Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 10771

 1                           Tuesday, 2 September 2014

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Good morning to everyone in and around the

 7     courtroom.

 8             Mr. Registrar, can you call the case, please.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  Thank you.  And good morning, Your Honours.

10             This is the case IT-04-75-T, The Prosecutor versus Goran Hadzic.

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

12             May we have the appearances, please, starting with the

13     Prosecution.

14             MR. STRINGER:  Good morning, Mr. President, Your Honours.  For

15     the Prosecution, Douglas Stringer, Sarah Clanton, Thomas Laugel.

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

17             Mr. Zivanovic, for the Defence.

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  For the Defence of

19     Goran Hadzic, Zoran Zivanovic and Christopher Gosnell.  Thank you.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

21             Mr. Hadzic, I remind you that you're still under oath.

22             Mr. Zivanovic, please proceed.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Thank you.

24                           WITNESS:  GORAN HADZIC [Resumed]

25                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

Page 10772

 1                           Re-examination by Mr. Zivanovic: [Continued]

 2        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Hadzic.

 3        A.   Good morning.

 4        Q.   Yesterday we discussed an exhibit that was shown to you by the

 5     Prosecutor, P1888.  Inter alia, he quoted one part from the minutes of

 6     that meeting regarding the events in Lovas.  I'm going to read to you a

 7     very short part from 10.008 or, rather, page 10.009 -- I apologise, the

 8     exhibit number is 1845 and the page number is 1041.

 9             The question was this.  I'm going to read it to you from the

10     transcript:  [In English] "Toward the bottom I should say the bottom

11     third, Panic is talking here about the expulsions in Lovas and that Lovas

12     is constantly being watched by Jovic's Chetnik, the White Eagles.  Now,

13     Mr. Hadzic, Zivota Panic 1992 about this it's your evidence that you

14     didn't know anything about Mr. Jovic's activities and those of his White

15     Eagles in Lovas during this period."

16             [Interpretation] And you answered that you didn't know.  And now

17     I'd ask you to look at the exhibit I just mentioned.  We saw it yesterday

18     as well, P1878.  In the original version, you will find it on page 21 and

19     in the English translation, it is on page 18.

20             Can you look at the penultimate paragraph, please.  That's in the

21     original and it will be the last page in the English translation.  I'm

22     referring to the words spoken by General Panic where he says: [In

23     English] "Every soldier who has been involved in paramilitary units can

24     no longer be a member of the Yugoslav army.  We have a straightforward

25     attitude towards paramilitary units, and it's not as of now, but since I

Page 10773

 1     was the commander of the 1st Army.  We have acted harshly towards every

 2     paramilitary unit, particularly towards this Jovic's unit, the White

 3     Eagles, who did horrific things.  We destroyed them physically in Srem."

 4             Yes.

 5        Q.   I'd like to put to you a couple of questions about this.

 6             You remember when General Panic was the commander of the 1st

 7     Army, do you?

 8        A.   General Panic was the commander of the 1st Army during the events

 9     in Eastern Slavonia and Srem, i.e., during the combat for Vukovar.

10        Q.   What year was that?

11        A.   I don't know what month it was, but it was in 1991.

12        Q.   And let me ask you one more thing.  He mentions Srem here.  In

13     geographical terms, in the Croatian part of the land, what would fall

14     under Srem?

15        A.   In the Croatian part, it is the Western Srem, which is a stretch

16     from Ilok and Tovarnik, which is where the border of Croatia is towards

17     the area around Vukovar.  That would be Srem but we call it Western Srem.

18     However, when you say Srem, that could also imply a part around Zemova

19     [phoen], including, Pazova [phoen], Sremska Mitrovica and the area along

20     the Sava river all the way up to Sid.

21        Q.   In other words, Srem is -- is divided.  The eastern part of Srem

22     is in Serbia, whereas its western part ask in Croatia.  Would that be

23     correct?

24        A.   That's how things were in the former Yugoslavia.  I would say

25     that 80 per cent was in Serbia and 20 to 25 percent were in Croatia.

Page 10774

 1        Q.   Can you tell me whether the village of Lovas would fall under the

 2     geographical term of Srem?

 3        A.   Yes, Lovas is in Srem as you could hear from the Prosecution

 4     witnesses, their fields, their arable land borders on Sid which means

 5     that Lovas is, indeed, in Srem.  It is closer to Serbian part of Srem

 6     than to the Croatian part of Srem.

 7        Q.   And when General Panic says "we physically destroyed them," what

 8     does that mean?  What was the explanation of the term "physically

 9     destruction"?

10        A.   From Panic's words, I would conclude that they were killed, that

11     they were assassinated.  Or perhaps "assassination" is not a good word,

12     because assassination is usually organised against some famous people,

13     some important people.  This would simply mean that they've killed them.

14        Q.   And now can we go back - I was speaking too fast; so were you -

15     it seems that not everything was recorded as it should have been due to

16     the speed.

17             You said that Lovas is closer to the Serbian part of Srem than

18     the Croatian part of Srem.  Could you please clarify or, rather, could

19     you tell us what you meant?  Could you repeat your answer?

20             MR. STRINGER:  Objection, Mr. President.  This is beyond the

21     scope of the direct examination.

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I think that it requires clarification whether

24     the Lovas is in the Srem or not.  And if -- if it -- if it is, whether in

25     the Serbian or in Croatian part of the Srem.


Page 10775

 1             JUDGE DELVOIE:  We --

 2             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  -- follow-up question from --

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  We got a clear answer about Lovas being within

 4     the Srem.  Isn't that sufficient?

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes.  In that case, I withdraw my question.

 6     Sorry.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Could we move into private session, please.

 9                           [Private session]

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10776











11 Pages 10776-10778 redacted. Private session.
















Page 10779

 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   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23                           [Open session]

24             THE REGISTRAR:  We're now in open session, Your Honours.

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.


Page 10780

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 2        Q.   I'm going to put a question to you or, rather, I'm going to read

 3     out a question to you, that a question that was put to you by Judge Hall.

 4     This was on the 23rd of July, page 10.157 and 10.158.  I'm going to read

 5     out your answer too.  So after that I'm going to put a few questions to

 6     you in relation to your answer.

 7             [In English] "My question is:  When did you learn that Arkan was

 8     a criminal, that he was wanted by Interpol?"

 9             "The Witness:  You understood me very well.  In 2002, I told

10     Mr. Dzuro that I knew that when I was talking to him as for the time when

11     I learned that, I can't remember exactly when that was but certainly it

12     became known when Arkan became a media personality.  When foreign

13     journalists came, the Australian consul came to visit him as well as, and

14     there was a lot of controversy surrounded him.  He was portrayed as a

15     colonel in the army, as a criminal, as somebody who killed people all

16     over Europe and then I also heard that he robbed banks in the Netherlands

17     and in Sweden.  I'm not sure where.

18             After 1991, I heard a lot of rumours.  I heard very controversial

19     stories but I never heard that a judgement was passed against him.

20     Nobody ever told me that officially.  I never received that from Interpol

21     or any other police organisation in the world."

22             [Interpretation] You remember that I'm sure?

23        A.   I remember.

24        Q.   First of all, let us clarify one thing.  I think this your answer

25     that is recorded in the transcript, you already said that namely that

Page 10781

 1     this is not a visit of the Australian consul, that this was actually a

 2     member of parliament, of the Australian parliament.

 3             So when I put a question about the Australian consul, we don't

 4     have to correct that now.

 5             Actually, what I'm interested in is the following:  What is the

 6     context in which you mentioned this visit of the Australian consul in

 7     view of the question that was put to?  Was this in the context of Arkan

 8     having become a media star, or is the context your knowledge of him being

 9     a criminal?

10             In other words, at the time of the visit of the Australian

11     visitor, or -- the Australian consul or member of parliament, had you

12     heard by then that Arkan was a criminal or did you find out only later?

13        A.   I cannot be very precise but can I tell you what my understanding

14     of it was.  I said that there were a lot of controversies and I saw that

15     he was being visited by a visitor from Australia, although it is not in

16     the west.  Australia, for me, is part of the west.

17             Then I thought that he was not a criminal.  I mean, I didn't have

18     any document corroborating the stories that were being bandied about.

19     And there were journalists there, journalists of the world media.  I

20     mean, rich media, if can I put it that way.  At world level.  They talked

21     to him.

22             And I thought if what people were saying were true, these

23     journalists would not be talking to him.  I didn't really deal with

24     Arkan.  I had problems of my own.  But in 1991, I couldn't have known

25     anything about him, whether he was a criminal, whether he was not a

Page 10782

 1     criminal -- or, rather, these activities of his, and I did not know that

 2     he had been in prison in the west because of his crimes.  I mean, if he

 3     serves his sentence, then he becomes an innocent man.

 4             And if he is a host of an Australian MP, and if he acts host to

 5     the mayor of Belgrade, if one says that he is a colonel of state security

 6     of the SFRY, I could not discern myself what was true and what was not

 7     true.

 8        Q.   All right.  When you answered the question, when did you hear

 9     that Arkan was a criminal and that he was a wanted man by Interpol, what

10     did you think this meant, "heard," when it says "heard"?

11        A.   Ah, the media, whether I had read about that in the Croatian

12     newspapers, to be more specific, and that didn't have to be correct

13     because the Croatian media were saying that everybody were criminals,

14     everybody on the other side, on our side, that is, so I could not believe

15     them.

16        Q.   Does this mean that practically the source of your information

17     about this, namely that Arkan was a criminal, actually is something that

18     you first read about in the Croatian media and then you realised that he

19     was a wanted man by Interpol?

20        A.   Yes.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Sorry, Mr. Stringer.  I don't think you --

22             MR. STRINGER:  Well, I jumped up quickly before -- in an attempt

23     to get an objection before the answer came.  But it's a leading question.

24     That's our objection, Mr. President.

25             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  As far as I see, Mr. Hadzic already answered

Page 10783

 1     about the sources of his knowledge about how he learned, how he heard

 2     about Arkan being --

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  You mean he answered now or you mean he answered

 4     in the past?

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  He -- he answered before my question.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  He answered before your question.  Well, by all

 7     means --

 8             MR. STRINGER:  I --

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes, Mr. Stringer.

10             MR. STRINGER:  Well, we're just going -- it doesn't make this

11     question any less leading, if I can put it that way, Mr. President.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  That's right, Mr. Zivanovic.  So pay attention,

13     please.

14             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Just a moment, Your Honours.

15             I see -- I see his answer in -- at the page 12, line 3.  "The

16     media, whether I had read about that in Croatian newspapers, to be more

17     specific ..."

18             MR. STRINGER:  Well, then the objection is that the last

19     question, the leading one, is also already asked and answered.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Indeed, Mr. Stringer.  It's one or the other.

21     But, by all means, you may continue, Mr. Zivanovic.

22             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Thank you, Mr. President.

23        Q.   [Interpretation] Just like to go go back to that question of mine

24     that I put to you in the beginning.  It has to do with your answer when

25     you mentioned the visit of the Australian MP.

Page 10784

 1             Did you mention that in the context of Arkan becoming a media

 2     star, or did you mention it in the context that you knew at that time

 3     that he was a criminal or, rather, that he was a wanted man by Interpol?

 4        A.   No, no, I did not know then that he was wanted by Interpol

 5     because of that visit.  This ambassador, or, rather, this member of

 6     parliament came to see him as if he were a media star and I was confused

 7     by that.  When I heard that he was a criminal, I started wondering, how

 8     could the representative of a serious country come and visit a criminal?

 9     I said that in that context.

10        Q.   Perhaps my question was unclear.  Perhaps you misunderstood or

11     perhaps it was misinterpreted.

12             You said, I am reading line 21 [In English] "... know then that

13     he was wanted by Interpol because of that visit."

14             [Interpretation] I did not ask you whether he was a wanted man by

15     Interpol because of the visit.  But at the time of the visit, did you

16     know?

17        A.   I think that I gave a proper answer and that it was

18     misinterpreted.  I said at that time of the visit, I did not that he was

19     a wanted man by Interpol.  And I was particularly confused when I heard

20     about this and I thought these were rumours.  A man, a serious man from

21     the European Union, would not come and visit him then.  I think that

22     Serbia or Yugoslavia as a member of Interpol should arrest anyone who was

23     wanted by Interpol.

24        Q.   So when did you hear that?  Can you assess that?  Can you assess

25     when it was that you -- I mean, well, taking into account that visit by

Page 10785

 1     the Croatian ambassador -- or, I'm sorry, the Australian ambassador?

 2        A.   Not ambassador.  Member of parliament.

 3        Q.   Member of parliament.

 4        A.   I do not know.  During 1992.  I cannot be very specific.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  The Prosecutor showed you P1956 during the

 6     cross-examination.  I'm going to remind you, this is an interview.  It

 7     was shown on television.  Actually, several members of the Serbian

 8     National Council spoke.

 9        A.   TV Novi Sad, is that it?

10        Q.   Yes, TV Novi Sad.

11             Can we move on to page 17.  Actually, I'm going to reading is out

12     to you.  The Prosecutor cited a portion of what Ilija Koncarevic said.

13     I'm going to read out from the transcript.  It is 10.173 to 10.174.

14              "[In English] Serbian people as it seems would have to take a

15     very firm position in that moment and commence unification into one joint

16     state which I have been calling Serbian country for about half a year

17     now.  Serbian country singular, not Serbian countries, as some might say,

18     because then every territory that would join this new Serbian state at

19     some point would have a possibility of saying, I'm out of here now as I'm

20     one of the territories of the state, once the worst is over.  Therefore,

21     a clear definition of Serbian state borders should be defined right from

22     the beginning."

23             [Interpretation] In the same interview he also said that a

24     proposal would be sent that the decision had been adopted to send a

25     proposal to the Serbian Presidency to suspend all the authority of the

Page 10786

 1     Republic of Croatia in the territories that were uncontested or that he

 2     designated as such.  I would like to get some answers about this from

 3     you.

 4             First of all, please tell me how realistic was this proposal at

 5     that time, namely that the SFRY Presidency should decide about whether

 6     the Croatian authorities would be able to exercise their authorities in

 7     certain territories within the Republic of Croatia?

 8        A.   In line 15 or, rather, line 16 on page 15, you said the Serbian

 9     Presidency.  I think that he said the Presidency of SFRY, though I'm not

10     sure.

11        Q.   I think that I never mentioned the Serbian Presidency and I'm not

12     sure whether it existed at the time.  But in any case, what I meant was

13     the SFRY Presidency.

14        A.   Yes, that's logical.  Well, first of all, I have to say a few

15     things about Koncarevic and Petrovic, something that is substantial.

16     They belonged to the part of the Serbian public that was prone to

17     polemics.  They engaged in that type of politics where they would enter

18     polemics and state their positions.  Everything that Koncarevic and

19     Petrovic said were only their own positions from those polemics.

20             And what you asked me about, I think that the Presidency could

21     not have imposed anything on Croatia if Croatia did not want to accept

22     it.  Except, if possible, by force.  But just to have Croatia accept

23     anything, I don't think that would have worked, though this is only my

24     opinion.

25        Q.   Can you remember -- or, rather, do you remember how it worked at

Page 10787

 1     the time before the fighting started?  How did the SFRY Presidency

 2     operate?  Or, more specifically, can you tell us how many members did it

 3     have?  Who were those member?  How were they elected?  Who delegated them

 4     to the Presidency?

 5        A.   I can explain that as a layman.  I think I know the essence and I

 6     think the Trial Chamber will understand.  The Presidency consisted of

 7     eight members, six from the republics, and two from the autonomous

 8     provinces, that is to say, Kosovo and Vojvodina.  They voted by majority

 9     and they had to have more than half votes, so at least five had to vote

10     in favour of something or perhaps they adopted decisions by consensus.

11             Perhaps that's unimportant but I know that republics delegated

12     their members for the Presidency.  They elected them.  Croatia elected

13     Mesic, Serbia elected Jovic, Macedonia Mr. Tupurkovski, and I think that

14     was the selection.  I think that each republic elected its member of the

15     Presidency.  I'm not sure whether that was correct because I didn't

16     really inquire much about about that, but I think that's how it worked.

17     And I think there were eight of them, and I think if votes were four

18     against four, that then one side would be outvoted.  They couldn't vote

19     in favour of anything, as far as I remember.

20        Q.   And judging by the composition as it was at the time, was there

21     any realistic possibility for the Presidency to pass a majority of votes

22     or any other way whatsoever should adopt in a legal manner such a

23     decision, namely, ,that it would divest one of the republics from its

24     ability to exercise power in its own territory?

25        A.   Well, judging by the way the events turned out, eventually I

Page 10788

 1     think it was impossible.  This was a utopian idea of Ilija Koncarevic.

 2        Q.   I would ask you another thing regarding Ilija Koncarevic's

 3     statement given to the media house in this TV show.  He said that

 4     unification should begin in order to form a joint state.  Can you tell us

 5     in which country were the Serbs living at the time?

 6        A.   Yes, Serbs were living in Yugoslavia formally and also in

 7     practice without any secret, we wanted to remain in Yugoslavia, but I

 8     would comment on Koncarevic's ideas to help the Trial Chamber understand.

 9     Those of us who were from Slavonia and Baranja, the Serbs.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  [Previous translation continues] ...

11             MR. STRINGER:  Mr. President, my colleague, Ms. Clanton, has just

12     informed me if we look at the actual exhibit P1956 at page 12 this is

13     Ilija Petrovic talking, not Ilija Koncarevic.  So it might be useful just

14     to clarify the record on this.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  It might be my error.  I saw at the page 17.

17     Maybe -- maybe -- maybe I -- I made -- made the error and I'll check it,

18     double-check it during the break.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  On my screen, we are at page 18 right now.

20             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes, it is -- it was referred by the Prosecution

21     when -- during the cross-examination, but I spoke about -- maybe I -- I

22     did not refer the right pages of this transcript --

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And it's 17 you wanted to have on the screen?

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  17 -- yes.

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

Page 10789

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  17 --

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Let's try to have 17.

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  However, I cited -- I cited some parts of -- from

 4     the transcript.  These are page -- pages 10 -- 10.173 through 10.174.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  It's obviously not 17 because that's even

 6     someone else.

 7             Yes, Mr. Stringer.

 8             MR. STRINGER:  It might be that it begins at page 12 of the

 9     English.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Let's try to look at -- at page 12.

11     That's Koncarevic, indeed.

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Koncarevic --

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And then --

14             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  And that --

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Small part of Koncarevic and then it's Petrovic

16     again.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that Petrovic is the one

18     who said this.

19             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  [Microphone not activated] [Previous translation

20     continues] ... I made the error.  It was not the words from

21     Ilija Koncarevic but Ilija Petrovic.

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Please proceed.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I just finish my answer.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   Yes, yes, please.

Page 10790

 1        A.   I felt it was the same when I said Ilija Petrovic or Koncarevic.

 2     They were both in Novi Sad in any case.  Those of us Serbs who from the

 3     territory where the war was going on, said that it was easy for them to

 4     discuss because they would discuss and then they would go back to Novi

 5     Sad.  And we and our families remained there and were supposed to perish.

 6     So these were political views that we didn't really mind much, especially

 7     Petrovic.  He was a Montenegrin so he just spoke what he thought, and I

 8     was not authorised to shut him up.

 9        Q.   He says, inter alia, that the Serbian people should start

10     unifying into a joint state.  What I'd like to know is this:  In how many

11     states was the Serbian people living at the time?

12        A.   Only in one.  It was the Socialist Federal Republic of

13     Yugoslavia.  And as His Excellency Ambassador Zimmermann told me, it

14     should have stayed like that at that time, more or less.

15        Q.   And please tell me how did you understand his words that the

16     people living in one single state should start unifying, and to unify

17     again so as to be in a joint state?  How did you understand that?

18        A.   Well, I tried to say decently that he belonged to those from the

19     Serbian political scene who liked to debate and polemicise - how did I

20     understand it - as a lot of nonsense.  I didn't really understand why

21     that would be so when we were already in Yugoslavia, but that was his

22     private position.  I didn't even really understand it, to be frank.

23        Q.   During the cross-examination, the Prosecutor mentioned the

24     adoption of decisions on the resignation of the head of MUP.  That's from

25     page 10.192.

Page 10791

 1             Do you know what were the reasons why it was decided in the first

 2     place that the MUP be established and that the chief of the MUP be

 3     appointed?

 4        A.   Perhaps I may not be precise, but, in essence, I remember why.

 5     It was because a part of the Serbian police, the employees, moved to this

 6     side and did not want to stay within the Croatian police and it was

 7     necessary to control them in some way because they couldn't stay without

 8     a formally appointed head for a long while.

 9             It was Ilija Kojic's proposal that they should do it because he

10     said that they would otherwise try to make problems each on his own side

11     and that they were used to having a boss.

12        Q.   And at that time, before the MUP was established, was there any

13     other organ that would maintain public law and order?

14        A.   That was perhaps the initial problem or one parallel with this.

15     There were problems on the ground.  Someone ought to have prevented

16     looting, drunken behaviour and so on.  Because the situation was

17     unresolved for a long time.  It was neither Yugoslavia nor Croatia, in

18     fact.  There was still -- there was no longer any SFRY law that would be

19     implemented, and they had left Croatia.  So somebody was needed in the

20     territory to keep and maintain the public law and order.  I think it was

21     the main reason, actually, and what I remembered was the secondary reason

22     though it was also important.

23        Q.   The Prosecutor, during the cross-examination, showed you the

24     document P3217.  It's tab 763 from the Prosecution list.  It deals with

25     the proclamation on general mobilisation.  I will ask you to look at --

Page 10792

 1     if we could please zoom in so as to enlarge the original text.

 2             If can you please just look at the heading and tell us what

 3     number this is, within the heading?

 4        A.   The number is 1/91.  That means it was the first decision of the

 5     government, the first document dated the 23rd of August.

 6        Q.   It reads here prime minister, if I see it well.

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   But never mind.  I want to show something else from this.

 9             The Prosecutor also showed you the document P194.140.  It's

10     tab 231 from the Prosecution list.  It was on pages 9946 and 9947 of the

11     transcript.  I'm sure you remember this document.

12        A.   Yes, I do.

13        Q.   Can you please look at the number in the heading of this

14     document.

15        A.   It's the same as a second ago, 1/91.  But here the date is the

16     21st of September.

17        Q.   As far as you remember, the documents that were issued by the

18     government or the secretariat or anyone else, did they have the same

19     numbers, various documents with the same numbers?

20        A.   No.  All the documents which you were issued on behalf of the

21     president or the government had their own number, including the year when

22     they were issued.  So the year would be the same and the document would

23     have a number that increased over time.

24        Q.   Thank you.

25             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we now please look at

Page 10793

 1     Exhibit 1939.24.  And the tab number is 763.

 2             THE REGISTRAR:  Mr. Zivanovic, could you kindly repeat the

 3     number.

 4             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes.  It is Exhibit 1939.24, tab 763.

 5                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  We can't -- can't find the -- the -- the exhibit,

 7     Mr. Zivanovic.  Is it 1939.24?  Exhibit number?

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I -- I read from the transcript.  It is

 9     transcript from 23rd of July, page 10.197, line 11.

10             MR. STRINGER:  Mr. President, I believe this is a 65 ter number

11     and not a P number.

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes, it's 65 ter number.

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Then it's not an exhibit number.  It's a

14     65 ter number.

15             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Tab -- tab 763.

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Is this the one, Mr. Zivanovic?

17             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  The original is here, but I don't see the

18     translation.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  There's not much of a translation yet.  It's

20     probably just the cover page.  There it is.

21             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  That's it.

22        Q.   [Interpretation] I'm sure you will remember this text.  It was

23     published in Ilija Petrovic's book.  This is "The Last Call to Battle."

24     I'm interested in the signature or, rather, the text under Ilija Kojic's

25     text.  Could you please have a look.  It says here the -- commander of

Page 10794

 1     the defence of the Autonomous Province of Slavonia, Baranja, and Western

 2     Srem.  Tell me, please, can you explain, why does it say the commander of

 3     defence, why not the commander of Territorial Defence?

 4        A.   Because the Territorial Defence did not exist at that time.  All

 5     the commanders of the villages were known as defence commanders of those

 6     villages.  Ilija tried to unite them, in a way, as the overall commander.

 7     The Territorial Defence was set up only when Badza arrived and he became

 8     the commander of the Territorial Defence.

 9        Q.   I'm going to ask you something else.

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Previous translation continues] ... original

11     text, please.

12        Q.   [Interpretation] It says here "Sunday, 22nd September, 1991,

13     page 2."  Would you say that this is the original text from the newspaper

14     where it was first published or was that added subsequently to the

15     proclamation?  The text reads:  "Sunday, 22nd September 1991, page 2."

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I -- I don't see it in English translation.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can the page be scrolled down?  I'd

18     like to see the heading, as a matter of fact.  I'd like to look at the

19     date in the heading, if there's one.

20             I don't know.  That could be the date of the publication of the

21     newspaper and the decision itself was probably passed a day later.

22             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Let's clarify your last answer.  What do you mean when you say

24     that the decision was passed a day later?  Do you mean that the decision

25     was made a day later or that it was proclaimed a day later?

Page 10795

 1        A.   I was referring to the document that we saw previously.  I

 2     believe that the official announcement was signed one day later than

 3     Kojic and Petrovic actually made it known publicly but I'm not sure.

 4        Q.   I may not have been clear.  My question may have been ambiguous.

 5     Let me remind you.  This document was published in Petrovic's book.

 6     That's one thing.  And the document itself is what you see here.  That's

 7     why I asked you about the date that you had just seen.

 8             Is that the date when the appeal was drafted or when it was

 9     published?  I don't know whether it was published at all, where this was

10     taken from.  Was from a newspaper or some -- something else?  This ask

11     what I've asked you.

12        A.   Well, I'm looking at the same thing as you are.  That's the only

13     thing I see.  But I know that the -- on the document that we previously

14     saw, the date was the 23rd August and now it's the 22nd August.  I can

15     tell you what I think but I can't be sure of the facts.

16        Q.   I don't remember the 22nd August.  I believe that at the bottom

17     of the page, the date was 23rd September.

18             Can we scroll down a little?  The original I mean.

19        A.   Yes, you are right.

20        Q.   Let's go back to the top, please.

21             I can see that it's -- that the heading is:  The appeal of the

22     defence commander of Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem.  How would you

23     understand the term "appeal"?  IT doesn't say decision or order or

24     something of the kind.  What was the force of this legal document?

25        A.   Well, if I were to be allowed to interpret freely.  In my view,

Page 10796

 1     it was a desperate attempt, a desperate request for help.  An appeal

 2     cannot be binding on anybody.  The term is self-explanatory in itself.

 3     An appeal is not an order.

 4             This is a sequel of our decision which was made on 23rd of

 5     August and the invitation to those who had not responded.  This is just a

 6     reminder.  There was mobilisation going on.  We couldn't do it in Serbia

 7     because we're not -- we didn't have any authorities there.  We did not

 8     have any capabilities to carry out a mobilisation in Serbia.  We could

 9     only do it in Croatia.

10        Q.   And can we now look at P329, which is at tab 1502, on transcript

11     page 10.269.

12             You will remember that the Prosecutor showed you this document

13     during the examination-in-chief.

14        A.   Yes.

15        Q.   This is from a meeting which was held on the 12th of February,

16     1992 in Principovac or, rather, on the premises of the local commune of

17     the village of Bapska.  Could you just briefly jog our memory and tell us

18     where Bapska is?

19        A.   Bapska is Western Srem bordering on Serbia very close to Lovas at

20     the very beginning of Western Srem or, rather, at the beginning of

21     Croatia as you arrive from Serbia.

22        Q.   In the document itself, there is a reference to the attendees at

23     the meeting.  The MZ president, the TO commander, the director of the

24     agricultural company.  Did the government appoint any of them to those

25     positions which are mentioned here?

Page 10797

 1        A.   No.  They were never appointed by us.  We never discussed those

 2     things.  We did not have any authority there.  They were appointed by the

 3     military, all of them.

 4        Q.   And did that also apply to the president of the commission for

 5     settlement and resettlement who is also mentioned in the document?

 6        A.   Yes, it applied across the board and included him as well.

 7     Another term, commission for settlement and resettlement, is what the

 8     military administration and the military used.

 9                           [Defence counsel confer]

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Would you scroll down the English translation,

11     please.  Or move to the next page.  I -- yeah, that's okay.

12        Q.   [Interpretation] Now you can see the agenda of the meeting as

13     well.  The meeting was held on the 13th of February, 1992.  You will see

14     that the first item on the agenda was the establishment and functioning

15     of the local civilian authorities.

16             My question is this:  When the local civilian authorities were

17     being established in Bapska, did anybody from the JNA or from any other

18     body consult the government?  Did they make any inquiries with the

19     government about that?

20        A.   No.  This was all copied from Ilok, but this happened later.  The

21     government was not consulted at all.  And I've never come across this

22     term "resettlement."  We never discussed that.  We never heard of that

23     term.  I only knew about the settling of vacated houses.  Now as to what

24     the term "resettlement" means, I don't know.

25        Q.   The second item on the agenda of this meeting was the formation

Page 10798

 1     of a TO unit.

 2             Was the government consulted with regard to the formation of the

 3     Territorial Defence in Bapska or in the general area as such?

 4        A.   No, there were no consultations.  Although all those who have

 5     carefully followed the trial so far, you can -- that -- they can tell

 6     that this is the process that started with Mrksic and Jaksic and was

 7     carried out in the entire territory.

 8        Q.   The third item of the agenda is settlement and resettlement of

 9     the population and the organisation of life in the village.

10             Before the 13th of February, 1991, was the government consulted

11     about that topic?

12        A.   No, no.  No questions were asked of us.  The JNA did never

13     address us on any of those issues.

14        Q.   I believe that on the following page, we will find the

15     conclusions of that meeting.

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we go to the following page,

17     please.

18        Q.   There is a reference to the engagement of competent political

19     structures and the municipal authorities.  The government of Slavonia,

20     Baranja, and Western Srem is nowhere expressly mentioned.  Was the

21     government at all informed that a meeting had been held and that, as a

22     result, there was some conclusions?

23        A.   No, this was under military administration.

24        Q.   A bit further up in the document, there is a reference to the

25     work of the commission for settlement and resettlement, and it says that

Page 10799

 1     a new census of people and households had could be carried out in order

 2     to reach conclusions and make decisions.  Was the government informed

 3     about that?  According to what you know, was the government in any way

 4     engaged in the census of households and population in Bapska?

 5        A.   No, we were not engaged.  The first time I saw those lists were

 6     here for the village of Marinci.  I'm very close to that village, both in

 7     geographic terms and emotionally, and that's why I remember those names.

 8     And the JNA was the body which did all that.

 9        Q.   Could you please read the position under number 2 which concerns

10     the organisation of life in the village and dealing with various issues.

11     A sociological map of the population is mentioned.

12        A.   Yes, but that was supposed to be done by the newly appointed

13     government bodies that -- the bodies of authorities that they had set up.

14        Q.   And the last paragraph, the third one, it says:   "Establish as

15     soon as possible units of the Territorial Defence and police units and

16     build the security of the village on that basis as well as the safety of

17     individuals and the implementation of legal decisions ..."

18             My last question in relation to this document:  The government of

19     Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem, was it invited to take part in the

20     establishment of Territorial Defence units, the police, as mentioned

21     here?

22        A.   No, as I've already said.  They didn't even inform us about this,

23     let alone consult us.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now look at document --

25     this is actually a Prosecution document.  Sorry.  This is the document


Page 10800

 1     that was shown during cross-examination, P2415.2378, tab 1201.

 2                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  It's on the screen, Mr. Zivanovic.  Is it -- is

 4     it sufficient not to broadcast it or should we go into private session?

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I don't know.  [In English] I

 6     don't know whether this document definitely is not on the screen.  The

 7     previous one is on the screen.  329.

 8             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yes --

 9             MR. STRINGER:  I believe this is under seal, Mr. President.

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  This -- that document is under seal --

11             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes.

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So my question is --

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Oh sorry.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Is it enough not to broadcast it or should we go

15     into private session?

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  We may go to the private session, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Private session, please.

18                           [Private session]

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10801

 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                           [Open session]

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're now in open session.

18             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Oh, thank you.

19             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Mr.  President, it might be appropriate time for

20     the break.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  And this -- this is -- this is the

22     document you asked for; right?  You see it on the screen.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I believe, yes.

24             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Thank you.

25             So we take the first 30-minute break.  Court adjourned.


Page 10802

1                           --- Recess taken at 10.28 a.m.

 2                           --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Stringer, we were told that you would like to

 4     raise a procedural matter.

 5             MR. STRINGER:  Yes, Mr. President.  Thank you.

 6             And probably just to be on the safe side, I would request that we

 7     move into private session.

 8             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Private session, please.

 9                           [Private session]

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10803











11 Pages 10803-10804 redacted. Private session.
















Page 10805

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7                           [Open session]

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  We're now in open session, Your Honours.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  That's why we go back into open session.  We were

10     in private session.

11             Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

12             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Mr. Hadzic, during the cross-examination you had the opportunity

14     to see this document.  This is what I'd like to ask you now about the

15     content of this document.

16             In actual fact, this refers to an increase in crime in June 1992

17     and it says here that top people from the economic sector and the people

18     have joined forces in accusing UNPROFOR that they are discriminating

19     against them because they're Serbs and they're not being protected from

20     the fateful consequences of sanctions --

21             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We could not find the

22     reference in the original.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   My question is:  Were you aware of these protests of people from

25     the business community and the people in general as stated here?

Page 10806

 1        A.   I'm aware of complaints and I heard about these protests too, and

 2     I heard these complaints from people from the business community when we

 3     had meetings and so on.

 4        Q.   Can you remember roughly what this pertained to, these

 5     complaints, and these protests, what was being stated?  What kind of

 6     complaints did people have against the work of UNPROFOR at the time?

 7        A.   The main complaint was that UNPROFOR was not objective.  And also

 8     since we were an UN protected area, that we were not given the

 9     possibility to have proper movement of goods and people.  That is what I

10     seem to remember.

11        Q.   There's a reference to sanctions here.  Can you tell us what

12     sanctions are actually being referred to?

13        A.   Serbia was under sanctions and we thought that we were a

14     territory under the protection of the UN and that we were not supposed to

15     be included in these sanctions.

16        Q.   Do you remember whether there was a document on the basis of

17     which sanctions were declared in respect of this territory of the

18     Republic of Croatia that we call the Republic of Serb Krajina?

19        A.   I don't remember very well, but I don't think that there was a

20     document declaring sanctions against the RSK by anyone.  I cannot

21     remember exactly.

22        Q.   So people who protested, did they complain, believing that

23     UNPROFOR was applying this although there were no proper documents

24     supporting that?

25        A.   Yes, they were saying that they were doing this on their own,

Page 10807

 1     that there were double standards involved, and that this conduct caused

 2     the opposite effect.  I often said that at meetings with UNPROFOR.  When

 3     the economic issue is resolved when people start living better, then this

 4     is going to be a secondary issue.  As I said then, when people's stomachs

 5     are full and when their wallets are full.

 6        Q.   Tell me, this is a document from June 1992.  According to the

 7     legal relations of the then-Yugoslavia, the territory of the the Republic

 8     of Serbian Krajina, was it within it or not?

 9        A.   The territory of the Republic of the Serb Krajina was within the

10     SFRY until the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was established.  I think

11     that this was until the spring of 1992.  I think that it was in April or

12     May.  And I think that from a formal and legal point of view as far as

13     Yugoslavia was concerned, we were not a part of Yugoslavia.  We were an

14     undefined territory under the protection of the UN, and UN came in

15     accordance with its own mandate to Croatia.

16        Q.   Are you aware of this case that is referred to in this document

17     about the closing down of factories in the area of Beli Manastir and that

18     400 people would remain jobless because of that?  Were you aware of that

19     problem?

20        A.   This is a well-known problem although this was the job of the

21     government, but I was informed about this indirectly.

22        Q.   There's a reference here to the director of the medical centre

23     and the members of this community, I assume, and it says that he had

24     requested a meeting with UNPROFOR and that this meeting was scheduled.

25             Do you know about this?  People who worked in the field of

Page 10808

 1     health, those -- these hospital, these medical centres?  Did they have

 2     any problems in relation to these sanctions that were being applied?

 3        A.   Well, I know, of course, that they had problems.  That was

 4     supposed to to be a humanitarian issue.  Unfortunately, it was not.

 5        Q.   I see an explanation here that was provided by the

 6     representatives of UNPROFOR that they had held a meeting with a group of

 7     protesters and that they explained the functioning of UNPROFOR and that

 8     they said that they were there to help and not to punish or work against

 9     their best interest, against the best interest of the people in the area

10     so I'm interested in how people accepted this explanation.  How did they

11     take it?

12        A.   They did not take it seriously.  They just thought that these

13     were mere declarations.

14        Q.   Can you tell me whether you, when you talked to the

15     representatives of UNPROFOR, received any detailed explanations, for

16     example, on why such sanctions were being applied in an UN protected

17     areas, so the sanctions enforced against Yugoslavia.  Why were they being

18     applied in an area outside Yugoslavia?  And as a matter of fact, even in

19     an area that was under UN protection?

20        A.   Well, I don't remember if I received a valid explanation. All of

21     it was well, we'll see, we'll ask, we'll check.  I never got a concrete

22     answer.

23        Q.   This document seems to show that in this period that is referred

24     to here, there were some demonstrations of 500 Serbs in Ilok against

25     UNPROFOR.

Page 10809

 1        A.   Yes, I remember that.

 2        Q.   And it says here that they were involved only in the protection

 3     of --

 4             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Stringer.

 5             MR. STRINGER:  I apologise to counsel for the interruption,

 6     Mr. President.  I raised this yesterday and I'll raise it just once today

 7     so that I don't sound like a broken record.

 8             What's happening here, really, is just another shot at direct

 9     examination.  It's not focussed in the way that a proper re-direct should

10     be.  All of these documents that are being put to the witness were

11     available during the direct.  And the fact that the Prosecution put a

12     document to Mr. Hadzic during the cross, in our submission, doesn't mean

13     that on re-direct, the point is to go back to the document and just sort

14     of use it as a springboard to talk about really all sorts of other things

15     that could have been raised earlier.

16             And so I'm just going to raise this once.  Maybe the Chamber

17     disagrees.  But it just seems to us that this is not proper use of direct

18     examination.  What it really is is just now extending the direct for

19     another eight hours so that they're going to be up over 40.  That's how

20     we see it, and -- and so I just wanted to say that for the record, and to

21     object.

22             Thank you.

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  First of all, this document was used by the

25     Prosecution during the cross-examination, and in my understanding, I have

Page 10810

 1     full right to explore this document and ask -- put questions to the

 2     witness as to this document and ask him to explain some parts of this

 3     document and put in the context of his questions -- or his answer, sorry,

 4     on the Prosecution's questions.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Stringer.

 6             MR. STRINGER:  And if I would just -- my response would be that a

 7     proper re-direct, counsel, would have the record references and he would

 8     direct Mr. Hadzic to the part of the document that he was asked about on

 9     cross-examination.  And if there are parts that need clarification,

10     things that Mr. Hadzic didn't get a chance to answer fully, et cetera,

11     then that would be the focus of the re-direct.

12             It's our position that simply having shown the document to

13     Mr. Hadzic on cross-examination doesn't mean that they can use the

14     document to go talk about all sorts of other things that could have been

15     raised with Mr. Hadzic with the document on his direct.  This is just

16     another re-direct.  It's not focussed.  It's not linked to the points

17     raised with this document on the cross.

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I disagree.  Namely, the Prosecution, during its

19     cross-examination, as we illustrated both yesterday and today, used just

20     parts of these documents, taken from the context.  And we used the same

21     document just to put, and we'll do it, we really intend to do it with the

22     other documents too, that illustrate what was the proper answers, for

23     example, Mr. Hadzic would give if he has entirety of this document before

24     him.

25             MR. STRINGER:  If I could just -- one concrete example,

Page 10811

 1     Mr. President, and then I won't respond anymore.

 2             Just looking at page 37, line 18:  "Can you tell me whether you,

 3     when you talked to the -- I'm not sure what that is ... received any

 4     details explanations, for example, on why such sanctions were being

 5     applied to an UN protected area.  So the sanctions enforced against

 6     Yugoslavia, why were they being applied in an area outside Yugoslavia

 7     and, as a matter of fact, even in an area that was under UN protection?"

 8             I could be wrong, but I'm quite confident that the issue of

 9     sanctions was never raised in the cross-examination with this or for any

10     other purpose, and it's really not an issue in the case.  And so, again,

11     I think that the document is being used as -- as an excuse just to raise

12     all sorts of other things that weren't dealt with previously.

13             JUDGE DELVOIE:  One last response, Mr. Zivanovic.

14             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  That's true, that -- that the Prosecution did not

15     rise the issue of sanctions in his cross-examination, but it's shown --

16     this document was shown to the witness and this document mostly -- mostly

17     addressed the issue of dissatisfaction of the population in the SBWS in

18     Beli Manastir, in Ilok, et cetera, and mentioned the sanctions of the --

19     sanctions.  It doesn't explain what kind of sanctions they were but it

20     is -- but obviously these sanctions are closely related to this

21     dissatisfaction of population in SBWS that was subject of -- of this

22     document.  And --

23             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And is this -- is this a new issue -- issue to

24     the Defence?  Coming out of cross-examination?

25             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  This document is --

Page 10812

 1             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Coming out of this document?

 2             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes.  Yes, I -- namely --

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So the Defence didn't -- didn't know about this

 4     sanction issue before they saw this document?

 5             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Of course.  But we didn't -- didn't move the

 6     issue of the sanctions because we didn't see that -- that as necessary.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Well, neither did the Prosecution.

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Sorry -- sorry, no.  But the Prosecution showed

 9     this -- showed this document to the witness, put his questions related to

10     this document.  I'd like to explore this document in its entirety.

11                           [Trial Chamber confers]

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  The Chamber is of the view that it is some kind

13     of a grey zone where, on the one hand, the Defence can, of course,

14     explore to a certain extent a document used in cross-examination but,

15     nevertheless should focus on -- should focus its re-direct on what is --

16     what was the issue in cross-examination.  But, on the other hand, you

17     can -- the Defence can, of course, explore the document further without,

18     nevertheless, using it as a springboard to go to issues that have not

19     been raised so far.  I hope this is helpful for the parties.

20             Please proceed, Mr. Zivanovic.

21             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Thank you, Mr. President. I will leave the grey

22     zone.

23        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Hadzic, can we now please look at P144,

24     tab 215.  This is from the cross-examination, pages 9635 to 9639 of the

25     transcript.

Page 10813

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I have a hard copy of this article.

 2        Q.   [Interpretation] You will remember this text certainly as well as

 3     the questions that the Prosecutor asked you.

 4        A.   I do.

 5        Q.   I will remind you of the question that the Prosecutor asked you.

 6     I shall actually read it out to you.  And this question has to do with

 7     this text and another one that I will also show to you.  But just to

 8     refresh your memory about the question.

 9             [In English] "But the fact is a person reading this, particularly

10     in the very insecure and ethnically charged environment in which these

11     statements were being made at the time, someone reading this could indeed

12     conclude that their soon-to-be prime minister is telling them, it's okay

13     to drive away people who were descendants of those Herzegovian Croats who

14     arrived after 1941.  Isn't quite likely someone could conclude that it's

15     okay to do that?"

16             [Interpretation] I will ask you to look at this text closely.

17     It's in the first column in the original.  Just to find where that is in

18     the English text, it's near the bottom of the page in the English

19     translation.  Or, rather, on page 2 in English.

20             What I'm interested in is this part that says:  "It is is good

21     for Baranja that the Hungarian population returned their arms given to

22     them by Ustashas.  They do not help us much in our fight but they do not

23     hinder us either, as they recognise our sovereignty.  The Croats, the

24     native one, the so-called Sokci, are also passive.  The Croats from

25     Herzegovina, Dalmatia, even Zagorije men, all of them who settled after

Page 10814

 1     1941, are very dangerous as they now that one of our goals, once we gain

 2     the power, is that all Pavelic's volunteers who have come here be

 3     returned or sent back.  That is in case they do not resist us with

 4     weapons.  In case they do, then it is self-explanatory what will happen

 5     to them."

 6             I wanted, first of all, to check this.  Judging by the date, this

 7     interview, and that's at the very bottom of the text in the original, the

 8     interview was published on 4th of September, 1991.

 9             Would you please tell me, at the time of the publication, which

10     state still existed in this territory?

11        A.   At the time, only the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

12     existed as an internationally recognised state.  The one and only.

13        Q.   And another thing:  Going back of Pavelic's volunteers, as they

14     are called, is discussed here, it's noted that they had come from

15     Herzegovina and so on, from Dalmatia.  Could you now tell us, at the time

16     was it possible for you to decide that some people from that area would

17     move away to a different area?  Were there any other -- any authorities

18     that could have decided something like that?  You or your government,

19     which was about to be formed?

20        A.   I couldn't have done that then or later, and I didn't even want

21     to do it as a part of my activities.  I couldn't even establish who would

22     be included in that.  This was stated in a quite different context.

23             As a layman, I said that, that the genocide is a crime that

24     cannot become obsolete.  And that in 1941, I have to explain this to the

25     Trial Chamber, a genocide was committed against the Serbian people in

Page 10815

 1     Eastern Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem.  The Serbs were not

 2     expelled, they were killed.  And then deliberately the Fascist army

 3     brought these people to those areas in 1941.

 4             I never established who they were, nor could I have done that.  I

 5     just gave a statement so that this would be taken into account and that

 6     it would be known that they were populated there by the Fascists.  I

 7     think that it's uncontested that Hitler was a Fascist and that Pavelic

 8     was a Fascist.  If there's anything that is not contested, I think that

 9     that's it.  It's uncontested.

10             And I never believed that anybody should be considered guilty

11     because of something that his father or grandfather may have done.

12        Q.   Please tell me in view of the Prosecutor's question in which he

13     mentioned this sentence of the Herzegovina Croats, did you mention the

14     descendants of the Herzegovina Croats in this interview?

15        A.   No, I didn't.

16             MR. STRINGER:  Just to correct the record, Mr. President.  This

17     exhibit, P144, counsel referred to transcript page 9635 to 9639 as being

18     the place that I raised this.  Actually, the quote that he read from the

19     cross-examination is not found there.  It's found at transcript page

20     10.311 when I was asking Mr. Hadzic about a different document.

21             So the exhibit that we have on the screen has been linked to a

22     different -- to a question that I put to Mr. Hadzic, actually, in regard

23     to a different document, the different document being P2955.2913, and so

24     I just wish to point that out for the record.

25             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  That's correct.  And I said that I showed to

Page 10816

 1     Mr. Hadzic two documents related to this issue about Pavelic's

 2     volunteers --

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay --

 4             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  -- and I'll show him the document that the

 5     Prosecutor mentioned right now.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Please proceed.

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Mr. Hadzic, I will show you that specific document, P2955.2913.

 9     I also have it in hard copy.

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  And with the permission of the Chamber, I would

11     provide Mr. Hadzic with --

12             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Please do --

13             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  -- hard copy of this document.

14        Q.   [Interpretation] Yes.  I will ask you to focus on the first

15     column in this text -- or, actually, the next one after your answers

16     concerning the journalists from TASS where it says:  "To whom is

17     addressed the invitation to return to these areas?  Who will populate

18     them once the borders are fixed and what will be the status of the

19     Croats?"

20             "Hadzic specified that the invitation is open to all those are

21     native to the area, including Croats who, as he put it, do not belong to

22     any extremist Fascist forces and who will enjoy the same status as the

23     Serbs?"

24             And then it goes on to say that by contrast:  "Those who were

25     colonised in our areas by Pavelic during the war from Herzegovina, the

Page 10817

 1     Imotski Krajina and Zagorje will receive from us a return ticket."

 2             I see that the news are from September --

 3             THE INTERPRETER:  Can the counsel please repeat the date.

 4             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] -- dated the 20th of September.

 5     The text is dated the 20th of September.

 6        Q.   So a fortnight after the previous text which I showed to you.

 7             Please tell me, first, did the situation change with regard to

 8     the possibilities that the government of SBWS could order any people from

 9     the area to return to areas where they had been living earlier, for

10     example, to Bosnia-Herzegovina specifically?

11        A.   No, that didn't change.  The government was never involved in

12     that, nor me personally.  Just the opposite is true.  There's an example

13     in my village that things like that were never done.

14        Q.   You have already answered that question.  I don't wish you to

15     repeat it.  I just seek clarification.  Would you please tell me, in the

16     text, did you mention the descendants of those Croats from Herzegovina

17     and the region of Imotski.

18        A.   No, I didn't mention any descendants.

19        Q.   One more thing.  The words "authentic population" is mentioned

20     here.  What did you men when you said that?  For somebody to be a native

21     of the region or native population, how many years need to lapse?  50,

22     100 or centuries?

23        A.   I primarily have in mind those who hailed from the area, who were

24     born there, or who had been there before the Second World War.  In any

25     case, those who were born in the area.  In my mind, those were natives.

Page 10818

 1     Whereas settlers were those who had arrived from somewhere else.  A

 2     settler is somebody who came from somewhere and settled there and a

 3     native is someone simply who was born there and had lived there for some

 4     time.

 5        Q.   The Prosecutor showed you two pages in the transcript, 10.316 and

 6     10.317.  He showed you document P37.  He read something to you and I will

 7     remind you of what it was.  I will repeat the question put to you by the

 8     Prosecutor.  It was recorded on page 10.317.  It reads like this:

 9             "[In English] So, again, Dr. Karadzic is observing or saying:

10     'But who is goig to make the Croats from Vojvodina to move to Krajina.

11     These are nebulous ideas seen as abhorrent by the rest of the world

12     though, though Indian and Pakistan did exactly the same thing.'  He goes

13     on to say, 'It is rather questionable if anything like that would be

14     feasible in Europe at the moment.  I mentions this only to make you

15     cognizant of their way of thinking and of their hopes.  Their greatest

16     hopes are invested in your gradual migration as you will not be organised

17     enough and thus unable to hold hold on down there.  And this is where you

18     say there is nothing nebulous in it.  The Serbs from Zagreb should

19     resettle as well as those from Belgrade and it is out of the question

20     now."

21             [Interpretation] In view of the fact that your answer to that

22     question was very brief, I would like to say that the Prosecutor failed

23     to give you the entire quote of the words uttered by Karadzic at the

24     time.  I would like to repeat that -- correct that mistake.  We will find

25     that in document P37.  It's English 66 through 68.  In Serbian, it's 88

Page 10819

 1     through 92.  However, the part that I'm going to read from, since the

 2     rest are too long, can be found on English 66.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Stringer.

 4             MR. STRINGER:  Just before the next question comes,

 5     Mr. President.  Just to point out that it was on counsel's direct

 6     examination when the passage on this nebulous statement from Mr. Karadzic

 7     was read to Mr. Hadzic by his counsel.

 8             Mr. Hadzic was asked and invited to comment on that part of the

 9     transcript.  This is at pages 9796, 9797 of the transcript, from the 15th

10     of July.  So this was already covered in direct, and counsel evidently

11     doesn't feel that it was covered sufficiently enough by him on direct so

12     he is now going for another bite at the apple.

13             We did come back to it in cross, but I would like to point out

14     that it was already raised by counsel once in direct.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Is -- is this an objection, Mr. Stringer?

16             MR. STRINGER:  Yes.  The question's asked and answered.  Thank

17     you.

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  No.  This particular question was not either

19     asked or answered.  Namely, I asked just for -- to -- I asked Mr. Hadzic

20     just to clarify his response whether he say that -- to -- to -- we just

21     wanted to clarify his response.  I didn't mention the question of

22     Mr. Karadzic -- not the question, but the words of Mr. Karadzic.

23             During the cross-examination, however, the Prosecution took from

24     the context just a part of Mr. Karadzic's statement and put it as the

25     question to the witness.  I -- I'd like now to cite whole statement of

Page 10820

 1     Mr. Karadzic on which the witness answered.  And I didn't -- I could not

 2     foresee that during my direct examination that the Prosecution will take

 3     from the context in his cross-examination just one part and, in a way,

 4     mislead the witness to respond.

 5             MR. STRINGER:  Just to respond to that, Mr. President.

 6             What we did was go to the passage that was raised by counsel on

 7     the direct.

 8             Thank you.

 9             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  No.  As I -- as I said in my question, in my

10     words, I quoted the question of Mr. Stringer.  I quoted his question

11     during his cross-examination, and I say -- and you -- you may conclude

12     after I read this particular -- these two sentences from Mr. Karadzic's

13     statement, that this -- this was taken out from the context.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  If that -- that will stay -- if that is your

15     focus, Mr. Zivanovic --

16             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes --

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  -- you may proceed.

18             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] We can go to page 91 in the

19     English text -- or, rather, the original, and page 68 in English.

20        Q.   I have read out what the Prosecutor chose to quote from

21     Karadzic's words.  And now I'm going to read the entire paragraph.  The

22     three sentences that preceded the quote chosen by the Prosecutor in his

23     question.

24             Dr. Karadzic says:  "Friendly persuasion will not do and

25     patriotism is funny commodity if it is not accompanied with something

Page 10821

 1     else.  That is why I think that the investment programmes should be made

 2     urgently.  The programmes which shall be based on cheap labour,

 3     favourable taxation system and long and persistent work with the Serbs.

 4             First of all, the Serbs from Krajinas must not be favoured here.

 5     On the contrary, they have to be stimulated to go back there, of course,

 6     if it is in our best interest.  If it is not, then we should pass the

 7     initiative over to the Croats who say they were prepared to swap the

 8     150.000 plots of their best land in Vojvodina for 150.000 Serbs from

 9     Krajina.  But who is going to force the Croats from Vojvodina to move to

10     Krajina?"

11             What follows is what the Prosecutor read out to you.  And then

12     your answer:

13             "There is nothing nebulous in this," and so on and so forth.

14             When you said "there's nothing nebulous in this," what did you

15     have in mind?  Did you have in mind the Prosecutor's words and this is

16     who's going going to force --

17             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Stringer.

18             MR. STRINGER:  I object to this, Mr. President.  I'm looking at

19     the transcript, page 96 -- sorry, 9796 to 9797.  Counsel read to

20     Mr. Hadzic from this.  He said is:  "And then you said Serbs from Zagreb

21     should resettle as well as those from Belgrade and now from this area

22     it's out of the question."  Mr. Zivanovic says:  "So just allow me to

23     clarify two matters here.  Even though that -- what you said was very

24     brief, could you please tell us what you meant when you said it was not a

25     nebulous matter.  There is nothing nebulous in it.  This refers to the

Page 10822

 1     settlement of the population?"

 2             Mr. Hadzic answers:  "Well, it was not nebulous.  It already

 3     happened."  And it continues on to page 99 -- 9797.  Hadzic, page --

 4     sorry, line 18, says:  "Well, let me first explain this.  When I said

 5     'this is not anything nebulous,' these are my words.  And he goes on to

 6     explain.  And now what's just happened is that counsel has, again, asked

 7     Mr. Hadzic to basically, again, say, what his explanation is for having

 8     said this.

 9             So maybe I'm just being too dogmatic, but it seems like counsel

10     is not satisfied with how it came out the first time on his own direct

11     examination and now he's trying to get it fixed, if I may put it like

12     that.  But this has all been asked and answered on the direct,

13     Mr. President.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic.

15             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  If I may explain my -- my questions put to

16     Mr. Hadzic at the time.

17             I quote his answer, and this answer literally had no -- no sense.

18     I asked him to -- to say what he said actually.  And I -- I asked even

19     from the Serbian authority tape records from this session, because I

20     think that it is different, but it does not matter.

21             Actually, I'd just like to ask Mr. Hadzic whether, when he said

22     "it is not nebulous," et cetera, et cetera, whether he had on mind

23     everything that I now read from -- as the statement of Mr. Karadzic or

24     not, or just the part that the Prosecution read to him.

25             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic, it's a little bit odd that you

Page 10823

 1     want to put this quote "there's nothing nebulous in it," in the context

 2     of OTP's question.  But it's -- is the answer in the document?  Is the

 3     answer given at -- at -- at the meeting?

 4             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Yes, that's correct, Your Honour.  But this

 5     answer followed the -- the statement of Mr. Karadzic.  It was the answer

 6     on the -- on something that Mr. Karadzic just said.  It is -- that's it.

 7     That's this -- this meeting.

 8             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And that's -- and that's what -- and that's

 9     what -- what was asked and answered, Mr. Stringer says, on direct.

10             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Mr. Stringer, in direct, just quoted one part.

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Stringer, in cross, quoted one part; right?

12     Are you talking about direct or cross?  Mr. Stringer ... I'm perhaps a

13     little bit confused so help me.

14             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I said that Mr. Stringer, in cross, quoted just

15     one portion of this statement.  He --

16             JUDGE DELVOIE:  After you already asked Mr. Hadzic in direct.

17             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  About the answer.  About the answer.  Not about

18     the question.  I -- I didn't -- not the question, sorry, but about the

19     statement.  I didn't quote the statement, whole statement, or part of

20     statement of Mr. -- Mr. Karadzic.  I didn't do it at all.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  I -- I'll allow one question, Mr. --

22     Mr. Zivanovic, and we'll see.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Mr. Hadzic, this is my question:  When you said what you said -

25     and I'm not going to repeat your words - did you have in mind everything

Page 10824

 1     that Mr. Karadzic said or just one part of his words?

 2        A.   I had in mind his entire intervention.  But I was interrupted and

 3     I could not go on.  I couldn't say everything that I wanted to say at

 4     that meeting.

 5             Yes, I was interrupted at the meeting in Belgrade, not over here.

 6                           [Defence counsel confer]

 7             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Sorry, my question was not recorded because I

 8     turned off my microphone.

 9        Q.   [Interpretation] I had asked you whether you had been interrupted

10     here or in Belgrade.  So just for the transcript --

11        A.   I was interrupted in Belgrade.  And I think that this last part,

12     this end, makes no sense whatsoever.  The last five words, perhaps -- in

13     Belgrade, that is.

14        Q.   The Prosecutor put several questions to you about the work of the

15     judiciary in Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem and the Republic of Serb

16     Krajina.  Now this is what I'm interested in:  Among other things, it was

17     stated that you had been passive towards the crimes that were being

18     committed.  That is page 10.279.

19             Can you just say whether -- well, within the scope of the

20     authority that you had as prime minister of Slavonia, Baranja, and

21     Western Srem and, later on, president of the Republic of Serbian Krajina,

22     what kind of powers did you have vis-à-vis the judiciary?  Could you

23     influence their work in any way?

24        A.   I had no powers whatsoever, and I could not influence their work

25     in any way.  They were completely independent of me.

Page 10825

 1        Q.   I would now like us to take a look at an answer from page 10.340,

 2     line 16.  I'm going to quote this back to you now.  I'm going to tell you

 3     what it was that you said.  The questions had to do with Mr. Milan Ilic,

 4     if you remember, and your answer was [In English] [Previous translation

 5     continues] ... "... the end of 1991, president of the municipality of

 6     Dalj and only in the spring of 1992 that he was elected president of

 7     Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem."

 8             [Interpretation] You said here that he was elected president of

 9     Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem.  Does this faithfully correspond to

10     what you said or, rather, is that it?

11        A.   This was not faithfully conveyed.  I believe that it is my

12     mistake because I spoke too fast.  He could not have been president of

13     Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem.  This post did not even exist.  He

14     was elected president of the regional government of Slavonia, Baranja,

15     and Western Srem.

16        Q.   Now I'd like to ask you to look at P1707.  This was shown to you

17     on transcript page 10.344.

18             First of all, can you tell me whether this document was called an

19     order anywhere?

20        A.   It was not called an order.  At least not in the text that I can

21     see.  I cannot see the text further up.  Perhaps it can be scrolled down.

22             No, no, it was not called an order.

23        Q.   The Prosecutor showed you this document, and this document has to

24     do with resolving -- well, it says that problems should be resolved in

25     co-operation with the representative of the government of Slavonia,

Page 10826

 1     Baranja, and Western Srem.  There is a reference to Town Commands as

 2     well.  However, I would like us to take a look at the next page,

 3     paragraphs 4, 5, and 6.

 4             Could you please take a look at this.  I would particularly like

 5     to draw your attention to paragraph 6 that says:   "Local commands shall

 6     honour possible decisions of the municipal assembly, Executive Council

 7     and those made by the government of Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem,"

 8     and so on.

 9             Could you please tell me whether you were given any authority to

10     resolve these claims related to property in any way, or did this remain

11     in the hands of the military?  And if they wanted to, perhaps they could

12     have taken into account your requests.

13        A.   We never received this.  You asked whether it was an order.  I

14     wouldn't call an order.  It was an instruction for their internal

15     communication.  Here where it says "possible decisions," that means that

16     they don't respect us at all.  It means that they can and cannot and need

17     not honour that, and they didn't make us aware of any decisions and we

18     could not make any decisions in respect of them.  We did not have any

19     authority over the military.

20        Q.   If you look at paragraphs 4 and 5, they say what will be done

21     with this documentation that has to do with the use of property.  I'm

22     asking you whether this documentation was ever handed over to the

23     government of Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem?

24        A.   No, never.  No documents of the JNA; these included.  They state

25     quite clearly that they should keep this and that it is only for them to

Page 10827

 1     decide on this.

 2        Q.   I would also like to ask you to clarify before the break another

 3     answer that you provided on page 10.347.  I'm going to quote it back to

 4     you  [In English]:

 5             "A.  I don't know.  It was the president of the Executive Board

 6     that made those appointments but I have to respond to what you said at

 7     first if I said something that was not correct.  No, I'm speaking under

 8     oath and everything I said was correct.  When I said that they didn't

 9     want to talk to us, I meant in practical terms.  I mean they did speak to

10     us formally but to return cars to us -- but it to return cars to us.

11     They didn't even want to talk about it or, rather, they didn't want to

12     return them but they could have formally discussed this for 100 years but

13     they didn't want to do anything that we proposed.  And it is that sense

14     that I said that they didn't want to talk or discuss things because they

15     didn't want to do anything for us, and that is why I said that.  They

16     just kept on talk and talking but meaninglessly and that's what I -- what

17     I meant.  Everything I said is correct."

18             [Interpretation] This pertains to your communication with the

19     army, the military authorities.  So I'd just like us to -- actually, I

20     remember that when providing an answer, you said that people were

21     speaking "uprazno", in vain.  What did you mean by that?  Could you

22     explain this a bit, this communication with the representatives of the

23     JNA.

24        A.   First of all, perhaps I should explain a word that caused

25     confusion here and that's when I said this was not discussed at all.  In

Page 10828

 1     my language, that means that this was not brought into question at all,

 2     that this could not be carried through.

 3             So when I say this was not discussed at all, that means that they

 4     didn't want to do it.  That's what it means in my language.  And that is

 5     why the Prosecutor said "how come?" when this was discussed, and I said

 6     well, yes, of course, they said, yes, we will check, we will take a look

 7     at this.  But all of that was in vain.  It was just talk.  That is what

 8     uprazno means.  That is to say without the possibility of a solution.

 9             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I see, Your Honour, that it is time for the

10     break.

11             JUDGE DELVOIE:  If this is appropriate, yes.

12             Thirty-minute breaks -- break.  Court adjourned.

13                           --- Recess taken at 12.13 p.m.

14                           --- On resuming at 12.47 p.m.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Please proceed, Mr. Zivanovic.

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

17             First of all, I would indicate on one error in translation

18     concerning this last document, the document that's in -- at the screen.

19     It is in paragraph 6.  Because, in the English translation, it is stated

20     "local commands shall honour municipal assembly decisions ..."

21             However, I'll read it from original, paragraph 6 reads:

22     "[Interpretation] The commands of places will honour possible decisions

23     of municipal assemblies, that is to say, their Executive Councils."

24              The word "eventually" was omitted from the translation, and we

25     indicate it right now, but we'll ask the correction of this translation.

Page 10829

 1             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Thank you.

 2             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Mr. Hadzic, the Prosecutor showed you 1D3460, transcript page

 4     10.429.  It's a document dating from May 1994.  I think we will soon be

 5     able to see it on the screen.

 6             The document mentions, inter alia, Djordje Celosovic who is

 7     described as your escort.  You answered this question to the Prosecutor

 8     but as this is taking place in 1994, when you were no longer the

 9     president of the Republic of Serbian Krajina, I would like to know

10     whether you could tell me at the time you had some permanent escorts or

11     anyone who was your escort?

12        A.   I didn't have anyone.  I used to ride my Vespa around for a while

13     and a journalist noted that in a text it's no wonder that nobody noticed

14     it here.  When Martic took away my licenses plates, then I used a Vespa

15     as a means of transportation.  I even rode it along the first line, and

16     nobody shot at me from the Croatian side, even though they were able to

17     recognise me.

18        Q.   Also during the cross-examination, a video-clip was shown to you.

19     You said yourself that it dated from October or November 1991.  The

20     document number is 14873.2  from Prosecution list.  It's on page 10.442.

21             I will read out to you a section from the surrogate sheet for

22     this video and I will have you to -- well, I just want to ask you some

23     questions linked to your previous answers during the re-direct.  It's on

24     page 10.444.

25              "[In English] Do you think that Serbs and Croats can live

Page 10830

 1     together.

 2             "Goran Hadzic:   Not the brotherhood and unity type of

 3     co-existence introduced 50 years ago.  But knowing my people, I'm sure

 4     Serb also not harm anyone who is not harming them.  So all Croats who

 5     stay in our region, all Croats living here for years, like us, will be

 6     able to stay with us in the Serb region, have the same rights as everyone

 7     else, as Serb people, other nations, and nationalities.  And the Croats

 8     who have blood on their hands and are wallowing in it will surely be held

 9     responsible for what they did.  We will have no mercy with them, and I

10     say this for the third time this evening."

11             [Interpretation] You have already provided an answer to this

12     question.  I would just like to you clarify something when you said

13     that -- that there can be no co-existence of the brotherhood and unity

14     type introduced 50 years ago.

15             You explained here what your position is.  But what I'm

16     interested is this:  In that interview and generally at the time, was

17     there any distinction between the Croats judging by the place they were

18     coming from and the like?

19        A.   No, that never existed.

20        Q.   Did you, at the time -- I mean, it was a month or two after your

21     interviews which I have shown you, so it's war already, the war was

22     raging, one could say.  Did you give such statements relating to Croats

23     hailing from Herzegovina or some other area?

24        A.   Not at all, nor did anyone ever try to establish this on the

25     ground.  My statements that were quite sharp in September, I didn't even

Page 10831

 1     have a telephone at the time.  I said that because Stipe Mesic and that

 2     side were pointing their fingers at us.

 3        Q.   Perhaps I should be somewhat more specific in my questions.  Did

 4     you ever mention in this interview that anyone should be held accountable

 5     except for those who had blood on their hands?

 6        A.   I didn't do it then nor do I think that now.  And whoever has

 7     blood and their hand, perhaps I may have been wrong that I didn't also

 8     say the Serbs who had blood on their hands should also be held

 9     responsible, but that was implied because we did prosecute Serbs who had

10     bloodied their hands later on.  But this was a war and I was talking

11     about the other side.  But it is implied that this encompassed all the

12     people who had blood on their hands.

13        Q.   And another thing, in this interview, you mentioned Croats who

14     had been living alongside you for years.  Was the expression precise "for

15     years," when you said that in the interview?

16        A.   Perhaps I did.  I meant those who had been born there, just like

17     myself.

18        Q.   Yes, I have understood you.  I'm asking that you because it seems

19     that even though I didn't find it in the interview, but on page 10.451,

20     line 18, I'm not sure if this was an error in interpretation or something

21     else, but at one point, centuries were mentioned rather than years.  This

22     is why I asked you why you mentioned centuries or years?

23        A.   No, no, I mentioned years.  Well, there were many Serbs who had

24     arrived 40 or 50 years earlier to the area and that would relate to them

25     then.  But, no, I had years on my mind.

Page 10832

 1        Q.   Please tell me now, at the time when you gave this interview, was

 2     there a sentiment among people living in SBWS regarding the

 3     responsibility of those who had committed crimes?  I mean, that they

 4     should be prosecuted or that that should be resolved in some other

 5     manner.  Do you remember that?

 6        A.   When you said "at the time," could I just see when I gave that

 7     interview, what year and what month, because I've lost the thread

 8     somewhat.

 9        Q.   I think that perhaps we don't have the exact date.  But when the

10     Prosecutor showed you the video-clip, you said that it may have been --

11     or that it must have been before the fall of Vukovar because, before

12     that, he asked you about the military situation --

13        A.   I remember, I remember.

14        Q.   And you said that it may have been October or November 1991.

15        A.   Yes.  That was the general view held by everyone that all the

16     criminals and murderers ought to be prosecuted.

17        Q.   If you could please clarify another segment for us.  I will read

18     out to you the Prosecutor's question and your answer from page 10.362 of

19     the transcript.  It reads  [In English]:

20             "Q.  And then you say, we would appreciate at least being

21     informed about the criteria according to which it was done with the

22     possible remark that our approval does not go without saying.  And then

23     after that you say:  This all the more in view of your request which

24     represents a novelty as conveyed by Mr. Susa that the reason must be

25     stated and approval even for temporary settlement of refugees in

Page 10833

 1     settlements around Ilok.

 2             Now I'm going suggest to you, Mr. Hadzic, that among the reasons

 3     why the JNA wanted to retain some level of control over this was because

 4     you, your government, and its representatives, were intent on placing

 5     Serbs through these territories without regard to their own safety and in

 6     areas that were still in the conflict zone as was indicated in the

 7     previous exhibit we looked at.

 8             "A.  That's not true.  I said in my answer before the break,

 9     maybe I don't have the right to ask and it's not -- but from what -- what

10     did you get -- but -- but from what did you get this conclusion?  I

11     didn't know that and I couldn't even suppose.  It's not written

12     anywhere."

13             [Interpretation] As this letter that was quoted dates from

14     December 1991, I'm interested in the following.  Please tell me whether

15     at the time, as far as you knew, any combat was an ongoing in the area

16     that would indicate that people were settling there, regardless of their

17     own personal safety.  That is to say that they could be in danger because

18     of the ongoing combat operations.

19        A.    There was no combat as far as I know.  The combat lasted very

20     short even when there was any combat and that was in October or November.

21     So this claim is completely fabricated that anyone wanted to send the

22     Serbs there?  We couldn't have done it even if we had wanted to.  No one

23     ever consulted us and there was no combat going on there at the time.  So

24     that's the answer to your question.

25        Q.   When it says here that the JNA wanted to keep a level of control

Page 10834

 1     over a territory, what level of control did the JNA have at the time?

 2     What did it try to maintain?  Did it share that control with somebody?

 3        A.   The word used here was "level" but there were no levels.  It was

 4     100 per cent control.  It didn't share its responsibility with anybody.

 5     It did not co-operate with anybody.  The JNA had 100 per cent control

 6     over the territory.

 7        Q.   The Prosecutor also showed you P3227.  That was on page 10.504

 8     through 10.512 of the transcript.  P3227 is the document number.

 9             This document concerns an order issued by the commander of the

10     Territorial Defence of Vojvodina about the resubordination of some units

11     from the TO Vojvodina.

12             Could you please read the first paragraph after the title: Order.

13        A.   Yes, I can do that.

14        Q.   And could you then tell the Trial Chamber whether that order was

15     issued pursuant to some other order or was it an isolated order issued by

16     the commander of the TO Vojvodina?

17        A.   Even a layperson like me can see that the person who issued that

18     order did not have the right to -- to order anything directly because in

19     the title, it says "excerpt from the order" which means that he draws his

20     right from another order and you told me to read --

21             THE INTERPRETER:  Could, please, the appropriate page in English

22     be returned to the screen.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Pursuant to order strictly

24     confidential order number 5-110 of 27 September 1991 of the 1st Army

25     Direct Command on the engagement of manoeuvring units of the AP Vojvodina

Page 10835

 1     TO, I hereby issue the following..." which means that this person could

 2     not issue orders independently but had to follow instructions from a

 3     higher-ranking institution.  This the way I see things and understand

 4     things the way I understand things as a layperson.

 5        Q.   And what about the wording "pursuant to order strictly

 6     confidential" and so on and so forth.  Does that mean that the commander

 7     in question acted on that order?

 8        A.   Yes, this is very clear.  He only conveys a previous order issued

 9     by the 1st Army District Command.

10        Q.   In view of the fact that you were in communication with General

11     Mandaric, could you please tell us how much time lapsed between you were

12     in contact with him and the moment when this order was issued?

13        A.   To the best of my recollection, it must have been a whole of two

14     months.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Could we now please look at --

16             JUDGE DELVOIE: Just a moment,please.  And this is an excerpt ...

17     Mr. Zivanovic, before you move to another document, could we see the last

18     page in English.

19             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Oh, sorry.  We should see one-but-last, I think.

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Probably, yes.

21             Mr. Hadzic, on the first page, it is said that this is an order

22     from the commander of the TO -- excerpt on an order of the commander of

23     the TO.  Is Major-General Nikola Mandaric the commander of the TO?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] According to what I know, yes, he

25     was.  But he was the commander of the Vojvodina Territorial Defence.

Page 10836

 1     That was a level below the TO of Serbia.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Can we have the first page again, please.  Yeah,

 3     that -- that's exactly what is said -- what is said on the first page.

 4             Now, do I understand you well that despite the fact that it is

 5     said in the -- on the first page, that it is an order from the commander

 6     of the TO and it is signed by the commander of the TO, Mr. Mandaric, that

 7     in spite of that, the fact that it said that it is an excerpt means that

 8     it is not an order from this man who signed it and whose function is

 9     given here in the -- in the heading and in the -- and on the last page?

10             Is that your evidence?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's what I can see, that this is

12     a -- an order of the commander of the 1st Army District which this one

13     conveys and he hedges -- makes -- hedges that order by saying that this

14     is it an excerpt from another order.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I'm just trying to understand.  What -- what

16     allows you to say that it is an order from the commander of the 1st Army

17     District and that it is -- how do you -- how do you put?

18             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I apologise.

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  And this is an excerpt so why -- what -- what is

20     it that allows you to say that this is an order from the commander of the

21     1st Army and this is an excerpt from that other order?  That's what

22     you're telling us; right?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] But this is what it says here.

24     This the first time I ever see this type of indirect order.  I never saw

25     that before.  Because the main title reads:  "Excerpt from order."  And

Page 10837

 1     above the word "order" it says:   "Pursuant to the order strictly

 2     confidential," and so and so, issued by the 1st Army District commander,

 3     which he only conveys.  The last few words are my addition.

 4             The way I saw it was that he did not have the right to issue any

 5     direct orders.  All he could do was to convey orders previously issued by

 6     the commander of the 1st Army District.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.  Thank you.

 8             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   Perhaps we should elaborate a bit further.  May I have a hastily

10     omitted the requirement to read the entire paragraph consisting of three

11     lines where it sayings:  "Pursuant to order, strictly confidential number

12     5-110 of 27 September 1991 issued by the 1st Army District Command on the

13     engagement of manoeuvre units of the AP Vojvodina TO ..."

14             Can you tell us what the order of the command of the 1st Army

15     District refers to?

16        A.   It is clear that it refers to those units which were part of the

17     TO of Vojvodina Autonomous Province.  And you can see that they were

18     under the command of the JNA, i.e., of the 51st Motorised Brigade.  You

19     can see that from further text.

20        Q.   The Prosecutor asked you and he showed you a document, P112.111.

21     The transcript page is 10.525.  I'm not going to ask you anything about

22     this document.  I'm sure you will remember the document and you will

23     remember the one issued on the 21st of September.  What I do want to ask

24     you --

25             [In English] Sorry, may we move into private session for the


Page 10838

 1     moment.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I --

 3             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I would repeat, may we move into private session,

 4     please.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Private session, please.

 6                           [Private session]

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)


Page 10839

 1                           [Open session]

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

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

 4             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Questions were put to you about the protest in Dalj on the 15 of

 6     October, 1991.  You will find it on page 10.531.

 7             I would like that ask you whether you perhaps remember that day

 8     or those days, the 15th and 16th of October.  Where were you?  What did

 9     you do?  Did you come to Dalj at all?

10        A.   No, I did not come to Dalj at all.  I don't know what I did each

11     of those days.  However, on one of those days I was in Paris and I was in

12     Belgrade preparing for Paris, which means I did not come to Dalj either a

13     few days before the event or after the event.  I didn't work in Dalj at

14     that time.  So if I did come later, I was perhaps only in the Erdut but

15     not in Dalj at all.

16        Q.   You probably remember some documents bearing witness to your

17     travels to meet Mr. Wijnaendts.  I don't know whether you remember the

18     dates.  If you do, fine; if not, it's neither here nor there.

19        A.   I remember one date very well, 100 per cent.  I'm now very tired,

20     but I remember that on the 12th of October, which is my religious

21     holiday, my family's religious holiday, I was air-borne on the way back

22     from negotiations.  I don't remember whether that was from The Hague or

23     from Paris, but I remember that evening that it was my patron saint's

24     holiday, and I was onboard a small Falcon 12-seater.  I remember that

25     very well.  I was so busy around that time that I remembered only late in

Page 10840

 1     the evening that it was my patron saint's day which I normally celebrated

 2     every year before that.

 3        Q.   I'd like to remind you of something.  You gave several answers to

 4     the Prosecutor in relation to the functioning of the judiciary of

 5     Slavonia, Baranja, and Western Srem and Republic of Serb Krajina, and he

 6     showed you a number of documents in that connection.

 7             As far as I understood the Prosecutor, he wished to say -- what

 8     he put to you was that actually the judiciary took certain steps only

 9     when the representatives of UNPROFOR would possibly intervene and ask for

10     something to be done.  For example, when they would carry out an entire

11     investigation and when they would hand all of that over and then

12     practically at some insistence of theirs, the judiciary would start

13     functioning.  I'm talking about crimes against non-Serbs.

14             Tell me now, please, is that correct, to the best of your

15     knowledge?

16        A.   To the best of my knowledge, that is not correct.  That could

17     only be partly correct, but sometimes it had to do with pressure.

18             The injured parties were on the Croatian side sometimes so it was

19     only UNPROFOR that could bring the necessary documents in so that the

20     perpetrators could be tried.  Not on the basis of any kind of pressure,

21     but only certain documents that we could have received from the Croatian

22     side.  However, we were at war with them, so we could not receive

23     documents from them, and then UNPROFOR was a party in between and then we

24     would try people in Osijek and Vinkovci on the basis of documents that we

25     would receive in this way through UNPROFOR from the Croatian side.  So

Page 10841

 1     the answer is no.

 2             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note: Could the speakers please

 3     be asked to slow down.

 4             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   We are not going to go through these documents.  We are not going

 6     to you go through all of these documents that were shown to you during

 7     the cross-examination.  We'll probably deal with that through some other

 8     witnesses.  But I'd just like to ask you one more thing that was also put

 9     to you by the Prosecution.  Actually, it was on page 10.572.

10             It was stated that the focus of all criminal investigations and

11     criminal prosecutions was the prosecution of Ustasha criminals as is

12     stated here.  That is to say, in other words, the prosecution of Croats,

13     not the equal prosecution of all perpetrators of crimes.  Tell me, to the

14     best of your knowledge, was that correct?

15        A.   That was not correct.  Not nearly so.  First and foremost, we

16     tried the persons who were available to us, and these were Serbs, over 90

17     per cent.

18        Q.   Also, the Prosecutor asked you -- well, among other things, you

19     gave certain answers that had to do with that story about children's

20     fingers, if you remember that?  Could you give us the source of that

21     story.  Of course it was fabricated, this story, but I think you did not

22     manage to say that.  But could you please tell us now what it was that

23     you wanted to say then?

24        A.   I found out what the source of that story was and the basis of

25     the documents that I received from the Prosecution so I came to 00, the

Page 10842

 1     Italian journalist Milena Gabanelli and a Reuters journalist who has a

 2     name that is reminiscent of the former Yugoslavia, but could I not tell

 3     whether he was a Serb or a Croat.

 4             So it was the two of them that actually launched this story and

 5     this Reuters journalist was speaking Serbian, but he had an accent.  I

 6     realised that he did not live in Serbian lands, obviously he was from

 7     abroad.  So these were the sources.

 8             And it caused quite a bit of confusion because I thought that

 9     perhaps foreign journalists lied less than home journalists, Serb and

10     Croat journalists.  I think that the Reuters journalist's last name was

11     Milic, I'm not sure now, and the Italian journalist is Milena Gabanelli.

12     I could find these names somewhere.

13        Q.   Mr. Hadzic, the Prosecutor put to you on several occasions some

14     parts of -- I mean, well, your interview with Mr. Dzuro.  You remember

15     that?

16        A.   I remember that.

17        Q.   Among other things, what he put to you was a particular section

18     that has to do with the victims of Klisa; do you remember that?

19        A.   I remember that.

20        Q.   He indicated that part to you, the video-recording of this

21     interview.  The main question was:  How come you knew the names of the

22     victims from Klisa then?  Do you remember that?

23        A.   Well, yes, I remember, but not very precisely.  But I do remember

24     that we did talk about it.

25        Q.   I'm going to put this video to you.

Page 10843

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation] 4974.08 is the number.  Could we

 2     please take a look from the 29th minute to the first minute, 17 seconds.

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Stringer.

 4             MR. STRINGER:  Just to say, Mr. President, looking at line 6 of

 5     page 71, line 7, I don't believe the question to Mr. Hadzic on

 6     cross-examination was how come you knew the name -- names of the victims

 7     from Klisa then.  We didn't put it to him that he knew the names of the

 8     victims from Klisa.

 9             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honour, it is on page 10.656, lines 8 to 15.

10                           [Defence counsel confer]

11             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Okay.  I'll read it:

12             "So, Mr. Hadzic, you had, in fact, made the connection with

13     Klisa, to the missing people from Klisa that you were being asked about

14     and, at that time, despite what you said in this trial, at that time, you

15     claimed you didn't know anything about it.  Isn't that so?

16             "A.  It's not true.  I didn't connect the fact that those were

17     one and the same people.  I didn't know that the workers from Klisa were

18     employed in Dalj.  I didn't connect these two things.  The distance runs

19     in kilometres.  I didn't realise -- realise it was one and the same

20     company."

21             MR. STRINGER:  Well, I think that just confirms what I just said,

22     Mr. President.  We did not put it to Mr. Hadzic that he knew the names of

23     the victims from Klisa.  What we put it to him is what counsel said which

24     is Mr. Dzuro told him enough about the whole thing for him to be able to

25     put it together whether or not he knew the names of the victims.

Page 10844

 1             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Anyway, I'll put some question to Mr. Hadzic

 2     regarding this part of interview, Your Honours.  Since it was --

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Stringer, was -- was your intervention meant

 4     as an objection?

 5             MR. STRINGER:  Well, there was no record reference.  We have a

 6     record reference but the objection is -- we're noting that it -- what was

 7     just attributed to the Prosecution in what was put to Mr. Hadzic just now

 8     is incorrect.

 9             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Okay.

10             Please proceed, Mr. Zivanovic.

11                           [Video-clip played]

12             "Vladimir Dzuro:  You would like to find one incident that I will

13     read you some -- some statement related to it.  It's the" --

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zivanovic, it would be -- it would be

15     helpful -- it would be helpful if you would apply the same procedure as

16     we'd agreed upon and that the Prosecution applied, namely, that we --

17     when -- when we have a video-clip, we wait for the interpreters to

18     indicate that they are ready to interpret.  Thank you.

19             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We need a very specific

20     references which we have not been given yet.

21             JUDGE DELVOIE:  That's what my impression was.

22             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I just got message that it was translated in

23     English --

24             JUDGE DELVOIE:  What is your information?

25             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  It's in both English and B/C/S because there is


Page 10845

 1     a -- there is a translator present to the interview.

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  So we don't need the interpreters' intervention,

 3     is that what you're saying?

 4             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  I think so.

 5             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Let's see about that.  Okay.

 6                           [Video-clip played]

 7             "Vladimir Dzuro:  And reads so under the command of

 8     Zeljko Raznjatovic seven non-Serb civilians in the village of Klisa."

 9             MR. STRINGER:  I apologise for the intervention.  I believe for

10     this part of it, we went into private session during the

11     cross-examination because Mr. Dzuro is referring to something that

12     relates to a protected witness.  I think he is reading from the statement

13     of a protected witness.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Let's go into private session, please.

15                           [Private session]

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 10846











11 Pages 10846-10847 redacted. Private session.
















Page 10848

 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                           [Open session]

14             THE REGISTRAR:  We're now in open session, Your Honours.

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Sorry for the interruption, Mr. Hadzic.  Please

16     go on.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

18             I remember that I recognised Mr. Grahovac in the street.  We

19     stopped our car so I could greet him.  I saw him on the bridge between

20     Ilok and Backa Palanka on TV, and he a specific cap with a longer front

21     part.  That was how I remembered him.  It was a conversation that took a

22     few minutes but it wasn't any formal conversation between the two of us.

23             MR. ZIVANOVIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   When you mentioned a bridge, do you mean the 25th of May Bridge

25     which is between Backa Palanka and Ilok?


Page 10849

 1        A.   Yes, that's the bridge.  When you talk about Ilok among us who

 2     are from that area that one -- the one that only exists in this a bridge

 3     is implied, it's the bridge between Backa Palanka and Ilok.  It's the

 4     25th of May Bridge, as its name is.

 5        Q.   Did you go to the town of Ilok itself that time because the

 6     bridge is not in the town itself?  Did you enter the town?

 7        A.   No, you didn't understand me.  I recognised Grahovac because I

 8     had seen him on TV when he was on the bridge.  That was a month earlier.

 9     That was on TV.  He was saying he was being interviewed, that wsa why I

10     recognised him.  And I met him in the main street of the town somewhere,

11     I don't know, in front of a house.

12        Q.   I'm sorry.  That was my mistake because I didn't understand you

13     properly.

14        Q.   Did Colonel Grahovac know what your position was at that

15     moment -- or, rather, did you know him from before or was it the moment

16     when practically you had introduced yourself to him?

17        A.   I introduced myself to him and I think that when I told him who I

18     was that then he knew who he was, but we hadn't known each other from

19     before.

20        Q.   Did you talk at all about any further co-operation, the forming

21     of civilian authorities or anything like that?

22        A.   No.  Nor was there any will on his side.  I noticed that he was

23     just talking to me coldly.

24        Q.   The Prosecutor also showed you document P46.  This document

25     relates to -- we'll seen it on the screen now.  It relates to the

Page 10850

 1     disbanding of the Regional Council of Western Slavonia.  I would ask you

 2     a few things about this.

 3             Could you tell us, as briefly as possible, what were the

 4     weaknesses that were noticed, mentioned in item 1 of the document, the

 5     flaws in performance.  What exactly does it have to do with?

 6        A.   The main thing was the so-called Daruvar agreement which they

 7     signed and didn't inform the government or the assembly or the people

 8     they ought to have reported that to, because this was a matter of

 9     principle.  But this is a decision of the assembly.  I just signed it

10     because, as far as I remember, we had a state of war declared at the time

11     and I was supposed to sign a decree until the assembly confirmed it.

12             I'm not sure about the constitutional issues, but this was the

13     28th of April 1993, it was after Maslenica.  It was adopted by the

14     assembly and I didn't decide about it.

15        Q.   Do you remember whether any other bodies in the Republic of

16     Serbian Krajina, for example, the government or some ministries or, I

17     don't know, the assembly, as you said, did any other bodies discuss the

18     Daruvar agreement and assess it?

19        A.   Yes, I know that the government provided its assessment and so

20     did the assembly and probably some other structures also discussed it.  I

21     can't remember.  But the government and the assembly did discuss it and

22     they did provide their opinion.

23        Q.   And another thing.  This decree, was it adopted after all these

24     discussions in the government and some other organs or did you first

25     issue this decree and only then was it discussed before those bodies?

Page 10851

 1        A.   It was adopted eventually.  First the discussions about it took

 2     place.

 3        Q.   I will remind you also of another document.  It's a document that

 4     the Prosecutor also showed you, and it's from Belgrade Television.  It's

 5     4869.3.  It talks about combat and 30 Croats who were taken prisoner in

 6     Bilje and the participation of Milan Martic in these actions.

 7             Tell me if you could more specifically tell us at what time this

 8     was filmed?  What was the date?

 9        A.   I'm not sure, but I think it was in late August or early

10     September.

11        Q.   If you remember, a group of prisoners is shown in this TV report,

12     as well as a meeting at which you were asked whether it was a government

13     session, and a trip to The Hague is also mentioned.

14             What I'd like to know is, in view of the period in question, what

15     position did Ilija Kojic hold at that time; if you remember?

16        A.   Well, he was the defence commander.  That was how we called him

17     at the time.  Yes.  Because the government had not been established yet.

18     He later became the defence minister in the government.

19        Q.   And do you know roughly when this fighting around Bilje took

20     place?

21        A.   Well, now I'm somewhat confused.  I think that it was either on

22     the 3rd of August or the 3rd of September, but it's possible that it was

23     on the 3rd of September.

24             MR. ZIVANOVIC:  Your Honours, I'll need maybe 20 minutes more to

25     conclude my cross-examination [sic], and I would leave it for tomorrow.

Page 10852

 1                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 2             JUDGE DELVOIE:  We will adjourn for the day then and be back

 3     tomorrow at 9.00.

 4             Court adjourned.

 5                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.58 p.m.,

 6                           to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 3rd day of

 7                           September, 2014, at 9.00 a.m.