Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 12813

 1                           Monday, 1 December 2008

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness entered court]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 2.30 p.m.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon to everyone.

 7             Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honours.  Good afternoon to

 9     everyone in the courtroom.  This is case number IT-06-90-T, The

10     Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina, et al.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

12             First of all, the Chamber was kept busy with an urgent matter,

13     which did not allow any further delay and that caused the late start this

14     afternoon.

15             Mr. Misetic, are you ready to continue your cross-examination?

16             MR. MISETIC:  I am, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Mr. Theunens, I would like to remind you that

18     you are still bound by the solemn declaration that you gave at the

19     beginning of your testimony.

20             Please proceed.

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

22                           WITNESS:  REYNAUD THEUNENS [Resumed]

23                           Cross-examination by Mr. Misetic: [Continued]

24        Q.   Good afternoon again, Mr. Theunens.

25        A.   Good afternoon Mr. Misetic.

Page 12814

 1        Q.   Before we pick up where we left off on Friday, I would like to

 2     see if you can help us with respect to a document already admitted into

 3     evidence.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if I could please have Exhibit D182

 5     on the screen, please.

 6        Q.   And this question I'm asking you based not only the fact that

 7     you've reviewed documents, but also that you worked in UNPF at the time,

 8     so you may be able to assist us with the identity of a particular person.

 9             This is a document that both the Prosecution and the Defence

10     stipulate has the wrong date on it.  It should be dated 4 August 1995.

11             MR. MISETIC:  If we could get the English.

12        Q.   You'll see that it's sent from Knin by a Colonel Ratsouk.  Can

13     you tell us and help us understand who Colonel Ratsouk was?

14        A.   I know a Colonel Ratsouk who when I arrived at the -- it was

15     still called UNCRO headquarters in December 1994 -- was working in the

16     office called CMNAT, and I think that stands for chief military

17     negotiation an analysis team, and he was working there together -- or I

18     think he was a deputy to a Belgian Brigadier, Pierre Peeters now in what

19     position Ratsouk was in Knin in August 1995, I'm not sure.  I know he had

20     to leave the UNPROFOR headquarters in January or February of 1995, and my

21     understanding was that he was sent to the headquarters of Sector East.

22             He returned to the UNPF headquarters, but I don't remember

23     exactly when.

24        Q.   Do you know if, in fact, Colonel Ratsouk was member of UN

25     Sector South on the 4th of August, or was he affiliated UNPF or UNCRO in

Page 12815

 1     Zagreb at the time?

 2        A.   I wouldn't be able to tell.  So it could be that UNPF

 3     headquarters dispatched him for a certain time-period to Sector South,

 4     but I have no further information on that.

 5        Q.   Now, going back to where we left off on Friday, I would like to

 6     show you an exhibit which is --

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, is 1D63-0218, please.

 8             Mr. President, is not yet ready to be released, do we'll show it

 9     via Sanction or ...

10        Q.   You recall we were talking about the 134th Home Guard's Brigade

11     at the end of the day.

12        A.   Yes, I do.

13        Q.   And this is a report dated 21 August 1995 about -- which was a

14     list that was prepared of participants in Operation Storm of the 134th

15     Home Guard Regiment.  And you will see there at the bottom -- if we could

16     actually turn the page.

17             The last sentence there says:  "The 134th Home Guard Regiment has

18     a total of 2302 members on its list."

19             That's as of 21 August 1995.

20             MR. MISETIC:  One moment.

21                           [Defence counsel confer]

22             THE WITNESS:  Indeed.  And when we see the document we also see

23     that the 134th Home Guard Regiment, like the other units, has its own

24     artillery assets.  For example, under heading 10 and 11, just to clarify

25     a point that was discussed earlier during my testimony.

Page 12816

 1             MR. MISETIC:

 2        Q.   Okay.  Now, if we could go back to -- actually, Your Honour, I

 3     ask that this exhibit be marked, and I tender it into evidence.

 4             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit D986.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  D986 is admitted into evidence.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if we could now have 65 ter 1335,

 9     please.

10        Q.   You will recall, Mr. Theunens, that I took you through a series

11     of documents at the end of the day on Friday about the commander of the

12     134th being unable to implement orders effectively, a problem with

13     respect to burning and looting in that unit.  That's what was in the

14     operational diary for the 18th of August.  Then subsequent orders to

15     establish a check-point as well as to demobilize problem soldiers,

16     including soldiers in the 134th.

17             If we could turn here to page -- numbered page 37 in the English.

18     This is the report of the inspection of the Split Military District from

19     the 30th of October that was done by the Main Staff.

20             MR. MISETIC:  I think -- we showed the page on Friday, so ...

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, I show the English translation is

22     26 pages, so we can't show page 37.

23             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.  Well, it is numbered paragraph 3.1, so I may

24     have an earlier draft translation.  There we go.

25        Q.   Now for the 134th, it says:

Page 12817

 1             "By the order of the defence minister, based on the proposal

 2     submitted by the operative group and the order of the Split Military

 3     District, the approved numerical strength of the regiment was 581

 4     soldiers.  After the demobilization the number fell to 579 and the

 5     regiment's structure was adapted accordingly."

 6             MR. MISETIC:  If we could turn the page, please.

 7              "According to the commander's order, the regiment sent 392

 8     members on leave..."  And then talks about the 187 are doing.

 9             Now based on the prior document I showed you, as well as this

10     document, it would appear that between 21 August 1995 and

11     30 October 1995, 1,721 of the 134th Home Guard Regiment had been

12     demobilized.  Would you agree with that?

13        A.   Yes, I do.

14        Q.   And of the remaining 581, 392 were sent on leave.

15             So if we could turn now to the next page, please.  Actually this

16     is section 3.2, the proposed measures under section B at the Split

17     Military District level, the last recommendation is:

18             "Make the necessary training analysis, and in cooperation with

19     the Split Military District, organise --" oh, sorry.

20             It says:

21             "In according with the requirements, take into consideration the

22     demobilization of the unit retaining only the corps regiment command?"

23             Now it would appear, Mr. Theunens, would it not, that since that

24     report on 18 August about, the commander of the 134th Home Guard Regiment

25     having difficulty implementing the orders of the operative group, the

Page 12818

 1     decision was implemented to essentially first get rid of 75 per cent of

 2     the soldiers in the unit, and then with a recommendation of getting

 3     demobilizing the entire unit except for the corps regiment command,

 4     correct?

 5        A.   The report on 18 August is a -- at D885, or ...

 6        Q.   Yes, I believe so.  The SIS report.

 7        A.   Oh, okay.  It's another document.

 8             Indeed we can see there is a demobilization or to a large extent

 9     of the 134th Home Guard Regiment.  However, it is not clear why this

10     demobilization is taking place.  In relation to D885, I would like to add

11     that the document which states that the commander can demobilize people

12     at his own wish, in priority, those who are -- who don't behave in

13     accordance with the Code of Discipline.  That document was not indicate

14     that dismissal is used as a disciplinary punishment, as it is specified

15     in Article 13 of the Code of Discipline which is P1017.

16        Q.   Let's go to P1017 then, please.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, before we continue can you also make

18     reference to page numbers for -- for example, 3.1 appears both on page 8

19     and on page 19.  Apparently, you were referring to the latter.

20             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  But the numbering of this document is not in every

22     respect conclusive.

23             Please proceed.

24             MR. MISETIC:  If we could scroll down, because I can't see the --

25     I don't have this copy.  Page 20 is the recommendation to take into

Page 12819

 1     consideration the demobilization of the unit.  And, Mr. President, I will

 2     be referring back to this document so I ask that it be marked, and I

 3     tender it received into evidence.

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

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your, Honours, that becomes Exhibit D987.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  D987 is admitted into evidence.

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

 9             Mr. Registrar, if we could have Exhibit P1007, please.  And if we

10     can go to Article 13, which I believe is probably page 6.

11        Q.   Okay.  Now if we could go back to -- I see what you're referring

12     to, Mr. Theunens, and if we could back now -- scroll up, please, I

13     believe Article 11 is there.

14             Now, these measures, one of the measures that can be taken under

15     Article 11, subpart 5, is termination status as active serviceman,

16     correct?

17        A.   Yes.  But Article 11 refers to disciplinary punishments and not

18     disciplinary measures.  And there's a distinction.  Disciplinary measures

19     can be decided upon by a brigade commander and higher, and these

20     disciplinary measures are also specified in the various Articles, whereas

21     when you read the Code of Discipline, disciplinary punishments or

22     sentences are actually of a more serious nature, and they are used in

23     case of violations of discipline, i.e., what is described as more serious

24     violations, whereas the breaches -- I mean, you have the breaches.  Are

25     you getting response of a breach, you get a disciplinary measure.  In

Page 12820

 1     response of a violation, i.e., a more serious violation, you get

 2     disciplinary punishment.  And disciplinary punishments are in my

 3     understanding, the prerogative of the disciplinary prosecutor and the

 4     disciplinary Court.  And that can be also found in Articles 6 and 10.

 5        Q.   You're referring to Articles that talk about active duty

 6     servicemen, right?  And what's the distinction between active duty

 7     servicemen and mobilised members of the Home Guard Regiment, if you know?

 8        A.   I haven't seen any distinction in relation to those categories

 9     which is relevant in the context of your question int he code of

10     Discipline.  But if you point me to an Article, then, of course, I'm

11     willing to have a look at that time.

12        Q.   Well, I'll see if I can do that for you.  But as of right now

13     what I'm interested in is, at this moment, you're not aware of any

14     distinction between active duty serviceman and mobilised soldiers,

15     correct?  Under the Code of Conduct?

16        A.   Not in the context of the issues we are discussing.

17        Q.   Okay.

18             MR. MISETIC:  If we could now go back to D987, please.  And if we

19     could -- if we could now to section 7.1.  It's page 14 in the English,

20     please.

21        Q.   This is now talking about the situation in the 142nd Home Guard

22     Regiment as found during the inspection.  It gives the numbers present.

23     There's only 337 left -- present, I should say.

24             MR. MISETIC:  And if we go to the next page, Mr. Registrar,

25     please.

Page 12821

 1        Q.   That paragraph that begins:  "Displaced persons from Drnis ..."

 2             It says:

 3             "Displaced persons from Drnis make up 70 per cent of this unit.

 4     They had suffered heavy losses  ... the demobilization after Operation

 5     Storm went too fast, and it was impossible to make better preparations.

 6     The decline in the number of unit members should be approached in a much

 7     better way in the next demobilization.

 8             And this last sentence:

 9             "There is an certain degree of concern on the part of the members

10     of this unit - displaced persons - about what to do after the - it says

11     mobilisation; It should be demobilization - about what to do after the

12     demobilisation, and some of them have little time to prepare their

13     houses, find accommodations for their family, and work."

14             Now, in your analysis of Split Military District, you were aware,

15     were you aware you not, that mobilized soldiers, in many cases, were

16     displaced persons whose only source of income was, in fact, from the HV

17     and their service in the HV, correct?

18        A.   I know in many cases, there were displaced persons, but I'm not

19     familiar with the social system in Croatia as to know whether or not they

20     received any kind of assistance when they were not mobilized.  I know

21     they were paid when they were mobilized, but I don't know about their

22     financial status or social status when they are demobilized.

23             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if we could go to ...

24                           [Defence counsel confer]

25             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, if I may have one moment.  I have a

Page 12822

 1     hard time now because of the differences in the translations.

 2                           [Defence counsel confer]

 3             MR. MISETIC:  It's page 18 in the English, please.

 4        Q.   This is now the proposed measures concerning the 113th Sibenik

 5     Motorised Brigade.  And in contrast with the suggestion that the 134th be

 6     demobilized except for the corps command, this one has a recommendation:

 7             "Suggest that the Brigade be commended by the chief of the

 8     Main Staff for its distinguished and proper execution of tasks?"

 9             Now, there were, in fact, distinctions being made between units

10     in this inspection, correct, in terms of some that he were being

11     commended and others that were being suggested for total demobilization,

12     correct?

13        A.   Indeed we would have to see the reasons for this difference in --

14     in opinions that are expressed in relation to these units because whether

15     -- whether the commendation has to do with the manner in which, for

16     example, the records are kept or command and control is functioning at

17     the time of the inspection or whether the commendation is related to

18     other aspects is something that I would have to see in the document.

19        Q.   Well, this is a document that you cite in your report, correct?

20        A.   I do, but I haven't seen the page with reference to the 113th

21     Brigade on the screen now.

22        Q.   Okay.

23             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if we could now go to ...

24                           [Defence counsel confer]

25             MR. MISETIC:  Page 7 in the English, Mr. Registrar.

Page 12823

 1                           [Defence counsel confer]

 2             MR. MISETIC:  I'm sorry, Mr. Registrar, it's page 3 in the

 3     English.

 4        Q.   This is now in the introductory section of the inspection, and at

 5     the top it says:

 6             "Planned inspections and controls of the liberated areas have not

 7     been fully established yet, but considerable progress has been achieved

 8     in the prevention of theft, destruction of houses, and similar, which

 9     should continue to be considered a priority and permanent task."

10             Now, if we could go to the last page of this report.

11             MR. MISETIC:  I believe it should be the signature page.

12        Q.   You'll see that the report has as attachments, among other

13     things, the last entry is -- an attachment is the inspection of political

14     activities, and that, in fact, is Exhibit P1138.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if we could have that.

16             And if we can go to page 3 in the English, please.

17             Actually, if we could scroll up.  It may be the previous page; I

18     apologise.

19        Q.   Now, this at the bottom of this under "Discipline and Order," you

20     had highlighted this sentence that said:

21             "Due to undisciplined conduct and in the absence of sanctions

22     against what has occurred, the theft of property and arbitrary occupation

23     of premises still persists and could cause wider political damage."

24             Right?

25        A.   I put the entire paragraph actually in my report on English page

Page 12824

 1     353, so I -- maybe Mr. Waespi highlighted that sentence during my

 2     examination, but the entire paragraph under the heading "Discipline an

 3     Order" can be found on English page 353 of part 2 of my report.

 4        Q.   Okay.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Can we go to the next page, please, Mr. Registrar.

 6        Q.   At the top it says -- the conclusion reached, however.  It says,

 7     the among other things:

 8             "The problems troubling this Military District are no different

 9     from problems of other Military Districts."

10             And my first question to you is:  This was an attachment to an

11     overall inspection was done by the HV Main Staff which had a conclusion

12     which I have read to you now, which said that, in fact, progress was

13     being made on the prevention of -- let me quote it correctly.

14             "Considerable progress has been achieved in the prevention of

15     theft, destruction of houses, and similar, which should be continued to

16     be a priority and permanent tasks."

17             Would you agree with me that the report you cited was, in fact,

18     something that had been considered by the inspectors of the Main Staff,

19     and they came to the conclusion that I've read out to you?

20        A.   It's possible.  I mean, I believe that the report by the

21     political department stands as it is.  Now, whether anyone else looked at

22     other aspects and took those to draw the conclusion you have cited, it's

23     possible.  I don't know.

24        Q.   Okay.  Going back now to the 18th of August -- first of all, let

25     me ask you from a military perspective and as someone who was in the

Page 12825

 1     military, whether it is the Belgian army, the US army, or the Croatian

 2     army, is there a certain stigma attached when a unit is disbanded?

 3        A.   Everything depends of the reasons why it was disbanded.  If it is

 4     disbanded for disciplinary reasons, yes, indeed the senior NCOs and the

 5     members of the officer corps of that unit would be looked at in a

 6     probably negative way by other officers and NCOs in the military.  But if

 7     is disbanded just as a result of cutting of budgets, for example, some

 8     people may even feel sorry for them.

 9             My unit was disbanded because of budgetary constraints in

10     Belgium, and lots of efforts were being done to keep the name existing,

11     and so on, and so on, and the traditions, but there was no question

12     whatsoever of any stigmatization or other negative considerations.

13             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if we could please have Exhibit P71

14     again, which is the operational diary.  And if we could go, please, to

15     page 115 in the English.

16        Q.   This is now going back, and he is now reporting at the meeting

17     what was in the SIS report that I showed you where Colonel Fuzul says:

18             "Lack of discipline among 134 Home Guard Regiment."

19             Coric, whoever that is, reports that the order is issued to carry

20     out the control and inventory in 134th Home Guard Regiment.

21             Next entry is the military police:

22             "Control in Otric area.  The MP check-point was established.  The

23     burning of houses and killing of cattle is being continued."

24             Now, Otric was an area that was being used as a staging area for

25     combat activities in Bosnia; is that correct?

Page 12826

 1        A.   It's possible.  I have no specific recollection, but if you say

 2     so, I'm willing to accept that.  It depends also on the time.

 3        Q.   Okay.

 4        A.   Depends also obviously on the time.  I guess this is still around

 5     the 18th of August.

 6        Q.   Yes.

 7        A.   Okay.

 8        Q.   From an UNMO report, UNMO analysis which is Exhibit P176, at page

 9     8, the UNMO analysis reported that in the entire Otric area, which

10     includes Otic and all surrounding villages, there were a total of 70

11     destroyed houses and 16 partially damaged.  And if I could call up --

12             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if I could have 1D63-0202, please.

13        Q.   Now --

14             MR. MISETIC:  If we could zoom in on that, please.

15        Q.   You see where Strmica is and Otric is?

16        A.   Mm-hm.

17        Q.   On the left there.  Resanovci in Bosnia.  You see that the brown

18     line is the international border?

19        A.   Yes, yes, I do.

20        Q.   The blue line is the HVO line.  The red line is the VRS line.

21             When we're talking about Otric, we're talking about an area that

22     was being used by the HV to resupply into Bosnia.  If you follow -- you

23     can't really see the roads here, but there is only one road that goes up

24     into the Resanovci area.

25             Are you familiar with that?

Page 12827

 1        A.   No, on general terms, I'm familiar with the terrain, so I'm

 2     willing to accept that.

 3        Q.   Okay.

 4        A.   If we could --

 5             MR. MARGETTS:  Mr. President, if I could have this marked.  I'm

 6     going to use this later.

 7             MR. WAESPI:  No objection.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit D988, Your Honours.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  D988 is admitted into evidence.

11             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

12             If we could go back to P71.  Mr. Registrar, again, page 119.

13        Q.   This is now at a meeting, I think you highlighted this in your

14     direct or Mr. Waespi did.  This is now the 19th of August and an entry at

15     the very top of the page:

16             "The problem is the 6th Home Guard Regiment that is burning down

17     the houses in..."  and it's written as Rasanovci; I believe it should be

18     Resanovci.  And then it goes on.

19             Now, from the map that I just showed you and admitted into

20     evidence, Resanovci is a village in Bosnia, correct?

21        A.   Yes, Resanovci is a village in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

22        Q.   Now, in your direct examination at page 12375 to 12376, you spoke

23     about the importance of the war diary at lines 20 to 25.  It says:

24             "It includes all the information that is considered important in

25     order to understand the development of the operations, as well as the

Page 12828

 1     orders that have been given, degree of implementation, as well as minutes

 2     of - or records, I apologise - records of meetings that are held at the

 3     command post."

 4             At page 12376 you said at lines 10 to 14 when discussing these

 5     meetings, you said:

 6             "Then the members of the subordinate units or other attendees

 7     will provide their views on operations they have conducted, proposals

 8     they may have for future operations, problems they have encountered, and

 9     all other issues that are considered relevant in the context of this

10     command meeting."

11             Now, Mr. Theunens, after that entry about Otric on the 18th, and

12     the 134th, and the military police setting up a check-point, in the

13     operational diary of the Split Military District, there are no further

14     entries about any reports of burning, or looting problems on the

15     territory of the Republic of Croatia, correct?

16        A.   I would have to look again at the diary.  I don't know the diary

17     by heart.  Even if -- even if you're right, on the same page we see it in

18     front of us, the assistant commander for political activities at the end

19     of the page states:  "Burning down of houses is a huge problem."  He

20     doesn't specify whether it is in Croatia or Bosnia-Herzegovina.

21             From my point of view, there is no distinction, whether it is --

22     it -- it's not the area where these -- these crimes are being committed

23     that is important.  It is important that the commander knows that

24     subordinate units of his on -- still on the 18th, whereas we know from

25     the diary that similar crimes are already perpetrated in Grahovo and

Page 12829

 1     Glamoc around the 28th July, that three or four weeks the same activities

 2     are still being done by units that are subordinated to him, and that is

 3     the key issue in my view for the commander.

 4        Q.   That may be your view, but I may have a different view later, so

 5     let me ask you again:

 6             When you were reviewing these materials, is it correct to is say,

 7     and if you need time during the break, that's fine, that in the Split

 8     Military District operational diary after the 18th of August, there's no

 9     reference to burning and looting taking place on the territory of the

10     Republic of Croatia after the 18th of August?

11        A.   If I'm allowed so, I will check it during the break.

12        Q.   Okay.  The same question, then, with respect to reports from the

13     political affairs department.  There are no additional reports from

14     political affairs after the 18th of August about burning and looting

15     taking place on the territory of the Republic of Croatia that go to

16     General Gotovina.

17        A.   On English page 342, second part of the report, I have a

18     reference to looting and arson in the municipalities of Glamoc and

19     Grahovo which is indeed in Bosnia-Herzegovina, so it is not Croatia, but

20     it is still units of the Split Military District.

21        Q.   Well, let me before you -- let me get there first.

22             Is it units of the Split Military District or units of the HVO?

23        A.   I should be more precise.  It is units of OG North, whereby

24     OG North is subordinated to General Gotovina.  So it is indeed, it is not

25     just Split Military District, but are also units of the HVO included.

Page 12830

 1        Q.   You say it is included, but does it specify whether the people

 2     doing the burning are members of the HVO or members of the HV?

 3        A.   We would have to look at the document, and that is 65 ter 3461.

 4     But in any event, what I included of that document in my report is also

 5     the following quotation that is that:

 6             "During the command briefing at the OG North forward command

 7     post, the detrimental effect of such behaviour for the 'Croatian people

 8     and the promotion of our state in the world' is emphasised."

 9             So even if it is in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the person who mentions

10     this information at the command briefing has the impression that these

11     activities are detrimental to the Republic of Croatia.

12        Q.   Well, let's clarify this further.  The report you're citing is,

13     first of all, not from a meeting of the Split Military District and does

14     not concern burning on the territory of the Republic of Croatia, right?

15        A.   It is a report from the SIS operative team at OG North.

16        Q.   Of the HVO, right?

17        A.   It is it OG North, which is operating as a force under the

18     command of General Gotovina, and OG North is the -- I just have to look

19     at the date.

20             OG North used to be known as OG Vrba, but on 18 August there has

21     been an order by General Gotovina to rename the OGs.  And that document

22     is 65 ter 3361.

23        Q.   Okay.  But the SIS group there, that report is sent to Mostar,

24     right?

25        A.   That may well be possible.  But as I pointed out later --

Page 12831

 1     earlier, the commander should not be waiting for a SIS report to arrive

 2     on his desk in order to know what his forces are doing in his zone of

 3     responsibility.

 4        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Theunens, let me just see if can I cut to the chase

 5     here.

 6             Do you agree with me that this is not a report of burning and

 7     looting on the territory of the Republic of Croatia?

 8        A.   I agree with you.

 9        Q.   Okay.  Now, let's go back to my original question, which was:  I

10     take it from the fact that you pointed to this document, that you can't

11     point to any political affairs or SIS report which says that there is

12     burning and looting taking place on the territory of the Republic of

13     Croatia by HV after the 18th of August, correct?

14        A.   I would like to -- to look at my report during the break before I

15     give an answer to that question.  If I'm allowed to do so.

16        Q.   That's fine.

17             Mr. Theunens, let me show you Exhibit P20.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Please, Mr. Registrar.

19        Q.   I'm going to show you a witness statement that has been admitted

20     into evidence by Mr. Edward Flynn.

21             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could go to page 21 in the English,

22     please.

23        Q.   Now if we go to lines 17 to 24.  He says in his statement -- and

24     Mr. Flynn was the head of the human rights action team in Sector South

25     after Operation Storm.  And he says:

Page 12832

 1              "Considering the total number of houses that were destroyed by

 2     fire during the three weeks following 7th of August, it's, of course,

 3     very difficult to say, but in almost every village we visited, or, let's

 4     say in many villages we visited, that would be more accurate, at least

 5     half the buildings had been burned and the numbers easily and quickly

 6     exceeded 100 and 200.  So I have no doubt that at least 500 structures

 7     must have been burned down during those few weeks.  But when I think of

 8     the size of Sector South, it would seem to me that it -- may have been

 9     more than that, but I would feel very comfortable in saying at least 500

10     structures were burned."

11             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could go to the next page, Mr. Registrar.

12        Q.   Lines 29 to 30, he says:

13             "When I mentioned that estimate of 500 houses destroyed, I'm

14     referring to houses that were destroyed in the couple of weeks or two or

15     three weeks after Operation Storm."

16             MR. MISETIC:  And if we could go to the next page, Mr. Registrar.

17        Q.   Lines 5 to 8 he says:

18             "In the following period of two or three weeks, beginning around

19     the 20th of August, the frequency of burning buildings was reduced, but

20     we were still struck by the fact that every day more buildings were seen

21     to be on fire, and it seemed that some other areas were being targeted

22     that had not been targeted earlier."

23             Now, Mr. Flynn, just for the record, also testified in this case,

24     at trial transcript 1314, lines 9 to 17, in similar terms.

25             MR. MISETIC:  If we go ... Mr. Registrar, if I could please have

Page 12833

 1     65 ter 5658, please.

 2        Q.   Now this is a report that's sent to Josko Moric from the chief of

 3     the Split-Dalmatia police administration, Ivo Cipci.  This is a report

 4     dated 24 August 1995.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  And if we go to page 2, please.

 6        Q.   He writes at point 2:

 7             "From receipt of your previous telegram (18 August 1995) no cases

 8     of burning and destruction of houses in the aforementioned area were

 9     recorded."

10             Then he talks about thefts, some of the perpetrators in three

11     cases were HV members, were turned over to the military police.  Six

12     cases of the goods were confiscated, and criminal report was submitted

13     against the perpetrators.

14             Now, we're going to talk, Mr. Theunens, about Bosnia, but you

15     reach a conclusion in your report, and by the way, I noted that having

16     reviewed the first draft that you submitted to OTP in March of 2007, you

17     did not include a conclusion or an opinion that the number and frequency

18     of General Gotovina's orders indicated that the orders were not

19     effective.

20             And then -- one moment.

21             THE WITNESS:  Can I answer to that or ...

22             MR. MISETIC:

23        Q.   I'll pose a question.  I will allow you to answer the question.

24     Just let me complete the question, if you would.

25             I'll show you a portion of -- via Sanction a portion of the

Page 12834

 1     pre-trial brief that was filed by the Prosecution after you submitted

 2     your initial report.

 3             There is paragraph --

 4             MR. WAESPI:  Just for the sake of clarity, there was no

 5     submission of the official report.  As we all know it was a first draft

 6     was sent to the -- to Mr. Tieger.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  He submitted a draft so ...

 8        Q.   At 62, then, the Prosecution filed its pre-trial brief on the

 9     17th of March, 2007, which had a conclusion at paragraph 62 that

10     General Gotovina issued a number of orders between 4 August and 18 August

11     "... that criminal activities cease and that disciplinary measures be

12     taken, yet he failed to implement these orders to reign in the widespread

13     lawful acts of his subordinate."

14             Then the General Gotovina Defence filed a defence brief that

15     commented on that.  I noted in your April draft of the 2007 is the first

16     time then that you include a conclusion that the number and frequency of

17     the orders indicated that they lacked effectiveness.

18             Did that conclusion -- was that impacted by the Prosecution's

19     pre-trial brief and the Defence position -- I know you at least read the

20     Defence brief.  Did you conclude that conclusion because you had seen

21     argument about it in the pre-trial briefs?

22        A.   No, Mr. President.

23        Q.   Okay.

24        A.   And if you wanted, can I elaborate.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  I leave it to Mr. Misetic whether he seeks any

Page 12835

 1     further elaboration.

 2             MR. MISETIC:

 3        Q.   Mr. Theunens, my question to you is this, and can you look at

 4     that time during the break, but you reached this conclusion that the

 5     number of orders indicates that they lack effectiveness, and you base

 6     that on the fact that he issued additional orders on the same subject.

 7             However, if after -- if on the 18th of August orders are issued,

 8     and after the 18th of August, there are no additional reports to

 9     General Gotovina or the Split Military District Command about burning and

10     looting in the territory, and there are no orders from General Gotovina

11     regarding burning and looting and discipline in the liberated territory,

12     isn't it the case, then, then all those orders together culminating on

13     the 18th of August were effective, if I were to follow the logic that you

14     used in concluding that they were ineffective?

15        A.   No.  Because From the review did - and I can point you to these

16     documents - there are still orders being issued after the 18

17     August and --

18        Q.   [Overlapping speakers] ...

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Let him finish his answer.

20             THE WITNESS:  While reviewing that material, I did not make a

21     specific distinction as to whether these orders applied to

22     Bosnia-Herzegovina or Croatia.  From the point of view, from my point of

23     view, the fact that these orders were issued by units, be it Operational

24     Groups or their subordinate units, subordinated to General Gotovina

25     independently or whether they were majority HV or HVO, the fact that

Page 12836

 1     these orders continued to be issued, as well as there continued to be

 2     reports, maybe not in Croatia but at least in other areas where these

 3     units were active, to me showed or indicated that indeed these orders

 4     lacked effectiveness.

 5             Just to finalise, in relation to the 134th Brigade we have --

 6     Home Guard Regiment, 134th Home Guard Regiment we have been discussing at

 7     length, General Gotovina knew at the latest on the 6th of August that

 8     there were problems with the 134th Home Guard Regiment in Benkovac.  So

 9     the fact that this unit around the 18th August again, based on the report

10     we discussed, is involved in activities like burning and looting, in my

11     view, shows that there is a problem.

12             MR. MISETIC:

13        Q.   Mr. Theunens, you used the word "problems," but you used that

14     very vaguely when you say "problems in Benkovac."  Tell me specifically

15     what Mr. Grncaric reported as the problems in Benkovac?

16        A.   The situation in Benkovac is discussed on -- starting on page

17     325.  I will just take maybe 65 ter 2471 which is discussed on English

18     page 328.  I don't know whether you want me to read out what Grncaric

19     reported to Major Juric, but I think -- I will focus on the

20     paragraph which shows also the involvement of the operational commander

21     in the area.  I'm starting on:

22             "On that occasion --" that occasion is the meeting with the

23     operation group commander Colonel Mladen Fuzul.

24             "On that occasion I pointed out the real causes of the situation

25     which, at one point, developed into a state of anarchy.  Namely, since

Page 12837

 1     this was a unit whose members were mostly from this area, most of them

 2     stayed in town drinking the entire night.  Law and order were violated

 3     and various crimes were committed, after which the OG commander issued a

 4     strict order forbidding all HV members from entering the town of

 5     Benkovac.  He - and in my understanding that the OG Commander Fuzul,

 6     Colonel Fuzul - also summonsed the leadership of Benkovac municipality

 7     and the chief of the PU, police administration, to point out the

 8     omissions of both sides.  At the meeting we - and I understand by that -

 9     Colonel Fuzul - the military police, and civilian police agreed on how to

10     eradicate such incidents and established, i.e., I proposed measures."

11             That is just one example of several reports on the situation in

12     Benkovac, situation that develops upon the arrival of elements the HV

13     operating under the command of General Gotovina in Benkovac between the

14     6th and the 8th of August.

15        Q.   So they were drinking?

16        A.   If you want to have more information, I can also point you to --

17        Q.   Mr. Theunens, I mean, you're comparing, there is no report in

18     there about the unit went in there and burned down Benkovac, right?

19        A.   No.  But if the an officer of the military police states that the

20     real cause of the situation which at one point developed into a state of

21     anarchy, I assume he is referring to more than a few individuals having a

22     beer or two.

23        Q.   It is you're assumption the is what we're talking about?

24        A.   I call it assumption or conclusion.

25        Q.   Okay.  I'll call it an assumption.  Thank you.

Page 12838

 1             Now, let's get back to how we veered off on this topic, which is

 2     again fundamentally you and I agree is that your report made no effort to

 3     distinguish between HVO and HV, and I'm glad we agree on that.

 4             HVO --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  If you do.  If do you not, please tell us.

 6             THE WITNESS:  I think it should be rather more precisely.  I

 7     didn't make a distinction between the forces that were subordinated to

 8     General Gotovina at that moment in time.

 9             MR. MISETIC:

10        Q.   You cited a document now, a 65 ter.  Before we move on I do want

11     to --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

13             MR. WAESPI:  I think it was 65 ter 5658 which is still open, and

14     I would have no objections.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Actually he said 65 ter 2741.

16             THE WITNESS:  I can check the number.  I don't know whether it

17     helps to give you the ERN?

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, not for the Chamber.

19             MR. MISETIC:  That's okay.  Okay.  I will move on.  There is some

20     confusion on my part here.

21             THE WITNESS:  It is footnote 1325 in the second part of the

22     report, and I will check whether have I the right 65 ter.

23             MR. MISETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  It's actually a

24     different document that I will be referring to later on.

25        Q.   Getting back to this issue of -- you now acknowledge you didn't

Page 12839

 1     make a distinction between the forces that were subordinated to

 2     General Gotovina at that moment in time.

 3             Would you agree with me that the HVO was subordinated to

 4     General Gotovina, but was, in fact, a military that was part of a

 5     different country without getting into the legalities now of how we would

 6     argue this, but it was subordinated to General Gotovina pursuant to an

 7     agreement between President Izetbegovic and President Tudjman, correct?

 8        A.   The forces that were included in OG North were subordinated to

 9     General Gotovina based on, yeah, probably agreement or an order.  I'm not

10     sure -- you mean, I can make a leap to the Split agreement, but I assume

11     there would be more specific agreement even though I haven't seen them.

12     But I understand that what pointing at with the agreement between

13     Mr. Izetbegovic and Tudjman, i.e., the Split agreement of 22nd July 1995.

14        Q.   Let me ask you this question hypothetically:  In NATO, the forces

15     of one country could be operationally subordinated to the commander of a

16     different country, correct?

17        A.   That is correct.  And there would be particular subordination.

18     Relationships will be established for that.

19        Q.   Correct.  Now the operational commander from that other country

20     doesn't typically discipline the forces of the army of the other country

21     that is subordinated to him, correct?

22        A.   That is correct.  But I think it is important in that context to

23     make a distinction between the subordination relationships that exist in

24     NATO and those that exist been the HV and the HVO at that time.

25        Q.   Let's make those distinctions.  Is it your position that the Code

Page 12840

 1     of Military Discipline of the HV gave commanders the powers to discipline

 2     members of the HVO?

 3        A.   Starting with the basics, I believe -- I consider Article 26 of

 4     the Code of Discipline very relevant in that context.

 5        Q.   Mr. Theunens, please.  Is the HVO part of the HV in the Code of

 6     Military Discipline?

 7        A.   It is not.

 8        Q.   Okay.  Then Article 26 does not apply to forces that are not part

 9     -- that are not the HV, does it?

10             Let me put it a different way.  If the United States army

11     subordinated itself to General Gotovina in Bosnia in the fall of 1995,

12     General Gotovina couldn't say, Well, under Article 26 of my Code of

13     Military Discipline, I can discipline members of the US army, could he?

14        A.   No.  But I think -- I mean you cannot compare the relationship

15     between the HV and the HVO, which did not, by the way date from the Split

16     agreement but dated from such earlier, with a kind of hypothetical

17     scenario where US forces would be subordinated to the HV in

18     Bosnia-Herzegovina.

19             And in that context we have discussed documents like, for

20     example, D656 where General Gotovina appoints an HVO officer as the

21     commander of the town of Drvar in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It is hard to

22     image that General Gotovina has no authority over the HVO, whereas at the

23     same time he is issuing very strict orders as to how order and discipline

24     has to be maintained in areas where the HVO is operating under his

25     command.

Page 12841

 1             We also have the order for the -- the curfew in Jajce.

 2        Q.   Mr. Theunens, cite me one disciplinary measure taken by

 3     General Gotovina against a member of the HVO, and I mean disciplinary

 4     measures defined by the Code of Military Discipline or disciplinary

 5     sentences.  Let me talk about minor and major violations, both.  Give me

 6     one.

 7        A.   There is obviously a distinction between --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Theunens, would you please first answer the

 9     question whether you are able to give such an example.  If you wanted to

10     add anything to that, we will hear from you after the direct answer to

11     the question.

12             THE WITNESS:  I have no example on the imposition of disciplinary

13     measures by General Gotovina against members of the HVO.

14             MR. MISETIC:

15        Q.   Do you have an example of any HV officer issuing a disciplinary

16     measure pursuant to the HV Code of Military Discipline against a member

17     of the HVO?

18        A.   I would to have check, but I don't think so.

19        Q.   Did you see in the monthly or quarterly reports prepared by the

20     Split Military District or any other Military District, when they break

21     it down according to unit in terms of measures taken, that the HVO was

22     included for reporting purposes in reports of disciplinary measures that

23     were being taken?

24        A.   No.  I haven't seen such reports.

25        Q.   Is there any document that you can cite me to, putting aside your

Page 12842

 1     military experience, education, et cetera, any document that you can

 2     point me to, to support your conclusion that General Gotovina could issue

 3     disciplinary measures and/or sentences against members of the HVO?

 4        A.   Well, if General Gotovina can issue an order to appoint a town

 5     commander with clearly defined responsibilities in the area of discipline

 6     and military justice or the prevention of crimes for the town of Drvar

 7     and that is D656, and if he can decree or impose a military curfew in the

 8     town of Jajce in Bosnia-Herzegovina, if he has no powers to enforce these

 9     orders or at least there are people who violate that order, to have the

10     procedures started, i.e., send reports to the appropriate authorities in

11     the HVO, these orders do not make much sense.

12             So I agree with you that it was most likely again from the

13     material that I reviewed, it is not -- General Gotovina did not impose

14     the disciplinary sentences -- measures or sentences to members of the

15     HVO, but at least he was in a position to discover violations and report

16     them to the appropriate authorities in the HVO.  And that applies also to

17     the subordinate officers, I mean commanding officers of General Gotovina.

18        Q.   Well, Mr. Theunens, your report cites the fact that it's the SIS

19     HVO the SIS -- I mean the HVO military police, et cetera, that is, in

20     fact, reporting these measures to Mostar, right?  You wouldn't know about

21     there stuff if it wasn't being reported.

22        A.   That is not entirely correct because the orders -- I mean the two

23     orders I referred to by General Gotovina, the town commander and the

24     curfew, General Gotovina would not issue such orders if he didn't see a

25     requirement to do so.

Page 12843

 1        Q.   Yes.  But let's talk about this right now.

 2             Are -- do you understand the difference in General Gotovina's

 3     role as an occupation commander in Bosnia and as a commander in his home

 4     country who turned over matters to the civilian government on the 6th of

 5     August, 1995?  Do you as a military expert acknowledge a difference -- a

 6     different obligation that a commander would have when he is occupying

 7     territory and when he is a -- in effect, in peacetime in his home

 8     territory?

 9        A.   Such a distinction may be relevant for maybe legal discussions as

10     to whether what was the authority of General Gotovina in

11     Bosnia-Herzegovina, as pointed you out a different country or not, but

12     from the point of view of enforcement of military discipline, in my view,

13     there is no drinks between the two areas.

14        Q.   Well, it is it not just -- it's not just a distinction for legal

15     discussion.  You, at page 314, subparagraph S, you reach the following

16     conclusion.  You say:

17             "Based on the documents reviewed for the preparation of this

18     report, it appears that only in after the launching of

19     Operation Maestral, Colonel General Ante Gotovina takes more vigorous

20     action to prevent or punish crimes.  On 17 September 1995, Gotovina

21     appoints a military town commander in Drvar, BiH, to protect the town

22     from looting and destruction as the area is designated for the settling

23     of displaced Croats.  On 22 September 1995, General Gotovina imposes a

24     military curfew in Jajce and so on."

25             That is it your opinion in your conclusion.  Isn't it essential

Page 12844

 1     in reaching that conclusion that you first understand the authority of a

 2     commander as an occupying commander versus the authority of a commander

 3     where constitutional law has been restored in his area in his home

 4     country?

 5        A.   I have answered the question.  I do not see a reason to make a

 6     distinction when we are referring to the imposition or the enforcement of

 7     military discipline among subordinate forces.

 8        Q.   So it's your view when you say that paragraph that only in active

 9     and launching of Operation Maestral does he take more vigorous action.

10     That it is your conclusion, for example, that on the 10th of August he

11     could have imposed a town commander to control Benkovac, let's say?

12        A.   Well, Your Honours, from what I read out of -- what I considered

13     65 ter 2714, in any event, English page 328, part 2 of my report, we can

14     see there that the operational commander, General Fuzul, he calls the

15     civilian authorities to him.

16        Q.   On what day?

17        A.   This is the 6th or the 7th August, because the report by Grncaric

18     is dated 8th of August.

19             And there we see that the operational commander, based on the

20     report of Grncaric, called the military police commander the chief of the

21     civilian police or the representative of the civilian police, as well as

22     -- it is described as the leadership of the Benkovac municipality.  In my

23     view, those are the civilian authorities.  And based again on the report

24     of Grncaric, the operational commander tries to coordinate the whole

25     matter and tries to solve the situation.  He seems to take -- he is

Page 12845

 1     taking the lead in this area at that moment in time.

 2        Q.   Okay.  And again my question is:  So it's your position as of the

 3     10th of August onward, General Gotovina could name a town commander to

 4     control Benkovac like did he in Drvar in late September 1995?

 5        A.   I -- I am not stating that he could, for example, impose a town

 6     commander.  It is obvious that there should have been for such a decision

 7     there needs to be coordination with the civilian authorities.

 8        Q.   No, no, no.  Let me stop you there.

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  Please make pauses between the questions and

10     answers.  It is becoming impossible for the interpreters.  Thank you.

11             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.  I apologise to the interpreters and to the

12     court reporter.

13        Q.   The point is this:  Would you agree with me that if

14     General Gotovina after the proclamation that the constitution order had

15     been restored in Croatia on the 7th of August, after that point in time,

16     if General Gotovina imposes a town commander or a military curfew on the

17     territory of the Split Military District, without permission from the

18     civilian government and or President Tudjman, he has executed effectively

19     a coup d'etat?

20        A.   Obviously the way how you word it now it is it clear that the --

21     that would not be regular.

22             What I was trying to explain before the interruption was that the

23     military structures based on the documents I have seen, i.e., the forces

24     under command of General Gotovina, are best organised structures in the

25     area at that moment in time that.  That is one aspect.

Page 12846

 1             The second aspect is it there are problems with the enforcement

 2     of law and order.  Now, one would expect that the military commander,

 3     i.e., General Gotovina, based on his own observations as well the

 4     reporting he has received from subordinate commanders SIS political

 5     affairs and the military police would inform his superior, that, well,

 6     maybe it is it too early to hand over power to the civilian authorities,

 7     or maybe we should establish mechanisms in order to provide assistance to

 8     the civilian police and the civilian authorities in order maintain or

 9     restore law and order in this area.

10        Q.   So your suggestion that General Gotovina should suggest to his

11     superiors the suspension of constitutional law and the imposition of

12     military law in the area.  That's what he failed to do.

13        A.   I think -- I'm sorry for the transcript.

14             That is not what I was proposing or what I was stating.  How --

15     General Gotovina can inform his superiors about the problems he has.  I

16     would expect that as a military commander, he wants to have the largest

17     degree as possible over his forces and over his zone of responsibility,

18     because as we see from the documents, the fighting is not over on the

19     10th of August.  And that then based on the -- on the constitution and

20     the -- and the legislation of the Republic of Croatia, a solution is

21     developed involving the civilian authorities at the highest level as well

22     as military authorities in order to allow the commander on the ground to

23     indeed control the situation in his zone of responsibility.

24             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I don't know if now is a time for a

25     break.

Page 12847

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  It's a suitable time for the break.

 2             We will have a break and resume at quarter past 4.00.

 3                           --- Recess taken at 3.51 p.m.

 4                           --- On resuming at 4.21 p.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.

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

 7        Q.   Mr. Theunens, during the break were you able to find any

 8     reference in the -- operational diary to burning and looting by HV on the

 9     territory of the Republic of Croatia after the 18th of August?

10        A.   No, not -- not in the operational diary.

11        Q.   Before we get into -- back to the topic of the HVO, let me show

12     you one additional document.

13             MR. MISETIC:  And, Mr. President, I forgot to tender into

14     evidence 65 ter 5658, if I could do that now.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

16             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D989.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  D989 is admitted into evidence.

20             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, if I could have 65 ter 4609, please.

21        Q.   This is a report sent by the Split Military District to the

22     Main Staff on the 29th of August.  And it is a report of a survey of

23     military infrastructure facilities that are being -- in addition to

24     facilities, it talks about those being guarded by HV.  For example, if we

25     go to page 4, there's a subsection, facilities that the HV used and

Page 12848

 1     guarded before the Storm operation and is still using and guarding it.

 2             Go two pages in.

 3             Now, this is a report by General Gotovina, and in it he says, he

 4     is talking about transferring authorities of these to the civilian

 5     authorities and he says:

 6             "In the case of 31 facilities that are on our list, it is

 7     necessary, according to our statements to assign around 900 people to

 8     carry out guard duties.

 9             Engagement of the Split Military District units at the front line

10     from Martin Brod to M. Ticevo and the execution of the demobilization

11     order will make guarding of so many important military facilities even

12     more complicated.

13             In our opinion it is very important to solve the question of

14     future needs of the Split MD ZP units, and in accordance with that, solve

15     the question of allotment of facilities and question of their guarding

16     and maintenance."

17             Now, would you agree with me that the demobilization -- Let me

18     rephrase that.

19             General Gotovina points to the fact that he still has a front

20     line in Bosnia that he is maintaining, Martin Brod to Ticevo, and he is

21     guarding facilities, military facilities, and he says the execution of

22     the demobilization order will make guarding of these facilities even more

23     complicated.  Would you agree with me that the demobilization that was in

24     progress at that time imposed certain hardships on the Split Military

25     District Command given its ongoing responsibilities for combat in Bosnia,

Page 12849

 1     which was about to take place and its guarding of facilities in Croatia?

 2        A.   That is what the document says.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I ask that the exhibit be marked,

 4     and I tender it into evidence.

 5             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit number D990.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Exhibit number D990 is admitted into evidence.

 9             MR. MISETIC:

10        Q.   Now, some of the documents you looked at, Mr. Theunens,

11     particularly in the fall of 1995, have in the heading section as to who

12     is issuing the reports or orders, it says "Croatian forces" instead of

13     Split MD command.  Are you familiar with some of those documents?

14        A.   If I want to discuss them, I assume that will you show them, but

15     I have no particular recollection of these documents.

16        Q.   Well, do you -- are you familiar with the fact that

17     General Gotovina was using the title Commander of Croatian Forces in the

18     fall of 1995?

19        A.   I would have to see the specific documents again.  It is probably

20     the case, but it is helpful if you're going to discuss a specific

21     document that we can see it.

22        Q.   Okay.  Let me show you one.

23        A.   Because I mean, the one where he appoints --

24        Q.   Let me show you one document, 65 ter 5545, please.

25        A.   Yeah.  Just for the sake of completeness, D656 where he appoints

Page 12850

 1     the town commander in Drvar used the heading "Split Military District

 2     Command, Vrba Forward Command Post."  There's a similar one --

 3        Q.   Let look at the one on the screen.

 4        A.   Okay.  Yeah.

 5        Q.   The upper left-hand corner says:  "The Croatian Forces."  In

 6     Croatian, "Hrvatske Snage."

 7        A.   That's correct, yes.

 8        Q.   That is an operational formation; isn't it?

 9        A.   Yeah.  The author of the document must have had reason to use

10     Croatian forces.  It would indicate that -- and I don't want to go too

11     far in drawing the wrong conclusion, but it would indicate that there is

12     no distinction made between HV and HVO.  I mean, on the face of this

13     document.

14        Q.   Well, would it indicate that there's a coalition force between

15     the HV and the HVO, which the coalition is being referred to as Croatian

16     forces?

17        A.   That is possible.  Whereby, at least from the military point of

18     view, the expression coalition should be defined.

19        Q.   What is a coalition force?

20        A.   As long as I have not seen a document defining what the coalition

21     means, i.e., who is the commander, what is his authority, what are the

22     composing elements, then it is impossible for me to draw a conclusion by

23     what is meant by a coalition force.

24        Q.   Well, if you haven't seen a document defining what the coalition

25     means, who is the commander, what is his authority, what are the

Page 12851

 1     composing elements, with respect to the HV and HVO, then what were you

 2     able to draw the conclusion -- upon what were you aware you drawing the

 3     conclusion that General Gotovina could issue disciplinary measures to the

 4     HVO?

 5        A.   First of all, I have not used the expression "coalition" in my

 6     report.   I didn't specifically use the expression "Croatian forces."

 7             Secondly, the fact -- and I apologise for repeating myself, but

 8     the fact that General Gotovina issues an order to appoint a town

 9     commander in Drvar, and he does that under the heading "Split Military

10     District Command Vrba Forward Command Post," that's D656, there's also

11     the order for the transfer of a platoon of the 72nd Military Police

12     Battalion to Drvar on the 17th of September.

13        Q.   Mr. Theunens.

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   I'd like to get to ...

16        A.   But to answer the question, if General Gotovina issues all these

17     orders, it means he has the authority to do so, otherwise it would have

18     stopped after the first order and he would not issue such orders anymore.

19        Q.   Yeah, but --

20        A.   An order needs to result in certain effects.  It is not -- yeah.

21        Q.   But if, again let's go hypothetical.  If the US army imposes

22     military law on a city in Iraq, does that mean that they have

23     disciplinary authority over British forces in Iraq?

24        A.   I think I understand the question, even though I would like to

25     have it clarified because I would first need to know what is the relation

Page 12852

 1     between the British forces and the US forces in the city where the US

 2     army imposes military law.

 3        Q.   Well --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, you asked the witness whether he was

 5     familiar with the fact that General Gotovina was using the title

 6     Commander of Croatian Forces.  This -- then later on, the coalition

 7     forces were introduced as a term.

 8             Now, the only thing I really heard the witness say until now is

 9     that he doesn't have the details of forces that may have been under a

10     Joint Command or not.  Let's try to find out not on the basis of

11     hypothetical matters, but please put the question to Mr. Theunens which

12     brings us --

13             MR. MISETIC:  I will, Your Honour, but his answer it precisely

14     where I would like to get to.  Because I would like to know -- when

15     talking about different forces, you say, Well, I need to know -- just the

16     fact that one country's forces are controlling a town, you can't tell

17     what the relationship is with the other country's force because you say,

18     first you would first need to know what is the relation between the

19     British forces and US forces in the city where the US army imposes

20     military law.

21             So now going back to the HV/HVO, you keep going back to Drvar and

22     Jajce.  Let me ask you, using your own methodology, first let's look at

23     what is the relationship and the agreement between the HV and the HVO.

24        A.   Well, as I explain -- I'm sorry.  Do you mean the relation during

25     Operation Maestral?

Page 12853

 1        Q.   I mean from the Split Agreement until the Dayton Agreement.

 2        A.   I mean, I will start with Maestral, but if you want we can go

 3     page by page from the relevant sections in my report, but from Maestral,

 4     as it --

 5        Q.   No, no, no.  I gave you the time-frame because I don't think

 6     there is any difference between Maestral, Storm, summer 1995,

 7     Southern Sweep, the starting point that I'm giving you is from the Split

 8     agreement on the 23rd of July, 1995, until the Dayton Agreement, what is

 9     the relationship, and using your phrase again, you need -- you first need

10     to know what is the relation between the forces.  So what is the relation

11     between the HV and the HVO between the time-period I just gave you?

12        A.   Your Honour, I will start with Operation Maestral where --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Theunens, a specific question is put to you,

14     starting 23rd July 1995, whether that is -- whatever operation that is.

15     But you could tell us perhaps whether that date is in the course of what

16     operation so that we would then know.

17             THE WITNESS:  Your Honours, the 22nd of July refers to the

18     conclusion of the Split agreement between President Izetbegovic,

19     President Tudjman, and the president of the so-called Croatian Republic

20     of Herceg-Bosna, and this agreement among other things allows for the

21     presence of Croatian forces, i.e., HV forces of the Republic or Croatia

22     on the territory of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and also for the

23     Bosniak authorities to ask Croatia for military assistance.  I'm

24     summarizing the agreement.

25             Two days later Operation Ljeto is launched under the command of

Page 12854

 1     General Gotovina, whereby General Gotovina is in command of forces

 2     belonging to the HV, i.e., Split Military District, including 7th Guards

 3     Brigade and the 1st Croatian Guard, as well as forces of the HVO, and all

 4     these forces operate under the command of General Gotovina.

 5             During Operation Storm, elements of the HVO continued to

 6     participate in the operations on the -- call it the HV side, under the

 7     command of General Gotovina, and we see the same situation during

 8     Operation Maestral, as well as Juzni Potez in October 1995.  Maestral was

 9     in September 1995.

10             MR. MISETIC:

11        Q.   Thank you.  Now in all those operations, what is the -- again

12     going back to your question, what is the nature of the relationship

13     between the HV and the HVO?

14        A.   The forces of the HVO that are participating in these operations

15     are subordinated to General Gotovina.

16        Q.   Yes.  But again I'm talking it -- trying to ask you the question,

17     because you have raised the issue of what is the definition of coalition.

18     Because you said you didn't see how it was defined, et cetera.  What is

19     -- when you subordinated to General Gotovina, you mean operationally

20     subordinated, correct?

21        A.   Your Honours, in the beginning of my testimony, I explained that,

22     for example, in NATO there are specific subordination relations --

23     relationships that are applied in different situations.  Without going

24     into detail, one of these concept is the concept of the combined joint

25     task force, whereby, for example, in the case of KFOR, there is an

Page 12855

 1     American or an Italian or a German Force Commander, whereby for each and

 2     every troop-contributing nation there are agreements established as to

 3     what the authority is over the Force Commander over these national forces

 4     that are part of the combined joint task force.

 5             In general, countries do not give -- hand over disciplinary

 6     authority.  However, there will be a force provost marshall, i.e., a

 7     force, military police force, which has the authority to investigate

 8     alleged violations of discipline or even military justice committed by

 9     members of the national contingents whereby depending on the specific

10     situation, but in general, the results of the investigation will be

11     handed over to a national contingent commander who is then expected to

12     take the appropriate measures.

13             Again I'm talking about in general because these agreements, they

14     can be an encyclopedia of hundreds of pages.  I know that for the HV/HVO

15     no such specific subordination relations existed, i.e., I haven't seen

16     any document limiting the authority of General Gotovina over the HVO

17     forces that were subordinated to him during Ljeto, Storm, Maestral, and

18     Juzni Potez.

19        Q.   Interesting conclusion at the end, Mr. Theunens.  Because as you

20     were talking about NATO, the disciplinary authority of the other

21     country's commander only comes if the agreement of the first country --

22     with the agreement of the first country, right?  You don't say in NATO

23     every commander, unless there is an agreement otherwise, an operational

24     commander can discipline the troops of another country, right?

25             In other words, you are talking about in the NATO context,

Page 12856

 1     agreements on -- you say in general countries do not hand over

 2     disciplinary authority.  And then -- and then, right?  That's the first

 3     point.

 4        A.   That's in the concept of NATO.

 5        Q.   Well, hold on now.  Now, they can hand it over if they reach a

 6     specific agreement with that country to allow disciplinary authority by

 7     the other country's commander, right?

 8        A.   I must say I have not seen such an agreement and again --

 9        Q.   Well, I apologise to the court reporter --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  The issue seems to be, but correct me if I'm wrong,

11     that if there is agreement in which disciplinary powers are transferred,

12     then the situation is clear.  If there is no agreement, then you would

13     have to consider whether it is remained with the command under which

14     those forces usually operate, or whether it, as a consequence of

15     subordination, is moved to the operative command under which that unit is

16     operating.  That seems to be the issue.

17             Now, Mr. Theunens explained to us that, at least that's how I

18     understood your testimony, that you're not aware of subordination under a

19     foreign command without any specific agreement; that's clear.  Now

20     apparently Mr. Theunens says that he is not aware of any specific

21     agreement here between HVO and HV, and apparently you, Mr. Misetic, and,

22     Mr. Theunens, disagree on what the consequences of that situation are.

23     That seems to be the issue if I --

24             MR. MISETIC:  I'm not sure we disagree when it comes to what

25     happens in NATO.

Page 12857

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  No, no, but --

 2             MR. MISETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  We're not NATO.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  That's what I'm saying.  I don't understand how he

 5     got from the conclusion where he says countries reach agreements on

 6     subordination.  Countries reach agreements on these disciplinary

 7     provosts, I believe he said.

 8        A.   The Force Provost Marshall, which is the NATO slang for the -- I

 9     mean, it existed also in UNPROFOR.  There was a Force Provost Marshall.

10        Q.   Which by agreement then has the subordinated troops subject to

11     discipline of the Force Provost Marshall, right?

12        A.   They will investigate the matters, but they can -- -- excuse me,

13     they will investigate the matter, and again it -- you really have to look

14     at the specific agreement, but in general they will investigate

15     violations of discipline or justice, and then hand over the matter to

16     national authorities, whereby, of course, it is expected that the

17     national authorities, i.e., the authorities of the country to which the

18     perpetrator of the violation of military discipline or military justice

19     belongs.  That these authorities will take the appropriate measures, and

20     because, just to finalise, I know examples of UNPF, for example, that the

21     Force Commander can send members of the force home.

22        Q.   Okay.  My -- this very specific issue for me is this:  I agree

23     with you that, at least I think agree with you, that, for example, this

24     Force Provost Marshall is by agreement given the ability to investigate

25     the matter which is fine, then you go and say you haven't found any

Page 12858

 1     agreements between HV/HVO, and therefore, your conclusion is there were

 2     no agreements limiting General Gotovina's disciplinary power over the

 3     HVO, as if without agreements General Gotovina has that power, whereas in

 4     the into the context, I think you're saying absent agreement the

 5     commander of the -- the operational commander doesn't have that power.

 6             So I'm wondering why in the NATO context you -- I agree with you,

 7     say operational commanders absent agreement don't have disciplinary

 8     authority, but when you talk about General Gotovina you say he as an

 9     operational commander has that authority absent agreement otherwise.

10        A.   I mean, the answer is short.  It's a different situation.  When

11     reviewing Croatian military doctrine, I haven't seen any reference to the

12     specific command and control relations that exist within NATO armies,

13     even in the national context.

14             If I as a battalion commander of a armoured battalion receive an

15     infantry company under my command, it can be operational command,

16     tactical command, it can be under control.  That -- the arrangement that

17     is made and even if is from the same country, can have an impact on my

18     disciplinary authority.

19             As I mentioned Croatian doctrine I have not seen any such

20     restrictions.  I haven't seen it in the Code of Discipline, and when we

21     look at the practical implementation during Ljeto, Storm, Maestral, and

22     Juzni Potez, I see indeed that, for example, in his book, P482,

23     General Gotovina states -- I mean that all forces operated under the

24     commander -- under the command of the command for the Croatian forces,

25     whereby for military documents I have reviewed, well, the commander of

Page 12859

 1     all forces conducting these operations in the zone of responsibility of

 2     the Split Military District for what Storm is concerned by Ljeto,

 3     Maestral, Juzni Potez, the overall commander for these operations is

 4     General Gotovina.

 5        Q.   Again, we seem to go off an end up someplace that I'm not sure

 6     answers my question.

 7             You say you haven't seen any agreement that would subordinate the

 8     HVO for disciplinary purposes to the commander of the Split Military

 9     District.  You have already testified you see no examples of any

10     discipline ever being meted out by any HV commander to a member of the

11     HVO, right?  And yet you then talk about Croatian doctrine -- and let me

12     just put to you:  The HV commanders had no disciplinary authority over

13     members of the HVO, and you haven't found any document to support any

14     conclusion to the contrary, correct?

15        A.   No.  Because the documents I have seen, for example, to appoint a

16     town commander in Drvar to send or to order a platoon of the 72nd

17     Military Police Battalion to monitor an access road to Drvar to impose a

18     curfew in Jajce, if General Gotovina had no disciplinary authority over

19     the HVO, he would issue such an order to an HVO commander, instead of

20     issuing such an order to all the forces.  At least from the military

21     point of view.

22        Q.   I'm sorry.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me see whether I understand what keeps you

24     apart.

25             Mr. Misetic, you very much emphasise that under NATO that without

Page 12860

 1     an explicit consent or agreement, disciplinary powers would not be with

 2     the commander to which the units, which are usually are not under his

 3     command, are subordinated.  I understand Mr. Theunens's testimony, but he

 4     will certainly correct me if I'm wrong.  That a situation where no

 5     specific regulations are made for disciplinary command is as they say in

 6     latin casus non dabilis, a case which doesn't exist because there always

 7     is a specific arrangements.  Which leads to the next question,

 8     Mr. Theunens, would you be in a position if this hypothetical situation

 9     that in NATO, if there would be no specific regulation for the

10     disciplinary powers, would you be able to answer with whom the

11     disciplinary powers would be once a unit is subordinated to a -- to say a

12     foreign command?  Or is it so hypothetical that you say well --

13             THE WITNESS:  I'm not -- I'm not in a -- it is very hypothetical,

14     but military logic that would that be it would be the highest national

15     member in that multi-national force, i.e., national means members of the

16     same country as the alleged violators.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  So you say if there is no specific regulation,

18     disciplinary powers would be within the command of all units of

19     subordinated, whether.

20             MR. MISETIC:  No.

21             THE WITNESS:  No, no, excuse me, Mr. President.  What I'm saying

22     is that in the hypothetical case that is there no agreement, then of

23     course the -- the call it the multi-national commander he can discover or

24     even report a violation, but he will have to send it to the highest

25     national representative of the alleged country --

Page 12861

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  so reporting by the

 2     highest commanders, but finally to deal with the by the national

 3     commander.

 4             THE WITNESS:  Exactly.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

 6             Now we move away from NATO.  We find ourselves, as I understand,

 7     in a situation where no specific regulations exist.

 8             Mr. Misetic asks you what's the basis for your conclusions you

 9     present, that the highest command to which the -- and that's now become

10     specific, the HVO units were subordinated, what role and why that highest

11     command which you said was General Gotovina, what his role was in

12     disciplinary matters.

13             THE WITNESS:  Based on the documents I have seen, and I refer for

14     that to -- for Ljeto to the entries in the operational diary for Maestral

15     what is included in second part of my report, for example page 370,

16     General Gotovina at least has the authority to task his military police

17     to report all violations to him.  The same applies to the town commander

18     he appoints.

19             Now, I have not seen any documents indicating that

20     General Gotovina takes disciplinary measures against members of the HVO,

21     and I have not seen documents indicating that, for example, the

22     prosecutor at the military disciplinary court in Split takes or decides

23     about sentences against members of the HVO.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  And does that mean because that apparently is the

25     question when it didn't happen that there was no authority to do so, or

Page 12862

 1     do you say, I don't know, or what's -- what's your position.

 2             THE WITNESS:  Your Honours, and I'm just quoting from a document

 3     in P71 the operational diary, we see -- or we may remember the entry

 4     where it is said that shoot in the legs of all members of the -- of the

 5     armed forces who loot, I'm paraphrasing a bit, but we can find reference

 6     back.  And there's no distinction made between members of the HV or the

 7     HVO.  Now there is no Code of Discipline that says people who commit

 8     violations of military discipline or even who commit crimes should be

 9     shot in the legs.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  I do take it, but do you understand this to be

11     do everything can you do to prevent looting or further looting.

12             THE WITNESS:  Exactly, Your Honours, and there is no distinction

13     made between members of the HV or members of the HVO.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  I do understand.  But the way in which I phrased it,

15     I said:  "Do everything can you do," the issue is what can you do

16     apparently or what you are competent to do, not to say to your next door

17     neighbour, don't loot, but if he continues, what action to be taken?

18             Could I ask you one very factual question.  Are you aware of

19     disciplinary measures or disciplinary sentences imposed on HVO servicemen

20     when they were subordinated to General Gotovina, because you have already

21     told us that you have no examples of disciplinary measures or

22     disciplinary sentences imposed upon them by the HV command, by General

23     Gotovina.  Now any other command you are aware of that ever imposed

24     disciplinary measures to these HVO service members when they were

25     subordinated to General Gotovina?

Page 12863

 1             THE WITNESS:  No, Your Honours, and I will check my report again

 2     tomorrow morning, but based on the knowledge I have now, I am not aware

 3     of such cases.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  So either they never committed any disciplinary

 5     violations, or there was a vacuum or -- we'll see.  I'm asking you

 6     whether you could give us an explanation.

 7             THE WITNESS:  Yes, Your Honours, I mean -- another option would

 8     be that we don't have the document, even though maybe measures were

 9     taken.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

11             Mr. Misetic.

12        Q.   You didn't make it part of your task to review all the archives

13     of the HVO as well for this report, did you?

14        A.   No.  But I did, for example, searches like "Gotovina" as the

15     search term within 30 discipline, and then discipline with a star, for

16     example.  That is how the database functions, and it would not make a

17     distinction between the origin of the document, whether it would be HV,

18     HVO, or another document.

19        Q.   Following up where we got to this point.  The highest national

20     force commander, if we were to use that terminology, of the HVO within

21     the Croatian forces was General Blaskic, correct?

22        A.   Yes, certainly at the time of Ljeto.  I'm not sure for Maestral

23     and Juzni Potez.

24        Q.   To check on what disciplinary measures General Blaskic may have

25     taken, you would have to do a search in your database that says "Blaskic

Page 12864

 1     within 30 of discipline," right?

 2        A.   For example.  Or I could also do a search Gotovina within, for

 3     example, 30 HVO, because it may well be, and that brings us back to

 4     Article 26.  And I'm just trying to explain the practical importance of

 5     the whole issue.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me stop you here for a second.  When you ever

 7     Gotovina in your search, you miss all the disciplinary measures and

 8     sentences in which Gotovina is not involved or not within 30 words of

 9     that; isn't it?

10             THE WITNESS:  Indeed, Your Honours, of course when it comes to

11     discipline, I also used other criteria.  One of the things I was

12     interested in was disciplinary measures imposed by General Gotovina, for

13     example.  And then that search criteria would be relevant, but of course

14     in relation to the issue of discipline, I did many more searches using

15     other key words, not just restricting me to the name of Gotovina.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17             Mr. Misetic.

18             MR. MISETIC:

19        Q.   But you don't recall doing a specific subsearch for Blaskic and

20     discipline or HVO and discipline, right?

21        A.   Blaskic and discipline, I don't remember.  HVO and discipline, I

22     think I did.  I don't recall exactly whether I focussed on a specific

23     unit, but certainly in the context of Ljeto, I did so.

24             And --

25        Q.   Well, Ljeto is prior to Operation Storm.

Page 12865

 1        A.   Yes.  But from the documents I have reviewed, I have not seen any

 2     indication that there was a different command and control arrangement

 3     between the forces of the HV and the HVO that were -- that participated

 4     or that conducted these operations under the command of General Gotovina.

 5             And if you allow me, I would like to give --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  But even under the same arrangements, the facts

 7     could have been different, isn't it?  I asked you whether you searched

 8     for disciplinary measures or sentences imposed on HVO members.  Now you

 9     said I'm not aware of it.  You didn't find any of them under -- in

10     relation to Gotovina, you didn't find any of them in relation to HVO

11     commanders, which means that even if the arrangements were the same, it

12     could be that examples could be found under the same arrangement, but in

13     a different time-frame, isn't it?

14             THE WITNESS:  That is correct, and that is why the aspect of time

15     -- I would have to check again which search terms I exactly used, because

16     there are hundreds of terms and I haven't saved all of them, but it is

17     true that sometimes I imposed also time limitations because just for the

18     facility of the searches.

19             If you allow me, I would like to give a brief practical

20     explanation.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  As a matter of fact, I allow Mr. Misetic to put

22     the next question to you.

23             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you.

24        Q.   Mr. Theunens, looking at the document on the screen, you will

25     note the security situation upon the entry of the Croatian forces into

Page 12866

 1     Mrkonjic Grad.  It says:  "Not a single case of arson has been

 2     registered."

 3             I'm interested in the second paragraph.

 4             It says:  "The livestock is a huge problem.  The animals wander

 5     through the town and the neighbouring villages.  A certain number of

 6     animals are still in the stables, and they have to be collected in the

 7     coming several days, since there is a possibility that they will die."

 8             Now, in a situation where a force takes over an area where forces

 9     and people have left and livestock is left behind with no one to tend to

10     it, what should a military do in that situation concerning that

11     livestock?

12        A.   Procedures for the dealing with livestock should be included in

13     the order for attack.  For example, the logistics service -- and I will

14     phrase it, logistic service, they will have specific assets available.

15     There will also be veterinarians within the attacking force in order to

16     take care of these issues because that animals will be a huge problem as

17     they can create diseases.  That is also why, for example, killed soldiers

18     will have to be evacuated as soon as possible and buried as soon as

19     possible.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, may I interrupt you here.

21             Apparently Mr. Misetic asked you what should be done, which is a

22     matter of substance, take them away, kill them, whatever.  Your answer,

23     however, is about procedure.

24             Now, both may be relevant, but I'd like to make a clear

25     distinction between the two.  You said you should regulate it.  Where

Page 12867

 1     Mr. Misetic asked you what you a regulation or at least what action

 2     should look like.  So could we distinguish between procedure and

 3     substance.

 4             You understand what I mean?

 5             THE WITNESS:  Indeed.  Substance follows from the procedure so

 6     there should be -- I mean, the animals should be secured.  Measures

 7     should be taken to prevent them from wandering around the battlefield, so

 8     lock them up in stables or facilities where they can be kept under

 9     control.  If you're in a position to feed them, then you feed them.  If

10     you can't feed them well, you find other solutions, but you avoid that

11     they are killed at random because then corpses will stay where they have

12     been killed, and there is a risk of disease.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And this they starve at random because there is

14     no --

15             THE WITNESS:  Then you make arrangements to have them buried as

16     soon as possible in a way that prevents -- again, that diseases can

17     spread.  That is one of the problems at least in the military that dead

18     bodies that are spread on --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

20             THE WITNESS:  Okay.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  That goes without saying.

22             Mr. Misetic.

23             MR. MISETIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.  May this document be

24     marked and tendered into evidence.

25             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

Page 12868

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit D991, Your Honours.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  D991 is admitted into evidence.

 4             MR. MISETIC:

 5        Q.   Mr. Theunens, I'd like to take you to first to page 315 of your

 6     report, paragraph W.  And there you conclude:

 7             "Based on the documents that have been reviewed for the

 8     preparation of this report, Gotovina and his subordinate commanders only

 9     enforce the military discipline system when the violations or breaches or

10     crimes directly affect the combat readiness and/or operations of the

11     Split Military District or the immediate interest of Croatia, i.e.,

12     relations with UNCRO?"

13             And now I'd like to take you to page 160 of part 1 of your

14     report.

15             And there at paragraph D, in talking about the Croatian system

16     you say:

17             "Military discipline refers to the exact full and timely conduct

18     of military service."

19             And what I'd like you to explain is what is the difference

20     between General Gotovina's understanding of military discipline, which

21     you described at page 315, paragraph W, and your understanding of it, in

22     the Croatian system, which is described at page 160, paragraph D.

23        A.   The difference I see, Your Honours, is that based on the review

24     of the documents included in my report, I conclude that General Gotovina

25     has a rather narrow interpretation of the concept of military discipline,

Page 12869

 1     i.e., he sees military discipline exclusively focussed on the

 2     accomplishment of the specific combat tasks and combat operations.

 3             So, for example, if a soldier fails to present himself in time at

 4     the morning assembly, disciplinary measures maybe taken in that case.

 5             He also reacts very swiftly when there is a problem with UNCRO.

 6     Example, the incidents between the commander of the Split garrison and

 7     UNCRO members at an UNCRO check-point on the -- on the 4th of August,

 8     General Gotovina almost immediately orders to arrest the commander of the

 9     Split garrison.

10             In other cases, and I refer now to the incidents of looting and

11     burning that are reported during and after Operation Storm, the fact that

12     they continued to be reported and that at the same time orders are issued

13     at a high rate, indicates to me that there is no -- or not the same

14     willingness as there is in the -- to earlier situations I described to

15     act against violations of discipline.

16        Q.   Well, let's first get to the first part where you say it's a

17     narrow interpretation.  You say:

18             "He sees military discipline exclusively focussed on the

19     accomplishment of the specific combat tasks and combat operations."

20             First of all, if you reviewed the 1300-plus disciplinary measures

21     taken into the third quarter, you would have found that all of those

22     disciplinary measures were not related exclusively to failure in combat

23     operations, right?

24        A.   Well, can I only conclude on the material I have reviewed and

25     that starts on page 381.  For example, on page 384 I list the various

Page 12870

 1     breaches and violations of military discipline, which one can find in the

 2     reporting of the Split Military District Command.

 3        Q.   Yes.  But so from your answer, then, I take it that you didn't

 4     review what all the 1300 disciplinary measures were, right?

 5        A.   I -- I don't remember the exact number of -- what I reviewed,

 6     whether it was 1300 or less.  I believe there were less.

 7             So if you have examples, I mean, of other violations and

 8     breaches, of course, I am available to review them.

 9        Q.   Well, you're the one who is given the conclusion that he only

10     issues disciplinary measures when they're related to combat tasks.  So

11     I'm asking you, did you review all the disciplinary measures first before

12     arriving at a conclusion as to what he only imposes discipline for?

13        A.   I don't exclude that he issued disciplinary measures or had

14     disciplinary proceedings started or launched in other cases, but the

15     majority, I mean, the overwhelming majority of the measures I have seen

16     deal with matters that are almost exclusively focussed on -- combat

17     readiness and the execution of combat tasks and operations.  In a very

18     narrow sense.

19        Q.   Now you at page 160 say:  "Military discipline refers to the

20     exact full and timely conduct of military service."

21             What is the distinction between General Gotovina's -- in your

22     view, General Gotovina's interpretation and your interpretation?

23        A.   The distinction based on the reports is that General Gotovina's

24     interpretation focuses exclusively on combat aspects, i.e., that the

25     forces achieve the mission within the imposed time-frame, with a minimum

Page 12871

 1     of losses, almost -- I don't like to use the express at any cost, but

 2     from the documents I reviewed, it seems that the manner in which they

 3     accomplished the mission, as long as friendly losses are minimal and the

 4     goals or the objectives are reached within the imposed time-frame, then

 5     the mission is accomplished.  Whereas, the regulations also include

 6     elements like limitation of collateral or undesired damaged during the

 7     execution of the mission and also afterwards, i.e., military discipline

 8     also applies to the fact that armed forces should not loot or -- members

 9     of armed forces should not loot or burn or kill animals during the

10     execution of the task as well as afterwards.

11        Q.   Okay.  Well, I think we've already covered the relationship

12     between the criminal law and the disciplinary law, so I won't go back

13     into that with you now.

14             Mr. Theunens, let me ask you this:  What are a -- an occupation

15     -- occupying commander's -- well, let me take it back.

16             Generally speaking, are you familiar with what an occupation

17     commander's responsibilities are under international law in occupying

18     territory of a foreign country?

19        A.   I'm not a legal expert, so I'm not familiar with the details of

20     the international law in relation to the authority of the -- of a

21     commander or the responsibility of a commander under the occupational

22     regime.

23        Q.   Do you think that General Gotovina as an occupational commander

24     in western Bosnia in the fall of 1995, unlike yourself, would have been

25     or should have been familiar with his international obligations as an

Page 12872

 1     occupying commander?

 2        A.   Well, he should at least have been familiar with his obligations

 3     as a military commander as such.  And if the fact that he is an

 4     occupational commander in -- what you describe as a foreign country,

 5     includes additional obligations I would expect him to be also familiar

 6     with those obligations.

 7        Q.   Well, first of all, is there any dispute that Bosnia was a

 8     foreign country at that time?

 9        A.   There's no dispute about that.  But even before the signing of

10     the Split agreement, forces of the HV were operating on the territory of

11     Bosnia-Herzegovina.

12        Q.   Well, so what?  I mean, his duties as an occupational commander

13     -- well, let me -- let me ask it a different way.

14             In evaluating -- and you have evaluated General Gotovina in your

15     report in western Bosnia in 1995, do you think that if, in fact, General

16     Gotovina was issuing orders pursuant to his duties as an occupational

17     commander, it should have been incumbent upon you to learn what the

18     obligations of an occupation commander are before evaluating General

19     Gotovina's actions in western Bosnia?

20        A.   The orders I have reviewed, orders by General Gotovina, do not

21     make reference to a status that you have introduced of occupational

22     commander.

23        Q.   Well, the orders don't need to make reference to it.  Whether

24     they make reference to it or not doesn't change the fact that he is an

25     occupying commander in western Bosnia in the fall of 1995.  Is that in

Page 12873

 1     dispute?

 2        A.   I have -- I mean, the documents I have reviewed do not mention

 3     the term occupying commander or occupation commander, and I don't

 4     consider it of relevance, I mean this concept for the conclusions that I

 5     drew.

 6        Q.   Well, if you don't know what the responsibilities of an

 7     occupation commander are, do you take into consideration that that might

 8     affect how you are looking at issues like appointing a town commander for

 9     Drvar, imposing a military curfew in Jajce.  Do you think would be maybe

10     useful for you to first find out what the duties of an occupational

11     commander are?

12        A.   Your Honours, I don't think that is relevant because when we look

13     at D204 --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Theunens, what Mr. Misetic puts to you, if I

15     understand him well, is the following:  You relied several times on

16     examples of the way in which General Gotovina exercised what you say,

17     must have been his powers, because otherwise he couldn't have given that

18     orders or could not have made those appointments.

19             Now Mr. Misetic is asking you where you draw parallels from that

20     system, whether this, as you testified, rather broad concept or at least

21     broad exercise of these powers, whether the position of a commander whose

22     troops occupy foreign territory might be a clue to understanding this

23     situation, if I -- Mr. Misetic, if I understood you well.

24             MR. MISETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...

25             JUDGE ORIE:  So as to see whether the conclusions you have drawn

Page 12874

 1     from those examples to what you said would have been within his

 2     disciplinary powers of units which are subordinated to him, although not

 3     part of the regular forces he commands over, whether we have to adjust or

 4     to reconsider, or whether you would have to adjust or reconsider such

 5     conclusions, that is, I think, the relevance of what Mr. Misetic puts to.

 6     Now, although, I'm not under an obligation to explain to you the

 7     relevance.  Perhaps it's good that you are aware of my understanding of

 8     the relevance of this question is.

 9             Could you please try to answer the question, whether you have --

10     whether you have explored the duties of a commander of an occupying

11     force.

12             THE WITNESS:  I have not explored the duties of a commander of an

13     occupying force in this context.

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

15        Q.   Mr. Theunens, one moment, please.

16             Let me put this to you.  You've looked at a series of orders

17     yesterday -- Friday and today from before Storm, during Storm, and after

18     Operation Storm issued by General Gotovina, and we've established that

19     you don't know of any reports after the 18th of August going to

20     General Gotovina about a problem of burning and looting by units in the

21     Split Military District on the territory of the Republic of Croatia.

22             So let me put it to you this way:  Concerning your opinion that

23     the orders lacked effectiveness, if, in fact, as Mr. Flynn says the

24     burning peaked at the 20th of August, if, in fact, there is no evidence

25     of notice to General Gotovina or the Split Military District Command of

Page 12875

 1     reports of burning and looting after -- on the territory of the Republic

 2     of Croatia after the orders issued by the Split Military District Command

 3     on the 18th of August, and if, in fact, General Gotovina's orders

 4     particularly the order of the 10th of August, resulted in an increase of

 5     151 per cent in the number of disciplinary measures being taken in the

 6     Split Military District in the third quarter of 1995, didn't those orders

 7     have effectiveness?

 8        A.   Your Honours, I would like to draw your attention to D654, which

 9     is issued on the 31st of August.  It is by the commander of OG West, but

10     he refers to an order by General Gotovina, and the order starts:

11             "Commander of Split Military District units in their zones of

12     responsibility in newly liberated territory of the RH, Republic of

13     Croatia, shall take all necessary measures to ensure that all military

14     infrastructure facilities are placed under full supervision and

15     protection."

16             The next paragraph states:

17             "Stop all devastation regardless of what the facility's purpose

18     is (barracks, depot, training ground, residential building, and so

19     forth)."

20             The order continues then.

21             "What I'm trying to say is that the fact that on the 31st of

22     August, an order of a subordinate unit of the Split Military District

23     when referring to what is described as the liberated territory of the

24     RH shows that actually the problem or the problems that existed prior to

25     the 18th of August, at least based on the fact that on the 31st an order

Page 12876

 1     dealing with similar issues is again issued, shows that these problems

 2     still exist.  And whether they are less of them or more, that may be

 3     another matter.  But the commander of OG West, and he refers to an order

 4     of General Gotovina, considers it important to repeat to his subordinates

 5     in an order that they should not devastate buildings, whatever the

 6     building may be.

 7        Q.   Well, Mr. Theunens, let me put to you I think we saw a document

 8     before where General Gotovina was talking about handing over buildings

 9     that were under military control to the civilian authorities.  That was

10     on the 29th, I believe.  This is an order on the 31st.  You don't know,

11     or you have no information to know whether this is simply a reminder to

12     everyone as the process of the handover takes place or whether there is

13     any additional reports.  As I said in my question, you didn't find any

14     reports of any additional burnings or lootings by HV units, right?  There

15     are no reports?  Political affairs, SIS, the Split Military District

16     operational diary, right, after the 18th August?

17        A.   That is probably correct.  But orders are just not issued for

18     reminding people or just issuing them again, I mean, for the sake of

19     issuing them.  An order is only issued if one expects it to be abided by.

20     And in this case, if this is an reason, i.e., a problem which convinces

21     the commander to issue the order.  A commander who just issues orders

22     well, when he feels like it, he will see that his authority will be

23     undermined, because an order without measures to verify its

24     implementation works counter-productive

25        Q.   Let me put it a different way.  Prior to that order on the

Page 12877

 1     screen, are you familiar between the 18th August and the date of this

 2     order, which is I believe is the 31st of August, any reports of burning

 3     of military facilities on the territory of the Republic of Croatia in the

 4     Split Military District?  Do you know of any reports?

 5        A.   I answered that question before.  I said that the conclusion you

 6     draw is probably correct, but again the fact that there is no report does

 7     not necessarily mean it doesn't happen.

 8        Q.   And it doesn't necessarily mean that it did happen?

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  It is as if I'm listening to two politicians.  One

10     emphasizing how much the situation has improved due to the diligent

11     measures taken by the government, the other one stating that poverty is

12     still not over yet, and that therefore, it was a failure.

13             It is clear, and has been repeated several times that in the

14     questions we find repeatedly reference made to no reports, increased

15     number of disciplinary actions taken, et cetera, and in the answers we

16     find again was the reporting complete, et cetera.  I think the positions

17     are relatively clear.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  And a point --

20             MR. MISETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  end of my cross, and I

21     wanted to put my case to him because it is his opinion, and later on you

22     could say that I put it to their expert witness as to what our case is,

23     and now I can thank Mr. Theunens for his time.  Thank you, Mr. President

24     for allowing me the time, and I concede the floor.

25             Thank you.

Page 12878

 1             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 3             MR. KAY:  Looking at the clock, Your Honour, it is probably best

 4     to have the break now so we can rearrange the furniture.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  That would be preferable.

 6             Could I get an estimate on the basis.  I haven't asked

 7     Mr. Misetic before, and I am not in any way threatening you because I do

 8     understand that this is an important expert for you, and the Chamber has

 9     considered that it should perhaps be a bit less pushing to.

10             MR. KAY:  Yeah.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  -- could you nevertheless give us an indication.

12             MR. KAY:  I was hoping Your Honour was going answer the question

13     for me.

14             I think about a week, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Whole week.

16             MR. KAY:  Yeah, five days.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  I hardly dare to address the third Defence team.

18             Mr. Kuzmanovic I saw earlier on the transcript that I already

19     allowed you to put a next questions to the witness, but, of course, I

20     said Mr. Misetic.

21             Mr. Mikulicic.

22             MR. MIKULICIC:  Well, Your Honour it very much depends on the

23     progress of Mr. Kay.  But for this moment, I could predict a day, not

24     more.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We will consider the estimates, and we'll

Page 12879

 1     first have a break.

 2             Mr. Theunens, I do not know whether are you free for Christmas,

 3     but ...

 4             THE WITNESS:  No plans yet.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  No plans yet.

 6             We'll resume at ten minutes to 6.00.

 7                           --- Recess taken at 5.32 p.m.

 8                           --- On resuming at 5.53 p.m.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, the Chamber will closely follow how the

10     cross-examination develops, and then we'll finally see to what extent we

11     can meet your -- your needs.

12             In order to avoid whatever misunderstanding when I made the

13     reference to Christmas, it certainly was not to Orthodox Christmas.

14             Please proceed, Mr. Kay.

15             MR. KAY:  Thank you.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Theunens, you will now be cross-examined by

17     Mr. Kay, Mr. Kay is Defence counsel for Mr. Cermak.

18             THE WITNESS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

19                           Cross-examination by Mr. Kay: [Continued]

20        Q.   Mr. Theunens, first of all, can I ask you what exactly you see

21     your subject of expertise in these proceedings, if you could explain

22     that.

23        A.   Your Honours, my subject of expertise is that I am familiar with

24     command and control issues in the armed forces, as well as with aspects

25     of the conflict in former Yugoslavia which are relevant in the context of

Page 12880

 1     these proceedings.

 2        Q.   In relation to your expertise, the sources of information that

 3     you have primarily relied upon, if you could explain that.

 4        A.   Just to clarify, do you mean the sources for this report or the

 5     sources on which I -- yeah, I base my knowledge and understanding of

 6     command and control on the one hand, and the conflict in the former

 7     Yugoslavia on the other hand?

 8        Q.   The sources for your role as an expert, what you have drawn upon

 9     to provide your report as evidence to the Court.

10        A.   Well, the report is based on mainly military documents

11     originating from the HV, including documents by the HV Main Staff, Split

12     Military District Command, Knin garrison command, as well as subordinate

13     units and that applies specifically to the Split Military District

14     Command, special police, as well as legislation and doctrinal manuals and

15     regulations.

16        Q.   If there are documents that you have not seen in the preparation

17     of this report that are material to the evidence that you have given, how

18     would you view the provision of such material?

19        A.   Well, I would of course welcome any new documents that can assist

20     me in -- in -- or any other documents that can assist me in assessing the

21     conclusions or reviewing the conclusions I have drawn based on the

22     material available to me, and if needed, amend these conclusions.

23        Q.   Thank you.  I'm going to try and proceed through this in a very

24     orderly way, Mr. Theunens, but taking it subject by subject, and the

25     first matter we'll deal with concerns the service rules, laws of the

Page 12881

 1     garrison that you refer to in your report that may bear some examination.

 2             MR. KAY:  If, first of all we go to D32, Your Honours, with is

 3     the service regulations a document that the Court familiar with, and go

 4     to page 21 in the English where we have the section called:  Garrison.

 5        Q.   As you have expressed in your report, Mr. Theunens, these were

 6     rules that were produced in 1992, and do you agree they were at a stage

 7     when the armed forces of the new Republic of Croatia were being

 8     structured?

 9        A.   If I could see the English first page to see in which month in

10     1992 they were established.

11        Q.   These were produced in May 1992.

12        A.   Well, the Main Staff of the HV was established in -- in, yeah,

13     after September 1991, and I agree with you that at that stage the HV is

14     still in very early stage of its development.

15             As I have described in part 2 of the report also in 1992, 1993,

16     1994, the HV continues to develop.  So whether in May 1992, they're still

17     at earlier stage, it's difficult to conclude.  One can state that --

18        Q.   That's probably enough of the answer for the moment.

19        A.   Okay.

20        Q.   Because we will proceed through it.

21             You've cited the regulations in your report, regulation 50.  I'm

22     turning to regulation 52, first of all, and to deal with what this

23     regulation is about.

24             And what it is about is the function of the garrison commander

25     within the military system.  Is that right, as a general heading?

Page 12882

 1        A.   Yes, it is correct.

 2        Q.   And it tells us what the garrison commander is responsible for.

 3     We see billeting, order, discipline, and service in the garrison.  We see

 4     all units and institutions within the garrison being subordinate to the

 5     commander, as regards the issues of order, discipline, and service.

 6             And then in Rule 54, we see what the responsibilities of the

 7     garrison commander are, and they're to issue rules on order, discipline,

 8     and supervision of the behaviour of military persons in the garrison.

 9             No need to turn to page 22, which deals with other aspects, but

10     we're looking at this issue of order and discipline primarily.  Isn't

11     that right, Mr. Theunens?

12        A.   Yes.  That is what the first paragraph of Article 54 states.

13        Q.   Thank you.  And now the garrison commander is someone who, within

14     an area in which the military has a -- a presence runs various facilities

15     for the armed forces who may be part of that area, or who may be passing

16     through the area.  Isn't that right?

17        A.   That is correct, Your Honours.

18        Q.   And to achieve order and discipline within a garrison, the

19     garrison commander is entitled to issue various local rules by which

20     those forces would have to comply with.  Isn't that right?

21        A.   Yes, that is correct, Your Honours.

22        Q.   Just taking an example.  We have a garrison in a town.  There is

23     an old bridge, service vehicles cross that bridge.  The garrison

24     commander may put up an order saying that service vehicles must only

25     cross that bridge at 30 kilometres per hour.  Isn't that right?

Page 12883

 1        A.   Yes, that is one example.

 2        Q.   In fact, there can be rules by the garrison commander relating to

 3     the married quarters where soldiers may live.  Isn't that right?

 4        A.   If -- if they are outside of the barracks of the unit, I mean,

 5     the particular unit where these people live, yes.

 6        Q.   In the English army it is known as "the patch."  Is that an

 7     expression you know of?

 8        A.   I haven't heard that expression yet, Your Honours, but ...

 9        Q.   And the garrison commander may tell the wives of soldiers not to

10     hang out their washing on Sundays or on Saturdays.  That would be a local

11     rule.

12        A.   If that is the case in the British Army, then I'm willing to

13     believe that.

14        Q.   Yes.  And in relation to these rules that we are looking at here

15     concerning the garrison, it is those matters within Regulation 52 that is

16     the object of the regulation.  Isn't that right?

17        A.   Yeah, I would say 52 and 54, but probably we mean the same.

18        Q.   I'm taking it in stages, as others are following.

19        A.   Okay.

20        Q.   And in some bases there may be -- I don't know how familiar you

21     are with garrisons.  Perhaps if you can answer that question before I go

22     on further.

23        A.   Well, for -- I mean, each military unit is part of a garrison.

24     And like when I was stationed in Germany, our next operational command

25     level was located 60 kilometres more to the east, but we were part of a

Page 12884

 1     garrison known as the Spich garrison, S-p-i-c-h, which was a smaller city

 2     south of Cologne.

 3             When I was part of the military intelligence and security service

 4     in Brussels, we were all, as officers, part of the Brussels garrison and,

 5     for example, that included that we could sit on court martials.  There

 6     was a duty role for that.

 7        Q.   The garrison, then, has within it this commander who provides

 8     those local rules which are the rules that others have to follow to

 9     enable there to be order and discipline of the military forces, whilst

10     they are within the garrison.  In summary, that is it, isn't it?

11        A.   Yes, that is a correct summary.

12        Q.   To achieve that, of course, under Regulation 54, you have to

13     issue those rules, which has as a precondition -- you know the place that

14     you're serving at, that it is, in fact, a garrison in existence.  That`s

15     right; isn't it?

16        A.   I'm not sure I understand the question, but if it is not

17     established whether or not the garrison exists, then it is hard to

18     imagine there would be a commander.  But, again, I'm not sure I

19     understand the question well.

20        Q.   Thank you.  Let's turn to Knin.

21             Knin we know wasn't liberated by the Croatian forces until the

22     5th of August, 1995.  And on that day, Mr. Cermak was appointed as a

23     garrison commander for Knin.  There had previously been someone appointed

24     as an acting garrison commander, a Major Gojevic.  But Major Gojevic was

25     never sitting in Knin in that period before the 5th of August to enable

Page 12885

 1     him to draft any rules that may be necessary for order and discipline

 2     that may have to apply within Knin.  Would you agree?

 3        A.   It is correct that Major Gojevic was not sitting in Knin.  D33

 4     describes the municipalities that are covered by the Knin garrison, where

 5     it is put between --

 6        Q.   We're going to that in a moment.

 7        A.   Okay.

 8        Q.   I'd like to you take this in stages.  We will cover every

 9     document.  That's why I've said the time I have, and I want to make sure

10     that you follow the argument in stages.  I think it is better having

11     observed matters over the last week.  But be assured, I will be covering

12     everything.

13        A.   Okay.  So indeed Major Gojevic was not sitting in Knin.  I have

14     not seen any orders or rules he established as the acting commander of

15     the Knin garrison "pending its move" as is specified in D33.

16        Q.   Yes.  And in Regulation 52, when we look at it, it is correct

17     that those rules that are the garrison rules are issued and thereby cause

18     units and institutions within the garrison to be subordinate to those

19     rules, because that is part of the system of running the garrison.  Isn't

20     that right?

21        A.   Yes.  I agree.

22        Q.   Taking our example of the road bridge with the speeding limit

23     upon it, if a military truck from a unit not based in our garrison, we

24     don't even have to think of Knin as I don't think there were such rules

25     issued, but a truck from another military district area crossing that

Page 12886

 1     bridge would -- would have to respect that rule of the garrison put up by

 2     the commander.

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Failure to do so, if a military policeman is standing

 5     at the other end of the bridge, he may stop the vehicle and thereafter

 6     take a number of steps, in relation to a disciplinary breach.  Isn't that

 7     right?

 8        A.   Yes.  So even a member of the garrison command could do the same,

 9     if he sees the violation.

10        Q.   Exactly.

11        A.   Mm-hm.

12        Q.   I'm taking the military police because that is a subject within

13     this case, but someone else may also do that, and thereby be an

14     enforcement of that rule on that particular soldier.  Isn't that right?

15        A.   Yes.  In according with the procedures established in the Code of

16     Discipline.

17        Q.   Moving on now to the setting up of the garrisons, and we see at

18     D33 a document that the Court is familiar with, dated the 16th of

19     February, 1993, setting up of garrisons of the Croatian army, an order

20     that was issued by the Chief of Staff, General Bobetko.

21             And this, in 1993, as we know, set up the areas that were to be

22     part of the particular garrisons, and we know at page 4 that this

23     included Knin.  Isn't that right?  And if we just look at page 4.

24        A.   I agree that it is in the document.  It may be page 3.  But any

25     way, the Knin garrison is defined in this order of 16th February of 1993.

Page 12887

 1        Q.   Right.

 2        A.   D33.

 3        Q.   (E), Knin garrison, it's page 4 of the document that I have, but

 4     that doesn't matter.  Who is ever on the control there, if we go to page

 5     3.  Page 2.  Page 2.  We'll see it.  Because at this time in 1993, Knin

 6     garrison had been given an area, but it had not been established and

 7     subject to the jurisdiction and control of the Croatian armed forces as a

 8     geographical area.  That's right, isn't it?

 9        A.   That is correct.  We know that there is a body known as the Knin

10     garrison operating in Gospic, but it is it not yet in Knin and obviously

11     is not carrying out its duties in the actual Knin garrison.

12        Q.   We will be looking at all those documents very soon.

13             It says here:  "Within the command of the Home Guard battalion of

14     the Knin garrison."

15             Do you know what that means?

16        A.   My understanding is that the personnel for the Knin garrison is

17     to provide it by a Home Guard Battalion that would normally be located in

18     Knin but is -- consists of people originating from Knin.

19        Q.   Thank you.  If we turn now to further documents within this

20     exhibit that were annexed to it so that we can just cover a few details

21     on the way.

22             Turning to page 9 of the document that I have got, which is where

23     this is a report on troop numbers.

24             MR. KAY:  Page 5 on the document on the screen.

25        Q.   First of all, that's the right document.  Are you familiar with

Page 12888

 1     this document, Mr. Theunens?

 2        A.   I don't remember seeing this specific page which is on the left,

 3     but from other Split Military District documents, yeah, the figures on

 4     manpower are familiar to me.

 5        Q.   Yes.  The sort of garrison headquarters you were talking about in

 6     Brussels, how many people worked in the garrison HQ?

 7        A.   I have no recollection except -- no specific recollection except

 8     that in our system, normally that position would be a cumulative

 9     position, i.e., the first garrison I was part of, the garrison commander

10     was actually the commander of the -- of the largest battalion in the

11     area.

12             And in Brussels, I believe it was the commander of the barracks

13     where the -- the General Staff was located, but I'm not sure.  And he may

14     have had maximum one company available to him which was actually the

15     headquarters company, i.e., a company which is tasked with the -- which

16     is responsible for the functioning --

17        Q.   You say "may," do you know?

18        A.   I don't have an exact recollection.

19        Q.   Well, best not put things in if you don't actually know, as it

20     may cause further research.

21             But we see there, the numbers certainly in the 31st of August,

22     1995, turning to the next page in the document, current status of unit

23     being 10 people.

24             If we turn to the next page, in September.

25             The page after that, current status in unit, some eight people.

Page 12889

 1             And then if we could move to another document now.  65 ter 3514.

 2             This is a document dated the 28th of June, 1995.  It's from the

 3     Split Military District Command, sent to General Gotovina, and it

 4     concerns numerical strength.  And the document, first of all, if you look

 5     at the first page, is this a document that have you seen before?

 6        A.   I have seen it, and I believe that it is included in my report.

 7        Q.   If we turn to page 3 in the English.

 8        A.   Yeah.  I think it is actually at the bottom of the page.  Yeah.

 9        Q.   There we are.

10             The establishment should have nine people, but on the 28th of

11     June, 1995, that third column, current number, shows three.  So a few

12     weeks before Operation Storm and the entry into Knin, it was a unit of

13     three people.

14             Is that a fact that you have considered in the production of your

15     report?

16        A.   Indeed.

17        Q.   Very well.  Let's move on now to D34.

18             MR. KAY:  Can the last document be made an exhibit, please, Your

19     Honour.

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

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D992.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  D992 is admitted into evidence.

24             MR. KAY:

25        Q.   This document is the organisational order regarding work, order,

Page 12890

 1     and discipline at garrison HQs, dated the 27th of August, 1993.  And at

 2     that time in August 1993, it says, on the first page:

 3             "Garrison headquarters have not all been set up yet.  They've not

 4     assumed their functions, and their locations, personnel recruitment, and

 5     prescribed tasks have not been assigned."

 6             The next paragraph refers to the desire to a comprehensive system

 7     in place and working so that command, cooperation, control at the level

 8     of garrison headquarters can take place and ensure comprehensive work

 9     order and discipline.

10             If we turn to page 2 of the English.  And just pausing here

11     before we look at rule number 2, would you agree that on the 6th of

12     August, 1995, the Knin garrison was not established as a working and

13     functioning part of the Split Military District, to enable it to take on

14     its role within the system.

15             Would you agree with that?

16        A.   Your Honours, I think there are two components in the question.

17     First, the aspect of the 6th of August.  I can only answer that already

18     on the 5th, General Cermak issues an order.  Now to what extent the Knin

19     Military District is established -- excuse me, the Knin garrison, I

20     apologise, the Knin garrison is established as a functioning garrison, I

21     cannot conclude from the documents I reviewed.  I can only say that

22     General Cermak issues an order which is known as P506.

23        Q.   We will be looking at that.  Don't worry.

24        A.   Okay.

25             Now, the second part is that the Knin garrison, as a working and

Page 12891

 1     functioning part of the Split Military District, without wanting to jump

 2     already now, I include in my report, English page 258, a section on the

 3     relations between the commander of the Knin garrison, General Cermak, and

 4     the commander of the Split Military District, General Gotovina, and

 5     that's in part 2 of the report, I should have said, whereby I state that

 6     the relation between the two of them is not as clear-cut as one would

 7     expect from military discipline.

 8             And again I just mention that here because I wasn't sure that I

 9     understood the question well.

10        Q.   I will just tell you -- on the 6th of August, when the doors open

11     at the garrison HQ in Knin, from the documents that have you seen, do you

12     agree or disagree with the proposition that this was not functioning part

13     of the Split Military District.  As simple as that.  We know the history

14     of the matter.  They go into Knin.  The doors open.  Are we looking at a

15     well-oiled machine, or are we looking at something that is not

16     established?

17        A.   I cannot answer that question, Your Honours, based on the

18     documents that I have reviewed.

19        Q.   Thank you.  We'll have a look at some you have reviewed and some

20     maybe you haven't reviewed.

21             Looking at rule number 2 here, as you know, the garrison

22     headquarters commands don't have an operational function, and the next

23     part of the English.

24             "... and the right to issue orders to Croatian army units, accept

25     precisely prescribed authorities regarding work, order, and discipline at

Page 12892

 1     the garrison headquarters, et cetera."

 2             And that is referring to those rules that I was mentioning right

 3     at the start of my questioning of you, isn't it?

 4        A.   That is correct.

 5        Q.   I won't repeat it because I'm sure the Court has the point.

 6             And there are other tasks that are set out in number 3, requiring

 7     to establish cooperation and coordination with various bodies of a civil

 8     nature, as well as military, Ministry of Defence nature; and in four

 9     concrete tasks requiring to be set out regarding work, order, and

10     discipline; and the need in 5 to monitor that.

11             I refer to those last matters, just to refresh the Court's memory

12     on the matter.

13             If we go to the instructions that come with this document, at

14     page 3 of the exhibit, and this was issued in August 1993 about how to

15     set up the garrisons, and they were at various orders of tasks to be

16     performed, as well as the other jobs that had to be done within the

17     garrison.

18             In summary form, is that right, Mr. Theunens?

19        A.   Yes.  I mean, that's what the document states so ...

20        Q.   Yes.  And we can see in 1 that prepared documents for the

21     organisation of work, order, and discipline following their return to

22     their garrison's territory, that was something that was required to be

23     done in advance, so far as it could be.  Would you agree with that?

24        A.   That is correct.  But it is not, for example, I mean, to answer

25     the question you asked earlier, whether or not the Knin garrison could be

Page 12893

 1     a well functioning body on the 6th of August, in a military organisation,

 2     these procedures and these rules are standardized, and are most likely

 3     common to all garrisons with the exception of some geographic

 4     differences.

 5             So which means that the rules as such should already have been

 6     prepared prior to establishing the garrison.  There will be checklists

 7     and templates and so on being used, whereby only specific issues or

 8     specific details or specific locations may have to -- to be specified at

 9     a later moment, so --

10        Q.   Shall I just stop you there, because have you seen any in

11     relation to Knin garrison?

12        A.   You mean specific rules for the functioning of the garrison?

13        Q.   Yes.

14        A.   No, I have not seen such rules.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Going through the rest of the pages.  Page 4, we can

16     see along with arranging swimming, employing military police units, that

17     a procedure needed to be arranged to enable a unit within the garrison to

18     call the military police if it was wanted that they intervened in a case

19     of unrest.  Do you agree?

20        A.   Or in any other case where the garrison commanders -- excuse me,

21     garrison commander considers it necessary to have the intervention of the

22     military police.

23        Q.   Where's that?

24        A.   I mean, that's --

25        Q.   Sorry.  We're looking at -- are you and I looking at the same

Page 12894

 1     regulations?

 2        A.   Yeah, but you used the expression "unrest," and the document also

 3     says "accidents, et cetera when a military police unit is indispensable

 4     to establish order and disciplinary in the area of the garrison."

 5             I wasn't reading out document.  I was just explaining what I had

 6     seen or what my understanding was of the garrison's commanders relations

 7     with the military police, and when I look at the document, it is actually

 8     corresponds.

 9        Q.   This is quite a simple obligation for the garrison commander.  He

10     provides something to a standing orders that any unit within the garrison

11     may see on the barracks wall or be in a handbook which is a procedure

12     telling him that if he's got any problems how to call out the military

13     police.  It's as simple as that; isn't it?  This is standard?

14        A.   You mean -- for the garrison command as such, that the garrison

15     commander establish there is the procedure for the personnel of the

16     garrison command that when they need military police, that they actually

17     know which number to dial, or do you say that the garrison commander does

18     it for all the units in the area?

19        Q.   No, he doesn't do it for all the units in the area.

20        A.   Okay.

21        Q.   You agree.

22             It is an internal order that when you arrive as a unit into the

23     garrison, that the company commander or whoever knows how to get in touch

24     with the military police.  It's as simple as that; isn't it?  It's

25     standard.

Page 12895

 1        A.   Yeah.  But you would as a company commander who is not familiar

 2     with the area and who is planning to move there, one would expect -- I

 3     mean, it is among the basics of how the military works, that he collects

 4     that information prior to arriving in the garrison or in the area.

 5        Q.   That's why the garrison commander has to write a procedure in

 6     advance.

 7        A.   Yeah.  Or there has to be somebody at the -- in the office of the

 8     garrison with a telephone and whereby the number is known to the people

 9     outside the garrison commander -- outside the garrison command and

10     whereby that somebody can answer questions, like that one, for example.

11        Q.   Yeah.  It's a call-out.

12             Turning now to the Code of Military Discipline and Article 26;

13     English page 9.  This is -- I've got it as 65 ter 1834, but I know it's

14     P1007.  And it's the Code of Military Discipline that you have been

15     already discussing, dated May 1992, Article 26, is the one that refers to

16     commanders of units, institutions and garrisons, et cetera, "shall issue

17     disciplinary measures to offenders who are not members of their organic

18     unit, if such measures are required for maintaining order and

19     discipline."

20             Disciplinary measures, just for referencing the matter, in

21     Article 6 are defined as mild violations of the rules.  Article 10 has

22     minor breaches of military discipline and the various punishments.  And

23     so Article 26, when we look at it, this refers to when an offender is

24     brought before the garrison commander for breach of discipline, and there

25     is an issue to be dealt with as a disciplinary measure.

Page 12896

 1             That's right; isn't it?

 2        A.   Yeah.  And I think, more specifically, if this offender is not a

 3     part or member of the garrison command.

 4        Q.   Yeah.  And let's take our example of the bridge and the speed

 5     limit, and someone breaching the 30-kilometre-per-hour-limit who may be

 6     taken to the garrison commander, offender brought before him, explained

 7     -- asked for an explanation, and he may deal with it by one of those

 8     disciplinary measures, Article 6, and Article 10 in that way.  Isn't that

 9     right?

10        A.   Indeed.  And, of course, Article 26 applies to, eh?

11        Q.   That is why I'm talking this as Article 26, just so we know

12     exactly what we're dealing with here in relation to the authority of the

13     garrison commander.

14             Just turning to some other aspects concerning legal provisions so

15     that we deal with everything as one, if we could see page 86 of your

16     report, and it's page 86 of part 1, and you refer there to the military

17     police administration document of the 17th of December, 1992.  And you

18     cite the rules from that document.  And I'm reminded your report is

19     P1113, Exhibit P1113.

20             MR. KAY:  Page 86 of -- I don't -- it's not the one I see on the

21     page.

22             THE WITNESS:  No.

23             MR. KAY:  On the screen.  That's page 45.

24        Q.   You've got it, though, Mr. Theunens, haven't you.  Because you

25     have your report there.  You have a look at it as it comes up.  There we

Page 12897

 1     are.  We see it on the page there for Your Honours.

 2             Because you cite this matter and refer to these regulations.  We

 3     can see what you cite from it.  You refer to a marked vertical

 4     subordination and an effective horizontal coordination.  You refer to

 5     other passages of the document on page 86.

 6             Turning now to page 87, you refer to the garrison commanders,

 7     page 3 -- paragraph 3 and 4 on the screen now, and you cite from that

 8     document:

 9             "Commanders of Croatian army units and garrison commanders are in

10     charge of the military police units operating in their zones of

11     responsibility."

12             You cite further matters.  And in paragraph 4, you refer to

13     garrison commanders again.

14             Were you aware you aware that this document was repealed?

15        A.   I am indeed aware of that, but I included the document because it

16     actually provided additional background to what is stipulated in the 1994

17     military police rules, which are P880 --

18        Q.   We will be looking at them, but I want to take this in stages.

19        A.   Mm-hm.

20        Q.   Why isn't it in your report that these rules were repealed?

21        A.   Because it seemed logical to me that when you have a more recent

22     military regulation, that that automatically supercedes or replaces the

23     older regulation, and that is also how I worded it on the English page

24     86.  So the 1994 --

25        Q.   If we can turn back to page 86 so that can you show the Judges.

Page 12898

 1        A.   Under the title (B) between brackets the 1994 rules and so on

 2     confirm the subordination relations that were established through ... and

 3     that is the old document then.  It is correct that I didn't explicitly

 4     put that the 1994 rules replace the 1992 document, but for me that was

 5     logical.

 6        Q.   In fact, the 1994 rules do not contain those provisions about the

 7     garrison commands that you have cited in your report.  Isn't that right?

 8     The 1994 rules is Article 8 and Article 9, Mr. Theunens.

 9        A.   That is correct.

10        Q.   Well, do you think that that could have been misleading --

11        A.   Well --

12        Q.    -- to the Court who may be relying upon you for an explanation?

13        A.   Article 9 states:

14             "While performing their regular military police tasks, MP units

15     are subordinated to the commander of the Military District.  The

16     commander of the HRM, which stands for Croatian navy, the commander of

17     the HRZ, which stands for Croatian air force, or the highest ranking HV

18     commander in the military police units area of operations."

19        Q.   Well, we see that you cite garrison commanders, and would I be

20     correct in saying that you cited garrison commanders in page 87 of your

21     report, because you are dealing with a case against a garrison commander?

22        A.   Your Honours, if we can see --

23        Q.   Just answer my question.

24        A.   No.  I am citing the garrison commander from the 1992 document,

25     which you can see on page 87, and the text is in italics, and it

Page 12899

 1     originates from the 1992 document.

 2        Q.   And if we just turn to page 87 while you're referring it so that

 3     Their Honours can see it.

 4        A.   So -- if we go to the top of the page, the reference to garrison

 5     commander is in italics.  It is between quotation marks, so it originates

 6     from the 1992 document.

 7        Q.   Just stop there.  Was that extracted because you are dealing with

 8     a case against a garrison commander, yes or no?

 9        A.   No, it was not extracted from --

10        Q.   Very well.

11             Turning to 4, you refer to the bottom three lines of

12     subparagraph 4:

13             "Subordinated to relevant garrison commanders, commanders of

14     relevant HV Guards Brigades, et cetera."

15             Was that cited because you are dealing with a case against a

16     garrison commander?

17        A.   No.  It is cited in order to identify the relevant aspects of

18     this 1992 document.  Because the --

19        Q.   As you said yourself a few days ago, once a new law is into

20     place, the old law is replaced.  Isn't that right?

21        A.   I mean, I'm not going to give a general opinion in relation to

22     legislation, but I know for military documents and regulations that is

23     the case, and that will also be specified most of the times as such in

24     the new military regulation, i.e., there will be a paragraph at the end

25     or in the beginning stating that this new regulations replaces all other

Page 12900

 1     regulations -- older regulations, I'm sorry, in order to avoid any

 2     misunderstandings.

 3        Q.   Is there any reason why you didn't cite these rules of the 17th

 4     of December, 1992 as having been imposed as temporary rules under the

 5     temporary instructions for the work of the units of the military police

 6     of the Croatian army?

 7             MR. KAY:  65 ter 3106, if that could be brought up as the first

 8     page.

 9             There we are.  It's just coming on the screen.  The temporary

10     instructions for the work of the units of the military police of the

11     Croatian army dated January 1992, exhibit 65 ter 3106, were the temporary

12     rules that can -- that caused those 1992 rules to be made, were you aware

13     of that, Mr. Theunens?

14        A.   I don't think so.  I don't remember seeing this document before.

15     I may have seen it, but I have not referred to these temporary

16     instructions in my report.

17        Q.   Were aware of this document, because -- first of all, were you

18     aware you aware of it?

19        A.   I have no clear recollection.  So, I mean, if I have to say yes

20     or no, I will say no.  I think I have seen them, but I have not used them

21     in my report, so...

22        Q.   Did you realize those 1992 rules that you cited in your report at

23     pages 86 and 87 were invoked because of the temporary rules of

24     January 1992?

25        A.   I was not aware of this specific relation between these two

Page 12901

 1     documents.

 2             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, can 65 ter 3106 be made an exhibit,

 3     please.

 4             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

 5             MR. KAY:  Thank you.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  [Microphone not activated]

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit D993, Your Honours.

 8             MR. KAY:  We will now move to Exhibit P880, which is the

 9     governing rules of 1994.

10        Q.   And that is Articles 8 and 9 that Mr. Misetic put before you in

11     his questions.

12             MR. KAY:  For the record, just so that everyone knows, the 1992

13     rules were repealed under Article 77 of the 1994 rules.  We have no need

14     to go there and waste time.

15        Q.   But it is Article 8 and 9 which govern the relationship between

16     the military police, under command and control.  Isn't that right?

17        A.   Indeed.  And as I have explained, the relations that are

18     established in Articles 8 and 9 are also known as the professional line

19     and the operational line.  And that can be found in 65 ter 1336, which is

20     explained on English page 130 of part 1 of the report.

21        Q.   Let's just have a look at that.

22             MR. KAY:  Shall we get up exhibit, then, 65 ter 3116 while we're

23     there, if it can be put on the screen.

24        Q.   What is the date of this document?

25        A.   It is October 1995.

Page 12902

 1        Q.   Yes.  Well, that's -- that's after the liberation of Knin.  So

 2     this was passed in October 1995.

 3        A.   I --

 4        Q.   Was there anything in force before October 1995 called the direct

 5     line and professional line?

 6        A.   I have not seen a specific regulation, but the command and

 7     control relations that are established here, are -- did also exist, for

 8     example, in the JNA.  They also exist in other armies.  So based on my

 9     background, I concluded that even though the document dates from

10     October 1995, the information that is included in it also applied to the

11     situation that existed prior to October 1995.

12        Q.   And on what date did it come into effect?

13        A.   Well, if we have the corresponding English page of the B/C/S page

14     that is now visible on the screen, we may be able to determine that.

15        Q.   After the 30th of October.

16             MR. KAY:  Maybe that's a little bit difficult to achieve.

17        Q.   But is that essential for to us look at, Mr. Theunens?

18        A.   I thought you wanted to have, like, the exact date.  But

19     regulation -- regulation dated from October 1995, and I have explained

20     why I consider that the information included in it also applies to the

21     situation prior to October 1995.

22        Q.   And does it apply to the military police?

23        A.   The command and control relationship that is established by

24     Articles 8 and 9 actually corresponds with what is in this regulation

25     described as the -- on the one hand, the professional line, or functional

Page 12903

 1     line, and, on the other hand, the operational or direct line.  And it

 2     applies not only to the military police but also to specialized services

 3     like SIS and political affairs.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Just turning to Articles 8 and 9, those are the

 5     governing Articles relating to the issue of subordination of the military

 6     police.  Isn't that right?

 7        A.   That -- that is correct.  I mean 8 --

 8        Q.   Thank you.

 9             If we turn now to Exhibit D35.  Before this became an exhibit in

10     the case, was this a document that you had seen in your preparations?

11     Exhibit D35 is the order issued by the Minister of Defence, Mr. Susak, on

12     the 6th of July, 1994.

13        A.   No.  I hadn't seen it prior to becoming an exhibit, but I have

14     reviewed and we discussed it, and we discussed it also with Mr. Misetic.

15        Q.   Any reason why you hadn't seen it before it became an exhibit?

16        A.   Yeah.  The only conclusion I can draw is that it didn't pop up in

17     the searchs that I did, and I was very surprised by that.

18        Q.   Just looking at those searches, is that how things happen, that

19     they pop up?

20        A.   No, Mr. Kay, that is not how it happens.  But just to explain,

21     for example, when you do searches on numbers of documents, for some

22     reason a number of translated documents put the text handwritten when the

23     number is handwritten, the number of the document.  So when I would do a

24     search like, for example, here on 512?, 01?, 94?, 2897, that would not

25     give a hit in English if the number had been put in handwritten.  Of

Page 12904

 1     course, I checked that for as many documents as I could, but it is a

 2     human process.  Humans are not perfect unfortunately, and I am afraid

 3     that this one of the document I missed due to imperfection.

 4        Q.   Would you agree it's an important document regarding the issuing

 5     of orders to the military police?

 6        A.   It is an important document, I agree, but it doesn't change what

 7     is stipulated in Articles 8 and 9 of P880.

 8        Q.   And what it deals with, because there were ambiguities in the

 9     system of command and control over the military police units, set out a

10     procedure regarding the issuing of orders.  Do you agree?

11        A.   Indeed.  For the largest party D35 reiterates was is stipulated

12     in Articles 8 and 9 of P880.  Of interest, I mean, in addition to the

13     other paragraphs is paragraph 5 here which describes the procedure in

14     case of conflict of authority between an operational commander and a

15     military police unit commander.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay.

17             MR. KAY:  Yes.  This is it the last document in this section,

18     Your Honour, which --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  We have one and a half minute left.

20             MR. KAY:  We can deal with it.

21        Q.   And in 10, if we look at page 2 in the English:

22             "All orders regulating the system of command of VP units or

23     manning of VP units in a manner contrary to the Rules ... shall cease to

24     be in effect."

25             Would you agree that that is a very important clause?

Page 12905

 1        A.   It is very important, and if I remember the document well, it

 2     refers to a specific situation described in the introduction of this

 3     order, whether there seems to have been a problem on the southern front.

 4        Q.   So it would be right under your rules of interpretation, as you

 5     say, that this coming after the main rules, this would assist in

 6     interpreting the main rules and was issued by the minister of defence for

 7     that purpose?

 8        A.   That is correct.  If I had known that we had the document, I

 9     would have certainly included it in my report.

10        Q.   Thank you very much.

11             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, that completes this section of my

12     questioning.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Kay.

14             Mr. Theunens, I would like to issue the same instructions that I

15     did before; that is, not to speak to anyone about the testimony, whether

16     already given or still to be given.  We would like to see you back

17     tomorrow at quarter past two.

18             We adjourn for the day and will resume tomorrow, 2nd of December,

19     quarter past 2.00, Courtroom I.

20                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.02 p.m.,

21                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 2nd day of

22                           December, 2008, at 2.15 p.m.