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
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
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]
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
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."
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
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.
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
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.
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.
7 JUDGE DELVOIE: Okay.
8 MR. ZIVANOVIC: Could we move into private session, please.
9 [Private session]
11 Pages 10776-10778 redacted. Private session.
23 [Open session]
24 THE REGISTRAR: We're now in open session, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE DELVOIE: Thank you.
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
25 Q. Can you remember -- or, rather, do you remember how it worked at
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
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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
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 --
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
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
1 Exhibit 1939.24. And the tab number is 763.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Mr. Zivanovic, could you kindly repeat the
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
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
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?
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,
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?
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
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,
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
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
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
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]
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.
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]
11 Pages 10803-10804 redacted. Private session.
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?
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
25 MR. STRINGER: If I could just -- one concrete example,
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 --
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
24 Dr. Karadzic says: "Friendly persuasion will not do and
25 patriotism is funny commodity if it is not accompanied with something
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
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
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
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
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.
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,
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
2 JUDGE DELVOIE: I --
3 MR. ZIVANOVIC: I would repeat, may we move into private session,
5 JUDGE DELVOIE: Private session, please.
6 [Private session]
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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]
11 Pages 10846-10847 redacted. Private session.
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?
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
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
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
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?
1 A. It was adopted eventually. First the discussions about it took
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
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
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.
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.