Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 19943

 1                           Wednesday, 8 July 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 2.20 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             Before we continue, I expect that later today that we'll have

13     some time for procedural issues.  I see you're here, Mr. Hedaraly.  I

14     expect from you further report on P2550, because that's still due, from

15     what I remember.

16             I'm saying that we would have further time, because the next

17     witness is not available until tomorrow, isn't it, Mr. Kehoe?

18             MR. KEHOE:  That's correct, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

20             Mr. Zidovec, I'd like to remind you that you're still bound by

21     the solemn declaration that you have given at the beginning of your

22     testimony.

23             Mr. Carrier, are you ready to continue?

24             MR. CARRIER:  Yes, thank you, Mr. President.  Before I start I

25     should just say that yesterday I indicated that I hoped to finish during

Page 19944

 1     the first session.  I think I will need to go a little bit into the

 2     second session with the leave of the Court, but I will try to move it

 3     along as quickly as possible.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, well, that leaves us sufficient time, and since

 5     no other witness is waiting, I don't think that we have a major problem

 6     there.  Although it is of some concern to the Chamber if we have to wait

 7     for other witnesses not being available.

 8             Please proceed.

 9             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you.

10                           WITNESS:  ZDRAVKO ZIDOVEC [Resumed]

11                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

12                           Cross-examination by Mr. Carrier: [Continued]

13        Q.   Mr. Zidovec?

14             MR. CARRIER:  Before we start, Mr. Registrar, could we please

15     have Exhibit D496 on the screen, please.

16        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this is the order from General Gotovina, dated

17     11 August 1995.  You looked at it yesterday, and this is the order that

18     establishes a mixed detachment at the Military District level for

19     clear-up operations?

20             Were you aware that this order -- or, sorry, were you aware in

21     any way that this order was issued or that it existed during August 1995?

22        A.   What I have on my screen is a document from the Split-Dalmatia

23     police administration.

24             MR. CARRIER:  Sorry, P496; I apologise.

25        Q.   I apologise, Mr. Zidovec.  Now that you see P496 on the screen,

Page 19945

 1     are you aware that this order was issued or that it existed during

 2     August 1995?

 3        A.   I was not aware of it.

 4        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, I just want to go through this order in a little bit

 5     more detail than you looked at it yesterday with Mr. Misetic.

 6             At the beginning of the order you can see that it states that it

 7     incorporates the Knin clear-up operations group, as part of this

 8     detachment, and it mentions six other HV operations groups.  And then on

 9     page 1, point number 3, in the first point you can see that Boris Radovic

10     is appointed as coordinator at the detachment command level, and you

11     might recall that he was also appointed coordinator for animal, hygiene,

12     and sanitation measures under General Cermak's order, which is P506.

13             Just below that point 3, number 2, there is Boris Davidovic,

14     which we heard some evidence from you yesterday on.  And the next one

15     down, Stanko Batur.  The next person down is Mr. Vanjak, and he was

16     appointed civilian protection -- he was a civilian protection member, but

17     he was appointed as a member of the detachment command as well.  Down

18     from that, Dr. Samardzija, that was somebody that was also appointed

19     under General Cermak's order.  And page 1 in the B/C/S and onto page 2 in

20     the English, point 3, number 6.  And following you see that there are a

21     number of different commanders of territorial operations groups that are

22     named as members of the detachment command.

23             And number 10 on that list you see that Major Ante Krasnic is

24     also appointed.  Do you know this person, Major Krasnic, at all?

25        A.   I don't.

Page 19946

 1        Q.   And Mr. Zidovec, page 2, point number 4, you can see that

 2     General Gotovina has ordered that clear-up operations groups in

 3     Novi Grad, Gracac, Zadar, Knin, Sinj, Sibenik, and Biograd all need to

 4     have -- or have to contain certain elements, and among them on the list

 5     are items 1 and 2, an operations group commander and a deputy.  Item

 6     number 3, explosive experts; item number 4, a forensic technician and

 7     operative; item number 8 is a trench-digger; item number 10, five workers

 8     for clear-up of human bodies.

 9             And page 3 the English, point number 14, you'll see that another

10     item that's listed is a coach to be supplied by the HV in order to

11     transport civilian protection workers.

12             Now, Mr. Zidovec, these elements are basically the same elements

13     that you had ordered when you put together sanitation teams.  Isn't that

14     correct?

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

16             MR. MISETIC:  I don't know to -- I will be as vague as possible,

17     Mr. President.  But I believe a portion should be shown to the witness

18     that hasn't been addressed if this line of questioning is going continue

19     and I will do it in redirect if necessary, but ... I don't know how you

20     wish me to --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  You said a portion --

22             MR. MISETIC:  Of this order.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  -- should be shown.  Could you point at which

24     portion.

25             MR. MISETIC:  Number 6 of the order.

Page 19947

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, will you consider whether it would

 2     assist the Chamber to also show number 6.

 3             MR. CARRIER:  Certainly.

 4        Q.   Point number 6, Mr. Zidovec, just so you can see it now, and

 5     Mr. Misetic might ask you some questions about it later:  Personnel and

 6     equipment for items 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.10, 4.11, shall be provided by the

 7     Zadar-Knin county police administration; this should have been a police

 8     administration for item 5 and the Split Dalmatia police administration

 9     for item 5(g).  And below that, item 7:

10             "The transport professionals of the Split Military District are

11     assigned with items 14.12 and 14.4 [sic]; 14.4 being the coach for

12     civilian protection workers."

13             MR. MISETIC:  Just so the transcript, I believe, Mr. Carrier

14     misspoke; it is 4.12 and 4.14.

15             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you.

16        Q.   And, Mr. Zidovec, on page 3 in the English, page 2 in the B/C/S,

17     in the middle of the page just before item number 6, part of

18     General Gotovina's order is that Captain Radovic shall determine the

19     place or the parties that are to report under this order.

20             And on page 3 in the English and page 2 in the B/C/S, point

21     number 10 reads that:

22             "Clear-up should be carried out in line with the Ministry of

23     Defence health administration instructions, dated 15 October 1993."  And

24     for your information that's Dr. Brkic's instructions that we mentioned

25     before.  And it goes on to say under the law of international conflict,

Page 19948

 1     and the first priority named there, is the removal of human bodies.

 2             And on page 4 in the English and page 3 in the B/C/S, point

 3     number 12 orders daily reporting to the HV regarding this order, and you

 4     can see it is signed by General Gotovina.

 5             And at the bottom there it says "dispatch to," and the people

 6     mentioned in item 3 which includes all of the civilian protection people

 7     that were listed there.

 8             Were you aware of any of those people receiving this order?

 9        A.   I don't know about it.

10             MR. MISETIC:  I am afraid I can't keep pace with the four

11     paragraphs of questions.  So if I can just have a minute to --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

13             Mr. Carrier, if you would give sufficient time for those who are

14     following, critically following your cross-examination to give time to

15     look at the texts as well.

16             MR. CARRIER:  I'll try to slow down, Mr. President.

17             MR. MISETIC:  If I could just have a minute.

18             Perhaps if Mr. Carrier is can assist me.  When your question is

19     at the bottom there, it says "to," if you could just give me a

20     paragraph number.

21             MR. CARRIER:  I believe I said page 4 in the English, page 3 in

22     the B/C/S.  At the bottom it indicates this order was sent to -- or is

23     it, "dispatch to" with a colon next to it.

24             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.  Thank you.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

Page 19949

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

 2        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, starting where we left off yesterday, we were

 3     looking at a report from Dr. Brkic to General Cermak, dated 12 August

 4     1995, where he is reporting on the sanitation measures that took place

 5     between August 12th -- or sorry, August 5th and 12th, 1995.  That was

 6     Exhibit D30.  And, Mr. Zidovec, just for your information, there's

 7     another report that's already in evidence that was sent on that same day,

 8     which is D1059, and that was sent from Dr. Brkic and a Dr. Gotovac to

 9     General Cermak reporting on the number of bodies collected, identified,

10     and buried, during the period 7 to 11 August 1995.  And in that document,

11     those -- an October 1993 instruction from Dr. Brkic is also mentioned.

12     There's a -- also for your information and for my friends, it's

13     Exhibit D612, which is another report which in evidence, that one from

14     Dr. Brkic to General Cervenko, dated 29 August 1995, where he reports on

15     a clearing up of the terrain of human remains from 5 to 28 August 1995,

16     related to Operation Storm.

17             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I think -- I don't want to object

18     too many times, but I think the Chamber has previously articulated that

19     we're not supposed to educate the witness about what's in evidence or

20     not.  If there's a question, Was he aware of any reporting from person X

21     to person Y, the answer is, yes, fine, let's show it to him; if not, I

22     think that's fine as well.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier.

24             MR. CARRIER:  Yes.  The purpose, Mr. President, is simply, given

25     the position that he has taken, is to confront him with the weight of

Page 19950

 1     evidence is that is already in evidence in the Chamber.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, we usually start asking the witness about what

 3     he knows.  And if there is any need to further put to him certain

 4     elements of evidence, then whether it's evidence or not, you just take

 5     him to the -- take him to the exhibit and then put it to him.

 6             Please proceed.

 7             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. President, if I could just seek a little

 8     clarification on that.

 9             The issue I'm having is that when I don't agree with what the

10     position is, then I'm trying to show evidence in order to explore whether

11     or not --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, whether it is evidence or not is irrelevant.

13     There is a document which you would like to put to the witness and

14     whether that would be new for the Chamber or would already be in evidence

15     or what the status of the document is, is not -- there's no need to tell

16     the witness.

17             MR. CARRIER:  On that note, I understand the court's position.

18     If I could just then explain that there are simply documents that --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes --

20             MR. CARRIER:  That's fine.  Thank you.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, documents.  And, yes, sometimes it might be

22     helpful to give us a clue as to where to find it.

23             Please proceed.

24             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you.

25        Q.   And just -- there 's a document, Mr. Zidovec, and that's a report

Page 19951

 1     from Dr. Brkic that General Cervenko just talking about.  And in this

 2     document, Dr. Brkic reported that during August 1995, he had visited the

 3     entire front line.  And he's quoted as saying:  "Of course, corrected

 4     what was to be corrected."  And then he mentioned that others were

 5     assisting him in the process of correction.  This is regarding the

 6     sanitation of human remains.

 7             And finally in that same document, Dr. Brkic had reported:

 8             "I hope that my presence, and needless to say, with the aid of

 9     all the civil defence colleagues and with all other people engaged, I

10     helped [sic] that the assigned task be carried out thoroughly."

11             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. Registrar, if we could please call up document

12     number 65 ter 2096.

13        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, what's coming up on the screen is a report dated

14     20 August 1995, sent from Dr. Gotovac to Dr. Brkic entitled:  "Results of

15     supervisory reconnaissance of clearing up terrain from human bodies after

16     Operation Storm."

17             And in that report, it's reported that this is a regular duty of

18     the ministry of -- the health administration of the Ministry of Defence.

19             And he goes on to say that that's the supervision of professional

20     work which had taken place between 18 August and 20 August.

21             MR. CARRIER:  If we can go to page 2 in the English, still on

22     page 1 in the B/C/S, under the heading:  "Work results of professional

23     reconnaissance."

24             You have a chance to just review that.

25             Dr. Gotovac is talking about civilian protection's collection of

Page 19952

 1     human remains and whether or not it met the established standards.  And

 2     on page 3 in the English and page 2 in the B/C/S, the final paragraph on

 3     those pages he reports:

 4             "In all ... cases where discrepancies from established standards

 5     were noticed, the police and civil protection staff members were given

 6     verbal instructions regarding prompt elimination of failures.  During

 7     reconnaissance, we were met with good cooperation of professionals in

 8     appropriate civil protection services who assured us that all apparent

 9     failure would be eliminated as soon as possible."

10             Do you see that there, Mr. Zidovec?

11        A.   Yes, precisely.

12        Q.   And if I could please tender that document into evidence.

13             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I mean, I don't have an objection to

14     the document, but the transcript goes on for three, almost four pages

15     before the previous answer was given.  And now read out a document and

16     say, Does that say that in that the document, yes, and then tender it

17     into evidence.  I think there is nothing more than a bar table submission

18     at this point for this document.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, any objection, if it would be a bar table

20     submission?

21             MR. MISETIC:  Not if it is a bar table, Mr. President.

22             And I would have a standing objection to if we're going to go

23     through telling the witness what's in evidence and then reading portions

24     of the documents saying, Does that say that in the document?  As I said

25     there's four pages of transcript before the last answer was given.

Page 19953

 1             MR. CAYLEY:  And as I said yesterday, Mr. President, I'm joining

 2     Mr. Misetic on that issue.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 4             Mr. Carrier, if have you no other questions than whether the

 5     document says what it says, then there is no need to put it to the

 6     witness, unless you would want to know more of the witness, such as

 7     earlier you asked the witness whether he was familiar with a certain

 8     document, a document, which I take it in the view of the Prosecution

 9     contradicts the testimony of the witness.  But to ask a whether a

10     document which is clear in its language says what is it says, is not of

11     great assistance as far as testimony is concerned.  The document may be

12     important.

13             Since there's no objection, apparently against it having been

14     tendered from the bar table, Mr. Registrar, that would be exhibit number?

15             THE REGISTRAR:  Exhibit number P2572, Your Honours.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

17             Please proceed.

18             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

19             Mr. Registrar, if you could please call up Exhibit D603, please.

20        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this is a special report, dated 8 August 1995, from

21     Mr. Cemerin and was issued under Povratak, and he is reporting on

22     civilian protection activities.

23             Did you receive this report?

24        A.   This doesn't mention my name.

25        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... I didn't ask you --

Page 19954

 1        A.   But at this moment, I cannot remember having seen this document.

 2     However, there's no reason for me to suppose that it was not sent to me.

 3        Q.   I take it from that answer your -- is it your position that given

 4     that Mr. Cemerin, who is in charge of civil protection under you, as

 5     assistant minister, if he was sending you reports during August about the

 6     sanitation proceedings, you would have got this report or this

 7     information in another form.  Is that right?

 8        A.   That is right, yes, correct.

 9             MR. CARRIER:  If we could turn to page 2 in the English and

10     page 1 in the B/C/S.

11        Q.   You will see there, Mr. Zidovec, that there are some times

12     listed, starting with the number 19, and the relevant date is August 5th,

13     1995.  Can you see there that at 1910 it's reported by Mr. Cemerin that

14     the deputy minister had announced that "our units were entering Kijevo,

15     Drnis, Benkovac, Vrlika and Knin."

16             And just below that, Mr. Cemerin reports that, on the same day,

17     at 1917 hours, Dr. Brkic called and announced that he and his people were

18     going in first, in accordance with the agreement with

19     Vice-President Kostovic, and that basically the units were to prepare for

20     clearance from the next day onwards.

21             My question is, were you aware of this situation where there was

22     an announcement to go in, and then Dr. Brkic announced that in fact their

23     units were going in?

24        A.   I simply cannot remember this document now, now I know that at

25     the time Dr. Cemerin was at Knin.  He was preparing the organisation of

Page 19955

 1     activities of civil protection.  But I don't deny having seen this

 2     document.  But, at this moment, I cannot confirm that.  But I'm still

 3     waiting for a question with regard to this.  I don't see what I could say

 4     with regard to this document.

 5        Q.   The question was whether or not you were ever aware that

 6     Dr. Brkic had basically over -- seems to have over-ridden a decision by

 7     the deputy minister.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, that is argumentative and contrary to

 9     our interpretation of the document, so I would ask that he not argue with

10     him.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, you give a certain qualification of

12     what is found in the -- in the document.  You're invited to stick to the

13     text of the document.

14             MR. CARRIER:

15        Q.   My question is were you aware, Mr. Zidovec, that a Dr. Brkic had

16     made this announcement at all, were you ever aware of it, or that there

17     was any doctor making any kind of announcement about units going in

18     first?

19             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, again, I would ask that he stick to

20     the document, please.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  If there is any dispute about the way in which a

22     document is summarised, then you are invited to stick strictly to the

23     text and quote that.

24             MR. CARRIER:  I apologise, Mr. President.  I had basically read

25     out -- I can read it out if that would assist.

Page 19956

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Would you please do so.

 2             MR. CARRIER:

 3        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, the document reads:  "At 1910 hours the deputy

 4     minister announced that our units were entering Kijevo, Drnis, Benkovac,

 5     Vrlika, and Knin."

 6             The next paragraph below that reads:

 7             "At 1917 hours, Dr. Brkic called and announced that he and his

 8     people were going first, in accordance with the agreement with

 9     Vice-president Kostovic, and we were to prepare units for clearance which

10     should be clearing up the area in question from the morning (6 August)

11     onwards."

12             Were you aware of any kind of agreement involving Vice-president

13     Kostovic or any kind of doctor named Dr. Brkic or a doctor from the army

14     or any kind of issue with about who was going in first in any place on

15     the 5th of August, 1995?

16        A.   I was not aware of that.  And if you allow, I don't know to who

17     this sentence refers; namely, at 1910 hours the deputy minister announced

18     that our units were entering Kijevo, et cetera.  Who was that deputy

19     minister?  I don't know who that refers to.

20        Q.   Okay.  Mr. Zidovec, on page 4 in the English, third

21     paragraph from the bottom, and page 3 in the B/C/S, Mr. Cemerin is

22     reporting that:

23             "On 7 August 1995 at 0945 hours, Mr. Vanjak reported that the

24     situation in the field was exceptionally poor, coordination with the HV

25     was unsatisfactory."  And then in brackets, it reads that:

Page 19957

 1             "50 civilian protection conscripts were brought to HV members" --

 2     sorry.  "50 civilian protection conscripts brought to HV members

 3     travelled from Zadar to Knin for 7.5 hours so that on 6th August they

 4     worked in Knin for only two hours."

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, on that sentence, we'd like -- in the

 6     English, we'd like a translation check, please.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  I take it the line between brackets which causes you

 8     concerns.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Correct.  In the parentheses.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, we usually do not seek verification of

11     translation.

12             MR. MISETIC:  I just wanted to know --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  -- from our interpreters, but you want to put this

14     on the record.  And what we could however do is if you would read the

15     relevant portion in the original and then we will receive interpretation,

16     and that's not kind of verification, but it might draw our attention to a

17     possible problem.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Okay.

19             [Interpretation] "50 civil protection conscripts led my [as

20     interpreted] members of the HV."

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I did not receive translation of your words,

22     but interpretation.

23             MR. MISETIC:  I heard it in my ear, so I -- in English.  And it's

24     on the transcript at line 19.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  There was a problem with my channel which I was on.

Page 19958

 1             Could you please repeat the words in the original.  I apologise

 2     for not being on the right channel.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

 4             [Interpretation] "50 civil protection conscripts led by members

 5     of the HV."

 6             THE INTERPRETER:  It is "by" not "my," interpreter's remark.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We now have received the translation.

 8             Could you put your question to the witness.

 9             MR. CARRIER:

10        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, given that clarification and what I had read to you

11     before, and given your position that all of the work regarding human

12     sanitation in this area was done, or sanitisation projects were done

13     independently of the military, can you explain what it was that was just

14     read to you about the HV involvement, at least in the report?

15        A.   So the civil protection, namely the people who were on the ground

16     at Knin and in that entire area, did count on the logistical support of

17     the army, most of all when it comes to the provision of means of

18     transportation.

19             As far as I know, those agreements mostly were not honoured, even

20     though I don't know why.  In a snap-shot of the situation, the one we

21     discussed here yesterday, Mr. Cemerin, as the head of the civil

22     protection department and the chief operations officer on the ground,

23     informed me about what was agreed with the HV about the provision of

24     means of transportation to do the work necessary and mostly did not

25     function.  They didn't work well.

Page 19959

 1             MR. CARRIER:  If we could turn to page 6 in the English and

 2     page 5 in the B/C/S of this document.  Four paragraphs up from the bottom

 3     in the B/C/S and in the English.  It reads that:

 4             "About 20 bodies were picked up today in Knin," and just for

 5     reference, it's not here, but the date, I believe, is 8 August 1995.

 6             There's brackets:  "(Stored in refrigeration until burial).

 7     Dr. Brkic is causing concern problems, so Cicko asked for his activity to

 8     be restricted.  Until Mr. Cicko arrived, the burials organised by the

 9     Zadar-Knin police administration and by agreement with Dr. Brkic were in

10     a common grave."

11             My question is, were you ever aware of any kind of agreement

12     struck in this respect between Mr. Cicko and anybody or any knowledge

13     about an agreement or any kind of knowledge about these burials that are

14     listed there?

15        A.   If I am reading this sentence correctly, then it says organised

16     by the police administration of Zadar-Knin county, and until Mr. Cicko

17     arrived, the burials were in a common grave.

18             The Zadar-Knin police administration was doing -- was performing

19     these activities in agreement with Dr. Brkic.  But when Cicko arrived, I

20     suppose that what this goes to say is that, of course, these, the things

21     mentioned here, happened, but once the -- once the responsible person --

22             MR. MISETIC: [Previous translation continues] ... finish that

23     answer, Mr. President.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  No I think, Mr. Carrier is right.  The witness is

25     explaining to us what he reads, apparently.  If you would like to add any

Page 19960

 1     questions later, fine.  But do you have any personal knowledge of what is

 2     described here, or did you learn about it at the time?  That was the

 3     question.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not know about this.

 5             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... you're telling

 6     us is just interpreting what you read at this moment.  Is that correctly

 7     understood?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Carrier.

10             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

11        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, I'm -- I'm trying to understand how it would be that

12     this Dr. Brkic would be having contact with so many people from civil

13     protection, and you don't have any information about what was going on.

14     Can you explain how that's possible?

15        A.   It may have been possible because this was probably about

16     operational agreements made in Knin at the time when the -- these people

17     were representing the civil protection.  Whether the people in charge of

18     civil protection, namely the chief of department and the ministry, knew

19     about it is difficult for me to say.  But it can be clearly seen from the

20     orders that we issued and signed that all civil protection members had

21     clear instructions about how to go about their work.

22             So, the concrete case mentioned here in this sentence isn't

23     anything that I was familiar with.  In our orders, we explicitly pointed

24     out to the sanitation units to strictly adhere to the Geneva Conventions

25     and the civil protection conventions about the manner of burying human

Page 19961

 1     remains.

 2        Q.   So is it the case that you just don't know what was happening on

 3     the ground with regard to the collection of human remains during and

 4     after Operation Storm?

 5        A.   I don't think that what you said is the meaning.  Yesterday we

 6     saw a document which Mr. Cemerin sent to my attention at the Ministry of

 7     the Interior, and all activities that the civil protection had engaged in

 8     until that moment in the sanitation process can be clearly seen from it.

 9             We saw that document yesterday, so there is no need for me to

10     explain that to you.  But that document, dated 11 August, doesn't mention

11     any one problem that you have shown in this document.

12        Q.   So is your position that it was simply based on the information

13     that you had, you never actually had any first-hand knowledge of how

14     bodies were collected during that period?

15        A.   I did not have first-hand knowledge.  I got information in the

16     reports, like the one dated 11 August.

17             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. Registrar, if we could have Exhibit D353 on the

18     screen, please.

19        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, in your statement you said that there was no formal

20     or official communication between the HV and civil protection on the

21     collection of dead bodies and that you worked completely independently of

22     the military.  You've made some qualification regarding some logistical

23     support.

24             I take it that you're not aware of any separate reports coming

25     from the HV and from civil protection that contained almost identical

Page 19962

 1     information about the sanitation operations.

 2             Are you aware of anything like that?

 3        A.   No, I was not aware of it.

 4        Q.   And if you look at Exhibit D353, which is a one-page document in

 5     B/C/S.

 6             MR. CARRIER:  And, Mr. Registrar, I'm not sure whether it's

 7     possible to show two documents in B/C/S next to each other.  If it is

 8     possible, can I have document number 65 ter 4976 in the B/C/S next to

 9     that document, which is also, I believe, a one-page document.

10        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, the document with the date, August 8th, 1995, issued

11     under Operation Povratak, from the Sibenik police administration chief,

12     Mr. Matic, which is on the right of your screen, lists 20 bodies that

13     were buried on the 7th and 8th of August, 1995.  And if you look at the

14     other document, 65 ter 4976, which is a document the day after,

15     9 August 1995, from the HV Sibenik Operations Group which is a report on

16     the people killed, and that was filed by Major Krasnic.  You can see at

17     the bottom.

18             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar, for scrolling down.

19        Q.   And you will recall that this is the major had been appointed --

20             MR. MISETIC:  If can he finish the question, and then I'll ...

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, please finish your question.

22             MR. CARRIER:

23        Q.   You'll recall that that's the person that was appointed under

24     General Gotovina's order that we looked at earlier.

25             MR. MISETIC:  And that is my objection, Mr. President.  This

Page 19963

 1     document is two days prior to the order of General Gotovina.

 2             MR. CARRIER:  I'll rephrase the question.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

 4             MR. CARRIER:

 5        Q.   I apologise, Mr. Zidovec, this is the person who was eventually

 6     appointed under General Gotovina's order as one of the coordinators.

 7             Now, looking at these two documents side by side, you can see

 8     that the 20 people listed, other than items 4, 5, and 9 on the document

 9     issued by Major Krasnic, the rest of the people listed follow basically

10     the same information listed in the Povratak document, and follow

11     essentially the same exact order, and even for the items that aren't

12     exactly the same, which are -- if you look at items 4 and 5, item 4 seems

13     to correspond with item 3, and item 5 looks like it might be the same

14     thing or pretty close.

15             My question to you is whether or not you can explain how it is

16     that an HV report, issued the day after that civil protection Povratak

17     report, contains such similar information, given your position that there

18     was no official or direct communication on these types of issues.

19        A.   I cannot comment that.  I can't comment the -- or, rather, the

20     report of the chief of Sibenik police administration was such that it can

21     -- it in no way relates to the report that is -- was shown here on the

22     left.  We didn't know about it at all, at least I didn't.

23             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

25             MR. MISETIC:  It took me a while to find the portion of the

Page 19964

 1     statement, but for the record, it is paragraph 20 of the witness's

 2     statement, and I would not agree that the question accurately reflects

 3     what the witness said in his statement.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, it looks as if it has not influenced the

 5     answer, but it's on the record, that --

 6             MR. MISETIC:  If in the future, if we are a going to cite to a

 7     statement, if we could just -- he doesn't have to bring it up.  If he

 8     could say at paragraph such and such, we can then check it and make a

 9     necessary objection on time.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

11             Could you refer to the relevant portions of the statement,

12     Mr. Carrier, if you are summarising the position which finally is not

13     exclusively found in the -- in the statement but that's at least part of

14     the evidence the witness has given.

15             MR. CARRIER:  And just for the record, I didn't say it was in his

16     statement; I said it was position.  It was my statement of his position.

17     I apologise; I understand the direction.

18             MR. MISETIC:  Well --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  No, there's nothing wrong with that.  I didn't

20     criticise you for that.  The issue is that if you're summarising the

21     position of the witness, then I expect that you take into account all the

22     evidence the witness has given.  And if there is a specific written

23     portion of this evidence to be found in the statement, then it would

24     assist the Defence and the Chamber if you would briefly point at the

25     relevant portion of the statement.  And of course if you would like to

Page 19965

 1     refer to transcript passages, then, of course you are certainly invited

 2     to do so.  But I do understand that summarising the position of a witness

 3     does not always allow for pointing at all the various references you had

 4     in mind.

 5             Please proceed.

 6             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you.  And if I could actually have that

 7     document tendered, 65 ter 4976, please.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  No objections.

 9             Mr. Registrar.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit P2573.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

12             MR. CARRIER:

13        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, I'm going to turn to another topic.  And in your

14     2007 statement you said that civil protection sanitation teams did not go

15     around looking for bodies and that you were informed by the police and

16     police administrations where the bodies were located.  This is in

17     relation to picking up bodies connected to Operation Storm.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you assist us with the paragraph number,

19     Mr. Carrier.

20             MR. CARRIER:  Paragraph 50:

21             "The civil police would notify us of bodies that needed to be

22     buried.  There was never any discussion regarding" --

23             There's more.  Paragraph 72:

24             "We did not go around looking for bodies.  We were informed by

25     the police and police administrations where the bodies were located."

Page 19966

 1             Paragraph 74:

 2             "We were notified by the police administrations of the locations

 3     of the bodies to bury," and it goes on.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

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

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  A mere reference would have done under those

 7     circumstances.

 8             MR. CARRIER:

 9        Q.   Now, Mr. Zidovec, there are a number of Operation Povratak orders

10     which seem to emphasise that civil protection was to immediately carry

11     out a number of things, including reconnaissance and use words in --

12     there's orders that reflect words like finding, detecting, discovering

13     the bodies, and conducting burials.

14             MR. CARRIER:  And I can -- if my friends want to look it up, some

15     of the exhibits I'm referring to are Exhibit D232, Exhibit D233, Exhibit

16     D601, Exhibit D603.

17        Q.   And, Mr. Zidovec, yesterday you testified that civil protection

18     units -- you said a couple of things.  First, that they were first to

19     reach the area where the bodies were located, and that it was the HV that

20     told you where to find the bodies.  And I'm wondering whether or not you

21     can explain this apparent change in your evidence.

22        A.   I think that I spoke on a couple of occasions yesterday in quite

23     clear terms that the information about the location of human remains was

24     something that we received solely from the police.  There simply was no

25     other possibility for civil protection staff to cruise the area and

Page 19967

 1     locate human remains.

 2             Under the circumstances, it was impossible.  And given the

 3     resources we had at our disposal, it was impossible to organise.  What

 4     the flow of communication between civil protection staff was, and I mean

 5     those who were in Knin, is something I have not sufficient knowledge

 6     about, in order to be able to account for how certain members of the

 7     civilian protection got by the information to enable them to dispatch a

 8     sanitation team.

 9        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, in your 2007 statement, you said that the civil

10     police notified civil protection of bodies to be collected.  And that

11     there was never any discussion regarding an investigation of the cause of

12     death.

13             MR. CARRIER:  And just let me find the paragraph reference,

14     Your Honour.

15             MR. MISETIC:  It's paragraph 50, counsel.

16             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you.

17        Q.   And you also stated that there was no need to issue instructions

18     on what to do, and basically in this paragraph you're talking about

19     whether or not foul play was suspected regarding the body, because you

20     only collected bodies where the death had resulted from combat

21     operations.  And you also stated in your 2007 statement that if there was

22     a need for investigation, you assumed that it would have already been

23     carried out by the crime police.

24             And, Mr. Zidovec, during your testimony yesterday, I'm suggesting

25     to that you no longer assumed things and your evidence changed and you

Page 19968

 1     indicated that -- or you gave quite a detailed description --

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I mean, at this point it is

 3     argumentative.  And if there are fact questions to pose to the witness, I

 4     have no objection.  But to characterise the witness's testimony, and it

 5     is impossible check the assertions being made by counsel because there is

 6     no reference to transcript lines, specific references to the statement,

 7     et cetera, at this point I would object to the argumentative nature of

 8     the questioning unless there's a foundation established first with some

 9     questions and then can he put his case to him.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  I would like to invite Mr. Carrier to point as

11     precisely as possible to the references he has in mind.  At the same

12     time, Mr. Misetic, if you want to put to a witness that his evidence

13     apparently was not consistent because that is what you're asking about,

14     then you can't avoid at least some characterisation of that evidence.

15             But if could you do that in the least argumentative language you

16     can find, Mr. Carrier.

17             Could you please rephrase your question.

18             MR. CARRIER:  You already heard the first part, and I will go

19     about what you said yesterday.  The transcript references are T19874,

20     T19916, T19916 again.

21             Yesterday you said, and this is different from -- or at least a

22     more fulsome account of the investigative procedures that were carried

23     out with regard to bodies that you didn't include in your 2007 statement.

24     You indicated that the forensic technician basically was required to

25     examine the body for cause of death, to fill in a detailed crime report

Page 19969

 1     or forensic report, and that only after that was done by the technician

 2     would the body be allowed to be buried.  You also that on the basis of

 3     this procedure and the detailed crime report, the crime police would take

 4     further steps in the investigation.

 5             Now, my suggestion to you is that you never mentioned any of this

 6     when you were asked about these things by the Prosecution investigators.

 7     Specifically about establishing cause of death, and I'm going to suggest

 8     to you it doesn't make any sense given what you said in your statement

 9     that when you were dealing with the bodies, you assumed that if there was

10     a need for an investigation, it would have already been carried out by

11     the crime police.  And I'm going to suggest to you that your most recent

12     testimony is not consistent with what you said in 2007.

13             MR. MISETIC:  Is there a question for the witness?  We've --

14             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, I'm going object.  It's just

15     argumentative.  It's a closing argument, not a question.

16             MR. MISETIC:  The question implicit is, is your testimony

17     consistent?  Apparently.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, well, the question could be how can you

19     reconcile your statement in this respect -- [Overlapping speakers] ...

20             MR. MISETIC:  Well, there's four things that counsel put to him.

21     And is he supposed to answer all four things?

22             JUDGE ORIE:  It is better, Mr. Carrier, if you would take them

23     one by one: you said this, you said that, you said that.  How to

24     reconcile these points with what you said today or -- and put him to what

25     he said today.

Page 19970

 1             To some extent, you have done it, but I must admit that it could

 2     be more focussed, more to the point.

 3             Could you give it another try.

 4             MR. CARRIER:  Certainly.  The purpose is that it all relates to

 5     the investigation of the bodies themselves.

 6        Q.   So number 1, Mr. Zidovec, cause of death.  During your testimony

 7     you gave a very detailed description, and you outline that there is no

 8     obligation on the crime technician to figure out cause of death.  In your

 9     2007 statement you said that that wasn't the case.

10             MR. MISETIC:  Can we get a reference for that in the statement,

11     please.

12             Mr. President, disagree with that characterisation, and

13     therefore --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And apparently you disagree with all of the

15     characterisations.  And at the same time we can't do without.  We can't

16     read again the whole of the portion.

17             In your statement, Mr. Zidovec, you say there was never any

18     discussion regarding investigation of the cause of death of these bodies

19     we were directed to bury.  Whereas, I take it that's what you want to put

20     to the witness, that if you testified yesterday about the procedure, that

21     is that a crime technician would go with you and would establish what the

22     cause of death was.  So apparently Mr. Carrier has some difficulties in

23     reconciling your statement saying, Well, all these things like cause of

24     death to establish death, that was all not for us.  We just were pointed

25     at certain place where a body was.  We assumed that if there would have

Page 19971

 1     been any difficulty as far as the cause of death was concerned that the

 2     police would have dealt with that already.  Whereas in your testimony you

 3     said, We were accompanied, our people were accompanied, and they would

 4     apparently, then, in the presence of the civil protection officers would

 5     establish whether there was any question about the cause of death.

 6             So that is not exactly the same, and Mr. Carrier is wondering how

 7     this then can be reconciled.

 8             Mr. Carrier is this -- I see Mr. Misetic is on his feet.

 9             You disagree with my characterisation as well.

10             MR. MISETIC:  I do.  If we could look at paragraph 74 of the

11     statement.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then the same question arises, to what extent

13     50 and 74 are fully consistent.

14             MR. MISETIC:  I have no problem if he wishes a clarification of

15     50 and 74.  But to put to him that he said -- and this is -- the

16     objection is the question, and the question was, You said in 2007 --

17     sorry, you said [Overlapping speakers] ...

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I read to him literally what his 2007 --

19             MR. MISETIC:  Not your question; the Prosecutor's question.  That

20     is what I was referring to, Mr. President.

21             And my objection was to page 26, lines 19 through 22.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, but I think -- I

23     rephrased the question more or less for Mr. Carrier.  If have you no

24     problems with my question --

25             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

Page 19972

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  -- then you're invited to answer the question.

 2             The question being:  What was it?  Was everything already clear

 3     as far as cause of death is concerned?  If there would be any need for an

 4     investigation that it would have been taken care of already, and the only

 5     thing you still had to carry out is to bury the remains; or was it that

 6     in the presence of your people, with a crime technician, at that moment,

 7     it would be determined whether there was any reason to further

 8     investigate the cause of death.

 9             That is apparently, Mr. Carrier, what is bothering you.

10             Could you tell us which of the two it was.  Because we find

11     elements for both in your statement and testimony.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The crime technician conducted an

13     examination of the scene where the body was found.  This on-site

14     investigation comprises the activities I mentioned yesterday, which is

15     lifting finger-prints, preserving the scene, photographing the scene, in

16     order to produce something that is in the police jargon called the crime

17     report.  The crime report eventually ended up at the relevant police

18     administration.  The civil protection team had nothing to do with that.

19     Once the crime technician did his job, the sanitation team proceeded to

20     bury the remains.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Or not, if there was any reason for a further

22     investigation.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if, once such an

24     on-site investigation was carried out, the remains were taken somewhere

25     else.  I only know that once the crime scene examination was done and a

Page 19973

 1     crime report produced, the remains were buried.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  So even if there were clear signs of a not natural

 3     death, if that would have been established by the crime technician, then,

 4     nevertheless, if a report was made, then the body would be buried anyhow.

 5             Is that how I have to understand your answer?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  Yes.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Which means that, if your people would go to a place

 8     where a body was found, together with a crime technician, that the crime

 9     technician would do his job and that, irrespective of what he found, your

10     people then proceeded to burying this person.  They never had to go back

11     because the report was such that the bodily remains should not be buried

12     but should be further -- that a further investigation needed to be

13     conducted.

14             Is that how I have to understand your testimony?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  I don't know of a single case

16     where, on an order of the crime police, based on such a police report, a

17     body was taken for an autopsy or any other procedure envisaged by the

18     police rules.  In other words, once the crime technician did his job, the

19     remains were buried.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  In all cases, as far as you're aware of?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Carrier.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Correct.

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

25             If I could have Exhibit D234 on the screen, please.

Page 19974

 1        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, what's coming up on the screen right now are minutes

 2     from a meeting of the heads of the crime investigation departments.  We

 3     looked at a different one yesterday, so you might recognise the format,

 4     and can you see among the attendees there is was Assistant Minister

 5     Benko; and the head of the MUP crime police, Mr. Nadj.  Can you see that

 6     at the top.  And this is from 6th August, 1995.

 7             My question is, did you ever have any discussions with Minister

 8     -- Assistant Minister Benko about how investigations were to be conducted

 9     or instituted with regard to the forensic technicians that were to

10     accompany civil protection?

11        A.   I don't think so, because I did not consider myself capable of

12     discussing the matter or presenting any opinions on the matter.

13        Q.   Now, you can see in this document that items are listed and under

14     agenda, item 1 is:

15             "Handling of hygiene and sanitation measures on the ground and

16     tasks of the Forensic Services Department regarding identification."

17             MR. CARRIER:  And if we go to page 2 on the English and staying

18     on page 1 in the B/C/S.

19        Q.   At the top of the page in English, it reads:

20             "The police and the Forensic Services Department are tasked to

21     work on the identification of dead enemy soldiers and dead bodies of

22     civilians.

23             "If the identification of the body is possible, the body should

24     be buried under the established information ..."

25             And it goes on to say:

Page 19975

 1             "If the identification is impossible, the body should be buried

 2     under a number."

 3             The next paragraph I'm going to summarize, but basically the

 4     requirements that the body be finger-printed, possibly taking some

 5     photographs and video, marking the time and place of discovery, and

 6     that's for identification purposes.

 7             And below that there's assignments, and Mr. Maric is assigned to

 8     be coordinator for the different police administrations and should give

 9     specific instructions regarding the identification.  And that he's to

10     coordinate with a Mr., it says there, Cemeri.

11             My question, at this point, Mr. Zidovec, can you confirm that

12     that is actually Mr. Cemerin?

13        A.   Yes, that is him.

14        Q.   And you were aware that Mr. Maric was to coordinate, as it said

15     there, you were aware of that at the time, during August 1995?

16        A.   Mr. Maric was the head of the centre for forensics at the

17     Ministry of the Interior in Zagreb, and, as such, was the person who had

18     the authority to issue instructions like these.

19        Q.   But you understood that, in 1995, during August and

20     Operation Povratak, he was assigned to coordinate with Mr. Cemerin on

21     those issues.

22        A.   I think that this is a purely technical conclusion on

23     coordination, where the issuing and use of identification tags had to be

24     agreed on.  This was an item placed by a dead body and nothing more than

25     that.

Page 19976

 1        Q.   So I take you were not aware --

 2        A.   [In English] Sorry.

 3        Q.   I take it that you were not aware that Mr. Maric was assigned to

 4     do anything other than -- what you're saying is just supplying body tags.

 5     Is that how I'm to understand your answer?

 6        A.   [Interpretation] Yes.  I think that this was the only purpose of

 7     this conclusion.

 8             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. President, I'm noting the time.  This would be

 9     a convenient spot to break before I move to the next document.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll first ask Madam Usher to escort the witness

11     out of the courtroom.

12             We'd like to see you back after the break, after approximately

13     25 minutes, Mr. Zidovec.

14                           [The witness stands down]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, the last issue about the coordination,

16     of course, coordination is further described here.  Coordination and

17     shall give specific instructions regarding the identification.  I think

18     we should clearly distinguish between measures that were needed to be

19     taken to identify a -- the bodily remains, and any investigations needed,

20     in order to further establish the cause of death.

21             That may also explain - I do not say it does, but - with the line

22     that follows, which is the procedure of issue and use of identification

23     plates.

24             MR. CARRIER:  And I hope that the next document will clarify that

25     somewhat.

Page 19977

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  That's all fine.  But you just put to the witness

 2     that he had a task to coordinate, and you didn't say anything about -- I

 3     think what the purpose or at least the context of this coordination was.

 4             MR. CARRIER:  I believe I actually said in that respect after I

 5     had read it to him.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me just see.  Yes, but I think you read -- I

 7     think -- if I made a mistake there, I will be glad to -- could you point

 8     me at a ...

 9             MR. MISETIC:  Page 32, line 4, Mr. President.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I was -- that was not about the passage of the

11     coordination, but it may be that you read that out.

12             MR. CARRIER:  I think, Mr. President --

13             JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ...  should give specific

14     instructions regarding the identification.

15             Then you asked whether this was Mr. Cemerin.

16             And then you asked:

17             "And you were aware that he was to coordinate that during the

18     time, you were aware of that, in August 1995."

19             Yes, and then a few lines later you said:  "On those issues,"

20     referring to something that was said ten lines before, approximately,

21     after a lot of other questions.

22             The witness may have a better recollection of what was said ten

23     lines earlier than I had.  Perhaps I should have had it.

24             We'll have a break, and we will resume at quarter past 4.00.

25                           --- Recess taken at 3.49 p.m.

Page 19978

 1                           [The witness takes the stand]

 2                           --- On resuming at 4.19 p.m.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, you may proceed.

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

 5        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, while the document is still on the screen, which is

 6     Exhibit D234, under that -- on page 2 there's a heading assignment we

 7     already looked at.

 8             One of the things that Mr. Maric was assigned to was to

 9     coordinate the different police administrations, and he was supposed to

10     give some instructions regarding the identification.

11             MR. CARRIER:  And if we could turn to Exhibit P898.

12        Q.   And while that is coming up on the screen, Mr. Maric [sic], this

13     is something that you looked at yesterday.  And it was issued to the

14     crime police chiefs on August 6th, 1995, by Mr. Maric and is the

15     operating procedure for identification.

16             Now, on page 2 in the English, the procedure for dead bodies is

17     listed.  And you can see there, there are a number of things listed, one

18     of the things being a form called KTO 1, in relation to finger-prints.

19             I'm wondering if you know anything about that form.

20        A.   I cannot say anything.  It wasn't anything that I had to do with

21     in my line of business.

22        Q.   And, Your Honours, at some point the Prosecution will bar table

23     that form.  It's 65 ter 7333.  We could do it now if time permits.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I could already ask whether there's any -- would be

25     any objection or whether the Defence teams would first like to look at

Page 19979

 1     it.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  If we could have a little while to look at.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and then if possible, we'd like to hear from

 4     you later today.

 5             MR. CARRIER:  Could we have it marked for identification.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit P2574, marked

 8     for identification.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

10             MR. CARRIER:

11        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, yesterday you testified that the forensic

12     technicians were supposed to produce detailed crime reports.  And you

13     also said that these reports ended up in the police administrations, and

14     you said that at transcript page 19916.  And if you look at the order,

15     and we're just looking at P898 from Mr. Maric.  Under notice it says:

16     "Send forms KTO 1 and KTO 2 to this centre."

17             And then below that, it says:

18             "Send unprocessed roles of film of the body for development to

19     this centre."

20             And both of those are supposed to be sent to the attention of

21     Mr. Maric.

22             Were you aware that the film, et cetera, in connection to the

23     sanitation units and the forensic technicians were being sent directly to

24     Mr. Maric?

25        A.   What I know is the following.  All forms filled out at the crime

Page 19980

 1     scene were sent to police administrations where they were used for

 2     identification.

 3        Q.   How do you know that?

 4        A.   Because I don't know to who else a crime technician from a police

 5     administration would give their material, their crime reports, than to

 6     the organisation for which they worked; namely, to the criminal police or

 7     department of -- their respective police administrations.

 8        Q.   So you don't actually know; you're just assuming that that's

 9     where they would go.

10        A.   From the document that you have shown to me, it follows clearly

11     that the chief of the forensic centre required the chiefs of criminal

12     police in the individual police administrations to submit such documents.

13             I cannot believe that crime technicians would send their crime

14     reports directly to the forensic centre.

15        Q.   Well, if you're referring to the document I just showed you, they

16     were being sent to Mr. Maric at the centre for forensic science in

17     Zagreb, not to police administrations.

18             Is that what you meant when you said it was clear where it was

19     going to?

20        A.   I want to say that it is obvious here that Mr. Maric's letter was

21     sent to the heads of criminal police in the individual police

22     administrations, and the one thing that I can conclude from that is that

23     it was their duty to send or forward those crime reports to the forensic

24     science centre.

25        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, was Mr. Maric the coordinator for all forensic

Page 19981

 1     technicians that were attached to the civil protection units?

 2        A.   He was coordinator for the setting of procedures for

 3     identification, but the structure of the criminal police is such that --

 4     on instructions were forwarded to chiefs of criminal police and the

 5     police administrations, and then they would pass them on along their

 6     chain of -- along the hierarchy.

 7        Q.   Do you know if Mr. Maric was the coordinator for the criminal

 8     police, if investigations were required for any bodies collected by civil

 9     protection units that might require an investigation?

10        A.   Mr. Maric was not a person who would conduct criminal

11     investigations.  The criminal -- or, rather, forensic science centre is a

12     technical organisation.  So they do their part of the work as part of a

13     criminal investigation.  So, in other words, they verify and produce

14     evidence.  That is my understanding of the work of -- of a forensic --

15     forensics lab in my country.

16        Q.   Was there a coordinator assigned for criminal police, in relation

17     to sanitation units?

18        A.   Unfortunately, I cannot provide an answer to that question,

19     because I don't know.

20             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. Registrar, could we please have D235 up on the

21     screen, please.

22        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this is another set of minutes for the crime police

23     sector chiefs, this one held on August 7th, 1995, and you can see some of

24     the attendees.  Those included chief of crime police, Mr. Nadj, and can

25     you see Mr. Maric's name as well.  And on the agenda, item number 1 is

Page 19982

 1     listed as tasks in relation to clearing up the terrain.  And under AD-1,

 2     which corresponds to that agenda item, it reads:

 3             "Since in the area army activity war operations are being

 4     conducted, it is crucial to carry out cleaning [sic] up the terrain in

 5     that area, and it is our task to carry out the identification of persons

 6     in the prescribed manner, and it is not necessary to conduct on-site

 7     investigations.  Mr. Maric will carry out coordination of the above."

 8             Mr. Zidovec, were you aware in any way that there was a meeting

 9     of the crime police sector chiefs or that Mr. Maric was involved where

10     they identified their task as carrying out the identification of the

11     bodies but there was decision, or there was at least comment made that no

12     on-site investigation was required?

13        A.   No.  Such a document -- or there was no need for such a document

14     to reach me because it has nothing to do with the activities I was in

15     charge of at the time.

16                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

17             MR. CARRIER:  Your Honours, Mr. President, there are five other

18     sets of minutes related to meetings of the chiefs of the crime police

19     wherein Mr. Maric is involved in the meeting, and there's an agenda item

20     related to clearing up the terrain.  And Mr. Maric indicates that there

21     aren't any problems, et cetera, in different parts, and in two parts

22     mentions Mr. Cemerin.  Given the time constraints, and -- I think given

23     this witness's -- wasn't present at those meetings, but it is related,

24     I'd ask to tender those from the bar.

25             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, if those documents can be

Page 19983

 1     identified, we'll take a look at them.  We may have had an objection to

 2     bar tabling these documents.  The Chamber is aware that Mr. Kardum, who

 3     was a chief of crime police in Zadar, testified as Prosecution witness.

 4     And to that extent I need to check to see if these matters should have

 5     been put to him.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  How much time --

 7             MR. MISETIC:  It depends --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- do you think you'd need?

 9             MR. MISETIC:  I need to first know what the documents are, so ...

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I would have expected that Mr. Carrier would

11     have informed you about the documents he intended to use.

12             MR. CARRIER:  They are on the exhibit list.  I'll read them out.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  On the exhibit list.

14             Could you please identify them so that the Defence at least knows

15     which ones you are actually referring to.

16             MR. CARRIER:  65 ter 7335; 65 ter 7338; 7339; 7340; 7341.  And if

17     it assists, I'm looking through, and I don't see Mr. Kardum's name as

18     present in any of those.

19             But if they could be tendered into evidence under MFI numbers.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll already MFI them so that we know what we are

21     talking about.

22             Mr. Registrar.

23             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, 65 ter 7335 becomes Exhibit P2575,

24     marked for identification.  65 ter number 7338 becomes Exhibit P2576,

25     marked for identification; 65 ter 7339 becomes Exhibit P2577, marked for

Page 19984

 1     identification; 65 ter 7340 becomes Exhibit P2578, marked for

 2     identification; and 65 ter 7341 becomes Exhibit P2579, also marked for

 3     identification.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

 5             Mr. Misetic, before the break, you said that you would like have

 6     a little while to look at P2574.  Any response yet?  That was the

 7     document which Mr. Carrier sought to be admitted into evidence, in

 8     which ...

 9             MR. CAYLEY:  Your Honour, for the Cermak Defence, we have no

10     objection.  We've taken a look so ...

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and I see Mr. Mikulicic is --

12             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, we have no objections, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

14             MR. MISETIC: [Microphone not activated]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Then the status the P2574 changes from marked for

16     identification to admitted into evidence.

17             Please proceed.

18             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

19             If I could have Exhibit D236 on the screen.

20        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this is a report or order from you dated

21     18 August 1995, under Povratak, subject:  Terrain clearing up.  And in

22     the second paragraph -- or in the first paragraph, you're describing that

23     there's a -- been a warning issued from several international

24     organisations regarding the burial of persons killed in the course of

25     Operation Storm that has been fully carried out yet.

Page 19985

 1             And in the second paragraph, you're instructing that people look

 2     for bodies, and if they find them, to have them urgently buried in the

 3     manner established in the course of the operation (shorter identification

 4     procedure carried out by the crime police and burial organised by

 5     civilian protection)."

 6             Do you recognise this document?

 7        A.   [In English] Yes.

 8        Q.   And can you explain what you meant by "shorter identification

 9     procedure."

10        A.   [Interpretation] The shorter identification procedure, as applied

11     at the time, meant that all activities should be undertaken that would

12     have been applied under normal conditions; that is, at the beginning of

13     sanitation, when it was possible, of course.  But we're talking about the

14     18th of August, so this is about two weeks after the period or two weeks

15     after the start of the sanitation of the ground, and we couldn't suppose

16     where bodies can be found, if any, and what the condition of the bodies

17     would be with regard to weather conditions.

18        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... I just wanted to know if you

19     could actually explain what the "shorter identification procedure" was.

20        A.   Well, it means if it wasn't possible to identify a body by

21     finger-prints, then -- then that technique not be performed due to the

22     condition of the body, which may have been decaying already, due to the

23     general conditions.

24             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. Registrar, could I please have 65 ter 2459 on

25     the screen, please.

Page 19986

 1             And we turn --

 2        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this is a document dated 23rd November 1995 from the

 3     United Nations Centre for Human Rights field office, Zagreb.  And in the

 4     subject line on the first page it says:

 5             "Meeting with Zdravko Zidovec, Assistant Minister for Interior,

 6     in connection to the Security Council Relation 1019.  Please find

 7     attached a report on the meeting held with Mr. Zidovec."

 8             Can you confirm that that's you and that you attended a meeting

 9     on that issue?

10        A.   Yes, I confirm that.

11        Q.   Thank you.

12             MR. CARRIER:  And I ask that that be tendered into evidence.  I

13     don't have any further questions on it.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Is the report attached or ...

15             MR. CARRIER:  Yes.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  And you tender the whole of the document which is a

17     four-page document.

18             MR. CARRIER:  Yes.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Is it of any use to put to Mr. Zidovec, or are you

20     intending to do that, what is reported so that he has an opportunity to

21     either confirm or deny?  That might assist the Chamber in interpreting

22     the probative value of this report.  And it might be fair to Mr. Zidovec

23     as well.

24             MR. CARRIER:  I didn't intend to, Mr. President.  I understand

25     that this is actually on --

Page 19987

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Oh.  May I take that the report is about the

 2     conversation that was held with Mr. Zidovec and whether that's an

 3     accurate report or not?  Of course, I haven't seen it until now.  I see

 4     that it's two full A4, two and a half full A4, in which I would expect

 5     that it will be reported not only what the reporter said but also what

 6     Mr. Zidovec said.  And I take it that you want the Chamber to look at it

 7     and to consider that.

 8             MR. CARRIER:  Potentially in relation to some numbers.  I am

 9     happy to go through it.  I understand it is actually on the Gotovina

10     exhibit list as well.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But if it is a conversation -- are you going

12     to use it, Mr. Misetic?

13             MR. MISETIC:  I just finished my direct, Mr. President, so ...

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Of course, this has now been raised in cross

15     so ...

16             MR. MISETIC:  Obviously I think it is a pretty good document, so

17     if he wants to tender it, I don't have --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  So if every one thinks of it as a reliable

19     document even in terms of the role that Mr. Zidovec has given in this

20     report -- I have got no idea; I haven't read it.

21             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, just from the perspective of 90(H), if

22     there is something in there that the Prosecution intends to rely on, I'd

23     ask that it be put to him.  Otherwise, I mean, I don't have any objection

24     to the document coming in as a bar table or [Overlapping speakers] ...

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and there's no dispute about whether this

Page 19988

 1     reflects more or less what was said, or is there any challenge to that?

 2     Because that, of course, is it important for the weight --

 3             MR. MISETIC:  I cannot say that, Mr. President.  I didn't go

 4     through with the witness in proofing this document, so I have no idea

 5     whether the witness would confirm that this is what was said.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, I consulted with my colleagues.  We

 8     tried to read through it very quickly, but, of course, if the parties

 9     agree on the accuracy of the report, then the Chamber might take this as

10     a starting point, but --

11             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I'm checking right now.  I have seen

12     the report, but I don't see that it is on our exhibit list, and perhaps

13     Mr. Carrier can point it out if it is.  I may be mistaken, but I can't

14     find it here.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but you'll understand that if at a later stage

16     we'd like it consider what weight to be given to it, and then if there

17     would be any dispute as to the content of the report and the content of

18     the meeting which was apparently held, that we would not have the witness

19     here anymore, so therefore --

20             MR. MISETIC:  As I indicated, Mr. President, we think that any

21     matters of relevance should be put to him.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's use our time quickly to read ...

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, the Chamber suggests a very practical

25     solution for the matter, which is that either during the next break or

Page 19989

 1     when we are dealing with procedural matters that a B/C/S copy will be

 2     given to the witness so that he can tell us whether he finds any

 3     inaccuracies in the report in relation to what he supposedly had said

 4     during that meeting, that -- and if you would limit it to certain -- to

 5     certain subjects, because it deals with killings, it deals with looting,

 6     it deals with a lot of things, then please tell us because then we could

 7     invite the witness to specifically focus his attention on those subjects.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, my only comment was going to be if

 9     quo ask for foundation for those statistics when the witness is asked

10     questions about it.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, yes, if I see the numbers, some of them --

12             MR. MISETIC:  Right.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  -- approximately seem to be rather familiar to us.

14     But I suggest that we deal with it in this way so that the Chamber knows

15     to what extent it can rely on the report.

16             Yes.

17             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you very much.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Mr. Zidovec, at a later moment, you'll be able

19     to read through the document the Prosecution is now tendering, because

20     it's a report about a meeting you had with the person reporting, and so

21     that can you draw our attention to inaccuracies in this report, not

22     letter by letter perhaps, but whether it reflects in -- in general what

23     you said.

24                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we proceed for the time being, Mr. Carrier, and

Page 19990

 1     once we have a break, or when we're dealing with procedural matters,

 2     Mr. Zidovec will be provided with a copy in his own language.

 3             Please proceed.

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

 5        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, regarding your role in civil protection and fires

 6     and fire prevention, et cetera, I was wondering if you were ever aware of

 7     any order or decision made in the Ministry of the Interior to not

 8     investigate certain instances of arson or burning.

 9        A.   I don't know of such a decision.

10        Q.   And yesterday when you were testifying about reception centres,

11     you were asked a little bit about collection centres.  Is it your

12     evidence that you don't really know anything that was happening with

13     regard to collection centres?

14        A.   Are you referring to the reception centres for civilians?

15        Q.   No, I'm asking if you recognise any difference between the words

16     "reception centre" and "collection centre," other than the obvious fact

17     that they're different words.

18        A.   Collection centres were something that was completely outside of

19     the competence of civilian protection.  Our role, if any, could only have

20     been an auxiliary one, in terms of assisting in the food supply and the

21     provision of medical care.  I suppose that you mean to say that

22     collection centres were centres intended for prisoners or similar

23     individuals.  In such centres, if this is what you're referring to, the

24     civilian protection did not have a role to play whatsoever.

25             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President.

Page 19991

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Misetic.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Just while we're on this point, first with respect

 3     to the five bar table documents that, a few minutes ago, Mr. Carrier

 4     tendered from the bar, P2576 MFI, to me, appears to be a document about

 5     reception centres.  P2577 appears to be a document about collection

 6     centres.  And to that extent if there's matters in there that relate to

 7     those issues, I would ask that if there is something relevant to that

 8     issue that it be put to him.

 9             And we cannot pull up in e-court P2578 or P2579, MFI.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Sometime there is a short delay -- or do you have

11     the 65 ter numbers?

12             MR. MISETIC:  We do, and we couldn't pull it up either with the

13     65 ter or the P number.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, were you able to find the relevant

15     65 ter numbers?

16             THE REGISTRAR:  No, Your Honour, I was not.  It appears they

17     haven't been released.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Could that be done within the next 15 or 30 seconds,

19     Mr. Hedaraly.

20             Let's proceed for the time being and the invitation to deal with

21     the collection/reception centres seems to be relevant.

22             Please proceed.

23             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you.

24        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, on the topic of reception centres, you stated that

25     you were only assigned to collect those people remaining, that were not

Page 19992

 1     capable of living on their own and there was no plan or directive to

 2     collect people who were capable of living by themselves.  And you also

 3     stated that the authorities would not transfer people to the reception

 4     centres against their will.

 5             My question is, would you be able to explain why there's

 6     information that civilian women, children, and men were brought to

 7     reception centres against their will and that they were guarded --

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Can we have some references, Mr. President, please.

 9     I mean --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier.

11             MR. CARRIER:  Sorry, Mr. President, I'm not sure whether or not

12     it's actually in dispute that there's evidence in this case so far on

13     what I'm putting to him, so --

14             MR. MISETIC:  It is very much in disputes, Mr. President, and if

15     I can just state now my general objection to this.

16             The procedure thus far has been to put factual questions to a

17     witness and then confront him at the end with the argument if that is

18     what is.  I don't deny that it's possible to do it in reverse, but then I

19     think the person is required, if you start from the back, that you're

20     going to lay the foundation then for the ultimate question subsequent to

21     that.  We've been proceeding now with counsel giving essentially his

22     views of the evidence which is disputed.

23             So if we can go step by step and see exactly what it is that's

24     the basis for the question, then --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, then, of course, we might have another

Page 19993

 1     problem, that what is -- Mr. Carrier is blamed for putting the evidence

 2     to the witness, but now he does it in a rather general way.  Let's say

 3     that we have various types of evidence, disputed or not, but which

 4     relates to this matter.

 5             Let me just consult.

 6                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 7                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

 8                           [Defence counsel confer]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, let me put one or perhaps two questions

10     to the witness first.

11             Mr. Zidovec, do you know of any case where civilians were taken

12     to a centre - and I'm talking about civilians at this moment - where they

13     were taken against their will?  And for this moment, I'm not making any

14     distinction between whether it is a reception centre or a collection

15     centre.

16             Are you aware of any case where this may have happened?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am not, Mr. President.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you tell us where the reception centre closest

19     to the city of Knin was established?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wouldn't be able to give you a

21     precise answer to that question.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  If it is not a precise answer, an approximate

23     answer.  Could you tell us approximately would have been the distance

24     between the town of Knin and the reception centre you remember as being

25     closest to it?

Page 19994

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I note that there were centres in

 2     Knin, Obrovac, Benkovac, and Zadar.  I know of a centre located on an

 3     island opposite Sibenik, the island of Obonjan, which was the longest

 4     lived.  But I suppose that the centre could have been housed in a school

 5     building or in the vicinity of the Knin hospital.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  There was a reception centre established in Knin

 7     town itself?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you remember where that was located, in what kind

10     of building?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, I don't know.  I can

12     only guess that it may have been in a school building or the gym of a

13     school.  I can't give you an exact answer.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Do you exclude for the possibility that

15     someone was taken to a school building in Knin, being a civilian, and

16     would have to stay there for a while, although that person did not wish

17     to go there and to stay there?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't recall ever seeing an

19     account of a civilian having been forcibly taken to a reception centre

20     for civilians.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you tell us as far as collection centres and

22     reception centres are concerned, was there, to your knowledge, a

23     reception centre in Knin town?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said a moment ago that I believed

25     that there existed for a while a reception centre for civilians in Knin.

Page 19995

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I was talking about a collection centre, and

 2     apparently a distinction is made between a sabirni centre and I think

 3     what is called a prihvatni centre.

 4             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was a problem in

 5     interpretation.

 6             To the best of my recollection, there was a reception centre for

 7     civilians, which operated for a while in Knin.

 8             If my memory is correct, eventually, to improve the general

 9     conditions, it was transferred to Zadar, I believe, although I don't know

10     how many civilians were willing to go there at all.

11             There is one information I know of certainly, and that's

12     according to the information of the civilian protection, a bit under a

13     thousand individuals, 960 or 980 of them, passed through the reception

14     centre in Knin.  The information can be found in the final report of the

15     civilian protection in the implementation of Operation Povratak,

16     following Storm.  The report was compiled in early December of 1995.

17             Based on the information I know of, which comes -- comes from the

18     report, I can tell you that when it comes to reception centres for

19     civilians across the territory covered by Operation Storm, and I'm

20     pointing out that I'm referring to the entire territory, a bit under

21     4.000 persons went through these centres.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm not asking you about those centres.

23             Do you know when the reception centre in Knin was established?

24     I'm talking about the reception centre.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't remember the exact date.

Page 19996

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Was it right at the beginning of Operation Storm?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It may have happened in the first

 3     half of August of 1995.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, as far as a collection centre, sabirni

 5     centre is concerned, was there one established in Knin?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know if such a centre was

 7     set up in Knin, because it was not the focus of our interest.

 8             The document shown to me by the Prosecution here clearly

 9     indicates that the criminal investigation police engaged in preparations

10     for the setting up of collection centres.  This is something I saw in the

11     document from the specialist meeting of the chief of the crime police

12     sector, but that's all I know about it.  I saw that the persons involved

13     were those who were otherwise engaged in the investigations into war

14     crimes, and that's how I can conclude that it was they in fact who were

15     in charge of these centres and conducted their basic investigations

16     there.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you conclude for the possibility that the

18     collection centre in Knin and the reception centre in Knin were located

19     on the same premises?  Which would mean, if it is a school that both were

20     in that school.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can merely say that, with regard

22     to the collection centre for civilians, I'm sure that it was clearly

23     separate from the collection centre.  But whether or not it was in the

24     same building, I really don't know.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, if you can tell us that it was clearly

Page 19997

 1     separate, you must have some idea, isn't it, about their locations?

 2     Otherwise, it's difficult to say that they were clearly separate.

 3             A direct question:  Were they in the same premises, a school?

 4     Were they or were they not, to the extent you know?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I still cannot remember that

 6     because I know that the civil protection was engaged in the support of

 7     the population that was taken to the reception centres for civilians.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 9             Could I seek from our interpreters, because the Chamber has

10     looked at the original documents now and then.  A while ago the witness

11     talked about a collection centre for civilians.

12             Could we hear from our interpreters what word was translated in

13     this context, that is collection centre for civilians.  Was that sabirni

14     centre?  Could I --

15             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreters understood the witness to have

16     said sabirni centre, that is collection centre for civilians.

17             JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... then added for

18     civilians, which means that that this term apparently in some context is

19     -- well, let me not comment on it at this at this moment.  I just wanted

20     to know whether there would be any possibility of a --

21             MR. MISETIC:  If we could check that, Mr. President.  I don't

22     think, if you read the sentence in its entirety, it makes sense.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But, of course, I asked specifically, our

24     interpreters.  And if you want to verify that, you know that there is

25     audio available in the original to verify what he said.

Page 19998

 1             MR. MISETIC:  Again, I would simply -- if you wish, I will do it

 2     in redirect.  But this sentence doesn't make sense as it currently

 3     stands, in our view.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, of course, have you a possibility to ask any

 5     further questions.

 6             Mr. Carrier, I leave it further in your hands at this moment.

 7             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. President, if I could just clarify something.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'm not -- I have not exhausted this subject,

 9     but I just wanted to see whether some questions could put to the witness

10     and that we could receive some answers, hopefully without being engaged

11     in too many procedural issues.

12             Please proceed.

13             MR. CARRIER:  And just so it's clear, the purpose of citing his

14     evidence so far is that the foundation has been laid from the information

15     from before.  And the Prosecution is clearly under an obligation under

16     Rule 90(H) to put contrary evidence to him.  I don't plan to educate him

17     but taking him through pieces of evidence, but simply to put at least

18     contrary information to him.  So that was the purpose of the style of

19     questioning.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  You would say you would have to put your case to the

21     witness if you are eliciting from him evidence which contradicts your

22     case in which is not in direct response what has been dealt with in

23     chief, Rule 90(H).

24             MR. CARRIER:  Yes.

25             MR. MISETIC:  I was going cite Rule 90(H) myself, Mr. President.

Page 19999

 1     The witness, if there is an evidentiary foundation for the Prosecution's

 2     position, then that evidentiary basis should be put to the witness to

 3     give him an opportunity to refute it.  But to simply make a general

 4     assertion and then ask the witness whether he agrees with the general

 5     assertion doesn't, in our view, provide much probative value as to the

 6     evidence.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Zidovec, do you understand and/or speak English?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand it.

 9                           [Trial Chamber confers]

10                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Zidovec, as I announced earlier, there was a

12     document, a report on a conversation you have had which is available in

13     your language.  The Chamber thought that this might be an appropriate

14     time to invite to you read that but not in this courtroom.

15             Would you be willing to go through the document, and if there's

16     anything inaccurate in it, it's not a verbatim report on what you said,

17     but whether if you would say that the gist of what you are reported to

18     have said is incorrect, that you inform us about it.

19             Would you, for those purposes, please follow Madam Usher and read

20     that document.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

22                           [The witness stands down]

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's try to resolve what should and should not be

24     put to this witness.

25             We can't recount all of the evidence but, of course, there are

Page 20000

 1     portions of evidence.  I remember the evidence of a lady who said that

 2     she was taken to -- I think she said, but forgive me I'm wrong, to the

 3     school in Knin where she had to wait for 40 days.  She was not allowed to

 4     leave, at least that's my recollection.  I have not checked that.  And

 5     then was taken to Zadar, I think it was a lady together with her

 6     daughter.  So that is evidence which at least suggests strongly that she

 7     was taken there against her will.

 8             We -- I think we also have documentary evidence, in which the

 9     word detention or detainees is used.  And I'll not go through all of it

10     at this moment, but there certainly are pieces of evidence which would

11     contradict what this witness said, and -- because he said that never

12     anyone was taken against his will to such a centre, apart from how the

13     centre should be qualified, what name they should bear, where they were

14     located, close to each other, not close to each other.  This witness is

15     talking about 900 persons processed apparently through the reception

16     centre or collection centre for civilians in Knin.

17             Is there any way that we could agree on what is fair to put to

18     the witness and what is not fair to put to the witness against the

19     background of what I just said and which is certainly not an exhaustive

20     -- is not an exhaustive reflection of all of the evidence which is

21     directly or indirectly related to this matter.

22             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, from my perspective the issues are

23     much simpler than perhaps they may appear at first glance.

24             In my direct, I literally lifted verbatim from the Prosecution's

25     pre-trial brief on reception centres.  And I posed four questions that

Page 20001

 1     are the Prosecution's case from its pre-trial brief.  I asked him, Were

 2     the reception centres set up as part of a plan to remove Serb civilians?

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  The answer was no.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.  Were Serb civilians forced to stay in these

 5     centres?  Was fear deliberately instilled in the Serbs civilians in the

 6     centres?  And were they systematically transferred out of Croatia after

 7     being in the centres?

 8             I raised a fifth point which was that there no international

 9     criticism in the reception centres in 1995.

10             If the Prosecution wishes to impeach him on those claims, then I

11     there is a proper process to impeach him on that case whether they wish

12     to use statements of witnesses who have appeared, whether there is

13     documentary evidence, et cetera.  It is it improper, though, for council

14     to get up and say, The record says this, and how do you address that?

15             If they want to say there was a plan, that needs to be put to

16     this witness.

17             The issue of whether -- and Mrs. A said she felt that she was

18     held against her will might be relevant to one of these points but

19     doesn't address the overall picture, which is this is a JCE allegation.

20     He is the person at the top responsible for establishing and running the

21     centres.  And in the overall scheme of a joint criminal enterprise, I

22     think the Prosecution needs to put their case as to -- as it concerns a

23     JCE to the witness.

24             How they wish to go about it is up to them.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Part of that case is that people were detained

Page 20002

 1     against their will, whether this finally amounts to a plan, of course, is

 2     also the case, but you don't have to put the whole case to the witness.

 3     What you should put to the witness that he testified about never a person

 4     being taken there.  He said there was no plan.

 5             MR. MISETIC:  I believe the witness, and I could be easily wrong

 6     here, I believe he said he didn't know of a person being forced against

 7     their will --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 9             MR. MISETIC:  -- which is different from saying that a no one

10     was.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it is, however, the Prosecution's case that one

12     or more persons were taken there against their will.  So then it is fair

13     that that would be put to the witness.  And I think would also be fair to

14     put the witness the documentary evidence which specifically focuses on

15     who should stay in what kind of centre and whether it is it about

16     detention of civilians.

17             You'll understand, Mr. Carrier, I don't have all the sources

18     ready because I prepare in a different way for these court hearings than

19     the parties do.  Also this Chamber, of course, has no case to be put to

20     the witness because this Chamber has no case.  Therefore, we ask

21     questions in a bit of a different way.

22             I think it would be fair to raise the issue about -- that we have

23     received evidence of a lady who reports that she was detained, and if you

24     have any other examples, you can summarize it, and we can't go through

25     all of the evidence.  Further, I remember, and have you to forgive me not

Page 20003

 1     having all the P numbers present, but I have a clear recollection of a

 2     document in which centres and civilians being there and whether to be

 3     kept there or not to be kept there, appears.  I think it would be fair at

 4     least to put those two matters to the witness and to say the witness that

 5     it's the Prosecution's case that people were not voluntarily staying in

 6     those centres.

 7             MR. CARRIER:  I have to admit, Mr. President, I'm slightly

 8     confused on a couple of points.  And if I could just seek clarification

 9     and explain why.

10             The first being under Rule 90(H) the reason -- in the

11     cross-examination of a witness who is able -- I'm sure you know this, and

12     I apologise for -- partly it is for my own benefit.  But in the

13     cross-examination of a witness who is able to give evidence relevant to

14     the case for the -- for the cross-examining party, council shall put to

15     that witness the nature of the case of the party for whom that counsel

16     appears.  So my understanding of that was, number one, that it was simply

17     to put the nature, not specific pieces of evidence.  And I appreciate

18     your point, Your Honour, but then in background to this in preparation,

19     my understanding is that Defence have also objected to saying, well,

20     putting it to a witness, well, this person said X or that person said

21     this.  And it was also objected today that when I read things saying,

22     well, it's in evidence, so that was objected to, I should just say --

23     [overlapping speakers] ...

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

25             MR. CARRIER:  So that's why I'm confused.

Page 20004

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  I am aware of that.  Could we try to find a fair

 2     mixture that putting it in a general terms to the witness that this --

 3     the case of the Prosecution is that people were not -- at least not all

 4     of them were staying there.  We heard evidence of someone who was taken

 5     to a Knin centre, in a school building, from what I remember, and that

 6     apparently contradicts your testimony, do you have any comment on that?

 7     And perhaps the documentary evidence could be specifically put to him.

 8     I -- there is --

 9             MR. MISETIC:  That's fine, Mr. President.  If -- and just for the

10     record, if the Prosecution contends that there was international

11     criticism of the reception centres, if that could be put to him, because

12     he is the person in charge of them, and then can he deal with it.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If you would, in addition, put that to the

14     witness as well, whether there was any international --

15             MR. CARRIER:  I think Mr. Misetic already did that; he said no.

16     So you're saying if there's evidence -- [Overlapping speakers] ...

17             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  He said no, but isn't it

18     true that in cross-examination you try to challenge the credibility and

19     reliability of a witness.  So if it is the position of the Prosecution if

20     a witness has testified about a matter in chief, that there's no need to

21     further explore whether he -- his answers were in accordance with the

22     truth, then it would come as a surprise to me.

23             MR. CARRIER:  That wasn't my position.  It was simply --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  But that's what you said, I think.

25             MR. CARRIER:  I think my point is that the reason that I've tried

Page 20005

 1     to construct it in a certain way is to try to address the things that

 2     he's mentioned, which is why I read it him first, as I explained, to try

 3     to hit those points but ...

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I suggest that we take a break at this moment, that

 5     you try within the next 20 minutes to reach, and I have tried to broker a

 6     bit, to achieve an agreement with Mr. Misetic on what is appropriately

 7     put to the witness and what is not necessary to put to the witness, and

 8     then ask him questions.  And then I'd also like to know how much time you

 9     would further need.

10             MR. CARRIER:  This was the -- the last bit.  It's taken longer

11     than expected.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Then my next question would be to Mr. Misetic and

13     other Defence counsel, whether what happened during cross-examination has

14     changed their estimate as to how much would be needed in re-examination.

15             MR. MISETIC:  I think it is exactly what you said yesterday,

16     Mr. President.  Maybe up to ten minutes, no more.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Fine.

18             If this Chamber comes back after the break, we expect a smooth

19     conclusion of the cross-examination.  The parties are invited to assist

20     each other in making this happen.

21             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I think on behalf of all of the

22     parties we would like to see you come back after the break, so ...

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic, you would like to contradict what

24     Mr. Misetic just said?

25             MR. MIKULICIC:  No, no, not at all, Your Honour.  I would just

Page 20006

 1     like to add that based on cross-examination from my learned colleague,

 2     I'll need probably ten minutes as well.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Ten minutes.  Let's then try to do the following.

 4     We resume at five minutes to 6.00.  Mr. Carrier will certainly conclude

 5     within, then, the next ten to 15 minutes.  Then it is quarter past 6.00.

 6     Mr. Misetic would take another ten minutes.  Mr. Mikulicic would take

 7     another ten minutes, which brings us to 6.35.  I include already that you

 8     take a bit more, and the Chamber would at least have 15 to 20 minutes to

 9     deal with some procedural matters at the end of this afternoon's hearing.

10             We would like to see you back in 20 minutes.

11                           --- Recess taken at 5.36 p.m.

12                           [The witness takes the stand]

13                           --- On resuming at 6.01 p.m.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, you may proceed.

15             MR. CARRIER:  Thank you, Mr. President.

16        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, regarding the reception centres, did you ever visit

17     any of these reception centres on ground in the first few weeks of

18     August 1995?

19        A.   No, I haven't.

20        Q.   Did you visit any of them during August, at all, 1995?

21        A.   No, I didn't.

22        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, you have provided evidence that people were allowed

23     to leave these reception centres that you were in charge of, of their own

24     free will.

25             This Chamber has heard evidence, for example, Exhibit P30,

Page 20007

 1     paragraph 2, P1099, paragraphs 20 to 21 - and, sorry, page 2 on P30 - at

 2     a reception centre in Knin there was about 150 women, children, elderly,

 3     and that the Deputy Commander of that place in Knin told people from the

 4     UN that these 150 people were not free to leave, and that was for their

 5     own security.

 6             Do you have any comment on that?

 7        A.   Our instructions how civilians in reception centres should be

 8     treated were contrary to such a statement.  I know that civilians were

 9     able to leave the centre when they wanted to and some did, indeed, leave

10     and return to their homes.

11             In the first few days, on the 6th or 7th August, around that

12     time, I issued an explicit instruction for civilians in reception centre

13     -- centres to be allowed to leave such a centre, if -- if relatives come

14     to pick them up.  And in that -- in that context, I demanded that, once

15     communication is set up between these civilians and their family, the

16     Red Cross be involved, which has a tracing service.  The Red Cross, being

17     a humanitarian organisation, upon request of the civilians in the

18     centres, searched for their relatives who were willing to accept them.

19     So that was a way to leave for such civilians, they could go and stay

20     with their relatives.  We considered that the most secure possibility at

21     that time.

22             Anyway, civilians were completely free to decide whether they

23     wanted to stay in the centre or join their relatives or return their

24     villages; that is, the places where they lived before.

25        Q.   Now your answer says that you issued an order that people be

Page 20008

 1     allowed to leave the centre if relatives come and pick them up, in that

 2     context.

 3             And then you talk about --

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... getting the Red Cross

 6     involved.

 7        A.   Mm-hm.

 8        Q.   But you would agree with me that you're actually setting

 9     conditions for whether or not they can leave so they're not actually free

10     to leave, under your order?

11        A.   It is natural that such people were asked the question whether

12     they have anybody in the Republic of Croatia to who they wanted to go.

13     And there were requests by people to join their relatives.  And it was

14     possible to forward such a request through the Red Cross to their

15     relatives, and upon the receipt of the reply, stating that the relatives

16     were willing to accept them, we let these people go, and people did

17     leave.

18             I spoke to Mr. Cemerin and learned that in the early days, some

19     from our centre went -- well, let's call it a camp of the UN at Knin.

20     People from that camp came to our camp, and that is the essence of my

21     statement, that they were able to leave the reception centre of the civil

22     protection if they so wished.

23             People who wanted to return to their homes as soon as possible,

24     to them, we clearly -- we made it clear that in those areas there might

25     be some -- some threats to their security, but we were in no position to

Page 20009

 1     prevent them from returning home.

 2        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this Chamber has received evidence that people on

 3     arrival in Knin were told by police to go to a school building in Knin

 4     and, at that place, they were held, and during that time they were

 5     guarded by policemen wearing uniforms with guns, and that they were not

 6     allowed to leave.  And that's after they had been actually stopped and

 7     held in a basement first before being moved to Knin.  And the reference

 8     for that is P652, paragraph 17; P653, paragraph 11; P654.  Transcript

 9     reference 6718 and following.  And though I cite some of the evidence,

10     I'm being selective because clearly, and just for the record, I can't be

11     comprehensive in terms of this so ... but I'm putting pieces of it to

12     you.  So do you have any comment on that?

13             And actually before do you that, let me just -- there's also

14     evidence that people gather in the Knin elementary school, older people,

15     sick people, and there's a commentary by an international that it was

16     strange that there were 150 heavily armed and very aggressive police

17     people for 130 old people.  And that is D741, page 11.

18             Any comment on that?

19        A.   I have no comment to that.  I can't comment.

20        Q.   And some people -- there's also evidence that this Trial Chamber

21     has heard about people who were actually forced to leave their houses in

22     the countryside, and they were put in collection centres by the military.

23     That's P31, page 1, paragraph 2.  Do you have any comment on that?

24        A.   I have no comment.

25        Q.   This Trial Chamber has also received evidence from different

Page 20010

 1     Croatian authorities on the ground about collecting civilians and handing

 2     them over to the Ministry of Interior, and there's a number of different

 3     reasons, and I will go through them with you.

 4             D57, one person noted that people were collected in order to give

 5     them identification and also because there were some security concerns.

 6     That's also at P897.  A soldier reported that the default measure for

 7     civilians found in the area was to transfer them to collection centres

 8     for security reasons and to register them and conduct investigations,

 9     et cetera, to see if they had any connection to enemy forces.  There's

10     evidence from military police that testified they picked up people.

11     Sometimes it was because -- to protect them from harm; sometimes it was

12     so they could get ID.  And that's at transcript reference 9128 and

13     following.

14             More police evidence that military or police brought civilians

15     because they were incapable of living on their own.  Some had been

16     abandoned, some were brought there voluntarily, some for their own

17     safety.  That was all actually from one person.  P897, paragraph 35; and

18     also transcript reference T9292.

19             Do you have any comment on that?

20        A.   Concerning civilians who were in reception centres, we

21     interviewed them and collected information to issue them civilian

22     documents.  It was required for that to get a document about the Croatian

23     citizenship, et cetera, so the procedure to establish their -- their

24     civil position was conducted.

25             When it comes to persons who were incapable of living alone and

Page 20011

 1     had no one to take care of them, and I suppose those were mostly persons

 2     who were unable to move, they were taken to the centres in vehicles.

 3     Whether that was done by the police or civil protection, I don't know.

 4     That may have differed from case to case.  I know of some instances where

 5     such people were transported by the civil protection, and there is no

 6     reason to suppose that in some instances the police may have done so, on

 7     the occasion of patrolling the ground.

 8             When it comes to the activities of the military police, I cannot

 9     comment that.  Generally speaking, I can say that the reason stated for

10     protecting their security was something that everybody had warned of and

11     with good reason, because it was a very large area and with scattered

12     villages or hamlets that sometimes were made up of only a few -- of only

13     a few houses, and some of them lived alone or in households with two or

14     three persons.  But it is clear that offers to stay safely at such a

15     reception centre was something that was reasonable to suggest to such

16     people.

17        Q.   Who decided which people were in incapable of taking care of

18     themselves?

19        A.   Such decisions weren't taken, but if you found someone abandoned

20     lying on their bed in a house or wherever, unable to move, you would

21     certainly suggest to that person or plead, for sanitary reasons or even

22     for providing food regularly, to transport that person to a centre where

23     medical and other care would be provided to them.  Food would be provided

24     and hygiene.

25        Q.   And in relation to what you just said, is it the case that simply

Page 20012

 1     the need to provide food for people on a regular basis was sufficient to

 2     bring them to the collection centre?

 3        A.   No, that was not the decisive factor.  But at any rate, I know of

 4     no single instance when the civil protection, that is our people in the

 5     field, that they brought anybody to the reception centre forcibly.  We

 6     spoke to the people and explained them -- the situation to them.  They

 7     were simply left alone at the places where they lived.

 8        Q.   And this issuing an ID and interviews, et cetera, about

 9     establishing people's, I suppose, nationality, did that happen at

10     reception centres?

11        A.   In police stations, there were administrative services, which, in

12     our terminology, means regulating the civil status of persons.  That is,

13     citizenship, issuing personal identification documents, or driving

14     licences, passports, and any other documents.

15        Q.   [Previous translation continues] ... for a second.  I just want

16     to know, did it happen in reception centres?

17        A.   No, it is impossible to issue such documents in reception

18     centres.  We interviewed the people there, and the people produced the

19     documents they had.  And based on those documents, checks were conducted

20     in police -- in the police administrations, in order to establish whether

21     the person in question was born in Croatia, whether he or she had lived

22     in Croatia all the time, and everything else that had to be established

23     to grant citizenship to someone.

24             Once the documents were made, if those persons were in the

25     reception centres, they were handed to those persons, and whoever was

Page 20013

 1     able to move, went to the police station to receive their documents

 2     because receiving such a document requires signing a form, et cetera.

 3        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, this Chamber has received evidence that from ECMM

 4     reports - this is P815, paragraph 2 - that Croat authorities are taking

 5     the Serbs to so-called collection centres in Gospic and Zadar for the

 6     purpose of registration.  And then it said:

 7             "But this procedure has not yet caught all the people."

 8             And the Chamber has also received evidence - this is from Flynn -

 9     that he -- he was trying to get access to people that were kept in -- in

10     a school in Knin, that he had taken this up with General Cermak.  That's

11     at T1241.

12             Do you have any comment or any information about that?

13        A.   You mentioned collection centres.  I have already said that

14     during that period, such centres were not under the jurisdiction --

15        Q.   My question was, he was trying to get access to people who were

16     kept in a school in Knin, and I wondered if you had any comment on that.

17             I am sorry, I do apologise.  I was looking at the wrong thing.  I

18     did say collection centres.

19             Go ahead.

20        A.   I don't know if international monitors, observers, were faced

21     with any obstacles to enter collection centres for civilians.  But having

22     read the documents that you gave me and that refer to a meeting with

23     UN officials, I can say that at the UN centre in Knin, two or three days

24     after the end of combat actions, international observers suggested to the

25     population that happened to be there, to go to civil protection centre to

Page 20014

 1     regulate their status.  That is, their civil status.  Whether or not the

 2     observers had to produce a document that civil protection required them

 3     to show at the entrance to the centre, I don't know.  Many people were

 4     roaming the place, wearing various uniforms.  It is probable that civil

 5     protection wanted to check who wants to enter such a centre or leave it,

 6     or intends to stay there, et cetera.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier.

 8             MR. CARRIER:  Yes.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, it's not on the record, but I was looking at

10     the clock.

11             MR. CARRIER:  I apologise, Mr. President.  I'm just trying to

12     sift through the evidence.  There is quite a few -- obviously there is

13     quite a few pieces of evidence, so I was trying to pick ones that were

14     representative or fair enough, given that --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  I consult ...

16                           [Trial Chamber confers]

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier, I think before the break I asked for a

18     kind of a mix.  I think it would be fair at this moment to put to the

19     witness that his testimony about the reception centres where civilians

20     stayed at the time is quite different from the evidence, at least quite

21     different from some of the evidence that was produced by the Prosecution,

22     which, as may have been clear from the witness from now -- up till now,

23     that these reception centres were not places where people went

24     voluntarily, but that they were kept there for a shorter and longer

25     period of time and that they were not free to go, as the witness

Page 20015

 1     testified, and then ask a general comment because we could go into

 2     details for ages now.  Because we have, of course, heard quite some

 3     answers from the witness, which go all in a direction quite different

 4     from what the Prosecution thinks these centres were.

 5             So, therefore, if you conclude in a more general way, because,

 6     otherwise, we -- I don't know whether this in any way violates the

 7     agreement between the parties, but there comes a point where --

 8             MR. MISETIC:  I think you have the right to violation our

 9     agreement, so I have no problem with it.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, no problem with it.

11             Mr. Cayley, could you please --

12             MR. KUZMANOVIC:  Your Honour, if I may.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. --

14             MR. CAYLEY:  I don't want to cut into time here, but I do have to

15     state that, for example, the use of evidence in confronting the witness

16     on page 65, line 18, where the statement was made, There's also evidence

17     that the Trial Chamber has heard about people who were actually forced to

18     leave their homes, houses, in the country side, and they were put in

19     collection centres by the military.  And the reference for that is P31.

20             Well, when one looks at, P31 which is an HRAT report from

21     August 10th, there is a statement saying, Persons at the school in Knin

22     have started to leave, about 130 of 250 so far with safe passage cards,

23     "propusnicas," issued by the Ministry of Defence.  And then there's a

24     discussion below that says:

25             "One woman reported being forced to leave her house in the

Page 20016

 1     countryside."

 2             I mean, that's the kind of thing that's problematic about this,

 3     Your Honour, and you know that -- I raise that simply to draw the Court's

 4     attention to that one instance.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for doing that.  It may well be that

 6     Mr. Carrier has not -- at all instances he referred to, has achieved the

 7     accuracy one would wish to achieve in this respect.  I think, however,

 8     that the -- what was put to the witness in more general terms, and the

 9     answers of the witness sufficiently assist the Chamber so as not to urge

10     Mr. Carrier to proceed in this way.

11             Mr. Carrier, I earlier asked you to come to a conclusion.

12             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. President, if I could just respond to that,

13     because I'm just looking at it as well.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  No, I asked you to conclude, and otherwise we will

15     be here still at 7.30.  I do understand that you might not be fully happy

16     with it.  If there is any need to further explore this matter, you make

17     written submissions on the matter.  It is not at this moment assisting us

18     in receiving the evidence from this witness.

19                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Cayley.

21             MR. CAYLEY:  Very quickly, Your Honour, just following on from

22     what my learned friend Mr. Kuzmanovic said.  It's the reference that

23     Mr. Carrier gave in respect of my client.  And if the Chamber -- I'm not

24     going to read it out, because I don't want to waste anybody's time, but

25     if you look at the reference on page 1241, and it's not exactly what

Page 20017

 1     Mr. Carrier is saying.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, you are -- the questions have been put; the

 3     questions have been answered.  And there is some criticism, which will

 4     not at this moment, I take it, change the testimony of this witness.  And

 5     if you want to respond to that later, Mr. Carrier, you will have an

 6     opportunity to do so in all fairness.  But let's try to proceed at this

 7     moment.

 8             MR. CARRIER:

 9        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, had you a chance to look at that UN document during

10     the break; is that right?

11        A.   Yes.  Yes, I have.

12        Q.   And what you read there, is that an accurate record of your

13     meeting between the UN on the 23rd of November, 1995?  Do you have any

14     comments on that or ...

15        A.   I have only two minor points to make.

16             At item 4, it says the authorities provided their assistance to

17     prevent them from leaving, and a special agreement was signed with the

18     HVO.  Well, I don't know if that is exactly what I said and whether this

19     is this exactly how I put it, and whether the two points were part of the

20     same context, so I would place a reservation on the sentence, although I

21     don't consider it decisive.

22             At item 8, paragraph 2, it says:

23             "Mr. Zidovec pointed out that in the course of Operation Storm

24     more than 105 civilian policemen and explosive experts did their job in a

25     dedicated and professional way.  Of course, the number must be a typo.

Page 20018

 1     Or perhaps Mr. Mamadi Diakite misheard the figure.

 2             As for the rest, I think that it accurately reflects the topics

 3     discussed.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Now, just to sum it up, the evidence that this

 5     Chamber has so far received -- is quite different from your evidence on

 6     what reception centres were there for and whether or not people could

 7     leave, et cetera.  They weren't free to go, as you said.  They were kept

 8     there, on our evidence, by armed people, and they were brought there

 9     against their will.  And I just wondered whether you had any final

10     comment on the evidence in terms of that.

11        A.   My comment is that it is only natural that such statements, I

12     mean, the statements made by me and the documents you have, differ.  Now,

13     whether this will serve to complete the picture or whether you will have

14     at your disposal or whether you will be hearing statements that will

15     disprove the statements that were made to you and that differ from mine,

16     that's something that I cannot pass a judgement on.  What I would like to

17     say at this point is that by the end of 1995, by which time I performed

18     the duties of civilian protection, I had never, from a single

19     international organisation, including EU monitors, ICRC, the

20     International Committee of the Red Cross, and other humanitarian

21     organisations present and active in the area for various reasons, heard

22     any comments which would call into question the legality of actions taken

23     by members of the civilian protection.

24        Q.   Thank you.

25             MR. CARRIER:  No more questions.

Page 20019

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Carrier.

 2             Mr. Misetic, any need to re-examine the witness?

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President.

 4             Mr. Registrar, if we could have -- well, let me ask first.

 5                           Re-examination by Mr. Misetic:

 6        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, are you, or did you receive information about how

 7     many people were entering and exiting the reception centres in 1995?

 8        A.   The figure is roughly 4.100 civilians who went through, passed

 9     through reception centres.  According to the final data of the civilian

10     protection, as part of Operation Povratak, for the year 1995, the centre

11     in Knin accounted for roughly 1.000 of these 4.000 individuals --

12        Q.   Would you -- as you sit here today, would you know how many

13     persons had passed through the Zadar reception centre as of

14     September 1995?

15        A.   The information exists, but I cannot, unfortunately, remember it.

16             Compared to the numbers for other reception centres, I think that

17     the number is fairly lower than for the Knin centre.

18        Q.   Let me show you Exhibit P2357, please.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Carrier.

20             MR. CARRIER:  I apologise, Mr. President, I don't want to

21     interrupt.  But I'm just trying to figure out how this is a re-direct,

22     was this something that was raised during the cross-examination that

23     couldn't have been put to him in direct examination?

24             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President, I think you'll see it directly

25     relates to the issues of whether people were free to leave, which is a

Page 20020

 1     topic Mr. Carrier covered now within the last hour.  And what those

 2     numbers were.

 3        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, these are the statistics for --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  But was the matter raised in cross for the first

 5     time, or was it -- I mean, was it a matter which came up during

 6     cross-examination and was not in any way touched upon in chief?

 7             MR. MISETIC:  I don't know if it has to be -- to re-direct that

 8     it had been touch on in chief.  The issue was --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  If you deal with the matter in chief then, of

10     course, you can -- I think in re-direct any matter that arose during

11     cross-examination, but not everything to go over the same ground again.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Your Honour, I only have ten means.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Very briefly, yes.

14             MR. MISETIC:  So --

15        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, if you look on this document, this is it now the

16     statistics for the -- the reception centres and where people were or

17     where they went to after passing through them.  If you look at the column

18     for Zadar, it gives you the statistics.  366 were still in the centres,

19     seven placed in hospital, blank sent back to flats.  And in the original

20     you'll see blank left to Serbia.  543 left to relatives or friends.  And

21     then there's a total on the bottom.

22             Is that consistent, Mr. Zidovec, with what your understanding was

23     of where people were going and whether they could leave once they entered

24     the reception centres?

25        A.   Yes, of course.  Of course, they could leave.

Page 20021

 1        Q.   Was -- was there -- do you recall any issue regarding the use of

 2     terminology, collection centre versus reception centre, and that that

 3     issue had to be addressed by the Ministry of the Interior?

 4        A.   No.  However, since I had the opportunity to have a look at the

 5     document of my meeting with UN representatives, I remembered that, at the

 6     time, for the term used here as collection centre, we in fact used the

 7     term detention centre; whereas, reception centre was the venue receiving

 8     civilians.

 9        Q.   Okay.  I'm going to pull up a document --

10             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. Registrar, it's Exhibit P914.

11        Q.   And just ask you if you recall having seen this document or have

12     any knowledge about it.

13             It's a document from the crime police sector, 8 August 1995, and

14     if you look towards the bottom:

15             "We are hereby informing you that in the future, instead of the

16     term collection centre for prisoners of war, you are to use the term

17     admissions centre for prisoners of war" --

18             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. Misetic asked the question if he know anything

19     about reception versus collection centres and if there was ever a need by

20     the Ministry of Interior to deal with that.  He said no.  He is now

21     showing him a document, now he's reading him the document, without

22     actually asking if he had seen it first.  And he's basically telling him

23     what it says, which is leading --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I could have asked the question.  You may know that

25     I'm concerned, and not only me, with the terminology used here.  Do under

Page 20022

 1     those circumstances, it might have been one of our questions, so we'll

 2     let Mr. Misetic go for a time being.

 3             MR. MISETIC:

 4        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, my question to you is, you see that the last

 5     sentence, it says:

 6             "Instead of the term 'admission centre,' you are to use the term

 7     'reception centre for civilians.'"

 8             Since the reception centres were part of your portfolio, does

 9     this refresh your recollection as to whether there was issue of the

10     terminology used within the MUP for how your reception centres were

11     supposed to be designated?

12             If you don't recall, that's fine too.

13        A.   I can only say that the reception centre for civilians was never

14     in dispute, as a term.  It was never controversial.

15        Q.   Okay.  Did the International Committee of the Red Cross have

16     access to the reception centres?

17        A.   That's quite understandable.  They would come either individually

18     or with representatives of the Croatian Red Cross.  By virtue of its

19     status, the ICRC is entitled to interact with all civilians in reception

20     centres.  There was nothing disputable about that, and it was quite clear

21     to all involved that they have unimpeded access.

22        Q.   Did you have any meetings or receive with or receive any reports

23     from the ICRC in August or September 1995, as it relates to collection

24     centres -- I'm sorry, reception centres?

25        A.   I had occasion to attend meetings with a delegation of the ICRC

Page 20023

 1     in the course of these months in Zagreb, because back in 1995, I was one

 2     of the vice-presidents of the Croatian Red Cross.

 3        Q.   And in that -- those meetings with the delegation of the ICRC,

 4     did it -- was it brought to your attention that there was some dispute by

 5     the ICRC about how -- about the conditions of the reception centres, and

 6     whether people were -- had -- people's liberties were being restricted

 7     within them?

 8        A.   I have already said and I confirm now that we had never received

 9     any objections to the treatment of civilians in reception centres from

10     any of the international organisation, including the ICRC.

11        Q.   Mr. Zidovec, thank you for answering my questions.

12             MR. MISETIC:  I have no further questions, Mr. President.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Misetic.

14             Mr. Mikulicic.

15             MR. MIKULICIC:  Your Honour, due to the circumstances, I give up.

16     I will pose no questions to the witness.

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me just check, have the two documents you

19     thought should be put to the witness, they have been put to the witness

20     to --

21             MR. MISETIC:  They have not, Mr. President.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, in order to avoid -- you know that there were

23     two out of the five which caused Mr. Misetic some problems.

24             The other three, no objection against admission, Mr. Misetic?

25             MR. MISETIC:  No, Mr. President.

Page 20024

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Same, too, for the other Defence teams.

 2             Mr. Carrier, two out of the five meet objections.  You can do two

 3     things.  Either await for the decision of the Chamber, once we have

 4     reviewed the documents; or stay on the safe side, put them to the witness

 5     where apparently then, Mr. Misetic, no objections will further exist; or

 6     withdraw them.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  For the assistance of counsel, it is P2576 and

 8     P2577, which are 65 ter 7338 and 39.

 9             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. President, I'm just trying to look through it.

10     I'll just take a moment.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

13             MR. CARRIER:  Mr. President, I don't have any questions on P2577,

14     which was 65 ter 7339.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, do you insist on putting it to the

16     witness in order give up your objections against admission, or is it

17     sufficiently dealt with by the terminology questions you --

18             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President, I'll waive my objections.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  You'll waive your objections in relation to --

20             MR. MISETIC:  Both.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Both, yes.  That's fine.

22             Mr. Carrier, I think you showed a UN document to the witness, he

23     received a copy in his own language.  That has not been tendered, has it?

24             MR. CARRIER:  I wasn't sure if it was MFI'd or not, but if it

25     hasn't, then could we please tender it into evidence.

Page 20025

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, could you assist us?

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, it wasn't MFI'd, but it would

 3     become Exhibit P2580, marked for identification.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Are there any objections against admission?  There

 5     are no objections.  Therefore, P2580 is admitted into evidence.

 6                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, would you please state the numbers of

 8     the five MFI documents which were tendered as bar table documents.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, Your Honour.  That's P2575 up to and

10     including P2579.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  And are admitted into evidence.

12                           [Trial Chamber confers]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  I have one final -- perhaps two final questions for

14     you, Mr. Zidovec.

15                           Questioned by the Court:

16             JUDGE ORIE:  You told us, you gave us the picture of old people

17     on their bed not being able to move, starving, not able to look after

18     themselves.  Is that anything concrete that was reported to you, or is

19     that what you thought might have been the case when people were taken to

20     reception centres?

21        A.   My attention was particularly drawn to several such cases by

22     members of the civilian protection, because they wanted centres for

23     social welfare and other local government bodies to take care of these

24     individuals, since it was impossible for the civilian protection to

25     provide for these peoples in the long-term.  This involved medical care,

Page 20026

 1     the -- maintaining hygiene standards, and a number of other reasons.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Was this done orally, or is there any document which

 3     provides such a report?

 4        A.   One document which the chief of the civilian protection

 5     department, Mr. Cemerin, sent to me, and which constituted an overview of

 6     the situation as he saw it roughly on the 11th of August, referred to a

 7     great many problems encountered by civilian protection officers in such

 8     cases, as well as the problems they encountered in trying to transfer

 9     such individuals to the care of social welfare centres and other similar

10     institutions.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Are you aware of people taken from reception

12     centres to such institutions to further take care of their social

13     welfare?  Specific instances.

14        A.   Unfortunately, I am not aware of it.  As soon as the individuals

15     came under the care of such institutions, they fell within the purview of

16     the Ministry of Health and their structures within the local government

17     and administration.  They were no longer within the care of the Ministry

18     of the Interior, the social protection -- the civilian protection.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, you -- thank you for that answer.

20             Mr. Zidovec, this concludes your testimony in this court.  The

21     Chamber would like to thank you very much for coming the long way to

22     The Hague and for having answered the questions that were put to you by

23     the parties and by the Bench, and I wish you a safe trip home again.

24             Madam Usher, could you escort the witness out of the courtroom.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.

Page 20027

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 2                           [The witness withdrew]

 3             THE WITNESS:  Thank you.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I think it would not be wise at this moment to deal

 5     with procedural matters.

 6             Although we have find time for it, perhaps tomorrow, if we try to

 7     do with continue the first 15 minutes in the afternoon, which would mean

 8     that we would start late, and I'm certain that we would not need more

 9     than 15 minutes for it.

10             We adjourn for the day, and we'll resume on Thursday, the 9th of

11     July, quarter past 2.00 in this same courtroom, I.

12                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.04 p.m.,

13                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 9th day of July,

14                           2009, at 2.15 p.m.