Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 8336

 1                           Wednesday, 10 September 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 2.21 p.m.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon to everyone.

 7             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honours.  This is case

 9     number IT-06-90-T, the Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina, et al.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

11             Before we continue, I'd like to briefly deal with scheduling.

12             The Chamber is aware of the positions of the parties, it being

13     that considerable time will be needed for cross-examination and that even

14     Friday in the afternoon, sitting in the afternoon, would not help you

15     out.

16             The Chamber has considered this.

17             Mr. Waespi, if you would take another hour, then that would mean

18     that we would -- when we would also sit Friday in the afternoon, we would

19     have 13 hours left altogether and I'm talking about effective examination

20     time.  If you'd just take the net hours, I mean, a sitting day is four

21     hours and 45 minutes, 45 minutes of break, that makes four hours, and my

22     calculations for 13 hours, I started at three and a half hours for a day

23     session, which would mean that for Wednesday, Thursday, Friday morning,

24     Friday afternoon, we'd have all together 14 hours minus one hour to be

25     taken by Mr. Waespi today.  That's 13 hours.

Page 8337

 1             The Chamber considers that it should be possible to at least give

 2     it a serious try to finish the case, and therefore, suggest to the

 3     Defence teams to agree on how they would -- how they would use 11 hours

 4     for cross-examination.  We would then still have a couple -- two hours

 5     left, perhaps re-examination, perhaps some questions from the Bench.

 6     Let's see, whether, in the total of 13 hours remaining after Mr. Waespi

 7     has finished his examination-in-chief, whether we can achieve that.

 8             The Chamber is aware, especially in the circumstances, where

 9     reference was made to Rule 91 at an early stage, that the Chamber will

10     adapt the schedule, if it appears that, that would be required by the

11     fairness of the trial, which should be guaranteed by the Chamber.  That

12     remains unaffected.  Nevertheless, 13 hours, let's see whether we can do

13     it.

14             Mr. Misetic.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.  I understand your

16     instruction completely and I know you're aware of this but I feel the

17     need to make a record on our behalf concerning the time.  We feel

18     strongly that I will certainly try to get that done within the time you

19     have allotted.  However, we feel strongly given the fact that we have

20     five witness statements here, there will be approximately five to six

21     hours worth of direct testimony, there are 20 to 30 sitreps, and 100-day

22     report, that time should be given to the defendants in particular,

23     because we are not talking about one or two topic areas, if I may use an

24     expression, the kitchen sink here in this -- through this witness has

25     been thrown at us, and it will take some time to cover each topic with

Page 8338

 1     this witness.

 2             Given that, I completely understand the Trial Chamber's desire

 3     and, as always, will strive to make the cross-examination as effective as

 4     possible dealing with the issues.  However, did I want to state that we

 5     feel very strongly concerning this witness and that we be given the

 6     amount of time necessary to do a proper and thorough job in the

 7     cross-examination.  And as I said, I'm sure that the Trial Chamber was

 8     already aware of that but I wanted to make that clear on the record.

 9             Thank you.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  You already started speaking more quickly in order

11     to achieve that.

12             Mr. Waespi, you have until quarter past 3.00, I would say.  You

13     said four and a half hours.  You've taken three hours and 45 minutes.

14     This would bring you -- and if you would take five minutes more, that is

15     already part of our calculation.

16             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Liborius, I'd like to remind you that you're

18     still bound by the solemn declaration that you have given at the

19     beginning of your testimony, and I do understand that although you have

20     travel arrangements that that would be only for later on Friday.  Is that

21     correct?

22             THE WITNESS:  Yes, Your Honour.  I have been corresponding with

23     the Prosecutor and arranged that my latest departure from The Hague would

24     be Friday evening.  I have a prime minister's visit to attend to and I

25     simply have to leave The Hague on Friday evening.  I am, however, of

Page 8339

 1     course in the interests of justice, prepared to reappear here or produce

 2     material in writing or whatever.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  An afternoon session goes, then, till 7.00 p.m.,

 4     that would be still --

 5             THE WITNESS:  Sorry.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Your plane leaves at what time?

 7             THE WITNESS:  8.00 in the evening.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Hmm.  That creates an additional problem.

 9             Let's get started and see whether Mr. Waespi has a private plane

10     for you.

11             Mr. Waespi.

12             MR. WAESPI:  Since the previous Prosecutor has left there is no

13     more government plane available to the Prosecutor.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  I can understand that you're suffering, Mr. Waespi.

15             Mr. Misetic.

16             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I just wanted to clarify.  I assume

17     that the witness meant he has been contacting through the Victim and

18     Witnesses Unit.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't know whether the correspondence, Mr. Waespi,

20     was -- first of all, it was in writing.  It was --

21             MR. WAESPI:  Prior to the witness being sworn in.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

23             Please proceed.

24             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

25                           WITNESS:  SOREN LIBORIUS [Resumed]

Page 8340

 1                           Examination by Mr. Waespi: [Continued]

 2             MR. WAESPI:  If 65 ter 5441 could be brought up, please.

 3        Q.   Now, Mr. Liborius, while that is being done, did you maintain a

 4     notebook, a patrol notebook while you were on mission in 1995?

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   And what was the purpose of that notebook?

 7        A.   The purpose was to record observations and informations,

 8     statements and the like that I observed during my monitoring activity.

 9        Q.   Now, please have a look at this document.  Do you recognise this

10     document?

11        A.   Yes, I do.

12        Q.   And what is it?

13        A.   It is a meeting conducted on the 19th of --

14        Q.   Let me ask you first.  What is it -- have you prepared this

15     document, before you go into the contents?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   And when did you prepare it?

18        A.   I prepared it the day before yesterday or so, yeah.

19        Q.   Thank you.  Let's go to page 3 of this document.  And the basis

20     for this document was what, Mr. Liborius?

21        A.   The basis is my patrol notebook.

22        Q.   I believe we need to go to the next page.  Yes.

23             Can you tell us what it says under the entry of the 23rd of

24     October.

25        A.   Danish or in English?

Page 8341

 1        Q.   In English.

 2        A.   Voting in barracks.  4 Guards Brigade, under General Gotovina,

 3     arrow, Guards Brigade commander, arrow, Ministry of Defence, soldiers

 4     will vote in barracks.

 5             Shall I continue?

 6        Q.   No.  Let me ask you, do you remember having met with

 7     General Gotovina on or about 23rd of October?

 8        A.   For the preparations of the elections we had a host of meetings

 9     with different authorities in that period, and in and around that time,

10     yes, a short meeting.

11        Q.   And how do you remember that you had a short meeting with

12     General Gotovina?

13        A.   Because it was decided that that -- the further detailed

14     discussions should be delegated to some of the aides in his staff.

15        Q.   And do you remember the name of the aide in Mr. Gotovina's staff?

16        A.   That was Mr. Seric.

17        Q.   And do you recall his function?

18        A.   It's written on the yellow Post-It note that is referred to a

19     little bit down below.  Colonel Seric, Deputy Commander OZ Split, for

20     political affairs.  He later introduced himself as an aide to

21     General Gotovina during that meeting that was held on the 26th of

22     October.

23        Q.   Thank you Mr. Liborius.

24             MR. WAESPI:  If this piece could be admitted into evidence,

25     Mr. President.

Page 8342

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  I see and hear of no objections.

 2             Madam Registrar.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P821.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  P821 is admitted into evidence.

 5             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 6        Q.   Let move to the 27th of October.  And I would like to have

 7     65 ter 4337 brought up, please.

 8             Now do you know who Colonel or General Gambotti was,

 9     Mr. Liborius?

10        A.   Yes, certainly.  He was the designated Head of Regional Centre.

11        Q.   Of what organisation?

12        A.   Of the ECMM.

13        Q.   Now are you familiar with this document that you see on your

14     screen now, Mr. Liborius?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And were you the drafter?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   On the bottom part of the document, we see reference to a meeting

19     between the HRC DES with the OZ Split commander General Gotovina.  Does

20     that refer to Mr. Gambotti?

21        A.   Yes.  The HRC designate is Mr. Gambotti.

22        Q.   And it goes on to the next page, if we could see that, please.

23             Is that an accurate representation of what occurred during the

24     meeting in your memory, Mr. Liborius?

25        A.   It is a condensed and accurate version.

Page 8343

 1        Q.   And before drafting and indeed filing this report, I take it it

 2     has been filed ultimately.  Is that correct?

 3        A.   Oh, yes.  ECMM reports were sent and filed in the headquarters of

 4     the ECMM.

 5        Q.   Before doing that, did you discuss the contents of what you wrote

 6     down in relation to that meeting with General Gotovina and Mr. Gambotti,

 7     with Mr. Gambotti?

 8        A.   I discussed the meetings we had throughout the day and also, of

 9     course, the one we had with General Gotovina.  It was indeed a long one

10     and HRC designate Gambotti and I discussed in details the way the meeting

11     went before I drafted that report.

12        Q.   On what basis did you draft this report?  Did you have notes

13     which would have helped you drafting the report?

14        A.   Several pages, yes.  And the HRC designate's own impressions as

15     well.

16        Q.   Thank you.

17             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President, if this document could be tendered

18     into evidence.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.

20             Then Madam Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P822.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  P822 is admitted into evidence.

23             Mr. Waespi, the previous exhibit is partly in Danish, partly in

24     English.  How would you expect the Chamber to -- to digest that?

25             MR. WAESPI:  Yes.  We instructed an outside service to make a

Page 8344

 1     translation, verbatim translation of the Danish parts and we will receive

 2     it shortly.  So I hope tomorrow morning we will have it for

 3     cross-examination.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I then put on the record that, of course, the

 5     admission is conditional to receiving a full English text.  Now, these

 6     apparently are notes, may I take it handwritten notes, the original seems

 7     not to be attached to it.

 8             Mr. Misetic.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I feel a need to step in here.

10             We have been produced his entire notebook and an entire diary and

11     I will work it out with Mr. Waespi but we believe and we'll tender both

12     in their entirety in the cross-examination.  I will work out with him

13     whose going to pay for the translation but actually we'll have both

14     translated, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

16             MR. WAESPI:  At the end, we all have the same UN background as it

17     comes to translation services.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that is the optimistic view on the matter.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

21             Let's move to 65 ter 5434.

22        Q.   Now, Mr. Liborius, can you tell us what you see on the screen?

23        A.   I see my notebook.

24        Q.   And can you specify which parts of your notebook?

25        A.   That's my second notebook and it covers the dates for

Page 8345

 1     27 October -- yeah.  Both pages, I have the notebook at my availability

 2     here for the Chamber, if that serves in their interests.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  And on the right side, do you see a reference to the

 4     meeting we were just discussing with you, General Gotovina and

 5     Mr. Gambotti?

 6        A.   That is it indeed the first page of the many pages of notes I

 7     took during the meeting.

 8        Q.   Let's go slowly through the pages.

 9             MR. WAESPI:  If the next page could be brought up, please.

10        Q.   Is that the next sequence?

11        A.   Yes.  You see the questions discussed.  They are in numbers 1, 2,

12     3, 4, 5, up until -- I should state that if I am required to relate and

13     reflect and reproduce what is in the notes I must suggest that I have the

14     notebook in front of me.  It's in my bag.  Because it is not really so

15     clearly visible here on the screen.

16             Have I seen a photocopy of it.  It is much more clear on a

17     photocopy.

18        Q.   The only purpose is to identify that this is a true copy of what

19     you have in your notebook and we do have another exhibit, a typewritten

20     version of this notebook.

21             If we can move on to the last page, please?

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Just for my understanding, Mr. Waespi.  Is this the

23     same notebook or a different notebook from which we got the transcript in

24     the previous -- one of the previous exhibits.

25             MR. WAESPI:  It is the same one from the -- the same series of

Page 8346

 1     notebooks.

 2        Q.   And this is the last page.  Can you confirm that, Mr. Liborius?

 3        A.   Yes, I can.  And in the interests of saving time, Your Honour, I

 4     am prepared to produce the notebook so that the Judges can have it in

 5     front of them.  Under the condition that I receive it -- return.

 6        Q.   Now --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  If this would not find any objection with the

 8     Defence counsel, then of course we could have a look at the notebook.

 9             THE WITNESS:  Simply in the interests of time.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then could the usher please assist in ...

11             THE WITNESS:  This the first one; this is the second one; this is

12     the one we're looking at now, the small one; and the first one covers the

13     previous month.  They are my property.

14             Your Honour, you should look at the yellow mark in the little

15     book.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll find our way through it, thank you.

17             Please proceed.

18             MR. MISETIC:  I would note that if there is it a colour

19     distinction or things like that in the notebook, we haven't been produced

20     anything in colour.  So, I don't know what -- oh, I see, Post-It notes.

21     Okay.

22                           [Trial Chamber confers]

23             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.  If this could receive an

24     exhibit number, please.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.

Page 8347

 1             Madam Registrar.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P823.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  P823 is admitted into evidence.

 4             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 5        Q.   Now in producing those notes, who did you do that?  Did you take

 6     them at the meeting or after the meeting.

 7        A.   At the meeting as it was in progress.

 8        Q.   How good of a note-taker are you?

 9        A.   I'm a fairly senior civil servant in the Danish administration.

10     I would suggest that my note takings have been trained and refined over a

11     couple of years.  My prime minister relies on them, and will in a few

12     days' time.

13        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Liborius.  If we could go back to 5441, please;

14     that's the Exhibit we discussed at the outset of today.  And if we could

15     move to page 5, please.

16             In front of you, do you see now a typed written version of your

17     notes as it relates to that meeting of the 27th of October?

18        A.   Yes.  I produced it myself.

19        Q.   Thank you.  Now, let's move to item 15, which is at the very end.

20             MR. WAESPI:  If we can go back, please.  Yes.  Item 15.

21        Q.   Now, using these notes here and your memory, can you let us, what

22     was discussed under item 15?

23        A.   It dealt with the question of what would happen if a military

24     operation occurred in Sector East.  How would the Croatian forces be

25     controlled.  Prior to the item 15 had been a discussion of the tactical

Page 8348

 1     manuals for increasing control.  That had been the topic of the -- that

 2     section of the conversation.  The conversation had reached, I would say,

 3     a very -- the atmosphere was good, it was tense, it was a give-and-take

 4     conversation between Gambotti and General Gotovina.

 5             The first sentence, [Foreign language spoken], if a military

 6     operation comes, how will the HV forces be controlled, was the question

 7     raised by Gambotti.  And then follows the answer by General Gotovina.  It

 8     had been the subject prior 13, 12, 13, 14, the NCO corps.  The

 9     availability of them and the possibility for them for exercising control

10     in the military rank and the General focussed on the fact that they

11     lacked the sufficiently trained and skilled NCOs giving, among others,

12     the -- the result -- that was a result of the years under Marshal Tito,

13     the Yugoslav whole mentality, the way the armed forces were structured.

14     The fact that the NCOs -- some of them had also had bad experiences.

15     They were amongst all the people who were expelled from the Krajina-held

16     areas, that the feeling of harassment that they felt, that that taken in

17     total produced an environment in which the appropriate professional

18     execution of a NCO function as a controlling and commanding element in

19     the chain of command was not properly working.

20             However, the General stated that the professional soldiers were

21     of a higher quality.

22             Then the conversation ping-ponged forward and at a certain point

23     General Gotovina -- Gambotti, HRC designate Gambotti asked the question

24     whether, okay, we have discussed NCOs and the way they can exercise their

25     command but we all know that extraordinary events took place and the

Page 8349

 1     General concurred in that.  And then at that time, the silence kicked in

 2     to that part of the conversation, because at that time it was, well,

 3     admitted that extraordinary events did -- occurred at a quite a

 4     large-scale and that the previous, so to speak, protection of the

 5     integrity of the NCO corps and the developments trying to keep the

 6     professional soldiers out responsibility of that has, so to speak, been

 7     eroded.

 8             The conversation was conducted through silence, I would say.  And

 9     that was a distinct change in that meeting.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

11             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I just wish to note that the document

12     on the screen was prepared by the witness a few days ago.  I have now

13     noticed that he transcribed his notes, it says in 15:  "Professional

14     soldiers."  And in his original notebook it says:  "Professional soldiers

15     were controlled."  The two words "were controlled" are omitted from

16     what Mr. Liborius put on the paper here.  Just for the record, thank you.

17             THE WITNESS:  If we could reproduce the notebook itself, it is

18     perhaps easier.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  We're talking about 15.  Under 15, prof soldiers, is

20     that the portion --

21             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, yes, and the next words are "were controlled,"

22     in the original that I have been given.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I have the page in front of me.  That's the page

24     with the pyramid on it.

25             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

Page 8350

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we have to look at it.  Could you perhaps

 2     provide me with the --

 3             MR. WAESPI:  65 ter number would be 5434.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  This is what I was produced by the Office of the

 5     Prosecutor, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's see whether that looks more or less like the

 7     original I have got here.

 8             MR. WAESPI:  It would be the last page in this document.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, we have it now on our screen.

10             What is missing in your version?

11             MR. MISETIC:  Nothing it missing in my version.  What was written

12     before -- on the document before was purported to be a transcript of this

13     and what I'm pointing out is that when Mr. Liborius prepared this

14     transcript, he put "professional soldiers" and then the sentence "were

15     controlled" is omitted from the transcript that he has prepared.  The

16     typed version that was on our screen a few minutes ago.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, what is on our screen, what line do I find

18     that.

19             MR. MISETIC:  This is now the notebook which is P -- P821.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  One second.

21             I think a whole line is missing not only "were controlled,"

22     but --

23             MR. MISETIC: [Microphone not activated] Much improved, I think.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  There seems to an error in the transcript.

25             THE WITNESS:  That's the reason, Your Honour, that I would prefer

Page 8351

 1     to refer to my written notes because those are in front of you, and if we

 2     can relate to that I would feel more confident.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, the issue dealing with at this moment could be

 4     produced on your screen.  I don't know what --

 5             THE WITNESS:  That's perfect for me.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  You can see it on your screen at this moment?

 7             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  So the portion we are talking about, you'll see that

 9     the words "were controlled" and then the "D," and then something that's

10     difficult to read for me, "improved," do not appear on your transcript.

11             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  The meeting at that time had gone on for

12     some -- I don't know --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  I think it is just a transcript error.

14             THE WITNESS:  Okay.  Fine.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  That's --

16             THE WITNESS:  Let's take the original.

17             MR. MISETIC:  On that basis I'd ask, Your Honour, that the P --

18     P823 be marked for identification until we can make sure that everything

19     has been transcribed properly.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And of course it is a selection of the

21     notebook anyhow.

22             MR. MISETIC:  But even that selection should reflect what is

23     actually in the notebook at least.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  No, no, there is no doubt about that.  Then we

25     will have if marked for identification for the time being until the

Page 8352

 1     portions transcribed have been fully checked.

 2             How much time would you need for that Mr. Misetic.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Given that I'm doing the cross-examination,

 4     Your Honour, should we do it while the witness is still here, or I would

 5     prefer to do it early next week -- to get back to you early next week, I

 6     mean.

 7             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President, we'll get a translation later today

 8     and so I can disclose it to Defence and we have an English translation of

 9     everything that is in Danish.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Perhaps other counsel may be just as much

11     interested.

12             Someone has just to check it.  It's as simple as that.

13             Please proceed.

14             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

15        Q.   Now earlier, Mr. Liborius, you said that it was admitted that

16     extraordinary events occurred, I believe.  Do you recall that?

17        A.   Yes.  What happened between the line "professional soldiers were

18     controlled though much improved," and then "extraordinary" on one line

19     was that the ping-pong between General Gotovina and Mr. Gambotti,

20     narrowed in the -- the focus of the conversation into how was the control

21     exercised over, not only reserve units but also professional units.

22             The starting point of General Gotovina's explanation was that

23     professional soldiers were controlled, were completely free of

24     accusations of having engaged in irregular activities burning and looting

25     and that stuff, and as the discussion in 15 developed to a crucial point

Page 8353

 1     where -- that is where "extraordinary," that word, is reflecting there,

 2     had reached such a tense atmosphere.  Now I want you to remember that the

 3     two persons had in -- had a tete-a-tete before the formal meeting

 4     started.  They were speaking French.

 5        Q.   And by the two persons you mean?

 6        A.   Gotovina and Gambotti, who was a senior French officer.  So there

 7     was a good rapport between the two gentlemen.  Gambotti being a senior,

 8     old, experienced French officer and the General having a good rapport

 9     with him.  So you may say that it was difficult to escape the subject and

10     just giving lip service.

11        Q.   Let me ask you --

12        A.   And therefore, as the conversation became more focussed on, well,

13     there was these extraordinary events, yes, they were there, was the

14     silent admittance.  I, as a note-taker, would not be -- keep -- working

15     with my pencil because it would seriously disturb the rapport between the

16     two gentlemen.  It is not like, you know, you sit in the school and take

17     dictation.  And we both interpreted that the silence there was -- the

18     silence by General Gotovina was, in fact, the answer.  It was an a silent

19     exception that, yes, extraordinary events did take place and the soldiers

20     that General Gotovina -- Colonel Gambotti mentioned had indeed taken part

21     in that.

22        Q.   And what is meant by extraordinary events?

23        A.   Burning and looting mainly.  But extraordinary events was at that

24     time the common phrase used by the Croatian government and Croatian

25     officials for all sorts of activities that -- that included killing,

Page 8354

 1     burning, looting, extraordinary events.

 2        Q.   And you mentioned a couple of times NCO corps or NCOs.  What are

 3     NCOs?

 4        A.   They are the middle level commanders, sergeants and that stuff.

 5     The level of soldiers that are so crucial in controlling the men in your

 6     unit.  Can you be a fine general, you can be a fine officer, but you need

 7     the NCOs, the sergeants, in order to maintain control of your field

 8     units --

 9        Q.   Thank you --

10        A.    -- of the five to 15 unit size.  And if I may relate to what I

11     said yesterday, when you do see a unit of say five to fifteen soldiers

12     moving around they will usually in their -- down to earth business, be

13     controlled by the NCOs.  And if the NCOs do not react or act in a proper

14     way, they accept killing, burning, looting, whatever, then the entire

15     morale in the unit simply is eroded very fast.  I can say that as a

16     previous soldier.

17        Q.   Let me move on to item 16 on the same last page.

18             Can you tell us what was discussed?

19        A.   16 and 17, [Foreign language spoken] translates into who has been

20     arrested.  A question by Gambotti.  The reply from General Gotovina was

21     that General Cermak would have that information and he would continue

22     with some details there.  But in general, the situation was okay.  Saying

23     that well, okay, some people have perhaps been doing these extraordinary

24     events, discussed in 15, but in general the situation is under control,

25     it's okay.

Page 8355

 1             And he continues:  There are [Foreign language spoken]

 2     extraordinary events.  There is always extraordinary events, a repetition

 3     of the 15 [Foreign language spoken] I don't have concrete information.

 4     So the General flips between being, if you wish, honest with the senior

 5     French officer that he has established a good rapport with and, on the

 6     other hand, keeping the official line.  That is the art of the -- the

 7     conversation there.

 8        Q.   Thank you.

 9             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President, I don't know whether we have this

10     document admitted already.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  I think the document was admitted but the

12     transcription is now marked for identification, the selected portions.

13             Could I ask one question.  In 16, we find the word "events."  Has

14     that word been there when you wrote it or has it been changed at any

15     later stage?

16             THE WITNESS:  Your Honour, certainly not.  What you see in front

17     of you is what was produced in that meeting.  And I can assure you under

18     oath that the diary and what you see in front of you is what was produced

19     at the time.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, everything you say is under oath, so

21     therefore that needs -- it's not specific for this answer.

22             Could I -- you rightly said that this is your property.  Could I

23     nevertheless instruct you that should keep it so that the original is --

24     will always be available when needed.

25             THE WITNESS:  Certainly, Your Honour.

Page 8356

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 2             Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.

 3             MR. KAY:  Your Honour.  I don't know whether Your Honour is

 4     finished looking at the document, might the Defence bar have a look at it

 5     as well in the original form.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  The original.  I take it that there's no objection

 7     against temporarily leaving it and I take it that the Defence, certainly

 8     in view of the instructions I just gave, has no concern to give it back

 9     to you once they've inspected it.

10             Please proceed.

11             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

12        Q.   Let's move on to meetings you had with General Cermak.  How many

13     times did you meet with him?

14        A.   With General Cermak, I don't have the exact number.  From time to

15     time we would meet to discuss different issues of running the ECMM

16     operation.  We would sometimes discuss human rights -- humanitarian

17     issues.  I would have some of the meetings, my humanitarian officer would

18     have some.  So from time to time.

19        Q.   Thank you.  Let's turn to 65 ter 4002.  This is a daily report of

20     5th August, and it refers to the fact that the new military governor is

21     General Cermak.  I'm sure we will see it in a moment.

22             Now, that's the 5th of August, a report by you.  Was that the

23     first time you heard of Mr. Cermak and the fact that he is the military

24     governor?

25        A.   Could we have it enlarged, please?

Page 8357

 1             Yes.

 2        Q.   And why do you describe him as military governor in this report?

 3        A.   Because at that time we had information via UN and I believe also

 4     public media that a new general had been installed in Knin as a military

 5     governor.

 6        Q.   Now in the meetings you were present, how was he addressed, as

 7     far as you recall?

 8        A.   Either as General Cermak or the military governor.

 9        Q.   As far as you were aware, did he ever protest as to the fact that

10     you called him military governor?

11        A.   No.

12        Q.   Let me turn to your second witness statement.  That's P800.  At

13     page 3, where you say that, and I quote:  "Turning to the authority of

14     General Cermak, the military governor, there is reason to say that his

15     authority grew during the month of August and September."

16             And then you move on to discuss the rising authority in relation

17     to how you got through check-points.

18             Do you have other examples of how you saw his authority

19     increasing?

20        A.   As we discussed yesterday, frequently a -- a call to him or his

21     staff would resolve a restriction of movement problems.  And as the weeks

22     progressed after Operation Storm, sometimes the mentioning of his name

23     would suffice to -- to solve the problems of restriction of movements or

24     in conversation with soldiers.

25        Q.   In general, based on the meetings you had with him and perhaps

Page 8358

 1     other people, how did you see his authority?

 2        A.   I saw General Cermak's authority indeed as military governor.

 3     The senior figure in charge of the, you may say, housekeeping, not the

 4     operational military figure.  And his words to me was that he was sent to

 5     ensure the upholding of law and order.

 6             MR. WAESPI:  If we could move back to 65 ter 5441.  And I do

 7     apologise that it might be exhibits already.

 8        Q.   And does it refer to a meeting you had with General Cermak on the

 9     19th of October?

10        A.   It was a meeting between General Cermak and a visiting troika

11     delegation of EU ambassadors, France, Spain and Italy, I believe, and I

12     participated in the meeting.

13        Q.   Now I see that there are subject matters that were discussed.

14     Was the issue of burning and destruction raised during this meeting?

15        A.   Yes, certainly.  If I am to relate to the meeting, I again prefer

16     that my notebook is produced on the screen, please.

17        Q.   Yes.

18             MR. WAESPI:  Perhaps if we can move on, what we have on the

19     screen, the next page -- or perhaps also it would be fair to have

20     temporarily the notebook given to the witness so he could refer to it

21     right now.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Usher.

23             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

24             MR. WAESPI:

25        Q.   It's the 19 October 1995.

Page 8359

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   Now, can you let us know what was said in relation to the issue

 3     of burning and destruction.

 4        A.   Throughout the meetings -- throughout the meeting, in the

 5     different questions, burning and destruction was an element.  In the

 6     first question of the Spanish ambassador where, as a first, he dwelled on

 7     the humanitarian problems, the reply of General Cermak was to contain

 8     that denial of -- of that.  That is carried in the word [Foreign language

 9     spoken].  We should move up on the page.  We have the second page in

10     front of us, in the printed version.

11             Secondly, in the questions of the French ambassador, now we are

12     on that page we have on the screen, later in the meeting where he

13     returned to the -- the French ambassador returned to the subject

14     specifically asking why Kistanje was burnt.  FRA AMB is French

15     ambassador.  And --

16             MR. WAESPI:  Can we go back to the page we just had on the

17     screen.

18        A.   FRA AMB is French ambassador asking Kistanje question, why being

19     burned, why burned.  General Cermak answered, Well, happened during

20     Operation Storm and the day after.  Professional army is okay, but

21     reserve units and Home Guard, they are just people.  The notes reflect

22     the statements by General Cermak that Kistanje was burned during

23     Operation Storm and just the day after.  That he then continued on saying

24     that it was not the responsibility of the professional army but the

25     Kistanje had been burned by reserve units or Home Guards and as they are

Page 8360

 1     just simple people, i.e., they act out of revenge, they are wanting to --

 2     to repay for all the harassment that they have suffered and the issues we

 3     discussed during the Gotovina meeting, the motivation for that.

 4             If I may, Your Honour, refer to the discussion I produced in the

 5     report for the visiting senators where I would said that I would, in that

 6     report, produce input for the discussion.  These were the elements that

 7     were usually produced during discussions on what happened and who were

 8     engaged.

 9        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Liborius.  Just one more question on this page.

10     Security of Serbs, what was discussed?  Just below the entry you see on

11     the screen, Varivode.

12        A.   Yes.  The question was raised by the French ambassador, what

13     about the security of the Serbs?  General Cermak replied, We have

14     increased the police presence.  There are, of course, scattered hamlets.

15     They are far away, difficult to -- to come around in.  Of course we know

16     that as the winter will start, we will see that -- that will mean

17     problems.

18        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Liborius.

19             Let me move in the remaining few minutes, very briefly to two

20     subjects.  Yes?

21        A.   On the next page.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.  Is there anything?

23             MR. MISETIC:  I'm waiting, patiently, Your Honour, until now, but

24     I thought that 3.15 -- is it one hour or ...

25             JUDGE ORIE:  We started a bit later.

Page 8361

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Fine.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.

 3             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Like the Defence, I have

 4     to cover a number of topics because the evidence requires it.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  If I may respond, I only have eight hours, you've

 6     had much more than that with the statements.  Thank you.

 7             MR. WAESPI:  65 ter 4359, please.

 8        Q.   You -- I think it has been mentioned already that you drafted a

 9     special report dated 26 November 1995, entitled:  100 days after

10     Operation Storm in the former Serb Krajina.  Is that correct?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   And did you have a chance to review it before you came to

13     testify?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   And is it an accurate description of what you observed, what

16     other people told you?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   Thank you.

19             MR. WAESPI:  I would like to have the report admitted,

20     Mr. President, once it comes on the screen.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections?  Madam Registrar.

22             MR. WAESPI:  It's a lengthy report, so it may take some time to

23     have it brought up.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P824.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  P824, in the absence of any objection, is admitted

Page 8362

 1     into evidence.

 2             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you.

 3        Q.   And the last point is -- I'd like to refer you to your first

 4     witness statement, 1995, now P799.

 5             In the middle of the last page - it's your first witness

 6     statement - middle of the last page:  "HV MP and CRO POL personnel.  My

 7     assessment of the number of the police was that it fitted the requirement

 8     needed to control civilians, POWs and others in a sustained period of

 9     combat operations.  They were everywhere.  In the Knin town and outside

10     and in the rest of Sector South, the personnel to control the whole

11     sector was in place."

12             Do you stand by this?

13        A.   Yes.

14             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I don't have any more

15     questions.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Waespi.

17             MR. WAESPI:  Just, Mr. President, before I forget, of course we

18     have filed a 92 ter motion which has a few documents I haven't addressed

19     but they are in the witness statements addressed which are now in

20     evidence and a few photographs also addressed in the witness statements

21     so I would like to move these into evidence as well.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  They were attached to the statement or were

23     they just mentioned?

24             MR. WAESPI:  They were just mentioned in the statement.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I have no -- I can't reproduce at this moment

Page 8363

 1     an exact list.  Could you please produce a short list in which we find

 2     what has not yet been dealt with so that we can then ask the Defence

 3     whether there are any objections to that.

 4             MR. WAESPI:  Certainly, Mr. President.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Your net time finally was four hours and 33 minutes,

 6     Mr. Waespi.

 7             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 8             Mr. Misetic, will you be the first to cross-examine the witness.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Liborius, you will now be cross-examined by

11     Mr. Misetic.  Mr. Misetic is counsel for the Prosecution -- for

12     Mr. Gotovina.  I am -- I apologise.  Gives me an opportunity,

13     Mr. Misetic, to point at a small mistake you made earlier, when you

14     said --

15             MR. MISETIC:  That's impossible, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  -- P823 be marked for identification whereas you

17     apparently wanted the transcript to be marked for identification which is

18     P821.

19             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, I apologise, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Your mistake is minor.  Mine is not.

21             Please proceed.

22                           Cross-examination by Mr. Misetic:

23             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

24        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Liborius.

25        A.   Good afternoon.

Page 8364

 1        Q.   Mr. Liborius, first, I noticed when you came and sat in the chair

 2     you immediately wanted to take notes and can I ask you why you needed to

 3     take notes?

 4        A.   Because I know that you would ask me.

 5        Q.   Ask you what?

 6        A.   I do take notes in my profession.

 7        Q.   Something you -- it's standard practice for you?

 8        A.   When it's important for me, I do.

 9        Q.   Okay.  In your diary, you make reference so something called

10     Dan Del.  You had to prepare a report for Dan Del.  Do you know what

11     Dan Del stands for?

12        A.   Danish delegation.

13        Q.   And can you tell us what Danish delegation you were referring?

14        A.   The Danish delegation of the ECMM.

15        Q.   And in that same diary entry you will recall it says you are

16     writing a report for UMN as part of the Dan Del monthly report.  Can you

17     tell us what UMN stand for?

18        A.   It stands for Unres Ministaire [phoen].

19        Q.   And can you -- in English, what does that mean?

20        A.   Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

21        Q.   Of which country?

22        A.   Denmark.

23        Q.   And -- thank you, sir.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic and Mr. Liborius, you are developing a

25     speed which is almost impossible to follow for transcribing what you say.

Page 8365

 1             Please proceed.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 3             Madam Registrar, if I could have P801, please.  If we could go to

 4     page 7 in the English version, please.  And go to the bottom, please.

 5        Q.   I'd like to start by reading you that bottom paragraph of your

 6     statement from 2005, Mr. Liborius.  "I had met Gotovina previously in his

 7     office in Knin sometime in August 1995.  I don't remember the exact date.

 8     When I protested about the fact that Gotovina wanted us to give up our

 9     premises in Knin, as they were required for Croatian soldiers and that he

10     had reserved for his own purposes the large ECMM building.  I refused to

11     give in, and he then said that ECMM must therefore leave Knin.  I argued

12     that the Croatian government would not be complying with its own

13     obligations that the president had signed up to.  This angered Gotovina

14     and he stormed out.  The Croatian Senior Liaison Officer, I cannot recall

15     his name, he was bearded, told me that I was crazy to have responded in

16     this manner, as Gotovina, held life and death in his hands."

17             Now my first question to you, Mr. Liborius, is:  It's true, is it

18     not, that that never happened.  Correct?

19        A.   I can't hear you, sorry there's a noise.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  There apparently was a -- a problem.  I also heard

21     something not normal in my earphones.

22             Could you please repeat your question.

23             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  I'm trying to listen to the

24     French in order to keep on pace.

25        Q.   Mr. Liborius, my question and I will repeat it from the

Page 8366

 1     transcript, it's true, is it not, that that never happened what you

 2     described there in your witness statement?

 3        A.   Your question is --

 4        Q.   It's true that you never had a meeting or a conversation with

 5     General Gotovina where you had an argument with him about the ECMM

 6     premises and the Croatian government taking it over and then subsequent

 7     to that meeting that the CALO, the Croatian Army Liaison Officer, told

 8     you that were crazy to have responded in this manner and that Gotovina

 9     held life and death in his hands.  That never happened, correct?

10        A.   That is not correct.  I had a meeting with him and he stormed

11     out.

12        Q.   You're a good note taker and the prime minister relies on your

13     notes so could you look in your notebook, please, and point out the

14     specific passage where the commander of the Split Military District had

15     an argument with you?

16        A.   My --

17        Q.   And let me take that back.  This statement by the CALO that were

18     crazy to have responded in this manner as Gotovina held life and death in

19     his hands, that could be perceived as a threat to your physical security,

20     correct?

21        A.   Colonel Lukovic was a generally --

22        Q.   Mr. Liborius --

23        A.   -- kind man so I did not consider that as a threat.

24        Q.   You didn't consider that Colonel Lukovic telling you that

25     General Gotovina held life and death in his hands --

Page 8367

 1        A.   The conversation was right after the General had stormed out that

 2     I must have been crazy.  He said that with half a smile or that -- that I

 3     should not have responded that way, that I had to move from the ECMM

 4     accommodation and that of course the -- the words of the General were law

 5     as he held life and death in his hands.  I did not consider that as a

 6     personal threat to my security at that time.

 7        Q.   So this was kind of a half-hearted, sort of joking statement by

 8     the CALO, is that it?

 9        A.   You will have to ask him, sir, whether it was a joke.  It was a

10     part of the housekeeping business where the ECMM could have its office

11     and its accommodation.

12        Q.   Okay.

13        A.   It was a subject that we discussed in numerous conversations

14     throughout August.

15        Q.   Mr. Liborius, sorry to cut you off but I need to get through as

16     many factual --

17        A.   Yes.

18             MR. MISETIC:  And I understand, Mr. Waespi, I will allow him to

19     answer factually but given the constrictions on time, I am going to try

20     and get him focussed on specific answers to my questions.

21             MR. WAESPI:  Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Liborius, could you please try to focus your

23     answers very much on the precise questions.  If Mr. Misetic wants further

24     details, he will certainly ask you for it.

25             Please proceed.

Page 8368

 1             MR. MISETIC:

 2        Q.   Now, it caught my attention, obviously, that the prime minister

 3     depends on your notes so if you could please refer to your notebook or

 4     your diary or if you know of a daily report where you reported this

 5     incident with General Gotovina and then we can proceed from there to

 6     discuss those parts of your notes, diary, or the daily report.

 7        A.   The issue, as I said, was an ongoing one, so in that case, I did

 8     not have to take notes in my diary for that and my diary served another

 9     purpose.

10        Q.   You had to take notes when you sat down in this chair, but you

11     never wrote down anywhere, am I right, of this type of incident of

12     General Gotovina and the CALO; is that fair to say?

13        A.   No.  I did in my notebook once, I recall, had an entry on the

14     accommodation and office issue.

15        Q.   That is true.  And we'll take a look at that right now.  However,

16     you have looked at your notebook and you know that there is no reference

17     to a meeting with General Gotovina there.  Correct?

18        A.   With regard to this issue here.

19        Q.   Yes.

20        A.   Not that I know of.

21        Q.   That's right.  Okay.  Well, let's take a look at your diary, I

22     believe.

23             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, 1D50-0069.  Sorry, I'll call up

24     the first page number which is 1D50-0001.  And now if we could move to

25     0069, please.

Page 8369

 1        Q.   Now, I'm -- sorry.

 2             Mr. Liborius, I'm going to read you three entries at the same

 3     time in the interests of saving time, and then I will ask you a few

 4     questions.

 5             This is your entry for the 2nd of September --

 6        A.   I prefer to relate to my original notebook.

 7        Q.   That's fine.  This is -- however, it has been stipulated by the

 8     Prosecution that you actually have gone through this document reviewed

 9     it, made corrections to it and returned it back to the Office of the

10     Prosecutor as an accurate representation of your diary.  Is that correct?

11        A.   If I'm asked a question with regard to my notebook, I would like

12     to refer to my notebook.

13        Q.   That's fine.  I'm just asking you to -- is it correct that this

14     transcript of your diary, not your notebook, is accurate because you were

15     the one who received it, the original draft, you made corrections to it

16     and then returned it back to the Office of the Prosecutor.  Do you recall

17     that?

18        A.   Yes.  But in all human activity there is a slight risk of small

19     error, so if I'm asked to relate to what I wrote, I would like to refer

20     to it and I have it with me.

21        Q.   That's fine.  You can use your diary; I'm going to use what is on

22     the screen.  Because that is it all I have.

23        A.   Your Honour?

24             JUDGE ORIE:  We are working on the basis of the material which is

25     uploaded in the e-court system.  If there's any reason at any moment to

Page 8370

 1     have any doubt as to whether that is not a true copy of the original,

 2     then please draw my attention to that, and then we'll see whether we --

 3     we have to verify that.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Bottom of the page, please.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  And if you can't read it as it is reproduced --

 6             MR. MISETIC:  It is 00 -- yeah, good, it's the 2nd of

 7     September in the original.  Sorry.

 8        Q.   You'll see there, sir, it says you entered in your diary:  "Today

 9     we are moving the rest of the Knin office.  I am going to a meeting with

10     the CALOs.  Kreso, Stanko and Karolj are there."  Do you recall the

11     CALOs, sir, as Stanko Bacic, Kreso Dragic and Karolj Dondo?  Do those

12     names mean anything do you?

13        A.   Dondo does.

14        Q.   Bacic or Dragic?

15        A.   What was their first names?

16        Q.   Kreso Dragic and Stanko Bacic.  Do you recall them as being the

17     CALOs?

18        A.   Stanko Babic, yeah, I think so.

19        Q.   "I come informally, casually, by and tell them that we have found

20     a good place.  Chief of police office is aware of it and that it suits

21     our needs."  Then skipping some sentences:  "NATO planes are bombing BSA

22     positions again," that would be Bosnian Serb army.  Is that correct?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   "The CRO can hardly hide their enthusiasm for this.  They feel

25     like they are almost in the same club as us.  But no, dear friends, you

Page 8371

 1     and not members of the EU, WEU, NATO, or the European Council.  You have

 2     committed far too many war crimes for that."

 3             If we could turn the page, please, two pages.

 4             For 6 September, again:  "Meeting with CALOs about accommodations

 5     for ECMM.  I refuse to move because a General has gotten the idea to move

 6     into our earliest RC Knin house.  They are offering to find something

 7     else for us.  I'd really like to see that but everything turns out, as

 8     expected, to be a pile of shit."

 9             Then you go on down towards the middle of that:  "Then I will

10     close the Knin office and report that ECMM work is not welcome in this

11     lawless country so they can expect to say farewell to DEM and FHARE,"

12     et cetera, et cetera.

13             And then if we can go to the 7th of September.  Beginning part of

14     this so I don't spend a lot of time reading it out, you went to the RC

15     building in Knin.  "The stench reaches all the way up to the top floor.

16     It seems as if it is destiny.  After the property has been taken over,

17     the reek of cadavers and dog corpses is foul and hangs in the walls.

18     Here you go, General Gotovina.  General, you can stick it up your ass.  A

19     capable artillery officer and with suitably unscrupulous conscience to

20     shell civilian targets and aid from a well-tuned propaganda machine was

21     what gave the victory there."  And finally, "more fuel and foreign

22     advisors than RSK and the Serbs."

23             Now, those are the entries in your diary concerning this issue

24     with the CALOs and the accommodations for the ECMM in Knin.  Is that

25     correct?

Page 8372

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   And in your entries there, you say meetings with CALOs.  You

 3     never actually met with General Gotovina; correct?

 4        A.   Again, that is not correct.

 5        Q.   Well, there's nothing in these entries saying that you met with

 6     General Gotovina and that the CALO told you that you were crazy to

 7     respond to him that way because he held life and death in his hands;

 8     correct?

 9        A.   This touches on another issue whether I use my diary as an entire

10     stenographic reproduction of every word mentioned in the whole day.  I

11     don't.  What you can see in the diary, to respond to your first question,

12     is that I have a meeting on 2nd of September.  Now, at that point in time

13     it had become an issue whether we could keep our accommodation or not, so

14     prior to the 2nd of September we have had that issue boiling.

15        Q.   Okay.  Then if you could direct me again --

16             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, excuse me.  I know this is

17     unprecedented for me to stand but I'm the last guy to go here.  I would

18     ask the Court to please ask this gentleman to answer the question because

19     if he is going to continue to answer like this, I'm not going to go till

20     next week.  So, I would like this person to answer the questions that

21     Mr. Misetic is posing.

22             Thank you.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Liborius, the last question was whether we can

24     see something in this diary.  You could just answer that question by

25     saying whether we see it or whether we do not see it.  You are not an

Page 8373

 1     accused here.  There's no reason to defend even if sometimes the language

 2     might sound a bit as if someone was blaming you for something, but please

 3     focus on the questions and your answers.

 4             Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

 5             MR. MISETIC:

 6        Q.   Now, we have already tendered into evidence, Mr. Liborius, the

 7     entry from your notebook on the 6th where you noted that at a briefing --

 8     and I believe it is in your witness statement from this past weekend,

 9     that -- here, let me find it.

10             Yes, paragraph 13 of your last witness statement from

11     September 2008.  You referred to the fact that your notebook does have a

12     note about an UN Sector South headquarters staff meeting, that is P802,

13     held on 6 September, where you were informed that there had been a

14     meeting between the UN Sector South commander and General Gotovina and

15     that General Gotovina had apparently said there was sufficient material

16     for a case in court against Alun Roberts.

17             Now, you felt that sufficiently important to include it in your

18     notebook.  You didn't feel it sufficiently important to include a -- what

19     could be construed as a threat to your physical safety by a CALO after an

20     alleged argument with General Gotovina, and I'd like to ask you why?

21        A.   Your Honour, I'm afraid that it will develop into somewhat of a

22     detailed answer.  As I take the question that it centres on how my note

23     taking is done, why, and when and for what purpose.  Before I engage in

24     that answer, I would seek your counsel or ask your advice on how the

25     question should be interpreted.

Page 8374

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, it's okay.  I will move on.  Let's

 2     keep moving to get as many facts in as we can, Mr. Liborius.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

 4             MR. WAESPI:  Yes.  Just one comment also to what my friend

 5     Mr. Kuzmanovic said.  If a witness is confronted it did not happen what

 6     he explained, let's be fair and give him a chance to explain and not just

 7     by answering yes or no.  I think we have to be realistic and respectful

 8     of this witness.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I understand Mr. Misetic to move on, because

10     what he did is to put emphasis on something that came into his mind,

11     whether a matter was important enough.  Of course you can say no, or yes.

12     That doesn't change that much perhaps because if suddenly we said, no, it

13     was important enough but it isn't this reason I didn't write it down,

14     then of course we would have an explanation.

15             If something of that kind comes to your mind, of course,

16     Mr. Liborius, give us an explanation.  But if Mr. Misetic is mainly

17     seeking to your confirmation that you didn't write something down

18     Mr. Misetic would expect you to have written down, then, of course it is,

19     well, I would say.

20             THE WITNESS:  I'm very well comfortable with the fact that

21     Mr. Misetic would like me to have written a lot of things down, but I

22     decide what is necessary to support my memory when I'm monitoring and

23     working in ECMM.  I have my colleagues, I have my different reporting

24     formats, I have my loads of papers I should produce for ECMM.  And if

25     there arises a doubt whether, first of all, as I heard earlier, that this

Page 8375

 1     was a -- a true reflection of what was said in the meetings, or what is

 2     said in my diary, I have to bring it to the attention of -- of the Court

 3     here that what I wrote down was in my notebooks for the meetings.  The

 4     ongoing issues of housekeeping I did not have to write everything down

 5     and I do think that all sensible people will have a recollection of what

 6     happens in their immediate daily life.

 7             The fact that something is not there in my notes or my diary is

 8     not to suggest that it never take place and that was, I think, the gist

 9     of Mr. Misetic's first question.  I will follow, of course, your advise

10     to answer as short as possible.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

12             MR. MISETIC:

13        Q.   Just following up on that, Mr. Liborius, you had this meeting

14     with the CALOs in your capacity as an ECMM representative, correct?

15        A.   That's correct.

16        Q.   It was your obligation as an ECMM representative that if had you

17     been threatened directly or indirectly by the commander of the Split

18     Military District, in your capacity as an ECMM representative you had a

19     duty to report that, didn't you?

20        A.   If there was a direct threat at gunpoint to me, I would report

21     it.  If people said, You know you shouldn't be driving on that road

22     because you may enter a mine, that was a frequent threat to us during the

23     Krajina years, and in a wartime environment you do come across people who

24     uses threats or the perception that something can be a threat as a tool

25     in their everyday conversation and everyday conversations are not always

Page 8376

 1     reported in -- in the ECMM format.

 2        Q.   Okay.  Let's put aside the substance of the conversation.  If you

 3     have a meeting with the commander of the Split Military District

 4     regardless of the topic, you had an obligation, at the end of the day

 5     when preparing your daily reports to note you had a meeting with the

 6     commander of the Split Military District, correct?

 7        A.   Not necessarily.  If the issue was, for example, on accommodation

 8     as you started out with, and it had become a topic that we would return

 9     to, if you ask me if I had an obligation to report that in the ECMM

10     reports, the team reports would, for housekeeping issues like this that

11     develops, only be reported when the team felt it important.

12        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Liborius, on the 7th of September you talk about the

13     fact that the Croatians had more fuel and foreign advisors than RSK and

14     the Serbs.  Who are the foreign advisors?

15        A.   To the Croatian army?

16        Q.   Yes.

17        A.   I would believe that, among others, also US personnel.

18        Q.   What type of assistance did the US personnel provide such that

19     they assisted in "giving the victory" here?

20        A.   I would reckon that part of their advice was military advice.

21        Q.   And what about Operation Storm led to you believe that it was

22     conducted with the advice of foreign advisors?

23        A.   Primarily, the development of the Croatian army from the basis of

24     the JNA, the Yugoslav People's Army and the introduction of a mobile

25     warfare, that whole concept required military advice at a level I don't

Page 8377

 1     think that the Croatian army, at that time, could produce itself.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, at this time I'd like to tender the

 3     entire diary which I will be making reference to throughout the

 4     cross-examination.  It is 1D50-0001.

 5             MR. WAESPI:  No objection, Mr. President.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mr. Misetic, you also referred to 1D50-0069 as

 7     the 2nd of September entry.  The note I just passed to the registrar is

 8     whether there are different numbers ...

 9                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

10             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  The confusion is I referred to

11     the handwritten page of the diary instead of the translated --

12     transcribed version.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And now I see that the numbering in the

14     translation is different from the numbering in the original.

15             Mr. Waespi, no objections against the diary.

16             Madam Registrar, that would be.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit D741.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  D741 is admitted into evidence.  I actually was

19     looking to the original.

20             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, it might be time for a break.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it is good that you assist me.

22             We will have break and we resume at ten minutes past 4.00.

23                           --- Recess taken at 3.47 p.m.

24                           --- On resuming at 4.18 p.m.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

Page 8378

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 2             Madam Registrar, if I may have 1D50-0071.

 3        Q.   And while that is coming up on the screen, Mr. Liborius, if I

 4     could ask you were there any other meetings that you had with

 5     General Gotovina that are not in an ECMM daily report, your diary, or

 6     your notebook?

 7        A.   No, I believe not.  I met General Gotovina only a couple of

 8     times.

 9        Q.   Now, at this alleged meeting where you had this altercation with

10     General Gotovina, who else was present from the ECMM side?

11        A.   Me.

12        Q.   Anyone else?

13        A.   No.

14             MR. MISETIC:  Sorry, the B/C/S ID is 1D50-0170.  Okay.

15             If we could turn to the next -- sorry, that's fine.

16        Q.   Mr. Liborius, this is a letter dated 11 September 1995.  It is

17     from Claudio Dei.  First, can you tell us who Claudio Dei is?

18        A.   Claudio Dei is the CC, Coordination Centre, Split, chief.

19        Q.   Did you work with Mr. Dei?

20        A.   I did not have him as a team member.  He was in the CC Split

21     structure.

22        Q.   Well, since we're not very familiar with how the structure

23     worked, were you within the structure that Mr. Dei was in?

24        A.   Yes.  At the 11 September ... I had leave sometime in

25     mid-September, but I know who Claudio Dei is, yes.

Page 8379

 1        Q.   Okay.  Based on the fact that as of 11 September 1995, Mr. Dei is

 2     writing to General Gotovina and ends his letter with:  "Thank you again

 3     for your continuous cooperation which is highly appreciated," that this

 4     incident with General Gotovina and the CALO telling you that he had life

 5     and death in his hands that you didn't report that internally within ECMM

 6     either.  Correct?

 7        A.   I don't understand your question.

 8        Q.   Did you tell anyone within ECMM that you had received that kind

 9     of message from the CALO after having had a meeting with

10     General Gotovina?

11        A.   It was discussed with my ECMM colleagues throughout August and

12     the beginning of September what about our accomodation.  So, yes, we did

13     have frequent meetings on administration issues.

14        Q.   Okay.

15        A.   Does that answer your question?

16        Q.   No, that is not my question.

17             My specific question is there is an allegation in your statement

18     of 2005 that you had an altercation with General Gotovina and that after

19     that altercation, the CALO told you that were crazy because he had life

20     and death in his hands.

21             My question is:  Did you pass that information along internally

22     within the ECMM structure?

23        A.   The information that we should leave the ECMM accommodation, yes.

24     But I'm not sure I understand your question.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Liborius, the question appears to be whether you

Page 8380

 1     reported within your organisation that the words, You're crazy to do this

 2     because Mr. Gotovina is -- he is mastering life and death.  He has it in

 3     his hands.

 4             Did you report that?

 5             THE WITNESS:  No.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  That is an answer to the question.

 7             Please proceed.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  That's fine.

 9        Q.   Now, turning back to this diary entry on the 7th and talking

10     about this choice of words you had for General Gotovina followed by a

11     capable artillery officer with an unscrupulous conscience to shell

12     civilian targets and aid from a well-tuned propaganda machine.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  This brings me to an issue, Mr. Misetic, that might

14     come as a surprise.  This same document apparently is there as a 65 ter

15     document.  There is a translation which is not exactly the same as you

16     just quoted.

17             MR. MISETIC:  This is --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I don't know whether it has -- as a matter of fact,

19     I asked the legal officer to send an e-mail.

20             MR. MISETIC:  I can explain it, Your Honour, and I had a

21     conversation with Mr. Waespi about it.  I assume what is with the 65 ter

22     is the original CLSS translation of the diary.  OTP then sent that

23     original CLSS translation to Mr. Liborius, who then reviewed it, made

24     changes and corrections to it, sent it back to OTP, and that's the one I

25     was using.

Page 8381

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And that's not the one which at this moment

 2     uploaded as 65 ter P00 -- is it, 361 or whether I have to look.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  311.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Something like that.  That is not the same.

 5             Just that I know that the parties are aware of these

 6     inconsistencies.

 7             Please proceed.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, may I tender the document on the

 9     screen.

10             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit D742.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  D742 is admitted into evidence.

14             Please proceed.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

16             Madam Registrar, may I have P804 on the screen, please.

17        Q.   Mr. Liborius, this is the daily report you filed for the 4th of

18     August.  Under section 2, you wrote, and the time here is 2203:  "The RSK

19     leadership have broadcasted message to the public that the army will

20     continue fighting, however, the RSK Supreme Defence Council decided the

21     evacuation to RS, Republika Srpska ..."

22             Is that correct sir?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   "... territory of elderly, women and children.  Comment:  This is

25     assessed to be very difficult in light of the intensity of fighting."

Page 8382

 1             Mr. Liborius, could you tell us a little bit more, please, about

 2     this broadcast message?

 3        A.   The broadcast message was done by via radio to the RSK

 4     population.

 5        Q.   Did you hear it?

 6        A.   I think that it was brought to me by a transcript.  I would

 7     usually hear in my OPS room radio broadcasts and in the rear, and if I

 8     would require a printout, either our interpreters or the interpreters at

 9     the UN Sector South headquarters would have the task, standing task of

10     summarizing and producing resumes of radio broadcasts.

11        Q.   What time of day did the first broadcast occur with this type of

12     message?

13        A.   I'm not sure.  I will have to see other documentation.

14        Q.   In number 3, it says:  "Knin received heavy artillery shelling

15     during the morning.  The evening has been fairly calm but renewed

16     fighting with shelling in the entire southern part of Sector South is

17     expected by first daylight."

18             Is that accurate that the evening was fairly calm on the 4th?

19        A.   There was a marked decline in the shelling activity, as opposed

20     to the heavy morning shelling.  And I assessed it at that time that there

21     was a -- a wish to, so to speak, empty the area of -- of people.

22             MR. MISETIC:  If we can move on to section 4, please.

23        Q.   "Trains are seen being moved --"

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, just for myself, what was just read to

25     you is the leadership have broadcasted message to the public, that the

Page 8383

 1     army will continue fighting, and then it reads, "however, the RSK Supreme

 2     Defence Council decided about the evacuation."

 3             You can read this in several ways.  Apparently Mr. Misetic did

 4     read it and I'm seeking your confirmation that that is the right reading

 5     that the evacuation was also part of the message that was broadcasted?

 6             THE WITNESS:  The evacuation message was part of the broadcast

 7     and it contained -- it concerned civilian and elderly.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That was also -- that is not unambiguous on

 9     paper, therefore, I was seeking clarification.

10             Please proceed.

11             MR. MISETIC:

12        Q.   Section 4:  "Trains are seen being moved in Knin.  Comment:

13     Presumably used for military purpose but could these be used for the

14     evacuation of civilians?"

15             First, did you see the trains moving in Knin?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   How many times during the day -- or let me ask it a different

18     way.  At what point in the day did you see trains moving?

19        A.   I observed that from UN Sector South headquarters so that would

20     have been in the afternoon when we had evacuated there.  And we did that

21     around 3.00 or so.

22        Q.   Now you said presumably used for military purpose.  What did you

23     presume that?

24        A.   It could have been used to move forces.  But it was in the end, I

25     think, abandoned.

Page 8384

 1        Q.   Okay.

 2        A.   I think they realised that the railroads were not the best option

 3     for moving either civilians or military.

 4        Q.   Now, that very report, if I could take you back to section 2.  On

 5     the radio -- I gather from the statement on the radio it was said that

 6     the evacuation is to the territory of Republika Srpska.  Correct?

 7        A.   The evacuation was through RSK territory and it also had a final

 8     destination in Belgrade, perhaps also, but that is also to RSK.

 9        Q.   No, I'm looking at the portion that says:  "Decided the

10     evacuation to RS."

11        A.   Republika Srpska.

12        Q.   Right.  So that's -- you heard in the radio message that the

13     evacuation had been decided to the RS or the Republika Srpska?

14        A.   As I said, either it had the -- either I had heard it in a

15     background as being translated to me, or that it was brought to us by

16     fellow monitors.  This is the RC Knin report and I was the operation

17     officer, so I'm compiling the information at that time.  Some of it not

18     being my own observations.  It is an important distinction between that

19     and the team reports.

20        Q.   Okay.

21             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, if I could have again 1D50-0001.

22     This is the diary again.  I'm sorry, D741.

23             And if we could go please to -- I only have the D numbers on the

24     bottom, so it would be 0062.

25             I'm sorry, I have the wrong document on the screen.

Page 8385

 1             Madam Registrar, it is 1D50-0202.

 2        Q.   And this is your notebook that I'm going it bring up,

 3     Mr. Liborius.

 4             Do you recognise that as the cover page of the notebook we were

 5     looking at this morning -- or this afternoon?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Okay.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, if we could go to 1D50-0238,

 9     please.

10        Q.   Now, Mr. Liborius, much of this is also in Danish.  So I would

11     ask you to please translate this for us.  I assume the Babel Fish online

12     translator that helped me translate portions of this is that it's titled,

13     Urgent report to DAN DEL.

14        A.   Could I have the date prior -- oh, sorry, yes, I have it here,

15     yeah.

16             Say again?

17        Q.   Is it titled, Urgent Report to DAN DEL?

18        A.   No.

19        Q.   Could you translate that for us?

20        A.   [Foreign language spoken] Monthly report.

21        Q.   Monthly report, okay.  And then if you -- could you translate

22     line by line what it says?

23        A.   Monthly report to DAN DEL.  Input regarding Operation Storm in

24     Sector South and in circled text out to the left about RSK.  [Foreign

25     language spoken] The way things passed.  RSK collapse.  Fleeing.

Page 8386

 1     Military RSK.  RS help.  Caught by their own propaganda.  Village

 2     population, situation as refugees now.  Then there's a circle CRO,

 3     Croatia.  Quickly in.  Totally planned operation.  Underline problematic

 4     questions.  POWs, civilians, non-POWs.  The tactic of the scorched earth

 5     in a new form.  Cattle, farms, why, an arrow, psy-ops, motivation or

 6     grounds, revenge (ethnic cleansing).  A circled text RS, spillover:

 7     Psy-ops.  Rivalry, political rivalry.  Supplies, or lack of supplies,

 8     [Foreign language spoken] indicates lack of.  Basic recipe for collapse,

 9     stricken out, and another word for collapse [Foreign language spoken] in

10     Danish.  And then the rest of the page there's a [Foreign language

11     spoken] --

12        Q.   I'm sorry, there's a what?

13        A.   [Foreign language spoken] future, abbreviation for future.

14        Q.   Okay.  Now, who -- was this something that was dictated to you or

15     were these your own thoughts?

16        A.   My own thoughts.

17        Q.   Now, I'm interested in the sentence that -- on the RSK caught by

18     their own propaganda.  What does that mean?

19        A.   The RSK had a much overinflated belief, I think, in their own

20     military compatibilities.  Secondly, their abilities to get constant

21     support from RS and the Belgrade government.  A belief that led them to

22     not properly interpret and assess the situation during the peace

23     negotiations that were conducted.  And that led them to, apparently up

24     through the summer of 1995, believe that their capabilities were far

25     greater than they in fact were.  And that their propaganda about

Page 8387

 1     rejecting any cooperation, future relations with the state of Croatia

 2     that they possessed such resources that they could just reject that.

 3        Q.   Mr. Liborius, just for future reference, and your answer is fine,

 4     I'm just -- I'm reminded to tell that you I will pause after your

 5     answers.  There will probably be a long pause so I can allow the court

 6     reporters and the translators to finish, so if there is an silence in the

 7     room it is not because I'm expecting you to continue to answer.  It has

 8     happened with other witnesses before.  You wouldn't be the first to think

 9     that.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honours, I would tender the entire notebook

11     into evidence, we've had the discussion before and we will have a

12     discussion about the translation of the entire notebook and I again will

13     be referring back and forth to various dates in the notebook.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

15             MR. WAESPI:  No objection, Mr. President.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, the notebook would be ...

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit D743.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I'm reminded to clarify for

19     Madam Registrar and the Court that we received it in two different parts

20     from the OTP, presumably because it is a such a large file, and therefore

21     I would ask that somehow we include the entire notebook even though right

22     now it is separated in e-court.  It is two exhibit.  And the other

23     Exhibit is 1D50-0080.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, is there a possibility to have the

25     two -- we are still talking about this notebook in two portions.

Page 8388

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, correct.  It's just divided, I think, around

 2     October 23rd, if I'm not mistaken, and then continues on.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, is there a possibility to reunite

 4     the several parts of the notebook, electronically.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  I think we may want to use two numbers because

 6     until that is done I'm going to be referring to both portions today.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Then D743 is the portion of the notebook that has

 8     been brought up on the screen.

 9             Do you want to tender the other part right away?  Yes.  And that

10     would be -- you have given, I think, already --

11             MR. MISETIC:  080.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, that second portion of the notebook

13     would be exhibit number ...

14                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

15             THE REGISTRAR:  The second document will be Exhibit D744,

16     Your Honours.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi, I take it that there are no objections

18     either.  D744 is admitted into evidence.

19             Please proceed.

20             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

21             Madam Registrar, if I could have -- this was on the Prosecution's

22     list of exhibits, so I think it is going to get a P number at some point,

23     but I will call it up by the 65 ter number, which is 5413 -- I'm sorry,

24     4002.

25                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

Page 8389

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, it was on the list of the documents

 2     which the Prosecution intended to tender.  I therefore suggest that

 3     65 ter 5413 will be assigned a P number at this moment.  It is then in

 4     evidence.

 5             And Madam Registrar, 65 ter 5413, an ECMM Knin daily report,

 6     dated the 2nd of August, 1995.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour --

 8                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

 9             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour.  I thought it was 4002, I think is

10     the number, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then I made -- oh, yes, I read up till the --

12             MR. MISETIC:  My mistake.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Sorry, 4002 is the ECMM Knin daily report dated the

14     5th of August, 1995.

15             Madam Registrar, that would be ...

16             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit number P825.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  P825 is admitted into evidence.

18             Please proceed.

19             MR. MISETIC:

20        Q.   Mr. Liborius, under 2a you write:  "Needless to say, RSK

21     south-western parts have now ceased to exist.  Both military and civilian

22     leaders seem to have fled before the fighting started 4 August."

23             Can you tell us what information you had about that, about

24     leaders fleeing before the fighting started?

25        A.   On 5 August, at that time, in the afternoon, we have had time

Page 8390

 1     to -- to talk with people who had tried to get in touch with military and

 2     civilian RSK leaders.  Apparently they were not there in the RSK

 3     headquarters.

 4             So the basis was the colleagues and the fellow organisations.

 5        Q.   And if you could go to the next page, please.  If could you go to

 6     the next page, please.

 7             Under 5 a, it says:  "After the shelling, a first impression of

 8     Knin town indicates that the town is still functionable.  Water,

 9     electricity and telephone system are fairly intact.  Comment:  This might

10     facilitate the refugee problem."

11             Does that accurately describe how you observed Knin on the 5th of

12     August?

13        A.   We only observed that the telephone system was working.

14     Electricity had been sometime cut.  Water piping, apparently functioning.

15        Q.   Okay.  Now, Mr. Liborius, the crater analysis that you did was --

16     you did as part of your job as an ECMM monitor.  Correct?

17        A.   I did it as part of my -- my monitoring.

18        Q.   Okay.  And you testified on Monday that you were looking for good

19     craters because you wanted the quality of the crater analysis to be as

20     good as possible.

21             Do you recall that?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Now, what I don't understand is, if you did a -- a crater

24     analysis, and you did it your capacity as an ECMM monitor and you were

25     looking for good craters so that you would do a quality analysis, why

Page 8391

 1     isn't your crater analysis reflected in a daily report, your notebook, or

 2     your diary?

 3        A.   The crater analysis is so-called in my perception of my job,

 4     on -- on a fairly basic -- it's a first step in a chain of observations,

 5     where you would, in the RC Knin daily report as the one we have here,

 6     only be asked to produce a fairly -- you would compile a lot of

 7     information, condense it, and transmit it on.  If we had a system where

 8     we should include in our reporting and in our notebook every single

 9     observation, we would have filled libraries.

10        Q.   Okay.  Well, you understand that the Prosecution here is using

11     that -- the results of the crater analysis you say you did in order to

12     demonstrate shell fire from HV positions into a residential area where

13     you say you found these craters.  Do you understand that that's the

14     purpose?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Okay.

17        A.   Well, the purpose of the crater analysis was also just to get a

18     closer feel.  Everybody understood that there had been fire.  I mean, it

19     was like proving that the sun was shining today.  Excuse me.  It was a

20     statement to the obvious.

21        Q.   Okay.  But there's a reason, then, that would you go out and do a

22     crater analysis even if it was obvious you still wanted to --

23        A.   Sometimes you -- oh, sorry.

24             Sometimes you just want a further input to your monitoring

25     activity, and the monitors in the field would decide how that should best

Page 8392

 1     be done.

 2        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Liborius, I'm going to show you again a whole series

 3     of documents to describe sort of the -- some of the important issues on

 4     these specific dates concerning shelling, and then I will ask you a few

 5     questions about it.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, I have a video first that I'd like

 7     to show the witness which is 1D50-0177.

 8        Q.   Mr. Liborius, this is a video - and I believe transcripts have

 9     been given to the booths.  This a press conference by Carl Bildt.  You

10     recall that Carl Bildt was the senior European Union negotiator for the

11     former Yugoslavia?

12        A.   Mm-hm, yes.

13        Q.   This is in Geneva on the 6th of August after -- just for the

14     record this is a press conference in Geneva after a meeting with the

15     Croatian foreign minister, and we can play the tape, please.

16                           [Videotape played]

17             "We have a very strong position on any sort of military activity

18     that goes against the innocent civilians and the shelling of cities is

19     among those, and the shelling of Knin, I think, is a very, very grave

20     thing.  And I've said to them that if they want to have that clarified,

21     the legal position of that, if they are interested in it it should be

22     taken to the Court to judge whether that was in conformity with the --

23     with the laws of war that are there on not.  And they answered and said

24     that it was not a matter for individual governments to bring that up but

25     that the Court was free to take it up and I took that as -- that they

Page 8393

 1     were prepared to accept a verdict from the International Court concerning

 2     the shelling of Knin."

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I don't know if I should tender them

 4     as we go along.  If there's no objection I would tender them right now.

 5             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, video and transcript.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit number D745, Your Honours.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  D745 is admitted into evidence.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, the next video is again of

10     Mr. Bildt.  It is 1D50-0184.  It is from the 7th of August on the BBC.

11                           [Videotape played]

12             "I don't think anyone was really tired [sic].  That's the

13     problem.  When you do as was done in May concerning Zagreb and you have

14     sent a rocket in the general direction of Zagreb, you can never be

15     certain where it hits and it happened to hit civilians.  And when you do

16     the kind of artillery shelling that we've seen in Sarajevo and that we've

17     seen now in Knin very extensively at the beginning of the offensive, I

18     mean, it is bound to be something that goes against civilian targets.

19     And that is something that I think the international community must react

20     against."

21             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I would tender this exhibit into

22     evidence.

23        A.   Please.

24             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

Page 8394

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit number D746.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  D746 is admitted into evidence.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  The next exhibit is 1D50-0187.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Is there any technical problem that we do not see

 5     the -- there we are.

 6             MR. MISETIC:

 7        Q.   Mr. Liborius, this is a letter --

 8        A.   Sorry, I can't hear you.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  We have some interference at this moment.  I don't

10     know where it comes from.

11             Can you hear me, Mr. Liborius?

12             THE WITNESS:  I can hear you through a lot of noise.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Still good enough to --

14             THE WITNESS:  I will say if I can't hear.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we will ask the technicians to assist us, but,

16     at the same time, we move on.

17             MR. MISETIC:

18        Q.   Mr. Liborius, this is a letter from the Croatian foreign minister

19     and the last page on the signature line has the date, which is 8

20     August 1995.  It is to Jacques Santer.

21             If we can go to the last page of the document, please.

22             The Croatian foreign minister wrote:  "I must inform you that the

23     activities and especially Mr. Bildt's recent public pronouncements have

24     been received with the deepest regret and dismay by the government of the

25     Republic of Croatia and Croatian public opinion in general.  At its

Page 8395

 1     meeting on August 7, 1995, the government of Croatia concluded that

 2     Mr. Carl Bildt, as far as the Republic of Croatia is concerned, has lost

 3     credibility for continuing mediating efforts, in search for a peaceful

 4     solution to the conflict in southeastern Europe and therefore finds it

 5     impossible to cooperate with the ICF mediator as the representative of

 6     the European Union."

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I tender this letter into evidence as

 8     well.

 9             MR. WAESPI:  No objection.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit number D747.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  D747 is admitted into evidence.

13             MR. MISETIC:  Finally, Madam Registrar, 1D50-0185.

14             If we can scroll to the bottom, please.  No, that's not it, I'm

15     sorry.  That's the wrong one.

16             Just one moment, Your Honour.

17                           [Defence counsel confer]

18             MR. MISETIC:

19        Q.   Well, Mr. Liborius, I guess I'll have to find it later.  It is an

20     ECMM report, I believe of the 9th of August, mentioning this conflict

21     between Croatia and Mr. Bildt, over his comments.

22             My questions for you are, you are the -- an ECMM monitor in the

23     field, the European Union's chief mediator is in a serious diplomatic

24     incident, I don't know what the proper diplomatic categorisation of it

25     is.  You find evidence of shelling from HV positions in Bosnia around the

Page 8396

 1     ECMM building in a residential area.

 2             My question to you, sir, is:  Do you know of any written

 3     contemporaneous evidence of the crater analysis that you did?

 4        A.   I don't understand the word "contemporaneous."

 5        Q.   Within two weeks of, let's say, the 7th of August.

 6        A.   The crater analysis, as a means to support the shelling, was not

 7     required at that time.  I took it that the beginning of your sentence

 8     referred to Mr. Carl Bildt's, the foundation for his words did not

 9     require any detailed crater analysis at that point in time.  They were

10     inside the UN Sector South headquarters, as he had his first press

11     conference.

12             It doesn't really take a crater analysis to assess whether the

13     shelling is intense or if it is laid out all over the town.

14             So I'm not sure that I understand the link between Carl Bildt and

15     the crater analysis here.

16        Q.   Let me ask you the first question and it should be a relatively

17     simple answer; it should be yes or no.

18             Are you aware of any written document between roughly, let's say,

19     4 August to 31 August, which contains the results of your crater

20     analysis?

21        A.   My specific crater analysis would not be tendered into ECMM

22     documents.

23        Q.   So the answer is no?

24        A.   They form the very basis --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Liborius, let's be -- the only thing Mr. Misetic

Page 8397

 1     wants to know is whether the results of your crater analysis are found in

 2     any report that was made at that time.

 3             THE WITNESS:  Yes, shelling from north-east.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  No, no.

 5             THE WITNESS:  So that is the result of the crater analysis.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  The results of your crater analysis understood as,

 7     this is what I saw, I found 61 degrees, 63 degrees, such, whether, not as

 8     an overall view but the specific results of that crater analysis of that

 9     craters, whether that appears anywhere in reports made at the time.

10             THE WITNESS:  At that specific time just around the 4, 5, 6,

11     August, no.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Any later anywhere where we found these figures that

13     were the results of your analysis?

14             THE WITNESS:  We did a review of different shelling craters and

15     we handed it over to the RC Zagreb.  I believe it was in the end of

16     September.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

18             MR. MISETIC:  I will assume, Your Honour, that the answer is no.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  The answer is what it is.

20             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.

21                           [Defence counsel confer]

22             MR. MISETIC:

23        Q.   Okay.  You just answered, "We did a review of different shelling

24     craters and we handed it over to the RC Zagreb."

25             When else did you do reviews of shelling craters and did you

Page 8398

 1     provide written reports of those?

 2        A.   I remember that there -- I at one time handed in notes to

 3     RC Zagreb of different -- an analysis of different shelters -- different

 4     craters.

 5                           [Defence counsel confer]

 6             MR. MISETIC:

 7        Q.   Did you write such a report that contained the results of crater

 8     analysis?

 9        A.   Not with the degrees, but where the shelling came from.

10        Q.   Did you -- have you ever seen a copy of that document in -- from

11     1995 to the present?

12        A.   No.

13        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Liborius, I'd like to take you now to a different

14     topic, which is your 2005 witness statement.  It's P801 -- I'm sorry, let

15     me do one additional thing.

16             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, 1D50-0174, while we're on the

17     topic of crater analysis.

18        Q.   Now, Mr. Liborius, from your notebook I saw an entry on the 25th

19     of October that you had a meeting with ICTY OTP investigators whom I

20     believe were Joakim Robertsson and Jul Hansen.  Do you recall that?

21        A.   Please repeat the date.

22        Q.   25 October 1995.

23        A.   What's the entry say again?

24        Q.   It says meeting with --

25             Have you found the entry for 25 October?

Page 8399

 1        A.   No.  I asked you because I don't know if you confused it with the

 2     2nd of November.

 3        Q.   No.

 4        A.   So in which document do you find it?

 5        Q.   I have it, I'm sorry, 25 October.

 6             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, I have it.  If we can put it on

 7     the screen first for him.  It's 1D50 -- I'm sorry, it was a P [sic]

 8     number already.  D743.

 9             Now, if we can go to --

10        A.   I found it in the meantime, yes.

11        Q.   0087 of this.

12        A.   No, it's a different book.

13             MR. MISETIC:  D744, please.  I apologise.  There we go.

14        A.   Yes, I found it.

15        Q.   25 October.

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   ICTY investigating events, recent Storm investigation.  Correct?

18     It talks about searching responsible command structure, HV, special

19     police, now collect evidence, have they witnessed victims, ICTY developed

20     a questionnaire.

21             Do you see that?

22        A.   Yes.

23        Q.   Now, this is a meeting that you had with Joakim Robertsson, an

24     OTP investigator.  Is that correct?

25        A.   I believe, yes.

Page 8400

 1        Q.   And this is a meeting you held with OTP investigator two days

 2     before you met with General Gotovina.  Correct?

 3        A.   Search my notebook ...

 4        Q.   Well, I think we established through Mr. Waespi --

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   -- yes, the 27th is when --

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   -- you met -- you and Mr. Gambotti met with General Gotovina.

 9        A.   Yes.

10        Q.   Two days prior to that meeting you had already sat down with OTP

11     investigators.  Correct?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Okay.  Now, this questionnaire that is in your notes, I'd like to

14     turn your attention back to the exhibit that was on the screen, which is

15     1D50-0174.

16             MR. MISETIC:  If we can just scroll through it a little bit.  Let

17     say at the fourth bullet point:  "(Was there a lot of women and children,

18     was the residential areas occupied.)"

19             The next bullet says:  "Was there a lot of soldiers in town?  If

20     yes, when and why were they there?  Rotation."

21             The next bullet point:  "Description of the attack on Knin, where

22     the shelling took place, residential areas, Knin hospital or other

23     protected installations.  Type of weapons used, MR LS."

24             Mr. Waespi is on his feet.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  I see he is on his feet but I thought he was waiting

Page 8401

 1     until the question would be put to the witness.

 2             Mr. Waespi.

 3             MR. WAESPI:  Is that the questionnaire that --

 4             MR. MISETIC:  No --

 5             MR. WAESPI:  What's the foundation to --

 6             MR. MISETIC:  I got it from Alan Tieger.

 7             MR. WAESPI:  Yes, but is that the questionnaires which is

 8     referenced --

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Well, that's what I was going to get to.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  That is what, perhaps, Mr. Misetic wanted to ask.

11             Therefore, Mr. Waespi, if -- if we wait until the question is put

12     to the witness then there's still time to --

13             MR. WAESPI:  Yes.  The only thing is the face of the document

14     might be helpful for the witness to start with, have you seen the

15     document before going to Court.

16             MR. MISETIC:  That's why I'm walking him through it is to see if

17     he is familiar with the various portions of it but ...

18             If we could turn to the next page.

19        Q.   The top category says:  "Description about how the Croats should

20     have been able before and during the attack to monitor the situation and

21     take steps to prevent possible war crimes being committed - on all

22     levels; from the ground forces to the supreme CO of HV," and then it

23     lists the various methods.

24             And then if we could go to the final page, please.  If we could

25     scroll to the bottom.  And there's a note that says:  "If you do not

Page 8402

 1     know, do not guess.  It is bullet points, so please feel free to describe

 2     the facts as you wish (maybe in form of a letter) and do not answer the

 3     questions on this questionnaire by referring to the above order."

 4             And then it has the ICTY investigators on the bottom.

 5             Is this the questionnaire that you're referring to in your notes

 6     that was given to you as a basis to prepare your first witness statement

 7     in this case, sir?

 8        A.   I don't recall having seen that questionnaire before.  The

 9     reference in my notebook, ICTY developed a questionnaire, was --

10        Q.   Well, first before you answer that, if I could just call your

11     attention to refresh your recollection a bit.  The first page of your

12     first witness statement.  Do you have it in front of you?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   It's the cover letter that you sent back on the 13th of November.

15             MR. MISETIC:  P799.

16        Q.   Now, you're writing to Mr. Hansen and Mr. Robertsson and the

17     reference is:  "A, our conversation in Knin on 2 November 1995; and B,

18     ICTY questionnaire from October 1995."

19             Now, was that the questionnaire that you used as a template to

20     prepare the first witness statement you did in this case?

21        A.   My first witness statement was prepared as a chronological

22     expression of my observations.

23        Q.   Why the reference to the ICTY questionnaire on the cover letter?

24        A.   I think the ICTY developed a questionnaire reference originated

25     from my notebook here.  I haven't had the questionnaire in front of me

Page 8403

 1     when I did this.

 2        Q.   Did you receive a copy of that questionnaire, however?

 3        A.   I didn't have it in front of me, no.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  That's not the question, Mr. Liborius.

 5             THE WITNESS:  Did I receive a copy?  No.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The question was not whether it was in front

 7     of you, you had said that already.  The question then was whether you had

 8     received it.

 9             THE WITNESS:  No.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  You never received a questionnaire --

11             THE WITNESS:  No.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  -- prepared by the ICTY.

13             Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

14             MR. MISETIC:  However the probative value may be, Your Honour, I

15     still tender that questionnaire into evidence.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi, work product of the ...

17             MR. WAESPI:  Well, if Alan Tieger gave it to Mr. Misetic.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  You would not object.

19             Madam Registrar.

20             MR. WAESPI:  I would like to talk to my colleague before I give

21     my final assessment.

22             MR. MISETIC:  First of all, I mean, it is not work product if it

23     is given to third parties.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  No, no.  Of course, I was not to be taken really

25     serious at that moment.

Page 8404

 1             MR. MISETIC:  It's his fault.  He made me say it.

 2             MR. KEHOE:  I'll take the rap.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  The -- I guess we would put on the record if that

 4     is not the questionnaire and appears that there is a reference to the

 5     questionnaire and if the OTP knows that there is another one that was

 6     given to him that it be produced to us in its place, in the place of this

 7     one.  This is the only one I have been given.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll give Mr. Waespi time to consult with

 9     Mr. Tieger.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  But it could be marked for identification meanwhile.

12             Madam Registrar.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that would be Exhibit number D748,

14     marked for identification.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

16             May we hear from you by tomorrow, Mr. Waespi.

17             Please proceed.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

19             Madam Registrar, can we go to P801, please.  If we can go to page

20     5 in the English, please.  All the way at the bottom, please.  Thank you.

21        Q.   Now, sir, I'm going to read this portion to you.  "On some

22     occasions I interviewed HV soldiers and asked them why they were doing

23     this.  The soldiers explained that the looting was their reward for

24     participating in the operation, as they were lowly paid, and it was

25     considered as part of their wages.  They said that their senior

Page 8405

 1     commanders had specifically authorised them to help themselves to the

 2     goods.  When asked about the destruction, the killing of livestock, and

 3     the poisoning of the wells, they explained that this was to prevent the

 4     Serbs from returning.  I understood exactly what they were saying because

 5     I come from a farming background and to destroy the infrastructure and

 6     destroy the means of their livelihood would ensure that no one could

 7     return and live in that particular region."

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, if we could now turn to P802,

 9     please.  At the bottom of the page in English, on page 5, please.

10        Q.   I'll read this to you:  "On page 5 of my 2005 statement, I refer

11     to being told by HV soldiers that they had been authorised by their

12     commanders to loot.  I remember that I was told on three occasions by

13     different HV soldiers, the first being on the 7th of August at the old

14     RC Knin building.  The soldier I spoke to was a Home Guard soldier.  I

15     know that because he told me he was a member of the Home Guard, and I saw

16     the insignia for the Home Guard on his uniform.  In my report of the 7th

17     of August, I referred to the 7th and 4th Guards Brigade soldiers looting.

18     There were two 7th Guards Brigade soldiers with us when I spoke to the

19     Home Guard soldier.  Later that same day, I encountered three soldiers

20     from the 4th Guards Brigade who were just arriving at my own

21     accommodation and when I spoke to them, one of them said it was their

22     right to collect things they wanted."

23             And then you talk about the third occasion being later.

24             MR. MISETIC:  Now, if we could turn to P805, please.  If we can

25     go to the next page, please.

Page 8406

 1        Q.   You see this is the report co-authored by you and Mr. Bigland?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Okay.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  And if we can go to the next page, please.  I'm

 5     sorry, the previous page, I apologise, at the bottom.

 6        Q.   Now, at the bottom of the sitrep -- sorry, the daily report, on

 7     the day that you say on two separate occasions that HV soldiers told you

 8     that they had been authorised by their highest commanders to take war

 9     booty because it was part of their wages, you and Mr. Bigland write a

10     report that says:  "In the Knin area, it seems as if random looting and

11     destruction of houses and property is about to reach a degree where it

12     will get even more difficult to restart normal life here.  Comment:  It

13     is very unlikely that this is a deliberate policy of the authorities.  It

14     is more likely that, as the front-line, more disciplined troops are

15     moving out, the second-line soldiers are less disciplined and more ready

16     to grab what ..."

17             MR. MISETIC:  If we can turn the page.

18             "... they can."

19        Q.   Now, Mr. Liborius, you would agree with me that an ECMM monitor

20     being told by Croatian troops in Knin on the 7th, that they had

21     authorisation to take property because it is part of their wages is an

22     important fact?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   A fact important enough that an ECMM monitor would be required to

25     report such information in a daily report.  Correct?

Page 8407

 1        A.   Mm-hm, yes.

 2        Q.   Now, not only is it not only in the daily report, sir, but the

 3     comment at the end is exactly the opposite.  Is it not?  Would you agree

 4     with me?

 5        A.   Could you go to the top of the report, please.

 6        Q.   I said the comment at the end.  Let's talk about -- the comment

 7     at the end is a conclusion that is directly contradicted by what you say

 8     you were told on the 7th but HV soldiers.  Correct?

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Can we go to the previous page at the bottom,

10     please.

11        Q.   Would you -- let me ask the question a different way.  Would you

12     agree with me that if HV soldiers told you that they had received

13     authorisation from their highest command to go ahead and loot, that that

14     would be inconsistent with a comment that it is very unlikely that this

15     is a deliberate policy of the authorities.

16             Can we agree on that?

17        A.   Yes.  But I didn't write that.

18        Q.   Okay.  So there was a failure to communicate between you and

19     Mr. Bigland.  Is that what happened?

20        A.   If I had signed off the report, the last line would not have read

21     like that.

22        Q.   Is it typical that your name would be on the author line of a

23     report that you hadn't reviewed before it went out?

24        A.   The RC Knin daily report, at that time, was, as I said yesterday

25     or the day before, the work of different people, so it would not be

Page 8408

 1     inconsistent with what you suggest there.

 2        Q.   The question is very specific:  Was it typical for your name to

 3     be on the author line of a report that you hadn't reviewed before it went

 4     out?  Regardless of where the sources of information are, do you review

 5     the reports before you send them up?

 6        A.   We certainly became aware that there was a need for consolidated

 7     views on the report.  This is one of the examples.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I'd ask for an instruction that the

 9     witness answer the question as posed.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me read it.

11             I may have another little problem, Mr. -- let me just ...

12                           [Defence counsel confer]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The question was whether that -- I take, it

14     often happened that you being the co-author of a report would let it send

15     out without you having reviewed it.

16             THE WITNESS:  It did not happen often.  But it did happen.

17             MR. MISETIC:  Now --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

19             MR. WAESPI:  Just an observation.  The question was actually a

20     compound question.  There were two different questions in one.  The

21     witness just answered to the best of his capabilities.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Did you, Mr. Liborius, did you review this report

23     before it was sent out?

24             THE WITNESS:  No, not in its final stage.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  Because that was implied in your question.  As

Page 8409

 1     a matter of fact, I was checking whether that assumption was already in

 2     the evidence, yes or not.  That was --

 3             MR. MISETIC:  I wanted the first -- the general policy and then I

 4     was going ask the specifics with respect to this document.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 6             MR. MISETIC:

 7        Q.   Mr. Liborius, given that you and I agree that that is an

 8     important fact for whatever reason your finding didn't make it into the

 9     7th of August daily report, so you must have made sure that it got into

10     the 8th of August daily report.  Correct?

11        A.   If you can show me the 8th of August report.  It certainly made

12     it into the way of the subsequent reports.

13        Q.   Sir, I can show you that report.  What I'm asking you is very

14     simple.  Do you believe there is a report on the 8th of August, where it

15     is reported that you were told by HV soldiers that their commanders had

16     authorised them to loot?  Is that in the report for the 8th of August, to

17     the best of your knowledge?

18        A.   I prefer to see the 8th of August -- if we're discussing text

19     here I really prefer to see the 8th of August report here.

20             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, it is P806.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Either the witness remembers, then he can ask

22     the question and apparently what he tell us is that I would have to check

23     in the report because I have no clear recollection of whether it is or is

24     not.  And that's fair.  So then I leave it up to you whether you want to

25     put it to the witness.

Page 8410

 1             MR. MISETIC:  That's fine.

 2        Q.   So you don't know, as we sit here, without looking at a document

 3     whether you put it in a daily report or not.  Correct?

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Well, it is on the screen now.  We can scroll

 5     through it.

 6        A.   And?

 7        Q.   Does that refresh your recollection?  Did you report it in the

 8     8th of August daily report?

 9        A.   The reference to looting is certainly there.  It is again a

10     report written by Mr. Bigland and myself.

11        Q.   Mr. Liborius --

12        A.   So the question whether the words "they have been authorised to

13     loot" is in the report, I did not find that here.  So, no.

14        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  One question to end this area, sir.

15             The house you were actually living in, it was owned by someone

16     named Mr. Urukalo who had actually been a mobilised ARSK soldier prior to

17     Operation Storm.  Correct?

18        A.   I think it was owned by the woman, but Urukalo, yes, family.

19        Q.   So, in your diary you note that on the 1st of August the husband

20     had just come back from the front line.  Correct?

21        A.   Mm-hm, yes.

22        Q.   So the house you were in was the house of a front line soldier?

23        A.   He was seldom home.  So I mainly met the housewife and the

24     daughters.

25        Q.   Again, your diary, I believe, and can you just tell me if you

Page 8411

 1     know this or not, he was on the front line?

 2        A.   That was what I was told, yes.

 3        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, this would be a good time for a break.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it's a good time for a break.

 6             We will have a break and we'll resume at five minutes to 6.00.

 7                           --- Recess taken at 5.35 p.m.

 8                           --- On resuming at 5.58 p.m.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

11             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President, Prosecution has no objection for

12     D748, MFI, to come in.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  D748 is admitted into evidence.

14             MR. MISETIC:

15        Q.   Mr. Liborius, following up on that topic we ended with before the

16     break, who from the ECMM was with you when these Croatian soldiers made

17     these statements that they had been authorised to loot?

18        A.   I was alone when I encountered the soldiers in my own

19     accommodation.

20        Q.   And without going through all the documents now, I'm just asking

21     you for your own recollection as you sit here, do you recall any document

22     ever, while you were part of the ECMM in Croatia, where you as part of a

23     daily report or your 100-day report or any other report, reported that it

24     had been reported to you by Croatian soldiers that they were authorised

25     to loot?

Page 8412

 1             Do you have any recollection of any such document?

 2        A.   I remember that the issue that the soldiers said they were

 3     authorised to loot, yes, it was brought up in some of the reports.

 4        Q.   Which ones, that can you recall?

 5        A.   I can't remember at this point in time.  I will have to see the

 6     reports.

 7        Q.   Okay.  Well, do you have 100-day report, a copy of it?

 8        A.   I do, yes.

 9        Q.   I will ask you, whatever reports you have, your 100-day report,

10     tonight as you're reviewing things, and tomorrow preparing for the

11     session, to go through them and see if you can find a reference to such

12     an admission, okay?

13        A.   I can do my best.  But I don't have the entire ECMM library at my

14     hand.

15        Q.   True.  Just -- but whatever you need to refresh your

16     recollection, or whatever you have.

17             I'm reminded to ask you:  You said you were alone when you

18     encountered in your accommodation.  I also testified that this happened

19     at the old RC Knin building.  Who was with you at the old RC Knin

20     building when these soldiers told you this?

21        A.   My team colleague, Eric Hendriks.  We had a tour through the

22     RC Knin house, and we went -- it was a quite large compound, so we went

23     through the facility, and I believe that Eric Hendriks was with us in

24     the -- one of the large rooms on the top floor.  We later saw the

25     soldiers out in the field around the RC again, and I believe that

Page 8413

 1     Eric Hendriks was also with me at that time.

 2        Q.   So Mr. Hendriks was there when these soldiers told you this?

 3        A.   Yes.  And with regard to, I believe, your last question ...

 4             Did you ask for the third reference as well?

 5        Q.   No, just those two.  But if there's a third reference where you

 6     were told that they were authorised to loot by their senior commanders, I

 7     would like you to tell us when and who was with you.

 8        A.   The third instance where we encountered soldiers that said that

 9     it was their right to take over property was at the -- the new ECMM

10     house --

11        Q.   I'm not --

12        A.    -- and the colleagues of the team was my Greek colleague --

13        Q.   Mr. Liborius, I'm going to stop you there.  We're talking about

14     apples and orange there, aren't we?  That was a dispute over who had the

15     right to use that piece of property.  That wasn't an issue of looting

16     property that was in the building.  Correct?

17        A.   It is both.

18        Q.   Well, what you were talking about is the dispute with the CALOs

19     that we went through earlier in your diary about the use of the RC

20     Knin -- the old RC Knin building.  Is that the general topic that you're

21     talking about?

22        A.   Let me just make sure.  You asked me who were in my company when

23     I had a chance to hear Croatian soldiers saying that it was their right

24     to loot and take over property, right?

25        Q.   Let me be more specific because I don't want to have a broad

Page 8414

 1     question which is unclear.

 2             You testified that soldiers told you that they were authorised to

 3     loot because it was part of their wages.

 4             Now, the third time, did soldiers tell you that part of their

 5     wages was that they could loot?

 6        A.   The third time the soldiers told me and my team colleagues that

 7     they had the right to take over the property in order -- but it was

 8     not -- the wage question was in the first instances.

 9        Q.   Okay.  Thank you.  I'm going to move to a different topic.

10             MR. MISETIC:  I don't know if the Bench want to --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  No.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.

13        Q.   Let's talk about your meeting with General Gotovina on the 25th

14     and the days preceding.  Now, we've established that you met with the

15     ICTY investigators on the 25th.  From your first witness statement

16     there's also a reference in the cover letter to a second meeting with

17     them on the 2nd of November, 1995.

18             And in between that week, those two meetings, is exactly the --

19     the 27th, when you and Mr. Gambotti met with General Gotovina.  Is that

20     accurate?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Okay.  Now, let's talk -- first, this morning you discussed that

23     you had another meeting, you believe, on the 23rd with General Gotovina

24     and I believe you called him Mr. Selic.  Is that right?  It is actually

25     Mr. Zelic, okay?

Page 8415

 1        A.   Yeah.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  If I could pull up 1D50-0178, please.

 3        Q.   This is now a document the cover page is in Croatian.  And if we

 4     could flip to the next page, please.  And there's a -- first let's --

 5     let's look at the cover page together.

 6             This is forwarded to General Gotovina on the 22nd.  And it says:

 7     "Today, on 22 October 1995 ... the office received a letter from ECMM

 8     office Knin, requesting that we set up a meeting for the future chief of

 9     the Regional Centre of the ECMM Zagreb, Mr. Gambotti, with the commander

10     of the Military District, General Gotovina.

11             "The said individual requests a meeting with you on 27 October,

12     possibly at noon or earlier."

13             Now, if you look at the original, inserted there it says "da," to

14     the right, in the middle of the page it says "petak," which means Friday,

15     and then it says [B/C/S spoken] at 10.00 a.m.

16             And if we could flip to the next page, please.

17             Now, this is the letter you sent on the 22nd requesting a meeting

18     with General Gotovina.

19             Do you see that, sir?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   So, you didn't meet with General Gotovina on the 22nd or 23rd.

22     What you were doing was making notes of your communications to schedule

23     the meeting with General Gotovina.  And if we turn to your notebook,

24     D744, page 6, please.

25             Now, if we look to the right-hand side of the page it says 10.00,

Page 8416

 1     Pasic, General Gotovina, Mr. Pupovac, timing, and I believe it says

 2     slotting?

 3        A.   Floating.

 4        Q.   Floating.  What does that mean?

 5        A.   That it -- it has not been established precisely yet.

 6        Q.   Okay.  So you see from the cover letter and the letter that you

 7     wrote that in the handwritten notation on the Croatian version it was

 8     written Friday, 10.00 a.m., yes.  And your notes, then, for the next day,

 9     on the 23rd, say at 10.00 there's a meeting with General Gotovina.

10             Do you recognise that?

11        A.   Yes.

12        Q.   There would have been no need for you to go through the CALOs to

13     schedule a meeting to send a letter to General Gotovina if in fact you

14     had met with him personally and could have asked for that meeting face to

15     face.  Correct?

16        A.   This -- you asked for this particular meeting, because it would

17     inquire -- it would entail a quite detailed agenda and the HRC designate.

18     That would be a long meeting, not like a usual meetings.

19        Q.   What I'm saying is, sir, is that you're trying to interpret your

20     notes today, and what I'm suggesting to you is what your notes are

21     referring to is your effort on the 22nd and 23rd to schedule a meeting

22     with General Gotovina for the 27th with Mr. Gambotti.  Do you accept

23     that?

24        A.   And all else, yes.

25             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I tender the document 1D50-0178,

Page 8417

 1     please.

 2             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will be Exhibit number D749.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  D749 is admitted into evidence.

 6             MR. MISETIC:

 7        Q.   Now we looked at your notes for the 25th earlier where, amongst

 8     other things in the notations of your meeting with the OTP investigators,

 9     it was discussed command structure -- if we could flip forward a few

10     pages here.  I believe it's on this document.

11             MR. MISETIC:  Can we get to the 25th of October, please, so ...

12     there we go.

13        Q.   Again, it looks -- on the right it says:  "Investigate way."  Is

14     that correct?

15        A.   "Investigate event."

16        Q.   Event.  Okay.  What's the next line say?

17        A.   "Recent Storm."  And then "investigate" and then "way."

18        Q.   Okay.  And then after that?

19        A.   "Collect documents and papers, search, responsible."  It says,

20     "until now."

21        Q.   Mm-hm.

22        A.   Command structure HV special police.  Then, now collect evidence,

23     have they witnessed?  Victims are searched.  Ten persons witness

24     themselves.  All lead to witnesses.  And I believe that this is a

25     description of what has been going on for the ICTY so far.

Page 8418

 1        Q.   Can you complete that page so that we're sure what it says?

 2        A.   ICTY developed a questionnaire what happened in restriction of

 3     movement days, what happened after.  How to identify perpetrators, HV

 4     plates, units.  Suggests, Rick Bigland during and then questionnaire.

 5        Q.   Okay.  Now, the notebook that you kept, you used this notebook to

 6     assist you in preparing your daily reports.  Is that accurate?

 7        A.   That's correct.

 8        Q.   Okay.  Now, if we could turn it that daily report.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  I think Mr. Waespi used this document, but we

10     haven't recorded a P number for the 28th October daily report.  I don't

11     know if it's our error or ...

12             It is 65 ter 4337 -- sorry P822, I'm told.

13             If we could turn the page, please.  Yes.  Okay.

14        Q.   It says:  "Asked about lessons learned in OPS Storm:  Both

15     positive and negative.  The latter being the lack of control with

16     'undisciplined soldiers of non-professional units doing extraordinary

17     things.  The General stated that the HV lacked, and still lack, the level

18     of skilled NCOs and medium-level commanders able to control the

19     soldiers."

20             Now, if we turn to your notes, and I believe -- this is P821, I

21     believe.  And I'd ask to you pay attention to the fact that when you

22     prepared your daily report and you saw the word "extraordinary" in that

23     report, it says that "extraordinary" refers to undisciplined soldiers of

24     non-professional units doing extraordinary things.

25             So you actually included the word "extraordinary" in quotation

Page 8419

 1     marks in the daily report.  Do you see that?  Actually we've --

 2        A.   We lost the report.

 3        Q.   Let me take you here, if we could ...

 4                           [Defence counsel confer]

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Could we scroll through this, please.

 6             One moment, please.

 7                           [Defence counsel confer]

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, I prefer to use the original, so

 9     if we could go to D744, please.  And it's page 18 of this document,

10     please.

11        Q.   Okay.  Sir, if we can scroll down there now.  In the original it

12     says:  "Professional soldiers were controlled the --" can you tell us

13     what that word is?

14        A.   Much improved.

15        Q.   The much improved extraordinary ...

16        A.   Extraordinate [phoen].

17        Q.   Meaning extraordinary in English?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Now, that is the only time the word "extraordinary" appears in

20     your notebook.  Is that correct?  For that day, I'm sorry.

21        A.   No, in 16, in view of the next page.  There is also --

22        Q.   Okay.  Well, I'll stand corrected.  If -- in this discussion

23     about discipline, that's the only time the word "extraordinary" appears.

24     Do you agree with me?

25        A.   No, it also on 16.  If look at the next page.

Page 8420

 1        Q.   Okay.  Well, if we go through the context or the logical

 2     progression of the discussion here, in that discussion, where you

 3     referred to as the silent conversation between Gambotti and Gotovina --

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   -- the word "extraordinary" appears once.  Correct?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   Okay.  Now when you wrote your daily report, for the 27th and the

 8     28th, you used that word and put it in General Gotovina's mouth as him

 9     saying:  "The General stated undisciplined soldiers of non-professional

10     units doing extraordinary things."  And then you continued on by saying:

11     "But all the professional units are still kept free from these

12     accusations despite the fact that numerous IO have witnessed such events

13     involving professional units."

14             That's in the daily report that you prepared.

15             So what I am again putting to you, sir, there was no silent

16     admission by General Gotovina when you wrote that report on the 28th.  In

17     fact, would you agree with me that you wrote quite the opposite, that

18     General Gotovina continued to keep the professional units free from those

19     types of accusations.  Do you agree with me?

20        A.   No.  What I wanted to say, as before, that Gambotti and I

21     carefully discussed the way the meeting went and how it should be

22     reflected in the report.  That's what you have in the report there.

23        Q.   Are you suggesting that you and Mr. Gambotti provided a report

24     that was inaccurate in terms of what took place in the discussion?

25        A.   It was a consolidated effort of the two of us.  And if you read

Page 8421

 1     the report, if we could it have it up again, please.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, please.  P822, please.  And the next page,

 3     please.

 4             THE WITNESS:  If you read the report, "undisciplined soldiers of

 5     a non-professional units doing extraordinary things," that was the

 6     closest to the quotation I could come together with Gambotti.  Then the

 7     team comment, starting:  "TC:  Tailored to the presence of the HRC

 8     designate that in our view promoted postwar image --"  Sorry.  Speak --

 9     slow down.

10             "Speaking a lot about the role of the HV in a peaceful society.

11     Unlike previous meetings, the General now admitted that a lot of

12     atrocities were committed in Storm.  But all the professional units are

13     kept free from these accusations, despite the fact that numerous IOs have

14     witnessed such events involving professional units.  The lack of skilled

15     NCOs and medium-level commanders is maybe the understatement of the

16     month."

17             That was as both the HRC designate and I felt that we could --

18     could take it at that point.  Now what does that mean?  It means that the

19     HRC designate, of course, had also interpreted the silence as in fact an

20     admission.

21             Now, he would later, in the further reporting in the ECMM

22     structure reflect his impressions.

23             So I do not see any -- dealing as you would suggest.

24        Q.   I'm not sure I understood the answer, Mr. Liborius.

25        A.   Then I didn't understand your question.

Page 8422

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's try -- if you don't understand the question,

 2     Mr. Liborius, I would invite you to tell us rather than to give an

 3     incomprehensible answer for Mr. Misetic to a question you did not

 4     understand.

 5             Is that clear?

 6             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 8             MR. MISETIC:

 9        Q.   You've come here to testify that there was a silent conversation,

10     whatever that may mean, between Mr. Gambotti and General Gotovina, where

11     General Gotovina silently admitted that professional forces of the HV

12     were involved in atrocities.

13             Is that -- have I fairly stated what you stated in the course of

14     your testimony thus far?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   You write a report on the 28th where you write:  "But all the

17     professional units are still kept free from these accusations."

18             And I put it to you again, that what you've told us here, about a

19     silent admission by General Gotovina, is inconsistent with what you wrote

20     in the report on the 28th.

21             Do you agree with me?

22        A.   I -- I -- I'm afraid that the full understanding is perhaps

23     missed.  But at this point in time, yes.  But if the, Judge, Your Honour,

24     you require me to -- to elaborate further, I'll do so.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  I first want a clear answer to the question,

Page 8423

 1     the question being that where you testified about a silent conversation

 2     apparently interpreted as an admission, that your report, as Mr. Misetic

 3     puts it to you, says otherwise, is inconsistent with that testimony.

 4             Could you answer that question, to start with?

 5             THE WITNESS:  The report itself, yes.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  That's an answer.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  I take it that it's an answer to a question you

 9     understood, Mr. Liborius.

10             THE WITNESS:  Your Honour, I think it is important that also --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Just there's no question about that.

12             Okay.  Now would you like -- apparently you feel the need to give

13     a further explanation.  If you want to give a brief explanation, please

14     do so.

15             THE WITNESS:  Yes, please.

16             MR. MISETIC:  I have no problem with that.  I do want to state

17     and advise the witness that the longer we go into long explanations, the

18     longer the examination goes.  But feel free to clarify on this particular

19     point, but just keep it in mind for future questions.

20             Thank you.

21             THE WITNESS:  Well, Your Honour, I'm prepared to continue next

22     week on videolink if that is required.

23             It is important to understand the reporting structure of the

24     ECMM, that the RC Knin reports is only one and that the HRC would, in his

25     further work in the headquarters with his information gathered, work on.

Page 8424

 1     So the RC Knin report is only one part.  And I'm sure that the HRC

 2     designate had his impressions that there was this admission.  But, at

 3     that time, it was a very sensitive subject, of course, and that it was

 4     perhaps best that that be reflected in subsequent reports made at the

 5     headquarter level.

 6             Thank you.

 7             The reflection is:  "But all the professional units are kept free

 8     from these accusations."  What I said before was that the General was

 9     walking a fine line between the official position and then the -- the

10     acknowledgment that the HRC designate, Mr. Gambotti, was in fact right.

11             Now, that would of course require further conversations, if you

12     wish.  Because it was a change of, so to speak, a policy of how you

13     related to the campaign by the Croatian authorities at that time then.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  I see.  Now, I'm the one who might not have

15     understood all of your answer.

16             Mr. Liborius, the beginning of your answer let's focus on that.

17     You say it is it important to understand that the HRC might have further

18     elaborated on the information gathered.  So I understand this to be that

19     even if the report is not consistent with your testimony, that others

20     might have added something to that.

21             Is that --

22             THE WITNESS:  Yes.  The HRC used this meeting as one of the

23     events, one of the meetings --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me just try to understand that.

25             From what I see, this report is authored by you.

Page 8425

 1             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Are you telling us that although you authored it,

 3     that someone, some of your superiors, has instructed you to add something

 4     or -- how do I have to understand this reference to your superior, the --

 5     from what I understand, the head to add something in a report you

 6     authored?

 7             THE WITNESS:  Your Honour, as I said previously, that we

 8     discussed how to reflect the meeting, Mr. Gambotti and I, in the

 9     afternoon after the meeting, knowing that he would, in his further work

10     in the headquarter level, be able to develop some of the points in, among

11     other things, also the question of extraordinary events by professional

12     soldiers.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

14                           [Defence counsel confer]

15             MR. MISETIC:

16        Q.   Now, can you tell us what you meant when you said:  "The lack of

17     skilled NCOs and medium-level commanders is maybe the understatement of

18     the month."

19        A.   By that I mean that if you attribute all the destruction, looting

20     and burning and so on, to the sentence, well, we lacked the skilled NCOs

21     and medium-level commanders, that is a very, very ironically short way of

22     saying that this is a reason for all our problems.  That the General

23     stated that we lacked the NCOs and medium-level commanders explains

24     everything that went on after Operation Storm --

25        Q.   Well --

Page 8426

 1        A.    -- is like saying we failed to understand that there was an

 2     earthquake coming.  It just came.

 3        Q.   Well, sir, when did the Croatian army form its first NCO school?

 4        A.   What I have in my notebook as General Gotovina said, We have

 5     created NCO centre that has worked for two years.  I don't know whether a

 6     NCO school has been there before.  That was what the General told us at

 7     that time.

 8        Q.   Did you check to see if there was NCO training that had taken

 9     place for longer than two years?

10        A.   I did not feel the need at that time.

11        Q.   Did you ever look to see how many trained NCOs the Croatian army

12     had?

13        A.   No.

14        Q.   Okay.

15             MR. MISETIC:  I'd like to move on to a different topic,

16     Your Honour.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  I'd like to ask one additional question in this

18     respect.

19             You said that the reporting, after having discussed the matter -

20     and let me just check your answer - you said the -- Mr. Gambotti would in

21     his further work in the headquarter level be able to develop some of the

22     points in, among other things, also the question of extraordinary events

23     by professional soldiers.

24             Now, the report, unlike your testimony, may admit that

25     extraordinary events may have taken place, but not by professional

Page 8427

 1     soldiers.  Could you explain to me why saying that it was not done by

 2     professional soldiers would enable Mr. Gambotti to develop some of the

 3     points in the question of extraordinary events by professional soldiers?

 4     Because the report says that it was not these professional soldiers.

 5             THE WITNESS:  Yes, Your Honour.

 6             The team comment, beginning "tailored to the present" and so on,

 7     was the result of a conversation between Mr. Gambotti and I.  We

 8     discussed, in particular also this next sentence:  "But all the

 9     professional soldiers are kept free from these accusations."

10     Mr. Gambotti had the feeling that the General, having deployed both the

11     official line and also silently had admitted to his questions that wasn't

12     it right that extraordinary events that were also committed by

13     professional soldiers, both of them were deployed in the conversation,

14     but that the admittance part of professional soldiers, it was the first

15     time it was heard, and it would require further investigation, if you

16     wish.

17             So we decided the formulation carefully like you see it.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  You said you heard for the first time what was said

19     in a silent conversation.  Is that --

20             THE WITNESS:  Your Honour, you should take into consideration

21     that the two gentlemen had a conversation in French, tete-a-tete, prior

22     to the formal part of the meeting.  And as they both have a, so to speak,

23     French background, they developed a good rapport between the two.  The

24     conversation was quite long.

25             When we reached point 15, as I said before, there was a -- a good

Page 8428

 1     dynamic, ping-pong dynamic in the conversation, and the silent part of

 2     the acknowledgment was interpreted by both Mr. Gambotti and myself as a

 3     yes answer to the -- the gist of that particular subject.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And then you said you heard that for the first

 5     time ... it would require further investigation.

 6             Now, is by not reporting it, is that furthering an investigation

 7     or was the investigation in any other way developed or ...

 8             THE WITNESS:  The HRC preferred that we should -- that he should

 9     further the pursuit of that question.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And do you know how he did that?  Have you any

11     knowledge of that?

12             THE WITNESS:  I don't know now.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

14             MR. MISETIC:

15        Q.   Just one question on that, sir.  If that's true what you're

16     saying now, wouldn't you have just -- if there was any doubt about the

17     fact that General Gotovina kept professional units free from these

18     accusations, wouldn't you have just not written that sentence?

19        A.   The sentence was the product, the conclusion of Mr. Gambotti's

20     and my conversation, how that should be reflected.  So -- so the question

21     is answered no, I wouldn't write it in a different way.

22        Q.   Let's clear this up.  So what you are really saying is you and

23     Mr. Gambotti afterwards agreed to write a sentence that you both felt

24     wasn't true?

25        A.   It was not the whole truth.

Page 8429

 1        Q.   Well --

 2        A.   Deploying both one line, the official line and then the silent

 3     admittance.

 4        Q.   Well, people are supposed to read this up your information chain.

 5     Correct?

 6        A.   He was supposed to read it.  He is the HRC designate.

 7        Q.   As well as other people, correct?

 8        A.   Yes, but primarily he.

 9        Q.   So he is writing to himself?

10        A.   In essence, the HRC receives the RC reports -- the team reports.

11     That was the reason why that this sensitive subject should be developed

12     further and he felt perfectly capable of doing that because he was in the

13     chain of reporting.

14        Q.   Well, sir, the memo line says you're sending it to CC Split and

15     it says for information to RC Zagreb.  So you are actually distributing

16     this beyond you and Mr. Gambotti writing a private little memorandum to

17     each other?

18        A.   If could you go to the top, please.

19        Q.   Sure, let's go to the first page.

20        A.   There you see it is inside the RC Zagreb structure.  It is inside

21     the HRC structure.  CC Split is a coordination centre subordinated to the

22     Regional Centre Zagreb.

23        Q.   My point is you're sending it to more than just Mr. Gambotti?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   And according to you, you and Mr. Gambotti decided to send false

Page 8430

 1     information in a written report to people within the ECMM?

 2        A.   Omit the word "false," please.  It's not -- it's the truth but

 3     not the whole truth.  And the HRC would be perfectly capable of knowing

 4     what is going on inside the RC.

 5        Q.   And other people who go this report wouldn't have been able to

 6     know of silent conversations and silent admissions, correct?

 7        A.   At that point in time, there would be follow-on meetings inside

 8     the RC with the other members where we could meet to discuss our

 9     findings.

10        Q.   And it would be there that would you say, Listen, where we wrote

11     that all professional units were kept free from these accusations, what

12     we meant was no, he actually admitted it.

13        A.   In order to appreciate the full answer, and with the risk of

14     repeating myself, if you deploy both the official line and you say, well,

15     not really.  You can have that dialectic difference.  I know it's a very

16     tricky issue and of course it goes to the core.

17        Q.   Okay, Mr. Liborius.

18             MR. MISETIC:  I'd like to move on to a different topic,

19     Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

21                           [Defence counsel confer]

22             MR. MISETIC:  Sorry, I do have to ask a question as my colleague

23     reminds me.

24        Q.   How many times in your reports did you not tell the whole truth?

25        A.   It was the only meeting --

Page 8431

 1                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 2             MR. MISETIC:

 3        Q.   It was the only meeting, is that what you said.

 4             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President.  I object that's not what the witness

 5     said --

 6             MR. MISETIC:  He says it was not the whole truth in his report.

 7     It is exactly what he said.  "Omit the word 'false,' please.  It is the

 8     truth and not the whole truth."

 9        Q.   My question again for the witness is:  How many times in your

10     daily reports did you not write the whole truth?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi, let's try to avoid a semantic discussion

12     on whether not the whole truth still is the truth.  That's -- it --

13             It appears from your testimony, Mr. Liborius, that in this report

14     not the whole of the truth was reflected and now Mr. Misetic asks you how

15     often this happened in reports you authored.

16             THE WITNESS:  Your Honour, this is the only example I can recall

17     now.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

19             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, if I could have -- this is one of

20     the videos that went in yesterday.  We will play it on Sanction.

21        Q.   Before we play it, Mr. Liborius, this is a portion of the video

22     you did with the OTP in 1997.  Now I'm going to play you two minutes of

23     the clip.  This is the portion where you went to Kricke --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  To?

25             MR. MISETIC:  Kricke.  It's in the Drnis area.  And I'd like you

Page 8432

 1     to -- after you watch the video what I'm going to ask you to do is help

 2     the Trial Chamber to determine which houses that are burned are owned by

 3     a Croat, which houses were owned by a Serb and whether the damage was

 4     done before Operation Storm or after Operation Storm.  First can you tell

 5     me before we play the video when you were doing these patrols, how were

 6     you able to determine whether a particular village was burned down before

 7     or after Operation Storm?

 8        A.   We would have information from our usual patrols before

 9     Operation Storm to relate to.

10        Q.   If you saw a house that had been burned down on the spot, would

11     you be able to say -- assuming it is not still on fire.  Let's say if the

12     fire ended and it is now two weeks after the fire has been put out.  How

13     would you tell that that house had been burned down two weeks ago as

14     opposed to a year ago?

15        A.   The ECMM information on the villages, houses there, was quite

16     detailed.  It was very, very, very, seldom that houses or hamlets would

17     be burned down in the RSK period.  I cannot recall of a village burning

18     just, say, a half a year before Operation Storm.  It was a so-called

19     state, semi-state RSK.  In our usual patrols through the area, we would

20     have that information to relate to when we saw destruction afterwards.

21        Q.   How would you know --

22        A.   I can't hear you.

23        Q.   How would you know whether a village was majority Croat or

24     majority Serb?

25        A.   Again, from our previous information, before Operation Storm, the

Page 8433

 1     Regional Centre Knin with its ECMM teams had throughout the war, covered

 2     the whole area.

 3        Q.   Okay.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Let's play the video.  It is from the 58 minute 58

 5     second mark of P821 to the 1 minute and 56 second mark of P821.

 6        Q.   And again, Mr. Liborius, I would ask you to pay particular

 7     attention to how do you know it is a Serb or Croat house and how do you

 8     know when the damage took place.

 9                           [Videotape played]

10             "Unknown Male:  ... May 1997.  We are in the Drnis area

11     south-east of the Drnis in the village Kricke and we follow the road

12     towards south-east."

13             MR. MISETIC:

14        Q.   Mr. Liborius, you see that that is Kricke?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Now, can you tell us how when you were in the theatre in

17     August of 1995 as well as on this patrol in 1997, how were you able to

18     first identify it as a Serb village?

19        A.   There's still a noise here.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  I take it that those who are -- there is still a

21     volume button on it and perhaps if we stop playing.  There we are.

22             Please proceed.

23             THE WITNESS:  Your question how we would know whether it was a

24     Serb or a Croat-dominated village, right?

25        Q.   Yes.

Page 8434

 1        A.   Usually we would relate to the information that was gathered by

 2     the teams prior to Operation Storm.  Secondly, we would relate to the

 3     government of Croatia's statistics survey for each municipality, the big

 4     blue book on municipality structures.  Secondly, whether it was a Croat

 5     or a Serb-owned house, was that your question?

 6        Q.   Yes.

 7        A.   I would always myself hesitate to say a Serb or a Croat-owned

 8     house.  I don't do that in my report.  Usually when coming to an area

 9     after Operation Storm, where there were inhabitants, I would ask who

10     owned this house.  Generally some of the houses would have a sign saying

11     Croatian house.  That would be the sign that some of the houses had been

12     taken over by some Croats.

13             With regard to your question how to establish when the damage was

14     done, that would usually require us to be in the area close to the

15     houses, see if there were recent traces of burnings, see if there were

16     traces of battle damage, trees around the area, fences being demolished

17     by shrapnels, to inspect, so to speak, the way the damage was inflicted.

18        Q.   Well, if you were just driving through a village without stopping

19     and you see burned out villages, how do you know, again, taking aside the

20     situation where the village or the houses are smouldering still, but just

21     looking at what we looked at on the video there, how would you know if

22     you were just driving through that it was a Serb village as opposed to a

23     Croat village and that was destroyed Operation Storm as opposed to before

24     Operation Storm?

25        A.   Again, as I said, if I had patrolled or my team or colleagues had

Page 8435

 1     patrolled in that area prior to Operation Storm, and most of the area

 2     was -- was patrolled through many times, month and weeks prior to

 3     Operation Storm, so there was an updated accurate knowledge of the level

 4     of destruction prior to Operation Storm.

 5             Now you come through a village, start of July, it is not

 6     destroyed.  You come to a village mid-August, destroyed.  So you -- you

 7     relate to your prior ECMM-gathered information.

 8        Q.   Okay.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, I would like to call up again a

10     document that the Prosecution tendered right at the end of the direct.  I

11     have it still under the 65 ter which is 65 ter 4350, which is

12     Mr. Liborius' 100-day report of 21 November 1995.

13        Q.   By the way, Mr. Liborius, looking at that video, could you tell

14     anything from that video, as to when the damage occurred?

15        A.   I was not participating, myself, in that particular trip, as it

16     was mentioned yesterday, to Drnis area.  If you would re-wind the tape, I

17     would give some indications.  Now, I'm very hesitant on second-guessing

18     from a video; I prefer being there in person.  First observation.

19             Second observation.  Drnis, as we knew it, became a part of the

20     RSK due to a problem of the pink zones, the army of RSK.  So, again, we

21     would relate to the information gathered by monitoring prior to

22     Operation Storm.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, before we start with a new subject, I'm

24     looking at the clock.  Perhaps we should spend two or three minutes or

25     further discussing scheduling.

Page 8436

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Can I just wrap this up quickly?

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Madam Registrar, I just need to go to -- what the

 4     Bates number on the bottom is 388731, which is ... it should be, I think,

 5     43 pages in, if I'm not mistaken.  That's not -- I'm sorry.  The Bates

 6     number is 388731.  We're about 50 pages off now.  Page 44 of the

 7     document.  There we go.

 8        Q.   Sir, if you look that line and you find Kricke, this is the UNMO

 9     report you attached to your own 100-day report.

10             Now, the UNMO report says:  "Kricke," with the coordinates -- and

11     I have checked the coordinates so they're the same as what was played on

12     the video.  It says:  "Kricke damaged prior to Operation Storm."

13             Now did you go through the videos with the Office of the

14     Prosecutor to determine what was being represented on the videos was for

15     sure damage that had occurred during or after Operation Storm?

16        A.   When I went through the videos it was to ascertain whether my

17     voice was the one on the video.  I did not dwell on the question on

18     each -- each and every hamlet that they went through, whether it was

19     destroyed prior to Operation Storm.

20             Now, in this particular case, it is the voice of Mr. Jul Hansen

21     who is going through and I did not participate in that particular trip.

22             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I will end here but I will pick up on

23     this subject tomorrow in light of your instruction.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

25             Mr. Liborius, some research was done on your travel schedule.

Page 8437

 1     Although there is a plane to your destination which goes later Friday

 2     evening, you would not arrive until 5.20 in the morning which might be a

 3     bit too much for you.

 4             Therefore, you were so kind to offer to say that you would

 5     continue your testimony through videolink.  Now usually whether there is

 6     a videolink or not, is usually decided upon the Chamber upon application

 7     by the parties and, of course, if you would express such a wish since you

 8     are, at this moment, entitled to speak anymore with Mr. Waespi, of

 9     course, we could consider that.  But we ordinarily would hear the

10     testimony viva voce.

11             When would you be available to come back to The Hague if you

12     would leave on Friday evening?

13             THE WITNESS:  Your Honour, that is a question I'm sorry that I

14     cannot answer right on the spot here.  My government requires my

15     attention to a lot of details in September, and in the beginning of

16     October.  However, when I indicated a videolink, the embassy is prepared

17     to provide that and I think it would facilitate a further discussion as

18     the case is still fresh in mind and perhaps also be the easiest one.  We

19     have a lot of experience with detailed videolinking, so the quality is

20     usually very good.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Liborius, I'm working with videolinks so often

22     that although I appreciate that you explain to me that it can be done

23     with quite some good quality, my question was whether you would be

24     available to come back The Hague and not to expound further on what you

25     consider the advantages of videolink.

Page 8438

 1             THE WITNESS:  I would have to go back to Moscow to answer that

 2     question, Your Honour.  The --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you please get the relevant information you

 4     would need by tomorrow so that you could inform the Chamber about your

 5     availability in the very, very near future?

 6             THE WITNESS:  I'll see what I can do.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  We will adjourn for the day.  And, Mr. Liborius, I

 8     again instruct you, and you know it by heart perhaps already, that you

 9     should not speak with anyone about the testimony you have given or you're

10     still about to give.  And although Madam Registrar gave me the right

11     information about tomorrow, I'm afraid that ...

12                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  We adjourn, and we'd like to see you back tomorrow

14     at quarter past 2.00 in Courtroom I, unless it changes overnight again.

15             We stand adjourned.

16                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.04 p.m.,

17                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 11th day of

18                           September, 2008, at 2.15 p.m.