Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 27118

 1                           Wednesday, 24 February 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.24 p.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon to everyone.

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

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you, Your Honours.  Good afternoon,

 8     Your Honours.  Good afternoon to everyone in and around the courtroom.

 9     This is case number IT-06-90-T, the Prosecutor versus Gotovina et al.

10     Thank you.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

12             Before we will hear the testimony of the first Chamber witness,

13     the Chamber would briefly like to put a few matters on the record.  For

14     the sake of full transparency, the Chamber wishes to put on the record

15     the steps taken by the Chamber with regard to the calling of

16     Witness CW-1, which is Mr. Radic.  As the parties recall, the Chamber

17     announced its decision to call this witness on the 20th of January, and

18     on the 28th of January, a legal officer of the Chamber contacted

19     Witness Radic by phone and informed him about the Chamber's decision and

20     about the possible date for testimony.  This phone conversation was

21     recorded with the knowledge of the witness, and may be provided to the

22     parties, should any dispute arise as to what was said during the

23     conversation.

24             Subsequent to this, the Victims and Witness Section of the

25     Registry contacted the witness on numerous occasions in order to make the

Page 27119

 1     practical arrangements with regard to the witness's travel to and stay in

 2     The Hague.  On the 2nd of February, the Chamber granted the Prosecution's

 3     request to send Requests for Assistance to Croatia for Witness Radic and

 4     to the extent that the Request for Assistance did not require -- and to

 5     the extent that the RFA did not require Croatia to contact the witness

 6     regarding the substance of his testimony.

 7             I would like further to put on the record what is found in an

 8     e-mail of the 12th of February, 2010, in relation to the scope of

 9     cross-examination in general.  Easiest is to just slowly read the

10     substance of this e-mail.

11             It reads:

12             "Dear parties, on 27th of January, 2010, the Chamber informed the

13     parties of its inclination to focus its examination-in-chief of the seven

14     Chamber witnesses on very specific matters, and that the parties should

15     also focus their cross-examinations on the matters raised in the

16     examination-in-chief," which, is found at transcript page 27.106.  "The

17     parties were then invited by the Chamber to file written submissions by

18     the 5th of February, 2010, should they fundamentally disagree with this

19     approach."  Same page of the transcript.  "On the 5th of February, 2010,

20     the Prosecution filed the Prosecution's submission on the scope of

21     cross-examination of Chambers witnesses, in which it requested the

22     Chamber to confirm that the scope of cross-examination includes the

23     witnesses' credibility and to allow the parties to make requests in

24     advance of the witnesses' testimony to extend the scope of

25     cross-examination.

Page 27120

 1             "With regard to the first issue, the Chamber confirms that the

 2     scope of the cross-examination of Chamber witnesses will include their

 3     credibility.  When cross-examining a Chamber witness, the parties will be

 4     able to read into the record portions of previous statements alleged to

 5     be inconsistent with any evidence given by the witness during his

 6     testimony in order to challenge the witness's credibility.

 7             "With regard to the second issue, the Chamber recalls that the

 8     rationale of Rule 90(H)(i) of the Rules, coupled with the fact that none

 9     of the parties called any of the Chamber witnesses during their cases,

10     militates in favour of restricting cross-examination to the topics dealt

11     with during the examination-in-chief.  However, should the parties feel

12     the need to extend the scope of their cross-examination, they shall make

13     such requests as soon as possible."

14             And then the e-mail continues to say that this will be put on the

15     record, but I have read the substance of the e-mail of the

16     12th of February.

17             Next item deals with the scope of the examination-in-chief of

18     Chamber witness number 1.  And the Chamber wants to put on the record

19     that, on the 12th of February, 2010, the Trial Chamber informed the

20     parties by e-mail of the intended scope of examination-in-chief of this

21     witness.  More specifically, that the Chamber intended to question

22     Witness Radic with a view to exploring the consistency or inconsistency

23     of the aims and purposes of the use of Croatia's governmental powers and

24     instruments as expressed and observed in a public setting, on the one

25     hand, and as found in non-public -- in a non-public setting on the other.

Page 27121

 1     Further, the Chamber would primarily focus on the following subject

 2     matters: The return of persons; the temporary takeover and reconstruction

 3     of property; and the security issues following Operation Storm.

 4             As far as the non-public setting is concerned, the Chamber would

 5     focus primarily on the Presidential and VONS meetings that the witness

 6     attended.

 7             As far as the public use of Croatia's governmental powers and

 8     instruments is concerned, the Chamber is not intending to seek any

 9     further evidence on legislative activities or on planning, developing, or

10     implementing programmes on which the Chamber has already received

11     extensive evidence by -- through witnesses, such as Witnesses Sterc,

12     Skare Ozbolt, Skegro, and Bagic.

13             The Prosecution has asked to give time-limits.  The Chamber is

14     not intending to put very strict time-limits but the Chamber expects that

15     the testimony could be concluded in two days.  And as the parties may be

16     aware, we have swapped tomorrow's afternoon session to the morning

17     session.  However, if that would be not sufficient, then we still have

18     Friday reserved to continue.

19             Then I would like to move briefly into private session on a

20     matter not directly related to this witness.

21                           [Private session]

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 27122











11 Pages 27122-27123 redacted. Private session.















Page 27124

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17                           [Open session]

18             THE REGISTRAR:  We're back in open session, Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

20             One preliminary matter before we ask the usher to bring the

21     witness into the courtroom.

22             In preparing for the first Chamber's witness, the Chamber

23     received from the parties a statement that the witness gave to the

24     Gotovina Defence, a statement which was signed on the 25th of May, 2009.

25     This statement is not in evidence.  However, if the Chamber would like to

Page 27125

 1     rely on that, it has requested it to be uploaded so that we can see it on

 2     our screens and if there's any need to put anything of his statement to

 3     the witness.

 4             Then, unless there are any questions in relation to these, I

 5     would say, preliminary matters, if there are, I would like to hear them;

 6     if not, we will ask the witness to be brought into the courtroom.

 7             MR. KEHOE:  Just briefly, Mr. President, procedurally.  We filed

 8     an e-mail message to Chambers and parties yesterday concerning the order

 9     of examination by the parties when the Chamber concludes.  We went and

10     researched what the Chamber proposed and did in prior proceedings, and

11     frankly, adopted that, in that the order of proceeding would be

12     Prosecution with the burden of proof, then by the respective parties.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's what was on the mind of the Chamber,

14     and the Chamber was informed that the witness has shown some interest in

15     knowing as well on how we would proceed.

16             The one thing I do not know yet is whether a sequence of

17     examination or cross-examination, whatever would you like to call it, I

18     think we called it cross-examination among the Defence teams, whether

19     that has been agreed upon.

20             MR. KEHOE:  I haven't discussed it with my colleagues.  I

21     certainly at the first break will do so.  I thought, maybe

22     presumptuously, that we would go first, as we have done in the past, and

23     we are prepared to do so.  So that's -- but I will talk to my colleagues

24     on the break, and ascertain that.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

Page 27126

 1             Then I think we're at the point where we can ask the witness to

 2     be escorted into the courtroom.  Madam Usher.

 3             I also inform the parties that the Chamber has verified whether

 4     the witness would require any protective measures.  The answer is that he

 5     didn't ask for it.

 6                           [The witness entered court]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon, Mr. Radic.  Can you hear me in a

 8     language you understand?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, before you give evidence, the Rules of

11     Procedure and Evidence require that you make a solemn declaration that

12     you will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

13     The text is now handed out to you by Madam Usher, and I would like to

14     invite to you make that solemn declaration.

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

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

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Radic.  Please be seated.

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, the Chamber was informed that you would

20     very much like to know what the sequence of questioning will be.  First,

21     the Chamber will ask you questions.  That might take quite some time.

22     Once we have heard your testimony, the Prosecution will ask questions,

23     and after that, the Defence counsel will ask questions.

24             If there would be any need for further questions, we'll establish

25     that once we have concluded these series of questions.

Page 27127

 1                           WITNESS:  JURE RADIC

 2                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

 3                           Questioned by the Court:

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, would you please state your full name and

 5     date of birth for the record.

 6        A.   My name is Jure Radic.  I was born on September 15, 1953.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Mr. Radic, I'll just first like to go

 8     through some general information.

 9             From 1992 to 1994, you were the Chief of Staff of the Office of

10     the President of the Republic of Croatia and Secretary-General of the

11     Defence and National Security Council, the VONS.  Is that right?

12        A.   Yes.  In early 1992, I was the minister for science, and then

13     from mid-1992 up until the end of 1994, I was the head of the Office of

14     the President and the Secretary-General of the VONS.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  And were you deputy prime minister of the government

16     of the Republic of Croatia and the minister of reconstruction and

17     development from 1994 to 2000?

18        A.   That's correct.  Since 1994, up until 2000, I was the

19     vice-president of the Croatian government and the minister for

20     reconstruction and development.  But in the latter part of that period,

21     there was another function added to the ministry so the name changed, and

22     I actually became the minister for reconstruction, development, and

23     relocation -- resettlement.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  And as a deputy prime minister and minister of

25     reconstruction and development, and, as you said, later on, changed its

Page 27128

 1     name, were you closely involved in all tasks in the process of

 2     reconstruction, development, and the return of displaced persons

 3     following Operation Storm?

 4        A.   Yes, I was.  My task was reconstruction of homes, of

 5     infrastructure and the conditions, living conditions, and enabling or

 6     making the conditions such that people can actually return.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  I would now to move into a different area and deal

 8     with some of the meetings you were reported as having attended.

 9             Could we please pull up P462?  Page 16 in the English and page 25

10     in the B/C/S.

11             If you would like to look at the documents in hard copy and not

12     only on your screen, we have prepared a binder which would enable to you

13     look at the hard copies, but we'll start with having them on the screen.

14     If have you any difficulties in reading them, please tell us.

15             The front page, the first page of this document, mentions you as

16     being present at this meeting on the 11th of August, 1995.  Were you

17     present?

18        A.   Well, I would have to read the details of the meeting.  But it's

19     quite possible and very likely that I was.  A lot of time has passed in

20     the meantime, but I could say that I attended most of the meetings that

21     dealt with reconstruction and development so I do believe that I was

22     present there, because my name is -- appears there.  But once I see the

23     context, I will probably refresh my memory.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  If at any moment any doubts would come up as to your

25     presence, we'd like to hear from you.

Page 27129

 1             Could I take to you page 25 in the B/C/S, page 16 in English.

 2             For the parties, when I'm referring to pages, I'm referring to

 3     e-court pages which are not necessarily the same as the pages -- as the

 4     paging as we find it in the document.

 5             Mr. Radic, from these minutes, the Chamber sees that you are

 6     recorded as having said, and I quote part of which is seen on your

 7     screen.  You are reported to have said:

 8             "That Vojnic used to have only 51 inhabitants."

 9             You follow that?

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  "Today it's a town of 15.000 people.  Tomorrow we

12     can fill it up with 15.000 in addition.  Lapac has 14 inhabitants,

13     14 Croats, Donji Lapac 14 inhabitants.  (It's more than the number of

14     houses)."

15             Yes, Mr. --

16             MR. MISETIC:  I sincerely apologise for the interruption,

17     Your Honours, but there is a -- I now notice translation errors in this

18     paragraph so I don't know if you wish to tell me -- tell you outside the

19     presence of the witness, but what the numbers are today versus used to be

20     are mixed up in the translation.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, do you speak and understand English?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can understand it.  I don't

23     understand everything, but, yes, I do understand it.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  One second, please.

25                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

Page 27130

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, just -- you say there are translation

 2     issues in the document?

 3             MR. MISETIC:  In the English version, yes.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  In the English version.  Have they been raised

 5     before, have we missed anything?  Because this is what is at this moment

 6     in e-court.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  I don't believe it has been raised before and I

 8     don't recall focussing on this paragraph.  Quite honestly, Mr. President,

 9     we -- I haven't gone through all the transcripts to check the

10     translations.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I can imagine that you didn't do that.

12             Mr. Radic, since the Gotovina Defence would like to draw the

13     attention of the Chamber to certain issues in relation to this document,

14     this is preferably done in your absence.  So, therefore, with my

15     apologies, would you be kind enough to follow the Usher so that we can

16     deal with that matter, and we -- I think that we'll see you back very

17     soon.

18             THE WITNESS: [No interpretation].

19                           [The witness stands down]

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

21             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, we don't have the English on the screen

22     anymore.  But I believe temporally it is mixed up, so what it should say

23     is that:  "Today Vojnic has 51 residents.  It's a town of 15.000 people

24     in which tomorrow we can put 15.000 people."

25             JUDGE ORIE:  You say Vojnic has today only 51 inhabitants.  Is

Page 27131

 1     that --

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Correct, correct.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:   Which -- any other matter?

 4             This, of course, extends, I take it, to the lines that follow,

 5     that we should understood the reference to 14 inhabitants of Lapac as of

 6     today -- today, at the 11th of August, 1995, and that -- yes, that seems

 7     to be ...

 8             Ms. Gustafson.

 9             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Your Honour, I -- obviously I don't speak

10     Croatian but I do know that these numbers correspond exactly to the

11     numbers in the census.  In other words, if you look at the 1991 census,

12     the town of Vojnic had 51 Croats and Donji Lapac had 14.  So in that

13     sense it's more consistent with the --

14             JUDGE ORIE:  You would say --

15             MS. GUSTAFSON:  -- the translation as it is so perhaps we can get

16     some [Overlapping speakers] ...

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's then -- let's then --

18             MS. GUSTAFSON:  -- definitive clarification --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  We can ask clarification from the witness.

20             Mr. Misetic, what words exactly in your view are mistranslated

21     and, as we all know, it's not the task of our interpreters to make

22     corrections.  At the same time, to send it back to CLSS for one or two

23     words which are not perhaps very difficult issues and then to wait for a

24     day might not be very practicable.

25             Could you point us at where and perhaps reads it in B/C/S --

Page 27132

 1             MR. MISETIC:  I'll just --

 2             JUDGE ORIE: -- where it is said that it is today that Vojnic has

 3     51 inhabitants.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  I propose, Mr. President, that I just read out

 5     the -- from where it says:  "I don't -- and I don't know ..." and I will

 6     just read the rest of it.  And then ...

 7             It's in the second line.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me just have a look.

 9             I haven't got it in e-court in front of me.  The page number in

10     the hard copy would be ... yes, I see it.  That's page 11 out of 18 in

11     the hard copy.

12             Yes, if you would please slowly read from, "I don't know," but

13     then, of course, in the original language.

14             MR. MISETIC:  [Interpretation] "And I don't know, we don't have a

15     report on this, but I don't know if you know that Vojnic has only

16     51 inhabitants today.  It's a town of 15.000 people, and tomorrow we can

17     fill it up with 15.000."

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Gustafson, logic does not oppose against this

19     interpretation, because if today it is a town of 15.000 people, tomorrow

20     we can fill it up with 15.000 doesn't make sense.  Whereas, if you link

21     today to the 51 inhabitants, it makes more sense.  But we could verify

22     with the witness.

23             MS. GUSTAFSON:  Certainly, Your Honour.  I'm not opposed to the

24     clarification.  I just wanted to point that fact out.  That's all.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we'll proceed, and we'll invite the witness to

Page 27133

 1     be escorted into the courtroom again.

 2                           [The witness entered court]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, an issue was raised in relation to the

 4     translation into English.  I will read now in English what appears to be

 5     agreed upon by the parties at least, as a basis for proceeding.

 6             But I would, at the same time, like to very much invite you to

 7     carefully look in the text of what is now translated to you in B/C/S

 8     reflects what you understand is in the original minutes of the meeting.

 9             Then I start at the same point again:

10             "That Vojnic has only 51 inhabitants today.  It is a town of

11     15.000 people, tomorrow we can fill it up with 15.000, in addition, Lapac

12     has 14 inhabitants.  14 Croats.  Donji Lapac, 14 inhabitants.  (It's more

13     than the number of houses ...)."

14             Are you --

15        A.   Yes, I think that is consistent now, both the English and the

16     B/C/S versions are consistent with each other.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  I continue my quote, because as -- where it says

18     "It's more than the number of houses," then there are a few dots.  I then

19     continue:

20             "I agree, but it's strategically so important, and it's in such a

21     position that we must repair the houses, Gojko, and put Croats there,

22     such is the position of the place."

23             Could you briefly explain what you considered to be the strategic

24     importance?  If you could do it briefly.  And I'm talking about

25     Donji Lapac.

Page 27134

 1        A.   Well, we are talking about the time immediately in the aftermath

 2     of Operation Storm and the area where Croatia was practically cut off by

 3     the aggressor's army.  There were only a few kilometres left -- of

 4     territory left between Karlovac and Kupa where one could travel from

 5     north to south.  It is also a time when the war, in the immediate

 6     vicinity right across the border in Bosnia and Herzegovina, was still

 7     very intense and Mladic's forces were in a position where they were

 8     almost launching attacks and they certainly had opportunity to launch

 9     attacks again, to cut off Croatia one more time if this area was left

10     vacant.

11             So this was the strategic thinking that we were guided by.  But I

12     would like to add something.  Not only during Operation Storm or around

13     Operation Storm, but as early as the -- establishment of the Croatian

14     state in 1990, we were considering and thinking about regions that were

15     relatively empty, sparsely populated, because Croats had been actually

16     expelled from there by the Communist parties in the past.  So the

17     strategic goal was that Croatian citizens not be for the most part in

18     Zagreb, in other words, that Zagreb shouldn't be the -- in its number

19     half of Croatia, but that Croatian citizens should also live in this area

20     as well.  So this was our thinking, that this was a region that needed to

21     be settled.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Could I ask you now, the line, "It's more than the

23     number of houses," and then the dots, do you remember what you exactly

24     said at the time; and could you tell us what you then meant by what you

25     said.  We have only the line, "It's more than the number of houses."

Page 27135

 1        A.   Well, I think perhaps the transcript was imprecise.  I had

 2     occasion to see some other transcripts and I know that they're not always

 3     absolutely reliable in terms of their precision.  But I have to say that

 4     there were many apartments in this area, so not private homes but

 5     apartments, flats, and in almost 90 per cent of the cases, these flats,

 6     or apartments were actually socially owned or state owned.  I don't even

 7     know how to interpret socially owned [B/C/S spoken] into English.

 8             But during the socialist period, all of us, and I'm referring to

 9     Yugoslavia, were actually just tenants using socially owned flats.  So in

10     Donji Lapac or Knin there were a lot of apartments that were actually

11     owned by the Yugoslav People's Army.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe.

13             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, if I could be of some assistance on

14     how these transcripts have been transcribed.  And I'm not just looking at

15     this one in isolation but through all of them.  I don't know if -- if you

16     want me to do this in the presence of the witness and I --

17             JUDGE ORIE:  If --

18             MR. KEHOE:  -- focus on that which is in the parentheses.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  My first question for the witness was whether he has

20     recollection of what he said and that is I -- I already indicated that

21     the transcript may not be complete here.  So I would first like to hear

22     an answer to that question.  If at any later stage we would like to focus

23     more on how these transcripts were made, then we'll certainly do so and

24     you can raise the matter.

25             MR. KEHOE:  Yes.

Page 27136

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  My first question was whether you remember about

 2     what you said about it's more -- apparently referring to the number of

 3     14, because if you are talking about it's more than what is recorded here

 4     as the number of houses, that seems to relate to the number of 14.

 5             Do you remember what you said at the time?

 6        A.   No, I can't remember.  But I just realised now what's written

 7     here in the brackets, in the transcript, and I can only assume that

 8     perhaps this was an aside that somebody else actually said and that

 9     that's how it actually found its way into this transcript, because I

10     don't see any logic in this, in a person who would be taking these

11     minutes to put some words into parentheses in this way, and which makes

12     this sentence incomplete, in fact.

13             So I can't -- I absolutely cannot recall what it was that I was

14     actually saying.  I couldn't say that with any certainty.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So whether you said it or someone else said it

16     that's ...

17             Now, could you explain to us what may have been meant by the

18     speaker at the time, that 14 was more than the number of, as is said

19     here, houses, which suggests that there was apparently, as far as houses

20     are concerned, that there were less than 14.

21        A.   Well, I think this is just something that found its way into this

22     transcript from elsewhere because I cannot place it in the context in

23     which this is being said.  So I have to be quite honest.  I can't

24     remember what my words were, but I couldn't even draw any conclusions as

25     to what these words were actually referring to.

Page 27137

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you tell us, Donji Lapac, was by majority,

 2     inhabited by persons of what ethnicity?

 3        A.   The large -- a large majority of the Donji Lapac population were

 4     Serbs.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  "Large" could -- would that be 80 per cent,

 6     90 per cent, 70 per cent?  Do you have --

 7        A.   I think over 90 per cent, probably.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  And -- thank you.

 9             Could I take you briefly to P463.  Page 12 in the English;

10     pages -- page 17 in the B/C/S, at the bottom.

11             This is a -- these are minutes of a meeting in which, on the

12     cover page, as you may see on your screen now, it was you who was

13     present, and as we understand, with President Tudjman.

14        A.   Yes.  Yes, I was present at that meeting.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we go to the pages I indicated.

16             Could we go to the ... perhaps first -- no.  First go to, in the

17     original, page 17 in e-court, the last bottom.

18             There -- but if you want to read it first, you talk about

19     Donji Lapac.

20        A.   Mm-hm.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  And perhaps we should move to the next page in

22     B/C/S.

23             There you are reported to have said:

24             "Do you know that ethnically the cleanest municipality in Croatia

25     was Donji Lapac, the cleanest."

Page 27138

 1             In view of your previous answer, could we understand that to be

 2     as the cleanest, in terms of the -- the highest majority being Serb?

 3        A.   Yes, I said before, over 90 per cent.  Here it says 99 per cent.

 4     But, yes, we can take it to mean that, yes.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  And then the President said:

 6             "Probably none of them remained?"  With a question mark.  And you

 7     would have answered:  "Yes, none."

 8        A.   Yes, that is correct.  This is the period after Storm, and in

 9     spite of the appeals by President Tudjman, the government, and all of us

10     to stay, the population still left.  I cannot specifically say whether

11     nobody remained in Lapac, but a large majority did leave that area.  This

12     is a fact.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I would like to move back to P462.  That's the

14     minutes of the meeting we just looked at.  That's the minutes of the

15     meeting of the 11th of August.  We have looked already at the front page.

16        A.   Mm-hm.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  On the bottom of page 14, we find that you are the

18     person speaking.  And once we've seen that, I'd like to move on to

19     page 15.

20             Could we move to ...

21                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

22             THE WITNESS:  Mm-hm.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I wanted to show in the English version that - it is

24     on page 14 in English - that Mr. Radic is reported as being the speaker.

25             And we then move to page 15 and page 23 in B/C/S.

Page 27139

 1             You're reported here as having said - and perhaps you could

 2     please try to find it - that:

 3             "The Law on Property authorises the state to grant that property

 4     for temporary use."

 5             Have you found that?  I think it would be the [Overlapping

 6     speakers] ...

 7        A.   I see it.  It's at the top.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then Mr. Nikica Valentic is reported as having

 9     responded that:

10             "This law regulates the possibility of granting that property and

11     that somebody cannot be expelled from a house in a year time if" -- and

12     then it says -- or at least we have it, between slashes:  "/a refugee/

13     comes back.  But the fact is," and I'm still quoting Mr. Valentic, "that

14     we must think what we will be in two, three years, when somebody comes

15     back."

16             Then Mr. Susak stated that:

17             "Nobody will move in under such law."

18             To which Mr. Vrdoljak then responded:

19             "Nobody will, but let's say, according to the Law on

20     Compensation, this would definitely mean their final removal.  Those from

21     there would request to be sent few Kunas and would be very happy."

22             Now, one possible interpretation of these remarks is that the

23     Law on Property, the suggested Law on Property, would aim at guaranteeing

24     persons who were granted property for temporary use, that they would not

25     be expelled if the refugee who owned the house returned so that the

Page 27140

 1     refugees would not return, and I'm saying this is one of the possible

 2     interpretations.

 3             Is there any information available to you which would contradict

 4     such an interpretation of what is said here?

 5        A.   Yes, some people thought in this way, and I agree with you that

 6     this is one possible way of thinking about it.  Those of us who dealt

 7     with the renewal and the reconstruction thought differently, and we

 8     implemented this in the forthcoming period and there were many examples.

 9             For example, I think it's possible to show this even in video

10     footage.  In Kistanje we built an entire new settlement of 150 houses and

11     relocated people to those houses who were temporarily accommodated in

12     abandoned property, and then we freed up that property for the return of

13     their owners once they decided to return.  So we always took care of one

14     type and the other type of person whenever this was possible, because the

15     concept of the law was the preservation and guarantee of private property

16     but also providing shelter to people who, at that time, were without

17     homes, because they were, for example, expelled from Bosnia-Herzegovina

18     or from other parts of Croatia.

19             One more thing, which is perhaps the most important one here.

20     The proper way to save a house from destruction was to have somebody

21     inhabit it, either its real owner or a temporary tenant.  As far as homes

22     and especially estates in villages or forests were left empty, that house

23     would be destroyed by thieves, robbers, by bad weather or other reasons.

24     The goal was to preserve property at all costs and also to provide

25     shelter for people and not to prevent anybody who wanted to return, who

Page 27141

 1     wanted to apply, who wanted to come back as a Croatian citizen could do

 2     that.  This was something we didn't wish to prevent but it was a long

 3     process.  It took a few months.  However, if a house was left empty, it

 4     would become rundown and dilapidated within six months.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You started your answer by saying:  "Yes, some

 6     people thought in this way ..."  Did you refer to those speaking that

 7     they considered that this would finally result in a final removal, and is

 8     that also expressed by the speaker who says, Well, we can't expel them

 9     within a year; but what, if in two or three years somebody comes back,

10     which is --

11        A.   It's hard to say what a person thought.  But can I tell you what

12     I personally thought at the time.

13             I was personally in charge of creating such conditions.  As for

14     what individuals thought, well, it would be hard for me to speak about

15     that.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Our primary focus at this moment is to understand

17     what persons speaking in this meeting said.  If you may have other

18     thoughts, that seems to be already emerged from the first part of your

19     answer where you said, Some people thought in that way.

20             The thought as I put it to you, as a possible interpretation,

21     that the -- that the -- the person speaking may have hinted at a

22     non-return of refugees.  Those who had left the area where they had

23     lived.  Was that on the mind of some persons, and could this be

24     understood possibly as an expression of those thoughts, not to say that

25     those were your thoughts.  Perhaps we come back to that at a later stage.

Page 27142

 1     But I'm just focussing on this part of the minutes.

 2        A.   I cannot say in any way what somebody else was thinking.  If we

 3     read this record, these minutes, it's clear that there are individuals

 4     who could have said something like that, but these are not people who

 5     were charged with organising this particular task.  Those whose message

 6     was crucial, important, that was the president of the republic, the prime

 7     minister, and then that was also me, it was my task.  So I would not want

 8     to go into what that was supposed to mean, what was the message that

 9     person was trying to send when he said that at the time.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  I would like to stay on the same page.

11             The last part of what I just read to you was that Mr. Vrdoljak

12     remarked that:

13             "Those from there would request to be sent few Kunas and would be

14     very happy."

15             Now, these words could be interpreted as to suggest that

16     compensation should be offered to displaced persons so that they would

17     not return but accept a few Kunas.  Is there any information you could

18     provide to this Chamber which would contradict or shed a different light

19     on what was said in this line by Mr. Vrdoljak?

20        A.   Yes.  We began an assistance programme for expelled persons

21     sometime in 1991 and 1992 in Croatia.  These were Croats who had been

22     expelled in Croatia.  In the beginning, they were given money instead of

23     having their homes reconstructed.  They stayed in big towns.  The funds

24     they would receive for the reconstruction of their home in Nustar, which

25     was partially liberated, but they never renovated the house.  They would

Page 27143

 1     stay in Zagreb and use the money to buy a car, for example.

 2             So in principle, we abandoned the idea, and we put that into a

 3     law, of giving people money, but we actually did the renovations for

 4     their houses and in order to help them return to their homes, in order to

 5     prevent the money being spent for other purposes.  So maybe Mr. Vrdoljak

 6     knew this fact and that there was such examples among the Croats, but

 7     this was not something that we strived for.  We tried with the money that

 8     we had at our disposal to create conditions for these people to return

 9     where they came from.  I mentioned the example of Kistanje where this was

10     actually implemented.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Do I understand you well, that the remark by

12     Mr. Vrdoljak, "Those from there would request to be sent a few Kunas and

13     would be very happy," that that would relate to Croats, or would it refer

14     to Serbs who had left their homes?

15        A.   In this case, since this happened shortly after Oluja, I think he

16     meant Serbs.  But immediately before that, he did have some experience in

17     relation to Croats.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I would like to move on to another document,

19     Mr. Radic, to P2593.

20             Perhaps we could look at the first page, to start with.

21             Mr. Radic, you are reported to be present in the meeting, a

22     meeting of the 17th of December, 1996.  The same applies as earlier, may

23     I take it that if you are mentioned at the cover page, that we could

24     start on the basis of the assumption that you would be ready -- you would

25     be present, and if there's anything at a later stage which would make you

Page 27144

 1     think that that might be a mistake, we'd like to hear from you.

 2             Could we then move to page 3, to start with, in the English, and

 3     page 4 in B/C/S.

 4             There, Mr. Ivica Kostovic is recorded as having said -- and

 5     perhaps we could move a little bit further down in the English.

 6             "The second thing that needs to be done -and the prime minister

 7     has already given the green light for it - is the simple compensation,

 8     meaning that we would pay off the Serbs, and" --

 9             And we now move to page 4 in the English:

10             "... our bank would give a loan to a Croat, he would give that

11     money to a Serb, and the Serb would sign he would not return there

12     anymore."

13             And then on, I quote further from page 4 in the English, page 5

14     in the B/C/S, President Tudjman is recorded as having said:

15             "They should be offered to be compensated for what they have here

16     instead of return ..."

17             These remarks could be interpreted to suggest that compensation

18     should be offered to displaced persons so that they would not return.

19             Could you tell us of any information which would -- which would

20     you have and could tell the Chamber about which would contradict such an

21     interpretation, that the focus was rather on compensation with the result

22     that there would be no return?  At least no return of Serbs.

23        A.   There were different ideas voiced at our meetings.  Obviously, I

24     can't recall this, this was one of such ideas, but ultimately, this was

25     not accepted as a conclusion and it was not acted upon.  We set off the

Page 27145

 1     idea to consider buying out property from those who did not wish or were

 2     not going to come back a few years later.  At that point in time,

 3     however, these ideas were not accepted as a conclusion, and I as the

 4     minister in charge and neither the prime minister nor the President

 5     issued any kind of instructions for this idea to be carried through.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Do I understand you well that you say, from what was

 7     said here, although not accepted, that the priority would be for

 8     compensation which would result in non-return but you say this was not

 9     put in practice later.

10             I'm mainly focussing at this moment on how to interpret what was

11     said and not to pay a lot of attention on what, after that happened,

12     because the Chamber has heard quite some evidence on what was done at a

13     later stage.  I'm primarily focussing on the language used and the

14     thoughts expressed at that time.

15             Would you agree that this suggests, then, that compensation would

16     be the first thing to do and then this would result likely in the no

17     return?  Apart from what happened later.

18        A.   At the time, I understood that slightly differently then, and

19     today, still.

20             Everything should be done for them to return, and as for those

21     who decide not to return, a way had to be found to compensate them.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  But would you agree with me that if that was the

23     guiding thought, that you would have expected language such as, Let's

24     give them an option either to be compensated or to return, and if they

25     choose not to return, then compensation is still there.

Page 27146

 1             That is what you would expect if the thoughts were as you just

 2     interpreted them.

 3        A.   This was repeated at least 100 times at various meetings that I

 4     attended.  This is one such meeting where this was said slightly

 5     differently.  But it was stated in many meetings and publicly, as well as

 6     at government meetings, what you have just said, yes.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Can you point us at any non-public government

 8     meeting where an offer for compensation was put on the same level as the

 9     option for return?

10        A.   I did not quite understand the question.  Compensation on the

11     same level as the option for return?

12             JUDGE ORIE:  What I'm asking you, because we see here that they

13     should be offered to be compensated instead of return.  That seems to be

14     an expression of a policy considered by the speaking person.

15             Now, can you point us at any non-public meeting where you said it

16     was phrased some times slightly different and it was expressed often in

17     such meetings.  Could you point us at any non-public government meeting

18     or another non-public meeting, in which the option to be compensated and

19     the option to return were offered, or were suggested to be offered as

20     equal options, not the one that should be the aim of the policy to be

21     adopted rather than the other, but you say if they would not return we

22     could still compensate them.

23             But could you point us at any non-public meeting where it was

24     said, We should give them the free option: Return or be compensated, as

25     you wish, and we'll opt for such an approach.

Page 27147

 1        A.   At the time, we had cabinet meetings every morning at 9.00.  And

 2     it's been 15 years since then, but it's my impression that practically

 3     each meeting did discuss return first.  These ideas about compensation

 4     were in the background, because we simply didn't have the money.  These

 5     were ideas of some people.  I cannot remember, but I can see from the

 6     minutes that some people did voice these ideas.  But that was not the

 7     most important thing.  The key thing was to create conditions for all

 8     people to return, both Serbs and Croats, all those who wished to return,

 9     who wanted to take Croatian nationality.  That was -- or citizenship.

10     Croatian citizenship.  That was the question.  And immediately we opened

11     at our branch -- our office in Belgrade - it still wasn't an embassy

12     then, but it was an office - we opened up the possibility for people to

13     apply to return.  This couldn't happen immediately and we couldn't have

14     them returning in a -- spontaneously.  It had to be organised in some

15     way.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber has received a considerable body of

17     evidence on this issue.  Therefore, I'm not encouraging you to further

18     elaborate on that, and if any of the parties would want to re-visit this

19     matter, they are, of course, free to do so.

20             Mr. Misetic.

21             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I know we're approaching a break and

22     I so have an interpretation or translation issue and I didn't wish to

23     interpret you in your questioning but --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

25             MR. MISETIC:  -- perhaps we can ask the witness to leave when

Page 27148

 1     you're ready.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I would -- one final question.  You said,

 3     Well, return was more important for us because we didn't even have the

 4     money to compensate them.  Under those circumstances, I would expect

 5     President Tudjman to say, Let's do our best that they will return,

 6     because we have no money for compensation.

 7             Instead, he says, They should be offered to be compensated for

 8     what they have here instead of return, which gives a priority for

 9     compensation, at least that's how you could understand this, rather than

10     a priority for return.

11             Therefore, your explanation, We didn't have the money for

12     compensation, earlier a few Kunas were mentioned, that -- I'm trying to

13     reconcile your observation with what I read here as being said by

14     President Tudjman and also the few Kunas, who talked about a few Kunas, I

15     think it was Mr. Vrdoljak.  I'm trying to reconcile your explanation,

16     saying that, We didn't wish to compensate them, let them return, because

17     we have no money.

18        A.   At the time, and after this meeting, I had scores of

19     conversations with President Tudjman, and I convinced him that what I was

20     suggesting was right, and ultimately he accepted that.  So his final

21     position was not what is stated here.  Perhaps it was an idea at one

22     point in time, but the final position was what I said: Let us first

23     create conditions for people to return.

24             We must understand that at the time we were in the process of

25     discussing and figuring out what we wanted to do, and then the final

Page 27149

 1     position of the President was, Let us offer the option of return, and let

 2     us organise that.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  We are at a point where we have a break, Mr. Radic.

 4             Mr. Misetic wanted to raise a translation issue.  Therefore,

 5     we'll not bother you with that.

 6             Could you already follow Madam Usher, and we'd like to see you

 7     back in approximately 25 to 30 minutes from now.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 9                           [The witness stands down]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

11             MR. MISETIC:  Yes, Mr. President.

12             I have the original on my screen so I'm going try to follow it in

13     the English, but to my mind, we need to check the translation of the

14     first paragraph on the screen in the English, the President's comment,

15     and then Mr. Kostovic's follow-up which may affect what is actually being

16     discussed there.

17             I don't know if you wish me to read it out or just tell what you

18     I think it should say.  But ...

19             JUDGE ORIE:  I would rather wait until you have verified the

20     translation and then hear from you.  Of course, still in the absence of

21     the witness because you said, I still have to verify that, and that is --

22             MR. MISETIC:  No, but I mean verify with the interpreters or if

23     you wish to just tell me -- for me to tell you what --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, if would you read the relevant portion, and

25     again I apologise for the interpreters, but for very practical reasons,

Page 27150

 1     if it doesn't become too complex because complex issues should be sent to

 2     CLSS for proper verification.  But if there's an issue which you consider

 3     we could deal with and where I am not faced with any fierce objections by

 4     the interpreters, then you --

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  -- please introduce the matter.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  I also thank the interpreters.  It's just that if

 8     we're -- we seem to be doing somewhat of an exegesis on these transcripts

 9     so I wanted to make sure that we have it perfectly correct.

10             The sentence, Mr. Kostovic in the first paragraph starts and I

11     will speak in Croatian now:

12             "[Interpretation] The majority of them says, I will come back if

13     you guarantee my safety.  Naturally this is what they say but when they

14     need to come, we have been waiting for 100 Serbs for a month, from Bilje,

15     who want to come back but we still don't have that definite list."

16             [In English] And then the President says:

17             "[Interpretation] And they should be offered, instead of

18     returning, to have compensation for this here and then" [In English] And

19     then [Interpretation] "Or if they wish, Mr. President, Radic's men can

20     find him some intact Serbian house and tell him, Here you are, here's a

21     house, come back.  The majority of them will not."

22             [In English] Just in terms of the subtlety of the language here,

23     Mr. President, the -- the change from census to a list, it seems to me

24     that he is discussing 100 Serbs who were supposed to come back but they

25     haven't got a list of who these Serbs are, and they have been waiting

Page 27151

 1     since August.  The President says in Croatian [Interpretation] "And offer

 2     to them," [In English] meaning a reference, I believe, back to the

 3     100 Serbs.

 4             And then in the next sentence, Mr. Kostovic says:  We could offer

 5     them or Radic's men can offer them an entire or an undamaged Serb house.

 6     And it's been interpreted as, "They won't come back" which is accurate

 7     but I think there is a little more subtlety in it which is they don't

 8     want to come back [B/C/S spoken] meaning a personal decision as opposed

 9     to some other factors, et cetera.  So I just -- the context of the

10     questioning of the witness seemed to say that this was a broader

11     conversation and I read it as they're discussing this return of the

12     100 Serbs from Bilje.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  At the same time the witness testified that he

14     had to convince President Tudjman that he was right, which I understood

15     to be opposite to what President Tudjman expressed.

16             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.  But as I understand the transcript, it is

17     that he's being -- the president is being told that there are these Serbs

18     who say they want to come back but we have been waiting for four months

19     for them to do so and can't get a list yet of who they are.  And then the

20     president says, Well, to those, offer them something, and then there's a

21     further response.

22             That's just so that we're clear on what I think it says.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's put on the record.  If this needs a new

24     translation to be uploaded -- I do not know exactly.  You have explained

25     to us now how you understand this in the original language and we will

Page 27152

 1     certainly consider that.

 2             I was about to move to my next subject.

 3             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.  And I just wanted to make one additional

 4     point, and Mr. Kehoe had indicated it earlier.  It is our understanding

 5     from doing many exegeses on these Presidential transcripts that when --

 6     when -- and we can confirm that with the Prosecution during the break.

 7     When something is in parentheses when a speaker's portion, it usually

 8     means there is another voice that's heard on the tape, not the voice of

 9     the person speaking.  So that's -- we just wanted to clarify when we were

10     talking to Mr. Radic about on the 11th of August transcript, usually what

11     that will mean is that --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  I think I left it open that --

13             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  -- someone else was speaking when I then put my

15     further questions to the witness.

16             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.  Thank you, Mr. President.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we have a break, and we resume at a quarter

18     past 4.00.

19                           --- Recess taken at 3.53 p.m.

20                           [The witness takes the stand]

21                           --- On resuming at 4.25 p.m.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, I'd like to stay in the same document,

23     P2593, but now move to page 14 in English and page 19 in B/C/S.

24             And I would like to draw your attention to where it starts, I

25     think in B/C/S, "trece," "third" in English.

Page 27153

 1             You are reported to have said there the following:

 2             "The Serbs are the most corrupt people in the world.  There is

 3     isn't a single more corrupt or purchasable nation.  Starting from this

 4     fact, I believe that we can achieve more, as we just said, by buying

 5     their property."

 6             Earlier you explained how some people were -- may have been

 7     thinking about giving priority to compensation but that that was not your

 8     view.

 9             This remark could be interpreted to suggest, and that's -- the

10     question in that respect is similar to my previous questions, that

11     compensation should be offered to displaced persons so that they would

12     not return.

13             Same question to you:  What information could you provide to this

14     Chamber which would contradict this possible interpretation of those

15     words?

16        A.   Well, just this, that this was one of the ways to do it, that

17     this was one of the elements in the discussion, and as the discussion

18     went on from day to day, we increasingly were reaching the conclusion

19     that it was the correct thing to do, to offer everyone to return.  And

20     this transcript and many other transcripts from that time are just part

21     of those discussions, and no final conclusions were actually put forth

22     there.

23             Me, myself, I wasn't quite clear at the outset what the best way

24     to proceed would be, but after all these discussions and conversations

25     and argumentation, discussions with my colleague Serbs also who were in

Page 27154

 1     Zagreb, we managed to reach the final position, which was that they

 2     should return.  And this, although, as I mentioned earlier, there was the

 3     fact that we were aware there were not enough funds to actually cover the

 4     compensation plan at that point in time.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Nevertheless, in December 1996 - that is,

 6     approximately 15 to 16 months after Operation Storm - your language does

 7     not suggest that you have no money.  To the contrary, the language

 8     suggests that you can achieve much more by buying their property.

 9        A.   Well, this was the fact for those who had actually decided not to

10     return.  We have the following fact.  We had already actually had a good

11     picture of who was willing and going to return.  Let me just remind you

12     that we actually extended the time-line for applications for return by

13     three months several times over.  And after this, even those who directly

14     took part in the rebellion in Croatia and who had not opted for Croatia

15     as the state where they would finally wish to settle down, of course, for

16     those individuals the final variant that would be offered, the final

17     option would be to offer them money as compensation.  But that was --

18     there were various options that were being discussed.

19             And at this time, there was a third option which was actually

20     sort of going on the sidelines which was exchange of property.  There

21     were a lot of people, Serbs from Croatia, even Serbs from large cities,

22     from Zagreb, Zadar, and so forth, who actually exchanged their property

23     with Croats who were actually people who had lived in Vojvodina and were

24     born there, natives of Vojvodina.  And there weren't -- this was not a

25     small figure we're talking about.  There were tens of thousands of people

Page 27155

 1     entering this kind of process.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 3             Mr. Misetic, not another translation issue, I hope.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  I'm only doing translation issues, Mr. President.

 5     So it's just a -- actually it's interpretation.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Oh, it's interpretation.

 7             MR. MISETIC:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Then could you please point at the lines you

 9     consider not to be accurately translated so that we could ...

10             MR. MISETIC:  Page 36 --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

12             MR. MISETIC:  -- line 10 in my e-court - let me just make sure -

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Is it about at this time?

14             MR. MISETIC:  [Overlapping speakers] ... LiveNote.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  And what words then ...

16             MR. MISETIC:  Actually, it is page 36, line 9, on the central

17     LiveNote.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Line 9, central LiveNote.

19             MR. MISETIC:  The -- "on the sidelines."

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, I will read to you a sentence where there

21     possibly is a problem with the translation.  I read it to you, and after

22     you have listened, once it is translated to you again, please tell us

23     whether it reflects what you said.

24             I start at the end of line 8, Mr. Misetic:

25             "But that was -- there were various options that were being

Page 27156

 1     discussed.  And at this time, there was a third option, which was

 2     actually going on the sidelines, which was exchange of property."

 3             What is now translated back to you, is there any inaccuracy

 4     compared to what you said?

 5        A.   Well, I think I didn't say in parallel, running in parallel.  But

 6     in fact it was the -- the essence is there.  So there was a third option

 7     at the same time and it was going on without our knowledge.  That was the

 8     point.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's on the sidelines, then, I take it, that

10     was a discussion, which meant beyond your discussions.

11        A.   Well, yes, it was something that we didn't know about.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  You considered, apparently, buying the property as a

13     better achievement.  The discussion as we have followed it from these

14     texts is, Return or money to be paid, whether we call it compensation or

15     buying property, that that is -- may come down to approximately the same.

16             You said buying the property was the better achievement.  Could

17     you explain, in view of your other answers, why you considered where you

18     were -- as you said, you were in favour of first offering return, while

19     you, nevertheless, considered buying the property a better achievement?

20        A.   Well, the basic principle -- our basic position was there aren't

21     enough people in CroatiaCroatia had a major demographics problem and

22     we wanted as large a number of people to return as possible.  Those who

23     wanted to be Croatian citizens.  But as time went by, after two or three

24     year, we realised that this was not an option, that there was a number of

25     people who had left Croatia who didn't want that.  So then the other

Page 27157

 1     option actually prevailed, that we should also find this other option

 2     which was the -- the sanctity of private property should be upheld and it

 3     should not be violated.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And do I understand that in your answer, where

 5     you said that, "We had a major demographic and we wanted as large a

 6     number of people to return as possible," that that would include Serbs.

 7        A.   No dilemma at all, both Croats and Serbs, because large swaths of

 8     Croatian territory were sparsely populated, or unpopulated, even before

 9     Storm, and this was even more true after the war, or in the course of the

10     war.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  We are here in late 1996.  I'm not aware of -- let's

12     say, a general call, Croats and Serbs, say, Please all come back, Croats

13     and Serbs, and populate the areas which are so badly populated, almost

14     empty of inhabitants.

15             Could you point at any -- well, let's say in this period of time,

16     that is August of 1995 to December 1996, where there was such a -- kind

17     of a general call, We need people to inhabit our country.  Whether you

18     are of Serb ethnicity or of Croat ethnicity, please come back and be in

19     our population.

20        A.   Well, not only that this was a general invitation, it was much

21     more than that.  But I'm not certain whether this was in 1996 or 1997,

22     but I personally proposed a law on areas of special state interest, and

23     for the most part, they covered the areas in question, where we not only

24     invited people to come back but we actually stimulated this by -- by

25     providing tax incentives, large or higher salaries to those professions

Page 27158

 1     that were wanted.  So if a doctor, for instance -- and nobody spoke --

 2     nobody mentioned Serbs or Croats.  Doctors, if they wanted to come and

 3     live in Donji Lapac, or any of the areas that we had proclaimed as areas

 4     of special state interest, they would actually receive higher pay than a

 5     doctor in Zagreb.

 6             So it was much more than a general invitation.  There was a law

 7     that was passed in the Assembly and, of course, this was an additional

 8     expense, but we couldn't actually provide sufficient incentive for people

 9     to come back and settle down in those areas without this kind of

10     stimulus.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  If you say that they were better paid than a doctor

12     in Zagreb, that suggests that you would primarily address Croats because

13     there were no many Serb doctors in Zagreb, were they?

14        A.   No.  We were actually addressing our invitation to Croatian

15     citizens, absolutely to everyone who wanted to proceed in that way.  This

16     was a law that was passed.  You can take a look at the law, and there is

17     not a single article in it which would actually identify people according

18     to their ethnic background.  Simply this was a attempt to revitalise

19     these regions.

20             And if I may just add, at about the same time - I can't tell you

21     the exact date - but again at my initiative, the Assembly actually

22     adopted a national programme for demographic renewal.  And again, there's

23     not a single article --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  I'll come -- I'll come to that later.

25             My next question does focus, however, on legislation to be

Page 27159

 1     adopted.  And I'd like to move back to P462.  That's the same

 2     11th of August meeting we looked at before, Mr. Radic.  Page 15 in

 3     English; page 24 in B/C/S.

 4             Yes.  I'd like to draw your attention what was said by

 5     Mr. Krpina, and I quote from what he is recorded to have said.  He says:

 6             "... I think we should pass a law, they would declare all

 7     abandoned property state property on the pretext of preserving it [sic]

 8     and then in the procedure, if someone returns, if there are no legal

 9     obstacles, the state will give him back his property."

10             This remark suggests, or at least could be interpreted, that the

11     preservation of property, in the mind of Mr. Krpina, was used as a

12     pretext for declaring abandoned property state property but that

13     preservation was not the law's actually purpose [sic].

14             Could you -- same question.  Do you have any information which

15     would go against such an interpretation of his words?

16        A.   Well, I do, in the events themselves, which followed, which was

17     that this property was actually preserved and returned.  And, again, I

18     have to repeat, there were numerous discussions and various proposals put

19     forward and there were many situations where a proposal -- where a

20     conclusion -- or, rather, a meeting ended with a majority thinking one

21     thing, a majority of the participants, and then later on, after a

22     discussion with the prime minister and President Tudjman, we actually

23     reached conclusions that were non-discriminatory by nature.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, this Chamber has heard evidence from a

25     witness, Mr. Galbraith, who was, at the time, the US ambassador to

Page 27160

 1     Croatia.  And he testified - and for the parties I'm referring to

 2     transcript page 5.203 - with regard to passing a law declaring abandoned

 3     property state property, he stated that:

 4             "The notion of preserving the property was simply a pretext for

 5     taking the property, making it impossible for the Serbs who had left to

 6     return to that property, and as part of a scheme to try to resettle

 7     Croats in the area, thereby changing its strategic -- the strategic

 8     complexion of the Krajina from being Serb to being Croat."

 9             Now, Mr. Galbraith used very similar words as the words we just

10     read as being used by Mr. Krpina on the 11th of August.  Again, would you

11     have any specific information which would contradict what Mr. Galbraith

12     told us, how he perceived the intentions, and that could undermine his

13     testimony that preservation was used as a pretext for declaring abandoned

14     property state property so that Serbs would not return.

15             Mr. Kehoe.

16             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, if I may, Mr. President, I believe that

17     Mr. Galbraith was referring to this transcript if I'm not mistaken.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me just check that, T52 --

19             MR. KEHOE:  I know that during the course of his direct

20     examination he was shown this transcript.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

22             MR. KEHOE:  The reason I recognise that is because I objected to

23     it, but be that as it may --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You would say that the similarity of the

25     language not very striking --

Page 27161

 1             MR. KEHOE:  Right.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  -- if you put it to him.  Nevertheless his testimony

 3     is such that he would not say, Well, I never thought about that being the

 4     intention behind it.  I mean, if you wish, we could -- or in

 5     cross-examination could go through his testimony.  But I do agree with

 6     you, I -- I should verify.  But I take it that he was shown the -- he was

 7     shown the -- the document, the -- the minutes, but --

 8             MR. KEHOE:  Prior to trial.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  At least -- yes.  Yes, but, of course, then still

10     what remains is his testimony.  I might go into that into further detail

11     but I would have to properly prepare that and find the right portions of

12     his testimony and every detail in this respect.

13             MR. KEHOE:  Right.  With regard to that document, just one last

14     point.  I do believe we will find that it was admitted through

15     Mr. Galbraith, P462.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it may well be.

17             MR. KEHOE:  Yeah.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, leave alone that perhaps the language pretext

19     was -- was perhaps suggested to him by looking at the document.  I would

20     like to take you, then, briefly to your statement given to the

21     Gotovina Defence, and if you would allow, just read a portion of that at

22     this moment and if there is any further need to contextualise I will hear

23     from you.

24             In paragraph 33 of the statement, as it was presented to the

25     Chamber, it says that you stated that:

Page 27162

 1             "Some of the representatives of the international community

 2     exerted pressure on the Republic of Croatia with respect to return, but

 3     they did not understand, or didn't want to understand, the true reality

 4     of the situation in the field."

 5             Which suggests that pleading for the return was something you

 6     could only do on not a proper understanding of the reality.

 7             Could you, first of all, confirm that this is what you said, as

 8     we find it in the statement; and, then, second, comment on that?

 9        A.   Well, yes, I can confirm this by saying the following.  Some

10     representatives of the international community, including Mr. Galbraith,

11     exerted pressure on Croatia for the return to be allowed immediately

12     before the conditions were ready, before the infrastructure was renewed,

13     before the area was actually organised in a way to allow -- to provide

14     for normal living conditions.  So that what is I had in mind.

15             We did not have in mind a long period of time but, rather, a

16     short transitional period.  And if you allow me, just one additional

17     sentence about what Ambassador Galbraith said.  The fact -- I mean, the

18     proof that he was not correct in what he thought is that his successor,

19     Mr. Montgomery, found a way for the American government to assist our

20     programme of building homes in Kistanje, where he and I together actually

21     gave the keys over to the new owners to -- and where we actually made

22     sure that Serbs moved into those homes.  So our intention was not to

23     prevent it but, rather, to allow it.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Kehoe, at least part of the answer was that

25     Mr. Galbraith said that what he read was completely consistent with what

Page 27163

 1     he observed.  So as to make clear that even if the wording may have been

 2     borrowed, that the testimony does take distance from -- from what he read

 3     in this minutes.

 4             MR. KEHOE:  And my -- my thought, Mr. President, was simply

 5     the -- the similarity of wording.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, thank you.

 7             Then I would like to stay in P462; page 16 in the English, and

 8     25 in B/C/S.

 9             Mr. Valentic is recorded as having said -- no, let me first go to

10     what President Tudjman is recorded of having said.

11             And I don't see that on my screen at this moment.  Yes, it's on

12     the bottom of the page.

13             President Tudjman is there recorded as having stated:

14             "I am with the more radical.  If someone has left the country and

15     does not appear there, I don't know, a month, or three months, et cetera,

16     that shall be considered, think of the wording, state property,

17     et cetera.  We have come out of a war, et cetera, define it like that."

18             Which -- and perhaps I -- we move on to page 17 in the English,

19     26 in B/C/S, where Mr. Valentic is speaking.  He is recorded to have

20     stated:

21             "Not three months, three months is too long, because we ..."

22             And then President Tudjman says:

23             "Okay, a month, then."

24             This language could be interpreted as expressing the thought that

25     the deadline for declaring abandoned property as state property should be

Page 27164

 1     kept very short.

 2             Do you have any explanation as to why President Tudjman and why

 3     Mr. Valentic were -- were wanting this to be such a short period?

 4        A.   Well, I think what is key here is this.  In those areas where

 5     there were no problems that I mentioned earlier, such as the removal of

 6     land-mines and so on, that people should return as soon as possible so

 7     that the property would not get damaged.  But when we saw that the

 8     deadlines that we provided did not really produce any results, then we

 9     extended the deadlines in many instances.

10             There were a lot of apartments, flats, in small towns, for

11     instance, I was in Benkovac and then in Knin, where if a person returned

12     very soon, it was still possible to salvage that apartment.  When I said

13     earlier that conditions were not such to allow for people to move that,

14     because the land-mines hadn't been removed and so on, but there were

15     cases where we -- the conditions were such that people could return very

16     soon.  And this should not be understood in a negative sense.  Rather, it

17     should be understood as an incentive.  That was my understanding.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  If my recollection serves me well, this Chamber has

19     not received evidence in which it was explained that the longer period of

20     time for return was inspired by the fact that it was not safe due to

21     land-mines to return any earlier.  The Chamber did receive some evidence

22     quoting different reasons and -- but the parties will correct me when my

23     recollection is not correct.  Some of the evidence said that there was a

24     lot of international pressure on it, and not land-mines.

25             But if the parties could assist me in finding any piece of

Page 27165

 1     evidence where the land-mines are used as an explanation for why the

 2     30 days should be longer, then I would -- the Chamber would appreciate

 3     it.

 4             But first the question:  Do you have -- the land-mines, which you

 5     give now as an explanation, is there any -- is there any documentary

 6     evidence or is there any other information you could provide to the

 7     Chamber that this is what caused the change of the time-limits?  And the

 8     Chamber is aware of how the time-limits changed; that is, late August, a

 9     decree, 30 days; then 22nd of September, from 30 to 90 days; and then,

10     finally, in January 1996, the time-limit being abolished at all.

11             So the Chamber is aware of these, I would say, legislative

12     developments, but since the fact that it was not safe to return because

13     of mine clearance is, as far as I -- as far as my recollection goes, is

14     new.

15             Do you have any corroboration for that view as having triggered

16     the extension of time?

17        A.   I'm going back to that period in my thoughts.

18             The overall return was under my charge, both of Croats and Serbs.

19     There was a danger that Croats who had spent three or four years in

20     exile, for example, from the place of Slunj, would not suddenly rush back

21     within a day or two, without us having checked the -- whether the houses

22     were de-mined or not.  So when I'm talking about the return to the area

23     liberated during Oluja, I'm talking about the return of all persons,

24     regardless of their names.  So the first major problem was the problem of

25     mines and de-mining.

Page 27166

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  That was not my question.

 2        A.   Mm-hm.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  My question was whether there -- you have any

 4     documentary evidence to corroborate this explanation of extending the

 5     30 days' time-limit.  Any minutes, any documents, any decrees.

 6        A.   I haven't really been dealing with that subject for -- topic for

 7     ten years.  I'm not in the state government anymore.  So my recollection

 8     is what it is.  What I seem to remember is that we had that deadline for

 9     a certain reason and also because an insufficient number of people had

10     applied to return within that 30-day period.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  No international pressure on extending the

12     time-limits, as far as your recollection goes?

13        A.   I think so.  I think that there were talks with certain

14     ambassadors who did provide some suggestions in that direction, yes.  But

15     my recollection is more of this later period, when we extended it for a

16     year or longer, when we were preparing a conference, a donors' conference

17     and equipment, where the international community was supposed to help in

18     the rebuilding, overall building.  So that's when we had conversations

19     and deadlines and pressure to extend the deadlines for the return.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you have any recollection of specific instances

21     where you provided, if I could say, the same de-mining services to Serbs

22     who wanted individually to go back to the place where they had lived

23     before?  Because you said that's what you did with Croats returning.

24             Do you have any recollection of giving the same de-mining

25     services to -- to Serbs?  Any specific instances or ...

Page 27167

 1        A.   De-mining was never aimed at a particular house but it was aimed

 2     at a certain region, an area.  When a certain area was being de-mined,

 3     then all the citizens from the -- that particular area would have the

 4     same service.  And I must say, on the topic of de-mining, that we had a

 5     lot of help from the international community.  If ever any help came in

 6     that particular job, it came from the international community, and

 7     because they were the ones who were providing this assistance, it would

 8     never be something that was aimed at only one ethnic group.

 9             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, on the issue of de-mining, I don't

10     believe this transcript is in evidence as 65 ter 939.  December 4, 1995.

11     I was just directed to it by my learned friend Mr. Kay where

12     General Cervenko is talking about the difficulties in returns because of

13     those de-mining -- because of the mine problem.

14             MR. KAY:  Yes.  There is a considerable amount in this

15     transcript, Your Honour.  It is a 61-page transcript.  There is mention

16     of the United Nations.  It was a document I was aware of when Your Honour

17     raised that -- that matter, so I turned it up.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, it is appreciated.  I invited you even to --

19     to -- I said as far as my recollection goes, I've not seen anything in

20     evidence, which luckily is then confirmed by Mr. Kehoe that I didn't miss

21     a major portion of the evidence.

22             If could you provide a copy to Chamber's staff and, of course,

23     usually we're not seeking evidence on our own initiative but since it was

24     raised in this question, if we could have a look at it so as to see

25     whether this would -- although the witness didn't give that information

Page 27168

 1     but to see whether it -- not now immediately.  If would you take your

 2     time and provide it to Chamber's staff, then we may have a look at it.

 3             MR. KAY:  Mm-hm.  Apparently there is no English translation in

 4     e-court and quite how have I ended up with an English translation which

 5     isn't from my staff at all, I don't know.  Mine's got "OTP" on the bottom

 6     left-hand corner so ...

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  I suggest that the parties sit together during the

 8     next break and see in what way they can provide the Chamber with any

 9     information and especially, also, on -- and that's, of course, the focus

10     of my question in view of the answer of the witness, is Croats returning,

11     we had to de-mine, and the question was, were similar services provided

12     to Serbs returning.  That was my -- because what we are talking about,

13     we're talking about time-limits imposed on the return of those who had

14     left the territory.

15             So the Chamber might not be interested in the whole subject of

16     de-mining as a general subject but specifically in this context.

17             MR. KAY:  I suggest Your Honour reads this document, if

18     Your Honour is interested in that.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'm certainly interested in it.  I take it

20     that you would then provide the other parties so that everyone knows what

21     I'm reading, and I want to be very transparent in this respect.

22             Ms. Gustafson, you have 61 pages to read overnight as well, as

23     far as I understand.

24             I'd like to move on and move to another meeting, which is, again,

25     a Presidential meeting, 22nd of August; P463.  And ...

Page 27169

 1             We have that on our screen.  Mr. Radic, you are reported to be

 2     present here.  I think we had a look at it already.

 3             I'd like to move to page 6 in English and page 9, to start with,

 4     in B/C/S and then move on to page 10.

 5             According to the record, President Tudjman stated that upon

 6     learning that the mayor of Knin was a Serb and was no good for anything,

 7     that the mayor should be replaced.  And he added to that:

 8             "There is no reason for a Serb being there right now."

 9             And then you are recorded as having responded to that:

10             "Sure.  He shouldn't be there."

11             And then President Tudjman then stated:

12             "There's a majority of Croats there, so change that."

13             Could you shed some light on President Tudjman, in August 1995,

14     appearing to take the view that Knin should not have a Serb mayor?

15        A.   The emphasis is not on whether somebody is a Serb or a Croat,

16     from what I can remember, but whether they are capable of being --

17     managing a town after Oluja, a town which is more complex than Zagreb.

18     If I remember, I spoke about a number of mayors of towns where displaced

19     persons were coming back, so I was thinking both of Croats and Serbs.

20     Not only Serbs but also Croats which do not have enough self-initiative

21     or are not good organisers or did not prove to be people up to the

22     significant and difficult demands a town would require.  And the

23     President added to that the story about how in some area before the war

24     or perhaps at that particular moment, there was one majority ethnic group

25     or another, and he was thinking even of appointing somebody who would be

Page 27170

 1     accepted by the people who were there at that time, which is something

 2     that can then be reviewed after a certain period of time has passed.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, what -- you introduce the mayor, and you say

 4     that he wasn't good for anything and that it was a Serb.

 5             Now, if it was not about his Serb ethnicity, I would have

 6     expected President Tudjman to say, There's no place for incompetent

 7     people.  However, he says there is no reason for a Serb being there right

 8     now.  He does not respond in any way to your observation as to be good

 9     for nothing, apart from what that exactly means, being good for nothing.

10        A.   The transcript goes on.  Actually it's the only transcript that I

11     read before I came here.

12             You will see at the very end that we are also discussing the

13     mayors in Istria, for example, or Dubrovnik, where I am warning the

14     President that everything should be done for us to secure people of good

15     quality in Croatian areas as well, particularly in places where the

16     situation was problematic.  This would be something that is very

17     important for the return of displaced persons.

18             I'm trying to recall the entire conversation not just a detail

19     because the transcript is a transcript of an informal chat, in armchairs.

20     It is not an official meeting, and we did not really state precise

21     definitions or state our positions precisely.  My position at the time

22     was to warn the President, Let's go to some key towns and bring capable,

23     able people to positions there, in those towns.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, the President responds by saying:

25             "There's a majority of Croat there, so change that."

Page 27171

 1             Could you explain "the majority of Croats" at that point in time,

 2     and we're talking 22nd of August, being a majority in Knin?

 3        A.   When we're speaking about Knin, we're talking about the broader

 4     area of the town.  Knin also includes the nearby villages around the

 5     town, where, at that time, a number of Croats were able to return.  Also,

 6     a large number of apartments was preserved in the town, where a number of

 7     people moved in that were needed for the normal functioning of the town.

 8             At that point, from what I remember, the majority of those people

 9     were Croats, yes.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  And they had already moved in on the 22nd of August?

11        A.   Not all.  It was more about some of them could.  I remember that

12     we had a nearby village which was quite large, the village of Kijevo.  So

13     we had about 2.000 displaced persons in Split.  The idea was that they

14     could come to a state-owned property, apartments in Knin.  I think this

15     is stated in one of the transcripts.  So they could at a distance of

16     ten kilometres away from their homes physically help with the rebuilding

17     of those houses and then move back into them.  So logically, we needed

18     somebody to come back with them who would be able to lead those people

19     and manage the affairs.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Your explanation suggests that there was no majority

21     of Croats there but that you envisaged that in the future there might be

22     a majority of Croats.  But that's not what President Tudjman says, is it?

23        A.   I don't recall how many people there were at one particular point

24     in time or at what date.  I can't really remember that now.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Would you agree with me that if all the Serbs would

Page 27172

 1     return, that Knin would be a Serb-majority town and that the same would

 2     be true for the Knin municipality as well?

 3        A.   Absolutely, yes.  But we were aware of the fact that this was not

 4     possible at all, because a good number - I'm not going to say the

 5     majority - but a good number of the citizens of Knin were, let's say,

 6     officers of the Yugoslav People's Army who were attacking -- Croatia.

 7     They were not even people who originated from Knin.  They just got

 8     apartments there.  So they left.  They still haven't accepted Croatia as

 9     their own state.  We are aware of that.  Knin, absolutely.  Small towns

10     such as Knin, Benkovac, they just didn't have the local population,

11     people who actually came from there but a lot of people, especially those

12     who were in the army, were settled there deliberately.  So these towns

13     did not only have native inhabitants.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

15             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, I believe that a certain portion of

16     the witness's answer concerning what features were in the town wasn't

17     interpreted and may be relevant.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic, where should I ask the witness,

19     starting on what line, to repeat his answer?

20              MR. MISETIC:  Page 53, beginning at line 11:  "They just got

21     apartments there," and then there was something -- specific reason that

22     he offered.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I read again part of your answer as it was

24     translated to us and I invite you to complete it.

25             You said:

Page 27173

 1             "But a good number of the citizens of Knin were, let's say,

 2     officers of the Yugoslav People's Army who were attacking -- Croatia."

 3             Was there anything you added there to your answer?  Was there --

 4     is there anything missing -- or is it --

 5             MR. MISETIC:  Sorry.  There seems to be a problem with LiveNote

 6     being one line off depending on whether we're at our stations or the

 7     central LiveNote.  So it was the next line down, Mr. President.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  And now it has moved from my screen so I have to get

 9     the other version.  So you want me to start reading just prior to that.

10             MR. MISETIC:  No, just after that, Mr. President.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Just after that.  Okay.

12             Therefore I again read to you what was translated to us:

13             "... let's say, officers of the Yugoslav People's Army who were

14     attacking -- Croatia.  They were not even people who originated from

15     Knin.  They just got apartments there.  So they left."

16             What is missing in what I just read to you and was part of your

17     answer?

18        A.   These were not natives of Knin had who had spent ten or 15 years

19     living there and who had Croatian nationality, who would live there and

20     consider themselves citizens of Knin.  They were on temporary work in

21     Knin.  We would -- we could look at them like that.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Are you referring to people who had moved in since

23     the -- since Croatia lost control over their territory, so since 1991?

24     Is that what you're referring to?

25        A.   Partly about them, and partly those who, as officers of the

Page 27174

 1     Yugoslav People's Army, were given apartments in Knin, spent some time

 2     there, then they would move to Nis.  Then from Nis they would relocate

 3     somewhere else.

 4             The emphasis was this.  Those people when they left, of course,

 5     they didn't even think about going back to Croatia because Croatia was

 6     not their home.  They were living there temporarily.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I'm trying to understand what you meant

 8     exactly by "temporarily."

 9             Was that people that moved in since power was taken over; or are

10     you also referring to an earlier period in time?

11        A.   Both.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could you tell us what approximately was then

13     the percentage of such imported inhabitants of Knin town and

14     municipality, well, let's say, before the republic of --

15        A.   I don't have that data but it was not an insignificant number.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  But is it 10 per cent, 20 per cent?  What's your

17     understanding of what part of the population -- and I'm talking about

18     pre-war, so before the Serb forces took control of the area of the -- as

19     they called it, the Serbian Krajina.

20        A.   Precisely, preparations to take over control lasted for several

21     scores of years.  I cannot give you a specific number.  But at least

22     30 per cent of people like that were located to Knin on duty, serving in

23     the Yugoslav People's Army.  That was the largest percentage of people

24     who had relocated there.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So if we would take the census of 1991, and if

Page 27175

 1     we would deduct 30 per cent of those having reported as Serbs in Knin

 2     town and Knin municipality, would we then approximately have some insight

 3     as to what was the Serb population of that area, not influenced by an

 4     influx of JNA officers perhaps for preparing the takeover?

 5             Would that be a fair way to look at it?  Because then we might

 6     have a look at the census and then we could establish whether, if we're

 7     talking about a Croat majority or a Serb majority, what would have been

 8     the balance, excluding those who came in after 1991, excluding those who

 9     were there stationed as JNA officers, so that we get to what I would

10     suggest to call the core of the Serb population of Knin municipality and

11     Knin town.

12             I don't have the figures at hand.  We would have to look at it.

13     But I'm just seeking your position in this respect.

14        A.   I don't have them either.  This would require a more serious

15     demographic analysis.  But we're probably close to these figures, if

16     we're talking about that.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  Now going back to the transcript of that

18     meeting, when President Tudjman said something about the majority of

19     Croats there and said, "So change that," you then are recorded as having

20     stated:

21             "Yes, sure.  They wanted to put some Serb in Okucani as well.

22     Not a chance.  A Croat is over there and we did Okucani nicely."

23             I notice reading this, that you did not refer to an incompetent

24     Serb, which, whoever would wish to be put in Okucani, but about they

25     wanted to put some Serb, only reference to ethnicity, nothing else, and

Page 27176

 1     then you said, "Not a chance."

 2             Could you first tell us, Okucani, was the composition -- the

 3     ethnic composition of Okucani was approximately what?  We can verify it

 4     if you would like to, but not the whole of the census of 1991, and I'm

 5     now looking at the old figures is in evidence yet.

 6             What was Okucani composed of ethnically.

 7        A.   I think that they were in the majority before the war, but now

 8     we're talking about the situation when these socially owned or state

 9     apartments were occupied by Croats who were left homeless in Posavina,

10     across the area, and there was some ideas to leave the mayor who was in

11     office before, not that he was in Okucani from before but he was a mayor

12     while in exile.  And what they proposed was a man who had been leading

13     them, a man whom they trusted.  But I never personally discriminated or

14     distinguished between people as Serbs and Croats but as people who would

15     be able to manage or be part of a group.

16             When taken out of context it could be interpreted that we were

17     picking mayors based on whether they were Serbs or Croats, but, no, that

18     was really not the goal at all.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You said:  "They were in the majority before

20     the war."

21             You were referring to Serbs?  Or Croats?

22        A.   Yes, the Serbs were in the majority.  The Serbs.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you have any recollection as to that majority

24     being 55 per cent, or 75, or 95?  Was that a large majority?

25        A.   I think the ratio was not so pronounced.  The figures were quite

Page 27177

 1     similar in those areas, but please don't hold me to the figures.  I

 2     really don't have the data in front of me.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  No, I think from the pre-war period, the 1991 census

 4     at least, the parties could assist the Chamber in having more accurate

 5     figures on that.

 6             I put this question to you because the reference you make in this

 7     meeting is to ethnicity, and, therefore, if you say it should be looked

 8     into in the context, that's exactly why we are asking you questions, so

 9     that you also have an opportunity to give us the context and give us a

10     better understanding of -- a better possibility of understanding of what

11     was said and what was meant.

12        A.   Well, you see, in this unrelated conversation that we had, and

13     that's what this conversation of the 22nd of August was, where we

14     discussed all kinds of topics, we did not insist on people actually

15     expressing their views.  I frequently used the term "Croat" when I

16     refer - and that is the case today as well - to Croatian citizens.  And

17     at that time, well, in my office, as a university professor, I had four

18     assistant lecturers, two of whom were ethnic Serbs.  In other words, I

19     don't have any kind of bias -- negative bias towards them.  When I say

20     "Croat," I mean a Croatian citizen, a person who has in mind the Croatian

21     state.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Before we move to our next subject, I would

23     like to have a break first, because we will not finish that in two or

24     three minutes.

25             We have a break until ten minutes to 6.00.

Page 27178

 1                           [The witness stands down]

 2                           --- Recess taken at 5.32 p.m.

 3                           [The witness takes the stand]

 4                           --- On resuming at 5.55 p.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we proceed, I'd like to address one matter

 6     very briefly.

 7             Earlier today we discussed, and I'll not go into any details,

 8     about something being filed by Friday, and the other parties still

 9     considered whether or not -- you remember what it was.  We dealt with the

10     matter in private session.

11             Now the Chamber would like, even if the filing would come on

12     Friday at the end of the day, already be informed by noon whether or not

13     any choice has been made, because if the Chamber would consider to take

14     further action, we'd rather do that Friday afternoon, in order not to

15     lose further time.  So I said please file it by Friday but already inform

16     Chamber's staff by noon what they can expect more specifically also in

17     relation to names.

18             MS. GUSTAFSON:  That's understood, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

20             Then we continue, Mr. Radic --

21             Yes, Mr. Kay.

22             MR. KAY:  It's just on this because whatever application is made

23     by one party, the other parties will -- may want to respond to.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes --

25             MR. KAY:  And I'm concerned that the Court may implying that

Page 27179

 1     decisions are being made before responses to filings --

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  No.  As a matter of fact, if no one applies for A,

 3     B, or C --

 4             MR. KAY:  Yeah.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  -- then the Chamber feels free to do what it may

 6     have already on its mind.

 7             MR. KAY:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  If there would be any submission which leaves it

 9     open that the Chamber should continue to show self-restraint, we'd like

10     to know.

11             MR. KAY:  Yeah.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  If there is no reason for self-restraint, and that

13     is when none of the parties have indicated to take any action in relation

14     to A, B, or C, then the Chamber feels more free in proceeding in -- as it

15     intended, in relation to A, B, and C.  Is that --

16             MR. KAY:  Yes.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Does that meet your concern, Mr. Kay?

18             MR. KAY:  Yes.  If there are amendments to be made, I do alert

19     the Court to issues that might be arising which will involve discovery

20     issues.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I can imagine that.  We have to carefully

22     consider how we can proceed without obstructing -- for the Chamber not to

23     obstruct parties initiatives and that's on our mind, and we will

24     certainly find ways to do that.

25             At the same time, the Chamber, by being properly informed even

Page 27180

 1     about some details, will better be able to assess whether it can send an

 2     e-mail, make a phone call, whatever.

 3             MR. KAY:  I understand Your Honour more clearly.  Thank you.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  And close communication here can avoid any risk of

 5     unrepairable damage.

 6             Then I would like to move on.

 7             Mr. Radic, sometimes we have to deal with urgent procedural

 8     matters.

 9             We are in 463, and I'd like to move to page 10 in the English and

10     page 14 and 15 in the B/C/S.  And I read again what -- and perhaps we

11     should -- no, perhaps we should go back to -- where are we?  Are we in 14

12     in the B/C/S.  One second, please.

13             Yes.  I -- I again read to you what the portion of the minutes

14     is, which I would like to ask you some questions about.

15             You said -- oh, no, it -- you're recorded to have said:

16             "I defined five priorities according to the urgency of colonising

17     these places with Croats.

18             "If you ask me, this thing right here is the first and second

19     priority.  We should bring Croats back here urgently and this area should

20     be urgently colonised with Croats.  And we should by no means let more

21     than 10 per cent of Serbs be here ever again.  Because, that's where we

22     were cut off."

23             Where President Tudjman then responds:

24             "Not even 10 per cent."

25             First of all, talking about "here," and -- what area did you have

Page 27181

 1     on your mind when you made this statement?

 2        A.   I was showing a map to President Tudjman, and I was referring to

 3     the area between the rivers Kupa and Una.  That's the area where the

 4     Croatian territory is the narrowest, where it had almost been cut in two.

 5     For instance, sometime between Karlovac -- somewhere between Karlovac and

 6     all the way to Ogulin, this was a strategically important area.  I have

 7     already mentioned it earlier today.  And here we were still discussing

 8     these matters because there was still the threat of Mladic's army's

 9     aggression from Bosnia because it very active there at the time.

10             So I was pointing to the President the area between the rivers

11     Kupa and Una.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could you translate that for the Chamber in

13     municipalities.  What municipalities would be covered by what you were

14     referring to?

15        A.   Well, these were -- at the time those municipalities were larger

16     than they are today.  But certainly the town of -- the city of Karlovac

17     with its surrounding areas --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me stop you there.  If you say the

19     municipalities are larger now, I do not mind if you would refer to

20     municipalities as they were in, well, let's say, 1991.  Yes.

21        A.   Well, all right.  At one time Croatia had some 50 municipalities,

22     whereas today it has some 500, and that is why it is difficult to point

23     this out without a map, actually.  That's why I mentioned the area

24     between the rivers Una and Kupa, where the state was -- almost cut in

25     half.  But if you had the map before you, that would be the area between

Page 27182

 1     Slunj and Ogulin.

 2             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 4             MR. MISETIC:  If we could check the witness's answer there, what

 5     the area is.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could you repeat what the area was because

 7     there may be a -- I didn't look at the transcript, as a matter of fact,

 8     but could you please repeat how you described the area.

 9             It is translated to us as the area between the rivers Kupa --

10     Kupa and Una, or is it at a later stage?

11             MR. MISETIC:  He mentioned some cities, Mr. President, at the end

12     of the sentence.  If could just name the cities again.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Was that the reference on page 62, somewhere

14     around line 18, Slunj, Ogulin.

15             MR. MISETIC:  That's correct, yes.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17             You said:  "... if had you the map before you, that would be the

18     area between Slunj and --

19        A.   The towns of Karlovac, Slunj and to the south all the way to

20     Ogulin.  That's the area where Croatia is the thinnest, the territory is

21     the narrowest, and during the occupation that's where it was at the

22     greatest -- in the greatest danger.  That is the area I was referring to

23     and that's the area we were discussing.

24             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, if I could be of --

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

Page 27183

 1             MR. KEHOE:  -- some assistance in this regard.  As you recall,

 2     there has been some marking of maps on this score.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Granic has marked that map.

 4             MR. KEHOE:  Yes.  And we have that map but we also have the blank

 5     of that.  So as -- if Your Honour just wants to --

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, that might be a good idea, that I -- but I do

 7     not what the blank map is there --

 8             MR. KEHOE:  I do.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

10             MR. KEHOE:  Okay.  What was admitted into evidence was the map

11     that's marked.  The blank map is 65 ter 1D3011.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Could we have that on our screen and could

13     Madam Usher then assist so that we -- that it can be marked.

14             We will get the map on our screen, Mr. Radic, so that we ...

15        A.   Mm-hm.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Maps usually take some time.

17             THE WITNESS:  Yes.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  And could it be enlarged and can we focus on the --

19     we do not necessarily mean the whole of the map but that area to be ...

20             Perhaps move the map a bit to the right.  No, not the bar but the

21     map.  Yes.

22             Madam Usher, could you assist the witness in marking the area he

23     was referring to.

24             Mr. Radic --

25        A.   [Interpretation] I can see it all and I can mention the

Page 27184

 1     municipalities now if you would like me to, because now can I see them

 2     before me.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's do both.  Let's invite you to mark the map and

 4     then also to name the municipalities which were covered by your

 5     observation.

 6        A.   So I am talking about this area, this encircled area where the

 7     municipalities of Vrginmost, Vojnic, Karlovac, Duga Resa, and perhaps a

 8     portion of the Ogulin municipality, maybe even the larger part of Ogulin

 9     municipality, and the municipality of Slunj.  So this was the an area

10     that was of critical significance and in a critical -- at a critical

11     point strategically speaking.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  And when you said that's where we were -- no, let's

13     first ask you another question.

14             You said:

15             "We should by no means let more than 10 per cent of Serbs be here

16     ever again."

17             Do I understand that Serbs that would have left, that it was on

18     your mind that if Serbs were to return, that the final result would be

19     that there would never be more than 10 per cent after the return?

20        A.   No.  I certainly did not say that anywhere.

21             We were discussing the resettlement of Croats into that area.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Whoever you want to settle there, the language

23     used is:

24             "By no means let no more than 10 per cent of Serbs be here ever

25     again."

Page 27185

 1             Which suggests that, as the final result, that there would be no

 2     more than 10 per cent Serbs.  I mean, whether you would fill the area

 3     with Croats or Italians or Germans is another matter.  But this language,

 4     especially also if we look at the response by President Tudjman, could

 5     well be interpreted as saying, Whatever the return programme will be,

 6     finally, never more than 10 per cent Serbs there.

 7             That's, I would say, the -- unless you disagree with me, but this

 8     is what is my understanding of the ordinary language.  If I say, Let

 9     there never be more than 10 Canadians winning gold medal, then it means

10     not 11, not 12, not 13, not 14.  10 or less.

11        A.   But that would mean that 90 Croats might win the gold medal, if

12     we are discussing gold medals.  So what we are talking about here is a

13     relatively empty area which is sparsely populated, not enough people live

14     there, and if we were talking about the area before Operation Storm and

15     talking about Operation Storm in talking about immigration into Croatia,

16     we were of the view that they should not be actually -- they should not

17     migrate to Zagreb but rather to these unsettled areas.  Because we were

18     first to develop the economy, to develop factories and various plants and

19     so on --

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, a population will be 100 per cent.

21     That's those who are living there.  If you say, not more than 10 per cent

22     should be Serbs, apart from who will be the remaining 90 per cent, what

23     the Chamber is interested in to understand how many Serbs had been living

24     there and which would be above the 10 per cent that was mentioned here.

25             Could you tell us -- let's take an example.  Vojnic, how many

Page 27186

 1     Serbs were there pre-war?

 2        A.   I don't know off the top of my head what the figure would be, but

 3     we can add them up.  If we take this whole area, this whole circle that I

 4     drew up there, I assume that in that area, before the war -- it is hard

 5     to say off the top of my head now, but I think there were about 30 to

 6     40.000 Serbs living there and perhaps some 50 to 60.000 Croats.  And I'm

 7     talking about this entire critical area.  But I can't really give you a

 8     very precise figure.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  And if there would be areas within this circled part

10     of the map where there would have been a large majority of Serbs, what to

11     do -- well, let's say there may have been municipalities or towns where

12     there was, well, let's say, up to 70 or 80 per cent, or even more of

13     Serbs.  What should the remaining 60 and 70 per cent do if they wished to

14     return, where you had said that not ever more than 10 per cent?

15        A.   Well, I will be very specific again.  They should all return, but

16     let us settle in that area which was empty 10 per cent more of other

17     citizens.  And again I have to repeat, we always had in mind -- and when

18     discussing these matters, we always had to think in the back of our minds

19     we had these possibility of being attacked.  But when I mean -- when I

20     say Croats I mean citizens, ethnic Croats and ethnic Serbs.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Misetic.

22             MR. MISETIC:  Mr. President, maybe if could you just check -- I

23     have line -- page 67 --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.  67, yes.

25             MR. MISETIC:  Line 1.  "But let us settle in that area which is

Page 27187

 1     empty 10" -- something.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I read part of your answer and then please

 3     correct me when there's any mistranslation.

 4             You said you will be very specific:  "They should all return, but

 5     let us settle in that area which was empty 10 per cent," and then you

 6     said ... it is translated to us as "10 per cent more of other citizens."

 7     That is how it is translated to us.

 8             Is that what you said --

 9        A.   No, ten times, not 10 per cent.  Ten times more.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Ten times more of the others.

11             Now, please stay with me on arithmetics.  Let's assume, original

12     population, 70 per cent Serbs, 30 per cent Croats.  Now if you want --

13        A.   Not in this -- not in this area.  That was not the ratio.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Not even in some municipalities?

15        A.   Well, I drew this circle between Una and Kupa rivers and it is my

16     impression, if we take this whole area in consideration, that there were

17     some 60 per cent of Croats and 40 per cent of Serbs.  You know, Karlovac

18     is a big town.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  60 per cent Croats, 40 per cent Serbs.  Although it

20     may be that in some municipalities it was quite different which may have

21     resulted in people having to remove to other parts of the area you

22     circled.

23             Do we agree on that?  Well, let's say if in one municipality

24     there was 80 per cent majority of Serbs.  Could they then stay there,

25     and, nevertheless, fulfil your -- or return there, and, nevertheless,

Page 27188

 1     fulfil your wish that there should be ten times as much Croats, as I now

 2     understand, than there were before?  And some of the Serbs had to -- if

 3     we --

 4        A.   Absolutely.  If we look at a municipality as individual.  But I

 5     pointed out this entire area.  There is no dilemma about one or other of

 6     those municipalities in this area as being like that, but speaking of

 7     this critical area, critical for Croatia.  And, again, I'm talking about

 8     the time when we still had the threat of aggression over our heads.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's just, for purposes of -- if we would have

10     40 per cent of Serbs living there, yes?  Let's just, for argument's sake,

11     assume that 50 per cent of them would wish to return, which would

12     mean ...

13        A.   20.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  20.

15        A.   [In English] 20.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, then you would need a huge amount of

17     Croats in order to create that new situations because you wanted to have

18     ten times as much Croats as there were before, or ten times more Croats

19     than Serbs?  I -- it is not entirely clear to me yet.

20        A.   [Interpretation] Well, in your calculation and, of course, my

21     profession is mathematics, you would need another hundred thousand so

22     that you would have 120.000; correct?

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And then you would have a ratio of 1:6.  20

24     to -- no.  20 to 120 -- no.  20:140.000.

25             I'm just trying to -- to follow your --

Page 27189

 1        A.   Yes.  Exactly.  We are getting close to the figures.  But please

 2     just take this with a grain of salt.  We are getting closer in this math

 3     that we are trying to figure out.  But this is an area that could absorb

 4     another 100.000 inhabitants because it was empty.  There was no one who

 5     could work the -- till the soil or work in the woods.  We still have a

 6     lot of people in Croatia who are unemployed.  We have 300.000 unemployed,

 7     and this is what we were discussing rather informally.  But no one ever

 8     suggested that this could all be accomplished in three days, but this was

 9     just a strategic line that was to be followed and perhaps accomplished

10     in -- in some -- in a decade or so, or several decades.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  In our example we would still be well above

12     10 per cent, isn't it?

13        A.   Well, in the example that we gave, there would be 20.000 on the

14     one hand, and 160.000 on the other.  So some 12 per cent or so.

15             But these are figures that we are just generally discussing here.

16     When the president said this, he meant -- the 10 per cent, he was

17     actually referring to the figure that was approximately the ratio of the

18     Serb population before the war in Croatia, 10 to 12 per cent.  So if our

19     strategic direction, long-term, was in fact to retain this figure, but

20     nowhere was it said that anyone would be prevented from going back to

21     those areas, anyone who was prepared and wanted to be a Croatian citizen.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Nevertheless, in order to achieve that, you would

23     have to move people perhaps away, or would you accept that in one

24     municipality there was still a large Serb majority?

25        A.   Oh, absolutely we would accept that if that were the case.  That

Page 27190

 1     was not in dispute at all, that we would accept a Serb majority.  And

 2     second, the transfers of population is an issue which is rather open

 3     still.  At that point in time we had tens of thousands of people who were

 4     refugees from Bosnia-Herzegovina, expelled from there, and who were

 5     waiting to be settled somewhere.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Now, you explain this that you needed this area to

 7     be populated.  Because it was empty, you said.  What is at all the

 8     purpose of saying not more than 10 per cent Serbs?  I mean, what you

 9     needed is population as you explained it to us.  Why at all talking about

10     what percentage could be Serb and what percentage could not be Serb?

11             What's the use, what does it add to, apparently, what was your

12     problem, that is, that the area should be populated?

13        A.   At this point in time, when I referred to a Serb, I meant those

14     Serbs who actually took arms and fought against Croatia and did not

15     intend to take Croatian citizenship; but when I said "Croat," I meant

16     anyone who could be Croat or Serb or Bosnian, because there are a lot of

17     Bosniaks in that area and hopefully some day there would be even more of

18     them, because we needed people to develop that area.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Let's return -- could we assign a number for

20     this marked map.  Mr. Registrar.

21             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this document shall be assigned

22     Exhibit C3.  Thank you.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  C3 is in evidence.

24             Can we return to -- what was it?  I think we were in 463.  Let me

25     just have a look.  Yes, 463.  Same page where we were.  That was page 10

Page 27191

 1     in the English, and 14 and 15 in B/C/S.

 2             You then continue and give -- refer to certain areas, Petrova and

 3     Zrinska Gora.  I do not know exactly where that is.  Could you help us

 4     out?  In what municipality that was, or ...

 5        A.   Well, they were in Vojnic or Vrginmost municipality.  I'm not

 6     quite sure, one of those two, close to the border with Bosnia and

 7     Herzegovina, in that part.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You said:  "I'm talking about 10 per cent,"

 9     and then are you pointing at various locations.  And there you say you

10     have to establish some kind of a city sooner or later.  And you said:

11             "We have also have Vojnic and Veljun, a somewhat smaller place."

12             You say this in relation to the 10 per cent, where you focus on

13     certain areas.  How do we have to understand that you bring in other

14     people and that, finally, the balance would be not more than 10 per cent

15     Serbs and 90 per cent of other ethnicities?

16        A.   Well, if we look at the map that I mentioned earlier, that was

17     the thinking at the time.  To open up that area to give incentives for

18     people to move in, into that region rather than some other areas of

19     Croatia.  We weren't really discussing individual towns or villages or

20     municipalities, and that they should actually change their population.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.

22                           [Trial Chamber confers]

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, could you tell us, you were -- what

24     finally was the result in this area?  How many Croats were

25     additionally -- or on from the Operation Storm?

Page 27192

 1             Now, you said it was approximately 60/40.  Let's just assume that

 2     the 40 -- the 60 per cent Croats would remain and let's do it in terms of

 3     perhaps an example.  Let's say 60.000 Croats - I'm not asking about Serbs

 4     at this moment - 40.000 Serbs.  Could you tell us in -- as a result of

 5     this colonising, how many Croats are living in that area now?  If you

 6     know.

 7        A.   I don't know the exact figures.

 8             Unfortunately, many Croats and many Serbs did not return at all.

 9     Unfortunately.  Because during their exile, they acquired new living

10     conditions, and let's say even Croats from that area found jobs in

11     Zagreb, in Split, in Rijeka or somewhere else, and equally numerous Serbs

12     found jobs in Belgrade and other places.  Unfortunately, thus, that area

13     is still depopulated today.  The numbers living there are insufficient.

14     Were I in the government today, I would propose to the Croatian

15     government a programme to stimulate life in those areas, no longer for

16     some strategic or defence reasons but for just residence or living

17     reasons.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  So if I understood you well, the whole concept of

19     colonisation was, as you explained it to us, and that's how you explained

20     this conversation, is that by a huge import of Croats, you would have a

21     new, if I could say so, ethnic balance, where the Croats had a

22     90-per cent majority.

23        A.   At the time, after Storm, it was for strategic reasons.  Today

24     I'm talking about economic reasons, and I'm generally speaking about

25     Croatian citizens, because, for sure, there are no longer any people in

Page 27193

 1     Croatia who would rise up against Croatia now.

 2                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Radic, moving to page 11 in English and 17 in

 4     B/C/S, still in the same document, I read again what you stated there as

 5     we find it in the minutes.

 6             You said -- you refer to a village:

 7             "... which used to be called Maja and was predominantly Croat

 8     marked red, while the predominantly Serb areas are marked blue.  It is

 9     the key area to start bringing in settlers."

10             "Secondly, Croats are to return to Croat areas."

11             "Thirdly, the third priority is this marked area here, the

12     liberated Croat area, and this one here, which used to be populated by

13     Serbs.  This marked area here was populated 90 per cent by Serbs, but now

14     it is entirely under our control.  Only a few people remain."

15             You just explained to us that you looked at the whole area, if

16     you were thinking about settling and the balance between ethnicities.

17             Here, apparently, you are focussing more detailed on certain

18     areas, and you're specifically referring to 90 per cent populated -- an

19     area populated 90 per cent by Serbs but now entirely under your control.

20             That's at least -- but explain to me -- it sounds to me as it may

21     be not fully consistent to say, We were just looking at the whole area;

22     whereas, here, are you specifically looking at areas but perhaps you

23     explain what area you exactly pointed at with a 90-per cent Serb majority

24     which you say is "now entirely under our control."

25        A.   We don't have video footage from that meeting to be able to see

Page 27194

 1     which section of the map I'm showing to the President.  I would have to

 2     go over the whole transcript to refresh my recollection.

 3             But when we're saying that something is under our control, then

 4     what we mean is it was under the Croat control, the control of the Croat

 5     army and the Bosnian army in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  I think on the map

 6     we're showing a section of territory that is in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 7     But we're not saying that we would be populating that.  So it is very

 8     difficult from this segment to tell what, at that point, I was showing to

 9     the President on the map.

10             Perhaps we could read the next page, because it's hard for me to

11     follow the thread completely.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Another opportunity would be to provide you with a

13     hard copy of the transcript, so that -- I always hate to give you

14     homework, but perhaps that you take your time to read it over and to see

15     whether, in the context, it is -- it is -- whether you find relevant

16     information in the context.

17             So what you're saying here is that you may have referred here to

18     territory not within the original borders of Croatia but, nevertheless,

19     being under your control.

20        A.   The President refers to Kupres and Grahovo there.  These are two

21     settlements in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  When we say "ours," colloquially

22     speaking, it's -- I don't know actually to what extent it was under the

23     control of the -- or monitoring of the Croatian army, but at the time it

24     was under the allied friendly forces of the army of the Croat people in

25     Bosnia and Herzegovina.  But if the President is talking about Kupres and

Page 27195

 1     Grahovo here, we're talking about towns that are actually situated in

 2     Bosnia and Herzegovina.

 3             This is the time that I recall when the liberation of those areas

 4     from Serb occupation was under way.  I think that Grahovo and Kupres --

 5     actually, I know that for sure they were liberated before Knin was, and

 6     even that was a precondition for the liberation of other parts of

 7     Croatia.  So the topic here is discussed a little bit more broadly, and

 8     it has to do with territory of a neighbouring state.  And I think the

 9     context is that if there are no attacks by those attacking Croatia from

10     the other border, then it's not so essential to have long-term defence

11     forces on this particular side of the border, if things remain like that.

12     I think this is what was being discussed.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  I'd like to move on to another document, which is

14     D1823, which are the minutes of a closed session of the Croatian

15     government.  And there -- we do not have, I think, a front page.

16             Page 6 in English; 11 in B/C/S.  I still think we have not yet

17     the page in English.

18             Mr. Radic, on this page -- and let me see whether I find it in

19     English.  Maybe further down.  No, it should be further up.  It's at the

20     top, line 4.

21             You are recorded to have said -- and I think the discussion was

22     about the draft on -- the draft decree on the -- no, let me see.  Yes,

23     the draft decree on temporary takeover and administration of specified

24     property.

25             You said:

Page 27196

 1             "It surely is a historical document, which determines, I will use

 2     the word, demographic future of the liberated areas."

 3             Could you explain us what you exactly meant by those words.

 4        A.   It's hard with this sentence just taken out of context.  One

 5     would need to read the whole speech to the government.  But evidently,

 6     I'm talking about the fact here that in Croatia we have a large number of

 7     empty apartments and houses where we could accommodate displaced persons

 8     or exiled persons instead of placing them in hotels and other facilities.

 9             I think this is mostly relating to the property that is owned by

10     the state or socially owned.  For the most part.  One would need to read

11     the entire thing to know the context.  It's hard just to be precise on

12     the basis of one sentence.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If you would like to look at the previous

14     page, we move to the previous page.

15        A.   Perhaps the following one.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Could we move to the following page.

17             MR. KEHOE:  Mr. President, I believe a contextualisation of the

18     discussion would probably begin by Mr. Misetic on page - not this

19     Mr. Misetic - on page 3.  That's page 3 of the English.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Page 3 of the English --

21             MR. KEHOE:  Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  -- and that would be in --

23             MR. KEHOE:  He's talking about the issues that they are about

24     discuss and he lays it out, that President Valentic -- or the

25     Prime Minister Valentic gives Mr. Misetic the floor and talks about a

Page 27197

 1     series of individuals.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  We have a hard copy for you there, if you would like

 3     to quickly read the previous and the following page, then, Madam Usher,

 4     could you assist.  We are talking about -- it's already there.  It's

 5     D1823.

 6             Are there hard copies available to the witness?

 7        A.   Yes, if I may --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, if you -- yes, please.

 9        A.   As for your question, what did I mean when I said strategic

10     conditions were on what the future of the people depended on, what I

11     meant was that for a -- it was important to return people to their homes,

12     and I'm primarily thinking of Croats but others too, let's say those from

13     a village, and I mentioned the village of Kijevo today, those people

14     should be placed in empty apartments in Knin so that they could return to

15     their houses as soon as possible.

16             So what the strategic significance of that was, is that homes

17     that were emptied as a result of the war would not remain empty and

18     deteriorate.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I don't think that I asked about strategic

20     importance.  I asked about how this would determine the demographic

21     future.  That is what my question was about.  Because, apparently --

22     that's at least at first understanding of what you said, is that the

23     draft decree on -- well, let's say the houses, whether or not to return,

24     temporary takeover, that that would be very important for the demographic

25     future.

Page 27198

 1             Now demographic future, where you told us that this legislation

 2     was aiming at preserving houses, whereas demography is, for me, different

 3     from maintenance of buildings.

 4             You say it is important for the demographic future.

 5        A.   The demographic future, we adopted that programme and its first

 6     principle was that the population in Croatia be distributed throughout

 7     its territory.  If you take the document, this is the first sentence of

 8     that demographic programme of ours, that the population is not

 9     concentrated only in one area but throughout the territory.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  That's fine.  But what I would like to know is what

11     then exactly the link is between the draft, which is presented here,

12     which is the draft decree on temporary takeover, and demography.

13        A.   The possibility for people to come to the area immediately and

14     not to have wait for another three years before their homes can be

15     renovated.  This is most directly linked to demographics.  The person

16     from Kijevo and Kistanje, for example, would not need to wait in a hotel

17     for another two or three years but to immediately come to their home.

18     This is the basic demographic premise.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, now we earlier heard that -- or we saw that the

20     word "pretext" was used as the aim of this type of legislation.  Pretext

21     of preservation of houses.

22        A.   [No interpretation].

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Apparently there's a ...

24             You hear me again?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 27199

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  We talked about the pretext of preservation.

 2        A.   I'm hearing it now.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  And here demography is -- means to you that Croats

 4     could immediately return to their homes.

 5        A.   These are two things that do not exclude each other but

 6     compliment each other.  Thus, let's preserve the houses and bring the

 7     people close to their homesteads, so in one move one would achieve two

 8     objectives.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  But isn't it true that this piece of legislation,

10     whether we have the initial decree or the later law, would primarily

11     affect Serbs who had not returned in time?

12        A.   The rule or regulation applies to them giving them a deadline by

13     which they would need to return.  But at that time there was no event

14     that did not include everyone.  Each move was interconnected.  You always

15     had one block that, if touched, would require that you also touch another

16     block.  We had to -- I'm going to add a third argument.  We had to

17     relocated Croats, for example from the Love Hotel in Trogir, in order to

18     be able to make money during the following tourist season in that hotel,

19     in order to use those funds to restore a house to which a Croat would

20     return and, in turn, free up a house to which a Serb could return.  So it

21     was all interconnected.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  I would like to take you -- and this will be the

23     last document we'll look at.  That's P2678.

24             And I would like to move to page 26 in English, and 45 in B/C/S.

25     These are the minutes of a closed session of the Croatian government,

Page 27200

 1     5th of October, 1995.

 2             You are talking about:

 3             "The first priority of the overall national entity is currently

 4     to accommodate where Croatia is thinnest, and until yesterday, it was

 5     thinnest, like I said, we cannot discuss this in open session, but it was

 6     thinnest in the area south of Karlovac and up to the Slovenian border."

 7             I think that is the area we discussed before.  What I'd like to

 8     know is what could not be said in -- what could not be discussed in open

 9     session?

10        A.   It was a delicate subject at the time, the one of Croats expelled

11     from Bosnia and Herzegovina who were encouraged or incited by many when

12     they came to Croatia that they would not be able to receive care in

13     Croatia but that they should go wherever, from Australia to Canada.

14             So message like that could be -- to -- understood as a disturbing

15     one to them.  We understood that there were plenty of empty state-owned

16     and socially owned homes where people could be accommodated in that area,

17     so it was not appropriate to pour oil on the fire or add salt to their

18     wounds at the time when they had to run before the occupier in their

19     countries.  So -- and they didn't know what to do and where to go.

20             So that was the reason why this was being discussed at the time,

21     how to care for them and provide shelter to them.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  I do not yet fully understand.

23             You explained that the legislation which was drafted and the

24     efforts were, Let's populate the areas, let's get everyone back who, at

25     one point in time, whether Croat or Serb, would have had to leave the

Page 27201

 1     territory of Croatia.

 2             What was now the sensitive message?  That is still unclear.  Why

 3     couldn't you say, Come back, whether you were accommodated in the coast,

 4     at the coast-line or whether you had fled to other areas due to the

 5     occupation?  What was the -- what couldn't you say that was so sensitive?

 6        A.   I'm talking about the third group of people.  I don't know if

 7     this is quite clear.  People who had been expelled at that time from

 8     Bosnia-Herzegovina and to whom the message, Return immediately to your

 9     homes, under the knife of Ratko Mladic, would be -- the alternative to

10     which would be go to Australia or Canada, and many of them did that.

11     Unfortunately, there were plenty of empty apartments and houses in

12     Croatia where we could have accommodated those people.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  I'll re-read your answer over the break.  And see

14     whether I have any follow-up questions.

15             Let me just see ...

16             I would have not more than 15 minutes to conclude this

17     examination, but rather than rushing at this moment, we'd rather do that

18     tomorrow.

19             I would like to instruct you that you should not speak with

20     anyone about the testimony you have given today.  It is public, but,

21     nevertheless, you're the only one who should not speak about it.  And

22     also not about the testimony still to be given tomorrow.  And we'll --

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

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

25             MR. KAY:  -- if I could just raise one matter, because Your

Page 27202

 1     Honour wanted assistance in the matter.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Do we need the witness for that or ...

 3             MR. KAY:  It is a quick matter and if Your Honour wants to --

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but I have another matter as well so --

 5             MR. KAY:  Oh, very well.  Yes.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  -- I'd rather not bore the --

 7             MR. KAY:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- the witness with that.

 9             So, therefore, you're excused at this moment.  We'd like to see

10     you back tomorrow morning, at 9.00, in Courtroom I.  And, as I said, do

11     not speak with anyone about your testimony.

12             One second, please.

13                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

14                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  I think you asked to be provided with P463.  With

16     the assistance of Chamber staff and the Usher, we'll take that out of the

17     binder so that can you read that.  It was P463, isn't, the 22nd of

18     August ...

19             MR. KEHOE:  That's correct, Mr. President.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then you are already excused unless we would

21     need the witness --

22             MR. KEHOE:  Yes, Mr. President, on that score just in the spirit

23     of --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Perhaps also D1823.

25             MR. KEHOE:  And, Mr. President, I was going to say it may be

Page 27203

 1     quicker certainly during the examination if the witness is given the

 2     series of transcripts that the Chamber referred to during the course of

 3     its examination.  I certainly will be referring back to those, and I

 4     think it might be an easier exercise if we just give them all to him.

 5                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  We are very generous today, Mr. Radic, you can take

 7     the whole binder with you.  The only matter is ...

 8             One second, please.

 9                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

10             JUDGE ORIE:  You will not only find the exhibits we referred to

11     but you will find your own statement as well, which you gave to the

12     Gotovina Defence.

13             But can you keep the binder.  We expect to you bring it with you

14     tomorrow morning.

15             Madam Usher, could you --

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Gladly.  Thank you.

17                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

18                           [The witness stands down]

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Kay, before we rise.

20             MR. KAY:  It was just on the issue of mines which Your Honour

21     raised with --

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If you'll -- if there's --

23             MR. KAY:  -- this witness --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  -- any practical way of providing us with a --

25     either an electronic copy or a hard copy, then perhaps you could --

Page 27204

 1             MR. KAY:  Exhibit D1813, page 29, is a passage of text in which

 2     this witness mentions the problems of de-mining.  And in another exhibit,

 3     D1815, at page 11, is two passages, where -- where this witness refers to

 4     the problem of mining.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And you'd like us to specifically look at

 6     those pages and -- in the context.

 7             MR. KAY:  Well, it was something Your Honour raised --

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 9             MR. KAY:  -- and you raised it with the bar as well so those --

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but --

11             MR. KAY:  I knew there were passages.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I remember that you said something about a

13     lengthy report on de-mining is that --

14             MR. KAY:  That's another document.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  That's another document which will be provided.

16             MR. KAY:  That's a Prosecution document that I believe has been

17     released already.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Is there any way of giving guidance in the

19     61 pages so that --

20             MR. KAY:  I can do that, yes.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Would it be possible to do that, well, let's say,

22     within the next half an hour?

23             MR. KAY:  Oh, easy, yes.  Yes.  Not while I'm standing up at the

24     moment because I can't remember where I've put it in this [Overlapping

25     speakers] ...

Page 27205

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you please, then, communicate with Chambers

 2     staff on this matter so that we know, later this evening, what we have to

 3     read.

 4             MR. KAY:  Yes.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you.  Any other matter?

 6             Could I inquire, the Chamber has not many questions left, a few

 7     questions in relation to the statement, which will take not more than

 8     15 hours.  As matters stand now -- oh, 15 hours.  Yes.  Yes, I don't know

 9     whether this is Freudian or not.

10             As matters stand now, could the parties give an indication as to

11     how much time they would need in cross-examination.

12             Ms. Gustafson.

13             MS. GUSTAFSON:  I anticipate approximately two sessions,

14     Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Two sessions.

16             Mr. Kehoe.

17             MR. KEHOE:  Approximately the same.  Probably -- maybe a little

18     bit less.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Two sessions.

20             Mr. Kay.

21             MR. KAY:  It depends what goes before but it could be half a

22     session to one session.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Half a session.

24             Mr. Mikulicic.

25             MR. MIKULICIC:  The same with me, Your Honour.

Page 27206

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Which brings me to the conclusion that with a bit of

 2     discipline -- I don't know whether I've shown sufficient discipline

 3     today, but with a bit of discipline we could conclude the testimony of

 4     this witness Friday.

 5             If the parties would agree on that?

 6             It seems that the scheduling for three days seems to be more or

 7     less adequate.

 8             I would very much like to conclude the evidence by Friday and not

 9     to ask the witness to stay over for the weekend.  So, therefore, the

10     parties are urged to do their utmost best and also to find a proper

11     balance between what is still to be asked -- I'm also looking at the

12     Defence to see to what extent they could work together in this respect,

13     to see whether we can conclude on Friday.

14             Ms. Gustafson.

15             MS. GUSTAFSON:  I apologise, Your Honour.  Just to forewarn the

16     Chamber in light of the fact that there may significant -- it appears

17     that there will be significant cross-examination by the Defence, there

18     may be a need for the Prosecution to re-cross-examine --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  I am aware of that.  I am aware of that.

20             Mr. Kay, you said half a session, if I remember well.

21             MR. KAY:  I said half to one.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Half to one.  Mr. Mikulicic said --

23             MR. KAY:  It depends what goes before --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  -- the same, half to one.  Let's make that three

25     quarter then.  That would mean we would need four sessions plus one and a

Page 27207

 1     half for the two remaining.  That's five and a half sessions.  We have

 2     six sessions.  We will take tomorrow only 10 to 15 minutes.  Therefore

 3     there would be although limited time left, and if the parties could see

 4     whether it is able to make two sessions one and three-quarters.  And

 5     again the Chamber is not aiming at imposing much time-limits, but I think

 6     we all agree that, with this programme, it should be possible to conclude

 7     on Friday.

 8             We adjourn and we resume tomorrow, 9.00, Courtroom I.

 9                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.10 p.m.,

10                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 25th day of

11                           February, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.