Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 6146

 1                           Monday, 6 September 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The witness takes the stand]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Good morning, everyone.

 7             Good morning, Mr. Suljevic.  I thank you again for coming to the

 8     Tribunal from such a long distance, despite your busy schedule.  I

 9     appreciate it very much.

10                           WITNESS:  EKREM SULJEVIC [Resumed]

11                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

12             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I take it you have three hours more to

13     conclude your cross-examination, but I believe you can do that by the end

14     of the second session today.

15             Let's begin -- let's continue your cross-examination.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

17             Good morning to all.

18                           Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]

19        Q.   [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Suljevic.

20        A.   Good morning to all.

21        Q.   Is Sarajevo where it used to be?

22        A.   Sarajevo is always where it used to be.

23        Q.   That is part of a folk song of ours.  That's why I'm putting it

24     in those words, Is Sarajevo where it used to be?

25             So, Mr. Suljevic, you had occasion to see an order of

Page 6147

 1     General Milosevic related to operations against Hrasnica, and in one

 2     statement, you said that you were astonished by it, or words to that

 3     effect.  Tell me, why was it that you were astonished?  And, please,

 4     could you keep it as brief as possible?

 5        A.   As far as I can remember, the order was to select a target, a

 6     civilian target, in such a way so as to cause the largest number of

 7     casualties once the projectile is activated.

 8        Q.   Well, the problem is in one single word.  It doesn't say

 9     "civilian target" anywhere, it says "select a target."  Are you trying to

10     say that in Hrasnica there weren't any legitimate targets anywhere?

11        A.   I don't know what was a legitimate target for you in Hrasnica,

12     and I don't know where the lines were, I don't know where the military

13     commands were, and so on and so forth.  But just like Hrasnica, Sarajevo

14     was a target throughout the war.  That is to say, all of us who were

15     there were casualties throughout the time.  We were the victims of these

16     attacks coming from the hills.

17        Q.   Excellent.  Let us shed more light on this, one thing at a time.

18             Can we have 1D -- actually, I think it's 65 ter 10693.  That's

19     the Serbian version, 10693.

20             So could you please read this?  It's not too long.  Could you

21     please read the first paragraph in its entirety?  We have it in English

22     and in Serbian.

23             Could we please have both versions here for the interpreters.

24             Can you please have a look at this first paragraph:  "It's

25     already been three days ..."

Page 6148

 1        A.   Yes.

 2        Q.   "It's already been three days that the Muslim forces have been

 3     attacking the positions of the --"

 4        A.   "... Sarajevo Light Infantry Brigade."

 5        Q.   All right.

 6        A.   "And the attacks are particularly pronounced in the sector of the

 7     Famos factory.  Several of ours soldiers and a large number of civilians

 8     have been wounded."

 9        Q.   The next paragraph, please.

10        A.   "In order to thwart the enemy and give them a warning so they are

11     forced to accept the truce, I hereby order:

12             "The Ilidza Brigade will immediately prepare a launcher with an

13     aerial bomb and transport the bomb for launching.

14             "The most profitable target must be selected in Hrasnica or

15     Sokolovic colony, where the greatest casualties and material damage would

16     be inflicted.

17             "Inform me personally of the readiness for implementation of this

18     task."

19        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Suljevic.  Let us please focus on the first

20     paragraph:

21             "As for General Milosevic and his unit in Famos factory," that

22     was held by the Serbs.  Are the civilians from Hrasnica a threat to them

23     or the Muslim forces, as is written here?

24        A.   I just know that one of these air-bombs fell near my brother's

25     house.  My brother lives in Sokolovic Kolonija, and there weren't any

Page 6149

 1     targets there.

 2        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, we'll get to that.  First of all, let us deal with

 3     this order.  Can we see here that as for General Milosevic's forces and

 4     positions, who is the threat, civilians or the Muslim forces?  And it's

 5     during a cease-fire, at that; right?  That is clearly stated here.  Isn't

 6     that right?  Don't the first two paragraphs show that the Muslim forces

 7     were threatening the lines in positions of the Army of Republika Srpska,

 8     for which General Milosevic is responsible, during the cease-fire, and it

 9     was from Hrasnica towards the Famos factory the most; right?

10        A.   It says here:  "To thwart the enemy and give them a warning so

11     that they are forced to accept this truce, I hereby," and so on and so

12     forth, as I read it out previously.

13        Q.   All right.  Let us now go to the one-and-only paragraph of the

14     order, itself.  Does it say "civilians" at any point, or "civilian

15     targets"?

16        A.   It doesn't say "military targets" either, as far as I can see.

17     It says:

18             "In Hrasnica or Sokolovic Kolonija, select the most profitable

19     target."

20             We can only guess what the most profitable target may be, but

21     it's the civilian areas that were hit by the air-bomb.

22        Q.   Were you in the army, Mr. Suljevic?

23        A.   I did my service in the former JNA in 1983.

24        Q.   Did you get a rank?

25        A.   No, no.  Private first class, but that's not much, is it?

Page 6150

 1        Q.   "Profitable target," what does that mean to any military person?

 2     Why would "profitable target" mean civilians when it's the army that is

 3     carrying out the attack?

 4        A.   I said a moment ago that all of Sarajevo was a target throughout

 5     the war, and all of Sarajevo was shelled intensively.  If this were

 6     somewhere at the front-line where there were no civilians, perhaps I

 7     might have thought differently.  But in town, where we were all

 8     casualties and victims, at home, at the market, at work -- as we went to

 9     the market, or to work, and back home.  A house was hit with a projectile

10     where I lived.  A tram was hit --

11        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, let us leave that aside now.  But this is what

12     these proceedings are all about, whether Sarajevo was a helpless victim

13     of a Serb Army or was it a camp full of legitimate targets.  Now I'm

14     asking you about Hrasnica.  Is it legitimate to carry out a

15     counter-attack when, during the cease-fire, the Muslim Army from Hrasnica

16     is, nevertheless, carrying out attacks?  You did your service in the

17     military.  You should know whether this is legitimate.

18        A.   Perhaps it is legitimate if only military targets are attacked.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Suljevic, just to clarify one thing, do you know

21     where the Famos factory was?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I do, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Was it or is it in the Hrasnica area?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's the area of the municipality

25     of Hrasnica, and it's separate from the civilian area.  But it is in the

Page 6151

 1     area of the Hrasnica municipality.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Suljevic.

 3             Mr. Karadzic.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Is it correct that the line of separation went between the Famos

 6     factory and the rest of Hrasnica?

 7        A.   I don't know where the line was exactly, but it was somewhere

 8     around there.  Now, was it all of Famos that was on one side or not, I'm

 9     not sure.  But if the line did not go through Famos, then it went right

10     by the factory, itself, as far as I know.  And I don't really know

11     because I was never there during the war.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Let us focus on the last sentence now, please.  What

13     was it that General Milosevic ordered?  Did he order fire or did he order

14     readiness for the implementation of this task, and that he should be

15     informed personally?

16        A.   As we have read it out already, that all preparations should be

17     carried out, that a target should be selected, and that

18     Commander Milosevic should be informed about all of that personally.

19        Q.   Thank you.  However, on that day and on that occasion, was that

20     bomb actually fired?

21        A.   I don't know.

22        Q.   Thank you.  Do you know what existed in Hrasnica as a military

23     structure, as installations, positions, et cetera?

24        A.   I don't know.  I know that in Hrasnica, there was a unit of the

25     BH Army.  Now, I can't remember what its exact name was.  Now, was it the

Page 6152

 1     4th Company or Brigade, or -- I don't know what its name was.  But I

 2     don't know about the details, anyway.  A few times during the war, I did

 3     go there because my family, that is to say, my parents and my brother and

 4     sister are there, and a few times I just went to see them.  But I didn't

 5     go towards the lines, and I don't know where things were, specifically.

 6        Q.   Do you which heavy weaponry there was in Hrasnica?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   Do you know which weapons and artillery pieces were on Igman,

 9     right above Hrasnica?  Rather, is Igman to the south of Hrasnica, right

10     above Hrasnica, and is Hrasnica on the slopes where Igman rolls into the

11     fields?

12        A.   It's true that Hrasnica is at the foot of Mount Igman.  Now, I

13     really don't know what it was that the Army of BH had either in Igman or

14     elsewhere.  I don't know.  I mean, from the media, what I know to this

15     day is what I found out just that way, through the media.  I didn't know

16     anything else.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

18             Can we now please ask for 1D02358 [as interpreted].  Could we

19     have that in e-court, 1D20358, please.

20             Could we now have ERN number 03315973-03319574.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, while we're waiting for that, could you please have

23     a look at this and tell us whether these are documents coming from your

24     service?  Are they the ones that are referred to in these tables?

25        A.   I think so.  Judging by the numbers, I think these are documents

Page 6153

 1     from our service.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we admit that previous

 3     document, General Milosevic's order, the one that we discussed?  I don't

 4     know whether it's been admitted already.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that document is already in

 6     evidence as Exhibit P120.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you very much.

 8             Mr. Suljevic, could you read the title of this document?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "An Overview of a Part of

10     Accounting Records in Sarajevo."

11             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  Could the witness please

12     indicate where he's reading from.

13             JUDGE KWON:  He's reading from the document we are seeing at this

14     moment.

15             Yes, Mr. Tieger.

16             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, Your Honour.

17             Just for clarification purposes, and perhaps it's not necessary,

18     but the document, itself, I believe, is a document prepared by the

19     Defence.  I didn't know if the Court's call for --

20             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, that's why I asked him to read it out.  And he

21     said that it's from his service, and I want that part to be clarified.

22     But the title in e-court says it's a -- it says it's a review of

23     Mr. Karadzic's Sarajevo reports.

24             So if you could tell us what this document is about.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I said that this was from the

Page 6154

 1     service, I meant that the documents that are listed here under these

 2     numbers.  But this particular document is not from our service, because

 3     I've never seen it before, this document I see on the screen.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   If I may help, Mr. Suljevic, do you agree that this is an

 6     overview of documents emanating from your service?

 7        A.   Well, let me look at the numbers.  02/4-233, et cetera, yes,

 8     those are registration numbers from our service.

 9        Q.   Thank you.  Please focus your attention on the three columns on

10     the right-hand side.  It reads the registration number of the document,

11     the date of entering the document in the log-book, and regularity of the

12     entry.  How was it possible that this one document has a smaller number

13     than the previous one, but it comes after it?  I mean, line 4 as compared

14     to line 3, where we see the registration numbers.  If we look at line 3,

15     the date is 19 December 1994, and the one below is 5 June 1995, and yet

16     it has a smaller number than the previous one.

17        A.   I don't see the problem.  Numbers start from 1 every year, so for

18     every year you start from 1.  And depending on the number of documents

19     received, will you get as far as you'll get, because in line 3 the

20     document is from the previous year, and in line 4 it's from the following

21     year.  I don't see a problem with that.

22        Q.   All right.  But still there is a muddle with these numbers.

23     There's number 523, dated 10 July, on that line, and on the 10th line

24     there's 531 from 3 July.  How do you explain that?

25        A.   Well, it's easy to explain.  These are two entries that were

Page 6155

 1     completed in July, one on the 3rd and one on the 10th.  They were

 2     received under these numbers stated here.  We don't see the date of

 3     reception, but each entry is processed.  And if two staff work on two

 4     files, two entries, then one may do the work sooner than the other.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see the following page of

 6     this document.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   Look at the boxes marked in red.  All these dates are jumbled up.

 9     And what does this number 233 stand for, anyway?  Because we see it in

10     all years, this number 233.  What does it mean?

11        A.   These are registration numbers in our office work.  I'm not sure.

12     "02/4" stands for the organisational unit, and "233" is some sort of

13     classification.  I'm not exactly sure what.  But this is all about these

14     matters, and that's why all are marked "233."

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Can we see the following page,

16     please.

17        Q.   Take a look, and we can move on to page 4 and 5.  Is it the same

18     here?

19        A.   It's the same, yes.  There's no difference.  These are

20     registration numbers.

21        Q.   But, Mr. Suljevic, this doesn't say the date of completion, but

22     the date of the entry of the document, and it's such a muddle that your

23     explanation can't really account for it, because we see here "Date of

24     Entry."  On this page, only three fit in some sort of chronological

25     order.

Page 6156

 1             Let us see page 4.  See, it's the same here.  And let's see

 2     page 5 also, please.

 3        A.   Yes, but this document was not made by the same service that

 4     received and entered these documents, these files.  I think that these

 5     are registration numbers, but the column that reads "Date of Entry of the

 6     Document in the Log-book," I think that these are actually the dates when

 7     the files were processed.

 8        Q.   Yes, but -- that's what you think, but this was copied from the

 9     very documents, and it says when it was entered.  So the first one was

10     entered on the 22nd of September, 1995, under number 749, and number 751

11     was entered on the 13th of September.  Well, all right.  I'm satisfied

12     with your explanation.

13             I seek to tender this document.

14             JUDGE KWON:  I wonder whether this is a proper document to be

15     exhibited.

16             Mr. Gaynor, do you have any observations?

17             MR. GAYNOR:  Well, yes.  I quite agree.

18             First of all, it has been created by a member of the Defence

19     team.  As we've said before in respect of documents of this nature, we

20     believe it would be more appropriate for them to be tendered through a

21     Defence witness, who can then be cross-examined on the underlying data

22     used to create the document in question.

23             I'd also like to point out that this was made available to us

24     this morning, and the cross-examination of this witness began on the 22nd

25     of July, and we have not been provided with an English translation.  But

Page 6157

 1     we'll leave it in the Court's discretion as to whether to admit it.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  You didn't have time to check whether all these

 3     numbers were correctly referenced?

 4             MR. GAYNOR:  That's correct.  We received it about half an hour

 5     before court started.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If I may assist.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, you can use this as a kind of

 8     aide-memoir, but this is not the opportunity to tender this as a proper

 9     exhibit at this moment.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, I could have

11     displayed all these documents and pointed out these discrepancies that

12     way, but I don't have enough time.  But I can call up any of these

13     documents at random, so anyone may pick one and we can take a look at it.

14     This is totally unacceptable, the way they do business there.  It may be

15     propaganda purposes, for war propaganda.  But in criminal law, such

16     jumbled dates really are intolerable.

17             JUDGE KWON:  You'll have another opportunity to tender this as an

18     exhibit.  We'll do without it at this moment.

19             Let's move on, Mr. Karadzic.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

21             Could we please see 1D2194.

22             I apologise.  This was taken out of the indictment, so if there's

23     enough time left, we'll deal with this incident, because it doesn't

24     feature in the latest version of the indictment anymore.  So we have to

25     be economical and focus on what is in the indictment first.

Page 6158

 1             Could we please see it.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Do you remember the incident in Mis Irbina, Mr. Suljevic?

 4        A.   I don't know what exactly you're referring to.

 5        Q.   The incident that happened on the 17th of June, 1995.  I will

 6     make a reference to the table, but I believe there was only one on the

 7     17th of June, 1995.

 8        A.   Without a report, I really cannot remember.  There were many

 9     incidents on many dates.  I don't remember everything.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see ERN 0213-5485, please.

11     Perhaps this can assist:  1D02342, if we could see that.  Possibly all

12     this is already admitted as a P exhibit.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] All right.

14        Q.   Do you remember this map, Mr. Suljevic?  Do you remember this

15     report, Mr. Suljevic?

16        A.   Just let me look at it.

17             Could I please see the second page, too.  It seems familiar, but

18     just in case, I'd like to be sure.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Let us see the second page, please.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, this report was drafted by

21     Predrag Kurtes, as we can see here, so I was not involved in writing this

22     report.

23        Q.   But it's a report from your service?

24        A.   No, this is a report from the CSB.  Predrag Kurtes was at the

25     CSB, I think.  Our services' reports were very different.  I remember

Page 6159

 1     this event, and we worked on it, but this wasn't our report.

 2        Q.   Did you work on this incident?  Were you a team member, and if

 3     so, your name would be in first place?

 4        A.   I did work on this event.  I don't know about my name being in

 5     first place, but it doesn't matter.  It is clear who conducted the

 6     on-site investigation.  I was merely a team member.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  In this event, which happened on 17 June, whereas the

 8     report was written on the 1st of July, one boy was killed and six more

 9     persons were injured.  Out of six injured persons, five are children;

10     correct?

11        A.   Correct.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please see the previous

13     document, where the map was.  The previous document before this one, it

14     was a map.  Yes.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, is this a map where we see the Mis Irbina Street in

17     the center?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Who was Mis Irbi [phoen] after whom this street was named?

20        A.   I'm not sure.  I couldn't really say exactly, although I know it.

21        Q.   Do you know that Mis Irbi was a great British humanitarian worker

22     who was with the Serbian Army throughout the First World War?

23        A.   Yeah, I guess.

24        Q.   What's the name of that street today?

25        A.   I believe it still has the same name.

Page 6160

 1             JUDGE KWON:  What is the relevance of these lines of questions?

 2     What is your question, Mr. Karadzic?  You said that this incident had

 3     been taken out of the indictment, and you're coming back to this matter

 4     again.  Move on to your -- what is your question?

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Dositejeva Street was renamed, or,

 6     rather, was taken out, but these very things that were taken out of the

 7     indictment strengthen the position of the Defence, and we must deal with

 8     them because these are examples of what should not have been done.  And

 9     it all goes to show how the Serbian side was unjustly accused, and I

10     cannot fail to mention this since one of my generals has been convicted

11     already.  And the relevance, Your Honours, is that mostly all streets in

12     Sarajevo were renamed, to the detriment of cohabitation and coexistence.

13     Serbian and Croatian personalities were all -- their names were all

14     removed.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have the schedule number of this incident you

16     are going to refer to, which allegedly took place on 17th of June?

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the map has the number down

18     here, and it's 1D --

19             JUDGE KWON:  I mean the schedule number of the indictment.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We'll see in the table.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor, do you have --

22             MR. GAYNOR:  There might be some confusion.  There was an

23     incident on the 16th of June, 1995, at Dositejeva Street which has not

24     been removed from the indictment.  That's incident number 14 in

25     Schedule G.

Page 6161

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  So that was the reason why I asked the

 2     question.  I don't see any incident which allegedly took place on the

 3     17th of June.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 5             Could we then now see 65 ter 09808.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, this document has been admitted as

 7     Exhibit P1327.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

10        Q.   Are you familiar with this document, Mr. Suljevic?

11        A.   Yes.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Suljevic, would you like to see the last page of

13     this document, where your signature appears?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We can have a look at it,

15     Your Honours.  But judging by the introduction, I remember this document

16     and this incident as well.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  Let's continue, Mr. Karadzic.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19        Q.   This was the incident in Dositejeva Street.  Can you just briefly

20     tell us what happened on this occasion?

21        A.   In this incident, the Pomology Institute was hit by a modified

22     aerial bomb, which exploded there.

23        Q.   What was your role in this examination?

24        A.   I was at the site in the status of an employee of the

25     Counter-Sabotage Department.  We were collecting what remained after the

Page 6162

 1     explosion.  And then after on, I was involved in the expert analysis of

 2     the traces of the explosion.

 3        Q.   What was the goal of this investigation?  What were you supposed

 4     to establish?

 5        A.   Just like in any other on-site investigation, we acted on the

 6     orders of the judge who was in charge of the on-site investigation.

 7        Q.   Was that a ballistic expert analysis or did you focus only on the

 8     consequences of the explosion, the damage and so on?

 9        A.   Well, we from the KDZ, in general, did not deal with assessing

10     the damage.  That was not our main goal.  Our goal was to analyse the

11     crater, if we can call it that, because in this case the shell hit a

12     wall, and also collecting traces.  I'm not sure whether, in this specific

13     instance, we also tried to establish the direction from which the

14     projectile flew.  We can only see that if I read through the entire

15     document, because I cannot say this off the top of my head.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please provide this document

17     to Mr. Suljevic?  I have it here, so I can give him a hard copy, or

18     perhaps we can move on to the next page.

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's sufficient if I just have a

20     look at this document.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If you agree, I can provide a hard

22     copy of this document to the witness, and we might show up 1D02194.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  Unless the Prosecution opposes, I would

24     like the witness to have the hard copy of this document, and we move on

25     to another document.

Page 6163

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  Very well, Your Honour.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please see 1D02194.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Parts of which motor did you find there?  Was it Plamen?

 5        A.   We found three rocket projectiles of the Grad type, and calibre

 6     of 122 millimetres.  And at the site, we also found the metal part of

 7     irregular shape, with the markings which you mentioned, and that's what's

 8     stated in the report.

 9        Q.   It's Plamen, the name of the motor is Plamen, which means

10     "flame"; is that correct?

11        A.   Three rocket projectiles of the Grad type were found, and one

12     metal part, which is mentioned in the report, most probably was not part

13     of the device that exploded.  And I can explain that, in a way, because

14     people in Sarajevo used to collect these parts as souvenirs.  Even

15     journalists did that, and I don't know whoever else.  Quite often, people

16     would collect the parts which they found someplace, and they would keep

17     them as mementos or souvenirs of a kind.  And it says here that this part

18     most probably was not part of the device that fell.

19        Q.   Let us try to be more specific.  Who conducted the on-site

20     investigation and who collected the fragments?

21        A.   I participated in the work of the team which collected the

22     traces.

23        Q.   When did that take place; how long after the explosion?

24        A.   I don't know exactly how long after the explosion, but probably

25     you can see from the CSB report when it took place.  I just know that I

Page 6164

 1     was not at the official premises.  I was at home, as far as I can

 2     remember this incident, and they called me to come there.  I thought

 3     it -- I think it was one of the days of a weekend and that I came to the

 4     on-site investigation from my home.  But how long after the explosion it

 5     was, I couldn't specifically say, because I cannot remember such details.

 6        Q.   What did you find there?  Was the site properly secured for the

 7     forensic examination?

 8        A.   I think it was.

 9        Q.   Who did you find at the site?  What did you find there when you

10     got there?

11        A.   Well, you couldn't find anyone at such sites.  When shelling was

12     in progress, you couldn't find anyone there who was not there because of

13     their duty.  I don't have the report here, which would show whom we found

14     there and whom was at the site.  And from this point in time, I cannot

15     remember every incident and every on-site investigation and who was

16     involved, because the personnel in teams changed.  It was not always the

17     same people, always the same investigating judge and so on.  So from this

18     point in time, I cannot remember such details without reviewing certain

19     documents.

20        Q.   Well, this was a major incident, wasn't it?  What is the name of

21     the street now?  Can you please mark on this map Dositejeva Street?

22        A.   I can mark the street, but whether it has retained the name or

23     not, I really wouldn't know.

24        Q.   Am I right that it is the street which is the continuation of

25     Djuro Djakovic Street, that is to say, Kralja Tomislava, the name of

Page 6165

 1     which was changed and it's now called Kosevo; is that correct?

 2        A.   I will mark approximately where I believe that the street is.

 3     It's not the street up there you mentioned.  Dositejeva Street is, I

 4     believe, here [marks].  I think there or thereabouts is

 5     Dositejeva Street.

 6        Q.   All right.  So we see that the BiH Railway Company is there, so

 7     is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Presidency of Bosnia and

 8     Herzegovina?

 9        A.   In the vicinity, yes.

10        Q.   And do you know where the command of the helicopter unit on

11     Dositejeva Street was?

12        A.   I don't even know that there was a helicopter squadron, to be

13     honest, so I couldn't say.

14        Q.   The explosion was at 4A, and the command of the squadron was at

15     4.  That's the neighbouring building; correct?

16        A.   I don't know.  I know where the explosion occurred, but where the

17     command was situated, I wouldn't know.

18        Q.   All right, thank you.  How did you enter the street?  From which

19     end of the street did you come to the site?

20        A.   I really don't know.  I think you can reach the site from four

21     sides; that is to say, from two sides of the street once you enter the

22     street.  And I don't remember how I entered the street.

23        Q.   And where did you live?

24        A.   I lived in Cengic Vila.

25        Q.   You came by car, didn't you?

Page 6166

 1        A.   I don't know.  I cannot remember whether I came on foot or

 2     whether someone came to pick me up.  I really don't remember such

 3     details.  I did not record that, I did not keep a diary, so I cannot

 4     answer such questions.  It's possible that I got there by car.  I really

 5     don't know how important that is in this context.

 6        Q.   Please allow for the possibility that it's very important for the

 7     Defence.  Cengic Vila is about four kilometres away from this place, is

 8     that correct, if not more?

 9        A.   It's possible, because from work we usually needed 50 to 60

10     minutes to arrive, though sometimes we would need up to three hours due

11     to shelling.  So, more or less, it was like that.

12        Q.   So we have to assume that you did not come to the on-site

13     investigation, this incident, on foot, but, rather, by car; is that

14     correct?

15        A.   I'm not certain how I got there, so I wouldn't --

16        Q.   Well, and at what time did the explosion occur?

17        A.   As one can see from the report, the projectile hit at about

18     11.05 a.m.

19        Q.   And when did you arrive there?

20        A.   Well, I've told you.  I don't know when I got there, but the

21     on-site investigation was conducted on that same day.

22        Q.   Ah-hah.  And now please tell us, once you got there, what did you

23     find there?  Did anyone else come to the site before you?  I'm not

24     talking about the public, about people, but someone was doing something

25     there.  Who did you find on the spot when you got there?

Page 6167

 1        A.   I think I have answered that question.  I cannot remember all the

 2     people who were members of the on-site investigation team, or whom I

 3     found on the spot, or who arrived there after me.

 4        Q.   But you were certainly involved in the on-site investigation;

 5     correct?

 6        A.   Yes.

 7        Q.   And you collected the fragments of the projectile which were

 8     found after the explosion; correct?

 9        A.   Yes, I was involved in collecting the traces.  And I remember

10     that there was another colleague of mine there who was a member of the

11     Counter Sabotage Protection from my department within the CSB.

12        Q.   Thank you.  Can you please mark, with numbers, the BiH Railway

13     Company with number 1, and the Presidency with number 2, and the Ministry

14     of the Foreign Affairs with number 3?

15        A.   Yes, it's written here on the map.  You can see the BH Railway

16     Company, number 1.  [Marks].  Here it is.

17        Q.   And the Presidency?

18        A.   Here's the Presidency.  [Marks]

19        Q.   And the Ministry of the Foreign Affairs?

20        A.   [Marks]

21             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Suljevic.  It was because we couldn't

22     read in the Bosnian.  But did they exist at the time, i.e., in 1995, at

23     the same place?

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours, they existed

25     there at the time, and they are still there now.

Page 6168

 1             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 2        Q.   Can you please write the date and your signature or your

 3     initials.

 4             And I would tender this document into evidence.

 5        A.   [Marks]

 6        Q.   What you encircled here, is that the site of the explosion?  So

 7     that we can be a bit more specific, can you please put number 4 there.

 8     That's 4A.  I think the name of the street is Branislav Djurdjev now, and

 9     it used to be Dositejeva Street; correct?

10             Can we please return to the screen what Mr. Suljevic signed so

11     that he can add number 4 to the exact site where the explosion occurred?

12        A.   Yes, I think --

13             JUDGE KWON:  It won't be necessary, because well aware of the

14     marking where it is.  And then with the comments of the witness, another

15     marking of the number won't be necessary.

16             We'll admit it as a Defence exhibit.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D552, Your Honours.

18             JUDGE KWON:  And we can move on, Mr. Karadzic.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Do you agree, Mr. Suljevic -- actually, can we just keep the map

21     a little longer?

22             Is the regional SUP there as well?  That's right, isn't it?

23        A.   That's right.  The CSB is there.  But just a small correction.

24     I think that the street is a bit to the right, if I can mark it with the

25     red marker.  Perhaps I did not place Dositejeva correctly.  I think it

Page 6169

 1     was towards the left a bit more, towards the cinema called Dubrovnik

 2     before the war.

 3        Q.   Do we agree that Dositejeva is moving from north to south, not

 4     the other way around?

 5        A.   [Marks].  The Institute of Pomology, or whatever it was called,

 6     is there as I marked it.  Now, as for Dositejeva, whether that runs from

 7     north to south, I really don't know.  I mean, it's no problem to check

 8     that on maps that were contemporaneous.

 9        Q.   Did you live in Sarajevo for a long time?

10        A.   Yes.

11        Q.   Doesn't Dositejeva link Marsal Tita and Mis Irbina?

12        A.   I don't know exactly.  I don't know where it started and where it

13     ended; Dositejeva Street, that is.

14        Q.   Do you agree that within this complex that you marked just now,

15     there are no residential buildings?  This is a bank, the Dubrovnik

16     Cinema, then the old Austrian building of the railways, then the Foreign

17     Ministry, the Regional Centre of Security?

18        A.   And then after the CSB, there is a series of residential

19     buildings towards Mis Irbina and that entire area.

20        Q.   What you marked with red, there is no residential building there;

21     right?

22        A.   I don't know whether there are any residential areas there.  I

23     really don't know.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

25             Let's use the same number so that we know exactly where the site

Page 6170

 1     of the explosion was.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  I wonder whether we can keep this new map and admit

 3     it, keep it as D552.  So we replace the previous D552 with this one.

 4     Thank you.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The CSB is there on the corner of

 6     Mis Irbina and August Cerares.  I guess August Cerares did something

 7     wrong, too, so he lost his street as well.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 9        Q.   It's called Musala now; right?

10        A.   The CSB is now in the street called La Benevolencije.  I really

11     have no idea what it was called before the war.  The CSB is nearby, and

12     that's that street.

13        Q.   La Benevolencije, yes, and it used to be Augusta Cerares.  Right.

14     Now, do you recall that during the NATO bombing of Serbia, NATO hit

15     practically all the government buildings of Serbia at the time?

16             JUDGE KWON:  Irrelevant.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right, I'll withdraw it.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   How was it that you determined the direction from which this

20     modified aerial bomb, as the reports call it, came?

21        A.   In this case, what was taken into account was the position of the

22     remnants of the rocket motors that remained in the wall at the site of

23     the explosion.  The wall had been hit from the northern side.  The

24     building was hit on its northern side, rather, so that's the side that

25     was affected.

Page 6171

 1        Q.   Do we have a photograph?  Did you take any photographs there?

 2        A.   I didn't take any photographs.  There was a member of the team

 3     whose task that was, and I think that the site was photographed.

 4        Q.   Do you have that photograph?  Do we have that photograph?

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Just a question for the Registry, why we lost the

 6     red markings.

 7                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 8             JUDGE KWON:  We'll bring up the new marking -- D552 with the red

 9     marking.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] While we're waiting for all of

11     that:

12        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, did you determine the angle of decent of that

13     projectile?  You know which side of the building was affected.  However,

14     did you determine the angle of decent of the projectile?

15        A.   We did not determine the angle of decent of the projectile at

16     all.

17        Q.   Did you need that?  What were you able to conclude on that basis,

18     in view of the fact that you did not have the angle of descent?

19        A.   We could conclude what the approximate direction was from which

20     the projectile had come.  As far as aerial bombs are concerned, modified

21     aerial bombs that fell on the city, well, we didn't have any tables and

22     we didn't have the resources.  Even if we wanted to, we could not

23     determine the angle of descent.  I don't think there would have been any

24     point in doing that in the case of these modified aerial bombs that were

25     rocket-propelled.

Page 6172

 1        Q.   Did you know what the mass of the projectile was or of the

 2     warhead?  How heavy was it?

 3        A.   No, in this case we did not actually establish which aerial bomb

 4     that was.  We couldn't do that.  So the report says that it is most

 5     probably an aerial bomb, so this modified aerial bomb was probably the

 6     mechanism that was involved.

 7        Q.   What bomb could this have been, according to your knowledge?

 8        A.   I can just guess now.  What we established at the time on the

 9     spot is what is recorded in our reports.  Was it -- if it were possible

10     to determine it then, it would have been in our reports.

11        Q.   So what was possible, 100 kilograms, 250 kilograms; right?

12        A.   100 kilograms and 250 kilograms.  We saw that in those orders

13     where modified aerial bombs were referred to, and launchers as well.

14        Q.   Thank you.  Now, tell us, you established the approximate

15     location from which the projectile had been fired; right?

16        A.   We did not establish the approximate location.  We established

17     the direction, and that's what the report says, that the direction

18     coincides with the direction in which the enemy positions are in

19     Pionirska Dolina.

20        Q.   I see.  So it was only Serb positions in Pionirska Dolina?

21     Weren't there Muslim positions only 50 metres away from them?

22        A.   The separation lines were somewhere in Pionirska Dolina.  I don't

23     know.  I don't know what you're getting at, what it is you want to define

24     specifically.

25        Q.   We want to specify how it was that you determined the distance.

Page 6173

 1     You don't know the angle of descent, you don't know so many other

 2     factors, and you determined the actual distance involved.  In that area,

 3     Pionirska Dolina, towards the north, it goes all the way to Tuzla,

 4     doesn't it?

 5        A.   We did not establish the distance.  We said that this direction

 6     from which the projectile came coincides with the direction of enemy

 7     positions in the broader area of Pionirska Dolina.  It coincides with

 8     that, with that locality.  It doesn't say what the distance was.  It

 9     wasn't determined, it wasn't measured.  And we know where state -- how

10     big it was.

11        Q.   When you say "Pionirska Dolina," you're not saying only what the

12     direction is, but you're saying what the distance is, too; right?  Why

13     not between Pionirska Dolina and the actual site, along the same axis,

14     couldn't it have been fired from somewhere else?

15        A.   The direction coincides with that locality and from the site

16     where the projectile fell, so, I mean, that's the trajectory that the

17     projectile took.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm afraid that the transcript does

19     not reflect that they did not establish the mass of the bomb and so on.

20     This is LiveNote, so I hope that my fast speech will be corrected during

21     the night.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   So all these conclusions, do they coincide with what you had

24     established?  From Pionirska Dolina, did anyone else determine anything

25     else?

Page 6174

 1        A.   I don't know whether anyone else carried out investigations,

 2     besides us.  But I say, once again, that it says here that the direction

 3     of firing coincides with that locality where enemy positions were in the

 4     broader area of Pionirska Dolina.  There is no specific reference to

 5     where it had been fired from, but I'm sure that it's from that locality

 6     that it was fired.

 7        Q.   How can you be certain of that?

 8        A.   Well, that is confirmed by the orders that we saw during the

 9     previous two days of my testimony, where there is constant repetition of

10     launchers being made and these modified aerial bombs being made.  I don't

11     know of the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina having a single one of those, at

12     least within the Sarajevo theatre of operations.  As for these modified

13     aerial bombs, I first saw them inactivated or, rather, ready during

14     reintegration at Zeljezara Ilijas, a photograph, rather, because our

15     teams went to different locations after the Dayton Agreement had been

16     signed.  And within reintegration, we were carrying out preparations,

17     and, if necessary, we were removing mines, explosive devices, and the

18     like, so that the inhabitants could return to their homes safely.

19             I saw these modified air bombs on the photographs that were in

20     Zeljezara Ilijas.  There were metal barrels, 200-litres metal barrels

21     full of explosive, and tyres from freight vehicles had been mounted on

22     them.  They were used in order to get these mechanisms down from the

23     hills and activated somewhere in town.

24        Q.   So the Serbs did that.  They would fill a barrel with explosive

25     and then let it roll downhill; right?

Page 6175

 1        A.   Well, this is what was found in Zeljezara Ilijas that throughout

 2     the war was under the control of the Army of Republika Srpska.

 3        Q.   Was it a possibility that they were captured from the Muslim

 4     Army, and do you know that the Muslim Army used that from Igman when

 5     attacking Serb houses?  We'll find a document to that effect here.  Are

 6     you aware of that?

 7        A.   I'm not aware of that, but I know that in Sarajevo there were

 8     cases that such things had exploded somewhere above Bistrik, and the Army

 9     of Bosnia-Herzegovina certainly couldn't have rolled them uphill.

10        Q.   Although they had sophisticated artillery, the Serbs used these

11     barrels; right?

12        A.   If you are asking for my opinion --

13        Q.   Thank you.  Are you trying to say that the Muslim Army in

14     Sarajevo had no modified aerial bombs?  Just yes or no, that's easy.

15        A.   I think the answer is no.

16        Q.   Thank you.  What does this mean, "100 kilograms and 250

17     kilograms"?

18        A.   If you're referring to aerial bombs, I think it is the total mass

19     of the bomb.

20        Q.   What is the weight of the explosive therein?

21        A.   I really don't know exactly what the mass of the explosive is

22     there, but, say, 30 to 40 per cent.  However, there is data in

23     literature.  I cannot say now exactly.  I think that an air-bomb of 250

24     kilograms has about 100 kilograms of explosive, perhaps a bit less.  But,

25     tentatively, say it's about 100 kilograms.

Page 6176

 1        Q.   100 kilograms of TNT, what kind of damage does that inflict on

 2     buildings or wherever it may fall, Mr. Suljevic?

 3        A.   Well, it depends on the place where it falls.  Every situation is

 4     different.  It depends on what the building had been made of, where the

 5     projectile exploded.  There are many factors involved, so it is hard to

 6     give a specific answer to your question.

 7        Q.   Where did this one explode, on which wall, and what was the

 8     damage inflicted?

 9        A.   What kind of damage it inflicted you can see on the photo

10     documentation.  I think that the wall was a brick wall.  I don't know.  I

11     cannot remember now.  But we can only see that in the photographs.

12        Q.   But you do recall, on the spot, what was it, what was the debris?

13     Was it bricks or was it reinforced concrete?  Wasn't that an old Austrian

14     building?

15        A.   It certainly wasn't reinforced concrete, but I cannot remember

16     from this time distance.  That was not the only on-site investigation

17     that I carried out during the war.  Perhaps I would not remember

18     anything, given the time that has elapsed.

19        Q.   Let us be serious and precise, Mr. Suljevic.  100 kilograms of

20     TNT falls on a building that was made of bricks.  What kind of damage is

21     inflicted?  What happens when a 100 -- when a bomb of 100 kilograms of

22     TNT falls on that building?  What was it that you found there once you

23     came?

24        A.   Again, you are saying that this air-bomb is of 250 kilograms,

25     containing 100 kilograms of explosive, but the report does not show that

Page 6177

 1     at all, that it was 250 kilograms.  It was either 100 kilograms or 250.

 2     The report does not say specifically.  However, the destruction there was

 3     vast, and you can see that in the photo documentation.

 4        Q.   Give us this photo documentation.

 5             Can the OTP give us this photo documentation?

 6             The transcript does not reflect that you could not establish

 7     which bomb it was.  However, you do agree that there are no aerial bombs

 8     that are lighter than 100 kilograms; right?

 9        A.   I don't think that there are any that are lighter.  Without

10     referring to literature, I cannot say anything with 100 per cent

11     certainty.  Perhaps those were the smallest aerial bombs that existed.

12        Q.   You state in your report that it had three rocket engines of the

13     Grad type.

14             Can we please see 65 ter 09808 on our screens.  That's the

15     report, but you have it in front of you anyway.

16             Is it true that you state there that three rocket motors of the

17     Grad type were found there?  How did you arrive at that conclusion?

18        A.   It's stated in the report remains of a rocket motor, that is,

19     tubes, found at the site.

20        Q.   Which pieces are required to establish the number of motors?

21        A.   The bodies of the motors don't get destroyed in the explosion.

22     They can be found at the site only damaged or deformed.  Only at the RTV

23     Centre; we didn't find any at the site.  Probably the rocket motor got

24     separated from the aerial bomb, itself, during its trajectory.

25        Q.   Well, that would have been a unique instance.  You said to us

Page 6178

 1     that it happened when it ricochetted off that roof?

 2        A.   Yes, that's what I thought, and that's why I said it.

 3        Q.   You know why you found those pieces from the RTV Centre?  You

 4     found them in Safeta Hadzica, because it landed there, but we cannot

 5     leave this so messy and unexplained.

 6             Is it correct that you needed three vital parts of any motor to

 7     be able to establish that there were indeed three motors?  There must be

 8     three jets, twelve wings, et cetera?

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Can we see the part which is referring to what you

10     just said, motors of Grad type?  What page is it?

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Here on page 1, if I may assist.

12     It says four large metal tubes were found, seven large metal pieces of

13     irregular shape.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   What are these four large metal parts?  Are these four motors?

16        A.   On page 2, there is a description of the parts.  They are marked

17     by numbers, and then their dimensions are stated, as established by

18     measuring, and some characteristic traces visible on the parts.

19        Q.   So you found four, and you say that there were three motors.  And

20     one of these motors belonged to Plamen, correct, according to you?  I

21     mean, that's what your report says.

22        A.   If it says so in the report, then that's the way it is.

23        Q.   So three motors would propel the bomb, and the fourth motor would

24     belong to a Plamen missile; right?

25        A.   The fourth wasn't a Grad motor, because those parts were found at

Page 6179

 1     the site.

 2        Q.   Let us look at paragraph 3 on page 1.  You say here -- but it may

 3     be on page 2, after all.  You say here that the missiles were used to

 4     propel it, to propel the whole thing?  Actually, it's on page 2,

 5     paragraph 3.

 6        A.   On the last page, it says that the missiles were used to propel

 7     the bomb.  It's on page 5.

 8        Q.   Then do you -- would you say that missiles and rocket motors are

 9     the same thing?  Because it says here that missiles were used to propel

10     the bomb.

11        A.   Yes, rocket motors.

12        Q.   But read all of this:  "Based on the material brought for

13     forensic analysis."  Who brought it?

14        A.   The material was collected at the site and taken to the CSB.

15     Their requests for forensic analysis were filed, and these were attached

16     to material from the site.  No matter whether somebody from our

17     department conducted the on-site investigation, with the request to

18     conduct forensic analysis, traces had to be attached.

19        Q.   But you did that?

20        A.   Yes, I took part in collecting evidence.  That's what I said

21     earlier.

22        Q.   Now take a look at the following paragraph:

23             "A metal fragment of irregular shape ..."

24        A.   "A metal fragment of irregular shape with the stamped mark, 128

25     millimetres, M63 and BK comes from the exhaust duct of a 128-millimetre

Page 6180

 1     Plamen M-63 missile, which most probably was not a part of the device

 2     that exploded."

 3        Q.   But what was that motor doing there?  It's part of a missile;

 4     right?

 5        A.   I explained that.  At the site, there were also pieces of other

 6     projectiles, things people left there, souvenirs and the like.

 7        Q.   Could it have belonged to some military facility or military unit

 8     of the Muslim Army there in that street?

 9        A.   There, in that institute, most certainly not.

10        Q.   Do you want to hear what I think, Mr. Suljevic?  I think that no

11     aerial bomb ever flew to Dositejeva Street, number 4, although that's an

12     area full of legitimate targets.  And the neighbouring building housed

13     the command of the helicopter squadron of the Muslim Army, but,

14     Mr. Suljevic, even if there was only 100 kilograms of TNT there, the

15     whole building would have been blown to pieces.  But I don't understand

16     how they made you draw such conclusions to establish even the direction

17     and the distance from which it had come based on totally unclear elements

18     from which nothing can be concluded, and we don't even have a photograph.

19        A.   Nothing is unclear here.  What is stated in our reports is not

20     unclear.  Never, during my work in on-site investigations or forensic

21     analyses, did I put on paper anything that I haven't seen or that I

22     wasn't certain of.  Never did I receive instructions from anybody to put

23     on paper something I wasn't certain of and that couldn't be proved.

24     Nobody, to this day, instructed me to say something behind -- to say

25     anything to which I wouldn't stand.

Page 6181

 1        Q.   Was there a fire there?

 2        A.   Not at the time.

 3        Q.   But wasn't there -- wasn't there the mark for "inflammable" on

 4     the jet of that device?

 5        A.   I don't remember.  But if I did say so, then I stand by that.

 6        Q.   Well, I seem to be too fast for the transcript, but I want to

 7     finish today.

 8             I would like your statement given on 19 June 1995 to be referred

 9     to in the transcript, where you say that the Plamen exhaust jet was

10     marked "flammable."

11        A.   If that is stated in the report, then I stand by that.  But if it

12     isn't stated in the report, then it isn't that way.  But I cannot see the

13     report now, so I cannot confirm.

14        Q.   Well, since you know about these things:  Where is the

15     "flammable" mark placed, and how is it applied; by stamping, by colour?

16     And where is it placed, on the motor or on the warhead?

17        A.   As far as I remember, and what I am about to say doesn't refer to

18     aerial bombs or modified aerial bombs, with rocket motors to propel them,

19     but on artillery shells the marks are applied by painting them, and I

20     believe that in the Eastern Bloc, in the arsenal of the former JNA, a red

21     band meant flammable, whereas a yellow band meant chemical missile.  I

22     don't think that NATO has the same system of markings.  But I didn't

23     prepare for this line of questioning, so I didn't consult the relevant

24     literature, but there are books where that can be found.

25             When we speak about marking ammunition, we relied on the

Page 6182

 1     textbooks of the Military Technical Academy in Zagreb.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

 3             I note the time is time to break, but before we do:  Yes,

 4     Mr. Gaynor.

 5             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.

 6             A few lines ago, the accused said -- referred to part of the

 7     report of the 19th June 1995, and he said that there was a reference to a

 8     marking of "flammable" on the Plamen rocket.  I request the accused to

 9     direct us to the paragraph he's referring to.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] After the break, if I may.  I now

12     have just another question.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Who manufactured a Plamen missile with flammable heads in Bosnia?

15     Because you'll agree with me that the other Plamen missiles were not

16     flammable and that only certain special versions were flammable and who

17     made them in Bosnia-Herzegovina?  Do you agree with me when I say it was

18     a Soko Mostar?

19        A.   I really don't know what Soko manufactured and what Pretis did.

20     I really don't know.  But in the former Yugoslavia, there were industries

21     manufacturing such projectiles.  But where exactly, what type was

22     manufactured, I don't know.  I worked for the Zrak company, which didn't

23     manufacture projectiles, so I don't know.  I don't know which factory

24     exactly manufactured what.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  We will continue after

Page 6183

 1     the break, because were must clarify what happened in Dositejeva Street,

 2     because what is stated in the indictment never happened, Mr. Suljevic.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  That's your statement, Mr. Karadzic.

 4             We'll break for half an hour and resume at five past 11.00.

 5                           --- Recess taken at 10.37 a.m.

 6                           --- On resuming at 11.10 a.m.

 7             MR. ROBINSON:  Excuse me, Mr. President.

 8             If I could just let you know that Dr. Subotic, who's been

 9     assisting us as an expert, is present and will continue to be assisting

10     Dr. Karadzic during this testimony.  Thank you.

11             JUDGE KWON:  We noted it.  Thank you.

12             Yes, Mr. Karadzic, let's continue.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14             I need to discuss at least two other incidents with this witness,

15     as there is no better witness than this one I can discuss that with,

16     because he was involved in them.  One of them is in the indictment;

17     that's the flea market.  And the other one is not in the indictment, but

18     it has been admitted as P and some number, all the documents.  I really

19     don't know the exact number now, so we really have to review all that.

20     And I would ask you to consider allowing me sufficient time to discuss

21     this incident as well.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, let us just briefly conclude with the incident in

24     Dositejeva Street.  You concluded that it had to be a Serbian shell

25     because the Muslim Army did not have modified bombs; is that correct?

Page 6184

 1        A.   That's not what the report says, but I will now state my opinion.

 2     This is so, and there is no doubt that these aerial bombs were launched

 3     by the Army of Republika Srpska, whose supreme commander you were.  This

 4     was also confirmed by all the orders which we saw on the previous two

 5     days of my testimony.

 6        Q.   I'm not asking you that.  We will establish that.  But did you

 7     found your claim, that it's indubitable that it was the Army of

 8     Republika Srpska, on the basis of the fact that the Muslims did not have

 9     modified aerial bombs and that Serbs were in Pionirska Dolina, and what

10     else were the grounds for such a conclusion?

11        A.   Well, I said the report does not say whose bombs these were, but

12     I have stated my opinion after that.

13        Q.   Ah-hah.  So you could not establish what kind of bomb it was, 100

14     or 150 kilos.  It was probably not 500 kilos.  You could not establish

15     whose it was.  You are stating your opinion, and you say that only

16     Serbian positions were on this direction; is that correct?

17        A.   No, you are not precise, so it's not exactly as you just stated.

18        Q.   Well, on the basis of what do you claim that this was a Serbian

19     bomb, when you couldn't establish in the report that it was?

20        A.   The bombs that fell on the city of Sarajevo, it's well known

21     where they fell from, all of them, both artillery projectiles and bombs.

22        Q.   So you concluded it on the basis of that.  Was it on the basis of

23     that that you decided what was falling on Sarajevo had to be a Serbian

24     bomb; is that correct?

25        A.   We cannot speculate here or offer theses.  One projectile cannot

Page 6185

 1     be both launched and explosions staged in the same place, just like with

 2     the bomb on the RTV Centre.

 3        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, I'm asking you this:  During the on-site

 4     investigation, you could not establish what kind of bomb it was or where

 5     it came from, but you concluded that it could have come from

 6     Pionirska Dolina because Serbs were there.  But Muslims were also in

 7     Pionirska Dolina, 50 metres away from the Serbs.  I'm asking you this:

 8     Judging by certain circumstances, you concluded that this was a Serbian

 9     bombs, because the Muslims did not have such bombs and because what was

10     falling on Sarajevo were Serbian bombs?  Yes or no, and then we'll move

11     on.

12        A.   You want me to say that all bombs and all projectiles which did

13     not have any effect on the target, in the sense that they wounded or

14     killed someone, that they were launched by you and your army, and

15     whenever there were any victims, that we were the ones who launched it

16     against ourselves.  That's absurd.

17        Q.   Let us not enter into a debate.  Your conclusion was that the

18     Serbs had that, that they were in Pionirska Dolina, and that what was

19     falling on Sarajevo was launched by Serbs.  Do you have anything more

20     specific than that on the basis of which you concluded it was a Serb

21     bomb?

22        A.   If we take as our position the report, whatever is in the report

23     was concluded at the on-site investigation and it was like that.

24        Q.   Let us leave aside the report.  I'm asking you now, here in the

25     courtroom, on the basis of which do you conclude it was a Serb bomb?  Was

Page 6186

 1     it anything exact or were these the reasons that you just stated that led

 2     you to conclude that it was a Serbian-launched bomb?

 3        A.   Well, look, I'm now certain that these were the bombs which were

 4     launched from the positions of the Army of Republika Srpska.  And what

 5     convinced us that it was so were also the orders issued by the command.

 6        Q.   Let us leave that aside now.  On the basis of which did you

 7     establish, for this specific bomb, which allows you to claim that it was

 8     launched by the Serbs?  On the basis of what?

 9        A.   Let me not repeat.  Just like with all other bombs, this is my

10     opinion, and the report does not state whose bomb it was.  There is not a

11     single report that says whose projectile it was, but what's written there

12     is so.

13        Q.   Thank you, thank you.  Please tell us another thing.  Do you make

14     a difference between a motor and a projectile?

15        A.   Yes, a distinction should be made between a motor, which is a

16     propelling agent and propelling part, and the projectile.  It should be

17     distinguished.

18        Q.   What is the distinction?

19        A.   Well, the assembly of a rocket includes the head, with the

20     charge, and the propelling part.

21        Q.   So when you say it's a projectile, then it has the motor and it

22     also has the warhead; is that correct?

23        A.   It would be better to say that it's a rocket.

24        Q.   Thank you.  How many statements did you give since 1995?  We are

25     still searching for a document which says that you saw that it said

Page 6187

 1     "inflammable."  How many statements did you give in 1995?

 2        A.   I don't know how many statements I have given so far.  I really

 3     don't remember, but I always responded to the call of the Prosecutor

 4     whenever I was requested to give a statement.  I do not remember that I

 5     ever said that it was an inflammable projectile.  But as I said a while

 6     ago, I stand by all my reports and what they contain, if it is properly

 7     translated.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  But do you agree that if you saw that there was the

 9     word "inflammable" on a projectile, that then it had to be the warhead,

10     because such a word would not be placed on the motor; is that correct?

11        A.   Well, in general, only warheads are marked in this way, depending

12     on the type of projectile and the type of charge which the projectile

13     contains.

14        Q.   Thank you.  We'll move to the next incident, the flea market the

15     22nd of December, 1994.  Are you familiar with this incident?

16             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.

17             Yes, Mr. Gaynor.

18             MR. GAYNOR:  Mr. President, before we move to the next incident,

19     I'd just like to clarify one matter for the record.

20             Mr. Karadzic, before the break, said:

21             "I would like your statement given on 19th June 1995 to be

22     referred to in the transcript, where you say that the Plamen exhaust jet

23     was marked 'flammable.'"

24             Now, that's a clear reference to P1237, which is the report of

25     this incident drafted by the witness concerning this incident.  That

Page 6188

 1     report does not contain -- that statement, I understood, Mr. Karadzic was

 2     going to make that absolutely clear on the record, and we ask him to do

 3     so.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, you promised to come back to that point,

 5     Mr. Karadzic.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Perhaps just the date was wrong.

 7     It was not necessarily the 19th of June, which is my birthday, but

 8     probably some other date.  But it's quite certain that in one of the

 9     statements from that period, Mr. Suljevic said that in Dositejeva he saw

10     the word "inflammable," and we will obtain that; not in this statement,

11     but in some other documents.  We're trying to locate the specific

12     document that contains this reference.

13             JUDGE KWON:  You need to give us a specific reference by the end

14     of this session.

15             Let's move on.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  My associates will try

17     to locate the document.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, do you remember this incident which occurred on the

20     22nd of December, 1994, at the flea market?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Did you participate in the investigations?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   Did the incident occur at 9.10 in the morning?

25        A.   If that's what the report says, then it was so.

Page 6189

 1        Q.   It's G9 from the table, from Table G, Incident 9.

 2        A.   The time when the projectile fell and exploded were established

 3     at the site by interviewing witnesses, because we didn't know when which

 4     projectile fell.  We would establish that once we came to the scene.

 5        Q.   When did you come out to the scene?

 6        A.   Once again, it's the same question as the one you asked me before

 7     the break.  I think that you should take all the documents which relate

 8     to this incident, and whatever they contain is correct.  Once again, I

 9     don't remember when we would arrive to the scene.  In one of the CSB

10     reports, it should say at what time the on-site investigation began.  We

11     did not do that because we were the Counter-Sabotage Department and we

12     conducted the on-site analysis.

13        Q.   This is nothing against you, personally, Mr. Suljevic.  I'm

14     interested in what it looks like when we do not rely on 92 ter and

15     statements, but your testimony.  You are a witness here.  You were there.

16     What was the time when you came out to the scene?

17        A.   After the call from CSB, we came out to the scene and we joined

18     the on-site investigation team.

19        Q.   Was that at 10.00, 11.00, or 12.00?  When was that?

20        A.   I don't know when it was.  It's possible -- it couldn't have been

21     at 12.00.  It was probably earlier than that.  But from this distance in

22     time, I don't know who could remember whether he came out to the scene at

23     a specific time, because such incidents occurred practically on a daily

24     basis.

25        Q.   Well, do you have any notes that could serve as an aide-memoire?

Page 6190

 1     Did you use any notes in your work?

 2        A.   No, we did not keep a diary, or a log, or any sort of notes.

 3        Q.   Ah-hah, all right.  Can you tell us, what was the weather like

 4     that morning?

 5        A.   I cannot remember what the weather was like.  I know that there

 6     was no precipitation, but what it was like, whether it was cloudy or not,

 7     I can't remember that.

 8        Q.   What was the visibility like?

 9        A.   I also cannot remember what the visibility was like, whether it

10     was good or not.

11        Q.   Well, we both used to live in Sarajevo.  We know what sort of

12     weather you normally get in Sarajevo in December.

13        A.   In Sarajevo in December, when it's calm, then it's usually foggy,

14     but when it's windy, then it's clear.  So on that specific date, I don't

15     remember what it was like, and I cannot rely on the general assumption

16     about what the weather is usually like and then claim that the weather

17     was like that on that specific day.  At least I cannot do that.

18        Q.   All right.  There are many things you don't remember,

19     Mr. Suljevic, and that would be of great help for us.  I will recall you

20     that in the trial of General Milosevic, Witness W-12 testified that it

21     was foggy.  How come that you don't remember that it was foggy?

22        A.   The fog wasn't so thick that I would remember it.  I'm certain

23     that it wasn't the Sarajevo fog from before the war, when you couldn't

24     see a thing.  I think that the visibility was relatively good.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Page 6191

 1             Could we please look at 13172.  That's 65 ter 13172.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   On the second page, that's ERN 102-5464, can you please have a

 4     look at the second paragraph, line 16.

 5             I think there's been a confusion with the ERN numbers.  I have

 6     established that in many of the searches, the ERN is 102-5464.

 7             Is this 65 ter 13172?  Yes, now we have the version in Serbian.

 8             This is the statement of Salih Djedovic, but in English we do not

 9     have the right document.

10             Could I please ask you to read outline 16 from the second

11     paragraph?

12        A.   Line 16, you mean, from the title "Statement," and then the 16th

13     line?

14        Q.   Yes, yes.

15        A.   "... which hit -- caused by a shell, which hit the window of a

16     privately-owned shop in Petra Kocic Street across the street from the

17     market."

18             Is this what you mean?

19             "The explosion of the second shell caused the confusion and

20     screams among the citizens to increase at the market, and soon the

21     employees of the market and then also members of the police and members

22     of the Army of BH came to assist the wounded.  After the explosion of the

23     second shell, I started in the direction of the place where the shells

24     fell, and the distance between the places where the first and the second

25     shell was around 10 metres."

Page 6192

 1             Should I go on reading?

 2        Q.   And what was the time between the fall of the first and second

 3     shell?  Does the report contain that or did you note that in the report?

 4        A.   We did not.  I and my colleagues who worked on this did not

 5     establish how much time elapsed between the two shells.  Perhaps that is

 6     contained in some report, but I don't know what the situation was.

 7        Q.   Did you establish that the first shell fell in the shop window?

 8        A.   Look, when we came to the scene, we found two craters there.  The

 9     only thing that can be established on the basis of witness statements is

10     which one was the first to fall and which one was the second to fall.  So

11     if it says here the first one fell in the shop window, and after that the

12     second one, that's the way it was, but that is based on the statement of

13     the person who made the statement.  I cannot assert now whether that

14     statement made by that person is correct or not, and I do not wish to do

15     that.  And I cannot say which shell fell first, the first one or the

16     second one.

17        Q.   But this is an eye-witness though, and he says the first shell

18     fell into the shop window.  How do you establish that?

19        A.   No, it's not that the shell fell into the shop window.  It fell

20     in front of the wall of some shop, some craftsman's shop.

21        Q.   Very well.  Now, let us see whether you find this a bit strange,

22     that the police and the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina just happened to be

23     there all at the same time and all at once.

24        A.   I would not like to comment on this statement made by this person

25     who made the statement.  I mean, what does that mean, "members of the

Page 6193

 1     police" and "members of the army"?  Does it mean one, does it mean ten,

 2     does it mean an entire brigade?  I really wouldn't want to comment on

 3     that.

 4        Q.   Is this statement part of your investigation material in respect

 5     of this incident?

 6        A.   I have seen the statement.  And as I said, I accept all the

 7     statements that I saw, I accept them as such, because it is only the

 8     person who gave the statement that stands by these statements.  As a

 9     matter of fact, even the person who took the statement cannot stand by

10     the information provided in the statement.  In this particular case, it

11     was Curevac.  It is only the person who actually made the statement who

12     stands by the information provided in the statement.  We can only accept

13     it or not accept it as such.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             Can we have 103541.  That is a sketch of the scene.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Just before we move on, I note this is page 70 of

17     that document, and what we see in English seems to be a partial

18     translation thereof.  Can you confirm that, Mr. Gaynor?

19             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, the --

20             JUDGE KWON:  Page 70 seems to be the page in Serbian.  The

21     English translation has only 32 pages, compared to the 92 pages -- 91

22     pages of the original.

23             MR. GAYNOR:  I understand the difference in the number of pages

24     may be because the English translation contains translations of a number

25     of the originals on one English page.

Page 6194

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

 2             So for the purpose of future reference, you need to indicate the

 3     e-court page numbers, Mr. Karadzic.

 4             Let's move on.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6             Can we have this ERN number, 102-5411.  It's the same document,

 7     but it is 5411.  That's the page number.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Page 17, I take it.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I do apologise.  We are

10     short of human resources.  We don't have enough people.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, the Registry has set up various

12     regimes to help you, and you have a lot of associates.  I don't like to

13     hear that complaint again.  Let's move on.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's not a complaint.  I'm

15     grateful.  Can you imagine how hard it would be had they not made these

16     improvements?  We wouldn't have been able to do a thing.

17             Can we have that sketch, the one that was on the screen a moment

18     ago?

19             JUDGE KWON:  Page 18.  This is page 18, and now we are seeing

20     page 17.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, are you familiar with this sketch?

23        A.   Yes.  I saw it in the previous period.  I'm not the author.

24        Q.   Can you mark on this sketch the locations where the persons who

25     had lost their lives were?

Page 6195

 1        A.   I can't do it without a legend.  And I think that those locations

 2     are actually marked.  As I said a moment ago, we had no way of knowing

 3     when the projectiles fell, and, therefore, we could not know when persons

 4     died.  That was established on the basis of statements or, rather, on the

 5     basis of the locations where the corpses were found.  When we came to the

 6     scene, we did not find scenes on this location.  They had already been

 7     removed, both the wounded persons and the corpses.

 8        Q.   Did anyone register where these people were hit, where they died,

 9     and where they were wounded?  Did anyone mark these places?

10        A.   This sketch should have a legend of its own, and we will see what

11     is marked by the numbers that we see here on the sketch.  Numbers 1

12     through 30, it seems.  We should see the legend, and then that will show

13     what is denoted by each and every number.

14             JUDGE KWON:  So you do not have your own independent knowledge

15     where the dead people were or as to this map?

16             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't have that knowledge,

17     Your Honour, but I can assume, on the basis of this sketch, that

18     number 8 --

19             JUDGE KWON:  There's no point of asking those questions to this

20     witness.  Let's --

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we have the previous page,

22     please, so this one and the previous one.  On the previous one, we can

23     see the legend, so then let us help Mr. Suljevic help us understand what

24     it was that happened here or what is claimed to have happened here.  The

25     previous one with the legend.

Page 6196

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Page 16.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we have pages 16 and 17

 3     together on the screen.  No, we don't need the English one.  We need the

 4     sketch and we need the Serbian text.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Well, then we can print out this 16 and hand it over

 6     to the witness, and we can see if we can the sketch at the same time.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would appreciate that.  Could

 8     page 17 be on the screen, please.

 9             THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone, please.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Is it easier for you now, Mr. Suljevic, to tell us what is on

12     this sketch?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   Could you please do that, then?

15        A.   Well, I'm sure, and I assert and I saw that 1 and 2 -- actually,

16     I agree with that 100 per cent, that those are the craters where the two

17     projectiles fell.  One is in front of the wall of the shop window, of

18     some shop there, and the other one is on the pavement, marked number 2.

19     And then I can continue along with this legend.  3 and 4 are the

20     locations where two fragments were, probably of the projectiles.  Then 5

21     and 8 are pools of blood.  Number 7 is a shopping bag of one of the

22     injured persons.  Number 9 is part of the fuse of the projectile; that is

23     to say, the place where that happened to be.  Then 06 and 30 are also

24     fragments of the projectile.  10 and 11, again, places where fragments of

25     the projectile were.  Then 12 is a lamp post, and 13 is a landmark from

Page 6197

 1     which you can see how far away the crater is.  And it says here

 2     "Landmark, corner of the house in Oprkanj Street."

 3        Q.   It used to be called Danila Ilica or Petar Kocic; right?

 4        A.   I don't know what it was.

 5        Q.   One was called Danila Ilica and the other one was Petar Kocic,

 6     but they poor souls did something wrong and they lost their streets.

 7        A.   I wouldn't want to go into a debate of these street names.

 8        Q.   Well, their mistake was that they were Serbs.  One was a great

 9     Bosnian writer, Serbian, Petar Kocic, and the other one belonged to the

10     Young Bosnian Movement.  All right, I'm sorry.

11             JUDGE KWON:  You can't complain about the shortage of time at

12     all, wasting your time on these subjects.

13             What is your next question?

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, it took five seconds to say

15     what I said about the street name, Excellency.

16             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   All right now.  Did anyone die in this incident?

18        A.   I think there were some fatalities.  The report says exactly how

19     many.

20        Q.   Two persons; right?

21        A.   That's right.  It says here two persons were killed on this

22     occasion and several persons were wounded.

23        Q.   Where is that marked?

24        A.   Numbers 5 and 8 denote the pools of blood.  Again, I don't want

25     to speculate, but then there is a contour of a person here that is marked

Page 6198

 1     on the sketch, so I assume that that is one of the persons who was

 2     killed.  But, again, that can be established through the witnesses there,

 3     the persons who removed those persons, I mean, during the explosions.

 4     That's the way it happened.  That's how things happened.  I mean, I don't

 5     really see what you're getting at.  What are you trying to get at, where

 6     the person was, 20 metres, and then, say -- a person would be 20 metres

 7     away and get killed, and another person would be 5 metres away and only

 8     be injured.  I really don't want to go into a discussion of this kind,

 9     because discussions like this lead us nowhere, and we cannot draw any

10     conclusions, and, well --

11        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, this is a criminal investigation.  This is a matter

12     of criminal law.  Two persons were killed, several were wounded.  Why is

13     that not marked on this sketch?  How can we establish how it was that

14     they got killed and injured, or are we supposed to take the word of

15     someone?  This criminal investigation was carried out in a sloppy way,

16     and it cannot be used in this court or in any other court, for that

17     matter.

18             JUDGE KWON:  I don't understand how this witness would be able to

19     answer that question.  Ask relevant questions which the witness is able

20     to answer.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, is there a better, more accurate, more proper

23     investigation than this one?  Do you have anything else?

24        A.   I can testify about what I did, and I can confirm what I know and

25     what I saw and what I did on the scene.  I am not the author of this

Page 6199

 1     sketch.  As I said, I can confirm with 100 per cent certainty from this

 2     sketch the place where the two projectiles fell.  That much I do know,

 3     because that happened to be there on the scene when we came to carry out

 4     the on-site investigation.

 5        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, you came to testify about some incidents in whose

 6     investigations you participated.  One of these, for which the Serb side

 7     is being blamed, is this particular incident.  Please help us clarify

 8     this part of the indictment that the Serbian side is being charged with.

 9     You were part of that team.  Please tell us where these persons were,

10     what happened, so that we can establish beyond a reasonable doubt, yes,

11     this is what happened, and then we are going to find out who it was that

12     fired those shells.  This way, please tell me just where these dead

13     persons were lying and also where the wounded persons were here.  Tell me

14     that.

15             JUDGE KWON:  As we heard, this witness does not know that.

16     There's no point repeating the same question.  It's simply a waste of

17     time.  Move on to your next question.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

19             Can we now have a page from this document, ERN 10 --

20             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  It was too fast for

21     interpretation.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know -- it's a photograph.

23             JUDGE KWON:  What's the ERN number again?  Not exactly ERN,

24     but --

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 102-53 -- or, rather, 5434 --

Page 6200

 1     25434, that's it.  Page 40 of this document.

 2             Excellencies, the electronics seem to be way too slow.  We can

 3     see that here.  And also while I'm preparing for this, it is horrendously

 4     slow.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   Do you see this image, and is it familiar?

 7        A.   As it says down here underneath the photograph, this is a

 8     cover -- a protective cover where you can see damage sustained due to the

 9     explosion.  However, what we can see here on this photograph, actually,

10     it's barely noticeable, it's blurred, but we do see the damage on the

11     cover or shutter.  This is the wall on one of the shops that were there

12     in a single line.

13        Q.   So what do you infer on the basis of this photograph?

14        A.   What should I infer, except for what is written under the

15     photograph, that there is visible damage to the shutter, damaged caused

16     by the fragments of a projectile?

17        Q.   Thank you.  Let us now take a look at the panoramic photograph of

18     the site, DSCN -- just a minute.  1D02187.  1D02187.

19             Here in this photograph, while we still see it, can you see some

20     circles marked with chalk on the shutter?

21        A.   In this photograph, I see damages.  Whether or not they are

22     marked by chalk, I don't know, but there are some lighter portions.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Can we see the entire

24     panoramic photograph?

25             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

Page 6201

 1        Q.   Do you recognise this location?  Is this the site of the

 2     incident?

 3        A.   I think that this is a postwar photograph.  Yes, I think this is

 4     the site.  I think this is the site.  I can see the sign "Hotel."  After

 5     the war, a hotel was opened here which wasn't there before the war.  This

 6     could be the place.  I don't see the tram line up there, but it should be

 7     somewhere by those buildings in the rear?

 8        Q.   Can you mark the exact site of the incident here?

 9        A.   One of the projectiles, hereabouts [marks].  There was a curb at

10     the time here.  It's been changed since.  And the other place of impact

11     was hereabouts [marks] towards the tram line.

12        Q.   But where's the tram line?

13        A.   Well, if this is the place, then this is the tram line towards

14     Bascarsija [marks], if this is the site.  It looks like it, but I said

15     that I can't see the tram line.  If it's there, then the rails should be

16     there.

17        Q.   Could it be another place?  We can see the mosque as an important

18     landmark, so was this the flea market where the incident happened?

19        A.   This is the plateau [marks].  Let's take it -- let's assume that

20     this was the place, and then here there was the flea market [marks].

21        Q.   Please mark it 1, 2 and 3; 1 and 2 being the places of impact and

22     3 being the plateau.

23        A.   1 [marks] is the place of impact somewhere in front of a wall by

24     a shop.  I cannot mark it accurately.  Number 2 [marks] is the second

25     crater, the impact of the other projectile.  3 [marks] is the plateau

Page 6202

 1     where there was a flea market.  It may extend into the foreground.  And

 2     the arrow marks the position of the tram line.

 3        Q.   Please date it and sign it.

 4        A.   [Marks]

 5             JUDGE KWON:  And, Mr. Suljevic, you're confident this is the site

 6     which that incident -- where the incident took place?

 7             We can keep it for the moment, and can we go back to page 17 of

 8     the previous document.

 9                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

10             JUDGE KWON:  We keep it.  Yes, we admit it as a Defence exhibit.

11             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, that will be Exhibit D553.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Page 17 of the previous document, which appears to

13     have the note of a tram line and some further space, and then whether you

14     can confirm that this is consistent with the picture.  Page 17 in B/C/S.

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If this is what we see --

16             JUDGE KWON:  Do you see the sketch on the left side?  We can

17     collapse the right part.  Do you recognise the tram line there, and could

18     you read the letters which appear below that tram line?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Could you read that for our purpose so that we can

21     hear the translation?

22             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  I can mark it,

23     if required.  It reads "tram rails."  It's by the figure 30.  So between

24     the arrow pointing north and the figure 30, it says "tram rails."  And

25     under that, it says "Telali Street."  In the upper left corner, it says

Page 6203

 1     "Mosque."  And the street going down is Oprkanj Street.  By the spot

 2     marked "2," that is Oprkanj Street.  And this matches the photograph,

 3     but --

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Suljevic, it seems that this sketch is

 5     consistent with the photo on which you marked previously?

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, although I'm not

 7     sure whether that wall was the wall of the shop or the wall of the

 8     building closest to the spot marked "2."  But it's 100 per cent certain

 9     that this is the site.  That's what we established.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Do you agree that there is a mark for geographic north?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   Where is this place, then?  Where is the tram line in the north,

14     in the part next to the town hall or elsewhere?

15        A.   This is the part of the tram line which goes toward Bascarsija

16     from the town hall.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

18             Let us see the shutter once more, and that's page -- I think it's

19     page 40, this metal shutter.

20             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

21        Q.   How do you explain that there are some markings on the shutter,

22     most probably marked by chalk, whereas we see now no damages inflicted by

23     fragments on the wall?

24        A.   I wouldn't dare claim that, based on this photograph.  If we were

25     to examine it more carefully, we may be able to find some damages, but

Page 6204

 1     they aren't marked.  But the narrative under the photograph says that the

 2     purpose of this photograph was to show the damage done to the metal

 3     shutter.

 4        Q.   Does that satisfy you, as an investigator?

 5        A.   Yes, one may refer to it as to the scope of our authority.

 6        Q.   Now we'll speak about the photographs made by your investigators.

 7     I think that it's ERN 102-5429 -- ERN 102-5429?

 8             Yes, this is the photograph.

 9             Can you explain to us what this depicts?

10        A.   This photograph shows the place of impact of one of the

11     projectiles, and that's what the narrative under the photograph says.  It

12     says:

13             "Place of where a projectile fell on the curb of Oprkanj Street,"

14     marked by figure 2."

15        Q.   Where do you see this number 2?

16        A.   Number 2 is on the sketch, but I can maybe mark the crater,

17     itself.

18        Q.   Yes, please do.  We can see the number 2 here.

19        A.   [Marks]

20        Q.   Thank you.  How do you, as an expert, account for this

21     semicircular arrangement of objects in the background, and the

22     arrangement is convex toward the crater as if something had fallen there,

23     rather than here?

24        A.   I don't understand what it is that you're putting to me.

25        Q.   Please connect these bits and pieces in the background on the

Page 6205

 1     white surface.  Can you connect them with a line?

 2        A.   You mean the fragments, these pieces?

 3        Q.   Yes, the pieces that you can see here.  Can you draw a line that

 4     would all connect them?

 5        A.   One line to connect all the pieces?  [Marks]

 6        Q.   Do continue.

 7        A.   [Marks]

 8        Q.   Thank you.  How do you account for the semicircular arrangement

 9     of these fragments and the convex shape from the vantage point of the

10     place of impact?

11        A.   Obviously, these are not fragments of projectiles, certainly not

12     the larger pieces.  I don't know what their origin is.  And what is due

13     to the first projectile and what is due to the explosion of the second

14     one, I also can't tell.

15        Q.   Did the investigation established that?

16        A.   The investigation established that the spot marked "2" was the

17     crater where one of the projectiles exploded, and the second location,

18     which must be to the left somewhere, there is another crater where

19     another projectile exploded.

20        Q.   Did the investigation establish what these two black, most

21     probably, metal parts are, where they came from, and what made them be

22     arranged in this manner so that they are convex towards this side and

23     concave to the other?

24        A.   The purpose of the investigation that we conducted was to collect

25     fragments of the projectile.  We didn't collect any other fragments on

Page 6206

 1     site, and they weren't sent to us for analysis to establish their origin.

 2        Q.   What exploded here, Mr. Suljevic?

 3        A.   We should -- we would have to look at the report.  Two artillery

 4     shells exploded here, which was established, and the calibre was 76

 5     millimetres.

 6        Q.   Did you collect fragments here at this site?

 7        A.   Yes.  And based on the fragments, an expert analysis was made and

 8     a report was produced.

 9        Q.   Well, why do you think -- why did you think that it was of no

10     interest to the investigation to establish the reason for this impossible

11     arrangement of these fragments and two black pieces at the site?  Why

12     wasn't this registered and accounted for?

13        A.   The purpose of the investigation was to establish the direction

14     from which the projectile had come and to collect all traces of the

15     projectile to establish its type, or the type of the two projectiles that

16     were activated at this site.

17        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, I'm dissatisfied with your answer.  The purpose of

18     the investigation is to establish everything, isn't it?

19             MR. GAYNOR:  Objection, Mr. President.

20             JUDGE KWON:  It's not for the witness to answer those questions.

21             Please go on.

22             MR. GAYNOR:  He's inviting speculation from the witness.  The

23     witness has explained as well as he can.  Much of this is highly

24     irrelevant, in our submission.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Agreed.  I think -- I haven't counted the time, but

Page 6207

 1     I think you have less than half an hour.  Please try to conclude your

 2     evidence as soon as possible, Mr. Karadzic.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That is really deplorable, then.

 4     Then I cannot dwell on this any longer, and I must move on to Mis Irbina,

 5     which was admitted as a Prosecution exhibit.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   But, Mr. Suljevic, I must say to you that this is extremely

 8     sloppy and unusable for criminal law purposes.  You don't know what

 9     happened, what the weather was like.  You don't know what you

10     established.  When you came to the site, you had limited objectives of

11     the investigation to accuse the Serbs for propaganda purposes.  But in

12     criminal proceedings, this is not good enough.  You do not have relevant

13     evidence that we can rely on to prove what happened on the flea market.

14             JUDGE MORRISON:  You're making observations, which you are

15     entitled to make in the Defence case, but there is no point in putting a

16     series of statements to a witness.  They are not questions.  You are

17     simply making observations, which is tantamount to giving evidence.  As

18     the President has indicated, you are wasting precious time.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, I have stated some

20     claims, and I'm asking the witness to confirm it or not, because I'm

21     claiming that all these incidents in Sarajevo were staged, and I'm saying

22     that the evidence do not allow me to conclude anything, or actually

23     disqualifies this for the purpose of criminal proceedings.  I want the

24     witness to say what he has to say to this claim.

25             JUDGE KWON:  No, the witness is not able to answer that question,

Page 6208

 1     since he was not there.  And you can make that submission later on, as

 2     Judge Morrison indicated to you.

 3             Are you minded to tender the previous exhibited documents into

 4     evidence, i.e., the 65 ter 13172, the whole of it, or you're minded to

 5     only those parts which you used?

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The parts which I used.

 7             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 8        Q.   And I would kindly ask Mr. Suljevic to note the date and his

 9     initials on this page as well, and then I will tender it too.

10        A.   [Marks]

11             JUDGE KWON:  If my memory's correct, Mr. Karadzic didn't use many

12     pages, about five of them or six of them, and most of them were

13     translated, I take it.  But you would like to have the entire document be

14     admitted?

15             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, parts of this dossier have already been

16     admitted, not all of the parts which have been discussed with the

17     witness.  It might be just easiest to admit the entirety of 65 ter 13172.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Can you give us an indication of the number, the

19     exhibit number which we already admitted, albeit in a partial manner?

20             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.  Parts have been admitted as P1317, 1318, 1319,

21     and 1320.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Well, then we'll admit it in its entirety, and we'll

23     mark it for identification until we have a full translation.

24             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.  In respect of the translation, as I mentioned

25     earlier -- in respect of the photographs, for example, the translations

Page 6209

 1     of maybe 15 or 20 pages are reproduced on 2 pages in the English, so I

 2     believe it is, in fact, a full translation, although the number of pages

 3     in English --

 4             JUDGE KWON:  I take your word.

 5             Then we'll admit it.  We'll give it a new Defence number.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, Your Honour.  That will be Exhibit D554, and

 7     the photo will be Exhibit D555.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

10             Let me just say, for the transcript, that we have not clarified

11     the line for humanitarian aid in Dobrinja, not Alipasino Polje, nor

12     Safeta Zajke.

13             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

14        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, can you help me, what was the previous name of the

15     Safeta Zajke Street?

16        A.   I think it was Drinska.

17        Q.   Thank you.  And what about Safeta Hadzica Street, what was its

18     previously name?

19        A.   Perhaps Prvomajska, but I'm not quite sure.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Now I have to move on

21     to Mis Irbina Street.

22             Can you please consider that I be granted another session, or at

23     least half of another session, because it would be a pity if this witness

24     left without helping me clarify some issues.

25             And until you decide, could we please have 14945, 65 ter.

Page 6210

 1             JUDGE KWON:  How long would you need for your re-examination,

 2     Mr. Gaynor?

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  Very little time at the present, not more than 10

 4     minutes.

 5                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 6             JUDGE KWON:  We've just decided that you will have another half

 7     an hour in the next session.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 9        Q.   Do you remember the incident in Mis Irbina Street, number 18,

10     which occurred on the 27th of June, 1995?

11        A.   Yes.  This is the report about the incident, what we can see on

12     the screen right now.

13        Q.   So this is the report.  Can you just briefly tell us what was

14     established by the expert analysis in this case?

15        A.   The request was to establish what sort and calibre of the

16     projectile was and what was the direction from which it flew in.

17             Could we please see page 2 so that we can see what the

18     conclusions are or, rather, the opinion?  And the next page, please.

19        Q.   Thank you.  Can you just briefly explain to us what was

20     established in the expert analysis?

21        A.   It was established that in this incident, a contact fuse shell of

22     the 120-millimetre calibre for a mortar exploded.  And on the basis of

23     the azimuth, which was taken down, the direction from which it came was

24     established.

25        Q.   What does it report say?  Where was it launched?

Page 6211

 1        A.   The report says that the direction which was established on the

 2     scene corresponds to the enemy positions in Miljevic.

 3        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, when you say "Miljevic," then you also take a

 4     position in terms of the distance; is that correct?

 5        A.   No.  The report doesn't say that.  It says that the direction

 6     corresponds with the direction of the enemy positions in the general

 7     Miljevici area.

 8        Q.   Let us try to say that again.  Between Miljevici and the place of

 9     impact of the shell, are there any other positions?

10        A.   Yes, the separation lines are there.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, did you say this incident had been

12     taken out from the indictment?

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, the incident, but this has

14     been admitted.  This has been admitted in evidence with this witness.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Gaynor, could you help us?

16             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes.  The correct position was it was an unscheduled

17     incident, so it never was in the indictment.  We have included it in the

18     amalgamated statement of Mr. Suljevic.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

20             Continue, Mr. Karadzic.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Should we call up the map of

22     Sarajevo so you could show us where Miljevici are, where the place of

23     impact is, and who was between these two places?  Or, as you said, these

24     were the separation lines.  That means the Muslim position as well?

25        A.   There is no doubt about that, because Miljevici were in an area

Page 6212

 1     controlled by the Army of Republika Srpska, and it's normal that between

 2     these positions and Sarajevo were the separation lines.

 3        Q.   With both Serbian and Muslim positions; correct?

 4        A.   Well, on one side was the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and on

 5     the other side was the Army of Republika Srpska.

 6        Q.   When you said "Miljevici," you didn't just mention the direction

 7     but also the distance, and why couldn't it have been launched from the

 8     separation line in the same direction?

 9        A.   Because the azimuth was measured, and simply in every incident,

10     with every projectile which fell on the city of Sarajevo, one could say

11     that it flew from the direction where enemy positions were located during

12     the war, that is to say, the positions of the Army of Republika Srpska,

13     because Sarajevo was surrounded on all sides throughout the war with the

14     Army of Republika Srpska, and between the Army of Republika Srpska and

15     the BH Army, there were, of course, separation lines.

16        Q.   So your position is that it was the Serbian position, though it

17     could have been Muslim, and it could have flown from the same direction;

18     isn't that correct?

19        A.   It was Serbian, it was certainly Serbian, just like all the other

20     projectiles which were falling on the city of Sarajevo, including

21     everything up to the modified aerial bombs.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we just please call up map

23     number 1 from this special Sarajevo-specific court binder.  And the

24     number up there is 0546-6574.  It's map number 1 from the special binder.

25     The ERN number is 0361-5780.  If that can help us, that's the map.

Page 6213

 1             MR. GAYNOR:  I'm told that's P815.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, may I kindly ask you to mark approximately where

 4     Mis Irbina Street is located.  You can see where Skenderija is.  So in

 5     relation to Skenderija, where is Mis Irbina Street?

 6        A.   Could we please zoom in a little bit, because nothing can be seen

 7     here as it is, not even Titova Street, let alone Mis Irbina.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we then please zoom in on the

 9     part below which are the words "SA Centar," and then you see the

10     Okur [phoen] area.  If we can zoom in even more in the central part.

11     Yes, that's what I mean, the densely-populated area.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Can you see where Skenderija is close to the separation lines

14     here; that is to say, next to the municipality border, and the separation

15     lines were at the Jewish cemetery.  Can you find your bearings on this

16     map?

17        A.   This is approximately where [marks].

18        Q.   Yes, that's Skenderija, that's where Skenderija is.  Could you

19     please mark it with number 1?

20        A.   [Marks]

21        Q.   And further on after Skenderija is Djuro Djakovic Street.  Can

22     you please find your bearings, approximately, and try to find Mis Irbina

23     Street?

24        A.   I can just approximately say where it is.

25        Q.   That will be fine, thank you.

Page 6214

 1        A.   [Marks]

 2        Q.   Can we now show the total image, and if you can then draw a line

 3     depicting the direction of Miljevici.  Can you please mark this with

 4     number 2?

 5        A.   [Marks]

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If we will lose this if we now zoom

 7     out, then I would ask for this to be marked and admitted.  Number 1 is

 8     Skenderija and number 2 is approximately Mis Irbina Street.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Can you now please just note the date and write your initials?

11        A.   [Marks]

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I move to tender this.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

14             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D556, Your Honours.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now see the whole image,

16     please.  Thank you.

17             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   Could you now indicate approximately where Miljevici is located?

19        A.   Could we please see the report again, because I don't know the

20     azimuth.  I have to see where Miljevici is.  I cannot see it unless we

21     zoom in.  So if I can just see what the azimuth was so I can determine

22     what the direction of Miljevici is.

23        Q.   You can have a look at the report.  Do you have it with you?

24     I will provide you with it.

25             Number 14945, that's the report.

Page 6215

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  This had been admitted as Exhibit P1335,

 2     Your Honours.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Speaking for myself, Mr. Karadzic, I think this

 4     exercise is a waste of time, because the witness already confirmed there

 5     was a Muslim position between this place and Miljevici.  So asking the

 6     witness, who is not an expert on geography, to mark on the map is a total

 7     waste of time.  You have --

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] All right.

 9        Q.   Do you agree Miljevici is somewhere around the place on the map

10     where it says Novo Sarajevo?  So that we shouldn't waste any more time,

11     if we bring up the map again where it says "Lukavica" and

12     "Novo Sarajevo," do you agree that it's there, and you have confirmed

13     that the direction would cross the separation line up there on Trebevic;

14     is that correct?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Could we then agree that children of your boss,

17     Mirza Jamakovic, were also involved in this incident?

18        A.   Yes.

19        Q.   Did one of these children lose its life?

20        A.   Yes, one was killed and the other one was injured.

21        Q.   Did Mr. Jamakovic lose his hand on that occasion or did that

22     happen earlier?

23        A.   That happened earlier.

24        Q.   How did he lose his hand?

25        A.   At the time, I was not a member of the MUP, so I do not know the

Page 6216

 1     details of the incident.  But I think that a hand-grenade exploded in his

 2     hand.

 3        Q.   A hand-grenade or some other device?

 4        A.   As far as I know, it was a hand-grenade.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we now please see 1D02342.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  I note the time.  We'll have a break for half an

 7     hour.

 8             Before we do that, Mr. Robinson, last week you referred to D459,

 9     for which the translation has been complete, and you asked for admission

10     of the document.  We'll do that.  So we checked the document, and the

11     document is ready for proper admission.  But in the future, for the

12     convenience of the Chamber, I would like you to file a written

13     submission, covering a number of MFI'd exhibits, instead of informing the

14     Chamber the prepared exhibits in a piecemeal fashion.  That would be much

15     more convenient on the part of the Chamber.

16             My understanding is that you e-mailed our Legal Officer a number

17     of exhibits, so if you could file a motion in that regard as well.

18             We'll resume at 1.00.

19                           --- Recess taken at 12.32 p.m.

20                           --- On resuming at 1.03 p.m.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Welcome, Ms. Edgerton.

22             You will have half an hour, Mr. Karadzic, to conclude your

23     cross-examination.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  With kind co-operation,

25     Mr. Suljevic, we'll be able to achieve all that, I hope, although a great

Page 6217

 1     deal will remain unexamined.

 2             1D0342, could we have that now in e-court.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Do you recognise this report, Mr. Suljevic?

 5        A.   Yes, but we didn't compile this report.  It was one of the

 6     members of the CSB who did.

 7        Q.   But here it says, number 6, that you took part in this too;

 8     right?

 9        A.   Correct.

10        Q.   Since we haven't got much time, I would like to ask you to look

11     at the one-but-last sentence:  "At the moment of the fall ..."

12        A.   "At the moment of the fall, an explosion of the artillery

13     projectile in the yard, as well as at the two entranceways, number 18 and

14     20 in the Street of Mis Irbina, children from the neighbouring village

15     were playing."

16        Q.   So could you please explain this to the Trial Chamber?  In the

17     yard and also in the entranceways of these two particular street numbers;

18     right?

19        A.   That's what's written here.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

21             Can we have the next page, please.

22             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

23        Q.   Could you please read this from the beginning?  Actually,

24     starting with:  "Calibre 100 --"

25        A.   "Calibre -- 122-millimetre calibre fell and exploded on the

Page 6218

 1     surface near Mis Irbina.  The artillery projectile was fired from the

 2     positions of the aggressors, from the south-west, azimuth 205 degrees,

 3     which corresponds to the aggressor's positions on the locality of Vrace.

 4     When the projectile fell due to the explosion at the entrance number 18,

 5     Mis Irbina Street, the following person --"

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That will do.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Suljevic, did you say 122 millimetres or 120

 8     millimetres?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I should have said "120

10     millimetres," that is what's written here.  So a correction has to be

11     made.  It's 120 millimetres.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

13        Q.   And now it says here that someone was killed?

14        A.   Jamakovic, Haris, son of Mirza, mother's name Azra, born in 1984,

15     permanently residing in Mis Irbina number 18.  Serious bodily injures

16     were sustained by the following persons:  Children who were playing in

17     the yard at the moment when the explosion took place.

18             1.  Jamakovic, Jazenka born in 1981, residing in Mis Irbina,

19     number 18.

20             "2.  Habul Adi [phoen], born in 1981, residing in Mis Irbina,

21     number 18.

22             "Milan Trsic, residing in Mis Irbina, number 20.

23             "4.  Davor Mitic, born in 1979, Sutjeska number 2.

24             "Alija Strogorac, born in 1962, residing in Mis Irbina, number

25     20," and --

Page 6219

 1             JUDGE KWON:  I don't think the witness has to read all that.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right, he doesn't have to.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   However, Sutjeska 2 is my address, and there was no Mitic family

 5     living there.  Is that some kind of mistake?

 6        A.   I told you that I was not the person who compiled this report,

 7     and I was not present when these children were removed, were taken to

 8     hospital, those who were seriously wounded.  I don't know the names.

 9        Q.   Perhaps somebody moved in in the meantime.  Just let's deal with

10     one more sentence:  "In the entrance ..."

11        A.   "At the entranceway of the building in Mis Irbina, number 18,

12     where Haris Jamakovic was killed, large pools of blood were noted, as

13     were remaining shrapnel that went through the metal door."

14        Q.   Thank you.  Does it seem that in the yard and at numbers 18 and

15     20, Mis Irbina, children from the neighbouring buildings were playing?

16        A.   Yes, that's right.  Some children were in the yard, and others

17     were in the building itself, the entranceway.

18        Q.   That's right.  Somewhere in the stairwell too?

19        A.   Well, it's inside.  I don't know if it's the stairwell exactly.

20     It's probably somewhere near the entrance, since they were injured.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

22             Can we now have 1D2194.  1D2194.

23             Can the previous document be admitted, unless it's been admitted

24     already?

25             MR. GAYNOR:  No objection.  I don't believe it's been admitted

Page 6220

 1     already.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  We'll mark it for identification, pending

 3     translation.

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  MFI D557, Your Honours.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6        Q.   Can you please mark the location where the projectile fell?

 7     Could you mark that on this map, please?

 8        A.   [Marks].  It should be around here or in that area, but that's

 9     where that entranceway should be.  There's a passage from Mis Irbina, and

10     I think this is it.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Could you please write the date, and could you

12     initial this?

13        A.   [Marks]

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?

15             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, it will be Exhibit D558.

16             MR. GAYNOR:  I would just like to note for the record,

17     Mr. President, that this again is a post-conflict map, and the witness is

18     marking --

19             JUDGE KWON:  We dealt with this map when we admitted D552, on

20     which the witness marked the place where the -- I don't remember --

21     Schedule G14 took place.

22             MR. GAYNOR:  That's correct, Mr. President.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Branislava Djurdjeva, to the north on this map.  When did you

25     arrive on the scene as regards this incident?

Page 6221

 1        A.   Well, I don't know how many times you've already asked this.

 2     I think the reports say when the on-site investigations started, because

 3     I saw a few moments that it says when it was over.  We usually came there

 4     immediately after a particular incident.

 5        Q.   Please don't get angry at me, Mr. Suljevic.  If you were

 6     testifying viva voce, that would be a very important element in terms of

 7     your credibility, but that's why I'm asking you.  To the best of your

 8     recollection, when did you get there, what time of day was it?  You

 9     compiled a report concerning your expert examination of the site of the

10     explosion; right?

11        A.   That's right.

12        Q.   What we saw was your report; right?

13        A.   Yes.

14        Q.   How was it that you concluded that this had come from the

15     aggressor positions?

16        A.   It came from a direction that corresponds with the positions of

17     the aggressor in the area, as stated in the report.

18        Q.   Briefly, the same question:  The aggressor positions, the Serb

19     positions, that is, from there to the point of impact there's also a

20     Muslim line, isn't there?

21        A.   Any projectile that fell on Sarajevo, I mean, between the point

22     of descent and the Serb positions, there were the separation lines as

23     well.

24        Q.   Thank you.  In your report, 024-233576, dated the 13th of July,

25     you gave your opinion that this 120-millimetre shell that -- came from

Page 6222

 1     the Serb positions in the broader area of the area concerned.  And you

 2     and your boss, Mirza Jamakovic, signed this report; right?

 3        A.   Probably, but I have to confirm it.

 4        Q.   The ERN number is --

 5             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  We did not catch it.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's the second page, and that's

 7     where the signatures are.  Can we have it on the screen, 02 -- 14945 is

 8     the 65 ter number.  This map has already been admitted.  P1335, it's been

 9     admitted as P1335.  This is the first page.  Right.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   What is requested is to establish the calibre and the direction

12     from which it came.  Is the distance noted here from where it had been

13     fired?

14        A.   No.  It says here that this is what was requested, expert

15     analysis of the traces of explosion and the direction from which it had

16     come.

17        Q.   Why does the previous document from the MUP say "from aggressor

18     positions"?

19        A.   It says "from the area that corresponds with the positions of the

20     aggressor."  That's where the projectile came from.

21        Q.   Mr. Jamakovic lives on this address.  One of his children was

22     killed and one of his children was injured.  Is it customary for a victim

23     to participate in an investigation?

24        A.   As far as I know, the victim did not take part in the

25     investigation.  It is correct that as chief of the department, he signed

Page 6223

 1     the report that I had worked on, but he did not take part in the analysis

 2     of the traces, themselves, and the analysis of the crater, either.  I

 3     mean, I don't think anyone would have been capable of taking part in

 4     something like that in that situation.

 5        Q.   In the previous document, it doesn't say "in the direction."  It

 6     says that it corresponds to the positions of the aggressor in the

 7     locality of Vrace.  And in your report, it says "in Miljevici," so did

 8     you note this difference?

 9        A.   Yes, and I stand by what it says in the report, that this

10     direction matches the one stated in the report.  From the direction of

11     Vrace, it's all from that direction, and that -- and that coincides with

12     those degrees.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

14             Can we now see P -- correction, 1D02343.  1D02343.

15             I'm afraid that this is not usable.  Can we see the following

16     page, please.

17             Yes, that's the one.  The ERN number, or the last three digits,

18     are 488.

19             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

20        Q.   Can you explain what this is about?

21        A.   This is a yard where a projectile landed.

22        Q.   What are these bags?

23        A.   I believe that this was the place where a police officer had his

24     position, because behind his bag there is the CSB very nearby.

25        Q.   So what would you call this?  This bunker made of sandbags

Page 6224

 1     actually protects the sentry of the CSB?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   Can you say how high this bunker is?  You can see there is a car

 4     next to it and a man standing.

 5        A.   Well, considering all these, we could say about two metres.

 6        Q.   Thank you.  Is a bunker of this kind a legitimate military

 7     target, as far as you know?

 8        A.   If there's a police officer in here, and uses it to protect

 9     himself from shelling, then, to my mind, no.

10        Q.   And the CSB is not a legitimate military target, either; right?

11        A.   I don't know.  But I can say, for myself, that I would have been

12     carrying around a bunker with me all the time so as not to be hit.  But I

13     cannot say whether or not a police facility was a legitimate military

14     target.

15        Q.   Do you know that 15.000 police officers in Sarajevo took part in

16     combat activities regularly; yes or no?

17        A.   I don't know if there were that many police officers in Sarajevo

18     at all.

19        Q.   Do you know that the Laste and other police units were included

20     in regular combat activities?

21        A.   Yes, I do, but I don't know whether their headquarters was here.

22        Q.   Well, is it wise to erect bunkers and then let children play

23     around them?

24        A.   The place where the children were injured is not even 20 metres

25     away from this.  What do we do with the children; not let them leave

Page 6225

 1     their apartments?

 2        Q.   Can you please mark here where the place of impact was?  This is

 3     a photograph taken by your investigation group.  This is your

 4     investigative material; right?

 5        A.   Correct.  The projectile most probably fell here [marks], but I

 6     don't really remember where exactly it was.  Most probably it was here.

 7        Q.   And on the lower photograph?

 8        A.   I'm not sure.  There is no arrow marking it.  We can see that the

 9     bags are damaged [marks].  Even in the upper photograph, we can see the

10     same section [marks].  But I don't know where exactly the projectile

11     fell.  I suppose it was here, but given the time that has passed, I can't

12     remember.

13        Q.   Well, whatever you say.  Just mark where it fell, mark it in this

14     photograph, and sign and date it, please.

15        A.   Well, from today's vantage point, I would say that it fell on the

16     spot marked "1" [marks], but as I said, I can't remember exactly where

17     each and every projectile fell, and the exact hour when I arrived at the

18     site, and so on.

19        Q.   This is the place where one projectile fell; right?

20        A.   In this specific instance, yes.  Whether or not projectiles fell

21     here earlier without consequences, I don't know.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I seek to tender this document into

23     evidence, and I'll show a sketch.  Maybe that will make things easier for

24     you.

25             Can we please see 1D2344, if this document is admitted.  Maybe

Page 6226

 1     it's in the OTP's associated documents.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  You're tendering only this page, the picture on

 3     which the witness has marked?  Yes, it will be admitted.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There will be more.  I would like

 5     to tender the entire document, and I believe that the OTP tendered at

 6     least the statement of this witness.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  I think the previous report was admitted as

 8     Exhibit P1335, and we'll admit this marked photo as a Defence exhibit.

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  That will be Exhibit D559.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please see 1D2344.  It's a

11     sketch that may assist us -- or actually assist you to clarify things.

12     The same document, page 2, actually.  The ERN -- the last three digits of

13     the ERN number are 487 [as interpreted].

14             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's correction, 497, the last three

15     digits.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Last page of that document, 1D2344, page 3.  Yes.

17             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is it.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   Is this the sketch of the event that happened in

20     Mis Irbina Street, Mr. Suljevic?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Can you mark these elements in the sketch: the bunker, the CSB,

23     the entrance to the building, and the place of the explosion?

24        A.   As far as I remember, I believe that this is the location of the

25     bunker [marks], and I can mark it "1" [marks].  This may not be very

Page 6227

 1     precise, but the entrance is here [marks].  That's the building

 2     number 18.

 3        Q.   Mark it "2," please.

 4        A.   [Marks].  And the CSB is hereabouts [marks].  I'm not sure how

 5     far it is, but it's the block of buildings that goes as far as the

 6     La Benevolencije Street that meets Mis Irbina Street.

 7        Q.   Then mark it "3," please.

 8        A.   [Marks]

 9        Q.   And number 2 marks the buildings numbers 18 and 20?

10        A.   Well, this is actually building number 18.  This building 20

11     could actually be here [marks], because there's another entrance there.

12        Q.   Could this structure of an unusual shape be the bunker?

13        A.   No, it wasn't this size, because you saw in the photographs that

14     it has a rectangular shape, a square shape.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Now, where did the shell land?

16        A.   I see no legend, so I can only suppose that the distances marked

17     are the distances between the crater and some landmarks.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we perhaps reduce this and

19     exhibit the legend, too, for the benefit of Mr. Suljevic?  But if that

20     cannot be done before saving the document, then we should first date and

21     mark it and then save it.

22             THE WITNESS:  [Marks]

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I seek to tender this.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, you'll have five minutes.

25             We'll admit this.

Page 6228

 1             THE REGISTRAR:  As Exhibit D560, Your Honours.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That won't do, by any means, but

 3     what can I do?

 4             Can we please see the previous page.

 5             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 6        Q.   And you will see, Mr. Suljevic, that the spot marked "1" by you

 7     is actually the place of impact.  "1" stands for the place of impact or

 8     crater?

 9        A.   That's right.

10        Q.   And you see this structure that resembles a spade in shape has

11     next to it the bunker marked "18."  How do you explain that the fragments

12     went through all this and hit the metal door at the entrance of building

13     number 18?

14        A.   I don't know what exactly your question is.  But from the spot

15     where the projectile landed, there were no obstacles in the direction of

16     that entrance.  And with regard to that spade-shaped structure, well, I

17     don't know.  But, anyway, from the place of impact to the entrance, there

18     were no obstacles.

19        Q.   But if north is up, on which side did the shell actually fall; in

20     the north, south, east, or west?

21        A.   According to the legend, the projectile landed here [marks].  The

22     square, to my mind, represents the bunker.  And that other shape, I

23     really don't know what it is.  Maybe it's a lawn or something.  But there

24     was nothing between that structure made of bags and the entrance.

25        Q.   What is the distance between the place of impact and the entrance

Page 6229

 1     to building 18?

 2        A.   Well, we can tell from the sketch, but I think it may be up to 30

 3     metres, if at all.  But we don't have to speculate.  We just have to

 4     enlarge the sketch.

 5        Q.   It says "17 metres 16 centimetres."  Is that possible?

 6        A.   Yes, it is, and I'm sure it's accurate.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 1D02343, please.  The page is 490,

 8     the three last digits, that is, and it's the third page of the document.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Just a second.  Shall we keep this new version of

10     the witness's marking with blue?

11             MR. GAYNOR:  Yes, Your Honour.  I was just going to object to

12     this procedure, in general, that the witness has been asked to make

13     markings before he was provided with the legend to the map.  The legend,

14     itself, describes the locations on the diagram.  What the witness is

15     essentially being asked to do is carry out a memory test about an

16     investigation that he participated in over 16 years ago, without having

17     the opportunity to review the legend and the diagram beforehand.

18             JUDGE KWON:  I was minded for him to read the legend, but given

19     the time, I just let it go.  But it's on the record, and we can bear that

20     in mind when we are reading his evidence again in the future.

21             Let's move on.

22             But we'll admit this as a new exhibit, Exhibit D561.

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And I kindly request another 15

24     minutes just to finish at least this incident.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, you will have five minutes from now.

Page 6230

 1     You have to finish by 20 to 2.00.  You have just exactly five minutes.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It will be insufficient, you will

 3     see.  Well, I won't be able to complete it.  I'll break off.

 4             Could we see 1D02343.

 5             While we're waiting, let me just say that it's unfortunate that

 6     we don't have more viva voce witnesses, because then we would have

 7     problems in this courtroom.

 8             Let us see the following page of this document, 490.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Is this the door through which the fragment flew, and is that

11     marked "3" on the door?

12        A.   This is a door.  And as we can see, number 3 marks the spot that

13     was probably caused by the fragment.

14        Q.   Please mark it for us and explain to us what -- this one

15     fragment, only one, that went through the metal door, what did it cause

16     inside the building?  It killed one child in there and wounded several;

17     correct?

18        A.   I can't see that it says anywhere that one fragment killed one

19     child and wounded several.  If -- this reads that this was a damage

20     probably caused by a fragment.  I can see damages to the wall, but I

21     don't want to go to speculation now.

22        Q.   Well, please do not consume my five minutes.  Tell me, did

23     anything happen to those children behind this door?  What happened on the

24     ground floor and what happened on the first landing?  You know what

25     happened.  You investigated it.  Children were playing cards there, and

Page 6231

 1     somebody came to harm.  How did those shrapnel enter?

 2        A.   It could only come from -- could only have come from

 3     here [indicates].  Maybe the door wasn't fully closed.  Don't make me

 4     speculate now.  The children were in the staircase.  Maybe they were

 5     standing next to the door.  One boy was wounded outside.  I don't know

 6     whether he was coming out or going in.  But according to the statements,

 7     one boy was wounded outside, and the others in the staircase.  Whether

 8     the door was closed, as in this photograph, or fully open, I really don't

 9     know.  And let me not speculate, because this photograph was taken after

10     those injured and killed had been taken away.

11        Q.   How does this door open?  Does it open inward or outward?

12        A.   I don't know.  Usually, such doors open on the yard.

13        Q.   But, sir, if you can't tell us who was hit here, who was injured

14     or killed, if you cannot tell us, then who can?  And what about the

15     children behind this door?

16        A.   You must take all the reports and the entire file and review it

17     to learn all the details.  What we did was only to establish the type of

18     shell, its calibre, and the direction from which it had come.  Other

19     reports that are parts of the file, it probably can be found there, and

20     you have to review that if you want to know all these details.  Based on

21     this one photograph, it's impossible to go into further analysis.

22        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, you are here.  We are fortunate enough to have you

23     here.  So can you explain to us how these children were the victims of a

24     Serb mine, as you had put it, in an entranceway where the door was

25     closed?  The children were victims, but there were other children who

Page 6232

 1     were victims on the landing as well; right?

 2             JUDGE KWON:  All speculations.  I will allow you two more

 3     questions, and that's it.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With all due respect, Excellency,

 5     this is not speculation.  There are statements that we're going to put to

 6     the Trial Chamber when we have enough time, and they are going to show

 7     all of this inconsistency involved.

 8             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Now, the last two questions.

 9        Q.   Mr. Suljevic, I have no feeling whatsoever towards the evil

10     tongues that say this:  This could have happened because Mr. Jamakovic

11     had some devices that were being prepared there in his house, some

12     explosive device was being prepared there, and the Serbs have to be

13     accused of that.  What do you say to that?  Is it very strange that this

14     happened where Jamakovic lived and he is precisely in that line of work?

15        A.   I think that what you are saying is totally exaggerated.

16        Q.   Secondly, Mr. Suljevic:  When you worked on all of these

17     investigations, did you count on all of this reaching some court of law

18     or was this done only for the purpose of blaming the Serbs?

19        A.   These reports were not done to blame the Serbs.  They showed what

20     it was that had been established on the scene.  It is true that on-site

21     investigations were carried out - how should I put this? - according to a

22     faster rhythm due to the circumstances involved.  If we were to carry out

23     on-site investigations for two days, we wouldn't have enough time to

24     carry out even a small part of the necessary on-site investigations.

25     However, on the scene, we made an effort not to leave before the scene

Page 6233

 1     was properly viewed and before all the circumstances were clarified,

 2     those that were required by the judge who was in charge of the on-site

 3     investigation.

 4        Q.   You did not answer my question.  For what purpose was this done;

 5     for the purpose of being presented in a criminal court or for propaganda

 6     purposes?

 7        A.   We did nothing for propaganda purposes.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  He answered the question.

 9             Before I give the floor to Mr. Gaynor, two things.

10             If there remains some part which you couldn't cover, it's purely

11     because you didn't conduct your cross-examination efficiently.

12             Secondly, you promised to ask -- that you will come back to the

13     witness's prior statement you referred to.  Do you have that reference

14     now?

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'm still looking for it,

16     Excellency.  With your leave, we are going to put it when the next

17     witnesses come from the same investigation team.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

19             Mr. Gaynor.

20             MR. GAYNOR:  We have no questions in re-examination,

21     Mr. President.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

23             Then it concludes your evidence, Mr. Suljevic.  Thank you for

24     coming to The Hague twice, and now you are free to go.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

Page 6234

 1                           [The witness withdrew]

 2             JUDGE KWON:  We'll have a protected witness for the next witness.

 3     There are a couple of rulings I'd like to give in relation to that

 4     witness, so for that purpose we'll go into private session briefly.

 5                           [Private session]

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 6235











11  Pages 6235-6236 redacted. Private session.















Page 6237

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25                           [Open session]

Page 6238

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Now we are in public session, and, Mr. Gaynor, you

 2     may be excused.

 3             MR. GAYNOR:  Thank you.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  The next witness is a protected witness.  And to

 5     hear his evidence, we need to go into closed session.

 6             Before that, Mr. Robinson, do you have anything to raise?

 7             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes.  Thank you, Mr. President.

 8             We would like to make a motion to postpone the testimony of this

 9     next witness, pending appeal of the decision that the Trial Chamber

10     rendered in private session.  That held that the witness would not have

11     his protective measures modified and that no inquiry would be made

12     concerning the circumstances to the witness, and before continuing those

13     protective measures.  We believe that certification to appeal that

14     decision should be granted, and I'm speaking simply now about the

15     decision of whether to inquire with a witness, who has been completely

16     unavailable to the accused or the Chamber, whether or not protective

17     measures should continue for that witness, and, if so, what objective

18     reasons exist at this time for continuing those protective measures.

19             This is a witness who we requested meet with the accused prior to

20     giving his testimony, and he declined, as is his right.  And so the only

21     information that the Chamber has is that given by the Prosecution, both

22     in the earlier case, in which the Prosecution made those representations,

23     and in private interviews with the Prosecution.  And we think that it

24     substantially and significantly affects the fairness of the trial that a

25     witness can be given protective measures or protective measures can be

Page 6239

 1     continued without the opportunity of either the accused or the Chamber to

 2     determine for itself whether there are objective reasons for these

 3     protective measures to continue or even if the witness wants those

 4     protective measures to continue when asked in court by the Chamber, as

 5     opposed to by the Prosecutor.  And I note the witness has been a suspect

 6     and has been notified of such by the Prosecution, which may influence his

 7     decision in that regard.

 8             We also think that an immediate decision by the Appeals Chamber

 9     on this issue is necessary, because it's going to be a recurring one.

10     This is the first of several witnesses who will have protective measures

11     concerning their testimony, and if the Chamber is not willing to provide

12     an opportunity for such witnesses to be questioned about that in court,

13     we feel that that could affect, ultimately, the outcome and fairness of

14     the trial, and that it would be far better for the Appeals Chamber to

15     have decided the issue at the outset rather than having recurring issues

16     which may ultimately be found to be erroneous and under appeal from a

17     final judgement.

18             So for those reasons, we ask that you suspend the testimony of

19     this witness, pending appeal, and that you grant us certification to

20     appeal your decision today.

21             Thank you.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Ms. Edgerton or Mr. Tieger, do you like to respond

23     to this submission?

24             MR. TIEGER:  Well, Your Honour, I think our response should come

25     as no surprise to the Chamber.  We oppose the motion.

Page 6240

 1             The accused has essentially reiterated the arguments brought

 2     before the Chamber and rejected before.  To some extent, I note that

 3     they -- the submissions slide over the fact that the Chamber made every

 4     effort, clearly, to ensure compliance with the Rules, and instead this is

 5     a continuing attempt by the Defence to somehow establish a new regime,

 6     after many, many years of an established practice, with respect to

 7     protective measures, a practice that has been followed by the Chamber in

 8     this case.

 9             So we oppose this and would note, in particular, that this

10     witness's testimony has been scheduled for a long time, has been

11     postponed already, as the Court will recall.  We need to move forward,

12     and there's no basis for again postponing this witness's testimony.

13                           [Trial Chamber confers]

14             JUDGE KWON:  We will rise briefly, and we'll let you know whether

15     we can continue or not during the course of today through the

16     Legal Officer.

17                           --- Break taken at 2.02 p.m.

18                           --- On resuming at 2.18 p.m.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Robinson, your motion for certification is

20     denied.  Written reasons will follow in due course.

21             Let's bring in the witness.

22             Before that, we go into closed session.

23                           [Closed session]

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 6241











11  Pages 6241-6248 redacted. Closed session.















Page 6249

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.38 p.m.,

13                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 7th day of

14                           September, 2010, at 2.15 p.m.