of the war, he wanted to show symbolically
18 that Yugoslavia wanted to put an end to the war, and I was in the column
19 in which unfortunately the American reporter David Kaplan was killed. I'll
20 remember that time, that event all my life. I joked with him in the
21 plane, and I almost foresaw his death. So it's -- it's a sad memory.
22 Q. Witness, at the time, was this in July or August of 1992 or in
24 A. 1992.
25 Q. And as the military expert on the state delegation or assistant to
1 the Federal Ministry of Defence for strategy, what were your specific
2 duties and responsibilities?
3 A. On that trip to Sarajevo, I didn't have any. I just went there as
4 someone who knew about armies and defence, and the prime minister Panic
5 didn't go on a single trip without taking me with him because he thought
6 if there were any subjects that would be of military interest, it would be
7 good to have a military expert with him. We stayed in the UNPROFOR
8 building and no military conversations of any kind were led, in
9 particular -- were held in particular, apart from the fact that ...
10 Q. Witness, at any time --
11 A. Apart from the time that we sought for peace.
12 Q. At any time after July or August of 1992 through the period August
13 1994 did you visit the city of Sarajevo for any other reason?
14 A. No, unfortunately I didn't. I am emotionally tied to Sarajevo. I
15 passed the exam to become a major in Sarajevo, so I am emotionally tied to
16 Sarajevo. But that was my first trip and my only trip before preparing
17 for this testimony.
18 Q. Witness, you wrote in your report that the study trips gave you
19 the opportunity to learn some - and I'm quoting again - "significant
20 empirical facts." Can you please point to a page or footnote in your
21 report that refers to any of these facts which you learned as a result of
22 your trip -- your study trips to Sarajevo.
23 A. Perhaps we view facts in a different way, we have different ideas
24 of what facts are. I'll tell you what I thought about military facts:
25 The position of the warring sides in the Sarajevo theatre are facts which
1 are of key importance, and I visited these positions on foot and I became
2 personally -- I personally saw what the tactical positions of those sides
3 were. This was very important for me. I didn't have to cite anything. I
4 told you how I determined the positions of both sides and how I obtained a
5 view of the positions of the sides in the Sarajevo theatre. For me these
6 are facts of key importance. Perhaps they're not such for you, but for me
7 they are.
8 Q. Witness, these facts of key importance, where in your report do
9 you cite or acknowledge the important facts which you personally observed
10 during your trip to Sarajevo?
11 A. It's in the part of my report that deals with the position of the
12 forces of both sides and the analysis of the operative position of the 1st
13 Corps and the Sarajevo Corps. But in particular, when they mention the
14 elevations in the Sarajevo theatre, that was analysed in detail there, if
15 you remember.
16 Q. The question, witness, is: If I could find or if you could point
17 me to a place where there's a footnote or words in the text to the effect
18 that you discovered these facts on the basis of your study trips to
20 A. I don't understand your question, in spite of my goodwill.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mundis would like to know what facts exactly are
22 the result from your personal observation and where we find in your report
23 that this fact or that fact is -- has become known to you as a result of
24 your personal observation. I think Mr. Mundis is trying to identify what
25 sources have played what role in your report.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'd have to provide you with a
2 descriptive answer. I can't just say yes or no. When you pass by the
3 Mojmilo Hill from the reservoir up to Grbavica, that is the best way to
4 find out about the military facts that concern Mojmilo's military
5 position, that is to say, to find out about the advantage that the side
6 that has Mojmilo under its control has. It was only when I went there on
7 foot that I saw this, although I was aware of Mojmilo, and then I had to
8 write this down.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you. What Mr. Mundis seeks is where in
10 your report you write the importance of -- "strategic importance of
11 Mojmilo, I observed that with my own eyes during my visit." So he -- he's
12 seeking for any reference to your personal visit, your personal
13 observation, as the source of your -- of your opinion.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, in the introductory part where
15 I wrote about my method and in order to make sure that the method was
16 transparent, I described how I discovered the facts. If I had described
17 each detail, every detail, the methodological part would have been longer
18 than the report itself, which is fairly long. So I wasn't in a position
19 to describe each detail. If I said that I visited that former front and
20 the features held by the sides and that I observed positions on the spot,
21 then that was a way of directly observing this. Should I have said this?
22 Should I have stated this on each page, on every page? I don't think so.
23 I mentioned this in the introduction. So that should have been
25 JUDGE ORIE: Your answer is clear. You say "I gave a general
1 reference to personal observation in my introduction and I've given my
2 report, no more details."
3 Please proceed, Mr. Mundis.
4 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Q. Witness, when was your report completed?
6 A. A report of this kind is not completed once and for all. It is a
7 process. There are as many methods as there are people. I have certainly
8 made so far four or five different versions of this report. When I made
9 the first draft, I was not happy either with the style or contents or the
10 method of integration of various chapters, so I did it again. And the
11 version that we now have in front of us was completed in November 2002.
12 Maybe it was October. But there are -- there were several versions
13 preceding it.
14 Q. Witness, can you tell us where in the document you indicate the
15 date that you completed the draft that was filed in November of 2002?
16 A. I did not think that this piece of information is important. It
17 is a process of development. I didn't think it was important to write
18 down when the first version was completed, and I just marked the date when
19 my final one was done. You know, some works take 20 years to be written.
20 Q. Witness, there is no date specifying when you completed your
21 report listed in your report; isn't that right? Yes or no?
22 A. I don't think so. Maybe you can find out from context, but there
23 are no dates because to me it is a totally insignificant fact.
24 Q. You indicate, witness, at pages 5 and 6 that your expertise was
25 completed before the military expertise of the Prosecution was completed.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. You -- once the Prosecution military expertise was completed, you
3 did not go back and revise your report, did you?
4 A. I think I finished this version too without looking at the
5 military expertise of the Prosecution. I haven't received that military
6 expertise to this day.
7 Q. Let me stop you there, witness. Did you ask the Defence legal
8 team for the transcripts of the Prosecution military expertise?
9 A. Of course I did, yes.
10 Q. And they did not provide that to you for your use in producing
11 your report?
12 A. They provided me with the materials submitted by Mr. Philipps, but
13 that is not military expertise. That is the draft military structure of
14 the SRK. I knew that even without the material from Mr. Philipps. I
15 wanted to see how the Prosecution is analysing the military situation, the
16 conduct of the warring sides. I wanted to see from that material if I had
17 made a mistake that I could perceive only by comparing my military
18 knowledge with the military knowledge of the Prosecution's expert. But I
19 didn't receive that sort of military expertise, and unfortunately to this
20 day after completing my report I still haven't got it. I didn't believe
21 that such a major military problem can be treated without a serious
22 military report from the other side. I think that this would be treated
23 much better if we had two military experts, one on each side.
24 Q. Witness, do you know whether the documents or transcripts or any
25 of the material that you relied upon in producing your report, if any of
1 that material has actually been admitted into evidence?
2 A. I don't know. I'm not on the Defence team, and I can't possibly
3 know whether something is admitted into evidence or not.
4 Q. Witness, you provided several weeks ago copies of the notes you
5 took when you interviewed the individuals that you listed in your report
6 as being superior members of the SRK. I'm going to ask now that the usher
7 show you photocopies of those notes. There are several places, about nine
8 places in the notes where our interpreters and translators have had a
9 difficult time reading your handwriting, and I would like you to assist us
10 by reading out what selected portions of your notes say. Do you
11 understand what I'm asking you?
12 A. I understand what you're asking. But Your Honour, I want to ask
13 this: Is it possible that every working draft is studied here? They were
14 not made for this purpose. Of course I don't mind the Trial Chamber and
15 the Prosecution reading my notes that I took over there, but I simply
16 can't understand that such importance is attached to this sort of working
17 paper, the notes that I took in the margin when talking to some people.
18 It's just as when reading a book you make your own notes on the margin
19 reflecting your impressions and immediate thoughts. But of course I will
20 do whatever is asked of me. I simply think that it is hardly necessary.
21 That was just one thing I did in preparation. It was one of the steps in
22 my work.
23 JUDGE ORIE: General Radinovic, the Prosecution wants to verify
24 the sources you've used, and it is up to the parties to identify what they
25 think to be important sources to verify and what not. So therefore, I'd
1 like you to answer the questions in this respect, although I do understand
2 that you find it not that relevant.
3 But before doing so, are these longer -- how much time would it
4 take, Mr. Mundis?
5 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, we've got about -- or I have about
6 nine of these excerpts. I do have a copy here where I've highlighted in
7 the margins those portions which I'd like to witness to read out to us. I
8 do not expect that we would finish this prior to breaking for today.
9 JUDGE ORIE: But there is -- I think Mr. Ierace asked for a couple
10 of minutes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin asked for some time.
11 There are two ways of dealing with it: The first would be to
12 start with it tomorrow; the other one would be to ask the witness whether
13 on those specific parts indicated he could clarify the matter. But we
14 also could do it tomorrow. It's just the way you want to use your time.
15 [Prosecution counsel confer]
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I make a suggestion, Your
17 Honour, to save time?
18 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... Yes.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am willing to offer my spare time
20 to the Prosecutor to make whatever clarification if necessary, if it is
21 not important to do it here in the courtroom. So in my spare time, I will
22 be at their disposal to decipher whatever is unclear in my notes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mundis.
24 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, I think -- well, the Prosecution
25 certainly appreciates the willingness of the expert to assist us. I think
1 we would prefer that this material be read into the record. In the event
2 he were to simply take the notes in an attempt to make them clear, we
3 would still have problems with respect to translation. The notes as we
4 currently have them have been translated and distributed to the parties
5 and to the Bench. We would then have to revise that. It might actually
6 take up more time than simply asking him to read short excerpts from these
7 nine portions of the notes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then perhaps we will do that tomorrow morning
9 and spend the time now on the --
10 Unless, there -- Mr. Ierace, how much time would you need?
11 MR. IERACE: Well, Mr. President, it's simply a matter of the
12 Defence indicating if they've found the relevant passage and then what
13 should follow from that.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then --
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: In order to prevent that we -- in order to prevent
17 that we are going to rush against the clock, we'd rather start with this
18 exercise tomorrow, Mr. Mundis.
19 If you would have one or two questions, then we could continue for
20 just one or two minutes, but ...
21 MR. MUNDIS: I can certainly skip to another area and ask a few
22 questions, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then would you please stop in three minutes.
24 MR. MUNDIS:
25 Q. Witness, the very first document that you were shown when you
1 testified here, D246, clearly indicated that the JNA 4th Corps was renamed
2 the Sarajevo Romanija Corps. It was essentially the old JNA 4th Corps
3 under a new name. Is that right?
4 A. No. Many units from the 4th Corps did not get transferred to the
5 Sarajevo Romanija Corps. There is no mark of equality between the two.
6 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, I would ask the witness be shown 246,
7 the very first document shown on Thursday.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, would you please put it on the ELMO so
9 that we ...
10 MR. MUNDIS:
11 Q. Witness, could you please read out what the main text of this
12 document says.
13 A. The main part of this document speaks about the fact that the 4th
14 Corps is renamed into Sarajevo Romanija Corps. And I wasn't disputing
15 that. I just said that not all units of the 4th Corps ended up in the
16 composition of the SRK, nor was the zone of responsibility of the 4th
17 Corps turned into the zone of responsibility of the SRK. The brigade from
18 Doboj is missing, another brigade --
19 Q. Certainly, witness, the -- certainly the brigades, regiments, and
20 battalions listed on that document were former 4th Corps subordinate units
21 that were simply renamed and formed part of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps.
22 That's what the document says.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 MR. MUNDIS: No further questions for today, Mr. President.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Mundis.
2 General Radinovic, we will continue tomorrow morning at 9.00 in
3 this same courtroom. We have to deal with one or two procedural issues.
4 But meanwhile I ask Madam Usher to escort you out of the courtroom, and
5 I'd like to instruct you not to speak with anyone about your testimony in
6 this -- that you have given in this court or you're still about to give in
7 this court. Yes? Thank you. And I hope to see you back tomorrow
9 [The witness stands down]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Then I do understand, Mr. Ierace, you are waiting for
11 a response of the review of the tapes over the weekend.
12 Is there any response, Ms. Pilipovic? I'm talking about the Gray
13 tapes, where to locate some sequences.
14 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour -- Your Honour, I have
15 to say that in the absence of my colleague, I reviewed three videotapes,
16 two from the registry -- in fact, I think the third is two from the
17 registry. I was confused by the fact that I don't have the original of
18 the tapes, so I can't check that the recording corresponds to the
20 The three videotapes that I have managed to see over the weekend
21 contain certain excerpts from BBC programmes but very short. One of them
22 is 49 minutes long or 39 minutes long, maybe even shorter, and the third
23 videotape I believe contains no BBC programmes. So the fourth tape is
24 still missing, and I do have to review it.
25 I also received the videotape given by the Defence to the
1 registry, a clerk gave it to me on Saturday, so I am still not able to
2 compare the cassette disclosed by the Defence with parts of the original.
3 The problem is, therefore, that I don't have the originals so that I can't
4 see whether our own videotapes correspond to the originals. I believe
5 that as far as the three tapes that I have so far managed to see are
6 concerned, do not coincide with the original. I can't be very certain of
7 this, but I believe that this is the problem.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Just to summarise. I do understand that you reviewed
9 three videotapes. You did not identify on any of these three videotapes
10 the sequences specifically referred to by the Prosecution.
11 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] I did not identify on any of these
12 three tapes -- for instance, there was a sequence showing a radar.
13 JUDGE ORIE: So you were not able -- and you still have to review
14 the fourth tape; is that correct?
15 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Finally --
17 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] But I think I don't have it. I
18 don't think I have the fourth tape, but I'll look up my collection again
19 because in the office where I'm working we have about 80 tapes. I didn't
20 have numbers on the tapes I got from the registry, so I don't know if I
21 have all four of them or only three. I'm not certain, because we got them
22 in stages.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps there would -- if there's any doubt
24 remaining, that by comparing at least how the tape starts, you could see
25 whether these are the same tapes as the tapes that have meanwhile been
1 received by the Prosecution. When can we expect that you have reviewed
2 the fourth tape?
3 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I actually think I
4 don't have the fourth tape. This afternoon I could try to contact my
5 colleagues from the Prosecution so that we can identify the ones I've
6 seen. I can tell them what the contents are and how they begin.
7 JUDGE ORIE: So I expect that the Chamber will be informed
8 tomorrow about the achievements made this afternoon. So we still do not
9 know - I think I expressed myself in words - as to which party is most
10 happy after the weekend. We still have to wait one more day to see who is
11 the unhappy and who is the happier party.
12 Is there anything else on this issue?
13 Then, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you asked for 30 seconds at the end of
14 the hearing.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Briefly,
16 the Defence was not ready to question this witness. We say so and we say
17 so in defence of our legitimate rights to prepare for a witness. From
18 Friday, for reasons which are strictly personal and have to do with one of
19 my relatives, I had a similar situation to the one which caused the
20 suspension of this proceeding for several hours. I think you know what
21 I'm talking about. I was asking for a -- I was asking for a suspension of
22 the proceedings for several hours in order to be with them, and that was
23 rejected. I didn't know until Sunday evening whether I would be able to
24 attend until this morning, and this caused a major upheaval for the
25 Defence because Mrs. Pilipovic didn't know whether she was supposed to
1 take over -- to take over one part of the questioning which originally I
2 planned to handle and for which I prepared and not she.
3 I note that I made absolutely no comment on this matter.
4 Another thing - and I am mustering the courage to tell you
5 this - I formulated a request for recusal, and since then we are feeling
6 an atmosphere here which is not pleasant. There are -- this is reflecting
7 on everybody's quality of work, and I think this is hurting the
8 presentation of the Defence case. I am saying the Defence case, because
9 it is targeted against one person, certainly not Mr. Galic, and I think it
10 is one of our functions to say things even if they are not pleasant. I
11 tried to say this with the utmost respect but also with utmost clarity,
12 Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any need to respond, Mr. Ierace?
14 MR. IERACE: Well, Mr. President, I think in view of the last
15 comment made by Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I should indicate as a matter of record
16 that the Prosecution has not detected any change whatsoever in the
17 attitude of the Bench towards the Defence or the Prosecution. Thank you.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Just a moment, Your Honour.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please use your microphone.
22 It's not clear to me, Mr. Piletta-Zanin. You --
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, I'm watching the clock.
24 We all have to abide by the clock. No comments for now.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand that you do not wish to make
1 any comment at this moment.
2 Then we'll adjourn until tomorrow morning, 9.00.
3 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
4 at 1.49 p.m., to be reconvened on Tuesday,
5 the 11th day of March, 2003, at 9.00 a.m.