Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 22285

 1                           Wednesday, 30 September 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.20 p.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon to everyone.

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

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

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

 9     Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

11             Before the Cermak will call its next witness, there's a tiny

12     little procedural matter which the Chamber would like to raise not

13     because we think there will be a lot of comments on it.  Usually,

14     exhibits in a case which has not yet been concluded, although being

15     public documents, usually no copies are provided to third parties.  They

16     can look at it, there's nothing -- but copies are not provided.

17     Exceptions are made now and then, if there's a specific request.  There

18     was a request by the media or at least a newspaper - I'm not even

19     informed about what it exactly is - to receive a copy of the Kovacevic

20     expert report, D1676.  The Chamber has consulted on the matter.  We do

21     not see any reason why this document, which has been extensively dealt

22     with in court, why it should not be given to a party who is apparently

23     interested in receiving a hard copy.

24             Any comments from the parties.

25             MR. KAY:  No objection, Your Honour.

Page 22286

 1             MR. KEHOE:  We have no objection either, Your Honour.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Then the Chamber advises the Registry that the

 3     Chamber would agree with providing a copy of D1676 to interested parties,

 4     more specifically, media.

 5             Are you ready, Mr. Kay, to call your next witness or would it be

 6     you, Mr. Cayley?

 7             MR. CAYLEY:  No, Your Honour.  It's just the issue of the

 8     transcripts from yesterday.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10             MR. CAYLEY:  Do you want to settle that now?

11             JUDGE ORIE:  We can do that.

12             MR. CAYLEY:  In essence, I have agreed with the Prosecution on

13     the pages, and this was your request that in essence the particular page

14     that the Prosecution referred to be given some context, and I have agreed

15     those pages with Mr. Hedaraly.  For P2640, in the English transcript, it

16     would be pages 69 to 71, and that's the page numbers both on the

17     documents and in e-court; they're identical.  And in the B/C/S that would

18     be pages 69 to 71 and the corresponding pages, the ERN numbers for that,

19     because there are no page numbers on that document, the corresponding ERN

20     numbers, the last four digits are 7544 to 7546.  So that's for P2640.

21             For P2641, and there I would just point out to the Court that the

22     particular context of the comments that Mr. Skegro said at the time

23     concerned the refugee problems in Croatia.  This is where he was talking

24     about people not being able to live together, that those comments were

25     provided to you in isolation, and actually if you look at the transcript,

Page 22287

 1     what's being discussed by the president and his ministers are the

 2     problems with refugees leaving Bosnia and going to the coast in Croatia

 3     and there being public disorder problems.  And so the pages that I have

 4     put in actually address that and the Chamber can read it.

 5             But it's English pages 27 to 30 on the document, and in e-court

 6     that's pages 28 to 31.  And then in the B/C/S, it's pages 35, line 5

 7     to 39, line 18, and the corresponding ERN numbers are last four digits

 8     6493 to 6497.

 9             Thank you.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And they will be -- or are already uploaded together

11     with the cover page, because we're talking about the minutes of meetings

12     held with the president.

13             MR. CAYLEY:  I'll make sure, if they've not been already

14     uploaded, that they are uploaded.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Because there we see who's present and we have

16     a date --

17             MR. CAYLEY:  Yes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  -- and we have what the document is about.

19             MR. CAYLEY:  Yes.  Thank you.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, I do not remember whether we had already

21     assigned numbers to them.  But they have to be uploaded anyhow in the

22     limited version.

23             Mr. Hedaraly.

24             MR. HEDARALY:  It's just easier, we could just replace the

25     existing numbers for the full document with the extracts.

Page 22288

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  It was a rather silly remark I made because we

 2     talked about P2640 and 2641, so numbers have been assigned to them.  But

 3     now they will be uploaded in their limited version, cover page, and the

 4     pages the parties have agreed upon, which give sufficient context for the

 5     Chamber to understand the testimony and also contains those portions on

 6     which the witness specifically commented.

 7             Mr. Misetic.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  I have a different issue to raise so --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  This matter being raised, could the parties

10     inform the Registrar and the Chamber once the new versions have been

11     uploaded.

12             Mr. Misetic.

13             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President, just on behalf of the

14     Gotovina Defence, over the last few days we have seen Exhibit P463, which

15     is the transcript with Mr. Radic, and there's been some discussion about

16     the 10 per cent figure and it has been assumed that that was a reference

17     to not allowing more than 10 per cent to return.  And I just wanted to

18     note that we understand that's the Prosecution's interpretation of the

19     document; we have a different interpretation of what that document is.

20     We would like to at least put our position to the Chamber when -- either

21     now or whenever the Chamber feels it's convenient.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Wouldn't it be best that we are referring to

23     this document now and then, that the parties try to find, I would say, as

24     neutral as possible description of that document which then preferably is

25     to be used when the document is put to a witness.  And there's always a

Page 22289

 1     possibility that if we want the witness to look at the text itself, then,

 2     of course, that can be put to him, but that we don't have quarrels about

 3     the way in which you refer to the document is wrong because we understand

 4     the document to be a different one, and, of course, just referring to a

 5     document by number, which, of course, is also a way, but it is not very

 6     informative for the one to whom this document is presented.

 7             Is there any way of resolving it in this way.

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, we, of course, will be happy to

 9     speak to our colleagues with the Prosecution about the issue.  I do wish

10     to point out that -- just that, very briefly, our interpretation is that

11     the discussion there is about moving more Croats in so that -- if you

12     have a thousand Serbs there and you move 9.000 Croats in, they become

13     10 per cent of the population and not preventing return.  But I will --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  If you cannot agree, then the Chamber would

15     appreciate to receive from both parties a brief description of what this

16     portion is about, and then the Chamber will see whether it can find a --

17     as neutral possible characterisation of summary, or -- well, a text which

18     refers to that portion of the document.

19             So if the parties could not agree, the Chamber would like to

20     receive their, not more than ten lines, description of what that portion

21     of the conversation is about.

22             Mr. Hedaraly.

23             MR. HEDARALY:  That's fine, Mr. President.

24             Although I suspect we will not agree on the interpretation, I'm

25     sure we can try to at least find a way that we can characterise the

Page 22290

 1     document if it will be referred to in a general way rather than the

 2     specific language.  But we will talk to our colleagues from the

 3     Gotovina Defence.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Yes.  I'm not expecting the parties to agree

 5     on the interpretation at this moment, but to agree on a formulation which

 6     gives sufficient information in referring to this document and that

 7     portion of the document.

 8             If there's no other matter, then, Mr. Kay, the next witness the

 9     Cermak Defence calls will be ...

10             MR. KAY:  It's Mr. -- it's Mr. Rincic, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12                           [The witness entered court]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon, Mr. Rincic.  Before you give

14     evidence, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require that you make a

15     solemn declaration of which the text will now be handed out to you by the

16     usher.  May I invite you to make that solemn declaration.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

18     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Rincic.  Please be seated.

20             Mr. Rincic, you will first be examined by Mr. Kay.  Mr. Kay is

21     counsel for Mr. Cermak.

22             Please proceed, Mr. Kay.

23                           WITNESS:  ZDENKO RINCIC

24                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

25                           Examination by Mr. Kay:

Page 22291

 1        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Rincic.

 2        A.   Mm-hm.

 3             MR. KAY:  If the Court could produce on the screen a document,

 4     2D00719.

 5        Q.   Mr. Rincic, you're looking at some papers there.  Can you close

 6     them, please.  I know that's a hard copy of your statement.  Don't worry

 7     about that.  I don't think you have been in this courtroom before, but in

 8     front of you are two screens, and on the right-hand side, you will see a

 9     screen containing a document in your own language soon.  If you just look

10     at that.

11             Mr. Rincic, do you recognise a statement there that you gave to

12     the Cermak Defence which has been signed by you?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   And in relation to that statement, is it correct that there are

15     certain corrections you would like to make?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   If we go to paragraph 20 of the statement.  And can you see the

18     text there in your own language, and can you see paragraph 20?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Within that sentence, there is a -- within that paragraph, there

21     is a sentence containing the figures 2 to 3 per cent.  It's on line 9.

22             Can you see that?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   And in the statement signed by you, it says:

25             "General Cermak and all of us who attended these meetings

Page 22292

 1     believed that 2 to 3 per cent happened of everything that actually had

 2     happened."

 3             Did you want to make an explanation to clarify that sentence

 4     further?

 5        A.   During the first couple of days, we heard and we noticed that

 6     there was shooting and there was smoke at a distance, and we could hear

 7     shots coming from a distance.  And we believed that certain things were

 8     happening, certain incidents, related to war.  We believed that this was

 9     the sequelae of the previous war activities.  It was only later, a few

10     days later, that we realised that things were not what they seemed

11     initially, that things were different.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Is there another amendment to your statement that you

13     would like to make, in relation to paragraph 22.  If that can be put on

14     the screen in front of you.

15             MR. KAY:  In the English, please.  In the Croatian, sorry.

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

17             MR. KAY:

18        Q.   In relation to that paragraph, would you like that

19     paragraph taken out and deleted because it is inaccurate?

20        A.   Yes, I would like to do that.

21        Q.   Thank you.  That will be noted for the record.

22             Were there any other corrections or clarifications that you need

23     to make, in relation to your statement?

24        A.   Yes.  In relation to --

25        Q.   What is that?

Page 22293

 1        A.   In relation to the report on the repairs done to the electricity

 2     grid in certain villages.

 3        Q.   What would you like to say about that?  Is that a matter that's

 4     in your statement, relating to the repairs to the electricity?

 5             You're going to be looking at a document in a moment in relation

 6     to electricity.

 7             If could I ask you this question:  Taking into account the

 8     corrections that you have made to this statement, is everything that

 9     you've said in that statement, as it remains, true and correct, to the

10     best of your knowledge and belief?

11        A.   As far as my statement is concerned, everything is true and

12     correct and to the best of my recollection.

13        Q.   Thank you.  In relation to this statement, if we look at the last

14     page.

15             MR. KAY:  Croatian, please.

16        Q.   We see that it is signed by you.  And can you identify that as

17     being your signature?

18        A.   Yes.

19             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, all the pages in between are signed as

20     well, and we've just seen one on the way.  I don't propose to adduce each

21     of them, with the Court's leave.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Without any objections from the parties, leave is

23     granted.

24             MR. KAY:  Thank you.

25        Q.   Mr. Rincic, if I was to ask you today the same questions that you

Page 22294

 1     were asked in the making of your statement, would your answers be the

 2     same today as when you gave them for the statement?

 3        A.   Yes, they would be the same.

 4        Q.   Thank you.

 5             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, in those circumstances, I move that this

 6     document be put into evidence as an exhibit.

 7             MR. WAESPI:  No objections, Mr. President.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Waespi.

 9             One question.  Mr. Kay, you raised the issue whether there were

10     any other corrections or clarifications.  The witness said in relation to

11     the report on the repairs done to the electricity grid in certain

12     villages, and then we moved on without knowing exactly what the witness

13     wanted to do.

14             Mr. Rincic, would you like to change anything in your statement

15     in relation to the electricity in the villages, or would you just give

16     something in addition?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not have in mind any changes

18     with regards to what was said.  I am convinced that everything that was

19     said is true.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we don't have to pay further attention to

21     it at this moment and it's up to the parties to see whether what you

22     would apparently then like to add or further explain, whether they will

23     ask you about that, yes or no.

24             Mr. Registrar, the exhibit number for this document would be ...

25             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit D1680.

Page 22295

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  D1680 is admitted into evidence.

 2             Please proceed.

 3             MR. KAY:  I think all will become clear.  As it's a document --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, at this moment --

 5             MR. KAY:  Yes.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  -- the witness expressed that he had further --

 7             MR. KAY:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- comments or inaccuracies and before we decide to

 9     admit something into evidence, the attestations should be as good as they

10     with be.

11             Please proceed.

12             MR. KAY:  Absolutely, Your Honour, and thank you.

13             In relation to this statement, there are two documents which are

14     referred to which are not already court exhibits.  There are other

15     documents in paragraph 18 and paragraph 24 that are exhibits, but there

16     is two other documents that are referred to in the statement.  At

17     paragraph 24, line 10, a pass referred to, 65 ter 529.

18             Your Honour, I ask that that document be made an exhibit, as it's

19     within the statement.

20             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

22             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1681.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  And is admitted into evidence.

24             Please proceed.

25             MR. KAY:  And Your Honour, the next document, which is also

Page 22296

 1     referred to in the body of the statement at paragraph 17, in the first

 2     line of paragraph 17, you will see the number SVA2-107.  That is a

 3     document, 2D00720.  And I ask that that be made an exhibit.

 4             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1682.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  D1682 is admitted into evidence.

 8             MR. KAY:  Thank you.  And, Your Honour, that deals with those

 9     matters in the statement.  And then could we call up this document which

10     I will ask Mr. Rincic to comment upon.  It's 2D00286.

11             And Your Honour will find at paragraph 15 in the statement, the

12     area to which this refers to, which may deal with the matter raised

13     earlier by the witness.

14        Q.   Mr. Rincic, can you see before you a document --

15             MR. KAY:  If we just turn to the second page of it.

16             Can you go right to the bottom, please, so that the signature can

17     be identified.

18        Q.   Do you -- do you see your name there on the document?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   And is that your signature?

21        A.   Yes, this is my signature.

22             MR. KAY:  If we go back to the first page of the document.

23        Q.   Do you recognise the document?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Can you tell us what this document is about.

Page 22297

 1        A.   This is a report about the electricity grid in Knin and villages

 2     around it.

 3        Q.   And we don't see a date on the document.  But can you tell us, to

 4     the best of your knowledge and belief, when this report was written by

 5     you?

 6        A.   That was sometime around the 12th of August, or perhaps the

 7     13th of August.  Or maybe even the 14th.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

 9             MR. WAESPI:  Of course, I can raise it in re-direct, but if you

10     go to page 2 in English, it relates to the dates of 24th to

11     27th of August, due to whether that's prospective or the witness talks

12     about incidents that happened at those times.

13             MR. KAY:  Great -- I'm grateful to my learned friend.

14        Q.   Would you like to look at the second page of the report,

15     Mr. Rincic?

16             We can see a date referred to as the 24th of August to

17     27th of August.  Can you just read that to yourself.

18             Does that help you at all, in relation to when this report was

19     written?

20        A.   It does.  It does help, yes.  And all that happened a long time

21     ago, and obviously I've forgotten some things, and it is clear that this

22     was written sometime around the 27th or the 28th of August.

23        Q.   Thank you very much.

24             And the purpose of writing this report, in relation to the power

25     in the region was for what?

Page 22298

 1        A.   The purpose was to inform my superiors about the situation in

 2     Knin, how things stood, and how the situation with the electricity power

 3     would develop.

 4        Q.   Thank you.

 5             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, might this document be made an exhibit,

 6     please.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

 8             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1683.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  D1683 is admitted into evidence.

12             MR. KAY:

13        Q.   There's just another document that I'd like to you look at.

14             MR. KAY:  Can we have on the screen, please, Exhibit D01036.  And

15     the Court may want to turn to paragraph 25.

16        Q.   And if you look at the document on the screen in front of you,

17     Mr. Rincic, can you see the Croatian document there?  Can you look at it,

18     please.

19             If we turn to page 2 of the document --

20             MR. KAY:  Can the Croatian document be engineered so that we can

21     see the signature at the bottom rather than the text, please.  Ah, page 3

22     in the Croatian, I'm advised.  Thank you.

23        Q.   Do you see your name there, Mr. Rincic?

24        A.   Yes.

25        Q.   Is that your signature?

Page 22299

 1        A.   Yes, it is.

 2        Q.   Did you write this document?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   Can you recollect when this document was written, as there isn't

 5     a date on it?

 6             MR. KAY:  Perhaps if we can see the front page again.

 7        A.   I believe that this was drafted sometime between the 10th and

 8     the 12th of August, or thereabouts.

 9        Q.   And the purpose of writing this report, can you tell us what that

10     was?

11        A.   The purpose, again, was to inform my superiors about the

12     situation with regards the revival of economy in the municipality of

13     Knin.  I also wanted to inform Mr. Ivan Cermak about the same thing,

14     because that was his prerogative.  He needed to be informed.

15        Q.   Thank you.

16             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, this already an exhibit, so I -- I will

17     ask no further questions about it.

18             Your Honour, that concludes my direct examination of the witness.

19        Q.   Please wait there, Mr. Rincic.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Kay.

21             Mr. Kehoe.

22             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, we have no questions.  Thank you.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  No questions.

24             Mr. Mikulicic.

25             MR. MIKULICIC:  No questions, Your Honour.

Page 22300

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  No questions.

 2             Mr. Rincic, since the other Defence counsel have no questions for

 3     you, you will now be cross-examined by Mr. Waespi.  Mr. Waespi is counsel

 4     for the Prosecution.

 5             You may proceed, Mr. Waespi.

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

 7                           Cross-examination by Mr. Waespi:

 8        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Rincic.

 9        A.   Good afternoon.

10        Q.   I'd like to cover a few areas with you in clarification of your

11     witness statement and some of the things you said in

12     examination-in-chief.

13             But let me first go to the so-called deletion of paragraph 22.

14             MR. WAESPI:  So if we could get the witness statement on to the

15     screen, that's D1680, page 6 in English.

16        Q.   You recall, you testified that you wanted paragraph 22 to be

17     deleted.

18             Now, the witness statement, which I'm sure we'll get on the

19     screen shortly, was only taken a few months ago, end of March, beginning

20     of April, so what happened in the meantime?  Or, in other words, why do

21     you want this paragraph to be deleted from -- from the statement?

22             Did you understand my question?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   Take your time.  You can read it, of course, and I'm sure you

25     remember it.  It's the issue about the repair of the railway, and you go

Page 22301

 1     in quite some detail about how you went to see Mr. Ademi, the Chief of

 2     Staff of the Split Military District, or the duty officer at that time,

 3     and eventually got them to provide military security for the railway

 4     repair, and you go on in some detail about where it was, that it was

 5     surrounded by a forest, and so on, and so on.

 6             So why did you want this paragraph to be deleted today?

 7        A.   The main reason why I believe this should be left out is that my

 8     private visits to the Military District to see Mr. Ademi and other

 9     officers got conflated with the other memories I have of these events.

10     These were my private acquaintances; I knew them privately.

11        Q.   But -- please continue.

12        A.   So I conflated this with the official duties that I performed.

13     The security provided for the repairs carried out in certain areas had to

14     be sought by phone through duty -- through the duty service of the

15     military police.

16        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Rincic.

17             But do I understand you correctly, the events, as you described

18     them in paragraph 22 - this may be 12 or 15 lines - they happened as you

19     told them.  This is correct?

20             The only issue is that you don't want to conflate your private

21     involvement, because you knew Mr. Ademi from before, with your official

22     duties and you feel that's inappropriate.  But the facts, as you have

23     stated them, as you told the Defence, they are true and correct.

24             Do I understand you right?

25        A.   No.  What I said was true, but the statement I made that was

Page 22302

 1     written down here is a bit confused.  I confused certain matters.

 2        Q.   Very well.  Tell me, please, what's confusing --

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  If I could, just as technical matter, I believe

 5     that the Prosecution hasn't released its documents in e-court yet.  And

 6     if the documents could be released, please.

 7             MR. WAESPI:  It will be done instantly.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  You mean the documents for cross-examination?  Yes.

 9             Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.

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

11        Q.   Mr. Rincic, please tell me, which bits are confusing?  You can

12     also start, and we have all time, to tell me which lines, which sentences

13     of paragraph 22 is not confusing.  Or you can tell us which are

14     confusing, whatever you prefer.

15        A.   For the purposes of securing works that took place outside of

16     Knin, I sought, through the duty service of the military police, whom I

17     called over the telephone, that I be given a certain number of soldiers

18     who would secure workers, making repairs out in the field of certain

19     facilities or installations.  This detail which is not contained in

20     Article 22 is something that I remembered subsequently.  When, six months

21     ago, I spoke about the matters contained in item 22, I did not recall

22     this important detail.  I remembered only later on.  And I've just told

23     you what it is.  It is a -- an important issue, and that's why I believe

24     that item 22 needed to be left out.  It had to do with the provision of

25     security for works that took place outside.

Page 22303

 1        Q.   Thanks, Mr. Rincic.  But help me, please, so I understand.  In

 2     order to get these security troops to -- to guard the repair on the

 3     railway --

 4             MR. KAY:  I think the witness said military police.

 5             MR. WAESPI:  I thought the witness said he called the duty

 6     officer of the MP but I might have ...

 7             MR. KAY:  Yes, 18, line 9.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 9             MR. KAY:  Maybe it is something that needs clarification.  I

10     don't want do interrupt my learned friend but ...

11             MR. WAESPI:  Anyway, I can pick that up.

12        Q.   So you called the duty service of the military police.  Now

13     eventually I understand that the security was provided, and my question

14     to you is:  How did you manage that?  Did you manage by calling the duty

15     service of the military police, or by, as you explained in paragraph 22,

16     going to see Mr. Ademi, or the duty officer of that unit and get them to

17     release the security, or did you do both, one as a follow-up to the other

18     one?

19             Do you understand what my issue is?

20        A.   I understand your question.

21             That's where the essential difference lies, as I've told you a

22     moment ago.  I told you that this was something I remembered later on.

23     It was through the duty military police that I was given security

24     details; whereas, the rest were my private contacts and private visits in

25     the Military District.

Page 22304

 1        Q.   But they did happen, these, as you call them, private visits to

 2     the Military District.  You did go to see Mr. Ademi.  Is that correct?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And did you talk to him or to the duty officer about providing

 5     security, or did that not happen?

 6             MR. MISETIC:  I'm going to object.  That mischaracterises what

 7     the witness just said.

 8             MR. WAESPI:  I don't think the witness --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's -- one second, I will re-read.

10             The question may be answered.  It -- you may repeat the question,

11     Mr. Waespi.

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

13        Q.   You told us that eventually, you know, security came, and one of

14     the reasons was because you talked to the duty service of the military

15     police.  You also told us that you, indeed, went to see Mr. Ademi, as

16     stated in paragraph 22.

17             So my question to you is:  What did you talk about with

18     Mr. Ademi, when you went to see him.  And the sub-question is:  Did you

19     discuss the release of security for repairing the railway?

20        A.   The issue of securing workers conducting repairs on the railway

21     track was not something I discussed, was not something I discussed with

22     Mr. Ademi because it was one line of my duty, which was of no interest to

23     him particularly.

24             Your question was what we discussed.  We discussed matters that

25     were of interest to me and which had to do with the life and work of

Page 22305

 1     military units in the field, and I was privately curious about the

 2     situation.

 3        Q.   I'll follow up on that in a moment.  But let me go back to

 4     Mr. Ademi or the duty officer.

 5             So you did not discuss with Ademi and also not with the duty

 6     officer the issue of providing security to the repair of the railway?

 7        A.   I did not --

 8        Q.   So that's --

 9        A.    -- because I had already solved that problem before.

10        Q.   Very well.  I understand you better now.

11             So that's one of the sentences which is not correct in

12     paragraph 22.  Am I right?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Now, why did you tell that to the Defence when you met with them

15     end of March, beginning of April of this year?

16        A.   Because the events happened a long time ago - I'm referring to

17     the events in Knin - and what I had as a recollection at the time was

18     that this is the way things happened.

19             Subsequently, I cast my mind back to these events and I realised

20     that things were different.

21        Q.   Did somebody tell you that things were not as you had stated them

22     to the Defence, or was it your own volition that changed your mind?

23        A.   Of course, it was of my own volition.

24        Q.   Let me go back to what you did discuss with Mr. Ademi, and I

25     quote you:

Page 22306

 1             "We discussed matters that were of interest to me and which had

 2     to do with the life and work of military units in the field, and I was

 3     privately curious about this situation."

 4             Can you tell us what you discussed in -- in as much detail as you

 5     recall?

 6        A.   What I discussed with Mr. Ademi and other officers in Military

 7     District -- well, first of all, I had taken part in the homeland war

 8     together with them.  I fought side by side with them.

 9        Q.   And when you say "them," it's Mr. Ademi and whom?

10        A.   Commissioned and non-commissioned officers, who were members of

11     the 4th Brigade, 7th Brigade, who were deployed in the area of -- of Knin

12     and around Knin.

13        Q.   And so specifically going back to your discussion with Mr. Ademi,

14     can you tell me what you discussed with him, if you recall?

15        A.   I was interested in knowing what the developments were in Knin,

16     what the situation was like in the northern part, beyond Knin.  As you

17     know, in addition to Sector South, there was Sector North and other

18     areas, where war activities took place and which were liberated.  These

19     were very eventful days bristling with information where one was

20     interested in knowing as many things as possible, and where I knew that I

21     would be able to get informed, I sought to get informed.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Rincic, you have taken five or six lines to

23     answer the question without really -- you told us now what you're -- that

24     you had certain reasons why you would be interested but you still have

25     not told us what you discussed with Mr. Ademi.

Page 22307

 1             What did you discuss?  What questions did you pet to him, what

 2     did he say?

 3             MR. KAY:  Well, Your Honour, the witness has referred to these

 4     being a long time ago, and the question was prefaced by Mr. Waespi, if

 5     you recall, and a general answer is given.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, I disagree with you on the matter.

 7             MR. KAY:  I --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  If the witness doesn't remember what was discussed

 9     with Mr. Ademi, he can tell us.  And just tell us that you don't

10     remember.

11             The witness gave the reasons why he was interested in knowing

12     what and where, et cetera, and that it was -- that these were very

13     eventful days, and which gave information one was interested in.  He did

14     not -- and that was the question asked to him, he did not tell us what

15     the content of the conversation with Mr. Ademi was.

16             If you remember, would you please tell us, Mr. Rincic.

17             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I won't say anything but I do refer

18     Your Honour to page 22, line 11.  I won't say anymore.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you, Mr. Kay.

20             Could you please focus, if you have any recollection, what the

21     content of your discussion was.

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What was mostly discussed had to do

23     with the -- my acquaintances and friends who were members of certain

24     units.  I was interested in knowing whether anyone had been wounded,

25     lightly or seriously, whether anyone had been killed.  There were several

Page 22308

 1     of my acquaintances and friends who had been wounded and killed.  This is

 2     what most of our conversations revolved around.  I don't remember the

 3     rest.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.

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

 6        Q.   Do you remember when the meeting or conversation between you and

 7     Mr. Ademi took place, and also the location?

 8        A.   I don't remember when exactly.  And it took place in Knin.

 9     Again, I don't recall the specific venue.

10        Q.   And the railway works, were they on the railway between Knin and

11     Gracac?

12        A.   There too.

13        Q.   Thank you.  And do you remember how many security troops, people,

14     were eventually released to do the job alongside the railway?

15        A.   Three to four; I can't remember exactly.  Three to four soldiers,

16     I mean.

17        Q.   Were these normal soldiers, or were these military police?

18        A.   Military police.

19             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President, I'd like to show the witness a

20     document which just was brought to my attention, and obviously I haven't

21     included it to the documents to be released but perhaps that might assist

22     the witness in -- in his memory about who these soldiers were.

23             This would be 65 ter 657, an order by the commander of OG West,

24     Mladen Fuzul.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kay, it seems that we have two issues, the first

Page 22309

 1     to have it added to the 65 ter list.

 2             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I take no point on this.  Things arise.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  No point.  Yes.  Yes.

 4             You can put the document to the witness and ask questions in

 5     relation to it.

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

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed.

 8             MR. WAESPI:

 9        Q.   Witness, please have a look at the screen, and you see an order

10     by the commander of OG West, Colonel Fuzul, and it deals with the release

11     of 30 soldiers from the 134th Home Guard Regiment for railway works, and

12     it's following the orders given by the commander of the Split Military

13     District.

14             Now, is this order in any way linked, in your opinion, about the

15     railway works with which you were concerned or perhaps others of which

16     you have any knowledge?

17        A.   I'm not aware of this order.  This is the first time I'm seeing

18     it.  This particular security detail was required for five days only;

19     whereas, I -- my request had to do with a longer period.

20        Q.   So you don't recall having had 30 soldiers doing security for

21     railway works with which you were concerned with?  Your answer is no?

22        A.   [In English] No.

23             MR. WAESPI:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Mr. President, I would

24     like to tender this document.

25             MR. KAY:  No objection, Your Honour.

Page 22310

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will become Exhibit P2644.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  P2644 is admitted into evidence.

 4             Please proceed.

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

 6        Q.   And the second point I wanted to clear up from what you said in

 7     in-chief was that comment, and it relates to paragraph 20 of your witness

 8     statement.

 9             MR. WAESPI:  If we could go back to D1680.

10        Q.   Where you originally stated to the Defence, and I quote:

11             "General Cermak and all of us who attended these meetings

12     believed that 2 to 3 per cent happened of everything that actually had

13     happened."

14             And I believe you said, on page 8, lines 2 to 5, today, that

15     things were different to what they initially seemed.

16             Can you please clarify what was different and how did they seem

17     initially?

18        A.   [Interpretation] As stated in the transcript, as was written down

19     in the transcript, initially, we did not have the information reflecting

20     the state of affairs as they were.

21             Subsequently, we realised that several houses had been burned and

22     that there were instances of actions -- of unlawful actions.

23        Q.   So you initially believed that the reports you received or the

24     information was exaggerated; but, later, you realised that it was not.

25     Is that a fair assessment of what your testimony is?

Page 22311

 1        A.   Initially, we had not even been receiving reports, and then, as

 2     soon as we received reports, we went through them and realised that some

 3     had reflected the actual events and that others were exaggerated.

 4        Q.   Yes.  Let's turn to this issue of exaggerations and look at

 5     another example, which, I believe, did you not clarify.  In paragraph 23

 6     of your witness statement, you address the work of the ECMM.  And it's in

 7     English at the end of page 6, about the fourth or fifth line.  You say,

 8     and I quote you:

 9             "The monitors wrote reports about the crimes in the field without

10     having checked the facts but on the basis of information given to them by

11     somebody."

12             And then you also go into an example of shelling information.

13             Now, what's your basis for saying that?  How do you know that, in

14     your assessment, ECMM reported without having checked the facts?

15        A.   I know, because it was dangerous to check the situation on the

16     ground.  And they were afraid.

17        Q.   Who specifically was afraid?  Can you give me any name?

18        A.   I don't remember.

19        Q.   Let's go to a similar issue.  This is in paragraph 20 of your

20     witness statement.  And you state as follows, and it's in the middle of

21     paragraph 20, where you see -- actually, just below the 2 to 3 per cent

22     reference.

23             There you say:

24             "After about 15 days, Mr. Cermak started receiving letters of

25     protest from UN workers about arson and looting in the field, and during

Page 22312

 1     the meetings he would forward that information to the chief of civilian

 2     police and the military police commander."

 3             How do you know which letters Mr. Cermak received?

 4        A.   I know because the coordination meetings aimed at reviving the

 5     Knin economy that were chaired by Mr. Cermak were the meetings that I

 6     myself attended.  And Mr. Cermak briefed us about the letters at those

 7     meetings.  He told us about them, and he forwarded those letters to the

 8     military police and all the other relevant bodies that had to be

 9     informed.  In that way, he made sure, and he did his bit for such events

10     to be prevented.

11        Q.   Are you confident having seen every single letter the UN wrote to

12     General Cermak?

13        A.   There is nothing you can be 100 per cent sure about.  So I can't

14     be sure that I saw every single letter, but I saw the most important

15     ones.

16        Q.   I'm just interested in your unqualified statement:

17             "After about 15 days, Mr. Cermak started receiving letters of

18     protest from UN ..."

19        A.   Well, it doesn't have to be 15 days.  Maybe it was ten days.  I

20     was talking in principle.  It was after a certain time.  For the first

21     ten days or so, the figure that we were operating with was 2 to

22     3 per cent.  We didn't know what was going on.  At least from my point of

23     view, I didn't know what was happening.  Mr. Cermak, however, did [as

24     interpreted] know.

25             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President, I'd like to go to P363.  It's a

Page 22313

 1     letter.  And it appears on page 5, both English and B/C/S version.

 2        Q.   Mr. Rincic, soon you will see on the right side of your screen

 3     the Croatian translation of the letter, the original one, which is in

 4     English on the left side, and it's dated 11th of August, 1995.  And it's

 5     a letter from the UN commander to General Cermak, and it says as follows,

 6     and I quote:

 7             "During our meeting yesterday, both Mr. Paavo Pitcanen and I

 8     brought to your attention information gathered by UN sources concerning

 9     the widespread and systematic looting and destruction of property, crops

10     and livestock."

11             And I skip one sentence, continuing:

12             "Recalling your statements during yesterday's meeting concerning

13     your honest efforts to control the situation, I again protest these

14     activities and ask to redouble your efforts to prevent the organised

15     destruction and theft of property."

16             Do you recall, Mr. Rincic, being shown this letter from

17     Mr. Cermak during one of your meetings?

18        A.   I can't say with 100 per cent certainty, but I may have and

19     immediately thereupon, Mr. Cermak took steps.  He informed the military

20     police, and he called for an urgent action on their part, to remedy the

21     situation, to curb such activities.  I can see that this letter was sent

22     on the 11th of August, and given the circumstances, three or four days,

23     sometimes seemed as ten to 12 days, and that's why I'm not very precise

24     as regards the dates, due to the heavy circumstances that surrounded us

25     at the time.

Page 22314

 1        Q.   So we have to be careful in assessing your witness statement here

 2     when it comes to dates.  Thank you, Mr. Rincic.

 3             Let me actually stay while we're on the topic of the meetings you

 4     had with Mr. Cermak, and I believed you called them coordination

 5     meetings.

 6             In paragraph 19 of your witness statement --

 7             MR. WAESPI:  If we could revert back to that.

 8        Q.   You talk about the participants at these meetings.  And the

 9     witness statement is D1680.

10             Now, you say in the middle of paragraph 19, page 6 in the

11     English, at the top:

12             "It is important to note that people who were subordinate to

13     Cermak, for instance, Knin garrison employees, did not attend these

14     meetings."

15             But there were people there who were subordinate to Mr. Cermak;

16     for instance, like Mr. Gojanovic, Marko Gojanovic, who was his deputy.

17     Is that correct?

18        A.   Not always.

19        Q.   I have to correct myself.  It's -- the gentleman is called

20     Marko Gojovic and not Gojanovic.

21             But when he was present, he would be a subordinate of Mr. Cermak

22     being present at these meetings?

23        A.   Yes, he was his deputy, of course.

24        Q.   And do you remember whether Mr. Jonjic was present, if you know

25     who Mr. Jonjic was.

Page 22315

 1        A.   I know.

 2        Q.   What was his function?

 3        A.   I don't know exactly.

 4        Q.   Do you know what the relationship between Mr. Cermak and Mr.

 5     Jonjic was?

 6        A.   I believe that Mr. Cermak was Jonjic's superior.

 7        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Rincic.

 8             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President, it might be a good moment to have the

 9     break.  We will have a break.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Have a break.

11             Mr. Misetic.

12             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, there's just one issue with the --

13     with Exhibit P2644.  I would ask that it receive MFI status because I

14     think the translation needs to be checked on the document.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that's what I -- perhaps what I should have --

16     let me just ...

17             MR. MISETIC:  The issue, Mr. President, I can draw your

18     attention --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  If you'd give me one moment, Mr. --

20             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  There is -- you're referring to 2644 and there

22     being a translation issue.  Of course, there's still a pending

23     translation issue also on another document we mentioned earlier, that is

24     P2640, where -- where the parties agreed, I think, on what the

25     translation issue was.  But a formal request for -- I do understand that

Page 22316

 1     the Cermak was intending to or even has already requested a formal

 2     correction of the translation.

 3             MR. KAY:  I think there may be a little bit of confusion in this

 4     subject --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 6             MR. KAY:  -- Your Honour, as to the exhibits Your Honour has just

 7     mentioned there and the -- I think that we may need to look at it and

 8     just identify carefully what we're talking about.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I'm just referring to it, because earlier we

10     were talking about selections, and apparently there may have been a

11     translation issue there as well.

12             Mr. Misetic, 2644, the translation issue --

13             MR. MISETIC:  Is in the preamble.  The order is not for the

14     security of the final construction works.  It's in order to secure the

15     completion of construction works, and the difference is whether the

16     troops are there providing security or they're there working as physical

17     labour working on them.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I noted that in the order, the first item, that

19     there the security was not mentioned anymore and that seemed to be, well,

20     not to say directly contradicts but at least there was some tension

21     between the -- what came before, where, clearly, security is mentioned in

22     the English text; whereas, in the instruction given -- the reason why

23     they are there, that there is the -- it's the construction works

24     themselves and not providing security to those.

25             So, therefore, it struck already my eye and it certainly is

Page 22317

 1     worthwhile to have it verified.

 2             Mr. Waespi, may I take it that you would agree with that.

 3             MR. WAESPI:  Yes, I think it's on its way to Mr. Monkhouse

 4     already.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  That's good to know.

 6             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, before we rise --

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Misetic, have we done with it?

 8             MR. MISETIC:  Yeah, I just wanted to know if it would get MFI

 9     status, just so it wouldn't fall off the radar.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Mr. Registrar, would you -- for P2644, would

11     you please change the status pending the verification of the translation

12     into MFI.

13             Yes.  Mr. Registrar is nodding yes, so that's now on the record.

14             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, it's just a matter on the transcript and

15     the translation issue at page 28, line 8.  Mr. Cermak, however, did

16     know --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, one second.  Let me just get that on my

18     screen.  28, you said line 8.  Yes.

19             MR. KAY:  "Mr. Cermak, however, did know."  Those Croatian

20     speakers on my team have said that the word "not" was missing, that is to

21     be found -- will be found within the audio.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me then first perhaps verify with the witness.

23             MR. KAY:  "Did not know, however," is what I've just been told is

24     the phrase.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Rincic, I take you back to one of your answers:

Page 22318

 1             "The figure that we were operating with was 2 to 3 per cent.  We

 2     didn't know," I take it, I have to read, "what was going on.  At least

 3     from my point of view, I didn't know what was happening."

 4             And then you said something about Mr. Cermak.  Could you repeat

 5     what you said about Mr. Cermak, whether he knew or not?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] During the first couple of days,

 7     Mr. Cermak, just like me, I'm sure, didn't know what was happening.  He

 8     was not aware of those activities and events outside of Knin and around

 9     Knin.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  May I take it that you never learned anything

11     which might show that he knew, or did you learn that he did not know?  I

12     mean, if I say that someone doesn't know something, it could be two --

13     either he told me that he doesn't know, which is -- may be surprising now

14     and then because how could you tell not to know something you apparently

15     do not know.  What was it?  Did you never hear anything from him or did

16     you never receive any information which would allow to conclude that he

17     would have knowledge, or did you have specific information which would

18     point at a lack of knowledge?

19             Could you tell us what you meant by Mr. Cermak that, as you said,

20     that you were sure that he didn't know what was happening?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sure that Mr. Cermak didn't

22     know, because, during the first couple of days, we maintained very

23     intense contacts, we talked a lot, we discussed things.  We discussed the

24     needs of pursuing various kinds of actions and taking various kinds of

25     steps to provide for a normal life in Knin.  Namely, with your leave, I

Page 22319

 1     would like to remind you that during the first couple of days in Knin the

 2     conditions were extremely difficult.  It took a lot of effort, and before

 3     anything was done, a lot needed to be discussed and agreed, in order to

 4     tidy up all the streets and areas in and around Knin.

 5             The first time ever Mr. Cermak received information, he was very

 6     angry and very agitated, and that's how I know when he learned about

 7     those developments for the first time, and that's how I know that it took

 8     some time for -- for the information to reach him.  And then he --

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Can you tell us when that was, in time?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Most probably it was the letter

11     that was sent to him by General Forand.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  The matter has been clarified.

13             MR. KAY:  I'm grateful for Your Honour clarifying.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll have a break and we will resume at 20 minutes

15     past 4.00.

16                           --- Recess taken at 3.54 p.m.

17                           --- On resuming at 4.24 p.m.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we continue, I would just like to put on the

19     record that where D1682 was not objected, that there was a formal request

20     to have it added to the 65 ter list but that's included in admission that

21     leave was granted.

22             MR. KAY:  I'm so sorry, Your Honour.  I forgot about that and I

23     had it on my list to raise.  I apologise.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  No problem there.

25             Mr. Waespi, please proceed.

Page 22320

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

 2        Q.   Mr. Rincic, I'd like to talk with you a little bit about your

 3     background and the various functions you had, civilian and military.  And

 4     I think we can get through this fairly quickly.  And it's based, of

 5     course, on what you told us, what Defence in 1680, your witness

 6     statement.

 7             First of all, your military position in 1991, according to

 8     witness statement, and this is all in paragraph 1, you were the

 9     assistant -- you were an assistant commander of the 159th Brigade in

10     Zadar.  You were an assistant commander for what?  What was your

11     speciality?

12        A.   I was the assistant commander for logistics.

13        Q.   And from when to when was that?

14        A.   I was in the 159th Brigade from the establishment of the brigade,

15     and I believe that it was in the month of December 1991 to the month of

16     August or September 1992.

17        Q.   And then at one time you became the commander of the

18     307th Brigade -- logistics base in Zadar.  And from when to when was

19     that?

20        A.   When the logistics base was established, which was sometime in

21     the month of September, or maybe the month of August, 1991, until -- I

22     apologise, 1992.  Until the month of April 1993.

23        Q.   And who was your superior at the time, when you were commander of

24     the 307th Logistics Base?

25        A.   I was the commander of the logistics base, and it was

Page 22321

 1     subordinated to the Military District of Split, by establishment.

 2        Q.   And the commander was General Gotovina?

 3        A.   Yes, yes.

 4        Q.   Let me turn to your civilian position.

 5             In 1993/1995, according to your witness statement, between - it's

 6     paragraph 1 again - between the 22nd of July, 1993, to the 30th of April,

 7     1996, you were assistant minister of economy for special purpose

 8     manufacturing industry.

 9             Now, who was your superior, or who were your superiors?

10        A.   My immediate superior was Mr. Cermak; he was the minister of

11     economy.  After that, it was Nadan Vidosevic and after that it was

12     Mr. Matesa, for a very brief period of time before he became prime

13     minister.  He was followed by Mr. Stern, and then during Mr. Stern's

14     office, I was assigned to another duty.  I left the ministry, which means

15     that during my office, I went through four different ministers.

16        Q.   And I believe Mr. Cermak was your superior in 1993 while Mr. --

17     parts of 1993, while Mr. Vidosevic was your superior in 1995?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Let's talk about your military position in 1995, and the attack

20     on Knin or your -- as it relates to you on to Benkovac, you advanced to

21     Benkovac.

22             Now, you state in your witness statement, paragraph 9, that you

23     wanted to participate in Operation Oluja, and you were the advisor for

24     logistics in the 112th Brigade in Zadar.

25             Now, when did you join them, and why?

Page 22322

 1        A.   I joined them two or three days prior to the launch of Oluja.

 2        Q.   And --

 3        A.   And your question was why, and the answer is:  I wanted to

 4     participate in the liberation -- liberation and re-establishment of an

 5     integral Croatian state.

 6        Q.   Who was your brigade commander?

 7        A.   Colonel Fuzul.

 8        Q.   Wasn't he, rather, the commander of the operations group, and

 9     Mr. Ivkovic was your brigade commander?

10        A.   I really can't remember.  However, I remember that I spoke to

11     both of them.

12        Q.   But you cannot distinguish who was whom, what function Mr. Fuzul

13     had, as opposed to Mr. Ivkovic?

14        A.   I can distinguish between them, but I don't recall at this time.

15     I didn't consider it important.  I was not a classical soldier.  I was a

16     mobilised assistant minister, and a colonel.

17        Q.   And what was your exact task as an advisor?

18        A.   During Operation Storm and the other combat activities during

19     which I was in the army, I was in charge of logistics and had under me

20     the entire brigade of -- providing logistics support.  It belonged to the

21     OG Zadar.  I had extensive experience in providing logistics support

22     during war operations, specifically during Operation Maslenica.  We

23     provided logistical support to 18.000 soldiers, all of whom were either

24     deployed on the front line, on the move, or resting.  They all had to be

25     provided for logistically.  They had to have food, footwear, clothes,

Page 22323

 1     ammunition and everything else that comes under the logistics department.

 2             Along the axis from Zadar toward Benkovac, where a great many

 3     forces were deployed, I was providing support in action and expertise, in

 4     an attempt to have all the soldiers participating in the operation at the

 5     time as equipped logistically as possible and as safe and secure as

 6     possible.

 7        Q.   Just so I understand, because in your witness statement,

 8     paragraph 9, it talks about an advisory role, and, now, a moment ago, you

 9     said you were in charge of logistics.

10        A.   I wasn't charged with that.  You misunderstand me.  I was there

11     to provide assistance to logistics officers and others who were dealing

12     with logistics.  A word put in where -- where it's needed can go along

13     way.

14        Q.   What were the assets, logistic assets of the 112th Brigade, if

15     you recall?

16        A.   There was a logistics base that I was the commander of.  It was

17     alive and well and providing logistics support.  It was 307th Logistics

18     Battalion of the OG Zadar; I was its commander.  The commander who

19     replaced me was Zeljko Dilber.

20        Q.   So --

21             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction:  It was a base.  The

22     witness said logistics base.

23             MR. WAESPI:

24        Q.   So now we not only have you in an advisory role but you're now

25     the commander of the logistics battalion of OG Zadar?

Page 22324

 1        A.   I was a commander before becoming Assistant Minister.  I was the

 2     commander of the logistics brigade, until the month of April 2003 and

 3     Operation Storm took place in 2008 [as interpreted].

 4        Q.   Thanks.  We covered the phase 2000 -- 1992 and 1993.  I'm really

 5     interested in your exact role as a logistical advisor in 1995, during the

 6     advance of the 112th Brigade, which you joined voluntarily, to Benkovac.

 7     Were you in command or in charge of anything at the time, or merely an

 8     advisor?

 9        A.   I was only an advisor.

10        Q.   And my question back, and perhaps you can -- maybe you answered

11     already.  But the logistical assets the 112th Brigade had, was it a

12     platoon, was it a few men, was it a company, was it a battalion; do you

13     remember that?

14        A.   I don't recall exactly.

15        Q.   So you don't know, after so many years, what you were advising

16     about at that time?

17        A.   I can't recall the precise issues, but it must have been problems

18     that arose in the field.

19        Q.   Let's turn to Knin.

20             I understand that, and in paragraph 9 of your statement, that you

21     went to Knin the day after liberation, the morning of the 6th of August,

22     but, as an assistant minister of economy not as a member of the Croatian

23     Army.

24             Now, why did you remove your advisor hat of the 112th Brigade and

25     go to -- to Knin, back as an assistant minister of economy?

Page 22325

 1        A.   Because we had liberated Benkovac and Knin.  There was no reason

 2     why I should continue as an advisor.  I accomplished the desired

 3     objective.

 4        Q.   And you said that in paragraph 10 of your statements:

 5             "When I entered Knin with my friends ..."

 6             Who were your friends you entered Knin with?

 7        A.   I can't remember exactly who they were.  Some of my friends who

 8     were good at handling weapons.  They were supposed to provide protection

 9     for me, and cover for me during our trip to Knin.  Or, rather, I was

10     there to protect their backs and they were there to protect mine.

11        Q.   Were these friends part of any military unit or part of the

12     Ministry of Economy or something else?

13        A.   No, those were friends from Zadar.  They were members of certain

14     military units, but I can't remember which ones.

15        Q.   But they were in uniform?

16        A.   I was in uniform too.

17        Q.   Now let's turn to your evidence about the position of Mr. Cermak.

18             In paragraph 12 of your witness statement, the second sentence,

19     you state as follows:

20             "I know what the duties of a garrison commander were because

21     there was a garrison command in Zadar."

22             So that's the basis for you talking about the duties of a

23     garrison commander, because you were, at one time, in a garrison?

24        A.   The town of Zadar, where I was the commander of the

25     307th Logistics Support Brigade, is a garrison.  For the two years while

Page 22326

 1     I was commander there, the commander of the garrison was Brigadier

 2     Frane Saric.  I knew all of his duties and tasks which had to do with

 3     care for soldiers to billeted in appropriate quarters, funeral

 4     arrangements for officers, et cetera.  In fact, there were no daily

 5     goals.  It depended on the run of the garrison and life of military

 6     units.  I observed the garrison commander at work for two years, and I

 7     could see what he was doing and what his duties were.

 8             Before that, Saric was commander of the 159th Brigade for almost

 9     a year, and I was his assistant for logistics.  I personally knew Saric

10     very well, and I -- I was in daily contact with him during his term as

11     garrison commander.

12        Q.   So that's the basis of your knowledge about what the garrison

13     commander does, what the duties are, you're observing the gentleman you

14     mentioned, Mr. Saric, back in 1992/1993?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And you don't know what the regulations actually say about the

17     duties of a garrison commander?  You are not familiar with those?

18        A.   I wasn't interested in that at the time.  There was a war on and

19     regulations was something I was least interested in.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi, the Chamber is wondering, what the exact

21     knowledge of this witness about the tasks of a garrison commander, in

22     addition to what he describes in his statement, how that would assist the

23     Chamber.

24             MR. WAESPI:  Yeah, I'll move on.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Please do so.

Page 22327

 1             MR. WAESPI:

 2        Q.   Now in paragraph 21, Mr. Rincic, the first sentence says:

 3             "Mr. Cermak was not superior to the civilian and military

 4     police."

 5             And in relation to the military police, you continue later in

 6     paragraph 21:

 7             "I know that the military police was directly subordinate to

 8     General Lausic and Minister of Defence, Mr. Susak."

 9             Now, how do you know whether Mr. Lausic or Mr. Susak was in

10     command of the military police?  Did Mr. Lausic or Mr. Susak tell you

11     personally?

12        A.   I knew them personally, but they did not convey that to me in

13     turn.  I know that the military police was subordinate to Mr. Lausic and

14     Mr. Susak because, at the time when I was commander of the logistics base

15     in Zadar, I was on friendly terms with the commander of the military

16     police in Zadar, Captain Grancaric, as well as with the commander of the

17     military police in Zadar at the time when I was the commander of the

18     brigade.  I knew that the garrison commander in Zadar could issue no

19     orders to the commander of the military police in Zadar, or to the

20     commander of the civilian police in Zadar for that matter.

21             The fact is that, following its liberation, Knin had the same

22     legal standing as all the other free towns in Croatia's -- Zadar,

23     Sibenik, Split, Zagreb, all of which had the military police force and

24     the civilian police force.  Therefore, the civilian police in Zadar could

25     not issue any orders to the military police in Zadar.  Colonel - I can't

Page 22328

 1     remember his name at this time - but it doesn't really matter.

 2        Q.   So, again, your knowledge about the relationship between

 3     Mr. Cermak and the military police or the civilian police stems from what

 4     you know from your time back in 1992/1993.  Is that fair to say?

 5        A.   No, that's not correct.  Based on my knowledge, back from 1992

 6     and 1993, and based on my first-hand experience from Knin, during my stay

 7     there with Mr. Cermak and others in Knin.

 8        Q.   But as you said before, you have not talked to Mr. Lausic about

 9     that, about the situation, as it relates to Knin 1995?

10        A.   Well, we were worlds apart.  He was in his world and I was in

11     mine.  We didn't have occasion to speak.

12        Q.   And you don't know what General Lausic told this Trial Chamber

13     about whether he commanded the military police or not, or whether

14     Mr. Cermak commanded the military police or not.  You are not aware of

15     that?

16        A.   No.

17        Q.   In relation to the subordination between Mr. Cermak and the

18     military and civilian police, you also state in paragraph 21, and I think

19     that's the last sentence:

20             "Mr. Cermak ... could only ask them to do something."

21             But you don't know, do you, whether Mr. Cermak actually ordered

22     or asked the military police or civilian police something to do?

23        A.   I know that he asked them to do things and he didn't order them,

24     because he was not able to.

25        Q.   Can you give me a specific instance of fact when you saw

Page 22329

 1     Mr. Cermak asking the military or civilian police something to do?

 2        A.   At the meeting, at the coordination meeting for the

 3     reconstruction in Knin, on the day when Mr. Cermak received a letter from

 4     General Forand, I believe, the commander of the civilian police was

 5     present, and he asked him to make sure that these things did not happen

 6     again.  I saw that with my own eyes that he kindly asked him to make sure

 7     that it stopped.  He wasn't able to order him anything.  He asked for

 8     follow-up but it was all in the form of a request.

 9        Q.   Who was at that meeting?

10        A.   It was a long time ago.  I can't remember all of the participants

11     at the meeting.  I know that there was me, and, among others, the

12     commander of the police.

13        Q.   What was his name?

14        A.   Roman.

15        Q.   And who else was present?

16        A.   I can't remember.  There were four, five, or six of them.

17        Q.   And what were the exact words Mr. Cermak used when he asked the

18     commander of civilian police for something; can you recall that?

19        A.   Come on, guys, do something, stop the arson, stop all these ill

20     deeds, so to speak.

21        Q.   So he was talking to Mr. Roman or Romanic.  And to whom else?

22        A.   And the representative of the military police who was there.  I

23     don't recall his name.

24        Q.   So you recall -- can you tell me the exact words he used?

25        A.   I know for a fact that he said, Please, do everything you -- to

Page 22330

 1     make sure that it stops, for our sake.

 2        Q.   And stopping what?

 3        A.   The burning of houses and similar things.  Killing.

 4        Q.   Killing of what?

 5        A.   Probably certain civilians who they believed were soldiers.  I

 6     don't know for sure.

 7        Q.   Whom are you referring to when you say "they believed were

 8     soldiers."  Who are "they"?

 9        A.   I think that "they" were the ones who did these things.  It was a

10     matter for the police to find out who they were.  If I was able to tell

11     you that, then I wouldn't be telling that to you but to those who need to

12     hear that.

13        Q.   And before Mr. Cermak could ask, in your words, the civilian

14     police to do something, who relayed the information about the burning of

15     houses and similar things, killing?  Who said that at the meeting?

16        A.   I don't remember exactly who raised the issue.  As soon as Cermak

17     heard that, that's what he said.

18        Q.   So you don't remember who raised the issue but you do remember

19     almost exact words, at least the word "ask," from Mr. Cermak?

20        A.   Yes.  I was so astonished to hear of these things happen that it

21     remained etched in my memory, the moment when I learnt of these things.

22     I was surprised.

23        Q.   I think you said a moment ago that this meeting was probably

24     about the letter General Cermak received from the UNPROFOR commander,

25     which was around the 11th of August; is that correct?

Page 22331

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   And you entered Knin on the 6th of August?

 3        A.   Yes.

 4        Q.   And this meeting now takes place on the 11th of August and you

 5     are astonished that somebody raises the issue of burning houses to you.

 6        A.   Yes.  And we had a meeting on the 7th, and 8th, and 9th.  Nobody

 7     had ever mentioned anything of the sort beforehand, and on that day, when

 8     we heard of these matters, when the letter arrived, we had Cermak's

 9     reaction to that.  I wasn't aware of these things before.

10        Q.   Now, would your opinion about Mr. Cermak's ability to issue

11     orders to the civilian or the military police change if I would show you

12     orders from Mr. Cermak, General Cermak, to the civilian police or the

13     military police?

14        A.   You can show me the book of orders where Cermak may have issued

15     orders, but I know what the state of affairs in reality was and I know

16     that he couldn't issue orders to anyone, be it the military or the

17     civilian police.  I'm telling you what the actual state of affairs was

18     practically speaking.  Paper, what's on paper, that's quite a different

19     matter.

20        Q.   So you accept that, while he couldn't legally issue orders, he

21     might have issued orders but that's just on paper.  Is that what you're

22     saying?

23        A.   No, that's not what I'm saying.  What I'm saying is something

24     else.  Those who did issue orders and who should have been issuing orders

25     on paper and who were responsible for issuing orders to the military

Page 22332

 1     police and the civilian police, that they are the ones who you should put

 2     these questions to and not this boy over here.

 3        Q.   By saying "boy," you're referring to whom?

 4        A.   I meant the Generals.

 5        Q.   You're here to answer questions, and I'm questioning you about

 6     statements you gave to the Defence about the authority of whom you call

 7     "boys."

 8             Do you understand that?

 9        A.   I do understand what you're saying, but you are putting to me

10     matters that I know for a fact do not stand as you put them, and perhaps

11     you misunderstand me, perhaps I misunderstand you.

12        Q.   Let me just go back to my original point.  Do you deny that there

13     might be written orders by General Cermak to either the civilian police

14     or the military police?  Do you accept --

15             MR. KAY:  Well, sorry.  With all respect for my learned friend,

16     the question, "Do you deny that there might be written orders," I don't

17     think --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  The answer can be -- if we put it in a direct way.

19             Do you exclude for the possibility that written orders were

20     issued by Mr. Cermak to civilian and military police?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm not excluding

22     anything.  I only know this:  Even if he had issued an order of that kind

23     it would not have produced any effect.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  No, you -- if we would -- no, no.  Yes.  Now you had

25     answered my question but you apparently anticipated the next one.

Page 22333

 1             You say it would not have any effect.  Why not?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because, for example, if I had

 3     issued an order for them to do something, the result would have been the

 4     same.  Cermak was not in a position to issue orders to the military

 5     police.  He was not in charge of the military police.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, if you, nevertheless, would issue an

 7     order, what makes you believe that it would, under all circumstances,

 8     without any effect?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Because, in practice, I did ask and

10     requested assistance, and based on that, the commander of the military

11     police would approve that or not, or -- and then if he was able to help

12     me, he would issue an order for assistance to be provided to me.  I

13     realised in practice that that's how things ensued.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You're describing, apparently, what you

15     consider to be the proper way of seeking assistance.  And you say since

16     that worked, an order could not have been effective, which is a kind of

17     logic which -- why you would issue an order if you would know that it

18     would be without effect, under all circumstances?  What's the -- does it

19     make any sense to do that?

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It does make sense, Your Honour.

21     It was a state of war and one needed to do things fast and efficiently,

22     rather than linger on and wait.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, what you're telling us, since it was a

24     war situation, you would have to act efficiently by issuing orders which

25     would necessarily be without any effect.

Page 22334

 1             Is that the logic of your answer, or have I misunderstood you?

 2             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That is the logic.  One who is not

 3     authorised to issue orders must not issue orders.  He can, but without

 4     any effect.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And that is dictated by the war situation,

 6     which was asking for efficiency in doing things.

 7             Is that ...

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for those answers.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.

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

13        Q.   Let's turn to your actual position in Knin.

14             And I believe you just mentioned that you yourself asked or

15     requested the assistance of the military police; is that correct?

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Can you give me an example of -- of such an instance?

18        A.   We were supposed to go to a -- the source of the water for Knin,

19     which was three or four kilometres outside of Knin, it was not working

20     properly, and people from the water supply had to go there and try and

21     repair it for water to start flowing through the pipes and reach Knin,

22     and the security needed to be provided for those men.  And then I asked

23     the military police to provide that detail for us on the following day,

24     because there was such a need.  And then the commander of the military

25     police assigned a few individuals who were escorting the work -- workers

Page 22335

 1     who needed to go three or four kilometres out of Knin and be safe while

 2     performing their task.  That was in order to prevent somebody shooting at

 3     them from the woods or from a location nearby.

 4        Q.   Who was the commander of the military police you asked for his

 5     assistance?

 6        A.   Not the commander.  I always addressed the duty operations

 7     officer.  I don't know who the commander was.

 8        Q.   Do you recall the name of the duty operations officer?

 9        A.   No.  It was somebody else every six or, maybe, eight hours.  It

10     was always somebody -- somebody new.

11        Q.   How often would you use the services of the military police?

12        A.   There was that one instance with the water supply; another

13     involving telephone cables; then there was the railway situation.  As far

14     as I can remember, it was three or four times.

15        Q.   And all these three or four times you were provided with

16     assistance from the military police?

17        A.   I think that the civilian police officers helped me once or

18     twice.  It was either/or.  It really didn't matter who they were, as long

19     as they carried arms.

20        Q.   Was ever a request from your side, either to the military police

21     or civilian police, denied?

22        A.   Not directly.  Sometimes I had to wait for the service to be able

23     to provide me with men.  Sometimes I couldn't do things immediately the

24     following day.  I had to wait for a day or two and things needed then to

25     be postponed by a day or two.

Page 22336

 1        Q.   But you eventually got what you wanted.

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Now, you said in your statement, paragraph 14, that

 4     you wanted to open a Ministry of Economy branch in Knin.  And I think you

 5     then go on to say that you were "... officially sent to Knin as

 6     coordinator for the economy."

 7             Now you were given two officers and a secretary as support staff.

 8     Do you remember the names and the ranks of these two officers?

 9        A.   I don't know.  I didn't say that I was assigned officers.  I got

10     people from the Ministry of Economy, officials, civilians, and a

11     secretary.  They were not military officers.

12        Q.   In -- yes, there might be a translation or English issue.

13             In your witness statement, in the middle of paragraph 14, it

14     talks about two officers.  But these were employees of the Ministry of

15     Economy.

16             And -- is that correct?

17        A.   Yes.

18        Q.   And they were assigned to you throughout the period you were in

19     Knin?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   You remember the names?

22        A.   Oto Jungwurth, a man; Sandra, whose family name I can't remember

23     at the moment.  She was a lady whose name you can check with the

24     ministry.  It shouldn't be difficult.  And another gentleman whose name I

25     can't remember, but if need be, I can supply you with their names

Page 22337

 1     subsequently.

 2        Q.   And you also say -- state that you had the official Ministry of

 3     Economy stamp and the stationery with the letterhead.  Now that very much

 4     looks like a civilian position you had at that time in Knin.

 5        A.   Yes.

 6        Q.   But how come, then, that you signed documents on behalf of

 7     General Cermak, and you signed them -- and we have seen a couple

 8     introduced in examination-in-chief.  You signed these reports on the

 9     official Knin garrison command letterhead as a Colonel Rincic.

10             How do you explain that?

11        A.   Because of the war situation that was still pretty much on, in

12     reality, to provide for the effectiveness and the speed when it comes to

13     dealing with problems.  When something had to be done, using Mr. Cermak's

14     name did the trick.  Mr. Cermak's name was very strong, so using his name

15     would get things done much faster than using the title the Ministry of

16     Economy.

17             I hope you understand me when I say that his name was strong.  He

18     was respected.  And if I needed something to be done quickly, I would use

19     Mr. Cermak's name.  If I hadn't, things would not have happened as

20     quickly.

21        Q.   And I think you said earlier, you yourself were in uniform at

22     that time?

23        A.   In the office I did not wear a uniform, and I did not carry arms.

24     However, if I had to go on a field mission, I would wear a uniform for my

25     own safety.  I felt much safer wearing a uniform than wearing civilian

Page 22338

 1     clothes.

 2        Q.   And I believe on occasion you did introduce yourself as

 3     Mr. Cermak's assistant or deputy; is that correct?

 4        A.   Not officially.  In my official capacity I never introduced

 5     myself as Mr. Cermak's assistant.  Perhaps -- no, I didn't.  No.

 6        Q.   But, unofficially, it's possible, as you recall today, that you

 7     might have introduced yourself as the assistant or deputy of Mr. Cermak?

 8        A.   I did not introduce myself as such.  However, in some dangerous

 9     situations I wanted to make that impression, because it made me feel

10     safer.  When my life might have been at risk, I felt safer if I made such

11     an impression.  My life was at risk, you know.  As a civilian, I could

12     have been shot at.

13        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Rincic.  Two final topics.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi, if you have dealt with this topic.

15             Could I seek clarification of your last answer.

16             You said:  "As a civilian I could have been shot at."

17             Could you explain who would shoot at you as a civilian?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, it could have been anybody,

19     on any of the sides, in confusion, in fear.  Maybe they could have

20     perceived me as -- as threat.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Now --

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The enemy troops remained behind in

23     the woods or in some other areas, you know.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  And you would expect them to first fire at

25     civilians, but wearing a military uniform, you would not be a target for

Page 22339

 1     enemy troops?

 2             Is that how I have to understand your answer?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, that's what I believed at the

 4     time.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 6             Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.

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

 8        Q.   Let's go to the issue of the Tvik factory.

 9             In paragraph 25 of your witness statement, you talk about that,

10     and I think one of the reports you introduced -- or which was introduced

11     with you, talked about the factories.

12             In paragraph 25, you say -- state as follows, the last five

13     lines:

14             "I was very pleasantly surprised when I went to the Tvik factory

15     which was manufacturing ammunition for the RSK army and the JA and saw

16     that more than 800 machines were intact and in working order."

17             Now, when did you go to the factory?

18        A.   Two or three days after my arrival in Knin, when I started

19     working on reviving the economy in Knin.

20        Q.   And how do you know that the Tvik factory was manufacturing

21     ammunition?

22        A.   In two ways.  There were two things that confirmed my knowledge

23     about the production of ammunition.

24             First of all, we found some incomplete, unfinished ammunition of

25     different calibre, and they were never finished because the production

Page 22340

 1     was interrupted by Operation Storm.

 2        Q.   Can you --

 3        A.   And the second thing was that we found in the administration

 4     building a thank-you note from Captain Dragan, who is currently in

 5     Australia, as we know.  He thanked Tvik factory for the assistance in

 6     supplying his units.  And we also found a thank-you note from some other

 7     units; I can't remember which ones exactly.  They also thanked Tvik

 8     factory for supplying them with ammunition.

 9        Q.   Did you tell that to the gentlemen who interviewed you on behalf

10     of Mr. Cermak, when you met them end of March, early April, that you

11     found thank-you notes from Captain Dragan thanking them for supplying his

12     units?

13        A.   No.  They didn't ask me that so I didn't tell them.  But the

14     thank-you note is still there with Mr. Bozo Jusup in Zadar, who is the

15     managing director of Tankerkomerc.  He wanted to keep it as a souvenir.

16     It still exists.

17        Q.   Mr. Bozo Jusup, he is living in Zadar?

18        A.   Jusup, yes.

19        Q.   Can you get these notes, these thank-you letters?

20        A.   If he still has them, I might.  You know, all that happened

21     15 years ago.

22        Q.   I thought you said a moment ago it still exists.

23        A.   It was just my assumption that it still exists, my assumption

24     that he still has those documents.

25        Q.   Now, these unfinished ammunitions, what kind of ammunition was

Page 22341

 1     that you saw when you visited the Knin factory -- the Tvik factory?

 2        A.   I saw casings for automatic weapons in baskets, in -- in a very

 3     large number.  For machine-guns.

 4        Q.   And why do you say these casings were produced in Tvik, in the

 5     Tvik factory?  Did you see machines?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   You have --

 8        A.   Tvik is a huge factory.  It has all sorts of machinery, presses,

 9     metal machines.  I was the Assistant Minister for special-purpose

10     production, for the production of ammunition, grenades, machine-guns,

11     ammunition, and I know that Tvik could produce all that.

12        Q.   Sorry, I didn't get that.  You were the Assistant Minister for

13     special-purpose protection for grenades, machine-gun ammunition?

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   That's the first time I hear that.

16        A.   Yes.

17        Q.   Wouldn't it be something worth mentioning in your witness

18     statement, the official title of your role as an assistant commander?

19             I just don't see in your --

20        A.   No, no.

21        Q.   -- witness statement any mentioning that you were the assistant

22     minister for special purpose in relation to grenades, machine-gun,

23     ammunition.  But perhaps you can guide me.  Perhaps it's a translation,

24     or interpretation issue?

25        A.   It must be there.  Let me -- let me show you.

Page 22342

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic.

 2             MR. MIKULICIC:  If I may assist, Your Honour, paragraph 1, and

 3     line 12 and 13 of witness statement.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, half of it, apparently, is there.

 5     Special-purpose manufacturing industry.  It says special purpose which is

 6     certainly an indication --

 7             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes, Your Honour.  I'm looking at the --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- which goes in that direction.

 9             MR. MIKULICIC:  -- looking at the Croatian version of the

10     statement of the original one.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Is there a difference?

12             MR. MIKULICIC:  No, there is no difference, but there's a special

13     wording in it which, for the native speaker, is almost at the first sight

14     clear what kind of production is.  So "namjenska proizvodnja" means

15     exactly --  but I think that the witness could explain.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, the issue only was apparently

17     credibility of the witness.

18             Mr. Waespi, do you want to further explore that --

19             MR. WAESPI:  No, no, I'm -- I'm fine.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  -- or do you accept that at least --

21             MR. WAESPI:  Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  -- special production is specifically mentioned in

23     the witness's statement as -- as part of his responsibility although not

24     with the details, as he just told us.

25             MR. WAESPI:  Yes.

Page 22343

 1        Q.   Let me go back to the machine.  So you're saying when you visited

 2     the Tvik factory, you say that you saw that casket full of machine-gun

 3     ammunition and you saw machinery capable of producing that?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5        Q.   Did you make a report about that?

 6        A.   No, it wasn't necessary.  I didn't think that it was necessary,

 7     you know.  It was a notorious fact that in the so-called Republic of

 8     Srpska Krajina that they were manufacturing for their so-called army, and

 9     at the moment when I found that, I did not see anything out of the

10     ordinary.  It was normal.

11        Q.   You went -- you were sent down there to check the state of the

12     factory.  And I suggest to you it was certainly very, very useful, even

13     for the Croatian Army, having liberated this area to know that there is

14     still an existing machinery capable of producing ammunition.  And you're

15     the specialised minister, as we just heard.  You didn't think it was

16     important to bring that to the attention of your superiors?

17        A.   No.  I believed that that factory was extremely important for us

18     and that's why Minister Vidosevic appointed me as the president of the

19     steering committee of that factory, where over 300 people found

20     employment in a very short period of time.  I was the coordinator of the

21     revitalisation of the factory.  It didn't -- really did not matter to me

22     what the factory was producing for the Republic of Serbian Krajina.  What

23     mattered was what the factory would go on producing for the Republic of

24     Croatia by -- it was a matter of bygones and I wanted to face the future.

25        Q.   Just to clarify your question [sic].  Your first words in your

Page 22344

 1     response, you accept that you did not inform your superiors that you

 2     found a functioning machine capable of producing ammunition in the Tvik

 3     factory; is that correct?

 4        A.   Those were universal machines that were capable of producing

 5     nails, bolts and casings.  Those were not special machines that could

 6     only produce weapons.  A good handyman could produce even a violin on any

 7     of these machines.  I only reported back to my superiors that the

 8     machinery was good, in working order, and that we could use it for

 9     anything, and I left it to them to see what they wanted to do in the

10     factory.  And they decided -- I did report back to my superiors what kind

11     of machinery I found on the ground and what they were capable of

12     producing.

13             What I said, that it didn't matter, was what had been produced in

14     the past.  To be honest, I could not even say with 100 per cent certainty

15     that they had produced ammunition, because I wasn't there.  I did not

16     witness that with my own two eyes.

17        Q.   You just saw a functioning machine there, capable of producing

18     anything from a violin to a grenade?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Thank you.

21             MR. WAESPI:  Perhaps that's a good moment, Mr. President, for the

22     break.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  We will have a break and we'll resume -- could you

24     give us an indication, Mr. Waespi, as to how much time would you still

25     need.

Page 22345

 1             MR. WAESPI:  Yes, I think it's only about ten minutes.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And looking at the other parties, is there any

 3     chance that we could conclude the testimony of this witness today?

 4             MR. KAY:  Certainly.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Certainly.

 6             Then we'll have a break and resume at five minutes to 6.00.

 7                           --- Recess taken at 5.36 p.m.

 8                           --- On resuming at 5.58 p.m.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi, please proceed.

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

11        Q.   You knew, Mr. Rincic, Mr. Gotovina fairly well; is that correct?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   He was your -- your commander when you were in command of the

14     logistics base?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Did you also have private trips to see him in 1995, around the

17     time when you had private trips to see General Ademi, or maybe

18     Colonel Ademi, at that time?

19        A.   No.  Because he wasn't there.  At least he wasn't in Knin when I

20     was there.

21        Q.   Now, did you ever --

22             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President, I think the Defence of

23     General Gotovina has an objection to my next question.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, I do not know yet what your question.  Neither

25     do I know of the objection.  So this is a very pleasant situation.

Page 22346

 1             MR. KEHOE:  We -- I thank my colleague for bringing this up.  I

 2     did question this line of inquiry.  I don't know if it is appropriate.

 3     Maybe we can ask the witness if he speaks English, Judge, and I can

 4     possibly discuss this very briefly.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Rincic, do you understand English?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I do, though I can't be fully

 7     certain that I understand what is being said.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe is always so clear in his language that,

 9     unfortunately, Mr. Rincic, I have to ask you to briefly leave the

10     courtroom, because a matter will be discussed now which you're supposed

11     not to be privy with.  So if could you please follow the usher for a

12     second, and then we hope that it will be as short as possible.

13                           [The witness stands down]

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe, wouldn't it be best that we first hear

15     what question Mr. Waespi had on his mind so that we can understand your

16     objection?

17             MR. KEHOE:  I agree, Mr. President.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

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

20             The issue I wanted to raise with the witness was 65 ter 7423.

21     That's a newspaper report about the fact that Mr. Rincic was considered a

22     suspect in relation to the fugitive status of General Gotovina in 1994,

23     and his house was raided, according to newspaper --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  1994 was --

25             MR. WAESPI:  I'm sorry --

Page 22347

 1             MR. KEHOE:  2004.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  2004, yes.

 3             MR. WAESPI:  -- 2004.  Newspaper dates 27 September 2004.  So

 4     according to the newspaper article, the house of the witness was raided

 5     and the investigation interrogation was ongoing and I want to ask the

 6     witness whether he was ever involved in helping General Gotovina to avoid

 7     justice and --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If that's the question you'd like to put, we'd

 9     like to hear the objection.  Mr. Kehoe.

10             MR. KEHOE:  Well, the objection, Mr. President, is, with these

11     documents, the good-faith basis when the Prosecution knows that the

12     witness was brought in, questioned and released, and never charged.  And

13     what the Prosecution is attempting to do is somehow bring in some

14     conspiratorial agreement between this witness and my client that goes

15     into assisting General Gotovina during this time-frame.  The fact of the

16     matter is that the witness was questioned and released.

17             So I don't quite understand, Mr. President, you know, this

18     happens throughout the world people, where questioned and released, and

19     does that the subject of inquiry in a criminal case?  I suspect there is

20     no court in the world that allows that, if I may.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Well --

22             MR. KEHOE:  I shouldn't say that, Mr. President.  Maybe that is a

23     little -- maybe that's a little over the top.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  -- give us the --

25             MR. KEHOE:  Certainly --

Page 22348

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  -- first the --

 2             MR. KEHOE:  Certainly there is no basis under these

 3     circumstances, Mr. President, to go into an issue where someone is

 4     brought into a station, questioned and released.  It is an entirely

 5     different circumstance if the person is charged and there are criminal

 6     proceedings ongoing.  That didn't happen here.

 7             MR. WAESPI:  Mr. President.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

 9             MR. WAESPI:  Two points.  First of all, my house has never been

10     raided.  I don't know about Mr. Kehoe's house --

11             MR. KEHOE:  Yet.  Yet.  Your house hasn't been raided yet.

12     That's right.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Don't -- don't give up the hope, Mr. Waespi.  Yes.

14             MR. WAESPI:  So, that is a pretty significant event, for which

15     any police has to have whatever sense is probable cause.  That's number

16     one.

17             Number two, it shows the -- indeed the connection between this

18     witness and the accused, whom he volunteered to call "boys," and I think

19     it is important to point that out to -- to the Trial Chamber.  And he can

20     explain what it was, for how long he has been interrogated, whether there

21     was indeed probable cause, whether they found something or didn't find

22     something, and I think it is only fair that I raise this issue with this

23     witness.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Let me first briefly comment on the use of the

25     term "boys."

Page 22349

 1             From the transcript, I think, and also from what I heard, there

 2     was a reference to "this boy."  Apparently referring to Mr. Cermak.

 3     That's at least how I understood it.  And I noted that when you later

 4     referred to that, you were talking in the plural.  Whereas I understood

 5     it to be exclusively in relation to Mr. Cermak.

 6             Now, that, of course, may not be decisive, but at least, since

 7     Mr. -- since the issue apparently you're raising concerns not Mr. Cermak

 8     but only Mr. Gotovina that might -- the reference to "boy" might

 9     therefore not strictly apply.

10             MR. WAESPI:  On this point, Mr. President, on line -- page 46,

11     24, the witness said:  "... and not this boy over here."  And I asked by

12     saying "boy" you are referring to whom.

13             And he answered, at least in the English interpretation:  "I

14     meant the Generals."

15             JUDGE ORIE:  If that's correct, then he moved to the plural which

16     I then missed.  Let me just ...

17             Could you please repeat the page and --

18             MR. WAESPI:  Page 46.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Page 46, yes.  One second, please.

20             MR. WAESPI:  [Indiscernible] the word "boy."

21             JUDGE ORIE:  No, I'm there already in 46.

22             MR. WAESPI:  Page 47, line 1.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, one second.

24             Yes, you're right.  Again, there I understood -- it was my

25     recollection that it was said "the General."

Page 22350

 1             But let's not -- it's not the core issue.

 2             Any further thing in response to what Mr. Kehoe said?

 3             Mr. Mikulicic.

 4             MR. MIKULICIC:  Your Honour, just to be of some assistance to the

 5     Chamber.  As a native speaker, I heard the witness said "decki" which in

 6     the context of his speech should be translated as "guys," not "boys."  So

 7     I think the proper translation of his word should be "guys," not "boys."

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  At least atone other occasion his words were

 9     translated as "guys."

10             MR. MIKULICIC:  Right.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps he used the same word there, but I noticed

12     word "guys" was used.

13             MR. MIKULICIC:  Because it's a kind of, you know, slang speech,

14     kind of colloquial speech.  When someone is using the word "decki" in

15     Croatian, literally the right translation is "boys" --

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, at least --

17             MR. MIKULICIC:  -- but this is meant to be guys in that context.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You propose that the translation in this

19     context would be -- that's your proposition.  I'm not commenting on you

20     but you know that --

21             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  -- the final authority for translations, and I never

23     had any problem if someone would express views on sometimes improving or

24     suggesting other translations, but what it is, is finally in the hands --

25     but we have carefully listened to your observations, Mr. Mikulicic.

Page 22351

 1             MR. MIKULICIC:  Yes.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  And we --

 3             MR. MIKULICIC:  It's kind of fine-tuning translation,

 4     Your Honour, if I may say so.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but that doesn't change the matter, that even

 6     for fine-tuned translation, that the Chamber finally relies on the

 7     CLSS --

 8             MR. MIKULICIC:  I'm aware of it.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  -- and interpreters who are doing such a great job

10     here.  But I do understand that you, as a native-speaking person, have

11     raised some issues in relation to the use of the word "boys" in

12     translation of the word you just mentioned.

13             That's on the record.  That's clear.  Thank you, Mr. Mikulicic.

14             MR. MIKULICIC:  Thank you, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe.

16             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, just one last comment with regard to

17     this line of inquiry.  This is a witness for the Cermak Defence, and

18     given this is the Cermak Defence, what's the relevance with regard to

19     General Gotovina?

20             And clearly this is being brought to bear during the Gotovina

21     case if -- or against General Gotovina.  And consequently given the state

22     of the proceedings it is simply not relevant given the fact that this was

23     a witness put up by General Cermak.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Although the evidence this witness gives is

25     not excluded from being evaluated in the case against Mr. Gotovina, or is

Page 22352

 1     it your view that it is?

 2             MR. KEHOE:  No.  My view is that I think that if the Prosecution

 3     wanted to go into something along this line on their case somehow going

 4     into, you know, some type of conspiratorial agreement to -- while

 5     General Gotovina was a fugitive, then that is something they have put on

 6     in their case.  I'm not saying that the Court or the Chamber should dice

 7     and splice each individual item concerning what is put forth by the

 8     respective Defences, but this is clearly, clearly being pointed at my

 9     client.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it's clear.

11             Mr. Kay, it is your witness who is cross-examined by Mr. Waespi

12     --

13             MR. KAY:  Yes, and --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  -- and is there anything you would like to add

15     because I first wanted to --

16             MR. KAY:  I'm grateful, Your Honour, having now been enlightened

17     on the issue which I did not know was going to be raised.

18             This is called a so-called credibility issue and the fact is that

19     the Prosecution are relying on a newspaper report rather than source

20     material that defines the so-called credibility issue, which is the fact

21     that there was some sort of police inquiry out of which no charges arose.

22             In my submission, that puts to rest the credibility issue, as far

23     as this matter goes.

24             I must say, in my code of conduct where I come from, you're not

25     allowed to do this kind of thing.  If you have such information, it in

Page 22353

 1     fact does not go to a witness's credibility and it offends against the

 2     bar council's codes of conduct.  We had an example of that yesterday with

 3     the particular witness where some information was found from somewhere or

 4     other, I'm not actually sure where even now, and we had a big inquiry and

 5     now the witness came out and said, Well, actually I won this case and

 6     there was no finding against me.

 7             What is happening here is people's characters are being blackened

 8     before this Court than is actually in opposition to people giving

 9     evidence.  I can tell the Court that, that people are concerned about

10     what goes on in such a way, and it's a deterrent for the truth to come

11     out in this Court.

12             In my submission, the Court has duty to consider the interests of

13     witnesses.  This is just one such a situation, where the so-called

14     credibility issue amounted to nothing.  It is not a credibility issue

15     because the authorities in the police did not charge this man with

16     anything.  The fact that you may be arrested, questioned or your house

17     searched is a matter of criminal procedure.  That does not mean that are

18     you a man of bad character or that you are a man who has committed any

19     sort of offence.  Quite the opposite, in fact, because nothing further

20     came from it, and the Prosecution know that as a fact.

21             But in trying to use other materials, what is happening here, in

22     my submission, is not good for justice and not right for witnesses, and

23     does not assist these proceedings or show them in a good light.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi, could I ask you how familiar you are

25     with the follow-up of the raid and the questioning of Mr. Rincic?  Have

Page 22354

 1     you inquired into whether there was ever a prosecution?  If not, do you

 2     know the reasons why he was not prosecuted?

 3             MR. WAESPI:  We made a Google search, and found another article

 4     in Slobodna Dalmacija, the next day, where Mr. Rincic kind of admits to

 5     what happened, and he said that he was later released, he said in a phone

 6     interview to this newspaper, and accepted that he was -- that police

 7     interview with him lasted all night, and that -- and I just quote from

 8     this article:

 9             "They explored the possible connection to my people who helped

10     hide Ante Gotovina," and so on.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  It's not an answer to my question.

12             MR. WAESPI:  But that's as far as I could -- I did my inquiries,

13     no more.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, and you didn't ask for, I hardly dare to say,

15     for the Official Note which may have been taken at that moment in order

16     to give further information about what he may have told and ...

17             MR. WAESPI:  That could be -- sometimes after witnesses leave we

18     make follow-up RFAs and this could be, depending on whether you allow me

19     to question the witness on what his answers are.

20             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, with all due respect to counsel on

21     this, and I don't want to speak for Mr. Kay, but I do believe this

22     witness's name has been disclosed to the Prosecution for some time.  I

23     will turn to my learned friend.  I don't know exactly what the date was

24     but I do recall it being sometime in the late spring, if I'm not

25     mistaken.

Page 22355

 1             MR. KAY:  When we filed our Rule 65 ter list of witnesses, which

 2     was in March -- May.  May.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, thank you.

 4                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber will not allow you to put this question

 6     to the witness, Mr. Waespi.  However, there's another thing that came to

 7     our mind, which is the following.  Yesterday -- or, yes, I think it was

 8     yesterday, where the witness was able to explain that -- how this whole

 9     matter ended up in court, an option would be, the Chamber is not

10     insisting on it, but I could ask the witness that, During the break it

11     was brought to our attention that once your house was raided and you were

12     questioned, is there anything you'd like to bring to our attention, in

13     relation to that?

14             And if he then starts explaining why he was not prosecuted, then

15     I would think it would even be good to know that.  I would not

16     immediately expect him to say, I was questioned and, of course, what I

17     did was to assist Mr. Gotovina.  That's not the question I consider

18     most -- the answer mostly likely to be expected.

19             That came to my mind.  I'm, at the same time, hesitant to do such

20     a thing, but I'm seeking here the input of the parties and the ruling is

21     clear, we will not allow Mr. Waespi to ...

22             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, I understand that Your Honour --

23     Your Honours' questions in this regard, but this issue is directed

24     towards my client and it has real -- at this point, absolutely no

25     relevance to these proceedings so -- and given the fact that nothing

Page 22356

 1     happened and we don't have anything else, we would object and ask the

 2     Chamber just to preclude the Prosecution from asking the question and

 3     move on to another subject.

 4             MR. WAESPI:  Can I just --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Other parties.

 6             Mr. Kay.

 7             MR. KAY:  Again, I think it's a relevance issue.  Once we look at

 8     this for what it's worth, Your Honour, and in my submission, the Court

 9     really should be focussed on his evidence rather this kind of side issue

10     in relation to character --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             MR. KAY:  -- of the Prosecutor.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Mikulicic, anything you would like to add?

14             MR. MIKULICIC:  No, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Waespi.

16             MR. WAESPI:  The relevance issue is, as pointed out by Mr. Kay,

17     the character and the credibility of the witness, and that is not a side

18     issue.  That is as important the truthfulness, the transparency of where

19     these witnesses are coming from, the allegiance to the accused, to

20     anybody, is very important for Your Honours.  And I understand I'm not

21     allowed to go into that, but the relevance issue is certainly not the

22     crucial point, in my submission.

23                           [Trial Chamber confers]

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Having consulted my colleagues, the Chamber cannot

25     conclude that there's no relevance at all in such a question.  At the

Page 22357

 1     same time, irrelevant -- irrelevance is not such that I would proceed

 2     along the lines that came to my mind for five seconds and which I shared

 3     with you, so, therefore, we'll invite the witness to come back and you

 4     may move on, Mr. Waespi, with your next topic.

 5             MR. WAESPI:  I have no further questions, Mr. President.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Nevertheless, the witness will come back into the

 7     courtroom.

 8                           [The witness takes the stand]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Rincic, sometimes lawyers --

10             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  -- need close to ten minutes to find out that they

12     have no further questions for you, and you had to wait all this time.

13             Mr. Waespi has concluded his cross-examination.  I'll now address

14     the other parties whether there is any need to re-examine the witness.

15             MR. KAY:  Your Honour, I have no re-examination.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe.

17             MR. KEHOE:  Just very briefly, Mr. President.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

19                           Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:

20        Q.   Good afternoon, Mr. Rincic.  I just would like to ask you about

21     some of the questions that you were -- specifically questions that you

22     were asked by Mr. Waespi concerning assistance to railway workers and

23     matters of that nature.

24             I would like to show you 65 ter 4451.

25             MR. KEHOE:  And, Mr. President, just for the record, this is --

Page 22358

 1     this has -- parts of this have been put in evidence already.  It is a --

 2     the log-book of the 72nd Military Police Battalion.  All of it has not

 3     been translated, I have to guide the Court in that regard.  But I would

 4     like the -- excuse me, yes.  It's the Knin Company.  I have just been

 5     advised that the 72nd Military Police Battalion -- and if we could as

 6     part of this, if we could put page 5 of the B/C/S and page 1 of the third

 7     translation on the screen.

 8        Q.   I'd like to show you three entries here, Mr. Rincic, and then

 9     just ask you a question.  You can see the entry for the 72nd Military

10     Police Battalion, the Knin company, on 12th/13th of August, 1995, at the

11     top, entry 1.  Request by the Knin garrison to escort railway employees

12     to Zitnice.  If we can turn our attention to page 8 in the B/C/S --

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe.

14             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Mr. President.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me just try to understand what you're putting.

16     We're talking about 12th/13th of August, yes.  I would just like to read

17     what you put to the witness so that I --

18             MR. KEHOE:  It is entry number 1.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

20             MR. KEHOE:  And --

21             JUDGE ORIE:  If you would let me read.

22             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, I'm sorry.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

24             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, if we could turn to page 8 in the

25     B/C/S and page 4 in this third translation.  And at the bottom block for

Page 22359

 1     August the 16th, get the English.  We have the bottom block, yes, towards

 2     the bottom is the 16th, and I believe that is a request from Mr. Rincic

 3     for military police to provide security for the Croatian post and

 4     telecommunications employees.

 5        Q.   I believe you referred to that previously, Mr. Rincic.

 6             MR. KEHOE:  And we have -- if can turn to page 10 in the B/C/S

 7     and page 6 in this third translation.  And if we look at the bottom of

 8     that page -- the first -- yes, that's it, good.  Okay.

 9        Q.   And if we look at the entry number 2 there for the

10     18th of August, we have you, Mr. Rincic, requesting five or six policemen

11     to be sent to secure the HZ, being the Croatian railway employees.

12             Now, Mr. Rincic, when you were talking about those types of

13     requests for the military police, are these the types of matters that you

14     were referring to as we see in this log?

15        A.   Yes.

16             MR. KEHOE:  Your Honour, at this time, we will to offer

17     65 ter 4451, this third translation, which, again, is a -- in the 12

18     pages in this there are translations so the Court can see the context of

19     these entries.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

21             Mr. Waespi.

22             MR. WAESPI:  No objections.

23             MR. KAY:  No objection.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar.

25                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

Page 22360

 1                           [Defence counsel confer]

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Registrar, would you already assign a number for

 3     this document to be MFI'd.

 4             The reason for that, Mr. Kehoe, being that we have carefully

 5     finds what exactly is selected, what is evidence.

 6             MR. KEHOE:  Yes.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  There is no issue about admission as such but that's

 8     rather to clearly define what we have in evidence.

 9             MR. KEHOE:  I understand, Mr. President.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D1684, marked

12     for identification.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

14             One additional question in relation to this, Mr. Rincic, we see

15     in this entry it says:  "Rincic ZM."

16             Have idea what that stands for?

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, probably the individual who

18     wrote this assumed that I was a soldier.  Perhaps that was his

19     understanding of who I was.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. --

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not everyone was aware of the fact

22     that I was in charge of --

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Rincic, I didn't ask you about any thoughts

24     behind the person who may have written this but what the letters ZM could

25     stand for.

Page 22361

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To me, it seems -- Zdenko is my

 2     first name, so there you have a Z there, but I wouldn't be able to tell

 3     you what exactly this means.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  There is no M in your first name, is there?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Can you imagine any other meaning of ZM?  Was that a

 7     usual abbreviation for something?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, you see, normally that's how

 9     I sign my name, Rincic Zdenko.  Perhaps he mistook my name for something

10     else.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, did it come to your mind in the last

12     minute or last minute and a half that it could also be Zborno Mjesto?

13             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know.  Perhaps.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  I asked you whether it came to your mind.  I think

15     you can answer that question if ...

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It did, but it doesn't make sense

17     that this is what it should state.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you for that answer.

19             Any further questions?

20             MR. KEHOE:  Nothing further, Mr. President.  Thank you.

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Judge Kinis has one or more questions for you.

23                           Questioned by the Court:

24             JUDGE KINIS:  Mr. Rincic, in your statement in paragraph 28 and

25     paragraph 30, you mentioned how many tasks you were carried out under

Page 22362

 1     leadership of General Cermak.

 2             My question is -- maybe it will consist by two parts.  The first

 3     is:  I would like to know who participate in this activities?  Was there

 4     some labour force or was there -- was there soldiers who participate in

 5     these activities just cleaning up and transport and feeding and so on and

 6     so forth.

 7             And the second question is:  Who finances this operations,

 8     really?  Do you have some budget for -- for this garrison command, or how

 9     it was organised at that time?

10        A.   Let me be specific.  I recollect that when it came to the

11     clearing up of the streets in Knin that were overflowing with rubble and

12     for the cleaning up of apartment blocks and flats, with coordination from

13     Mr. Cermak, volunteers of the Red Cross were engaged, as well as various

14     associations from Zagreb.  These were mostly women who were engaged in

15     cleaning.  The support was provided by the civilian police, in terms of

16     lorries.  Others, who were able to, also provided support.  Assistance

17     was sought from units, and even from UNPROFOR itself.  They provided some

18     support too.  UNPROFOR was stationed in the vicinity of Knin, in

19     barracks.

20             As for financial support, when needed, we sought assistance from

21     public utility companies from the town of Sibenik to step in, the town of

22     Sibenik being the closest, as well as from the towns of Zadar and Split.

23             In other words, public utility companies of the surrounding

24     towns, of the towns nearby, were the ones that were most involved in the

25     cleaning exercise.

Page 22363

 1             JUDGE KINIS:  Thank you.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Rincic, I have a few questions for you about the

 3     railways.

 4             You were asked whether it was the Knin-Gracac railway.  And you

 5     said:  "Also" -- that's at least what was -- what I remember.  And I'm

 6     just checking that.  The problem is that the word "also" does not appear

 7     in the WordWheel.

 8             Are you aware of any other railway repair jobs that were done

 9     under security provided by the military police?

10        A.   The entire railway line from Slunj to Knin, which had previously

11     been occupied, was in a bad state of repair in many places.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  And --

13        A.   And the task was given for the whole line to be repaired, not

14     just for the Gracac-Knin section to be repaired.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  But I was specifically asking about security

16     provided not only for that portion but for other railway works, or

17     repairs as well.

18        A.   Really, I can't remember at the moment.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  And how do I have to understand the security?

20     Because I take it, were they working 24 hours a day, or was this a day

21     shift?  And how was this security then organised, in relation to these

22     repair jobs?

23        A.   It was mostly day shifts.  They did not work during the night, so

24     they did not have to be secured.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And would, then, the security report in the

Page 22364

 1     morning in Knin, or at the relevant portion of the railway line, or ...

 2        A.   Well, it depended on where they came from, where the repair

 3     workers came from.  If they came from Split, as they were entering Knin,

 4     they would meet up with them and then they headed together towards the

 5     point that was being repaired.  If they came from the northern part, then

 6     they would meet perhaps -- if they, for example, came from Karlovac, from

 7     the Croatian railway branch in Karlovac, then they would meet up

 8     somewhere in the north, near Udbina, which is north of Knin, for example.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Now would -- providing such security, was that more

10     or less a routine or was it exceptional?

11        A.   It was exceptional; it was not a matter of routine.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And in total, how many -- how many days -- I

13     don't know perhaps the right English expression, but how many man days,

14     that is, how many -- if we're talking about three days, five men, that

15     makes 15 man days.  How much was, in total, involved in the security on

16     these railway lines?  Could you give an estimate, if you know.

17        A.   During the period covering 15/16 and 17 days, the security was

18     needed for seven to eight days, even more than that.  Even longer.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  And you said three to four people.

20        A.   I was not the only person in charge of the repair of the railway

21     line.  The area was simply too large, and it covered over 100 kilometres.

22     There were several individuals involved in the task.  Mr. Cermak also

23     looked after the railway line, and it was not that I knew everything,

24     every detail of the exercise.  The managing director of the Croatian

25     railways and the executive directors of the Croatian railway branches in

Page 22365

 1     the neighbouring towns, we were all involved in that huge task.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Was a request for security for this type of work

 3     ever denied by the military police?  I mean not postponed but denied.

 4        A.   As far as I know, it didn't happen.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 6             I'd like to move to another subject.

 7             You talked about that meeting, where, apparently, the letter sent

 8     by General Forand was discussed and where you said that Mr. Cermak

 9     expressed that this should stop or requested that it should stop, and

10     when asked, What should stop, you included killing.  And then you gave

11     one answer, which I would like to briefly further explore with you.

12             You said, when asked who "they" were, they who had to stop.  You

13     said:  "Certain civilians, they believed that" -- no.  You were talking

14     about certain civilians being killed and then you said:

15             "They believed that they were soldiers," and you were referring

16     to the perpetrators of the killing.

17             You said:  "They believed."

18             Then you were asked by Mr. Waespi who "they "were.  And then you

19     said:

20             "If I would know, I would have told those who ought to know."

21             Do you remember that?

22        A.   Yes.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, if you do not know who the perpetrators are,

24     how could you know that they thought that the civilians that were killed,

25     that they believed that they were soldiers?

Page 22366

 1        A.   Maybe you didn't understand me properly.  That's what I believed

 2     at the moment when I heard the information.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But my question is:  You express your views on

 4     what those who apparently committed killings, what they believed;

 5     whereas, you don't know who they are.

 6        A.   I said that when I heard the information, I believed that those

 7     persons, those individuals, had believed that they were killing soldiers.

 8     It would not have made any sense for them to be killing civilians.

 9     Having put all in that way, I suppose that what I believed at the time

10     was wrong, within that context, because it turned out later that things

11     were actually different.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you explain that last -- what was different?

13        A.   Later on, I learned, or I understood, that people who were killed

14     were not soldiers but some other individuals.  And that's why I said that

15     if I knew who had killed them, I would have turned them in immediately.

16     If I had known who they were, I would have turned them in immediately, at

17     the moment when I learned what they had done.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Rincic, your initial answer was, about the

19     killings to be stopped, that these were civilians killed by persons who

20     believed they were soldiers.

21             Your last answer, in which you say it turned out to be different,

22     you said they turned out to be civilians.  That's not in way different

23     from what you earlier said, and I'm exploring what is at the basis of

24     your testimony where you say that persons unknown killed civilians but,

25     as you said, they believed them to be soldiers.

Page 22367

 1             How could you know, or how could we know, if you don't know who

 2     they are, whether they initially killed civilians, or whether they killed

 3     civilians, believing that they were soldiers?  How can we know; how can

 4     you know?

 5        A.   I was convinced that there were no civilians around Knin, that

 6     the only people who might have been there were some soldiers who had

 7     stayed behind.  During those two or three initial days, I could not even

 8     believe that there were any civilians there.  I believed that all

 9     civilians had already left.  At least that's what could be heard on the

10     grape-vine.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for that answer.

12             A final brief subject.  Did you move around in town the first day

13     when you were in Knin?

14        A.   Yes.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Did you ever see household appliances not in

16     apartment buildings but outside apartment buildings?  And I'm not talking

17     refrigerators but, for example, television sets, perhaps washing

18     machines, furniture?

19             Did you ever see that on the -- on the streets?

20        A.   Yes, I did.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  What did you think about that?  What came to your

22     mind when you saw that?

23        A.   Just like we said before, that people were leaving Knin, people

24     who had resided there, and that whatever they could not carry, they threw

25     out of their apartments in order to destroy those things.  They didn't

Page 22368

 1     simply want anybody who was going to move into their apartments to make

 2     use of those things.  That's what occurred to me.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Do I have to understand that if, for example,

 4     we're talking about television sets, they were all destroyed?  They are

 5     not perhaps still functioning?

 6        A.   The fact is that you could not even spend a night in Knin,

 7     because in those abandoned flats, you could not see any furniture.  There

 8     were no appliances.  Everything had either been taken away or thrown out.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Let me then -- do we agree that you can see

10     the difference if a television set is a thrown out of the window or when

11     it's put on the pavement.  Would you agree that that can be seen, the

12     difference between?

13        A.   Yes, of course.  Because if you throw out something, if you throw

14     it out of the window, then you break it.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  May I then take it that, in view of your

16     explanation, that television sets you may have seen on the pavement were

17     all destroyed, were not, from the outside, looking as if they were still

18     in a condition that they possibly could be used?

19        A.   They were broken.  They could not be used.  At least that's what

20     I could see.  That's my assessment.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

22             One very last item.

23             You told us about the Tvik factory where, as I understood you

24     well, half products, casings were found.  Did you find any ammunition

25     which was already ready to be sold, so fully produced, not a half product

Page 22369

 1     but in its end stage?

 2             Did you find any of those?

 3        A.   No, we didn't find any such products.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm asking you this because if you see a half

 5     products in a situation as you described, then Mr. Waespi asked you, but

 6     it looked rather obvious to me that if in such a factory you find these

 7     half products and that is apparently where they are produced or will be

 8     further produced.

 9             Now, talking about production, I wondered, but please give your

10     comment, that, with a -- perhaps not fully unexpected but at least with a

11     military operation which came to some extent as a surprise, the time not

12     being known, it would surprise me if all of the fully produced ammunition

13     could have been taken out in time under those circumstances.

14             Do you have any explanation as to why you found only half

15     products and where nothing fully produced was found?

16        A.   They needed any finished products, to use them against us as we

17     were advancing towards Knin.  They had ample time to take everything.  We

18     didn't find a single pistol, a single gun.  We didn't find any weapons.

19     They had taken everything away.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Were weapons produced as well in the Tvik

21     factory, according to your knowledge?

22        A.   No.  There was no technology in place to produce weapons.  Only

23     ammunition could be made there.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm trying to understand your answer where you said

25     well, they had all time because we didn't find any weapons; whereas, you

Page 22370

 1     say weapons were not produced there.

 2        A.   Well, you know, I have a lot of experience, and I saw a lot of

 3     things, not only in Knin but among people who worked even civilians were

 4     armed.  I believe that even those civilian workers in the factory had

 5     been armed and that's why I said what I did.  I suppose that in the area

 6     both troops and civilians carried weapons.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for those answers.

 8             Have the questions by the Bench triggered any need for further

 9     questions.

10             Then, Mr. Rincic, this concludes your evidence in this court.  I

11     would like to thank you very much for coming a rather long way to

12     The Hague and for having answered the questions that were put to you by

13     the parties and by the Bench, and I wish you a safe trip home again.

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  If there are no other procedural issues to be

16     raised, then we'll adjourn, and we will resume tomorrow, Thursday, the

17     1st of October, at quarter past 2.00, in Courtroom III.

18                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.57 p.m.,

19                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 1st of October,

20                           2009, at 2.15 p.m.